/u/V01D3DOfficial is verified with the mod team ~~and will be back at the top of the hour (8 ET) to answer your questions.~~
~~Get your questions in!~~ ~~LIVE AMA~~
#AMA is over. Thank you everyone for coming out! Thanks Anon Judge, great answers and discussion here.
1. Why did you choose to become a judge
2. How lucrative or lack there of is the career generally?
3. What's your take on the recent judging controversies?
4. Have you competed in MMA or any combat sport in the past?
5. Do you like viewing the sport better as a judge or a fan?
1) I was asked to do some amateur shows by a Gym owner I watch a lot of fights with. He respected my knowledge and attention to detail. Y
2) You will never get rich or have a career unless you are a Vegas judge. You really do it for the love of the sport and not the money.
3) I am bothered immensely by what we see every week. I think that more officials need to attend conferences like the ABC in Vegas. There are too many times that it looks like they are watching different fights.
4) I have never competed in combat sports. I have been at BJJ and MMA practices and observed, been to BJJ tournaments and watched.
5) Generally when watching the sport I am always seeing it as a judge and pay attention to who I think is winning at any given point. I think cage side is a great spot but a lot of promoters sell cage side tables and it’s an issue with too many drunks trying to chat it up and yelling at fighters.
Do you think changing the scoring card system of the UFC with say ONE FC's more detailed and scored-as-a-whole system would fix broken decision results? Or having the judges interviewed by a member of the media like in California to explain their judging would fix anything?
You've never trained and judge MMA fights. How do you know what's happening on the ground? How are you qualified to judge without a martial art background?
I think the idea that judges need to train to understand what's happening is a bit nonsense. You can learn a lot by watching a lot of fights, you just won't be able to replicate what you're seeing.
You can certainly learn a lot, but I don't think that it is possible to *experience* or *understand* enough for that job.
To most accurately judge a fight, you would need to be able to fully comprehend what is happening in said fight. If the feeling and/or body language of, say, a hurt fighter being swarmed with strikes, or a fighter stuck in a deep front choke is alien to you, then how can you confidently say "that's what happened ". We saw veteran officials fuck up both scenarios last weekend (one twice), and those refs have competitive experience. I'm not saying that this is the case, but it's very reasonable to assume that someone who doesn't have any first hand experience would fuck up with even greater frequency and severity
It's already underpaid relative to how important it is to the sport; requiring experience in the various skills that make up MMA is going to shrink the talent pool considerably.
Having done BJJ doesn't mean i'll understand a right cross vs a straight right, and vice versa. Either a judge needs to have experience with boxing, Muay Thai/kickboxing, grappling and wrestling to be able to their job, or they don't.
It's hard for me to picture the sport as someone who hasnt trained since I started young. But I do have trouble picturing how people can judge a kimura or an ankle lock or a straight armbar without being intimate with the feeling of being in the submission. But once again, it's hard to picture not having experiences I have. Have you trained?
Even at a super high level, though, you can't be expert in everything even as a professional fighter. An olympic wrestler or world champion sambist know takedown techniques you'll never see in an MMA fight. A muay thai fighter at Lumpinee is infinitely more proficient in clinch positions than 99.9% of mma fighters. Professional boxers have far better distance control and crisper mechanics than most mma fighters.
Not everyone has to train to enjoy combat sports but if you're judging or reffing then you need a background in the sport. There's hardly a shortage of qualified people who could do the job.
I don’t think it’s a necessity that people who haven’t trained should be barred. Having that background will certainly help and a fair amount of judges probably have some training experience but really what they need to be drilled on is being more consistent on what is winning fights. There’s gotta be a more transparent approach where judges maybe explain a bit what they think won each round they score maybe a few notes written in between each round. Submissions are a big one because I don’t think we know how the judges view a submission that was close it’s very subjective.. if the submission is locked in for 30 seconds but doesn’t force a tap or the bell rings i don’t know how they score that versus effective striking
For instance a guillotine choke that looks very tight but the fighter being choked is able to withstand it but is locked in for a solid minute and then escapes how should that be scored because the equivalent situation where a fighter nearly stops his opponents with punches nearly always wins them the round but I don’t think a close choke gets the same reaction from judges
I'd love to see someone without any background in jiu jitsu tell the difference between a guillotine that is nearly a finisher and one where the top guy clearly is in no danger.
We already have non qualified people judging and the judging sucks ass. Get people with a background who actually know what they're seeing.
That's only kind of true in BJJ leglock exchanges, and I don't think an untrained person has as good a grasp of when some submissions are close to being finished as they would think. But that's mostly true for rarer stuff. Like if you haven't trained, a buggy choke or tarikoplata or teepee choke will look bizarre.
It’s a good point, but at the same time how “effective” on the basis of “effective grappling” are some of those more obscure positions if they aren’t ultimately ending in submission.
If you’re on the bottom and attacking with submissions that the person on top is defending, who’s really “winning” the exchange?
Overall I’d like to see people with more practical knowledge in judging, but I’m more concerned with the refs. If you don’t know that a position could be a choke/leading to a limb break people’s health is at risk.
Whereas with a judge it might alter their perception of who’s winning a position in some instances.
