Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Other > MMA Forum

 
  


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-13-2012, 05:18 AM   #61
Haggis McJackass
Semi-neutralist Overseer
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: From the Lands Down Under.
Posts: 2,594
vCash: 177
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthpawSlayer View Post
yeah course mate
If you're digging deep to find one or two pieces of action in order to find a reason to split the difference between competitors in a closely-fought 5 minute round, then yes that shit suddenly does become very relevant.

I've never yet heard a commentator in boxing OR MMA (sitting cageside, same as the judges) who didn't sometimes get all excited about a strike and how it wobbled a guy, and then watch the replay between rounds and realize that it wasn't the flush, damaging strike he thought it was.

And if you're scoring a round on individual moments like that, then you can give a five minute round (and potentially a world title) to a guy purely because during a very close round he half-landed one grazing shot while his opponent was off-balance and you thought it was a significant moment in the fight, when really it wasn't at all.

You don't have to agree with this point of view, but it IS a fair point, backed up by logical statements.

Haggis McJackass is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 05:48 AM   #62
SouthpawSlayer
Im coming for you
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gay St Pierre
Posts: 8,187
vCash: 75
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggis McJackass View Post
If you're digging deep to find one or two pieces of action in order to find a reason to split the difference between competitors in a closely-fought 5 minute round, then yes that shit suddenly does become very relevant.

I've never yet heard a commentator in boxing OR MMA (sitting cageside, same as the judges) who didn't sometimes get all excited about a strike and how it wobbled a guy, and then watch the replay between rounds and realize that it wasn't the flush, damaging strike he thought it was.

And if you're scoring a round on individual moments like that, then you can give a five minute round (and potentially a world title) to a guy purely because during a very close round he half-landed one grazing shot while his opponent was off-balance and you thought it was a significant moment in the fight, when really it wasn't at all.

You don't have to agree with this point of view, but it IS a fair point, backed up by logical statements.

please stop doing this to yourself, your clutching at straws so bad to make your argument valid you are coming up with this bullshit of a judge not seeing a punch correctly, your gone totally off topic, this argument is old, it was finished with on page 1 when no one agreed with your idea of more rounds should be 10 10, btw i have sat ringside and cageside many times and i have always been able to see whether or not 99% of punches land, same as most people and judges i reckon, unless they are half blind or something
SouthpawSlayer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 05:54 AM   #63
Will Cooling
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,589
vCash: 500
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

As somebody who has been cageside (and ringside for that matter) I can tell you its a LOT easier to judge which punches connect and with what force than when you're watching on television.
Will Cooling is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-13-2012, 05:59 AM   #64
Haggis McJackass
Semi-neutralist Overseer
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: From the Lands Down Under.
Posts: 2,594
vCash: 177
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthpawSlayer View Post
please stop doing this to yourself, your clutching at straws so bad to make your argument valid you are coming up with this bullshit of a judge not seeing a punch correctly, your gone totally off topic, this argument is old, it was finished with on page 1 when no one agreed with your idea of more rounds should be 10 10, btw i have sat ringside and cageside many times and i have always been able to see whether or not 99% of punches land, same as most people and judges i reckon, unless they are half blind or something
Right, so I guess that the 10 point must system is a very satisfactory way of scoring three-round MMA fights then?

Everyone is very clear on how to score a round and what the most important facets are, it's quite simple and clear-cut and individual preferences for fighting styles is not a real concern?

And there is no widespread belief that the system as it stands (which was imported wholescale from a completely different sport for the sake of convenience) is too vague and ill-defined?

Okay then, I guess the 10 point must system as it is currently used for three-round fights involving striking, wrestling AND submission fighting has no problems then. Even though nobody ever has any idea what the hell has been going on in the minds of the judges when a close fight goes to the cards, or even what they were looking for in the first place.

Thank you for your wisdom, I guess I can now disregard every complaint I've ever heard a fighter or commentator make about the 10 point must system as used in MMA.

Haggis McJackass is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 06:05 AM   #65
Haggis McJackass
Semi-neutralist Overseer
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: From the Lands Down Under.
Posts: 2,594
vCash: 177
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Cooling View Post
As somebody who has been cageside (and ringside for that matter) I can tell you its a LOT easier to judge which punches connect and with what force than when you're watching on television.
Yep, it is.

