again with the judging: how about...

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: armbarandgrill
Date: June 16, 2011 at 09:56 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

- completely do away with "judges" and replace them with score keepers. no longer would opinion factor in.
- completely do away with the 10 point must system and replace it with a scoring system based on offense.
- strikes that land, though partially blocked = 1 point
- strikes that land cleanly = 2 points
- strikes that land and cause a knock-down = 3 points
- strikes that cause a KO obviously win the fight
- submission attempts that establish control but are not completely locked in = 2 points
- submission attempts that are locked in = 3 points
- submissions that end in a tap obviously win the fight
nothing else scores points.
face it...everyone wants to see guys trying to finish. if points are rewarded ONLY for techniques that show intent to finish, fighters should start fighting that way.
take-downs would no longer score points, but could obviously still be used to put your opponent in a position where you could deliver GnP or attempt subs, but would only result in points if either happened.
EDIT: fighters are aware of the score throughout the fight as are the fans via scoreboard!
add to it or flame away.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Brick
Date: June 16, 2011 at 10:22 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

Sounds like karate-tournament-style point fighting.
Do not want.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: armbarandgrill
Date: June 16, 2011 at 10:34 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

ok
bad idea.
i started thinking about this while watching game 7 last night and thought how easy it is to score. they dont give points for superb skating or fantastic passing...only if it results in a goal. wrestling could be looked at in the same way.
just as you dont get points for adding spinning back fists unless they score.
but i guess it's all just a bad idea.
EDIT:
BTW, i didnt say anything about doing away with wrestling. if you were around long enough to read some of my posts you'd find i am actually a wrestling fan who enjoys seeing sluggers shut down with control. its just that aspect isnt very popular. so as i said, wrestling and takedowns could still be used to achieve a position where the fight could be finished from or where points could be picked up, just the act itself would not score. it would still be a very important element in gaining a "finishing" position. and in case you haven't noticed, MANY fans are calling for an end for points given to takedowns.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Brick
Date: June 16, 2011 at 10:40 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

armbarandgrill said:
ok
bad idea.
i started thinking about this while watching game 7 last night and thought how easy it is to score. they dont give points for superb skating or fantastic passing...only if it results in a goal. wrestling could be looked at in the same way.
just as you dont get points for adding spinning back fists unless they score.
but i guess it's all just a bad idea.
Click to expand...

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: armbarandgrill
Date: June 16, 2011 at 10:45 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

Brick said:
Sounds like karate-tournament-style point fighting.
Do not want.
Click to expand...
i didnt know karate gave points for sub attempts buit ive never seen one so i could be wrong.
are karate style tournaments exciting??
"do not want" means you are good with the current system and the outcomes?

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Brick
Date: June 16, 2011 at 11:00 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

armbarandgrill said:
Brick said:
Sounds like karate-tournament-style point fighting.
Do not want.
Click to expand...
i didnt know karate gave points for sub attempts buit ive never seen one so i could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Well, of course they don't, it's karate, but I was saying assigning specific points with no subjective judgment is that tournament style of points.
armbarandgrill said:
are karate style tournaments exciting??
Click to expand...
No.
armbarandgrill said:
"do not want" means you are good with the current system and the outcomes?
Click to expand...
Yes.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: sourpuss
Date: June 16, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

I played a fight out in my head using this system and I think TS is onto something unless we want to listen to constant complaining for the rest of our lives. This is probably the best proposal I've heard yet although it needs fine tuning. It concentrates reward on the two facets of the sport everyone wants, action and finishes.
Unless someone gives reasons I would ignore people who hate on the idea and not get discouraged. They have little to contribute if they simply say no and have obviously not given it much thought. My big thing is how could anyone say things are alright as they are? You'd have to be locked in a cave to miss the ever rising roar of disapproval.
That's just my opinion.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: PsychoIcon
Date: June 16, 2011 at 12:16 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

