Wow–we’ve somehow hit the mother lode of intelligent MMA analysis. Here’s one that deals specifically with the MMA fan’s favorite ’straw man’ at the moment, the 10 point must system and MMA judging. Well worth reading but, again, not for the special ed set. Lateral thinking ability a prerequisite:

In case you’re wondering, after 5 viewings of the same fight, though it was met by a few bumps, my stand did not change, in the end, I still gave the fight to Shogun. However, I can’t be as sure about it as I was before. Shogun in my eyes won it through the facade of looking like the more aggressive fighter, only, a fight cannot be won by aggression alone nor will it be decided by feelings. The outcome of a battle between two fighters thumping on a professional stage will always be determined entirely by: The fighters themselves, the judges, and the Referee… unless of course that referee is the impressive “Miraculous” Dan Miragliotta, then you would have a true mystery at hand, where all magical things can happen.

MMA’s 10 point must system and the robbery that isn’t @ Ringside Report

While I agree that the retrofit from boxing’s 10 point must system has been somewhat awkward, MMA judging is well down on my list of things I worry about. It’s reached a point where a certain faction of MMA fans will scream about judging simply because they don’t like or agree with the decision. The current whipping boy among MMA ’smarks’ is Cecil Peoples, who is portrayed as an incompetent buffoon by those who disagree with his decisions. Agree or disagree with how he calls an individual fight, the guy is an experienced martial artist who has judged countless fights of far greater magnitude than Machida/Rua.

For some reason, Dana White (and those that follow his lead in the MMA media and fan base) likes to rant about athletic commissions. Nevada State Athletic Commission Director Ken Kizer has become a recent DW foil–odd since the most questionable decisions took place outside of his jurisdiction. The fight that started the firestorm of recent ‘judging bashing’ was Shogun/Machida, which took place in California. There were also some gripes about Brandon Vera’s loss to Randy Couture and that took place in England. The Kizer comment took place after the Tito Ortiz/Forrest Griffin snoozefest during Tito’s soliloquy of excuses. He claimed he was robbed, blamed crooked judging and then ran down a list of excuses why he couldn’t train or fight properly.

But here’s the big point that never gets mention during Dana’s ‘blame the judges/athletic commissions/refs’ comments: this is the strategy they have chosen for growing the sport. Obviously the most expedient route to legalization and acceptance of MMA was to go through boxing’s regulatory hierarchy. That’s why the UFC hired longtime Nevada boxing honcho Marc Ratner to spearhead their efforts–he knew the players and the game and had their respect. It wasn’t, however, the *only* route. On balance, it was probably the right strategy but if you’re going to ‘play boxing’s game’ you have to accept their rules–the most significant being the 10 point must system. To complain so virulently about a system that the sport has and continues to lobby for acceptance in (most recently in New York) is like marrying a porn star and getting upset when she has sex with other dudes at work.

Ultimately, the 10 point must system is the fight sport equivalent of Winston Churchill’s famous quip that ‘Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others that have been tried’. I like the DREAM/PRIDE judging the fight as a whole methodology, but that is more due to their 10 minute first round/5 minute second round fight format. And even if you’re judging the full fight as opposed to round by round, the outcome is still the same. Sengoku’s mandated criteria that says, in essence, ‘when in doubt favor the fighter who comes closest to finishing the fight’ is a concept I like but it comes back to the inability to mandate personal opinion on the components of what makes one fighter better than the other in a relatively even exchange. Honestly, I haven’t heard a workable alternative system to the 10 point must system that didn’t have some serious–fatal in my opinion–flaws. If you’ve got a good system you’ve thought about feel free to send it to savagescience@gmail.com and we’ll run it up the flagpole and consider its merits. To be considered it has to give the judges wide latitude in their ultimate interpretation of the winner (no backfitted systems counting leg kicks to justify a Shogun win over Machida), not be administered by the promotions themselves (and thus more subject to corruption and compromise) and can’t favor one technique or fighting style over another.

At the end of the day, all fighters know that the only way to *guarantee* victory is to end the fight inside the distance. Short of that, they know how to make the most compelling case via knockdowns, submission attempts and takedowns. Absent those components (as was the Rua/Machida fight) you’re leaving in in the hands of the judges and there’s no guarantee that their judging criteria and/or preferences will go your way.