Shogun vs Hendo was a clear-cut draw. Round 3 definitely not a 10-8 Hendo.

Bollocks, it wasn't clear cut at all, Popkins. The third was a 10/8, the second was up for grabs, the first, fourth and fifth were easy to score.

Oh wait, you scored the fifth 10/8 and didn't give Hendo 10/8 in the third. You're an idiot. There's NO WAY you can give the fifth 10/8 to Shogun and not give Hendo the third 10/8, it's stupid.

 

I had hendo winning by 1 point, he nearly stopped shogun in round 3, so that should be a 10-8. The 5th rounds shogun dominated but didnt do much damage. Round 3 was more of a 10-8 then round 5.

 

The beatdown was ridiculous and I think a good 50% of refs would have stopped the fight if not more, definitely a 10-8 round. Hendo did far more damage to Shogun in that round than Shogun did to him in rd 5.

 

**** it, I'm not going to get into a **** throwing match. In my opinion the only way you can say that fight was clearly a draw is if you have undoubted bias towards Shogun. Sure, there is an argument to be made, but to say you cannot see how Hendo won it tells me you weren't watching the fight objectively.

 

I could have seen it go to a draw but imo it was Hendo by 1 point but a case could be made for a draw also but i got a good fight out of it either way and what would have been with the avy bets that was made if it was a draw? :scaredas:

 

This seems like a pointless effort, as I know you'll still disagree but the MMAC rules for scoring are:

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

D. Scoring Fouls
1. Fouls will be assessed a one point penalty in the round they occurred. If two (2), fouls
occurred in a round, then a two point penalty will be assessed.
2. all fouls are the Referee's responsibility to call
3. the Referee will notify each Judge that a foul was assessed. The Referee will notify the Judges
immediately, if action stops. If the foul was committed by the "bottom" fighter, then
the Referee will notify the Judges at the end of the round.


If you refer to the areas I highlighted above, a 10-8 round can be scored if a fighter is dominant. A judge can score a dominant round to a fighter if they score a knockdown and land clean strikes to a grounded opponent. Hendo did both in the third round.

 

I know it doesn't change your personal opinion, but surely it shows you that there is an argument for it to be a 10-8?