Some thoughts on judging

SBG Ireland

so i was judging at Man of War last nite (very good show) and it got me thinking about how fights are scored. i know how much effort goes into training for a fight so i wanted to do as good a job as possible judging. as it turned out there was some very close fights and i was glad i had a 'system'. i wanted to make it as objective as possible.

as there is no forum for judges, i'm not sure how they are selected, i thought i'd put it up here as it might help with what is a tricky job and to get opinions from more experienced judges than myself.

the first thing to realise if you do not make notes during the round you will forget the beginning and probably be overly influenced by the last 30seconds or if someone has a cut. its a fact we tend to form incorrect memories of the past based on our own beliefs, its why we make terrible eye witnesses. but anywayz...

so what i did was make a note of every Significant Technical Move (STM - i'm thinking of trademarking it)by simply making a little dash in the box provided to put the round score in during the round. at the end of the round add up the number of dashes and that's who won the round.

some easy STMs to score are

• Clear strike that causes damage, a cut or wobbles the guy
• submission attempt
• takedown
• guard pass

if i had already awarded a dash/point for a takedown then another one for passing the guard i wouldnt award one for taking the back or getting the mount (unlike bjj). if a fighter took the back/mount i would only award the dash if they landed some decent shots or were close to subbing the guy.

some not so easy STMs to score were
positional advantage. this is where the guy has a position of advantage (top on the ground, or pushing the guy into the fence) and is able to control and land some shots for a period of time 20-30seconds say. this was definitely the most subjective part to judge.
stand up striking. if the fighter was able to use foot work to get in and out and land some nice combos that weren't neccessarily 'damaging' i would award a dash for every 2nd or 3rd 'good' combo and display of footwork. again fairly subjective.

well that's the bones of it, needs more work but it certainly helped me with judging some of the closer bouts last nite.

Arawn

Just out of curiosity would you award a dash for someone who stuffs the takedown and keeps it on the feet as they're controlling the fight by not letting it go to ground?

SBG Ireland

no, i dont think you should be scored on defending something. like if you escape a sub im not going to reward you. the scoring should always favor the person trying to win the fight. in the scenario you put forward neither would get a dash.

Arawn

In my head that gives the advantage to the grappler, what if lets say in the round a fighter stuffs 6 takes down attempts and only fails on the 7th, sure the 6 stops of going to the ground should count for more than the one successful time?

Thats just me though coming from a stand up back round

SBG Ireland

no disrespect but i dont know who you are or what your experience is in competing or judging mma so hard to know if we can have a shared frame of reference.
but anyway to use your analogy lets say a striker throws a head kick and its blocked? should the guy blocking it be awarded a point or the guy throwing it. lets say he throws 6 of them and the guy blocks 5 of them with only 1 landing. should the guy be rewarded more for blocking 5 of them or the guy for landing 1 of them?
by my line of reasoning the first 5 would not have scored for either. only the kick landing scored for the fighter on the offense. by your reasoning the guy blocking a few kicks actually would score more than the guy landing 1.
always reward the fighter looking to finish and who is on the offense.

Kieran81

is the guy defending takedowns not dictating where the fight takes place , is that not displaying superior "octagon control"

SBG Ireland

i cannot explain any better than i already have why defending a takedown does not score
you do not get points for defending a takedown, strike or submission. similarily i dont think you should score for a failed takedown or a strike that misses and only score for a sub attempt that is very close to finishing the fight.

if the fighter is defending takedowns and also landing shots that's a different matter. the strikes obviously score as outlined.