But you can still get unsighted, and you can still think a punch landed flush when in fact it was blocked and only made solid contact with an arm instead of the side of a head. Especially if it happens on the other side of the cage. Which is why every commentator (who sits ringside) sometimes makes mistakes, watches the replay and changes his opinion about how effective a damaging-looking or sounding strike actually was.

Hell, your perception of how solid and effective a strike or combination was can be heavily influenced just by the crowd's response to it. How many times do you see the home fighter win a close decision, especially in boxing? Most times, because every time they land anything, the crowd roars in appreciation. Whereas whenever the opponent lands, they don't respond. This gives the impression that the hometown guy has had the better of the action.

Haggis McJackass is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 06:09 AM   #66
Will Cooling
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,589
vCash: 500
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

A good judge can block that out. I think its difficult to think of too many hometown decisions in UFC history.

And commentators are not judges. They are not giving their whole attention to scoring the fight. They are primarily focusing on explaining the action to the viewer at home and keeping people interested.
Will Cooling is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 06:12 AM   #67
SouthpawSlayer
Im coming for you
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gay St Pierre
Posts: 8,187
vCash: 75
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggis McJackass View Post
Right, so I guess that the 10 point must system is a very satisfactory way of scoring three-round MMA fights then?

Everyone is very clear on how to score a round and what the most important facets are, it's quite simple and clear-cut and individual preferences for fighting styles is not a real concern?

And there is no widespread belief that the system as it stands (which was imported wholescale from a completely different sport for the sake of convenience) is too vague and ill-defined?

Okay then, I guess the 10 point must system as it is currently used for three-round fights involving striking, wrestling AND submission fighting has no problems then. Even though nobody ever has any idea what the hell has been going on in the minds of the judges when a close fight goes to the cards, or even what they were looking for in the first place.

Thank you for your wisdom, I guess I can now disregard every complaint I've ever heard a fighter or commentator make about the 10 point must system as used in MMA.

nobody once in this thread ever said the 10 point must system was a great way of scoring mma, once again you have resorted to changing your argument and insinuating that we think the ten point must system is a good scoring method in order to not make yourself look so stupid, problem is your OP already confirmed this for us, you never mentioned the system of scoring up until now as your trying to put the blame of this thread onto the scoring system rather than your OP, problem is although the system has a few flaws its the best system out there
SouthpawSlayer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 06:29 AM   #68
Haggis McJackass
Semi-neutralist Overseer
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: From the Lands Down Under.
Posts: 2,594
vCash: 177
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthpawSlayer View Post
nobody once in this thread ever said the 10 point must system was a great way of scoring mma, once again you have resorted to changing your argument and insinuating that we think the ten point must system is a good scoring method in order to not make yourself look so stupid, problem is your OP already confirmed this for us, you never mentioned the system of scoring up until now as your trying to put the blame of this thread onto the scoring system rather than your OP, problem is although the system has a few flaws its the best system out there
All I've said is that the scoring system is loosely-defined, that everybody interprets different levels of importance for different aspects of the sport, and that it often leads to scorecards that are all over the place.

You have one judge who is always going to give a close round to the more aggressive fighter, even if he can't land anything significant and is constantly getting peppered with jabs and leg kicks. Another judge might give the same round to the guy who hits and doesn't get hit. A third judge might have the deciding factor be workrate, not effectiveness. They are all judging on massively different criteria, and they are all finding excuses to justify scoring very close, non-decisive rounds according to their personal preference for what a fight "should" be.

Then there's massive dispute about the significance of takedowns and unsuccessful submission attempts, shit there's heaps of things that nobody has a clue about how significant they are or should be.

It's so loose and vague that it means you can find a reason to give any close round to one guy or the other.

I gave round 5 to Condit, because he was easily in control for 80% of it and escaped his one minute of danger without harm. But I can see that Diaz was closer to finishing the fight than Condit was. So it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I gave the round, and therefore the fight, to Condit. But it was close and that was purely my personal preference talking, because the scoring system is so loose and ill-defined.

