Judges are cowards... hence why scoring is broken!

[TempleoftheDog]

MMA shouldn't have adopted a boxing scoring system, judging the fight overall seems to work better

I disagree vehemently. A fighter can dominate two full rounds.. 66% of a 3 round fight.

But lose the last 4-5 minutes and lose on the cards because of recency bias. The last thing you see is one fighter having a good round. But what about the other 2 rounds?

No chance.

Live scoring is what I’d like to see though. Have the judges being responsible for their scores in real time.

Pride FC can suck 100% of my ass. And so can the people pretending that they actually ever saw one Pride card in real time.

Because 95% of you DID NOT.

 

[SCTwins]

You literally don't. From the Unified Rules:


Most MMA fans (and judges) don't know the rules though apparently. Maybe they should be changed to require damage because that makes more sense, but this is what the rulebook says.

I agree with you in a sense, but there are further criteria to consider when awarding points for dominance:

"Dominance in the grappling phase can be seen by fighters taking DOMINANT POSITIONS in the fight and utilizing those positions to attempt fight ending submissions or attacks."

So, disregarding Lewis' output it pretty clearly states that a dominant fighter must be threatening a finish.

The REAL argument for giving a 10-8 round is right here, IMO:

"If a fighter has little to no offensive output during a 5 minute round, it should be normal for the judge to consider awarding the losing fighter 8 points instead of 9"

Lewis had no offensive output, and therefor should have been awarded 8 points instead of 9, which we almost never see, but as written is supposed to be the norm.

So my position is that Almeida didn't exactly EARN the 10-8 via dominance, but that Lewis didn't earn himself a score of 9 either, so it should have been a 10-8 in the end.

 

[achoo42]

"If a fighter has little to no offensive output during a 5 minute round, it should be normal for the judge to consider awarding the losing fighter 8 points instead of 9"

Lewis had no offensive output, and therefor should have been awarded 8 points instead of 9, which we almost never see, but as written is supposed to be the norm.

Exactly. So the way I interpret these (slightly inconsistent) rules is that you are allowed to score a 10-8 for lay and pray as long as the bottom opponent isn't active off their back.

 

[SCTwins]

Exactly. So the way I interpret these (slightly inconsistent) rules is that you are allowed to score a 10-8 for lay and pray as long as the bottom opponent isn't active off their back.

Agreed.

Or if Lewis had landed some strikes on the feet before going down it could have evened the round more in terms of output, but he didn't.

 

[Barteh]

There's no such thing. The harshest score to give is a 10-7 and that's a round you watch where you basically think 'if that happens for another 5 minutes that man is dead'.
Just read the rules. A quick google search will do the job. They are out there. You might read some things in there you wouldn't have imagined.

I'll go one step further and quote you the official 10-8 criteria:

There needs to be a large margin in difference by impact, dominance and duration. Jailton had dominance and duration, but he just didn't outland Lewis more significantly than in a regular 10-9 round that takes place standing.

This may be confusing on first thought, maybe think of it this way:
Grappling activity/ dominance can determine who wins the round.
But as far as the actual score reads, a large difference in impact is a prerequisite for a 10-8 score and that is in no way affected by where the fight takes place.

If you keep reading then you'll find this line:

"If a fighter has little to no offensive output during a 5 minute round, it should be normal for the judge to consider awarding the losing fighter 8 points instead of 9."

So a round where you completely neutralize an opponent by lay and praying is basically supposed to be a 10-8 as well.

 

[Royce's Gi]

What's up with your AV? I can't make heads nor tails of it.

I think it's a hand and a finger saying Fuck Israel or something.

 

[Poirierfan]

idk this was the default picture. I don't know how to change it

With a name like "bootysweat", for some reason I get the feeling you might be fibbing a tad.

 

[Banana Tree's Nemesis]

You straight up quoted the 2012 rules that were changed in 2017.

The 2017 rules do not require impact, dominance, and duration. In fact, the 2017 rules explicitly say you only need one or the other.





So while most judges don't score 10-8s for damage without domination, or domination without damage, they can consider doing so which means it wouldn't be wrong to score 10-8s for Jailton Almeida.

I'm kinda confused by this because the document I have states all the dates it was changed and the last one is August 2018.
Either way I went to the abc site and downloaded a document that includes the phrases you quoted.

Having that new information now, I'm not certain there weren't multiple 10-8s in that fight any longer, but I'm still not sure there were. This is phrased so silly.
They must CONSIDER it. That doesn't mean anything. It means they can score whatever they want. That's terrible.
The way all of this is phrased leaves one with the impression that this could've been very much scored either way, and neither would have been wrong. Great.

The last resort I have here is arguing that

Dominance in the grappling phase can be seen by fighters taking DOMINANT POSITIONS in the fight and utilizing those positions to attempt fight ending submissions or attacks.

means that rounds where Almeida did not seriously commit to submission attempts do not meet the criterion of Dominance. Which recalling roughly would have been 2 or 3 rounds I think.

Not really sure what to make of this tbh.