Kieran81

SBG Ireland wrote: »

you do not get points for defending a takedown, strike or submission. .

i think the fighter looking to finish should always be rewarded and i like that part , but i think there's a difference with strikes or subs failing to a takedown failing. i like the way you scored strikes and the subs failing , but is the takedown not an attemp to change where you want the fight to take place and by stopping that you and not the opponent "won" that exchange and succeded in keeping your opponent where you want it

Fall_Guy

Kieran81 wrote: »

i think the fighter looking to finish should always be rewarded and i like that part , but i think there's a difference with strikes or subs failing to a takedown failing. i like the way you scored strikes and the subs failing , but is the takedown not an attemp to change where you want the fight to take place and by stopping that you and not the opponent "won" that exchange and succeded in keeping your opponent where you want it

But if the fighter who defends the takedown is "keeping the fight where they want it", it is likely to be reflected in the scoring by the fact that he will be more successful in the stand-up and will accrue "dashes" (to use the terms laid out in OP) in that way. I'd agree with the OP in that stuffing a takedown in itself shouldn't warrant scoring, its what you do as a consequence of keeping the fight standing that should be scored. I mean if a fighter is on his bike the whole time, landing very little in the stand-up, but stuffing take-downs....should they be viewed favourably in judging terms?

Kieran81

Fall_Guy wrote: »

But if the fighter who defends the takedown is "keeping the fight where they want it", it is likely to be reflected in the scoring by the fact that he will be more successful in the stand-up and will accrue "dashes" (to use the terms laid out in OP) in that way. I'd agree with the OP in that stuffing a takedown in itself shouldn't warrant scoring, its what you do as a consequence of keeping the fight standing that should be scored. I mean if a fighter is on his bike the whole time, landing very little in the stand-up, but stuffing take-downs....should they be viewed favourably in judging terms?

what if they were having an even stand up fight and one guy decided to try mix it up by going for a takedown a couple of times but the opponent stops them , is he not winning those exchanges and entitled to being rewarded in the scores

Fall_Guy

Kieran81 wrote: »

what if they were having an even stand up fight and one guy decided to try mix it up by going for a takedown a couple of times but the opponent stops them , is he not winning those exchanges and entitled to being rewarded in the scores

Not in my view, no. He is defending. As was said earlier, do you reward someone for every time they defend a strike? If he manages to land some shots on the other fighter in the clinch or as they break then I would think they should be rewarded, but not just for merely defending.

I wouldn't expect a fighter to be rewarded for defending a strike unless they countered it effectively, so why should it be different regarding takedowns?

SBG Ireland

Kieran81 wrote: »

is he not winning those exchanges and entitled to being rewarded in the scores

no

in that scenario neither is scoring. but to suggest awarding points to the person defending a takedown would be a dangerous thing to do because you'd make guys hesitant to attempt a takedown, bad idea. we want to encourage fighters to try and finish fights, this would discourage them from attempting an offensive technique.

Arawn

Would the guy defending being taken down not be trying to finish the fight in his best way by keeping it on the feet?? Lets face it a guy with superior hands comes up against a guy with superior bjj it's obvious that the bjj guy will want it on the ground to better his chances to finish the fight just like the guy with superior hands stuffing take downs and keeping it on the feet is giving himself the best chance to finish the fight??


Good topic by the way JK, really shows the need for a course on judging or at least a very open and honest discussion between judges on what they're looking for

Kieran81

SBG Ireland wrote: »

you'd make guys hesitant to attempt a takedown, bad idea. we want to encourage fighters to try and finish fights, this would discourage them from attempting an offensive technique.

great point , never looked at it from that angle

El Guapo!

Is your method based purely on the number of dashes at the end of the round?
What if one guy took the other guy down and kept him there for the majority of the round landing decent strikes and completing different transitions etc. But then in the final minute of the round the guy on the bottom managed to get up and then lands a few decent combinations and rocks the guy and then manages to land a takedown at the end of the round?
By the "dash" method you have outlined, it might not accurately reflect the way the fight actually went. The guy who got up and landed the combos and a takedown may have a couple more dashes than the other guy who controlled the majority of the round.

