Quesition about possible revision to "judges decision" selections
MMAPlayground.com »
Community »
MMA Playground Game Talk »
Quesition about possible revision to "judges decision" selections
POLL: How does everyone else feel about this?
| Maaaaybe there should be a tinkering with it |    |
57% | (8) |
| Nobody cares what you really think MDS. Go away. |    |
43% | (6) |
Mr_Dead_Sexy
6/7/10 9:39:33PM
This is more me being nitpicky and thinking out loud more than anything, but it's something I have always kind of wondered about. Will there ever be any incentive to selecting split decision over unanimous/majority? This past season, there were a total of 49 decisons. Of those..
41 were Unanimous/Majority
8 were Split
So basically, if you select unanimous/majority 100% of the time (me), and it ends up going to the judges 80% of the time you will get the full eleven points. The other 20% of the time, you will only get seven points, but nevertheless, if you play the odds, you will come out positive more times than not. The only incentive to selecting split would be you hope that most people are like me, and think the risk/reward isn't worth it. And IMO it's not. So I'm wondering if there ever will be a revision to this. Technically, less than 20% of decisons were splits. Underdog +2 bonus for selecting split decisions maybe?
41 were Unanimous/Majority
8 were Split
So basically, if you select unanimous/majority 100% of the time (me), and it ends up going to the judges 80% of the time you will get the full eleven points. The other 20% of the time, you will only get seven points, but nevertheless, if you play the odds, you will come out positive more times than not. The only incentive to selecting split would be you hope that most people are like me, and think the risk/reward isn't worth it. And IMO it's not. So I'm wondering if there ever will be a revision to this. Technically, less than 20% of decisons were splits. Underdog +2 bonus for selecting split decisions maybe?
Taylor8766
6/7/10 9:49:33PM
Sorry dude but I cant even comment on the Judges decision, there just awful. I swear i could judge the fight blind folded and just by hearing have a better decision than the judges, I dont know if anyone else feels this way but their just bad.
hippysmacker
6/7/10 10:55:17PM
sorry no, but I admit it is interesting research.
BlueSkiesBurn
6/7/10 11:56:06PM
I tend to pick it the way I think it will happen, though, common sense would tell you that Unanimous is the safest bet. I play it more for me. Now that I've read your research I may just put everything down as a UD. thanks for the research.
jiujitsufreak74
6/8/10 2:07:32AM
Posted by BlueSkiesBurn
I tend to pick it the way I think it will happen, though, common sense would tell you that Unanimous is the safest bet. I play it more for me. Now that I've read your research I may just put everything down as a UD. thanks for the research.
the way i look at it is that no decision should be a SD. a SD implies an error with the uniformity to which the criteria was scored. however, with this emergence of SDs, and trust me 8 out of 49 is way too many, i don't know if i can look at it that way anymore
ncordless
6/8/10 4:58:46AM
I have always thought that a "majority decision" would be better classified with a split decision since in both cases there is a disagreement amongst the judges and it would very slightly balance out the discrepancy between the odds of a UD and a SD.
Picking a SD is an odd thing to do, because you are basically saying that you think one guy will win but that some people will see it the other way. The odds tell you that in general a UD is a better choice, although if you look at some guys records you might be able to pick out a history of being involved in SD that might make it a decent darkhorse pick to add some points that most will not get.
Picking a SD is an odd thing to do, because you are basically saying that you think one guy will win but that some people will see it the other way. The odds tell you that in general a UD is a better choice, although if you look at some guys records you might be able to pick out a history of being involved in SD that might make it a decent darkhorse pick to add some points that most will not get.
DCRage
6/8/10 10:27:44AM
I tend to pick an average of one SD per UFC card, usually when/if it's a fight between grapplers or it's a fight that I think will be very close (usually Lightweights). That seems to be about the average per UFC as it is, roughly one SD.
As far as the original suggestion, if anything were to be changed I would make majority decision separate so there are 3 choices: UD, MD, SD. UFC already does this in their fantasy game.
As far as the original suggestion, if anything were to be changed I would make majority decision separate so there are 3 choices: UD, MD, SD. UFC already does this in their fantasy game.
emfleek
6/8/10 10:51:25AM
Posted by DCRage
As far as the original suggestion, if anything were to be changed I would make majority decision separate so there are 3 choices: UD, MD, SD. UFC already does this in their fantasy game.
Majority Decision has no place in the game, in my opinion. Dating back to UFC 70 (3+ years), there have been a total of 5 in the UFC.
UFC 113 - Hendricks/Grant
UFC 109 - Hague/Tuchscherer
UFC 107 - Struve/Buentello
UFN Burkman vs. Swick - Burkman/Swick
UFC 70 - Kongo/Silva
That, to me, is proof that there is absolutely no skill in picking a Majority Decision. If you were to pick that as the outcome, you did it on sole luck. If you add Majority Decisions to the fantasy game, you may as well add No Contests and Disqualifications, in my opinion.
I personally think it's fine the way it is. I wouldn't argue with giving a +2 bonus for picking a Split Decision, but again...picking a SD and getting it right, in my opinion, is done mostly on luck and not knowledge/skill.
Kpro
6/12/10 4:16:05PM
I occasionally pick SD's, but only on Hot Bouts because it would essentially be an 8 point bonus over everyone taking a UD.
Sure I miss out on 8 if it goes to a UD, but that's worth a 20% risk to me personally, considering, I imagine, less than 5% of PG'ers are going SD on the Hot Bout. Now if 1 in 5 PG'ers were picking SD over UD on the Hot Bout it wouldn't be worth the risk, but I imagine it's more like 1 in 40 or so. Good risk/reward.
Just my two cents.
Sure I miss out on 8 if it goes to a UD, but that's worth a 20% risk to me personally, considering, I imagine, less than 5% of PG'ers are going SD on the Hot Bout. Now if 1 in 5 PG'ers were picking SD over UD on the Hot Bout it wouldn't be worth the risk, but I imagine it's more like 1 in 40 or so. Good risk/reward.
Just my two cents.
Related Topics