Time to Re-Think MMA Judging?

MMAPlayground.com » Community » MMA News Share Forum » Time to Re-Think MMA Judging?
emfleek
6/22/09 2:24:59PM
Diego Sanchez's split decision victory over Clay Guida at Saturday night's Ultimate Fighter Finale was one of the best UFC fights of the year, but MMA fans have been talking almost as much about the judging of the fight as the fight itself.

STORY
emfleek
6/22/09 2:26:32PM
Another article on the subject...

LINK

RearNakedJoke
6/22/09 2:50:23PM
in my opinion it wasnt as close of a fight at the media is reporting it. if it wasnt for guida having an amazing chin of solid granite he would have been finished long before the decision. that guys tough as balls!


what should really be brought into question is the reffing from that strikeforce card friday night. whats up with the refs constantly standing people up when they are throwing punches or threatening to stand it up after every little transition?
Giant_Ochai
6/22/09 4:44:51PM

Posted by RearNakedJoke

in my opinion it wasnt as close of a fight at the media is reporting it. if it wasnt for guida having an amazing chin of solid granite he would have been finished long before the decision. that guys tough as balls!


what should really be brought into question is the reffing from that strikeforce card friday night. whats up with the refs constantly standing people up when they are throwing punches or threatening to stand it up after every little transition?

I agree with every word. Those refs who worked Strikeforce really wanted some ultimate kickboxing.
Aether
6/22/09 5:06:29PM
I've been saying it forever. Things like takedowns and top control without effective offense should not be scored so heavily. Times when fighters are tied up in the clinch or in guard without doing any damage or making any submission attempts should be seen as dead time, and submission attempts and takedowns need to be given some kind of weight relative to standup scoring. For instance you could say a very tight sub attempt would be equivalent to a strong combo on the feet, or a takedown is roughly equivalent to landing a power shot.

Whatever the actual values assigned, there needs to be some kind of quantification and clearer qualification of the judging criteria. It's too vague and it is weighted too heavily in favour of control over damage, which is the purpose of wrestling, not fighting. Control should be a tool used to fight, not the fight itself.
wrona666
6/22/09 6:08:29PM

Posted by RearNakedJoke

in my opinion it wasnt as close of a fight at the media is reporting it. if it wasnt for guida having an amazing chin of solid granite he would have been finished long before the decision. that guys tough as balls!


what should really be brought into question is the reffing from that strikeforce card friday night. whats up with the refs constantly standing people up when they are throwing punches or threatening to stand it up after every little transition?



Strikeforce has a stand up rule.....If the ref warns you about the action i think it's like a 15 sec rule then they will stand you up......I guess they are trying to prevent lay and pray.
prozacnation1978
6/22/09 7:47:12PM
mma judge's suck it's time to get big john back in the ufc
lll-lll
6/22/09 9:54:44PM
I don't have a problem with most of the judges. I have said a few cross words about Peoples, but I think most of the rest do their best. The way I look at it is that if you on't come out and try to finish the fight and you get screwed, then that is what you get. Never leave it in the judges hands. If a fight is close then peoople see them many different ways. The judges are no different than most fans. Like Forrest/Jackson me and my 4 friends who watched the fight almost all saw the fight by a different score and different decision. It happens.

The recent judging wasn't all thta bad. I watched the guillard fight and though Tibau won, but he fougth lazy and couldn't seem to do anything with Guillard, so IMO that is what he gets. On paper he was head and shoulders ahead of Guillard on the ground, but did he even attempt a submission when he got it there? I don't think he did. So IMO that is what he gets. He fought to Guillard's strengths, and although I had him winning, he lost on the judges cards. I can't complain for that. Guillard stuffed most of his takedowns and he out struck him the little striking there was. I'd give Tibau octagon control, but I wouldn't say he was dominant in that either. IMO it was like watching standing lay and pray.

higdon10
6/23/09 12:28:04AM
I scored the fight 29-28 Guida, but I understand how one could say that Diego won the fight.
lll-lll
6/23/09 1:13:04AM

Posted by higdon10

I scored the fight 29-28 Guida, but I understand how one could say that Diego won the fight.

I had rd 1 a 10-8 to Diego, rd 2 to Clay, and rd 3 to Diego closely. But I too would not be shocked by somone having Clay winning or a draw. I was torn on the first round being a 10-8 or 10-9. The high kick near decapitation sealed it after Clay took a beating early on.
D0wnUnd6e6r
6/23/09 8:33:56AM
Let's stop talking about sanchez/guida for a while and turn our attentions on guillard/tibau. I can't believe no one else is as livid as I am after seeing the fight. Basically everything that is told to us about how the judges score the fight, went flying out the window for this one. If i recall correctly, Tibau got at least 8 takedowns during the fight, he DID NOT lose all of the stand up exchanges (he maybe looked bad on 2 occasions) and he put the pressure on constantly. So maybe, maybe and even then it seems kind of far fetched to me, you can give the 1st round to melvin but In no other way possible do I see him winning the last 2. I mean the guy was on his back for the whole length or the 3rd while getting GnP only with the bell to save him at the end. I really really really hope the judges get their acts together cause that decison was worst than bisping/hamill or any other ones people don't agree with IMO . Robbed is not even close to the word i would use to described what happened to Gleison, poor dude.
Hillbilly
6/23/09 8:54:16AM

Posted by Aether

I've been saying it forever. Things like takedowns and top control without effective offense should not be scored so heavily. Times when fighters are tied up in the clinch or in guard without doing any damage or making any submission attempts should be seen as dead time, and submission attempts and takedowns need to be given some kind of weight relative to standup scoring. For instance you could say a very tight sub attempt would be equivalent to a strong combo on the feet, or a takedown is roughly equivalent to landing a power shot.

Whatever the actual values assigned, there needs to be some kind of quantification and clearer qualification of the judging criteria. It's too vague and it is weighted too heavily in favour of control over damage, which is the purpose of wrestling, not fighting. Control should be a tool used to fight, not the fight itself.



Yeah, I would be fine if takedowns weren't even scored at all. In a lot of fights being in your opponents guard isn't even an advantage. Giving points for GnP or transitioning to better positions while on the ground should be enough to make your takedown worth it. If you take a guy down and spend the rest of the round just trying to hold them down or blocking elbows and submissions you should get absolutely no points for the takedown.

I think for submissions you shouldn't really get any points for an attempt but a "near submission" should score you more points than it currently does.
slapshot
6/23/09 9:29:57AM
Hay I still feel if the judges used the ten point must system correctly then there is no way you can score that fight for clay, none.

I also question this guy bringing up the first round and saying a 10-8 is questionable. That round can be scored 10-8, the prerequisites are there. To me there is no debate about "IF" it can be scored 10-8 it absolutely can.

I think what makes this shoddy journalism to me is that he's crusing along making his case and then tossed in that Cyborg won his fight as well, excuse me what? umm No.

I mean how many fights can you think of that deserve more scrutiny than the Cyborg fight I can think of many...

My point is it dose not matter what system you use if the judges are blockheads or too inexperionced to be there in the first place. I dont remember the name of the female judge but if they develop a track record of wack scoring FIRE THEM! Up training is another tool I think should be used more efficiently.

You cant blame the ten point must system if its not being used properly.
Related Topics