Also, why no extra points awarded for extravagant ring entrances?! :pac:

SBG Ireland

Dean09 wrote: »

Is your method based purely on the number of dashes at the end of the round?
What if one guy took the other guy down and kept him there for the majority of the round landing decent strikes and completing different transitions etc. But then in the final minute of the round the guy on the bottom managed to get up and then lands a few decent combinations and rocks the guy and then manages to land a takedown at the end of the round?
By the "dash" method you have outlined, it might not accurately reflect the way the fight actually went. The guy who got up and landed the combos and a takedown may have a couple more dashes than the other guy who controlled the majority of the round.

Also, why no extra points awarded for extravagant ring entrances?! :pac:

Don't think i hadn't thunk about that read the part on positional dominance. that's a dash for every 20-30seconds of positional dominance. the dash system is flawless

Id be curious to hear from other experienced judges out there.

El Guapo!

SBG Ireland wrote: »

Don't think i hadn't thunk about that read the part on positional dominance. that's a dash for every 20-30seconds of positional dominance. the dash system is flawless

Id be curious to hear from other experienced judges out there.

Ah I see. I misread that part.
Dashing stuff. :cool:

SBG Ireland

I really don't know why i just didn't say 'point' don't know where dash came from.

El Guapo!

Point is too mainstream. Dash is for mma hipsters.

Mellor

SBG Ireland wrote: »

some easy STMs to score are

• Clear strike that causes damage, a cut or wobbles the guy
• submission attempt
• takedown
• guard pass

Just on the striking.
How do you decide which strikes are awarded a dash.
It the guy is knocked down, cut or rocked then obviously it gets one. But what about simple power shots that land, without an immediate effect like above. It doesn't mean they aren't contributing to finishing.
Then what about non-power shots, how many clean jabs equal a dash worthy power shot.

cowzerp

I do something similar John, I put ticks as scoring stuff happens-more so at the end of the round you remember it-if I put 4 ticks each it does not mean a draw necessarily though, just gives me a clearer view of what happened throughout the round.

Barry.Oglesby

cowzerp wrote: »

I do something similar John, I put ticks as scoring stuff happens-more so at the end of the round you remember it-if I put 4 ticks each it does not mean a draw necessarily though, just gives me a clearer view of what happened throughout the round.

I do more or less the same as this. A successful takedown and I'll note "td" in a column and then any subsequent takedowns and I'll dash beside it. In a busy fight the scorecards look like and ADHD kid sat in.

On a more general point, I think judges owe fighters a few more courtesies other than just calling it fairly.
1) to be isolated from the crowd, other judges and the cornermen as much as possible If possible they should have a "wall" of the cage to themselves.
2) to respect that for that night they are paid professionals and as such should not drink alcohol before and during.
3) should not discuss their decisions or how they scored particular fights on Facebook/Internet forums or with the crowd. There are a lot of potentially bad scenarios that come with this, from potential crowd trouble to open questioning of judge's credentials on the web.
4) particularly with pro matches, to respect that your decision is worth money, and if the fighter has ambition, career money!

I think the major shows use good judges like the people on this thread, but maybe sometimes shows just use whoever is available. I think it should be down to the referees to select their judging panel for the night.

Jason McCabe

Good points on the drinking

I also think judges should be split from each other. Too easy to be swayed by looking at other score cards

I have judged and do make my own notes though I think you normally go with ur gut about who won the round

Impartiality is probably the main concern from my point of view

Jason McCabe

nightvisionsuk wrote: »

“There's nothing wrong with enjoying looking at the surface of the ocean itself, except that when you finally see what goes on underwater,you realize that you've been missing the whole point of the ocean. Staying on the surface all the time is like going to the circus and staring at the outside of the tent.”

Eric Cantona???

Mellor

Jason McCabe wrote: »

I also think judges should be split from each other. Too easy to be swayed by looking at other score cards

That's only an issue if judges intentionally look at each others cards or share scores. Which they shouldn't be doing if it can be helped.

Gorey_R

On the few occasions that i have judged at mma events i have used a similar scoring structure also. Except instead of dashes i use points. So, for example, if in an exchange i deem one fighter marginally got the better of another i would give him one point. If he lit him up and dropped him i would award him significantly more, maybe 5-8 points.

