Tapology Forums
Would we see better or worse decisions if MMA wasn't scored in rounds?
Anonymous Mode
You are not logged in to Tapology. When browsing anonymously, profanities and images are automatically removed from the forum.
02.19.2019 | 3:49 AM ET
I've been thinking about this a bit lately. What if instead of scoring fights round by round, each fighter was given a score from 7-10 for the entire fight?
I get that we have contingency plans in place already with 10-8's ( and soon to be 10-7's in most areas) but ultimately these don't work as intended, as ultimately MMA is about damage. A fighter might get controlled completely one round, receive a ten eight, come back and put a good solid beating on their opponent for the next two, not quite earn a 10-8 and still wind up drawing. Not much fair or realistic about that--especially if their opponent is about to go out in the closing seconds of the fight.
Now, a score of 7-10 for an entire fight would put a lot of control in the hands of the judges, but that's a damp squib anyways. They already have all the power. Wouldn't the removal of round by round scoring force the judges to think harder about who was most dominant, who looked most likely to win at the end of the fight, and most importantly who damaged who the most overall?
I don't know. What do you think?
I get that we have contingency plans in place already with 10-8's ( and soon to be 10-7's in most areas) but ultimately these don't work as intended, as ultimately MMA is about damage. A fighter might get controlled completely one round, receive a ten eight, come back and put a good solid beating on their opponent for the next two, not quite earn a 10-8 and still wind up drawing. Not much fair or realistic about that--especially if their opponent is about to go out in the closing seconds of the fight.
Now, a score of 7-10 for an entire fight would put a lot of control in the hands of the judges, but that's a damp squib anyways. They already have all the power. Wouldn't the removal of round by round scoring force the judges to think harder about who was most dominant, who looked most likely to win at the end of the fight, and most importantly who damaged who the most overall?
I don't know. What do you think?
* Edited at 02.19.2019, 3:50 AM ET *
This user is suspended from posting until 8 years, 11 months, 1 week, 5 days, 10 hours, and 55 minutes from now.
Responses
02.19.2019 | 4:29 AM ET
Like all things MMA, it's still evolving. When I watch a fight I generally score it by 2 or 3 different scoring methodologies. (10 point must, pride rules & schoolyard) This is why I get confused when I see being being sad that Kongo won UD against Minakov. I mean, even if you a wrestling buff and think a TD's are worth like 20 head strikes even though he didn't pass or threaten a sub (he pretended too) and think it was bad judging, you have to agree that by pride rules or schoolyard, Kongo clearly won the fight. I personally had it 30-27 Kongo. I think finding a balance between scoring the grappling and the striking means the current system has the most potential to be "correct" and will likely stay around for a long time no matter how much I don't like it.
The only way to be sure is to keep them locked in the cage until there is a clear result. Sounds good in theory but in practice MVP vs Daley goes for 14 hours and 56000 mma fans commit suicide. Better the devil you know is what I'm saying, I guess. I dunno.
The only way to be sure is to keep them locked in the cage until there is a clear result. Sounds good in theory but in practice MVP vs Daley goes for 14 hours and 56000 mma fans commit suicide. Better the devil you know is what I'm saying, I guess. I dunno.
"You're all my children, I'll discipline you how I feel" Massabruce
02.19.2019 | 10:57 AM ET
I think there would be better decisions if fights were scored as a whole, instead of round-by-round.
02.19.2019 | 1:03 PM ET
If I'm not mistaken, One Championship professes to score their MMA fights as a whole, not round by round.
"Become like water my friend."
-
- MassaBruce
02.19.2019 | 1:32 PM ET
I agree a fight should be judged as a whole. 95% of the criteria should be based on damage. The other 5% should be about aggressiveness/willingness to engage & control.
But if its not judged as a whole, then simply have the Round winner earning a point while the Round loser gets nothing. Super close round? Neither get a point. Judging should be open to the public like in Glory. Meaning judges HAVE to submit their scores after every round.
I see absolutely NO reason for adding an independent-variable, people's math skills, to judging a fight.
Also, there should be UNLIMITED use of instant-replay. Eye-poke? Lets take a look. low-blow? Lets take a look. Shot landed to the back of the head? Lets take a look. Overeem felt a tap? Lets take a look.
But if its not judged as a whole, then simply have the Round winner earning a point while the Round loser gets nothing. Super close round? Neither get a point. Judging should be open to the public like in Glory. Meaning judges HAVE to submit their scores after every round.
I see absolutely NO reason for adding an independent-variable, people's math skills, to judging a fight.
Also, there should be UNLIMITED use of instant-replay. Eye-poke? Lets take a look. low-blow? Lets take a look. Shot landed to the back of the head? Lets take a look. Overeem felt a tap? Lets take a look.
This user is suspended from posting until 5 years, 5 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, and 10 minutes from now.
02.19.2019 | 4:10 PM ET
Even though ONE Championship has 3 5-minute round, and 5 5-minute round fights, the fights are judged as a whole.