I wasn't there so I'm not making a complaint, but surely a good way of sorting out what seems to be a poor way of judging would be to follow amature boxing and equip the judges with a buzzer/button. When the judge sees a score he/she presses their button. If 2 out of 3 judges press their buttons within a second of each other then the point is scored.
As for the attendance - was anyone really surprised? As someone mentioned earlier, the reason why most comps have larger attendances is because the partners, family and teammates of the competitors go to watch their friends and loved ones and fill up the stands. All ADCC was relying on was fans, and we don't yet have a fanbase like established sports to support running an event on fans alone. Add in a location away from a major city and without an established BJJ/MMA community and it all adds up to low attendance. Given the larger numbers of participants in BJJ/No Gi/MMA in either NY or California, ADCC should have been held in either of those locations.
I wasn't there so I'm not making a complaint, but surely a good way of sorting out what seems to be a poor way of judging would be to follow amature boxing and equip the judges with a buzzer/button. When the judge sees a score he/she presses their button. If 2 out of 3 judges press their buttons within a second of each other then the point is scored.
that works better in sports where there are no gradations of scores, a point is a point in am boxing, there are what, 4 different types of score you could get in adcc (-1, 2, 3, 4), so would be tricky.
Jsho - true, but as the points for each position are set in the rules, all the judges are deciding is whether the athlete has done enough to warrant the points, not the amount of points. If 2 out of 3 judges feels the athlete has fulfilled the scoring criteria, then the points are scored.
Ya Mon - of course it ran smoothly. It's not fair to compare a professional closed door competition such as ADCC to an amature public one like a BJJ comp. By closed door I mean that even though there was the open trials around the world, in the main competition (which is what we're talking about) there was a limited number of competitors (16 per division and 5 divisions for the men, 8 per division and 4 divisions for the women plus 2 open weight divisions), everyone was there the day before for rules meetings. When you know exactly what you're dealing with it makes it much easier to plan.
And really, no-one's complaining about how well the tournament ran, more the choice of location where it was held.
Javi was jumping to Uematsu's back and fell into guard -- hence the -1. Miscommunication between Javy and his corner. Sucks, but that's the way it is.
In Felicia's final match, she got a sweep and the table said there wasn't any control when I went over to argue -- funny since the girl got a sweep for putting Felicia back on the bottom. Explain how you can sweep someone who never got controlled on top?
Fowler vs. Marcelo -- first mount 3pts. Next two mounts 2pts. This went on until Marcelo's corner yelled and argued.
The guys on the tables were horrible. They didn't know the rules and let their decisions, a lot of time, be based on crowd reactions.
As for organized -- the brackets are run VERY smoothly. Everything else, not so much. Barely knew when weigh-ins were, had to asked 4 people when the event was supposed to start before I got an answer. I still don't know if the lightest weight class is 65kg and under or 65.9kg and under. That .9 = about 2lbs which makes a pretty damn big difference in weight cutting.
The location -- not so good. I mean really, Trenton? wtf?
As for the rules, they need to change. The no-points time just seems to increase stalling, and there is no incentive in the points system that encourages submission attempts. Additionally, I agree with the people who say that many of the judges seemed confused as to when to award points and made a number of questionable and/or late calls. Maybe ADCC should give the FILA rules a try.