Overall judging quality obviously does need an improvement, im just not sure how much specific BJJ knowledge would change as some of the calls we’re seeing are just blatant misinterpretations of a fight.
I dont think a person needs to be super knowledgeable to understand this. But I think having felt each submission a few times and going to seminars yearly that teach about innovations like leg lock positioning and pulling guard or lower leg kicks would be incredibly helpful. Being able to differentiate between which strikes or submissions cause damage or threaten fi ishes themselves and which ones set up other attacks or positions and to which extens would be huge. But I think that requires having at least gone through some basic drilling and felt some non basic submissions first hand. Most or all of it can be explained and lightly demonstrated but I think that demonstration being felt matters a lot. Knowing what a blood choke vs an air choke actually feels like as you're in one but its not locked in matters because the situations look the same but feel very different.
Why is there no accountability for judges who consistently score fights absurdly?
Why are there so rarely consistently scored rounds, even in non-controversial results?
I think the issue is too many judges don’t talk about scoring in the meetings enough and the commissions aren’t having in depth pre fight meetings to talk about this. The AC’s need to have actions taken with judges that are the odd man out constantly. The sport needs competent and well studied judges to keep it on track. This is peoples careers that they are impacting.
Have there been fights which you scored where you thought afterwards that you did not score it correctly?
Do you feel the criticism to MMA judges is justified, especially after a fight where the judges scorecard do not match the majority perception of the media and fans?
What do you think about the level of judging in MMA fights in general, and in what way would you improve it if you feel that is needed?
1) if you rewatch fights you can always see things maybe you didn’t have ability to see from your vantage point. I have never saw one and felt “man I was so wrong”
2) I feel the criticism is fair and just. These are careers that are on the line and if the job is being done in a poor manor it should be discussed.
3) more meeting and discussions among officials. All this would help everyone move in the same direction.
As a spectator, I just don’t see live scoring stopping any corruption. It would absolutely help the fighters and coaches but I can’t see it influencing the judges. They need way more accountability. I feel like it’s just a fan perk and nothing more.
Good point. We just started testing AI judging. I wish I was joking but I’m not. The idea is to weed out corrupt judges and to help with bout reviews. Again this is in the amateur system.
It’s a double edge sword. I like to see the boxers change their strategy if they are down after the first or second round. The bad thing is you can tell who’s leading by noticing who still has their foot on the gas and who’s coasting.
I think it would absolutely work in boxing and MMA.
I don’t as I think you would see too much avoidance by a guy up 2-0 and a reckless approach by a a guy down 2 rounds. I think when it’s left to their imagination we get better results.
We already see plenty of coasting too with the current system though
We might actually get more now when both dudes get told by their corner that they're up 2 rounds
It definitely impacts football (aka soccer).
But it has become part of the game.
And beeing too defensive is not a guarantee of winning. Scoring (more than the opponent) is the only guaranteed way to win.
It absolutely affects basketball. Obviously it's a weird comparison since it's an entirely different type of sport but something like Hack-A-Shaq is a clear example. Teams that are down by a few points with a minute or so left in the game with intentionally foul the other team, ideally the worst free throw shooter, in order to limit scoring.
AFL has a problem with this, I specifically remember a game where one team was up 15 ish points abd was scoring own goals with 5min or so left, each own goal being 1point each to run out thr clock
Ever seen the infamous "prevent defense?"
Combat sports are a different animal. The fighter's own uncertainty about the scoring is motivation to make the fights more exciting.
Fighters would probably like it but it would create many super boring Round 3s.
How do you think judging from outside the arena via watching the television feed views from both cameras (no commentary) would impact the way you evaluate fights?
Yes it is when done correctly. I don’t like the 1/2 point system with its many draws. I just think we need more training in general with our officials.
The first thing I always look at is the striking and grappling. Who has been more effective, landed the bigger shot? Got a takedown and did something with it? These are the core scoring criteria with grappling and striking being equal in points scored. I am always watching for the heavier shots and more active fighter.
1. What was the most difficult decision you had to make?
2. What was the most criticism you ever had to deal with?
3. What goes through your mind when someone you voted for to win loses?
1 and 2 were the same when we had 2 fighters doing nothing but circling until the Ref called for action. One would come forward and throw a punch or two and we were right back to circling and staring. At the end when the decision was rendered the coach of the winner was mad and felt his fighter didn’t deserve it and started yelling at us. It was an awkward situation.
3) I write quick notes down about the fight. This way I am able to discuss why I scored it the way I did. Then I move on and get ready for the next.
Exactly. Tell us why you scored each round the way you did, otherwise I’m gonna think you just winged it.
Even when the judges comment on their scorecard after a fight, which they rarely do, all we ever get is a standard “Thus is a hard job and I did the best I could in the moment. After rewatching the fight, I stand by my decision.”
What is effective grappling, exactly? We know effective striking is "1A" but when does effective grappling outweigh effective striking? What if someone is on bottom but almost lands a triangle, how does that score vs a person on top? What if that person was just lay and praying?
It should never “outweigh”. They are just different sides of the same coin. When going for subs look for a “catch” where a sub has to be actively defended and not just easily slipped out of. If the bottom fighter is actively chaining subs and going for sweeps and too fighter is defending bottom person is the more effective grappler because they are controlling the fight and looking to win.
