Posted 1/8/08 1:05:00AM
Doc Hamilton can fix the system!
When UFC light heavyweight champion Lyoto Machida got his hand raised on Oct. 24 after his title defense against Mauricio “Shogun” Rua, in a fight where most polls showed about 80 percent of the public believed the title should have changed hands, it set off a series of three straight major-show UFC main events in which judging became a hotly debated issue.
But some of the most vehement response has come from a surprising source: the judges themselves, some of whom feel handcuffed and frustrated with the system in place.
Posted 10/11/07 4:18:00PM
wow! I feel so vindicated. I've been talking about a 20 point system for a while now. Hamiltons half point system is essentially the same thing. Probably even better. I love the idea.
In addition to the half point system they also talk about adding damage and who's closest to stopping the fight into the criteria. This is probably the best article about MMA judging I've ever read. I agree with nearly everything in it.
If you haven't read the article in its entirety, you should. This could be the answer we've all been waiting for. I hope that in the future we can have less contested decisions.
Posted 1/29/07 9:12:00AM
If the plan is to revamp the system, why not get rid of the first 8 points if they are never used anyway?
Posted 3/25/08 7:48:00PM
It's an interesting idea. I'll give you that, but as Keith Kizer states in the article “The problem is you will start getting arguments about a 10-9 vs. a 10-8.5. Do we then go to quarter-points, or go like gymnastics with tenths of a point".
It's just like now with the current system, why don't they just use the points available to state the same idea, give 10-10 rounds from time to time. Give a 10-8 more often, sh*t, give a 10-7 if somebody really takes a beating.
If they don't already do this with the available system what makes you think they'll use all the points (and half points) available with a new system?
The problem is the judges fear of reprisal for scoring a close fight decisively. Nobody's going to give a 10-7 because nobody else does it and you'd be essentially sinking the fighter. They need to all sit down and just tell the judges "Hey, 10-10's are ok if you can't see a winner, 10-7's are ok if the guy barely maintained vital signs."
The problem is the fact that the judges feel pigeon holed in to using only those 2 points, 8 through 10. That's not going to go away by relabeling the points.
Posted 7/19/07 11:27:00AM
I think it needs to be decided by a larger group of people than just the commisions, add the judges, refs, org owners (yes even Dana) and most importantly the fighters themselves. That and American judging IMO will probably always favor wrestlers over BJJ guys because being on top looks more dominating to most, even though we all know a good BJJ fighter can control the fight on the ground from his back.