The "Robbery" Plague in Boxing and MMA

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 8:45 AM EDT in News Comment 65 comments

A few years back I didn't endear myself to a lot of MMA fans and writers by coming out in support of the 10 point must system. I still feel that it is the best way for transparent, honest scoring in MMA but that is neither here nor there for the point of this article. What does matter is that the system is what is in place and it has to be understood by someone before they can argue about the outcome of decisions.

Brickhaus over at BadLeftHook wrote a piece in response the outcries of "Robbery!" after Miguel Cotto was awarded a split decision victory over Joshua Clottey. It has become such a common thing for fans of both boxing and MMA to claim that the losing fighter was robbed in every close fight. Brickhaus does a great job of explaining the difference between a close decision fans wanted to go the other way and a "robbery." He says:

What is a robbery in boxing? Here's a hint - it's not a decision that you merely disagree with. It's a decision that is impossible; that there's no reasonable way the judges could have scored the fight in favor of the fighter who actually won.

Obviously this translates to MMA the same way. A fight like Bisping/Hamill is a great example. I score that fight for Bisping every time I see it, FightMetric also scores it for Bisping...etc. But people will constantly bring it up as a robbery when it is actually a fight that legitimately could go either way.

Brickhaus goes on to explain 4 major scoring fallacies such as:

Scoring fallacy #1 - "Fighter A can't have won, he got beat up, and Fighter B looked like he just walked out of the shower."

Real-life non-robbery example: Kessler-Andrade. This argument is so silly when you think of how many times a clear winner has looked worse for wear than the loser, yet the argument comes up again and again. The fact is, some guys just get more beat up looking than others in a boxing match. Arturo Gatti and Vito Antuofermo would probably get cut from someone else's stubble rubbing against him, yet they won their fair share of fights when they looked like murder victims at the end of the fight. Also, even if someone takes a real licking in one round, that's still one round. If they go on to win the other 11 rounds, then it's a blowout win, and there's just no argument that can be made that the more beat up boxer won the fight.

This is just such a great piece that really translates to MMA scoring perfectly. I really want to encourage everyone to go take a look. But the main thing I hope the piece does is encourage people to stop calling every single decision they don't agree with a robbery. This, of course, won't happen as fans are generally too emotional in their response to events. But still, it is something that needs to be absorbed and understood by fans of both MMA and boxing.

1 recs | Comment 65 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: bisping, hamill, UFC 99: The Comeback

Comments

yeah, people seem to shout "Robbery!" every single time there is a close decision..

i mean, that’s the point. It’s a CLOSE decision, meaning it could go either way..
Just like the Pacquiao vs. Marquez II.. I wouldn’t whine and bitch if marquez won, cause the fight was that close.

What more in MMA where you only have 3 rounds to score fights?

weoweoweo .deviantart .com

by Anton Tabuena on Jun 15, 2009 8:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice article Brent.

Jackson/Griffin is another great example of a coin toss decision and it’s good to know I’m not alone in thinking Bisping won against Hamill. runs and hides from the nationalistic Americans

"Like a ballet of violence clothed in fine Brazilian silk." ~ MMASuPreMaCy

by Benicio on Jun 15, 2009 8:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

hmm so that’s how you bold something.

"Like a ballet of violence clothed in fine Brazilian silk." ~ MMASuPreMaCy

by Benicio on Jun 15, 2009 8:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Has nothing to do with nationalism

There’s no way Bisping won that fight, and it has nothing to do with nationalism.

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

unless you score like me and think Bisping won 29-28. Or if you score using a fancy emotionless effectiveness system like FightMetric and score the fight for Bisping 29-28….or are any number of people who all score the fight for Bisping.

Absolutely no way indeed

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did no one score it for Hamill?

At all? So you’re saying if I went looking for scorecards for that night of fighting I would find no one who scored it for Hamill?