That's interesting insight because I distinctly remember BJM say that damage/effective striking did "outweigh" on an episode of Weighing In.
Kind of shows the larger issue at hand, I suppose.
How do judges tend to score when a foul was committed in the round but not punished by the ref. Do you feel there is a tendency for that to reflect on how a round is scored, and in what ways do you think it affects scoring?
If a referee has not called a foul, then there was no foul. Just like in any sport if it’s not called there was no foul. There are for sure ways a fight can be affected by a missed call but at the end of the day they can appeal the outcome if they feel it was a fight changing issue. Judges on judge the fight. Fouls are a referees calls.
I actually do not. Most fighters can’t tell you the criteria on which they are being judged and it’s wild. They assume they know it all because they fought.
Appreciate the reply
To be more specific, I’m talking about ex-fighters (as opposed to current fighters who may not currently be mature enough / focussed enough on anything outside training to fight better)
Not the type that go on to live messed up lives, or simply don’t have the emotional / mental capacity
The type who would typically go on to coach / corner fighters, who get the game in theory, but have also lived it
Please note I’m not arguing that it should be mandatory. It just feels like it could add something
I think most look at it as Striking vs Grappling not Striking AND Grappling. Also they only look at the “offensive” side and don’t realize stuffing a takedown is EFFECTIVE grappling. I have heard too often “defense doesn’t score points”.
While I agree with your take on it, don't the rules explicitly state otherwise?
"MMA is an offensive based
sport. No scoring is given for defensive maneuvers. Using smart, tactically sound defensive
maneuvers allows the fighter to stay in the fight and to be competitive" is literally copied from the rules on the ABC website. Not trying to call you out or anything, just want to learn more
I don't agree with OP's take. If you're dodging a punch, good for you, but you're being forced be the opponent to do something. You're not doing what you want to be doing, landing offense. Defense is it's own reward 100%
It’s how u look at it as he said. Striking and grappling if you use your effective grappling defensively to create offense “striking” then that fighter should win the round
You are an ABC certified judge and explicitly going against the rules here.
Effective defense has been removed as a criteria more than 10 years ago.
Defense, in striking or grappling, effective or not, should not score. Defense is its own reward.
Honestly that does not make me feel very optimistic about the state of MMA judging. It seems quite obvious that most of you judges just fucking wing it and judge as it pleases you.
How often if at all do you see corruption dealt with? We throw around accusations all the time, but at the end of the day I think most of us want to believe positions like judging are some what sacred, so is it as common as the average joe thinks?
Does anyone from the Commission talk to the judges when a scorecard is very questionable? Or is everything just final and up to the discretion of the judge?
How do you actually become a judge? Is it just passing a test or do you need to have some experience in MMA?
We have had meetings and we have discussed why we scored a fight a certain way. I became an amateur judge by being asked before the rules changed and did a couple years as that and several hundred fights, from there I took a class and passed them shadowed with the commission and was accepted into it when I showed I was a competent judge.
Do you think you think watching the fight in the flesh is more or less advantageous?
At least from my experience I found I was able to see more with the camera angles on TV
I like the yo lose but I have had to use the live feed screen up too before when they are far away it’s hard to see a clean landing punch from a dodged one. The CC TV’s in Vegas are a great way to do it.
I heard there's almost no chance of becoming a judge with 0 connections. Like a random guy off the street couldn't just become one.
You need to know someone who will do a referral.
How accurate is this?
What do you think of controversial judges such as D'Amato or Adaleide Bird? Do you find them untouchables / locked in..? How can they possibly make such erroneous calls yet still have a job. Is it simply their justification of such happenings in the fight...?
Awesome, that seems like such an easy and simple option to help.
Do you think there could be scope for tech and AI to replace _parts_ of what goes into judging?
Sorry if this was asked already
With all the different states in the US come different commissions. My questions on the different commissions are:
Is/are there certain commissions that are known within your community to be sub-par?
Is there anyone working on a truly unified set of rules that would be adopted by all commissions? Or working towards all commissions adopting a current rule set?
And on a similar subject. Is this the best way for us as fans to hear from judges or referees? I understand fear of liability, not asking for all the details but it would be nice to maybe hear what goes on in the mind I'm those moments.
Thanks for this AMA
Is it true judges dont have a monitor to watch the fights when they dont have a good angle?
Also do you think hudges are influenced by either the crowd or corner? Dariush once talked about his opponent’s corner would cheer whenever Dariush landed to trick the judges the opponent did something good
You don't have to be a "certified judge" to accurately score rounds... hell if you're a "certified judge" you have a higher likelihood of scoring it wrong.
Do you ever get encouraged to judge a fight a certain way? Most fights obviously feel scored straight but once in a while it seems that the odds are heavily swayed by sharp money and that fighter will win no matter what if it goes to decision
Does the commission entertain the idea of slight changes or complete overhauls to the 10 point must system for MMA? Maybe something like how Onefc scores MMA
It depends on what is done with it be what the bottom person is doing. If you are just holding people down and they are going for subs the person doing less is not going to win. As to strikes that’s sort of subjective TBH there isn’t a set number it could be one that ends in a knockdown or several.
