Yes, the first thing is making sure the judges actually understand all of the aspects of MMA.. I have no idea how you can judge a fight if you have never even taken a jiu jitsu or submission grappling class..
And there were some of those judges at the UFC..
illini89i - Yes, the first thing is making sure the judges actually understand all of the aspects of MMA.. I have no idea how you can judge a fight if you have never even taken a jiu jitsu or submission grappling class..
I'm not even totally convinced judges would have to go to those lengths to get an understanding of whats going on in a fight.
For example, in the Sherk vs. Dunham fight it was pretty clear Sherk was initiating the takedowns while Dunham kept attempting subs via choke.
Outside of the GnP Sherk laid on Dunham that opened the cut in the first round he wasn't really that close to ending to the fight.
Whereas, Dunham was closer to ending the fight with the subs, than any of the subsequent takedowns Sherk attempted; not mention the better of the standup Evan was getting on Sherk.
There needs to be more/better checks in balances in place for judges. Along with the education/practing of judging.
rusty balls - they don't hire judges but they control which judges get to judge an event
they can blackball certain officials if they want to - like they did to big john
Exactly
JimmersonzGlove -Uncle Justice - All I'm saying is that everyone is shitting themselves that monitors are the answer because one judge in one round of one fight in MMA history said his view was obstructed.
Well how many judges have we actually heard talk? You have Doug Crosby trollin the UG. You have Cecil Peoples saying leg kicks dont end fights, and you have Doc Hamilton saying if he had a monitor he would've scored Machida/Shogun 1 differently, giving Shogun the decision.
I'm not sure what your point is, but yes, those are the 3 examples of judges explaining themselves.
I think that's the issue; we need to hear more of the rationale behind a judges decision before we can start to identify the problems.
illini89i, I got your PM. I literally had no idea.. I stand corrected.
Well, I don't consider that valuable information. Again, Peoples didn't say that, Crosby didn't say that, so we have one judge in one round of one fight in MMA history saying his view was obstructed. I don't think that's hardly any reason to "concede".
Also, it's far from a simple request. Think of the cost to front monitors across the board for the AC's in pro-MMA. They usually don't create a "special circumstance" in government policies, such as, "For the major UFC events we'll use monitors, but not any other pro-MMA events".
AC's are the bottom of the totem pole for government commissions. There's a mystique surrounding Nevada because there's so many shows there, and I haven't asked Keith, but I know most other commissions are seriously hurting for cash.
Do you agree with my point thought? That it would be nice to actually poll the judges generally or after an event and just find out their rationale for their scoring? I mean... the idea of presenting solutions without even knowing what the problem really is (or based on one comment) is pretty ludicrous.
joe k - illini89i, I got your PM. I literally had no idea.. I stand corrected.
Thanks joe k, I appreciate it.
BJJkilla - cecil peoples would just change the station if he was given a TV.
Legit LOL