LawrenceWesTerry said:
sourpuss said:
I played a fight out in my head using this system and I think TS is onto something unless we want to listen to constant complaining for the rest of our lives. This is probably the best proposal I've heard yet although it needs fine tuning. It concentrates reward on the two facets of the sport everyone wants, action and finishes.
Unless someone gives reasons I would ignore people who hate on the idea and not get discouraged. They have little to contribute if they simply say no and have obviously not given it much thought. My big thing is how could anyone say things are alright as they are? You'd have to be locked in a cave to miss the ever rising roar of disapproval.
That's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
We are saying that it's not the "Judging Criteria" that is currently being used in Mixed Martial Arts that is the problem. The problem is obviously judges who are not educated in the following:
A) The "Judging Criteria" itself.
B) Mixed Martial Arts in general.
Have you seen the "Judging Criteria" that is currently used in Mixed Martial Arts? It has everything covered in it, but hilariously they break one of the first rules stated in the Criteria by having judges at MMA events that obviously have no knowledge of how to intelligently judge an MMA bout, because they have no knowledge of MMA in general.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with teh way they score it now, like he said its the judges.
You have to be a complete idiot or payed to mess up decisions. mmajunkie poles and questionairs and questions asked on facebook and the crowds reaction to decisions are obvious that even the simple fan can get it right.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Brick
Date: June 16, 2011 at 12:36 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

OK, then, some clarification on my positions that (a)there is nothing wrong with the status quo and (b)even if there were, there is not much to be accomplished by rule changes.
On suggestions that there is widespread disatisfaction: I don't really see it, I interact with a lot of both casual and long-time fans, and really the only time I see any real, constant complaining about the judging/scoring system is by a few on an internet forum.
On the point that fights are called wrong all the time: The vast majority of fights are called exactly right, and therefore no one talks about those decisions. It's just a few close decisions that everyone freaks out about and says the whole system is broken. The majority of those close decisions, IMO, are "they boy who cried wolf" cases where people claim "robbery!" because their guy lost. Close decisions happen. The percentage of fights where the decision is actually a headscratcher to almost everyone but the judges is very, very small. But when one happens, everyone is quick to say the whole damn system is broken.
OK, so some fights get called obviously for the wrong guy: This not a MMA problem, this is a sports problem. Even in sports with very clear scoring rules suffer from it. Blown calls in football, was it a goal or not in hockey, baseball strike zone, etc.
To the idea that changing the rules would mean less bitching: Please. Say we adopted armbar's rules verbatim. Then you get people bitching because submission locked in should be worth 3.5 points not 3 points, etc. And after each fight, people bitching about "WTF GSP had that submission locked in, but didn't get scored for him" or "Anderson landed 55 clean shots by my count, not 50, robbery!" I'm not picking on armbar's system specifically, I'm just saying that a minority are currently disgruntled with the scoring system, and a minority (perhaps more) will be disgruntled with whatever you change it to.
So, bottom line, the system is working just fine. In cases of a true blown call it is usually a case of the judge(s) not knowing what the hell they are doing. The judging/reffing skill simply has not kept up, because of the incredible growth of the sport. That will change.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: JC507
Date: June 16, 2011 at 12:51 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

Brick said:
OK, then, some clarification on my positions that (a)there is nothing wrong with the status quo and (b)even if there were, there is not much to be accomplished by rule changes.
On suggestions that there is widespread disatisfaction: I don't really see it, I interact with a lot of both casual and long-time fans, and really the only time I see any real, constant complaining about the judging/scoring system is by a few on an internet forum.
On the point that fights are called wrong all the time: The vast majority of fights are called exactly right, and therefore no one talks about those decisions. It's just a few close decisions that everyone freaks out about and says the whole system is broken. The majority of those close decisions, IMO, are "they boy who cried wolf" cases where people claim "robbery!" because their guy lost. Close decisions happen. The percentage of fights where the decision is actually a headscratcher to almost everyone but the judges is very, very small. But when one happens, everyone is quick to say the whole damn system is broken.
OK, so some fights get called obviously for the wrong guy: This not a MMA problem, this is a sports problem. Even in sports with very clear scoring rules suffer from it. Blown calls in football, was it a goal or not in hockey, baseball strike zone, etc.
To the idea that changing the rules would mean less bitching: Please. Say we adopted armbar's rules verbatim. Then you get people bitching because submission locked in should be worth 3.5 points not 3 points, etc. And after each fight, people bitching about "WTF GSP had that submission locked in, but didn't get scored for him" or "Anderson landed 55 clean shots by my count, not 50, robbery!" I'm not picking on armbar's system specifically, I'm just saying that a minority are currently disgruntled with the scoring system, and a minority (perhaps more) will be disgruntled with whatever you change it to.
So, bottom line, the system is working just fine. In cases of a true blown call it is usually a case of the judge(s) not knowing what the hell they are doing. The judging/reffing skill simply has not kept up, because of the incredible growth of the sport. That will change.
Click to expand...
Damn good post. The bolded part is the main thing, with time will come better judges. I'm sure all sports had problems with referees and umpires and whatnot in the beginning of their sport, and still do to this day.
And just like Brick said, there hasn't been many, very few actually, robberies, alot of close calls that have maybe not gone to the majorities view but that's what happens when it's close.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: PsychoIcon
Date: June 16, 2011 at 12:54 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

