
From: http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2011/7/4/2258314/graph-visualize-round-scoring-simpson-vs-tavares
Whenever we dig into the details of scoring, the toughest part of the discussion is quantifying.
The discussions can be broken down into two categories, which are general and specific. Often our intent is a broad brush stroke with no specific fight or example to accompany it: a takedown is worth this much, or submission attempts should be given this much credit in the rules, or this qualifies as a 10-8 round versus a 10-9.
The shortcoming there is that a takedown can range from an ankle-pick where the defender is hopping on one leg, landing effective strikes and standing right back up to the opposite end of the spectrum, such as the rare circumstance of a slam-knockout like Shamrock vs. Zinoviev or Harris vs. Branch. Wrapping an arm around the neck and wrenching a standing guillotine for just a moment is technically a submission attempt, but much different than spending a few minutes fending off a rear-naked choke, turning purple in a triangle, or dislocating your elbow while spinning out of an armbar.
The opposite is analyzing a specific fight with tangible examples of the unified scoring criteria and how effective they were. Anytime you score a round, your decision should be based on a handful of significant events that swayed your score toward one fighter or the other. Those events have to contain effective demonstration of the scoring criteria in order to count, and just how effective that fighter scored can be a challenge to describe in words.
The title picture is an idea I had to help quantify all of these elements. Each round starts off at an equal score, which can be represented by the exact center of the 10-10 round, and as time passes, each fighter attempts to demonstrate better effectiveness with the scoring criteria. The ebb and flow of the action, or one fighter's significant actions contrasted with his opponent's, can be mapped on this graph to denote a significant action that took place, the time it occurred, and how much you felt it swayed the round in that fighter's favor.
I realize Simpson x Tavares is far from a hot topic, but I came up with an odd score for that fight and randomly decided to apply it to my graph.
I just figured I'd share the idea for those of us who go overboard with judging. It might be an interesting way to explain the significant actions of a round and visually demonstrate how much of an impact you thought it had, and how you arrived at your particular round score.
Benny Lava - patent that shit
Patent pending, actually.
Yet another UJ thread/post that is sheer awesomeness
Uncle Justice - Benny Lava - patent that shit
Patent pending, actually.
Just kidding.
I don't know if it would be copyright, trademark, or patent. Anyone?
I really like this concept. But i fear this may lead to judges looking at their scorecard too much and not the action they need to be watching. Is that taken into consideration?
I like the idea of this more than I like this, but I like this nonetheless 
slamming - I really like this concept. But i fear this may lead to judges looking at their scorecard too much and not the action they need to be watching. Is that taken into consideration?
The intention of this was more when we all break down scores (usually controversial) after the fact. I don't think it would work "live", but you could explain the way your scored a fight live with this afterward.
Yeah man. This is actually pretty great. You should definitely look into a patent or copyright of some sort. I think something like this would be great for training current and future MMA judges.
Re: "countering opponents takedown attempt" could this mean countering with your own takedown, and not just nullifying the takedown attempt? 
The Dean of Bean - This is MMA ffs. Striking doesn't have priority over grappling.
Ah ... in the standard unified rules, it does indeed. New Jersey and the states that copy their rules are the only ones that prioritize by time spent (standing vs. grappling) and CA doesn't prioritize anything.
This has great potential.
Add judges monitors with instant replay based on real-time que points that the judges can set by pressing a "marker" button during action to return to either between rounds or directly after the fights and we have a viable quantitative solution to an otherwise qualitative judgement. 
shielja - eh i don't understand this???
I'd be happy to explain if you could be a little more specific?
What, exactly, "don't you get"?