UFC Scoring System

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » UFC Scoring System
JWils
8/17/07 9:49:05AM
I was watching a replay of the Forrest Griffin vs. Tito Ortiz fight last night and it got me thinking about the "10-9" system the UFC uses to score its fights. I remember after this fight happened many people thought that Griffin should have won 29-28. If Tito wouldn't have gotten that late takedown, they might have had a case under the current scoring system. Tito won round one, Forrest won round two, & the third was really too close to call until the Ortiz takedown.......

Anyway, anyone who has seen this fight knows how much Ortiz dominated the first round. He really pounded Griffin.

My beef with the current scoring system is that it is possible for a guy to get dominated for a full 5 minutes and then win two close rounds without doing a ton of damage and win the fight. Even though his opponent inflicted much more damage to him during the first 5 minutes than the guy does for the next 10.

I really don't have a solution. But it seems like they should judge the fight as a whole instead of on 3 different 5 minute periods.

Anybody agree? Anybody have any thoughts?
DCRage
8/17/07 9:56:05AM
I kinda have to disagree a little bit. Remember that judges can give the round loser 8 or lower, but that very rarely happens when there is no penalty involved. The only real solution could be something like in boxing, where generally the losing fighter is docked 1 point each time he is knocked down in that particular round, which is why oftentimes there are 10-8 or 10-7 rounds. I could see this as being like 10-8 for the losing fighter if he's being warned too much for stalling or if he gets knocked down a lot by strikes with little or no effort made to avoid them or defend himself from followups. I could see this most likely being applied in times like when the ref stops them when they're on the ground and stands them back up due to inactivity, the guy deemed to be less active could lose the point.
TNunley
8/17/07 12:06:41PM
Where does it end though? I mean who determines how severe the knockdown has to be? In boxing it's simpler due to the fact that you don't fight on the ground. So what if you get brushed with a kick that throws you off balance, and you fall... should you get the same deduction as someone who collapses?
catal77
8/17/07 12:16:33PM
i believe that the fights are best scored this way until the judges used are more knowledgeable in all aspects of mma. most of the judges are used to scoring boxing matches and other styles of standing fights. when it goes to the ground many cant tell who is winning or what is happening or who is in worst shape. it just looks like they are rolling on the ground and dont see the subtle movements that are made. my .02 cents.
Mastodon2
8/17/07 12:48:56PM

Posted by TNunley

Where does it end though? I mean who determines how severe the knockdown has to be? In boxing it's simpler due to the fact that you don't fight on the ground. So what if you get brushed with a kick that throws you off balance, and you fall... should you get the same deduction as someone who collapses?



If you watch K-1 fights, they dont score all downs as knockdowns, if the fighter takes a shot hard and goes down, they will start counting, which is an official "down", if a fighter slips, or falls over off a little shot, they allow them to stand up without counting, and an official "down" is not recorded. However, its just not that simple in MMA!


I think the UFC needed to adopt the Pride system, which doesnt award lay and pray fighters, because the highest scoring criteria in the Pride rules was effort to finish. While in Pride I did see a few baffling decisions (Carlos Newton dominating Takase, judges apparently not watching the fight and giving it to Takase despite the fact Carlos was all over him), I thought the Pride system was more solid, and more relevant to MMA, as it doesnt favour lay n Prayers, but rather favours effort to end the fight, as opposed to fighting just to score points and win a decision.
tepid55
8/17/07 6:57:35PM
I think that they should adopt the Pride scoring system.
adamal
8/20/07 12:59:12AM
I was watching that replay too and had similar thoughts. I think that the system works most of the time and since there is no perfect alternative then the times that it appears not to work it is all the more glaring. As with I would imagine most MMA fans I never want to see a decision I want to see KO or Sub. I don't think we need to change the system just yet but it could be in UFC's interest to begin evaluating and brainstorming new systems for possible future use.
johny_rotten
8/20/07 1:55:35AM
I like how Pride did it in theory, but from a distance the UFC has as many questionable descions as Pride did. Another solution would be get more liberal with 8 or even lower, and for the love of good this shouldn't be scored like a boxing match, or by boxing judges. You have to really steam roll a guy to get an 8 in a round currently. Even the first round of the Tito/Forrest fight 2 of the judges didn't give Tito a 10-8 round. If you inflict some good damage ala Tito, or BJ round 1 against GSP, and your opponent does nothing that is a 10-8 round These judges need to pull the trigger on these rounds. This isn't boxing where it will work it self out in the 12 rounds. With only 3 rounds on the line the judges need to get each one right.
Related Topics