Haggis McJackass is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 08:04 AM   #69
nuges
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 439
vCash: 75
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

I see a lot of faults with scoring it 10-10..scoring it that way to me is a sign of indecisiveness which shouldn't be exhibited if you're a judge. Cause in reality, there may be a razor close round, but a round will never be equal. Also if it's commonly acceptable to allow 10-10 rounds when it's really close, you leave it open for judges to score many rounds 10-10 which will leave a different mentality for scoring and have way too many draws. At the end of the day, you hire a judge to be decisive. Not to be wishywashy and give an even round whenever it's close.
nuges is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 08:58 AM   #70
Stoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,933
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

This thread is hilarious

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggis McJackass View Post
All I've said is that the scoring system is loosely-defined

Quote:
VIII. JUDGES

A. No judge will have a financial interest in any fighter he judges.

B. No judge will be a manager/trainer of any fighter he judges.

C. In a bout goes to it's full time limit, the outcome will be decided by a majority decision of
three, (3), MMAC judges.

D. A judge is accredited, sanctioned and selected based upon his character, experience, stature in the MMA world, knowledge of MMA systems and impartiality.

E. Judging Criteria
1. Judges are required to determine the winner of a bout that goes to it's full time limit based upon the following criteria:
-Clean Strikes
-Effective Grappling
-Octagon Control
-Effective Aggressiveness

F. Clean Strikes
1. The fighter who is landing both effective and efficient clean strikes.
2. There are two ways of measuring strikes:
-the total number of clean strikes landed (more efficient)
-the total number of heavy strikes landed (more effective)

G. The heavier striker who lands with efficiency, deserves more credit from the Judges than total number landed.
1. If the striking power between the fighters was equal, then the total number landed would be used as the criteria.
2. The total number of strikes landed, should be of sufficient quantity favoring a fighter, to earn a winning round.

H. Strikes thrown from the top position of the guard, are generally heavier and more effective than those thrown from the back.
1. Thus a Judge shall recognize that effective strikes thrown from the top guard position are of "higher quality", than thrown from the bottom.
2. The Judge shall recognize that this is not always the case.
However, the vast majority of fighters prefer the top guard position to strike from. This is a strong indication of positional dominance for striking.

I. Effective Grappling
1. The Judge shall recognize the value of both the clean takedown and active guard position.
2. The Judge shall recognize that a fighter who is able to cleanly takedown his opponent, is effectively grappling.
3. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter on his back in an active guard position, can effectively grapple, through execution of repeated threatening attempts at submission and reversal resulting in continuous defense from the top fighter.
4. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter who maneuvers from guard to mount is effectively grappling.
5. A Judge shall recognize that the guard position alone shall be scored neutral or even, if none of the preceding situations were met.(items 2-4)
6. A Judge shall recognize that if the fighters remain in guard the majority of a round with neither fighter having an edge in clean striking or effective grappling, (items 2-4), the fighter who scored the clean takedown deserves the round.
7. A clean reversal is equal to a clean takedown in effective grappling

J. Octagon Control
1. The fighter who is dictating the pace, place and position of the fight.
2. A striker who fends off a grappler's takedown attempt to remain standing and effectively strike is octagon control.
3. A grappler who can takedown an effective standing striker to ground fight is octagon control.
4. The fighter on the ground who creates submission, mount or clean striking opportunities

K. Effective Aggressiveness
1. This simply means who is moving forward and finding success.(scoring)
2. Throwing a strike moving backwards is not as effective as a strike thrown moving forward.
3. Throwing strikes and not landing is not effective aggressiveness.
4. Moving forward and getting struck is not effective aggressiveness.
5. Shooting takedowns and getting countered and fended off is not effective aggressiveness.

L. Criteria Evaluation
1. Each judge is to evaluate which fighter was most effective. Thus striking and grappling skills are top priority.
2. Evaluating the criteria requires the use of a sliding scale. Fights can remain standing or grounded. Judges shall recognize that it isn't how long the fighters are standing or grounded, as to the scoring the fighters achieve ,while in those positions.
3. If 90% of the round is grounded one fighter on top, then:
-effective grappling is weighed first.
-clean striking is weighed next. If clean strikes scored in the round, the Judge shall factor it
in. Clean Striking can outweigh Effective Grappling while the fighters are grounded.
-octagon control is next (pace, place & position)

4. The same rational holds true if 90% of the round were standing. Thus:
-clean striking would be weighed first (fighter most effective)
-clean grappling second (any takedowns or effective clinching)
-octagon control which fighter maintained better position? Which fighter created the situations
that led to effective strikes?