Similarly with takedowns. If one fighter took the other down to his butt against the cage i would give him one point. If he took him down to his back-another point. If he picked him up and slamed him-3 points.

Scoring on the ground then i did similar to outlined above also. I would break it into 20-30second segments then i would use my point system there too. So if the fighter on top was holding positional dominance and staying busy he would score one point for his 30 sec work. If he postured up, landed some hevey shots and passed the guard in 30 seconds i would give him maybe 5 points.

With submission attempts i never really score them too highly. I don't think you should score too much for nearly doing something. i would just take note of the sub attempts and in a close round i would award to the fighter who made more of an attempt to finish the fight!

With regards to courtesy for fighters. It is ridiculous that some judges would deem it appropriate to drink alcohol while judging. Also, i don't think judges should be allowed communicate with eachother during fights. Also, opposite to what Barry said i think all judges decisions should be public and while i agree they shouldn't be discussing their decisions after fights with the general public i don't think it should be a secret. I think judges should be answerable too. If i judge a fight and a someone disagrees with my decision i feel there should be a medium for him to go through to get clarification on why i judged a fight in whatever way i did.

Judging fights is very difficult and you have to be extremely knowledgable. Judges should be suffiecently educated and paid accordingly.

Barry.Oglesby

Gorey_R wrote: »

Also, opposite to what Barry said i think all judges decisions should be public and while i agree they shouldn't be discussing their decisions after fights with the general public i don't think it should be a secret. I think judges should be answerable too. If i judge a fight and a someone disagrees with my decision i feel there should be a medium for him to go through to get clarification on why i judged a fight in whatever way i did.

I see what you mean, but my reasoning is based on the fact that we don't have a council or body for overturning results. I certainly wouldn't mind discussing a decision with a coach or fighter for example, but putting it on the web for discussion by people who are interested because they're a bit bored in work just isn't the right thing to do for a sport that relies on people volunteering to judge.

SBG Ireland

Gorey_R wrote: »

With submission attempts i never really score them too highly. I don't think you should score too much for nearly doing something.

some good points there. just on this though i wonder are we on the same page. i agree i would award nothing for throwing up an armbar from guard that's not even close. but a fully locked in triangle that the guy barely escapes? for me that has to score as highly as a knock down from a punch. both 'nearly did something', both nearly finished the fight one by KO and one by Sub.

Barry.Oglesby

According to the commissions in the USA, a near submission attempt (ie. one that the opponent has to rigorously defend such as an extended arm, triangle held for a long period of time etc.) should be scored in the same manner as a knockdown. So if one guy connects with a right hand and knocks the opponent to the floor, follows him down but the guy gets his back and almost chokes him, then that round is technically even.

That, of course, throws up notions of how close is close, but I guess that's where the judgement in judging comes in.

Gorey_R

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

I see what you mean, but my reasoning is based on the fact that we don't have a council or body for overturning results. I certainly wouldn't mind discussing a decision with a coach or fighter for example, but putting it on the web for discussion by people who are interested because they're a bit bored in work just isn't the right thing to do for a sport that relies on people volunteering to judge.

Ya, ok, i think we have a very smilar idea then.

Gorey_R

SBG Ireland wrote: »

some good points there. just on this though i wonder are we on the same page. i agree i would award nothing for throwing up an armbar from guard that's not even close. but a fully locked in triangle that the guy barely escapes? for me that has to score as highly as a knock down from a punch. both 'nearly did something', both nearly finished the fight one by KO and one by Sub.

Ya, ok. I agree. It's just easier to view the damage being done by strikes. Sometimes, with chokes especially, it can be hard to tell how much danger the guy is really in. With guillotines and triangles especially there have been many times when i was sure the guy was definitely escaping and 2 seconds later he's tapping and on the other side there have been times when i'm sure the guy is screwed and 2 seconds later he's on top putting a hole in the guys face.

