9/09/2007 11:21pm, #31Originally Posted by Askari
I knew i had read about an indepth article about split decisions and judging from mmaweekly. The articles are based on comparing Pride versus UFC decisions, and which judging criteria is more effective (written about 6 months ago)
here's a snippet from the article (part 2)
Since September 28, 2001, Pride has held 425 total fights, 137 of which have gone to a decision. Of those 137 decisions, 33 of them were split decisions, for a split decision rate of 24 percent.
In the same time period, the UFC held 387 fights, of which 112 went to a decision. In all that time, only 10 of the UFC’s decisions, or 9 percent, were split decisions. This would seem to indicate clear superiority for the UFC, however that 9 percent number is somewhat deceiving. Because the UFC criteria allows for draws as well, there were also five majority decisions (where two judges pick one fighter and the other calls a draw) and two draws, both of which were split draws (one judge picks one fighter, one judge picks the other fighter, and the third judge calls a draw). Since these also involve judges coming to different conclusions, they must also be considered split decisions for our purposes.
Still, the UFC beats Pride by nine percentage points, with only 15 percent of its decisions not unanimous, compared to 24 percent for Pride. This should clearly indicate something wrong with Pride’s decision criteria. Nearly a quarter of its decisions have one judge saying that the wrong fighter got the victory. Utilizing human judging necessitates some split decisions, but a 24 percent rate signifies that the murkiness of Pride’s criteria leaves too much to the subjective opinions of its judges.
So the UFC’s criteria would seem to be better. With judges able to reach a consensus 85 percent of the time, the system would seem to be clearer than Pride’s and clear enough for judges to apply it uniformly the vast majority of the time. But is that really true? How uniformly are the judges seeing the fights? Or put another way; are these unanimous decisions really unanimous?
Thanks to the Nevada State Athletic Commission, we are able to take a deeper look at this question. The NSAC posts the results of every fight card held in Nevada on its website for anyone to access (something every state athletic commission should really do). They make public how each of their judges scored each fight, giving anyone who wants the opportunity to examine if a decision was truly unanimous or not.
A true unanimous decision would be one in which all three judges score all three rounds the same. For example, a bout that gets scored 30-27 by all three judges would be a truly unanimous decision. But what about fights that get scored 30-27, 29-28, 30-27? What happened in the one round that one judge scored for the other fighter? Even though all three gave the victory to the same fighter, making the outcome a unanimous decision, there was still one round that was a split decision. Using publicly available data from the NSAC website, we can analyze split decisions on a round-by-round basis. The same logic we used when looking at fight results should apply to the findings for round results; if judges consistently disagree about the scoring of individual rounds, this too could point to a problem in the judging criteria.
To look at this problem we must expand our scope a bit. To arrive at a total number of fights similar to the figures dealt with before, we will look at every fight conducted by the NSAC from its first event in 2001 until the end of 2006. In that period, NSAC judges watched 425 fights (mostly UFC and King of the Cage bouts), of which 96 went to a decision. Each of those 96 fights had three rounds, plus there were nine title fights that had an additional two rounds apiece, for a total of 309 rounds judged by the NSAC. Of those rounds, 235 of them were scored exactly the same by all three judges. But that means that 74 rounds were split, with one judge scoring the round differently than the other two judges. Divide 74 by 309 and what do you get? It equals 24 percent, exactly the same proportion of split decisions received in Pride.
In all, only 30 percent of decisions handed down by NSAC judges were truly unanimous decisions. The remainder of the fights – more than two thirds – contained some discrepancy between judges, whether calling the fight for a different fighter, calling a round for a different fighter, calling a draw, or calling a 10-8 round when others didn’t. And this was not the case where one bad judge was responsible for an undue share of disagreements. Each judge was responsible for his relatively fair share of discrepancies.
So in the end, it seems just as difficult for judges to implement the Unified Rules criteria as it is for Pride’s judges to use that system, with each producing a 24 percent disagreement rate. And in the end, with each system’s flaws laid bare, we are left with our own choice of which system is superior.
mmaweekly article, part 1
mmaweekly article, part 2
and finally, another article found while searching for the above. Interesting read as well, and written only 2 months ago
9/09/2007 11:29pm, #32
great analysis fatherdog....
its how i remembered it
9/10/2007 1:48am, #33
Mirko's tentative behavior really pissed me off. I expected a LOT more outta him. Being a Cro Cop nutrider though, I'm confident that he'll win his next fight.
That is, if there IS a "next fight"...
9/10/2007 2:28am, #34
Some one please make a
I has it
motivational poster with a pic of Rampage.
9/10/2007 6:43am, #35
Originally Posted by meggaman7
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
Click on the image or the link below for the big pic. One or the other will work for you.
Hosted on PicTiger:
Last edited by Askari; 9/10/2007 6:47am at ."Sifu, I"m niether - I'm a fire dragon so don't **** with me!"
9/10/2007 10:05pm, #36Originally Posted by Osiris
I've also have a photo of BJM during the fight.....
THIS IS NOT AN EXIT
"Ladies and gentlemen, the pilot has instructed everyone to sit the **** down and shut the **** up." Henry Rollins
9/10/2007 10:08pm, #37
So...an MMA fighter was beaten by the d33dly nut shot? (Awaits hordes of gloating "Too Deadly for Ring" Martial Artists to descend on this thread)
9/10/2007 10:09pm, #38
no, he was beaten by 4 or 5 of them...delivered by a 6'4'' 240 lb kickboxer
9/10/2007 10:11pm, #39
Yes..that is a little different that some short fat RSBD or skinny 98 pound soaking wet chunner. Kongo is a beast.
9/10/2007 11:35pm, #40
I'm thinking American food disagrees with mirko or something . . . I seem to remember him having this very good a game that he would use when fighting....