tx3
Hey guys, I've still not gotten around to posting the detailed scores, but thought Id go ahead and post some thoughts.
I didn't intend to come off as " glib", but I was certainly being defensive. First of all, in the above scenario, do you feel the current scoring norm of rewarding the round to the guy who LnPs with the 10-9 round to be the right call?
The problem with the 10 pt must is it's designed to score 2 to 3 min rds for 8 to10 rds. Its also for a one dementional striking art. You have to judge the fights in all areas. MMA is 3 rds at 5 min. You have to apply a much more diverse scoring system to get a good sample of who wins the round.
At the same time you need to keep it as simple as possible since you only have 60 secs to score it. I don't pretend to have all the bugs worked out yet, but its way better than the 10 pt must.
Hey haulport, do you have any ideas for a better criteria?
If you look at the scoring for the diaz v kim fight. The first 2 rds were pretty clearly won by kim, although just barely. however rd 3 was much more heavily won by diaz hence he eked out the win with our scoring. With the 2 point must system, you'll see a lot more 10-5 scores which more accurately shows how a fighter dominates. As is now, you have to plumb near kill a man to get a 10-8.
MagnumBill - Hey haulport, do you have any ideas for a better criteria?
Actually I do. I created this using a mixture of statistical regression against an existing fight database and then got a ton of feedback like you are doing on the UG and from a ton of commission officials, ref and fighters. I recently retooled the striking again:
www.ibiny.com/files/altscoring.pdf
tx3
A judging system that is worse than the system currently in place?! Didn't know it existed.
ttt
tx3