The UFC used to show round by round fan voting for the fighter that had won the round, and it always seemed near impossible for a fighter to turn in a dominant enough performance to get more than 80% of the vote. Dead wrong attracted 20-30% of the votes (accident, pranksters, nut huggers, etc.). In some instances, these voting patterns would be easily recognizable, and it would have been interesting to see what effect removing these votes from these would have had on the community agreement for closer rounds, and what further vote counting refinements could have taken place.
The preferred fix for the judging situation would include some method to avoid split decisions all together. This might be helped by:
-Judge like in the Olympics, where they have a few more judges, but throw out the lowest and highest scores for the final tabulation.
-Have more rounds. 3 rounds are too few, but having longer fights could be a detriment to the sport. 4 four minute rounds would take roughly the same amount of time and would allow for an overtime round which should be exciting if the action has been that close. Championship fights could be 6 four minute rounds, and this is where Shogun-Machida would likely have gone to overtime (28 minutes) based on the judging from that night.
-Limit the use of judges with an obvious bias. If a judge were to come out and say that leg kicks do not count, they should probably not be judging. If a judge only scores for obvious damage, then they should probably not be judging.
CNN used a tool for its undecided voter group to express their agreement to the talking points during the presidential debates. It was just a dial that you would tilt in one favor or the other, and it graphed the intensity of where you had that dial over time. A judge for MMA might use this tool to record their favor on the action, and end up with a graph at the end of the round to make it easier to judge a round as a whole.
John McCarthy, Herb Dean, and Yves Lavigne might make some excellent judges....
Doug, thank you for the excellent thread and awesome answers! You seem like a real down to earth, honest guy. Many of us here appreciate the time you take to share with us!
IrishFighter110 - Doug is it possible for the judges to communicate with one another during the fight, are they sitting beside each other?
Doug, when you get a chance, this is a great question above. I'd really like to know if the judges ever talk to one another.
I have a fine, collegial relationship with all the other Judges. I generally don't fraternize with them because I am usually on the way TO or FROM something all the time. I went from the last UFC I judged back to NY, then on 3 planes to do a car commercial in a forest in Poland, then up to Albany for a film, then back to NY, out to LA for a bullshit meeting, etc. So I usually go to the arena, Judge, and I'm gone.
DMV
Page 7
THINK
Or MMA is....
DOOMED
TtT
Yves Lavigne - TtT
You are good for the fans. Thanks for being a good ref on Davis Vs. Taylor and Nog Vs. Herring III specifically. You and Yamasaki are my two favorite refs!
Yves Lavigne - TtTYves and Doug on the same thread might just be more awesomeness than the mma.tv hardware can handle. If Bruce Buffer were to join in, the UG might crash for a week.
Rail Shredder,
Bad news. This month's edition of "Thrasher" magazine has hit the stands, and the market report shows your popularity in the skateboarding world to be plummeting dramatically.
Surely, posting your thoughts on my questions would only serve to quell this disaster.
HI KIDS..............Uncle D's working today but I have a bunch of answers for you! I'll be by tomorrow w/some trenchant observations.....THANKS! DC/NYC
Doug, do the judges talk to each other during the fights?
ttt
knockoutfighter - Doug, do the judges talk to each other during the fights?
Pretty sure I can answer this as a definitive no, sir. The judges sit in three different perspectives, away from each other, and don't look away, pay attention to the crowd, or anything other than the fight itself.
Hello there......I answered a bunch of questions a fewdays ago from another computer...None of those posts appear to have gone onto this thread. SORRY. Anybody still into hearing Uncle D's unique and brilliant perspectives? Lemme know & I'll hit you back tonight. Back in US thru Christmas on my own new computer. DC/NYC
Couture clearly won that fight. People need to look past the "Couture was boring" aspect of the fight, and judge it based on the correct criteria. If Vera had recieved the decision, we would have had double the amount of complaints. Just respect the fact we get to see a legend still fighting, meanwhile, shuting down top notch competition.
As I understand it, the UFC takes the role of the Athletic Commission when they are in Britain. Their people are responsible for bringing in the refs and judges for the fights. I don't understand how it is that they are not experimenting more with different judges when given this opportunity.
I don't know who the judges were for this fight (Buffer should be announcing this when reading the decision). During past events over there, why would they choose to use Cecil Peoples or Dan Miraglioti? There would have to be several dozen suitable people unable to make the trip before they should even consider bringing the incompetence of Peoples into the mix (he has turned many unanimous decisions into split decisions, and played a role in Hamill Bisping, as well as Shogun Machida).
They should be doing what they can to manage the judging to avoid wrong or unnecessary split decisions. The first and main problem with the judging is some of the judges themselves. In England, this means bringing over new judges. The Athletic commissions in the States probably have strict rules preventing veterans of the sport from participating, but they should go out of their way to test and validate some new eyes.
Japan has its share of questionable judging, but they do get a couple of things right. One is where they award points to the competitor closest to finishing the fight. Western judges cannot use this because of the 10 point must system, but the final round should be scored with the thought of 'who would likely come out on top if this were to continue?' The other tool that Japan has that would have really helped this fight is the yellow card. The UFC needs some form of a yellow card for stalling (any time there is a forced separation?) so that fighters can have a point taken for multiple offenses.
One inescapable factor in judging is the crowd's influence. Most bad decisions coincide with a nod to the fan favorite, and there is likely no fair way to combat this besides having more rounds to avoid decisions altogether.
1. More rounds = more problems. Not all rounds are created equal and not all rounds deserve the same point designation. Which is a glaring problem since...
2. Not enough even rounds. Boxing also has the same issue. Rounds that you have to really think hard about should just be called draw rounds. A lot of the "interpretation" drama comes in because a judge is trying to base a round on such relatively minor things as a specific flurry or takedown.
3. Yellow cards are great in theory but then add more chance of fight rigging or at the very least, more interpretation. Boring fighters should just be dropped or relegated to undercards. Having arbitrary yellow cards which add another layer of bullshit to an already problematic judging system is the wrong move.
4. Stand ups should be barred. This is a fight not the WWE contest. Its impossible to say "control" is a judging criteria only to stand a fight up because one fighter simply cant get back up. That in and of itself is the very definition of control, not allowing a fighter to stand up or gain a position they desire.
5. Japan's system isnt perfect but its a much better system because they view the fight in total, based on fewer criteria (Damage, closer to finishing, agressiveness)
I think there should be a shift in the judging menatility to not who won the fight, but who was the better fighter on the night. It might be arguing semantics, but there is a subtle difference. You can argue to me based on a myriad of criteria that vary in actual signifigance, that Courture might have scored enough under this system to get the decision, but you CANNOT argue he was the better fighter on the night. Same with Machida/Shogun.
Doug are you disappointed with the state and results of judging in 2009?
Randy won based on the Judging Criteria.
Doug,
I jumped on this thread quickly to remind you of my earlier questions regarding how to judge a round when each fighter wins different categories, the description of 10-8 versus 10-7 rounds, and how "damage" is counted.
Also, or perhaps more importantly, do you know where or how to access a copy of the updated unified scoring criteria? I've been using those posted on the New Jersey AC's website: http://www.state.nj.us/lps/sacb/docs/martial.html
But, then this set of rules was brought to my attention, which seems to be more detailed and improved, but dated back to 1999: http://www.fcfighter.com/mmac9906.htm
Help please?
Thank you!