MMA Judging Thought

[Matt "Gumby" Glach]

Why don't the athletic commissions just pony up and pay a few more judges, why is the number 3? Applying basic statistical theories, the more judges that score the fight, the more accurate the outcome. Even upping it to 5 would be a huge help. I think 7 judges would do the trick to pretty much eliminate "bad" decisions. Do they just not want to pay more judges? Is there some sort of rule that says 3 judges score the fight? To me it seems like the most obvious answer to improving decision accuracy. Anyone else have thoughts or insight on this? Is there something I don't know?

[Eddie Bravo]

That's a great idea, 5 seems like a good number

[Daniel Valdez]

I think this is a good idea. But, what about increasing the odds of variability with how bad some of them are. instead of one bad judge, you might get 3. The root problem still needs addressed. Clearer judging rules, and more educated judges.

[Andy Lopez]

more judges plus more educated judges. I really hate how some matches outcomes have come about you would think after so many questionable incidents something would have been done about it by now

[Kevin Gibbs]

educated judges, better use of 10 must, including judging 10-10 rounds, and realizing you can't just throw 10-9 on every round because not all 10-9 are the same. I like the 5 judges idea.

[Rick Martinez]

Great point, adding more judges would definitely do that. I also heard a friend talking about a promotion having a .5 vote, anyone hear anything about this?

[James III]

The 5 judge thing sounds like a great idea!

[Kevin Gibbs]

half point has been talked about and it has potential my issue is that as they are now judges rarely give out 10-8 or 10-7 rounds. 10, 9.5, 9, 8.5, 8. is really the same as 10, 9, 8, 7, 6. or you could just do it on a 20must which gives the same variability as a half point system., whatever the point system, its useless without educated judges.

[Sarah-Jane & Del Christie]

I think the judges here is the obvious problem not so much the points basis or even the amount of judges, I do think that with the boxing ring having 3 judges was fine but we are talking an Octagon now and a considerable size difference not to mention time of the rounds and all manner of anomalies thrown in, which leaves me to agree with the 5 judges theory, it would also be good to see them utilise the stats from each round to maybe help the judges in some way, I know Dana says don't leave it in the hands of the judges but sometimes we just don't get that option wouldn't it be nice though to just be able to compete without the stress of worrying about that, knowing you have faith in the people who are JUDGING you.

[Jason Hyatt]

The point system has always been kind of a mystery to me. I understand some of the different point schemes in grappling, but MMA points I just don't really get. There is effectively a three point scale: You lose the round, you win the round, you win the round a lot. It seems like maybe they could break up the way points are scored. Like score the grappling component of the fight like a grappling match (but then I suppose that could shift the balance even more towards wrestlers). I dunno. At the very least, I really like the five-judges idea. The athletic commission simply needs to recognize that MMA is not boxing and stop trying to jam MMA's octagon-shaped peg into boxing's square hole.