Pro Judge: "Randy got his a$$ kicked"
by NCSAR on Nov 17, 2009 8:45 PM EST
Email
PrintAlthough I understood the decision win for Randy Couture at UFC 105, I was surprised that he won. That got my mind going so I got in touch with a pro MMA judge to ask him about that decision, judging MMA, and why there have been so many bad judging errors of late.
The entire breakdown can be found here
If you have any questions you would like to ask, throw them in the comments and I will send them his way. If there are several I will post them (making sure you and BE get full credit).
It was nice to get his thoughts about the sport! He was truly an unbiased look behind the scenes! It was also interesting to hear that he though "Randy got his ass kicked!"
Please remember this is the actual judging criteria, not what the UFC puts out before the event but then again they are not the judges. A Key note is in the “- Criteria Evaluation line 1″ it states “Thus striking and grappling skills are top priority.” So you can think what ever you want about the fight, based on the actual judging guidelines of the athletic commission Randy(as much as I love him) got his ass kicked.
Octagon Control...
- Octagon Control
1. The fighter who is dictating the pace, place and position of the fight.
2. A striker who fends off a grappler’s take down attempt to remain standing and effectively strike is octagon control.
3. A grappler who can take down an effective standing striker to ground fight is octagon control.
4. The fighter on the ground who creates submission, mount or clean striking opportunities
We also talked about ways to fix the judging problem in the sport.
He explained that the athletic commissions are one entity for MMA and Boxing. There are far more Boxing judges than MMA judges in most commissions. Bad decisions will never completely go away, but one way to greatly reduce the number of them is to separate the two commissions. Make them two different agencies that control their own sport, letting each expert work in their own area of expertise.
Hope you guys enjoy!
The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.
46 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well since the fight was in England, where there is no commission and no “judging criteria”, this guy doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground. The UFC can say the fight is judged based on fart stink and instruct and pay the judges to only judge on fight stink. Now the UFC has judging criteria that they always put up on the screen and in has to stay consistant, but it doesn’t effect how the judges work. I hate when judges say that.
Also, I don’t know what state this judge is from, but in every rules version I have read this..
3. If 90% of the round is grounded one fighter on top, then:
is bullshit. When most of the fight takes place on the ground then grappling is weighted first, not 90%. That is a high threshhold to weight grappling first.
Either way,
Failed takedown attempts =\= laying on top control 90% of the round.
Plus, More effective and damaging strikes and takedown+mount should weigh a lot more than failed takedown attempts.
weoweoweo.deviantart.com -- @antontabuena
Due to the Questionable decision: "The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint."
by Anton Tabuena on Nov 17, 2009 10:37 PM EST up reply actions
Szucconi,
Does that mean if this fight had been in Vegas or Ca, that it would have been judged differently than it did overseas?
No, but it could have been. There are no guidelines or criteria. The judges are basically independent contracters acting on a whim. Now the employer may give them guidelines or tell them to use the NSAC rules, but they could make up there own rules or use any set of rules they want. And the judges can pretty much do anything they want and risk only future employment through Zuffa. The UFC can run a legit show and in all likelyhood they do, but this judge saying “Please remember this is the actual judging criteria, not what the UFC puts out before the event but then again they are not the judges” when he has no idea what the criteria is in a place that doesn’t sanction MMA. There is no criteria, it is only slightly better then Japan in that there is less mob involvement.
That is crazy…How do they then keep the judges from doing nothing more than picking their favorite fighter to win?
The judges don’t know enough about MMA to have favorite fighters.
Keep firing Assholes!
The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint.
by Ubernoober on Nov 17, 2009 9:43 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
How indeed.
...Behold, a pale horse. The man that sat upon it was Wieters, and hell followed with him.
"BJ on the BE" - Kierkegaard
by Brett Jones on Nov 17, 2009 10:06 PM EST up reply actions
Illinois has NO criteria for grappling at all in their rules. Technically, if you were a complete dolt who didn’t understand MMA and just read the rules and were somehow commissioned to be a judge. Wrestling wouldn’t count for a thing.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 18, 2009 3:03 PM EST up reply actions
I think about this, and the I remember my personal motto: “Screw Brandon Vera.”
Keep firing Assholes!
The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint.
by Ubernoober on Nov 17, 2009 9:09 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I'd like to ban you for fighter bashing.
Haha :P
…but actually, that’s why people aren’t clamoring much about the fight.. If it was couture on the other side of a bad decision, people would want those judges head.. Now, it’s just “screw Vera”..
It’s like saying Kenny was winning most of the rounds against BJ Penn.
weoweoweo.deviantart.com -- @antontabuena
Due to the Questionable decision: "The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint."
by Anton Tabuena on Nov 17, 2009 10:30 PM EST up reply actions
Here’s the thing: if Brandon Vera wanted to win, he could have. He was hurting Randy with every long distance striking exchange. Instead he chose to clinch with a world greco-roman champ. If you’re that stupid, you deserve to lose.
Keep firing Assholes!
