Adventures in Scorekeeping: Unmasking the Ten-Point Must System - Fight Forum - MMA - UFC - Boxing - K1

jdogresorg · 10-09-2007, 07:21 PM

Read Full Article

If the current MMA climate was a battle between fans in one corner and the ten-point must system in the other corner, even Dalby Shirley would have to score a 10-8 round for the critical thrashing the judging system has been taking lately. Irate fans bashed the decision in the Matt Hamill-Michael Bisping fight and called out judges for some questionable scoring in several fights at UFC 76. Even the UFC’s broadcast team has piled on, leveling withering criticisms of the system during several of their recent events.

Defenders of the system say that if judges were better educated and were more willing to call 10-8 (or 10-10 rounds) then the system would work just fine, nevermind the uptick in draws. What supporters fail to take into account is that they are defending a system with an inherent conceptual flaw: The ten-point must system takes one perfectly good fight and turns it into three fights for no good reason.

Read Full Article

DoQ1 · 10-09-2007, 07:29 PM

Terrible system, not boxing so lets not use that system.

subgenius · 10-09-2007, 08:57 PM

Interesting article. I agree with the points that it made. I hate the ten point must system, but figure out an alternative. It's easier than it sounds. MMA is a very dynamic sport.

Saskabush · 10-10-2007, 11:11 AM

That was a good article, I like how he compared the must system to other sports. The only thing lacking is his opinion on what would make the best type of scoring system. I personally think that Pride's scoring system is the best to date, hopefully they will adopt something similar in North America in the near future.

Mulla · 10-10-2007, 11:17 AM

Interesting article jdogresorg, thanks for posting!

FatCatMC · 10-10-2007, 11:35 AM

Ten point must is definitely flawed but like Sub said, nobody has come forth with a better system. I agree that if the judges were more willing to call 10-8 rounds, (even 10-7 IMO) there would be more accurate decisions. Seeing that Yahoo did a compu-stat sort of thing is defintely a step in the right direction.

Crashsti · 10-10-2007, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FatCatMC

Ten point must is definitely flawed but like Sub said, nobody has come forth with a better system. I agree that if the judges were more willing to call 10-8 rounds, (even 10-7 IMO) there would be more accurate decisions. Seeing that Yahoo did a compu-stat sort of thing is defintely a step in the right direction.

i recall a Pride DVD where i Matt Hume ( i think thats his name) discussed exactly what went into scoring a PrideFc fight. It was really in depth and he even said that it takes alot of training before a Judge actually gets to score a match. ringside judges even use stop watches.

FatCatMC · 10-10-2007, 11:58 AM

Not sure where I found this, but it was on a forum a while back and I saved it to .pdf, but here is the current criteria for scoring:

Quote:

E. Judging Criteria
1. Judges are required to determine the winner of a bout that goes to it's full time limit based upon the following criteria:
-Clean Strikes
-Effective Grappling
-Octagon Control
-Effective Aggressiveness

F. Clean Strikes
1. The fighter who is landing both effective and efficient clean strikes.
2. There are two ways of measuring strikes:
-the total number of clean strikes landed (more efficient)
-the total number of heavy strikes landed (more effective)

G. The heavier striker who lands with efficiency, deserves more credit from the Judges than totalnumber landed.
1. If the striking power between the fighters was equal, then the total number landed would be used as the criteria.
2. The total number of strikes landed, should be of sufficient quantity favoring a fighter, to earn a winning round.

H. Strikes thrown from the top position of the guard, are generally heavier and more effective than those thrown from the back.
1. Thus a Judge shall recognize that effective strikes thrown from the top guard position are of "higher quality",than thrown from the bottom.
2. The Judge shall recognize that this is not always the case.
However, the vast majority of fighters prefer the top guard position to strike from. This is a strong indication of positional dominance for striking.

I. Effective Grappling
1. The Judge shall recognize the value of both the clean takedown and active guard position.
2. The Judge shall recognize that a fighter who is able to cleanly takedown his opponent, is effectively grappling.
3. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter on his back in an active guard position, can effectively grapple, through execution of repeated threatening attempts at submission and reversal resulting in continuous defense from the top fighter.
4. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter who maneuvers from guard to mount is effectively grappling.
5. A Judge shall recognize that the guard position alone shall be scored neutral or even, if none of the preceding situations were met.(items 2-4)
6. A Judge shall recognize that if the fighters remain in guard the majority of a round with neither fighter having an edge in clean striking or effective grappling, (items 2-4), the fighter who scored the clean takedown deserves the round.
7. A clean reversal is equal to a clean takedown in effective grappling

J. Octagon Control
1. The fighter who is dictating the pace, place and position of the fight.
2. A striker who fends off a grappler's takedown attempt to remain standing and effectively strike is octagon control.
3. A grappler who can takedown an effective standing striker to ground fight is octagon control.
4. The fighter on the ground who creates submission, mount or clean striking opportunities

K. Effective Aggressiveness
1. This simply means who is moving forward and finding success.(scoring)
2. Throwing a strike moving backwards is not as effective as a strike thrown moving forward.
3. Throwing strikes and not landing is not effective aggressiveness.
4. Moving forward and getting struck is not effective aggressiveness.
5. Shooting takedowns and getting countered and fended off is not effective aggressiveness.