SBG Ireland

true, it is a bit subjective and does require an educated eye.
in the same weigh i've seen guys hit hard, wobbled and as the guy ran into finish them they were KO'd.

Gorey_R

SBG Ireland wrote: »

true, it is a bit subjective and does require an educated eye.
in the same weigh i've seen guys hit hard, wobbled and as the guy ran into finish them they were KO'd.

Yep, hard to argue with that! Dead right.

Mellor

Gorey_R wrote: »

Also, opposite to what Barry said i think all judges decisions should be public and while i agree they shouldn't be discussing their decisions after fights with the general public i don't think it should be a secret. I think judges should be answerable too. If i judge a fight and a someone disagrees with my decision i feel there should be a medium for him to go through to get clarification on why i judged a fight in whatever way i did.

There shoudl definitely be made public, is that we can see who scored it for who, and by how much, which rounds etc. Similar to score cards being posted onlien for big events. Transparancy is important here.
But I don't think we should have a medium to question decisions. It would start off with seeking clarification and then quickly proceed to call-in out people and accusations.

If a Judge wants to example his scoring for a high profile or controversial fight, then thats his choice. But he should have to anywers to everyone with an interent connection

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

According to the commissions in the USA, a near submission attempt (ie. one that the opponent has to rigorously defend such as an extended arm, triangle held for a long period of time etc.) should be scored in the same manner as a knockdown. So if one guy connects with a right hand and knocks the opponent to the floor, follows him down but the guy gets his back and almost chokes him, then that round is technically even.

That sounds fair to me.
A fully locked in choke where the guy hangs on until the bell deserves to be scored for the aggresor. Chalking that down to simply an attempt/failed sub is far too harsh. How close is close is enough to score is always going to be subjective

John Ferguson

Mellor wrote: »

There shoudl definitely be made public, is that we can see who scored it for who, and by how much.

Transparancy is important

Totally agree with these points, we had a well documented judging issue back at CC5 and have made all score cards available since. It serves two purposes, firstly it keeps everything transparent and secondly it allows us to see if one judge is more favourable to any particular side or seems to get it totally different from the other judges (we then get the guys together to revisit the scoring criteria)

cowzerp

John Ferguson wrote: »

Totally agree with these points, we had a well documented judging issue back at CC5 and have made all score cards available since. It serves two purposes, firstly it keeps everything transparent and secondly it allows us to see if one judge is more favourable to any particular side or seems to get it totally different from the other judges (we then get the guys together to revisit the scoring criteria)

If judges are going to get put in a position to be criticised by internet warriors then their pay should reflect that-most get peanuts in fairness and do it for the sport and should not get put in a position to be abused by random internet folk.

I'm all for putting up the scores but less so for what judges done what, no problem coaches of the fighters been aware as they are the 1's who matter.

John Ferguson

cowzerp wrote: »

If judges are going to get put in a position to be criticised by internet warriors then their pay should reflect that-most get peanuts in fairness and do it for the sport and should not get put in a position to be abused by random internet folk.

I'm all for putting up the scores but less so for what judges done what, no problem coaches of the fighters been aware as they are the 1's who matter.

I can't comment on what others pay officials (refs and judges) but we pay a pretty decent rate.

It's slightly different in the CC case as our fights are televised and the judging made public in that way too. Regardless of how, I am of the opinion that all scorecards should be made public.

cowzerp

John Ferguson wrote: »

I can't comment on what others pay officials (refs and judges) but we pay a pretty decent rate.

Fair enough John.

John Ferguson wrote: »

It's slightly different in the CC case as our fights are televised and the judging made public in that way too. Regardless of how, I am of the opinion that all scorecards should be made public.

I think we need to start separating the shows that aim to be professional and the shows that are clearly Amateur, The Rumble for example is an Amateur show and does not claim anything else and if it had ambitions to be bigger would need to move to a bigger venue , Judges basically get expenses, should cover petrol and lunch but again it's totally different to CC.

