Why does nobody ever score 10-10 rounds? What's the problem?

FFS you are ****ing dense mate.

For the last time, THERE IS A HUGE, HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "CAN NOT BE SCORED" AND "COULD LEGITIMATELY BE SCORED EITHER WAY." atsch

What exactly is so hard for you to accept about that? Why can you not understand the difference between "can't be scored" and "can be scored for either guy depending merely on personal preference"? :huh

You seriously want me to make a list of close rounds where many people strongly disagree about who won it and both sides of the argument have merit?

Why is it so important to you that you HAVE to find one guy to award the round to, NO MATTER WHAT? How deep do you go before you are awarding a guy a W because of ONE meaningless strike or half-assed takedown or failed submission attempt over a 15 or 25 minute fight?

:hat

 

And, where's the lie?

All I have posted here is my opinion. And IN MY OPINION, I don't like the idea of judges deciding who gets the win based essentially on "I like Nick Diaz more than I like Jon Fitch."

If you can see that a given round was very close and could be legitimately argued for either man, but you score it for Fighter A, then that is essentially exactly what you are doing. And that means that, going into the fight, one fighter too often has an unfair advantage over another because 2 or 3 of the 3 judges simply happen to prefer his style of fighting over his opponent's.

That means that Fighter B has to do more to get the decision than Fighter A does. One guy has to win the round clearly, the other just has to fight on even terms and he'll get the nod for "aggression" or "octagon generalship" or "workrate" or whatever these judges as people prefer to see.

:hat

 

Any rounds where the judge's decision causes heated discussion afterwards about who should have won the fight.

Well, you're the one saying that there is always, ALWAYS a reason to give the round to one fighter over another. So the closer the round is, by extension the smaller those reasons become. So in a very close round, yes it does sometimes come down to "Fighter A got a takedown" or "I thought Fighter B wobbled him a little bit when he landed that hook and made him backpedal for two seconds."

And I'm not going to try to read any judge's minds for exactly why they scored one round for one guy over the other. I could say it was this kick at 3:17 which seems like it was the deciding moment, when in fact the judge scored it for that man simply because he felt he was more aggressive over the five minutes.

:hat

 

For me, if someone is saying after a close fight, "Well, round 4 could have gone either way. I give it to Fighter A, but I can't argue with anyone who scored it for Fighter B", that is a HELL of a thing to be the reason why a champion should lose his title, or a guy should miss out on a title shot, or a guy should get cut from the organization.

Five minutes is a LONG time to clearly remember every single little thing that happened at every stage of the round. Watching it live you get impressions of the action as it unfolds. You don't play it back on replay, scrutinize every frame and THEN make the decision. Half the time you're not even sure if a strike landed or not, or even who got the better of an exchange. Oftentimes that kind of **** only becomes clear on slow-motion replays from multiple angles. It's not so clear as it's happening and being judged in real time, and the closer the round is, the less clear it is and the more important these individual moments become.

You could watch a very close round, think back over what happened and give it to Fighter A because of that big combo he landed in the second minute of the round. But in reality your angle was bad and the truth was he threw 6 strikes, of which 3 missed completely because of top-notch defensive movement, 1 was a glancing shot and 2 were expertly blocked. So it was an ineffective attack nullified by superior defence. But in real-time from the angle you saw it, it left you thinking "BIG combo!". When you see the replay later you realize that the combo wasn't nearly as damaging as you thought it was. But in real-time, the rest of the round is very close and that missed combo was the deciding moment that you chose as justification in awarding Fighter A the round, and very possibly the fight.

:hat

 

So you've never thought "Nice combination!" and then watched the replay at the end of the round and realized that no strikes of consequence actually landed? :huh

You've never once thought that someone landed a huge punch and wobbled the other guy, but in fact it was a glancing shot or it was blocked, and the guy's reaction to it was because it happened while he was off-balance for an instant, and not because he was actually hurt?

:hat

 

Answer the question then.

Have you ever thought "Nice combination!" and then seen on the replay at the end of the round that actually nothing landed flush and no damage was done?

:hat

 

atsch

Now you're just lying because you know it's a fair point. :good

:hat