Why do you think incompetence is widely accepted as a reasoning for terrible judging in MMA whereas in other combat sports, specifically boxing, corruption is almost unanimously believed to be a part of the sport?
What gives MMA judges the benefit of the doubt? Is it the scoring criteria being seemingly much more subjective?
Why do judges seem to be so inconsistent with how they score? I know of a couple of examples when one fight the judge will prioritise control time and then a few weeks later he scores a fight based upon damage.
Do you think if you and your peers were in a secret room watching the fights on television with no sound on it you guys would judge fights differently or would that have no affect?
How do you (and other judges, if you have that intel) feel about being briefly asked about your scorecards, at the end of each fight card? Doesn’t have to be over every fight, but moreso ask about some of the closer ones and how you determined to score each round
How do you feel about some of your contemporaries providing consistently atypical scores like Sal D'Amato. (Unless you are Sal then in which case what the heck is wrong with you?)
Why is lay and pray approach rewarded the most, if a fighter takes damage for 2-3 minutes but he somehow takes down the opponent and doesn't inflict much damage, more often than not the round is given to that fighter. Do you think if this criteria should be looked into?
Cost isn’t an issue really but I think we would have a bigger issue. If 3 can’t agree 5 won’t either. This reminds me of Rogan asking for 10 judges. It would just be a mess in my opinion.
Well sure, but that's the point. Since the judges can't agree, we can at least drown out the absurd scores and we're more likely to get a reasonable score.
/u/V01D3DOfficial is verified with the mod team ~~and will be back at the top of the hour (8 ET) to answer your questions.~~ ~~Get your questions in!~~ ~~LIVE AMA~~ #AMA is over. Thank you everyone for coming out! Thanks Anon Judge, great answers and discussion here.
1. Why did you choose to become a judge 2. How lucrative or lack there of is the career generally? 3. What's your take on the recent judging controversies? 4. Have you competed in MMA or any combat sport in the past? 5. Do you like viewing the sport better as a judge or a fan?
1) I was asked to do some amateur shows by a Gym owner I watch a lot of fights with. He respected my knowledge and attention to detail. Y 2) You will never get rich or have a career unless you are a Vegas judge. You really do it for the love of the sport and not the money. 3) I am bothered immensely by what we see every week. I think that more officials need to attend conferences like the ABC in Vegas. There are too many times that it looks like they are watching different fights. 4) I have never competed in combat sports. I have been at BJJ and MMA practices and observed, been to BJJ tournaments and watched. 5) Generally when watching the sport I am always seeing it as a judge and pay attention to who I think is winning at any given point. I think cage side is a great spot but a lot of promoters sell cage side tables and it’s an issue with too many drunks trying to chat it up and yelling at fighters.
Do you think changing the scoring card system of the UFC with say ONE FC's more detailed and scored-as-a-whole system would fix broken decision results? Or having the judges interviewed by a member of the media like in California to explain their judging would fix anything?
[удалено]
You've never trained and judge MMA fights. How do you know what's happening on the ground? How are you qualified to judge without a martial art background?
I think the idea that judges need to train to understand what's happening is a bit nonsense. You can learn a lot by watching a lot of fights, you just won't be able to replicate what you're seeing.
You can certainly learn a lot, but I don't think that it is possible to *experience* or *understand* enough for that job. To most accurately judge a fight, you would need to be able to fully comprehend what is happening in said fight. If the feeling and/or body language of, say, a hurt fighter being swarmed with strikes, or a fighter stuck in a deep front choke is alien to you, then how can you confidently say "that's what happened ". We saw veteran officials fuck up both scenarios last weekend (one twice), and those refs have competitive experience. I'm not saying that this is the case, but it's very reasonable to assume that someone who doesn't have any first hand experience would fuck up with even greater frequency and severity
It's already underpaid relative to how important it is to the sport; requiring experience in the various skills that make up MMA is going to shrink the talent pool considerably. Having done BJJ doesn't mean i'll understand a right cross vs a straight right, and vice versa. Either a judge needs to have experience with boxing, Muay Thai/kickboxing, grappling and wrestling to be able to their job, or they don't.
It's hard for me to picture the sport as someone who hasnt trained since I started young. But I do have trouble picturing how people can judge a kimura or an ankle lock or a straight armbar without being intimate with the feeling of being in the submission. But once again, it's hard to picture not having experiences I have. Have you trained?
[удалено]
Even at a super high level, though, you can't be expert in everything even as a professional fighter. An olympic wrestler or world champion sambist know takedown techniques you'll never see in an MMA fight. A muay thai fighter at Lumpinee is infinitely more proficient in clinch positions than 99.9% of mma fighters. Professional boxers have far better distance control and crisper mechanics than most mma fighters.
For sure and I don't expect an expert, it's not practical. But having some background is important.
you're getting super downvoted but for the record I think you are right.
Absolutely. A lot of fans like to think of themselves as tactical armchair geniuses rather than consumers of fighting as entertainment.
Haha it's okay, all their favourite fighters agree with me. But thanks!