JC507 said:
Brick said:
OK, then, some clarification on my positions that (a)there is nothing wrong with the status quo and (b)even if there were, there is not much to be accomplished by rule changes.
On suggestions that there is widespread disatisfaction: I don't really see it, I interact with a lot of both casual and long-time fans, and really the only time I see any real, constant complaining about the judging/scoring system is by a few on an internet forum.
On the point that fights are called wrong all the time: The vast majority of fights are called exactly right, and therefore no one talks about those decisions. It's just a few close decisions that everyone freaks out about and says the whole system is broken. The majority of those close decisions, IMO, are "they boy who cried wolf" cases where people claim "robbery!" because their guy lost. Close decisions happen. The percentage of fights where the decision is actually a headscratcher to almost everyone but the judges is very, very small. But when one happens, everyone is quick to say the whole damn system is broken.
OK, so some fights get called obviously for the wrong guy: This not a MMA problem, this is a sports problem. Even in sports with very clear scoring rules suffer from it. Blown calls in football, was it a goal or not in hockey, baseball strike zone, etc.
To the idea that changing the rules would mean less bitching: Please. Say we adopted armbar's rules verbatim. Then you get people bitching because submission locked in should be worth 3.5 points not 3 points, etc. And after each fight, people bitching about "WTF GSP had that submission locked in, but didn't get scored for him" or "Anderson landed 55 clean shots by my count, not 50, robbery!" I'm not picking on armbar's system specifically, I'm just saying that a minority are currently disgruntled with the scoring system, and a minority (perhaps more) will be disgruntled with whatever you change it to.
So, bottom line, the system is working just fine. In cases of a true blown call it is usually a case of the judge(s) not knowing what the hell they are doing. The judging/reffing skill simply has not kept up, because of the incredible growth of the sport. That will change.
Click to expand...
Damn good post. The bolded part is the main thing, with time will come better judges. I'm sure all sports had problems with referees and umpires and whatnot in the beginning of their sport, and still do to this day.
And just like Brick said, there hasn't been many, very few actually, robberies, alot of close calls that have maybe not gone to the majorities view but that's what happens when it's close.
Click to expand...
Very very true, and its the judges, and not the system... It was the same judge in the past UFC that messed up 2 fights, and then the others were razor close

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: darcebandit
Date: July 06, 2011 at 06:01 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

Official MMA judging solutions thread.
There has been a few Judging threads but I found none that really leaves it as an open thread for opinions and discussion more like one guys views and then the discussion on their views.
Have your say, what judging would please you most? What changes would you make if any? I have a lot to say about it and will contribute myself when I get my post finished

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Brick
Date: July 13, 2011 at 11:49 AM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/again-with-the-judging-how-about.39643/

Excellent article by Kevin Iole, I agree 100%.
Mailbag: Does MMA point system need change?
By Kevin Iole, Yahoo! Sports
Jul 12, 4:45 pm EDT
Hopefully by now you have read the excellent piece by my colleague, Dave Meltzer, on judging in mixed martial arts and the experiment in California amateur fights with half-point scoring.
What is perceived to be the sport’s judging woes has been the topic of almost nonstop conversation for the last several years.
But what truly is wrong with the judging? Is there something so badly flawed in the scoring system that a change in the format is required? I don’t think so, because all that going to the half-point scoring system does is essentially change the scoring from a 10-point must system to a 20-point must.
The question that needs to be answered is whether anything is seriously wrong with the judging and, if so, is it the scoring format or the criteria used to judge fights that needs to change?
I firmly believe that the controversy is overblown. Remember, who is qualified to assess the judges? Are fans who are watching on television, cheering with their friends, drinking, eating and having a good time, the ones who should be deciding who can score a fight properly and who can’t?
Should reporters, who are doing live chats, play-by-play, Twittering and the like, be evaluating the judges?
I think not.
I don’t think the problem is nearly as pervasive as some outraged fans and media members would have you believe, though I agree wholeheartedly that there have been some calls I vehemently disagreed with.
The better thing to do, as I suggested before, is to first better train the judges. They must be evaluated consistently by a qualified peer group. And the scoring criteria should be changed to exclude defense and only cover offense.
MMA is an offensive sport and nebulous things such as defense and cage control are too difficult to accurately assess. The fighter who does more damage and comes closer to finishing should be given the round.
There isn’t a need for a new scoring system or even new judges. All that is needed is a clearer scoring standard.