5. If a round was 50% standing and 50% on the ground, then:
-clean striking and effective grappling are weighed more equally.
-octagon control would be factored next

6. In all three hypothetical situations, effective aggressiveness is factored in last. It is the
criteria of least importance. Since the definition calls for moving forward and scoring, it is
imperative for the Judges to look at the scoring first.

7. Thus for all Judges scoring UFC fights, the prioritized order of evaluating criteria is:
-clean strikes and effective grappling are weighed first.
-octagon control
-effective aggressiveness

M. Domination Criteria
1. A Judge may determine that a fighter dominated his opponent in a round. This can lead to a two point or more difference on a Judge's scorecard.
2. The definition of a dominating round is a fighter's ability to effectively strike, grapple and
control his opponent.
3. A Judge may determine a round was dominating if a fighter was adversely affected by one of the following:
-knocked down from standing position by clean strike
-by submission attempt
-from a throw
-from clean strikes either standing or grounded.

N. Judge's Scorecard Procedures
After each round:
1. each Judge will determine and record a score each round
2. a MMAC official will collect the scorecard after each round
3. the MMAC official will track and add each Judges score by round
4. If the fight goes the time limit, the MMAC official will add each Judge's scorecard and double check total
5. the fighter with the greater number of points wins the fight on each Judges scorecard
6. the fighter who won on the majority of the Judges Scorecards, wins the fight
7. the MMAC official will hand the decision to the PA announcer

O. Types of Judge's Decisions
1. If all three scorecards agree Unanimous
2. If two of three scorecards agree Split
3. Two scorecards agree and one draw Majority
4. two scorecards agree on draw Draw
5. all scorecards different Draw

IX SCORING SYSTEM

A. The MMAC and UFC have adopted a 10 point must system.
The Judge will use the criteria to determine a winner each round. The three step procedure per round is as follows:
-determine winner of round (can be draw)
-determine if winner dominated round
-fouls then factored in (subtract one point per foul from fighter)

B. Draws are again acceptable in MMAC events

C. Point Totals
1. two fighters who draw are given a score of 10-10
2. the fighter who wins a round is given a score of 10-9
3.The fighter who dominates a round is given a score of 10-8
(a score of 10-7 is possible for a dominant round)
4.For each foul a fighter commits, a point is subtracted. This deduction can change a winning round to a draw. 9-9
Stoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 04:04 PM   #71
Ne5ville14
Rationalist by default...
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,318
vCash: 500
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

LOL, Haggis have you ever realised that you are arguing the exact same way a christian would argue about there religion ?
Ne5ville14 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 10:53 AM   #72
DavidChao
A contender,.. a somebody
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 595
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

Machida v Rampage would be a good example here.
DavidChao is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 08:12 PM   #73
Ai-edy2007
STOCKTON 209 MOTHER****ER
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,771
vCash: 500
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

yrs.
Ai-edy2007 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 06:53 PM   #74
Stoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,933
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

BUMP!

Stoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 07:19 PM   #75
Wilhelm
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Northwoods of Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 1,455
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

I'm not going to go back and deal with every post here, but Haggis is 100% correct. If the judge thinks the round is even, he/she should score it as such. The idea that they're discouraged to do this because it "leads to too many draws" or whatever is BS. This is more the fault of the shitty three-separate-rounds format than anything else. They could do away with it and score it all at once in terms of "who did the most damage", but then we'd be whining about guys who finish strong getting the unfair nod. We could also do something like an extra round or at least a minute or two when a draw occurs. Rinse and repeat until a legit winner is determined.

Don't people see that if you think a round is even (either because both guys did well or neither guy did shit) and have to just pick one guy that that's way more unfair?

Edit: Since I didn't read every post, I guess saying "Haggiss is 100% right" is kinda dangerous. I'll say that I agree that more even rounds should be scored when it's close as opposed to just picking one of the guys.

Last edited by Wilhelm; 09-03-2012 at 07:21 PM. Reason: Not reading all that shit
Wilhelm is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Other > MMA Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013