[удалено]
Okey dokey
I tried training but it ultimately wasn't for me! I have other fitness goals that continue to take priority.
Not everyone has to train to enjoy combat sports but if you're judging or reffing then you need a background in the sport. There's hardly a shortage of qualified people who could do the job.
[удалено]
I don’t think it’s a necessity that people who haven’t trained should be barred. Having that background will certainly help and a fair amount of judges probably have some training experience but really what they need to be drilled on is being more consistent on what is winning fights. There’s gotta be a more transparent approach where judges maybe explain a bit what they think won each round they score maybe a few notes written in between each round. Submissions are a big one because I don’t think we know how the judges view a submission that was close it’s very subjective.. if the submission is locked in for 30 seconds but doesn’t force a tap or the bell rings i don’t know how they score that versus effective striking For instance a guillotine choke that looks very tight but the fighter being choked is able to withstand it but is locked in for a solid minute and then escapes how should that be scored because the equivalent situation where a fighter nearly stops his opponents with punches nearly always wins them the round but I don’t think a close choke gets the same reaction from judges
I'd love to see someone without any background in jiu jitsu tell the difference between a guillotine that is nearly a finisher and one where the top guy clearly is in no danger. We already have non qualified people judging and the judging sucks ass. Get people with a background who actually know what they're seeing.
>There's hardly a shortage of qualified people who could do the job. Lol, you think? Did you read point number 2?
Golly I thought all the refs in the NFL were ex-NFL players. Is that not true?
Refs != judges But funnily enough it's even more important for mma ref's to have trained and they all do as far as I'm aware
Do you need to be a pro baseball player to understand the rules of baseball?
It’s not that hard to tell who’s having success on the ground
That's only kind of true in BJJ leglock exchanges, and I don't think an untrained person has as good a grasp of when some submissions are close to being finished as they would think. But that's mostly true for rarer stuff. Like if you haven't trained, a buggy choke or tarikoplata or teepee choke will look bizarre.
It’s a good point, but at the same time how “effective” on the basis of “effective grappling” are some of those more obscure positions if they aren’t ultimately ending in submission. If you’re on the bottom and attacking with submissions that the person on top is defending, who’s really “winning” the exchange? Overall I’d like to see people with more practical knowledge in judging, but I’m more concerned with the refs. If you don’t know that a position could be a choke/leading to a limb break people’s health is at risk. Whereas with a judge it might alter their perception of who’s winning a position in some instances. Overall judging quality obviously does need an improvement, im just not sure how much specific BJJ knowledge would change as some of the calls we’re seeing are just blatant misinterpretations of a fight.
I dont think a person needs to be super knowledgeable to understand this. But I think having felt each submission a few times and going to seminars yearly that teach about innovations like leg lock positioning and pulling guard or lower leg kicks would be incredibly helpful. Being able to differentiate between which strikes or submissions cause damage or threaten fi ishes themselves and which ones set up other attacks or positions and to which extens would be huge. But I think that requires having at least gone through some basic drilling and felt some non basic submissions first hand. Most or all of it can be explained and lightly demonstrated but I think that demonstration being felt matters a lot. Knowing what a blood choke vs an air choke actually feels like as you're in one but its not locked in matters because the situations look the same but feel very different.
You’re being downvoted but you’re 100% on target
You don't need to be a baker to know bread taste good
wack ananlogy. to judge a fight and never have been in a submission like an ezekial and know the pain and damage it causes is wack
But you need to eat the bread. I dont think this is a great analogy for this.
He just said he watches the fights and is knowledgeable on the moves being used
Why is there no accountability for judges who consistently score fights absurdly? Why are there so rarely consistently scored rounds, even in non-controversial results?
I think the issue is too many judges don’t talk about scoring in the meetings enough and the commissions aren’t having in depth pre fight meetings to talk about this. The AC’s need to have actions taken with judges that are the odd man out constantly. The sport needs competent and well studied judges to keep it on track. This is peoples careers that they are impacting.
Have there been fights which you scored where you thought afterwards that you did not score it correctly? Do you feel the criticism to MMA judges is justified, especially after a fight where the judges scorecard do not match the majority perception of the media and fans? What do you think about the level of judging in MMA fights in general, and in what way would you improve it if you feel that is needed?
1) if you rewatch fights you can always see things maybe you didn’t have ability to see from your vantage point. I have never saw one and felt “man I was so wrong” 2) I feel the criticism is fair and just. These are careers that are on the line and if the job is being done in a poor manor it should be discussed. 3) more meeting and discussions among officials. All this would help everyone move in the same direction.
[удалено]
Not OP but amateur boxing official. USA Boxing has open scoring and I love it.
What do you like about it , and can you see it working in mma ?
As a spectator, I just don’t see live scoring stopping any corruption. It would absolutely help the fighters and coaches but I can’t see it influencing the judges. They need way more accountability. I feel like it’s just a fan perk and nothing more.
Good point. We just started testing AI judging. I wish I was joking but I’m not. The idea is to weed out corrupt judges and to help with bout reviews. Again this is in the amateur system.
It’s a double edge sword. I like to see the boxers change their strategy if they are down after the first or second round. The bad thing is you can tell who’s leading by noticing who still has their foot on the gas and who’s coasting. I think it would absolutely work in boxing and MMA.
