The "I could see how the judges would score it that way" fallacy

[TheLastEmperorReurns]

Seeing a lot of strange rationalizing with the Whittaker/Romero decision and the fans that feel that Whittaker rightfully got the nod.

Just wanted to point out the idea that forcing yourself to see how/why the judges would score a fight for a certain fighter does not by any means imply that the decision was right.

Many people were committing this logical fallacy with the GSP/Hendricks decision.

You could literally take a fight like Cain/JDS II, if the nod was given to JDS, and play mental gymnastics with yourself to argue how the decision was correct.

The question you should ask yourselves with decisions like Romero/Whittaker II and GSP/Hendricks is this:

• If the decision went the other way, would there be more or less outrage? That is, how much more effort would you have to put into your empathetic rationalizing to understand how the judges scored the fight the way they did?

Now that's out of the way, here's how the fight should have been scored and could have been scored under completely objective judging:

Round 1: Whittaker tees off on Romero with strikes the entire round. No answers from Romero. 10-9 for Whittaker.

• Should have been scored: 10-9 Whittaker

Round 2: Whittaker gets the better of the exchanges in another uneventful round.

• Should have been scored: 10-9 Whittaker

Round 3: Romero rocks Whittaker and proceeds to beat his ass for most of the round. Whittaker survives and manages to answer with some hard shots of his own that make this round a 10-9 instead of a 10-8.

• Should have been scored: 10-9 Romero

Round 4: This round looks like rounds 1-2 for the majority of the 5 minutes before Romero seriously hurts Whittaker again with 2 hard shots. Despite this, Whittaker has a lead in significant strikes (34-20). Romero deals more damage but scores no knockdown.

• Should have been scored: 10-10.
• Could have been scored: 10-9 Whittaker. 10-9 Romero.

Round 5: Romero's most dominant round. Similar to round 3, Romero knocks Whittaker down and scores a takedown. Unlike in round 3, there are no answers from Whittaker. Complete and utter decimation of Whittaker. 46 strikes from Romero, 14 strikes from Whittaker.

• Should have been scored: 10-8 Romero.

Final Decision:

• Should have been: 48-47 Romero
• Could have been: 48-48 Draw. 48-46 Romero.

Round 3 is certainly Romero's.

Round 5 is certainly a 10-8 for Romero.

Round 4 was the murkiest round because the most meaningful moment of the fight had Romero send Whittaker to drunk street but, looking past that, there were 4 minutes of technical exchanges that Whittaker was leading in with minimal responses from Romero. Could arguably give this round to Whittaker despite the only damage in that round being inflicted on him.

Raw fightmetric stats: http://www.fightmetric.com/fight-details/5a09fd7cb3db9705

 

[TDD]

The judging is somewhat open though, with the fact that judges arent the best and the criteria isnt too clear, its hard to judge MMA, its not judge who hit who more, but also control time and all that.

 

[GTS]

This is a stupid thread where you are basically stating your opinion of how the fight went as if it were fact, while denouncing anyone else's ability to have an opinion that differs. Every "should" and "certainly" is your way of disguising your opinion as fact. That is ignorant, dishonest, and not in any way mature. Take away your "certainly" 10-8 5th round makes the fight awarded correctly. You just need to get over yourself and understand that your opinion is not fact, just because someone disagrees with you does not automatically mean they are wrong, and get on with something that resembles a real life rather than rag on this decision.

 

[Dogo1]

I wanted to read it until I saw it was a thesis

 

[TheIrishPsycho]

I wanted to read it until I saw it was a thesis

Exactly,

Sort this out TS. Sherbros are busy people.

 

[LockardTheGOAT]

This is a stupid thread where you are basically stating your opinion of how the fight went as if it were fact, while denouncing anyone else's ability to have an opinion that differs. Every "should" and "certainly" is your way of disguising your opinion as fact. That is ignorant, dishonest, and not in any way mature. Take away your "certainly" 10-8 5th round makes the fight awarded correctly. You just need to get over yourself and understand that your opinion is not fact, just because someone disagrees with you does not automatically mean they are wrong, and get on with something that resembles a real life rather than rag on this decision.

*Knows TS is right

 

[The Accuser]

Even if you give Whittaker the 4th round I don't see how the 5th is not 10-8, thus leaving Whittaker with a draw at best. Not a single judge scoring round 5 10-8 is really a bad look on the commission.

 

[2004 account]

I agree with this. It’s not that all these Whittaker fans are delusional, they are just being dishonest. If Romero had been called the winner, they wouldn’t have any argument at all to back up their view.

A lot of dishonesty here. If they had to sware to god with a hand over their heart, many probably would still continue their own contrived narrative that Whittaker won.

 

[2004 account]

This is a stupid thread where you are basically stating your opinion of how the fight went as if it were fact, while denouncing anyone else's ability to have an opinion that differs. Every "should" and "certainly" is your way of disguising your opinion as fact. That is ignorant, dishonest, and not in any way mature. Take away your "certainly" 10-8 5th round makes the fight awarded correctly. You just need to get over yourself and understand that your opinion is not fact, just because someone disagrees with you does not automatically mean they are wrong, and get on with something that resembles a real life rather than rag on this decision.

He is using the new rules as judging criteria better than the judges. He has a good argument, better than yours

 

[TheLastEmperorReurns]

This is a stupid thread where you are basically stating your opinion of how the fight went as if it were fact, while denouncing anyone else's ability to have an opinion that differs. Every "should" and "certainly" is your way of disguising your opinion as fact. That is ignorant, dishonest, and not in any way mature. Take away your "certainly" 10-8 5th round makes the fight awarded correctly. You just need to get over yourself and understand that your opinion is not fact, just because someone disagrees with you does not automatically mean they are wrong, and get on with something that resembles a real life rather than rag on this decision.

Dude, you literally had 2 sentences that said the same thing for each point.

 

[Alxair]

I honestly don't see how anyone could score this anything other than a win or draw for Romero unless they're super biased against him - which likely is the case for those scoring this fight against him.

 

[Bmurray]

Different people weight things differently. How important are weak leg kicks? How do you score takedowns that go nowhere? How critical is octagon control?

There are dozens factors where judges may differ in their opinions, whether it be based on preference, viewing perspective, rules ignorance, or flat-out bias.

Empathizing with human interpretation is not a fallacy.

 

[BabyBlue_Bomber]

Scoring is very subjective in a fight like Romero/Wittaker 2...

The emphasis in scoring a round is placed on effective striking, but everyone has their own idea of what an effective strike is...

For some just landing is enough to sway a judge, others think a strike that visibly hurts a person defines an effective strike, and I'm sure that there are a few judges who believe strikes that leave cuts/bruises are synonymous with effective striking.

That's why in fights like this I can see both sides of the argument, and would even go so far as to say both sides are right.

What I have an issue with is how top position seems to trump effective striking in many judges' eyes, even though effective striking is the main criteria to look at when scoring a round.

 

[xhaydenx]

We didn't need to force ourselves to see anything. 2 out of 3 judges didn't either.

Whittaker won and it was the right decision. Just let it go man.

 

[ChucksGlassJaw]

I had Whitaker winning round 4 pretty soundly and I don't think there was a 10-8 round. Romero wasn't active enough the entire fight and paid the price.