I won't be making public judges scores as judges have enough pressure without answering to biased fans that may totally know nothing of MMA scoring.

troygracie

i have judged on cc and other shows and when judging i do make notes and give marks to each fighter on striking-takedowns-subs etc i make these notes on the back of the score card

Pccb

troygracie wrote: »

i have judged on cc and other shows and when judging i do make notes and give marks to each fighter on striking-takedowns-subs etc i make these notes on the back of the score card

How did u score the joe mc colgan vs levi kehoe 30-27 to levi when both judges gave it 29-28 to joe. U must b lookin cecil peoples job lol
Cecil cassidy lol

themandan6611

Pccb wrote: »

How did u score the joe mc colgan vs levi kehoe 30-27 to levi when both judges gave it 29-28 to joe. U must b lookin cecil peoples job lol
Cecil cassidy lol

maybe, just maybe his perception of the score and who won differed when compared against the other judges. Thats why things like boards exists, opinions differ

John Ferguson

themandan6611 wrote: »

maybe, just maybe his perception of the score and who won differed when compared against the other judges. Thats why things like boards exists, opinions differ

But should perceptions and opinions differ vastly if judges are working on the same scoring criteria during the same fight? Not getting at Cecil oops I mean Conor btw lol. But on a serious note I see it in MMA and boxing alot where one judge scores a bout the polar opposite to the other two and I always think how can they see it so differently?

Arawn

Pccb wrote: »

How did u score the joe mc colgan vs levi kehoe 30-27 to levi when both judges gave it 29-28 to joe. b lookin cecil peoples job lol
Cecil cassidy lol

This thread has shown how some people can score differently to others seriously though have a bit more class than laughing at someone in a public forum when mma is still a minority sport in Ireland.This is why the card results shouldn't be made public tbh, only the ref and promoter should see the results with maybe both gym owners if it's a proper dispute.

Mellor

John Ferguson wrote: »

But on a serious note I see it in MMA and boxing alot where one judge scores a bout the polar opposite to the other two and I always think how can they see it so differently?

Because rounds are isolated in terms of scoring.
Obviously everyone is aware of this. But based on comments on here after big events a lot of people don't apply it too well in a lot of situations. And they compare the scores as a assessment of how clsoe a fight was, which it isn't really.

Take the scoring above as example, two judges scores it 29-28 and the other 27-30
So they all agreed on one round and gave it to fighter B.
what if the other two rounds were very close, and a case could be made either way. If two go with fighter A and the other with B we get the result above.
The scores might look like the judges were watching two different fights, but when you think about it, it can happen pretty easily.

Obviously i know you are aware of the scoring John, i'm just pointing this for dicussion really. And highlight that clsoe fioghts can produce hugely different scores

5weenytodd

I also have a system i use to judge and score fights. Ive used it since the first time i judged and havnt really had any problems with it yet.
I score the rounds on three ranges S,C,G (Striking, Clinch work, Grappling)
I use the dash idea that JK spoke of earlier in these three ranges and add them up at the end of the round and then the one with the most scores 10 the least scores 9. Its very simple and altho not fullproof it does suffice for the level of MMA that i have officiated. If anyone is interested i will explain in detail how it works if you want.
I do intend to get back into officiating in Ireland by the end of this year when i return and i would have no problem making my score cards public for anyone who wants to see them.
Keyboard warriors on this little forum dont bother me and at the end of the day by the time any scores would be made public the fights over so there aint much you can do about it. Being a Ref or Judge has criticism as a perk. Ive said it before that we are very lucky with the standard to officials we have at home. However with the amount of "shows" now i do worry about the pool of officials being overworked. Having one ref do an entire show of 15+ fights at different rules sets is not on. When i reffed on any show (apart from one) i was always with at least one other Ref. Thats the way it should be.

Marty(lost my old sign in details):cool:

John Ferguson

Arawn wrote: »

This thread has shown how some people can score differently to others seriously though have a bit more class than laughing at someone in a public forum when mma is still a minority sport in Ireland.This is why the card results shouldn't be made public tbh, only the ref and promoter should see the results with maybe both gym owners if it's a proper dispute.