L. Criteria Evaluation
1. Each judge is to evaluate which fighter was most effective. Thus striking and grappling skills are top priority.
2. Evaluating the criteria requires the use of a sliding scale. Fights can remain standing or grounded.
Judges shall recognize that it isn't how long the fighters are standing or grounded, as to the scoring the fighters achieve ,while in those positions.
3. If 90% of the round is grounded one fighter on top, then:
-effective grappling is weighed first.
-clean striking is weighed next. If clean strikes scored in the round, the Judge shall factor it in. Clean Striking can outweigh Effective Grappling while the fighters are grounded.
-octagon control is next (pace, place & position)

4. The same rational holds true if 90% of the round were standing. Thus:
-clean striking would be weighed first (fighter most effective)
-clean grappling second (any takedowns or effective clinching)
-octagon control which fighter maintained better position? Which fighter created the situations that led to effective strikes?

5. If a round was 50% standing and 50% on the ground, then:
-clean striking and effective grappling are weighed more equally.
-octagon control would be factored next

6. In all three hypothetical situations, effective aggressiveness is factored in last. It is the criteria of least importance. Since the definition calls for moving forward and scoring, it is imperative for the Judges to look at the scoring first.

7. Thus for all Judges scoring UFC fights, the prioritized order of evaluating criteria is:
-clean strikes and effective grappling are weighed first.
-octagon control
-effective aggressiveness

M. Domination Criteria
1. A Judge may determine that a fighter dominated his opponent in a round. This can lead to a two point or more difference on a Judge's scorecard.
2. The definition of a dominating round is a fighter's ability to effectively strike, grapple and control his opponent.
3. A Judge may determine a round was dominating if a fighter was adversely affected by one of the following:
-knocked down from standing position by clean strike
-by submission attempt
-from a throw
-from clean strikes either standing or grounded.

N. Judge's Scorecard Procedures
After each round:
1. each Judge will determine and record a score each round
2. a MMAC official will collect the scorecard after each round
3. the MMAC official will track and add each Judges score by round
4. If the fight goes the time limit, the MMAC official will add each Judge's scorecard and double check total
5. the fighter with the greater number of points wins the fight on each Judges scorecard
6. the fighter who won on the majority of the Judges Scorecards, wins the fight
7. the MMAC official will hand the decision to the PA announcer

O. Types of Judge's Decisions
1. If all three scorecards agree Unanimous
2. If two of three scorecards agree Split
3. Two scorecards agree and one draw Majority
4. two scorecards agree on draw Draw
5. all scorecards different Draw

IX SCORING SYSTEM

A. The MMAC and UFC have adopted a 10 point must system.
The Judge will use the criteria to determine a winner each round. The three step procedure per round is as follows:
-determine winner of round (can be draw)
-determine if winner dominated round
-fouls then factored in (subtract one point per foul from fighter)

B. Draws are again acceptable in MMAC events

C. Point Totals
1. two fighters who draw are given a score of 10-10
2. the fighter who wins a round is given a score of 10-9
3.The fighter who dominates a round is given a score of 10-8
(a score of 10-7 is possible for a dominant round)
4.For each foul a fighter commits, a point is subtracted. This deduction can change a winning round
to a draw. 9-9

The rules are in place but obviously not completely taken into consideration by current judges. I think if we had judges with a better understanding of MMA, it could work. That's a huge if though.

Crashsti · 10-10-2007, 12:04 PM

the UFC wants to resolve this as much as the fans. there have even been a few examples of Dana White not agreeing with the judges. so what can the UFC do since they're not involved in the process of selecting judges? you hear horror stories from smaller promotions where judges are taken directly from amatuer boxing. i am sure the UFC judges are more educated in the sport but even so, i am sure they have things they prefer to see. Its the same in other sports as well. My sister used to always watch figure skating and the judging in that is equally as bad if not worse then in MMA. i think i will take the 10 point must system as is for the time being. its not the best but its also not the worst.

FatCatMC · 10-10-2007, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crashsti

the UFC wants to resolve this as much as the fans. there have even been a few examples of Dana White not agreeing with the judges. so what can the UFC do since they're not involved in the process of selecting judges? you hear horror stories from smaller promotions where judges are taken directly from amatuer boxing. i am sure the UFC judges are more educated in the sport but even so, i am sure they have things they prefer to see. Its the same in other sports as well. My sister used to always watch figure skating and the judging in that is equally as bad if not worse then in MMA. i think i will take the 10 point must system as is for the time being. its not the best but its also not the worst.

At least in figure skating there are certain routine criteria that need to be met, and point deductions are made due to content of the routine and execution instead of just a base "ye he won the round, or ney he lost" score. Far more accurate IMO. Either way, with the rate that MMA is growing, I hope someone comes up with something soon.

Crashsti · 10-10-2007, 12:45 PM

all i can say is that i am glad that i don't have any role in this, as i would'nt have a clue how to fix it. i guess it comes down to making certain that judges know as much about the sport as they can. however that means they need to understand all aspects of the game at a level that meets or exceeds the skills of both fighters involved. i think allowing knees to the head of a downed opponent could also help handle the scoring issue as it would force fighters to be more active in sometimes boring positions. a simple rule change could be all it takes.