Should fights be judged the day after?

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

Mishima Zaibatsu

TMMAC’s resident musician
Feb 27, 2016
2,969
3,523
Hear me out.

This is probably a pretty crazy idea, but I just wanted to get the opinion of this forum.

With the amount of bad decisions we have and given how much is riding on the correct or fairest decision being made, should live judging be thrown out the window and have a panel go through the fights that go the distance with a fine toothed comb post event? We have the kind of technology nowadays, where you could seriously get down to the nitty gritty. I think live judging is an archaic means that they used in the early days of Boxing because they had to make up their minds since there was no footage, no way of going back and reviewing.

I think judging a fight, especially a close fight, in the moment is a flawed system honestly. Look at all of the bad or controversial decisions we've had over the years. The people they have aren't just incompetent, they're also seeing things in the moment that APPEAR to be meaningful but actually aren't(look at the Fight Metric stats for example, they can often be horse shit). I'll be more specific. Looking at the tape you can see alot of Wonderboy's shots really didn't have much on them, should they be considered power shots just because they aren't jabs? Tapping or barely hitting a guy shouldn't register as a power shot in my book.

After watching the fight live myself I thought Wonderboy had it, but when I actually looked at the tape closely I saw it was clear as mud. Could be a draw, could've gone either way. I lean towards Till because I feel like Thompson didn't land as many significant strikes as people think and because in the 4th(which was the swing round) Till did just a bit more.

What do you all think?
 

Mishima Zaibatsu

TMMAC’s resident musician
Feb 27, 2016
2,969
3,523
I'd like to add, I know it'd take away from the excitement with hearing who won immediately after the fight and the post fight press and everything, but that doesn't make it the right system for determining who actually won.

It'd also give fans a chance to clear their heads and review the fight the next day themselves, to get a more clear and objective view of the fight.
 
Last edited:

SongExotic2

ATM 3 CHAMPION OF THE WORLD. #FREECAIN
First 100
Jan 16, 2015
39,772
53,672
I like the idea. I think it offers a better way of doing it. It's still gonna be the same idiot judges who watch the footage? Do they do it without sound?

You already highlighted the major problem and that's the delayed decision. Fans want an instant answer. Perhaps the judges should watch it live but from a soundproof booth, isolated backstage. They turn in thier score at end of fight and it's transmitted to ringside.
 

Limpy

Banned
Oct 20, 2015
14,842
27,929
They should show the fight to a full courtroom and have like a two month long trial with witnesses, etc, then have a vote.
 

SongExotic2

ATM 3 CHAMPION OF THE WORLD. #FREECAIN
First 100
Jan 16, 2015
39,772
53,672
They should show the fight to a full courtroom and have like a two month long trial with witnesses, etc, then have a vote.
Do the fighters get to eliminate jurors? I'd imagine Colby would be fucked with Brazilian jury
 

The Sound of Violence

Host of a podcast about mma podcasts
Oct 28, 2015
2,975
4,612
If only that were possible.

Boxing has a bad case of incompetent judging aswell alot of the time.

I just think it'd be easier to discern more accurately and objectively who won.
True. Go figure using the same boxing judges for mma doesn't work. 99.9% of ACs don't give a shit about improving the sport they're just glorified boys clubs whose main objectives are to get their friends jobs and make more money than they spend.
 

Andrewsimar Palhardass

Women, dinosaurs, and the violence of the octagon.
Jan 8, 2016
5,234
6,822
I'd like to add, I know it'd take away from the excitement with hearing who won immediately after the fight and the post fight press and everything, but that doesn't make it the right system for determining who actually won.

It'd also give fans a chance to clear their heads and review the fight the next day themselves, to get a more clear and objective view of the fight.
I like the idea in terms of getting things right, but it would hurt the product so much and the decisions would be even more anticlimactic than they are already. It's not a viable system for a sport that's main product is entertainment. As bad for the sport as bad decisions are, not knowing who won until the next day is even worse.

You'd also likely have a lot more people calling fix on decisions, because the judges will effectively have another day for someone to "get to them" and the conspiracy-minded internet will run with that.
 

MMAHAWK

Real Gs come from California.America Muthafucker
Feb 5, 2015
15,098
32,957
Need to judge the fight as a whole(pride) and have 5-7 judges.
 

Ted Williams' head

It's freezing in here!
Sep 23, 2015
11,283
19,102
If you want to get the best judging, take the judges from ringside and put them in an isolated room in the arena with a large TV and a feed of the fights with no commentary, just the sound.

Give them a production guy with them who can call stuff up in between rounds or after the fight ("Show me a replay of that last combo in slow motion from a better angle", etc).

It's absolutely retarded that people at home have a better view of the fight than the judges, who have to watch it through a cage from only ONE vantage point and don't get replays.
 

Rambo John J

Eats things that would make a Billy Goat Puke
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
71,542
71,465
Not judging round by round and the fight judged on who they think wins.
I think more judges will also help weed out the chance of a bad decision. In Glory they have 5 judges currently.
and it is much more expensive and risky to rig 4 of 7 judges...I have only seen a few I think were rigged in MMA

but Boxing is rife with fights where 2 judges are bought/placed to sway a fight

as MMA gets more and more mainstream I think more than 3 judges is a great idea

it will dilute the adelain byrd and cecil peepholes type of shit
 

MMAHAWK

Real Gs come from California.America Muthafucker
Feb 5, 2015
15,098
32,957
and it is much more expensive and risky to rig 4 of 7 judges...I have only seen a few I think were rigged in MMA

but Boxing is rife with fights where 2 judges are bought/placed to sway a fight

as MMA gets more and more mainstream I think more than 3 judges is a great idea

it will dilute the adelain byrd and cecil peepholes type of shit
Exactly with only 3 judges it's to easy for corruption/bias to take place. In theory that why the olympics have several judges and drop the high and low scores.
 

MMAHAWK

Real Gs come from California.America Muthafucker
Feb 5, 2015
15,098
32,957
I like the idea of having 5 judges.

Glory did that, I think they changed it to 3 though.
I was at Glory 52 in March and they had 5, didn't see the last event though.
 

Mishima Zaibatsu

TMMAC’s resident musician
Feb 27, 2016
2,969
3,523
If you want to get the best judging, take the judges from ringside and put them in an isolated room in the arena with a large TV and a feed of the fights with no commentary, just the sound.

Give them a production guy with them who can call stuff up in between rounds or after the fight ("Show me a replay of that last combo in slow motion from a better angle", etc).

It's absolutely retarded that people at home have a better view of the fight than the judges, who have to watch it through a cage from only ONE vantage point and don't get replays.
100%.
 

aghof

an person
Apr 15, 2015
2,037
3,814
They should show the fight to a full courtroom and have like a two month long trial with witnesses, etc, then have a vote.
if there's any issue out there crying out for a constitutional amendment, this is it