I think that the way we can talk about it in a light hearted manner is actually a good thing tbh. Because we are still a very small community it's important to discuss these things between ourselves and a little humour keeps things sensible.

My opinion will always remain that score cards should be made public for the sake of transparancy.

John Ferguson

Mellor wrote: »

Obviously i know you are aware of the scoring John, i'm just pointing this for dicussion really. And highlight that clsoe fioghts can produce hugely different scores

To be fair scoring is something that is still quite alien to me as I have no MMA background, but after 13 of my own events and spectating at loads of others I am getting more of an idea about it (I think ).

cowzerp

Mellor wrote: »

Because rounds are isolated in terms of scoring.
Obviously everyone is aware of this. But based on comments on here after big events a lot of people don't apply it too well in a lot of situations. And they compare the scores as a assessment of how clsoe a fight was, which it isn't really.

Fights can be scored 10-10 so if the rounds are that close then you should not flip a coin, I was not at the fight that was talked about so unsure if the rounds differeing where close or not, In most cases the Score cards should be the same/similar, opposite is usually not good and often points to biased judging either by style or worse by club.

I think overall the judging is good

Last week at the jr show my kid kept it standing for the full fight and clearly dominated the fight yet a judge gave it to the opponent, lucky the other 2 judges where on the ball with all rounds going the right way

Same happened me years ago when a 3x5 round stand up fight went against me that i had dominated, when even the locals knew I'd won and showed their displeasure

Some judges are just useless, biased or just don't have a clue

In cases like this judges need to be looked at and just not asked to do it again as they're not competent for MMA judging clearly. .

p to the e

I've found in the UFC the judges are often reluctant to give a round a draw even when the round is extremely difficult to score. The last Cage Contender I was at, I remember seeing that several rounds of various fights were marked draws which I thought was unusual but also realising that when I was watching it that it was probably the best way to score that round.

MMAIRELANDFAN

5weenytodd wrote: »

I score the rounds on three ranges S,C,G (Striking, Clinch work, Grappling)
I use the dash idea that JK spoke of earlier in these three ranges and add them up at the end of the round and then the one with the most scores 10 the least scores 9. Its very simple and altho not fullproof it does suffice for the level of MMA that i have officiated. If anyone is interested i will explain in detail how it works if you want.

So all ticks are even

I'm interested as the rest seem to indicate that it's just a guideline for them then to make a decision

You add your's and that is it

Surely all ticks are not equal

5weenytodd

Ok ill give it a go.

So i have a note pad and on this pad i draw two grided boxes.
One on for fighter one and one for fighter two.
Along the top the letters S,C,G in a colum each and down the side round 1,2,3 in a row each.
1; S or Striking for me, includes cage control, aggression and of course contact. Contact is both "clean" and "messy".
2; C or Clinch for me, includes closing the distance, clinch work, dirty boxing and takedowns. Takedowns are again "clean" and "messy".
3; G or Grappling for me , includes control, passes, transitions and submission attempts/escapes.

Every time a fighter does something significant in my opinion in one of these ranges they get a "dash" in the corresponding round box.
However when it comes to what in my opinion are dominant actions ie "clean" striking or takedowns i will award a dash and a cross. Essentially two dashes but i record it as a cross to remind me it was "Clean".

Examples of "Clean" movements are:
In the striking range i would consider a striking combination that lands cleanly without reataliation resulting in a stun or knockdown.
In the clinch range its a flowing double leg takedown. Basically taking the fighter from one position to another with complete control.
ect....

At the end of each round i add up the dashes and if appropriate the crosses and use these numbers to declare who gets a ten and who gets a nine.

Like i said this isnt by any way full proof and depents alot on my opinion.
However ive been involved in MMA for some time and train in a club 3 times a week so i feel that i have a general understanding of the way the game flows.