What Is a 10-8 Round After All?
by Luke Thomas on Jul 7, 2008 9:44 AM EDT
in News
30 comments
Rami Genauer tries to unpack the concept behind the 10-8 round and why it's so hard to decide in close cases what is and isn't a 10-8 round:
To combat the vagaries surrounding the requirements for scoring a 10-8 round, FightMetric uses a simple rule, based on data around average round effectiveness differential. If a fighter puts up a score of more than 100 and his score is more than six times his opponent’s score, that round is called 10-8. In that case, Round 1 of St. Pierre-Serra was a clear 10-8, with St. Pierre’s score nearly 10 times that of Serra.
Taking a look at a dozen or so folks who live-blogged the event, only one of them scored the first round 10-8 for St. Pierre. That is not an accusation or indictment of the judgment of those who scored it 10-9; they scored it based on their interpretation of the rules, which is as valid as anyone else’s. And therein lies the problem. Since there are no official guidelines for what constitutes a 10-8 round, your guess is as good as mine, which is as good as the official judges’, as we see in…
I tend to give 10-8's in situations where there was dominance bordering on the necessity of referee intervention. I also give weight to when a fighter is able to do very effective damage in addition to offering strong positional control. So, I'd be a little hesitant to giving Griffin the second round on a 10-8 basis since Rampage's health and awareness were not being compromised. I won't argue with those who did give Griffin the two point edge, though.
What I would say, however, is that without any sort of clear criteria in the Unified Rules regarding what constitutes a 10-8 versus a 10-9 round, we are mostly just arguing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.
0 recs |
30 comments
Email
Print
Comments
“I tend to give 10-8’s in situations where there was dominance bordering on the necessity of referee intervention. I also give weight to when a fighter is able to do very effective damage in addition to offering strong positional control. So, I’d be a little hesitant to giving Griffin the second round on a 10-8 basis since Rampage’s health and awareness were not being compromised.”
I agree…he did very little damage to Rampage….damn it…I’m STILL pissed at the scoring of that fight.
Kelvin Hunt
I'm like those boyz on the sidelines...cause I ain't playing...
by Tha Realness on Jul 7, 2008 9:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What I would say, however, is that without any sort of clear criteria in the Unified Rules regarding what constitutes a 10-8 versus a 10-9 round, we are mostly just arguing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.
That’s exactly right. There needs to be clarification on round scoring, just like the new Unified Rules tried to define blows to the back of the head. I can tolerate debate, but I’d rather not see MMA go down the Constitution path where there are multiple interpretations of vague clauses. We’ll know something is wrong when a grad student is able to do a paper calling Nelson Hamilton a developmentalist, Roy Silbert a strict constructionist, and Adelayde Byrd an originalist.
by FightMetric on Jul 7, 2008 10:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Fightmetic…your scoring of the fight was dead on.
Kelvin Hunt
I'm like those boyz on the sidelines...cause I ain't playing...
by Tha Realness on Jul 7, 2008 10:06 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well even if you have rules that define a 10-8 round. Wouldnt it still just be the judges inturpretation of the rule. What I am trying to say is that everyone has an opinon and we will not all agree on each others opinon. To be sure fighters must stop fights.
by WhiteyBarrington on Jul 7, 2008 10:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
It’s not as if rules would somehow magically make matters simple. But with absolutely no guidelines, judges are allowed to be as arbitrary as they like.
by Luke Thomas on Jul 7, 2008 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
From your own site
Round 2 – A huge lecg kick and Rampage is hopping. He is hurt badly. Guillotine almost finishes Rampage but he survives. Forrest is in half guard. I don’t know what Rampage can do if they go back to standing, he looked like he could barely put any weight on it. Forrest passes to side control. Forrest is looking for an Americana to finish but Quinton is fighting it off. Forrest is OWNING this round. Full mount for Forrest. Elbows from the top now. One minute left and Forrest is hanging out on top landing short elbows. The round ends and it is an easy 10-8 round for Forrest Griffin and I’ve got the fight at 19-18 for Griffin.
by mythbuster on Jul 7, 2008 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boy, you sure are smart
Considering that was written by a completely different writer with completely different standards, I guess you have a point. Oh wait, you’re just making my point for me again.
by Luke Thomas on Jul 7, 2008 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bad day, Luke? Relax.