The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint.
by Ubernoober on Nov 17, 2009 10:41 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
People love Randy because it’s a has-been/never was world, and Randy defies that.
Keep firing Assholes!
The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint.
I get why people love Randy..
I like him too.. and yes, Vera could’ve done even better with the right strategy.. BUT, he still won that decision..
weoweoweo.deviantart.com -- @antontabuena
Due to the Questionable decision: "The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint."
by Anton Tabuena on Nov 17, 2009 11:41 PM EST up reply actions
If Vera won the fight, then why are you sporting the colours of the greatest country on earth?
Vera should have won the fight, but he pissed it away.
Keep firing Assholes!
The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint.
I don’t know why I didn’t notice earlier, but someone lost a Sig bet. Must hurt worse considering we all know he did enough to win.
i couldn’t care less about the sig or the avatar.. but yes, the decision did stink.. (in my opinion)
weoweoweo.deviantart.com -- @antontabuena
Due to the Questionable decision: "The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint."
by Anton Tabuena on Nov 18, 2009 1:57 AM EST up reply actions
Mine too
I only watched the fight last night having been away for the weekend.
How is what Randy did any different at all to Kenflo v Penn for the first 3 rounds?
Except Vera MOUNTED and KNOCKED DOWN Randy. Randy held Vera and didn’t do anything. I just don’t get the decision at all.
You have all probably seen enough of these rants anyway so I’ll stop, but had to get a little one out since I am so late to the party.
'He built his whole reputation as a waffle house chef. They’ve been serving him up ham and eggs with a side of canned tomatoes' - Don Frye on Fedor Emelianenko
by Well Read Idiot on Nov 18, 2009 8:05 AM EST up reply actions
Even with this explanation I can see how you could give Randy the fight.
R1: Striking goes to Vera, Randy won grappling and octagon control.
R2: All Vera
R3: Striking I thought could go either way, Grappling the same and Randy with control.
Live, I scored every round for Vera but I can see why someone would score it for Randy.
effective striking also means who dealt more damage.. stopping takedowns is as much control as failing to do it..
weoweoweo.deviantart.com -- @antontabuena
Due to the Questionable decision: "The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint."
by Anton Tabuena on Nov 17, 2009 11:42 PM EST up reply actions
Yes it does, which is why Vera was the more effective striker in round 1 and 2. Three is very iffy, Vera didn’t do much and Randy was scoring.
As for stopping take downs, you’re right. That said, when you are being controlled on the cage, you are being controlled. If he was blocking shots that would be one thing, but Randy was keeping Vera right where he wanted him, on the cage.
by Chris Barton on Nov 18, 2009 1:08 AM EST up reply actions
and hurting randy on the third?
getting a takedown and a mount? (which a takedown where Vera got up quick won Randy the 1st round)
weoweoweo.deviantart.com -- @antontabuena
Due to the Questionable decision: "The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint."
by Anton Tabuena on Nov 18, 2009 1:56 AM EST up reply actions
The take down and mount should count more than the rest of the round where he WAS being controlled and out grappled. Randy getting a takedown in the first didn’t “win” him the round, it simply helped him win it.
Randy got stung by a body kick in the third, but lit Vera up with flurries that made him back up where Randy wanted him. It was close, but even live (again, I gave every round to Vera) I thought Randy might get the edge striking because of his boxing in that round.
Round by round it’s easy to see how someone scored it for Randy.
by Chris Barton on Nov 18, 2009 2:13 AM EST up reply actions
******************
The take down and mount should NOT count more
by Chris Barton on Nov 18, 2009 2:14 AM EST up reply actions
did kenny florian win rounds against BJ Penn because he was “controlling and outgrappling” BJ penn early?
cause Keith did say that a judge had him leading.. Guess i shouldn’t be surprised that they scored Vera/Couture that way… Oh wells. it’s done anyway.
weoweoweo.deviantart.com -- @antontabuena
Due to the Questionable decision: "The only thing Fishbob does consistently is dissapoint."
by Anton Tabuena on Nov 18, 2009 2:20 AM EST up reply actions
Well I didn’t think Kenny won a round in that fight either, but if I recall it correctly Florian didn’t control BJ for the same length of time Randy had Vera.
The real shame is, I think this is true of Dan Hardy in his fight too, Vera could have finished the fight and chose not to.
by Chris Barton on Nov 18, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions
That wasn’t actually true, as I recall. I could be making this up but I’m pretty sure all three judges had the fight scored 29-28 BJ going into the fourth round.
...Behold, a pale horse. The man that sat upon it was Wieters, and hell followed with him.
"BJ on the BE" - Kierkegaard
Randy was keeping Vera right where he wanted him, on the cage.
Who gives a F if the fight took place where Randy wanted it to? Kalib Starnes WANTED to run like an embarrassed schoolgirl and make Nate Quarry chase him, does that mean he won the fight?
The only thing that should matter is what DOES happen, not what the fighters WANT to happen.
