The Doggy Bag: The Holiday Wish List Edition
Never Too Late for More 10-8
The last couple UFC events have had so many 10-8 rounds after what seems like years of fans complaining. Did UFC President Dana White have a conversation with these judges? Is it just these particular judges, the judges in Australia or Nevada? Honestly, as a longtime MMA fan, this has really struck me. There have been so many noticeable 10-8 scorecards it feels like there was an interoffice memo for judges. -- Nate from Abilene
Mike Whitman, news editor: Well, if you want to call out a card for its excessive amount of 10-8 rounds, it seems like Seattle’s UFC on Fox 5 would be the choice. No 10-8s were even scored at UFC on FX 6 in Australia, and just one 10-8 round was used last month at UFC 154. While the “The Ultimate Fighter 16” Finale saw six 10-8 rounds scored, half of them were due to a deducted point in the first round of Tim Elliott’s flyweight win over Jared Papazian.
Advertisement
Even so, I still believe that scoring 10-8s more liberally generally decreases the awful disparity that can exist between 10-9 rounds within the same fight. My hope is that we can avoid the following whenever possible: Fighter A kicks the crap out of Fighter B in round one and is then narrowly outpointed in rounds two and three, costing him a unanimous decision, scored 29-28 for Fighter B. This is the same reason I like the idea of using half points. However, since we currently don't have half points at our disposal, these clunky whole numbers will have to do.
I think it is safe to assume that there was no memo from the UFC
directed at the judges in Seattle urging them to score more rounds
10-8. However, I do think those 11 scores shows conclusively that
there is still a massive degree of ambiguity that exists within the
description of how to score an MMA bout, inevitably resulting in
differing human interpretations of the criteria.
What constitutes dominance? Are fewer power strikes viewed more favorably than a host of less-damaging blows? How do we quantify a knockdown? What if Fighter A spends the entire round on Fighter B’s back but inflicts only marginal damage? If a man has his face busted into pieces for five minutes but continues to fight back aggressively, does that warrant a 10-8?
Some of these questions were answered at the Association of Boxing Commissions’ most recent meeting, during which the body updated the Unified Rules. For instance, equal weight is now given to effective striking and grappling, and heavier strikes are now given more credit than volume strikes. Additionally, the commission reworded the description of how rounds should be scored:
10-10: Both contestants appear to be fighting evenly and neither contestant shows superiority by even a close margin. This score should rarely be used.
10-9: A contestant wins by a close margin, landing the greater number of effective legal strikes, demonstrating effective grappling and utilizing other effective legal techniques.
10-8: A contestant wins by a large margin, by effective striking and/or effective grappling that has great impact on the opponent.
10-7: A contestant totally dominates by effective striking and/or effective grappling, which puts the opponent in great danger throughout the round. In a 10-7 round, referee stoppage may be imminent. This score should rarely be used.
There it is, folks, clear as day. The problem is that in real life, things inevitably become more hazy, especially when you factor in the disparity in qualifications between judges across the board. Nevertheless, as the sport grows and more dedicated fans and ex-fighters begin serving as judges, I hope that a responsible use of the 10-8 score will positively impact the sport and result in more fair verdicts.
Finish Reading » A Goldie Oldie
Related Articles