My point is: How was a round in which one guy did all the offense, and the other guy tried to survive for the ENTIRE ROUND, considered arbitrarily 10-8? That round was the epitome of a 10-8 round via complete domination.
by mythbuster on Jul 7, 2008 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry for snapping
My point is this: if there are no criteria for establishing 10-8, then what authority are we appealing to? Essentially, our own sense of what a fight is and how it should be evaluated. In many people’s mind, a 10-8 is when a fighter is dominated positionally but not hurt. I don’t really have a problem with that, but that’s not sufficient for me.
by Luke Thomas on Jul 7, 2008 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because you didn’t analyze the content of the round, what a 10-8 round would be, and then tried to attribute someone else’s recap of the round to Luke Thomas.
Did you really expect him not to come back in the manner he did?
Forrest controlled the round positionally, but never landed any damaging strikes from mount (neither hurt Rampage nor did any aesthetic damage). That’s not enough for a 10-8 round. Rampage was never in any danger of being stopped, so he was not just “trying to survive” as that implies a situation where a finish was near, which was not the case.
by Hardcharger on Jul 7, 2008 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well..
I watched the fight. I copy/pasted the recap as a memory refresher on just how dominant Griffin was. Seems a lot of people forgot pretty quickly.
So let’s see… From Forrest we have hugely damaging leg kick(s), a few submission attempts and multiple elbows from mount, which he was passing with ease.
From Rampage we had lots of squirming.
If Forrest had been doing actual damage for that whole time he was mounted, the fight would easily have been stopped—making the score irrelevant. It’s a round that the recapper said, “...is an easy 10-8 round for Forrest Griffin..”.
20/20 hindsight doesn’t change the round tho.
by mythbuster on Jul 7, 2008 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He "tanked a set", so what?
In tennis, they call it, taking a set, when you get off to a bad start and you just want to fast forward. It’s considered bad sportsmanship, but I don’t think anyone would argue that Quinton was really fighting back after his knee went out. Does that mean he shouldn’t get penalized? I dunno. But I don’t think that round should be weighted as much as it is, considering Quinton’s valiant effort to fight injured for the next 15 minutes.
by Jaydoggydog on Jul 7, 2008 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
In tennis, they call it, taking a set, when you get off to a bad start and you just want to fast forward.
In tennis, if you lose a set 6-0 or 6-5 you still just lost the set. If you know you’re going down for the set, there’s no incentive to try to win it back.
In MMA, it’s different. You will get scored 10-8, or even 10-7, if you decide to tank it.
But I don’t think that round should be weighted as much as it is, considering Quinton’s valiant effort to fight injured for the next 15 minutes.
This is a point someone else made – the judges score the fight as it happens. They don’t wait until it’s over, or go back and review later in the evening, etc. They score it as it happens. You can’t say “the next 3 rounds should have weight”, cuz they don’t.
by mythbuster on Jul 7, 2008 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
In tennis, they call it, taking a set, when you get off to a bad start and you just want to fast forward.
In tennis, if you lose a set 6-0 or 6-5 you still just lost the set. If you know you’re going down for the set, there’s no incentive to try to win it back.
In MMA, it’s different. You will get scored 10-8, or even 10-7, if you decide to tank it.
But I don’t think that round should be weighted as much as it is, considering Quinton’s valiant effort to fight injured for the next 15 minutes.
This is a point someone else made – the judges score the fight as it happens. They don’t wait until it’s over, or go back and review later in the evening, etc. They score it as it happens. You can’t say “the next 3 rounds should have weight”, cuz they don’t.
by mythbuster on Jul 7, 2008 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t care when or from where you pasted the recap. It wasn’t from the author you claimed, which was embarrassing to your claims.
What were these sub attempts? That weak americana/keylock from mount, that was never even close to being dangerous. Get real.
Yes, Forrest passed to mount. He stayed in mount because he was conservative in giving any space. As a result, he didn’t land any significant strikes, never did any damage, and was never even close to having the fight stopped. That’s not a 10-8 round.
Hindsight is suggesting a person should’ve done something different after knowing the outcome. That’s not what is going on. What is being done is analyzing round 2 based on the action that occurred, and it wasn’t a 10-8 round. Maybe you meant to use a different word?
by Hardcharger on Jul 7, 2008 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
blah blah blah
The only thing you said remotely interesting is this:
I don’t care when or from where you pasted the recap. It wasn’t from the author you claimed, which was embarrassing to your claims.
which is a blatant lie. I said “from your own site”, which it is.
Thanks for playing, tho!
by mythbuster on Jul 7, 2008 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fantastic diversion from the topic you brought up. Good move, since your points got blown out of the water.
by Hardcharger on Jul 7, 2008 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right...
...you can’t say “a fighter must inflict X damage while taking none in return” or whatever…because this isn’t a video game where there are life bars. You’d still have judges having to decide how much damage the fighter really did.
