Brent Wilson talks MMA judging and why ten point must system isn't the problem
by: Brent Wilson
Bad decisions will always be the bane of judged sports, it's unavoidable. The key is to minimize the number of bad decisions by locating the root of the illness not the symptoms. Want to avoid bad decisions in boxing? Don't go to Texas. Want to avoid them in K-1? You can't, they will always be terrible, live with it. What about in MMA? What should be done about the terrible decisions that are sullying a growing sport, and cause people to make associations between it and *gasp* boxing?
Just today here on F4W Ben Miller suggested that the solution should be to replace the ten-point must system with the old PRIDE scoring system based on the totality of the fight. The ten point must doesn't fit with MMA since MMA is all about "finishing the fight". Plus it is from boxing and winning that sport of hitting people is much different than this sport of hitting people. We want to force judges to think of the fight in a total purview rather than data mining for singular points in each round. None of that is true but more importantly it obscures where the real problem lies.
Miller mentions that the ten point must be broken because if Shogun had taken Machida down at the end of Round 3 then he would have won the round, and consequently the fight, even though that takedown is worthless in terms of "winning" the fight.
Miller is absolutely right, in most cases a late takedown does not result in effective grappling or striking but is just a last ditch effort to try to appeal to the judges and "score points." The problem with that being scored has nothing to do with the ten point must system, if either Machida or Shogun had scored a takedown at the end of Round Three and done nothing with it that wouldn't have changed the fact that that was an even round. The ten point must system is perfectly capable of scoring such an instance, it`s called 10-10.....when good judges are using it. The problem isn't with the ten point must system. It goes far deeper.
The problem is with the judges themselves, the level of judging at the highest levels of MMA is not nearly good enough. Replacing a scoring system while leaving the same judges in place will solve nothing. How could you possibly expect a panel of individuals who couldn't pick the correct winner of a five minute period to somehow expand their scope, take everything into account and successfully pick the winner of a period three or five times that? Scoring the totality of a fight only introduces more subjectivity, more guesswork, more biases, and more opinion work out of judges. Judging is so bad in MMA that we should reward them by giving them more freedom? Come now.
Garbage in, garbage out, whatever scoring construct you pick won't change that.
The solution is better education program for judges, more and continued training, and the Commissions holding the judges accountable for their scores. That's a key point, outside of New Jersey there is essentially no accountability for judges that consistently turn in poor cards in either MMA or boxing.
A key factor in the goal of getting more and better judges is to reduce the bureaucracy involved in becoming a judge to make it more accessible for new eyes. This creates a deeper talent pool and easy replacements for judges who aren't performing. The same judges get recycled over and over again because no fresh blood can get opportunities in large states without first having experience. It`s a catch 22 since amateur MMA in California is non-existent so it's almost impossible to gain experience to climb the rungs. In other states the vetting process is so long that it's a deterrent for anyone to get involved since it'll be years before they can get legit experience.
These are the barriers that need to fall to get better judges, changing the scoring construct is a kneejerk reaction that won't help anything. It's going to take years to get such an overhaul but it's the only thing that will bring about real change rather than putting new lipstick on the same pigs by changing the scoring.
That's why a scoring change wouldn't help things even if the ten point must was broken. But there's also the small matter that scoring the totality of the fight is the worse choice regardless of the judges` skill level.
Totality scoring is a recipe for brutal decisions. I invite you to watch Yuki Kondo/Dan Henderson and the Henderson/Kazuo Misaki rematch or Takimoto/Bustamante. What do these decisions have in common besides being awful.....Well the winning fighter won the scant latter part of the fight while losing the majority of the beginning. Due to the recency effect people place more emphasis on things that have just happened. ie Who won the last five minutes, just call it the Hendo Special.
That's not the person who actually won but it would be the results we'd get due to plain ol' human bias. This effect is actually why the ten point must system works in combat sports, it rewards efforts spent on the entire fight, not just the last round.
Would Shogun have won if the fight was scored on its totality? Sure, because he won rounds four and five, not really for any other reason.
Ben also mentioned the point of a fights single defining moment which is another reason why the PRIDE judging system doesn't work. Rather than judges focusing on a singular moment in a round to pick a round winner they often key on one single point in the entire fight instead. This becomes their rationale for picking a victor. Gil Melendez dropped Tatsuya Kawajiri once? Sure, he wins! Dong Sik Yoon took Tarec Saffiedines back once? He gets to win as well! People will always have these innate biases, the very reason that scoring constructs like the ten point must exist is to reign them in by forcing judges to assign worth throughout the whole fight rather than letting them pick single moments to determine the winner.
To Ben's final point that MMA and boxing are different because MMA is a real fight and real fights are about beating someone up, and that boxing is about outpointing your foe. Well...that's a ridiculous generalization. The boxers that can somehow punch his opponent in the face time and time again without beating him up are few and far between (Ivan Calderon, Omar Narvaez, and to some degree Floyd Mayweather excepted). Of course those three make up for it by displaying outstanding defense which has an innate worth that isn't accounted for in singular moments, but should absolutely be rewarded in the scoring. Real fightzzz are about not getting beat up to. As well, like it or not, defense is becoming a growing part of MMA.
I've got some more bad news, MMA is growing closer and closer to being about outpointing your foe and it will continue to get closer. As MMA fighters have become less and less exploitable there have be more and more decisions, and more and more close fights. The incidence of decisions has risen significantly in the top promotions over the past decade and this trend will only continue. There will be more bad decisions simply due to there being more decisions in general but also makes it vital that the best scoring construct available be used. Boxing already reached this point long ago as a much more mature sport with far deeper talent pools.
I have yet to see a fight where the simple ten point must system could not adequately describe the fight and the correct winner, regardless of combat sport. Nor have I seen a potential system that keeps things as simple while rewarding fighters for the entire fight and minimizes biases. Although I`m all ears to other suggestions. The key is to put those tools into the hands of those who can actually use them correctly.
Send us a news tip: newstips@wrestlingobserver.com
Note to webmasters/reporters:
When recapping news from this site or from our newsletters, please include a link to www.wrestlingobserver.com
For the most in-depth and detailed news and analysis on pro-wrestling and MMA, always turn to Wrestlingobserver.com/Figure Four Weekly Online, the #1 website of its kind on the Internet.
Members receive online access to both the Wrestling Observer and Figure Four Weekly newsletters and growing archives, Wrestling Observer Radio with Bryan Alvarez and Dave Meltzer three times per week,
the popular Bryan and Vinny Show twice per week, additional radio shows including Figure Four Daily with Alvarez, Mike Coughlin's Five Star Radio, the Dr.
Keith Lipinski Show, The Adam and Mike Big Audio Nightmare, Tough Talk and the Karl Stern Wrestling History Show, the infamous BOARD, and more! Members also have full
access to the thousands of hours of audio in our radio show archives which date back to 2005. For your convenience, we offer secure online payments using your VISA, Mastercard,
American Express, Discover card or PayPal account. Don't miss out on the fun, sign up now!
Don\'t miss out on the fun, sign up now!
Want full access? QUICK AND EASY $10.99 SIGNUP!
