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.