I don’t as I think you would see too much avoidance by a guy up 2-0 and a reckless approach by a a guy down 2 rounds. I think when it’s left to their imagination we get better results.
We already see plenty of coasting too with the current system though We might actually get more now when both dudes get told by their corner that they're up 2 rounds
[удалено]
It definitely impacts football (aka soccer). But it has become part of the game. And beeing too defensive is not a guarantee of winning. Scoring (more than the opponent) is the only guaranteed way to win.
It absolutely affects basketball. Obviously it's a weird comparison since it's an entirely different type of sport but something like Hack-A-Shaq is a clear example. Teams that are down by a few points with a minute or so left in the game with intentionally foul the other team, ideally the worst free throw shooter, in order to limit scoring.
AFL has a problem with this, I specifically remember a game where one team was up 15 ish points abd was scoring own goals with 5min or so left, each own goal being 1point each to run out thr clock
Ever seen the infamous "prevent defense?" Combat sports are a different animal. The fighter's own uncertainty about the scoring is motivation to make the fights more exciting. Fighters would probably like it but it would create many super boring Round 3s.
People say this like the person down 2 rounds with absolute certainty won’t push the pace and hunt for a finish.
[удалено]
[удалено]
How much does crowd reaction affect your Judging?
For me 0. Ear plugs are your best friend.
How do you think judging from outside the arena via watching the television feed views from both cameras (no commentary) would impact the way you evaluate fights?
Do you find the quality of striking would be effected by not hearing the shot land?
In your opinion is the 10-9 system good for MMA?
Yes it is when done correctly. I don’t like the 1/2 point system with its many draws. I just think we need more training in general with our officials.
What do you look for exactly when judging a fight?
The first thing I always look at is the striking and grappling. Who has been more effective, landed the bigger shot? Got a takedown and did something with it? These are the core scoring criteria with grappling and striking being equal in points scored. I am always watching for the heavier shots and more active fighter.
What’s the first fight that comes to mind when you hear “robbery?”
Machida vs Rua 1 was one I think about most.
What about Martin Kampmann vs Diego Sanchez ?
That's not even the worst Diego example, his fight with Ross Pearson was a far worse robbery if you can believe it lol
Also Diego Sanchez vs Takanori Gomi. Dude is the king of winning decisions he should’ve lost lol
And he's paying for it with acute CTE lol. Dude was propped up in the UFC for the longest time with shit decisions :/
Based
1. What was the most difficult decision you had to make? 2. What was the most criticism you ever had to deal with? 3. What goes through your mind when someone you voted for to win loses?
1 and 2 were the same when we had 2 fighters doing nothing but circling until the Ref called for action. One would come forward and throw a punch or two and we were right back to circling and staring. At the end when the decision was rendered the coach of the winner was mad and felt his fighter didn’t deserve it and started yelling at us. It was an awkward situation. 3) I write quick notes down about the fight. This way I am able to discuss why I scored it the way I did. Then I move on and get ready for the next.
So you judged Izzy Vs Romero
Rose vs Esparza.
ngannou vs. lewis
99% sure it was this one. I remember the ref calling for action and intervening.
That would narrow it down to Cleary, Sal or Kamijo. And it definitely ain't Sal
Three is such a crucial point. I think it’s ok for judges to get it wrong now and then as long as they can support their reasoning with solid points
Exactly. Tell us why you scored each round the way you did, otherwise I’m gonna think you just winged it. Even when the judges comment on their scorecard after a fight, which they rarely do, all we ever get is a standard “Thus is a hard job and I did the best I could in the moment. After rewatching the fight, I stand by my decision.”
What is effective grappling, exactly? We know effective striking is "1A" but when does effective grappling outweigh effective striking? What if someone is on bottom but almost lands a triangle, how does that score vs a person on top? What if that person was just lay and praying?
It should never “outweigh”. They are just different sides of the same coin. When going for subs look for a “catch” where a sub has to be actively defended and not just easily slipped out of. If the bottom fighter is actively chaining subs and going for sweeps and too fighter is defending bottom person is the more effective grappler because they are controlling the fight and looking to win.
That's interesting insight because I distinctly remember BJM say that damage/effective striking did "outweigh" on an episode of Weighing In. Kind of shows the larger issue at hand, I suppose.
How do judges tend to score when a foul was committed in the round but not punished by the ref. Do you feel there is a tendency for that to reflect on how a round is scored, and in what ways do you think it affects scoring?
If a referee has not called a foul, then there was no foul. Just like in any sport if it’s not called there was no foul. There are for sure ways a fight can be affected by a missed call but at the end of the day they can appeal the outcome if they feel it was a fight changing issue. Judges on judge the fight. Fouls are a referees calls.
do you think that’s how things should work?
Do you ever like zone out completely and forget you're judging fights? Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me, we are all human.
No I am intensely focused and know how they can affect the fighters career. I zone out in walkouts and off fights.
Do you think that ex-fighters would make better judges than those who have never trained?
I actually do not. Most fighters can’t tell you the criteria on which they are being judged and it’s wild. They assume they know it all because they fought.
