Official Scoring vs My Proposed New Scoring.

[Chart69r]

Basically, I think that the current scoring system isn't good enough.

My proposed scoring system is essentially that a 10-10 round is one that you could "easily give to either fighter", all the way down to a 10-1, where it's a total shutout without a finish (what is currently given as a 10-8, or even 10-7 round.

This would work best with an open scoring system,

Round	Official​	Scoring	Proposed​	Scoring
	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​
1	9​	10​	8​	10​
2	10​	9​	10​	8​
3	10​	8​	10​	6​
Final Score	29​	27​	28​	24​

I feel like this represents the flow of the fight, and in who's favour the fight really went far better than the current system does.

 

[markys00]

No. Terrible idea. We need less 10-8s, not more. This would ruin the sport

 

[Get To Da Choppa]

Basically, I think that the current scoring system isn't good enough.

My proposed scoring system is essentially that a 10-10 round is one that you could "easily give to either fighter", all the way down to a 10-1, where it's a total shutout without a finish (what is currently given as a 10-8, or even 10-7 round.

This would work best with an open scoring system,

Round	Official​	Scoring	Proposed​	Scoring
	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​
1	9​	10​	8​	10​
2	10​	9​	10​	8​
3	10​	8​	10​	6​
Final Score	29​	28​	28​	24​

I feel like this represents the flow of the fight, and in who's favour the fight really went far better than the current system does.

That midget carry + toss in the third is worth 3 points...

 

[Bob Sagat]

Basically, I think that the current scoring system isn't good enough.

My proposed scoring system is essentially that a 10-10 round is one that you could "easily give to either fighter", all the way down to a 10-1, where it's a total shutout without a finish (what is currently given as a 10-8, or even 10-7 round.

This would work best with an open scoring system,

Round	Official​	Scoring	Proposed​	Scoring
	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​
1	9​	10​	8​	10​
2	10​	9​	10​	8​
3	10​	8​	10​	6​
Final Score	29​	28​	28​	24​

I feel like this represents the flow of the fight, and in who's favour the fight really went far better than the current system does.

the left score should have cejudo at 27
so 29-27

 

[Chart69r]

the left score should have cejudo at 27
so 29-27

Edited, thank you.

 

[RicardinhoPT]

Lol, hell no

 

[Chart69r]

No. Terrible idea. We need less 10-8s, not more. This would ruin the sport

In what way?

Combine this with open scoring and the scoring laid out in a way that rewards activity and action rather than stalling, and I see no weakness.

What's the point of utterly dominating someone, like lets say you think that one fighter was twice as effective as the other but the judges will MAYBE give a 10-8 there. Instead, I would argue if you were twice as effective as your opponent and only get one or maybe 2 more points if you're lucky, that is absolutely wrong.

But if you're open with the scoring, a guy that loses a round convincingly KNOWS that he needs to push the action to recoup the score, maybe even try to get a finish.

This also has the potential to get rid of the stupid "robbery" arguments, if you actually make the scoring system more marginal in how the fight is scored.

28-24 is way more indicative of the flow of dominance in that fight than the 29-28 was given.

 

[DiddlyDoodly]

Corky likes it.

 

[Chart69r]

That midget carry + toss in the third is worth 3 points...

More that Merab was FAR more effective than Henry. That was just a cherry on top.

 

[smiles mma]

Basically, I think that the current scoring system isn't good enough.

My proposed scoring system is essentially that a 10-10 round is one that you could "easily give to either fighter", all the way down to a 10-1, where it's a total shutout without a finish (what is currently given as a 10-8, or even 10-7 round.

This would work best with an open scoring system,

Round	Official​	Scoring	Proposed​	Scoring
	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​	Dvalishvili​	Cejudo​
1	9​	10​	8​	10​
2	10​	9​	10​	8​
3	10​	8​	10​	6​
Final Score	29​	27​	28​	24​

I feel like this represents the flow of the fight, and in who's favour the fight really went far better than the current system does.

I think it would be more clear who won which round if they used 10-8s more and 10-10 for even rounds. I'm in favor of a change

 

[Chart69r]

Round	Official	Scoring	Proposed	Scoring
	Neal	Garry	Neal	Garry
1	9	10	9	10
2	9	10	9	10
3	9	10	8	10
Final Score	27	30	27	30

 

[markys00]

In what way?

Combine this with open scoring and the scoring laid out in a way that rewards activity and action rather than stalling, and I see no weakness.

What's the point of utterly dominating someone, like lets say you think that one fighter was twice as effective as the other but the judges will MAYBE give a 10-8 there. Instead, I would argue if you were twice as effective as your opponent and only get one or maybe 2 more points if you're lucky, that is absolutely wrong.

But if you're open with the scoring, a guy that loses a round convincingly KNOWS that he needs to push the action to recoup the score, maybe even try to get a finish.

This also has the potential to get rid of the stupid "robbery" arguments, if you actually make the scoring system more marginal in how the fight is scored.

28-24 is way more indicative of the flow of dominance in that fight than the 29-28 was given.

Because the judges suck. They have trouble with the current system, why give them more room to fuck up? Why give them more power?

 

[Chart69r]

I think it would be more clear who won which round if they used 10-8s more and 10-10 for even rounds. I'm in favor of a change

You're probably the first commenter to understand my point.

 

[markys00]

That midget carry + toss in the third is worth 3 points...

Reported for bigotry

 

[Chart69r]

Because the judges suck. They have trouble with the current system, why give them more room to fuck up? Why give them more power?

By your logic, you might as well have just a 1-0 either way for a won round, and 1-1 for a draw. What's the point of 10-9, 10-8 if you don't want proper marginal scoring.

If you want to change JUDGING, then punish shitty scoring. Make them lose their license if they clearly have no idea what the hell they're doing.

 

[markys00]

You're probably the first commenter to understand my point.

Without good judging and accountability none of that matters. One judge gives a 10-8 another 10-4.

Like, get, you know what the worst part of mma is? The judges suck. You know what a good answer to that is? Give them more options to fuck things up even more

 

[markys00]

By your logic, you might as well have just a 1-0 either way for a won round, and 1-1 for a draw. What's the point of 10-9, 10-8 if you don't want proper marginal scoring.

If you want to change JUDGING, then punish shitty scoring. Make them lose their license if they clearly have no idea what the hell they're doing.

Yea that's a start. And I'm okay with 1-0. It's just another way to score. Nothing wrong with it. My logic is still sound.

You don't want crazy margins because then you just have a clusterfuck of all sorts of scores. We want scores to be as objective as humanly possible. You score a fight 10-7, I score it 6-1. It creates, again, a clusterfuck

 

[Objectively Correct]

Very good idea. 10-9 round could mean anything right now.

 

[sdpdude9]

Yes, giving the judges 10+ options will suddenly make them understand what they’re watching. They get it so wrong when limited, this would be a disaster.

 

[Chart69r]

Yea that's a start. And I'm okay with 1-0. It's just another way to score. Nothing wrong with it. My logic is still sound

So a round that you win by the slimmest of margins is worth the same as a round that you won by an absolute landslide? That is ridiculous.

Your reasoning seems to be that the JUDGES suck. So punish judging, have more judges and do it similarly to how gymnastics, figure skating and such are scored, you remove the scores that are total outliers from the average. 5 or maybe even 7 judges to a fight, and remove outlier at either end, using only the 3 (or 5) that are relatively consistent. Even doing so on a round-by-round basis.