 

[Killer Kadoogan]

they need to bring back the cliffnotes like they used to on PPVs, outlining the ways to win a fight. which is it these days? is it based off of damage? is it based off of ground "control?" is it based off of number of takedowns completed and some sort of minimal control time after that? is it based off of someone continously walking forward? is it based off of someone trying to engage more than the other? IMO, in the golden era (2003/2004 - 2012) some shit like that, if you got a takedown, and the opponent did not get up right away, that was your round, no doubt, no questions about it. in this modern era, we've seen fighters get the takedowns, do nothing with them, and lose the fight (that one chinese girl vs. the girl who always jumps in the arms of the announcer). so what set of rules/criteria are the judges viewing the fight in? its a mixed bag, no consistency, and the onus is on the UFC to educate the judges, educate the fans, into what is actually and how is it actually being scored.

 

[Shaddows]

There's no such thing. The harshest score to give is a 10-7 and that's a round you watch where you basically think 'if that happens for another 5 minutes that man is dead'.
Just read the rules. A quick google search will do the job. They are out there. You might read some things in there you wouldn't have imagined.

I'll go one step further and quote you the official 10-8 criteria:

There needs to be a large margin in difference by impact, dominance and duration. Jailton had dominance and duration, but he just didn't outland Lewis more significantly than in a regular 10-9 round that takes place standing.

This may be confusing on first thought, maybe think of it this way:
Grappling activity/ dominance can determine who wins the round.
But as far as the actual score reads, a large difference in impact is a prerequisite for a 10-8 score and that is in no way affected by where the fight takes place.

Sorry, it's a nice explanation, but it is... how can I say this gently.... Blatantly wrong!
But it may be that in my ignorance, you know something that I do not... so let me ask you this:
Please tell me where is it written in the official rules that 10-7 is the maximum advantage a fighter can win a round by.

I will be eagerly waiting for you response, as I mean it humbly! I love learning new things about this sport, and if you are right, believe me, I will be far less frustrated with the scoring system.

 

[Banana Tree's Nemesis]

Sorry, it's a nice explanation, but it is... how can I say this gently.... Blatantly wrong!
But it may be that in my ignorance, you know something that I do not... so let me ask you this:
Please tell me where is it written in the official rules that 10-7 is the maximum advantage a fighter can win a round by.

I will be eagerly waiting for you response, as I mean it humbly! I love learning new things about this sport, and if you are right, believe me, I will be far less frustrated with the scoring system.

It's not written anywhere. It is implied by the things that are written.

The progression of what constitutes a 10-8 going over to a 10-7 leaves little room for anything worse. According to the more recent additions I was just informed about in the thread, a 10-7

is when a fighter completely overwhelms their opponent in Effective Striking and/or Grappling and stoppage is warranted

Other than a finish, there really isn't anything that would exceed completely overwhelming your opponent in effective striking and grappling in an MMA fight, is there?

 

[Ozze]

"Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10 – 8 when the judge has establishedt that one fighter has dominated the action of the round, had duration of the domination and also impacted their opponent with either effective strikes or effective grappling maneuvers that have diminished the abilities of their opponent."

Almeida just sat on Lewis for the last three rounds, which where the ones I saw. So maybe since he didn't do any damage, judges chose not to gave him a 10-8.

 

[checktheknuckles]

Why not make it a positive-scaled system where you start with 0 points and if you do better you get 1, do much better you get 2, etc.

In the 10-point-must system, it's theoretically possible to have a 10-1 round, which would in reality mean something like one fighter separated all the platelets from the other fighter's blood and pulled his fingernails out or something. In reality, we rarely see a 10-8 round, leaving 10-7 through 10-1 as absolute unicorns.

.

They both the same thing. 10-9 should be who wins the round, same as getting 1 point for the round. 10-8 should be clearly dominating round by damage, same as getting 2 points for the round. 10-7 would be where one is on the brink of getting the fight stopped but somehow avoids the stoppage, same as getting 3 points for the round. So at the end of the fight, say 50-45, you just subtract them and you get the net positive scoring, so up 5 pts. Its all the same at the end of the day. Them broads just clearly couldn't math.

 

[ferrisjso]

They are hesitant to give out 10-8s because a 10-8 is equal to 2 rounds. Even in a five rounder that makes it very difficult for the loser to overcome. 10-8s also make draws substantially more likely.

The boxing scoring system was built for a sport with more rounds. Also 10-8s are not arbitary they are for knockdowns. But regardless a 10-8 does not decide the fight in a 10 or 12 round contest.

 

[oldschoolmmafan]

MMA shouldn't have adopted a boxing scoring system, judging the fight overall seems to work better

bring back yellow cards.

judge the fight as a whole. not by rounds.

boxing scoring does not translate to mma

This would work in a 10 minute first round system similar to Pride fc but how would this work in a 3 or 5 round system?

 

[markys00]

No. Please stop sherdog. Don't make things worse.

The more 10-8s the worse things will get. It's a guarantee

 

[markys00]

Scoring those rounds 10-8s isn't in the spirit of what the new scoring criteria was implemented for. There was no damage and he was never very close to finishing with sub. There was mayyyybbe 1 10-8 at best.

We keep getting told it's about damage/impact.

 

[Shotcy]

I seen a 9-7 round once.

Both guys got a point taken away and someone won the round 10-8. It was like 2007-2010 UFC. I think Tito was on the card...

 

[Trabaho]

Convincing

It was damage control

Lewis couldn't spin out of it

 

[WolverReem]

MMA shouldn't have adopted a boxing scoring system, judging the fight overall seems to work better

One doing it right