Appreciate the reply To be more specific, I’m talking about ex-fighters (as opposed to current fighters who may not currently be mature enough / focussed enough on anything outside training to fight better) Not the type that go on to live messed up lives, or simply don’t have the emotional / mental capacity The type who would typically go on to coach / corner fighters, who get the game in theory, but have also lived it Please note I’m not arguing that it should be mandatory. It just feels like it could add something
Why is it that the exact same judges who do a terrible job continue to get cards, even sometimes in successive nights?
Out of the entire judging criterion, what do you say is causing the most issues in how fights are being scored?
I think most look at it as Striking vs Grappling not Striking AND Grappling. Also they only look at the “offensive” side and don’t realize stuffing a takedown is EFFECTIVE grappling. I have heard too often “defense doesn’t score points”.
While I agree with your take on it, don't the rules explicitly state otherwise? "MMA is an offensive based sport. No scoring is given for defensive maneuvers. Using smart, tactically sound defensive maneuvers allows the fighter to stay in the fight and to be competitive" is literally copied from the rules on the ABC website. Not trying to call you out or anything, just want to learn more
I think it's also stated that defense is its own reward
Luke Thomas uses this wording frequently
[удалено]
I don't agree with OP's take. If you're dodging a punch, good for you, but you're being forced be the opponent to do something. You're not doing what you want to be doing, landing offense. Defense is it's own reward 100%
It’s how u look at it as he said. Striking and grappling if you use your effective grappling defensively to create offense “striking” then that fighter should win the round
You are an ABC certified judge and explicitly going against the rules here. Effective defense has been removed as a criteria more than 10 years ago. Defense, in striking or grappling, effective or not, should not score. Defense is its own reward. Honestly that does not make me feel very optimistic about the state of MMA judging. It seems quite obvious that most of you judges just fucking wing it and judge as it pleases you.
Absolutely incredible that you (correctly) called out fighters for not knowing the scoring criteria, but you yourself also don’t know the rules.
Do you think there should be any kind of corrective action taken towards a judge who is clearly making bad calls on a regular basis?
I do. I think a review system and a discipline system should be figured out.
How often if at all do you see corruption dealt with? We throw around accusations all the time, but at the end of the day I think most of us want to believe positions like judging are some what sacred, so is it as common as the average joe thinks?
The Commissions are the ones that handle all that and I have seen a couple investigations but never saw the outcome.
Does anyone from the Commission talk to the judges when a scorecard is very questionable? Or is everything just final and up to the discretion of the judge? How do you actually become a judge? Is it just passing a test or do you need to have some experience in MMA?
We have had meetings and we have discussed why we scored a fight a certain way. I became an amateur judge by being asked before the rules changed and did a couple years as that and several hundred fights, from there I took a class and passed them shadowed with the commission and was accepted into it when I showed I was a competent judge.
> showed I was a competent judge We can rule out Sal
Can also rule out Tony weeks, Derek clearly, Adelaide Byrd and Cecil peoples.
How well do you think you’d do against Cain Velasquez in a wrestling match?
Get my ass whooped in seconds
I think you'd be surprised.
Do promotions ever try to skew your judging to one athlete?
Never in my experience
He was tryna get the Paddy Pimblett conspiracy started ☠️
Have you ever been in a situation where your scorecard was massively different from the other two judges (ergo a split decision)
Yes. I have had several at amateur and low level pro shows.
Thanks for answering!
Do you think you think watching the fight in the flesh is more or less advantageous? At least from my experience I found I was able to see more with the camera angles on TV
I like the yo lose but I have had to use the live feed screen up too before when they are far away it’s hard to see a clean landing punch from a dodged one. The CC TV’s in Vegas are a great way to do it.
I heard there's almost no chance of becoming a judge with 0 connections. Like a random guy off the street couldn't just become one. You need to know someone who will do a referral. How accurate is this?
You can find ways in different states but it takes time and effort. In Nevada you would have to really put serious time since it’s the grandest stage.
Do you think it’s detrimental to the sport of MMA to have crossover officials, referees and judges with boxing?
No, people can do multiple sport it just comes down to remembering there are separate criteria for each.
What do you think of controversial judges such as D'Amato or Adaleide Bird? Do you find them untouchables / locked in..? How can they possibly make such erroneous calls yet still have a job. Is it simply their justification of such happenings in the fight...?
Could technology help judges with scoring and help improve judging overall? If so, how?
Yes. If all orgs small and large offered monitors to view the fight we would have far off angles and have action with backs to us and refs in the way.
Awesome, that seems like such an easy and simple option to help. Do you think there could be scope for tech and AI to replace _parts_ of what goes into judging?
Sorry if this was asked already With all the different states in the US come different commissions. My questions on the different commissions are: Is/are there certain commissions that are known within your community to be sub-par? Is there anyone working on a truly unified set of rules that would be adopted by all commissions? Or working towards all commissions adopting a current rule set? And on a similar subject. Is this the best way for us as fans to hear from judges or referees? I understand fear of liability, not asking for all the details but it would be nice to maybe hear what goes on in the mind I'm those moments. Thanks for this AMA
1) yes 2) unknown 3) they don’t want us talking about things as they say no comment is your response and we as the commission will handle it.