What happened is Couture did next to nothing and Vera got a hell of a lot closer to ending the fight, on more than one occasion.
I disagree stronly with someone holding someone up against a cage unable to get a takedown winning a fight.
'He built his whole reputation as a waffle house chef. They’ve been serving him up ham and eggs with a side of canned tomatoes' - Don Frye on Fedor Emelianenko
by Well Read Idiot on Nov 18, 2009 8:10 AM EST up reply actions
It gives him octagon control, the fight took place where he wanted it to. That won’t win you a fight, but it can HELP you win a fight if grappling and striking are close.
by Chris Barton on Nov 18, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
i dont anything about that website, but i felt like i couldnt trust what was posted. who knows, maybe the did talk to a “pro mma judge” but he was incorrect in a few cases.. maybe that means i should believe the post? lol
by sadface on Nov 18, 2009 12:40 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Dumb....
So, where’s the controversy still?
Randy Couture won Round 1 via control. Just because Vera landed a couple of blows, I should suddenly sway my decision to Vera because STRIKING and GRAPPLING are seen as more effective. What if Vera lands a few punches, but Randy controls most of the round via the clinch and boxes a bit in it? It sounds like I should COMPLETELY IGNORE any control in the clinch if someone lands a punch, which is fucking stupid.
Round 2 was clearly Brandon Vera’s round, so I don’t see any reason to discuss.
Round 3 is a bit tougher. Randy did a great job with the inside boxing while Vera landed a couple of good kicks, and got on top of Randy in the end. But Randy did land a lot of blows with the inside boxing. By this account of RANDY GOT HIS ASS KICKED, striking was a PROFOUND decider in his assessment, so I should just go ahead and give Randy R3 then.
This is just another account of another dumb judge who gives ridiculous merit to striking over EVERYTHING.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 18, 2009 11:35 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
My opinion of this man
This is a dude who thinks he is right about everything and leaves no room to be wrong. I would wager he has never scored a 10-10 round and seldom conciders it. It sounds like he has never read the rules. This is frustrating for me. He speaks as if he is a judging god, but some of his statements are so wildly wrong that I want to slam my head into things. I don’t want to even talk about the attitude that striking is better then grappling. Its a whole issue of accountability for judges and it is clear that this man has none. He does what ever he wants.
One of the things I find strange is that since people take the rules, and then rank each piece of criteria in order of importance, they feel the top two are WAYYYYYY more important. Like they are ten fold above the rest of it.
The way I see it… Striking and grappling are top priority… if most of the round is simply that. If we turn the fight into a round where someone controls someone against the fence for massive parts of a round but land a couple of strikes… round goes to controlling fighter, not a fighter who landed three blows or whatever.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 18, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions
The rules say to weight them in an order, but have no guidelines on the split. Its really a gray area. Its confusing. I would say that if you could explain to a robot how to score a bout correctly using the rule book, then the book is antiquity written. This is not the case. The rules for judging are more like an outline and it is left for the judge to interpret. I think writing detailed guidelines would be nearly impossible, so I am happy with what the rules say, but I think judges need to be trained to come to a consensus on how to score a bout. Its all fuzzy math (not real fuzzy math) and lying with statistics. Judging is an art and not a science. When is should be mostly a science and less an art.
The thing is that I don’t see how a judge could say…
Well, Striking and Grappling are 1 and 2, but the rest are really like 30, 31, and 32 on my scale of importance. That’s fucked.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 18, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah it is, but its also right because they are given zero guidance in weight so its open to there own interpretation. So your interpretation and there interpretation’s are vastly different, but both correct under the over generalized rules. This is where the problems is. Not with the rules, but the application of the rules. It is simply not uniform. I should be able to watch a round and conclude within a certain degree of variation, how the round will be scored. It should not be a mystery. I should be able to say 10-9 Randy, or 10-9 Vera, or I can see a reasonable person scoring that round either way.
My problem is that if a judge actually thinks Octagon Control and Aggression don’t mean shit if there is even a glimmer of striking… those people should be kicked out the door. And there are judges like that out there apparently.
Follow me on Twitter @lelandroling
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
by Leland Roling on Nov 18, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions
You know, I don’t understand the purpose of scoring things like defense and octagon control.
If you have superior defense and octagon control, odds are you’re scoring the more effective/meaningful offense anyway. And if you have superior defense and octagon control but still AREN’T scoring the more effective/meaningful offense, then you’re almost certainly losing the round anyway.
I think the issue on all of these controversial decisions continues to be how different judges weigh the various components of mma against each other. Randy have dictated where the fight took place during the majority of the fight but he did very little with it. Vera did far more damage to Randy and had him in danger during the second round, which imo should be prominent when deciding on scoring. The criteria that judges are given to score a mma fight is a wide spectrum which encompasses several combat sports, a huge problem seems to be that there is no value given to individual criteria as far as how they relate to each other. In my book, overall damage scored and the “danger” a fighter is in has higher value than something like octagon control assuming other factors are even and/or not present.
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 © 2012 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.