I tend to score 10-8 rounds based on what each fighter did. In round 2 Rampage did NOTHING. As in FightMetric scored 0 points for Rampage. Forrest took his leg out to where in the moment it looked like there was no way ‘Page would be able to continue fighting if it went back to the feet. Then it got to the ground where Forrest was able to pass, mount and do enough damage in my eyes. There was a clear domination of this round which is what I look for scoring 10-8.
For me a 10-8 round is one of the following:
1) A clearly dominated round wherein one fighter is unable to do anything to the other offensively.
2) A round in which a fighter takes an extraordinary amount of damage verging on a stoppage.
I have scored 10-7 rounds in the past when both of those criteria are met and it is an extremely dominant round for one fighter. I can see saying that round 2 was a 10-9 round, but for me if a fighter is unable to do ANYTHING and is damaged and dominated positionally…that’s a 10-8 round.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
"The reason a lot of people do not recognize opportunity is because it usually goes around wearing overalls and looking like hard work." -- Thomas Edison
by Brent Brookhouse on Jul 7, 2008 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There were rounds
Where Swick was unable to do anything against Burkman. Are those 10-8? Granted, Swick wasn’t mounted, but I don’t think it’s sufficient to say that there must be some offense when a fighter is working some defensive skills.
While Rampage was mounted, Griffin wasn’t able to do much with it. If you have a guy mounted for more than a minute and you can’t inflict damage to even a moderate degree, that’s a pretty big waste of time.
by Luke Thomas on Jul 7, 2008 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The difference is the leg kick...
for me that is a significant amount of damage. Swick/Burkman was mostly a “both guys doing nothing” kind of affair. At the times when Swick wasn’t able to do anything I wouldn’t say Burkman was clearly dominating the round.
You have to remember that these bouts are getting scored in the moment. When the fight initially took place that leg kick (or rather the few in round 2) looked like it may have been a fight finishing strike. Add that to the choke attempt, side control, arm lock attempts, full mount and elbows (although not hugely damaging elbows)...and I think you’ve got a pretty clearly dominated round.
The scorecards are turned in once the round ends…sure, once I watched the fight a second time it is a much less dramatic round because you know that Rampage is able to come back and keep going. But for me the “in the moment” scoring was very clearly a 10-8 round.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
"The reason a lot of people do not recognize opportunity is because it usually goes around wearing overalls and looking like hard work." -- Thomas Edison
by Brent Brookhouse on Jul 7, 2008 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
For me, if we are judging a round based on effective striking, grappling, aggression and Octagon control then a 10-8 round must be very effective. How does one define very effective? To me, neutralization without damage isn’t not very effective. It’s absolutely effective, but not close to fight ending. Had he done anything with the mount other than ride it, I would have given him a 10-8 round. But when Rampage was using poor technique to hang on and IT WORKED, I can’t say that’s very effective grappling.
by Luke Thomas on Jul 7, 2008 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with what you’re saying. You outpoint a guy and show positional control but that’s not enough. I think it becomes a 10-8 when you prevent the other guy from doing anything offensively at all. To me, that’s the third criteria to a 10-8 round.
Not sure Forrest did that.
by jebushchrist on Jul 7, 2008 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely...
he prevented Rampage from doing anything offensively at all in that round. Look at the fightmetric scoring of the round. Rampage had zero offensive points in the round.
I can absolutely see people scoring the round 10-9. But in my eyes it was a clear 10-8 round.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
"The reason a lot of people do not recognize opportunity is because it usually goes around wearing overalls and looking like hard work." -- Thomas Edison
by Brent Brookhouse on Jul 7, 2008 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with ya, buddy!
and I also think back to the Kimbo-Big Ear fight where people were saying how the fight should have been stopped because Big Ear was laying on Kimbo for 40 seconds or something, even tho his elbows were doing no damage.
Sometimes I scratch my head.
by mythbuster on Jul 7, 2008 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So I guess round 1 in Sylvia/Couture was a 10-8 since Randy had Tim’s back for bout 4 mins…getting a guy’s back is a dominant position is it not? Forrest did nothing with that position…nothing…
Kelvin Hunt
I'm like those boyz on the sidelines...cause I ain't playing...
by Tha Realness on Jul 7, 2008 11:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And
Couture had rocked Sylvia and got the takedown.
by Luke Thomas on Jul 7, 2008 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BJM - FWIW
On Inside MMA 2 weeks ago, Big John McCarthy stated that for a 10-8 round, you look for the 2 D’s – Dominance and Damage.
by !claw on Jul 7, 2008 6:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