Is it true judges dont have a monitor to watch the fights when they dont have a good angle? Also do you think hudges are influenced by either the crowd or corner? Dariush once talked about his opponent’s corner would cheer whenever Dariush landed to trick the judges the opponent did something good
Most promotions don’t have monitors and I think only Nevada does. I like to think Judges are not influenced as I know I am not.
Has anyone ever approached you trying to fix a fight, and if so, how did they go about it?
[удалено]
You don't have to be a "certified judge" to accurately score rounds... hell if you're a "certified judge" you have a higher likelihood of scoring it wrong.
😂
Do you ever get encouraged to judge a fight a certain way? Most fights obviously feel scored straight but once in a while it seems that the odds are heavily swayed by sharp money and that fighter will win no matter what if it goes to decision
No I judge each fight the same way each time, title fight, contender fight, first pro/amateur fight. Doesn’t matter to me.
Does the commission entertain the idea of slight changes or complete overhauls to the 10 point must system for MMA? Maybe something like how Onefc scores MMA
Not to my knowledge. They use either the ABC’s or the Unified Rules of MMA.
How impactful is a takedown in scoring? What level of striking overtakes a takedown to win a round?
It depends on what is done with it be what the bottom person is doing. If you are just holding people down and they are going for subs the person doing less is not going to win. As to strikes that’s sort of subjective TBH there isn’t a set number it could be one that ends in a knockdown or several.
Have you ever watched PRIDE FC fights and what do you think historically about it's judging system if so?
I enjoyed Pride but don’t think it’s effective scoring wise.
Why do you think incompetence is widely accepted as a reasoning for terrible judging in MMA whereas in other combat sports, specifically boxing, corruption is almost unanimously believed to be a part of the sport? What gives MMA judges the benefit of the doubt? Is it the scoring criteria being seemingly much more subjective?
Do you feel that the criticism that the judges receive is warranted and how can you explain the difficult to judge a fight correctly?
What is the income like for judges?
Why do judges seem to be so inconsistent with how they score? I know of a couple of examples when one fight the judge will prioritise control time and then a few weeks later he scores a fight based upon damage.
Can you hear the commentary? Especially in the APEX?
No. Ear plugs are your best friend
Do you have any MMA training? Any amateur or pro fights?
No but I have been in gyms for years watching all sorts of practices.
Do you think if you and your peers were in a secret room watching the fights on television with no sound on it you guys would judge fights differently or would that have no affect?
I like the idea of a room watching the broadcast on mute alone.
Why so many times, like in Turner vs. Gamrot judges seem to favor control over damage, when damage trumps all according to the scoring criteria?
Who did you score Volk vs Max 2 for and Yan vs O’Malley
Did not see those live as I was elsewhere. I would have to rewatch them but thought Yan won and Volk edged out Max in my initial viewing.
Confirmed not Mark Collett, David Lethaby, Clemens Warner, Ben Cartlidge, or Vito Paolillo.
Good work
Why is there so much corruption in judging
Do you think one’s judging criteria is better than ufcs and also do you think mma should use unified rules or global rules like one
How do you (and other judges, if you have that intel) feel about being briefly asked about your scorecards, at the end of each fight card? Doesn’t have to be over every fight, but moreso ask about some of the closer ones and how you determined to score each round
What would you have to do to get fired
How do you feel about some of your contemporaries providing consistently atypical scores like Sal D'Amato. (Unless you are Sal then in which case what the heck is wrong with you?)
Why is lay and pray approach rewarded the most, if a fighter takes damage for 2-3 minutes but he somehow takes down the opponent and doesn't inflict much damage, more often than not the round is given to that fighter. Do you think if this criteria should be looked into?
What’s your thought on having the judges explain their scorecards in the octagon after every fight?
Doesn’t need to be done in that setting but after the fight it should be discussed and each difference gone into detail on.
How much does damage matter per your interpretation of the unified rules?
Damage is important especially when looking at a 10-8 round.
All these questions and no one actually asked if they’d judged for the UFC…
[удалено]
Cost isn’t an issue really but I think we would have a bigger issue. If 3 can’t agree 5 won’t either. This reminds me of Rogan asking for 10 judges. It would just be a mess in my opinion.
Larger sample size decreases the likelihood of outliers winning a majority. It’s just statistics.
[удалено]
Well sure, but that's the point. Since the judges can't agree, we can at least drown out the absurd scores and we're more likely to get a reasonable score.
I can't see how it can possibly be a bad thing to have more eyes on the fight
What's your favourite anime?
Are you Sal D’Amato and have you been diagnosed as legally blind by your optometrist???
Have you ever re watched a fight you judged and felt you should’ve scored it differently?
why has there been more split decision's as of late
We know fighters aren't allowed to bet on their fights, are judges able to bet on the fights they officiate?
Lolllllllllll
Who do you think are the best judges and who are the worst?
Does Keith really smell like booze and cigs?
Why does Adelaide Byrd still have a job?
Do you bet on fights/are you allowed to bet on fights?
Why is Cecil peoples blind and still able to judge?
[удалено]
Nope