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just an example

http://www.fightticker.com/story_0420092300_how_did_michael_bisping_beat_matt_hamill

I think it boils down to personal opinion here. In your opinion, you think Bisping won. I just think the majority opinion for that fight is that Hamill won. I could probably find a dozen other opinions who share the same thought. (And to be honest, I think Fightlinker’s opinion holds just as much weight as your personal one, Brett.)

In the end it doesn’t matter. Bisping got the “W”. But to say the reason people think Hamill won that fight is because of nationalism is just ignorant.

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

fighticker, not fightlinker...

my bad.

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

(And to be honest, I think Fightlinker’s opinion holds just as much weight as your personal one, Brett.)

of course it does! You’re proving the point. All I was saying was that when you said:

There’s no way Bisping won that fight

That you were wrong

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 10:22 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

The fact that you can...

find people who are on both sides of the argument goes to prove that it’s not “the worst decision ever” as someone on fightticker said. Either guy getting the decision would not have been outlandish meaning claiming either guy was “robbed” would not really be an argument that carries a lot of weight.

I wasn’t saying that my opinion is more important than anyone just that 2 judges (official cards), me (some media guy), fightmetric (a computer scoring method) and others saw it for Bisping. So saying there is “no way” that Bisping won the fight is a bit outside of reality.

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Good point BRETT! :P

weoweoweo .deviantart .com

by Anton Tabuena on Jun 15, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with you 100%

I was definitely expressing my opinion when I made that statement. But I’m a nobody, who cares what I say? ;)

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

haha...

Well…If you were saying “you can’t see any way that he won” then fair enough ;)

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good article. As a fan of boxing and mma, I’ve been very impressed with the overall judging that I’ve seen. I rarely see really bad decisions.

by SlickRick00 on Jun 15, 2009 8:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

You dont have to look very far to find bad judging in MMA. It seems there is always 1 judge that is watching another fight when the scores are read.

"Like a ballet of violence clothed in fine Brazilian silk." ~ MMASuPreMaCy

by Benicio on Jun 15, 2009 8:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fightmetric has Davis winning, but only by the 10 point must system, not on total points

by Flyghtt on Jun 15, 2009 8:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

http://www.fightmetric.com/

NEW! Rich Franklin vs. Wanderlei Silva – In-Depth Report
NEW! Cain Velasquez vs. Cheick Kongo – In-Depth Report
NEW! Dan Hardy vs. Marcus Davis – In-Depth Report

by Nick Thomas on Jun 15, 2009 8:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

do they have Fisher-Uno?

"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"

by Kid Nate on Jun 15, 2009 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, they don’t.

I’m interested to see how FM tries to score that. I don’t think it’s truly possible to do it accurately via the formula.

Follow my analysis of all things MMA on BloodyElbow.com

by Leland Roling on Jun 15, 2009 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What weirds me out the most is when people get upset that a decision was unanimous, arguing that it should have been a split decision.

by brad23 on Jun 15, 2009 8:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Haha...

yeah! That too. “I can see how he won. But how was it unanimous?!” what the fuck? really?

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

what's so outlandish about that?

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

the fact that you’re admitting that you can see one guy winning…but are shocked that the judges all thought he did. It’s a kind of weird thing to say.

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I can see what your saying

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Because people asking for a split decision implies they don’t understand how the ten point must system works. Split decision is “weaker” than a unanimous decision so fans without experience with the system often call for one. The problem is it implies a difference of opinion among judges. Theoretically all decisions should be unanimous because each judge is watching the same fight.

Keep in mind the judges have no control over if a decision is unanimous or split. They only control their own score cards, and even in unanimous decisions the scores will be different.

by Andy R on Jun 15, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good explanation

Thank you. I don’t agree with the statement “people asking for a split decision implies they don’t understand how the ten point must system works”. I’m no expert, by any means, but I understand it and still have been puzzled by unanimous decisions at times.

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not understanding the system kinda reflects Brent’s response to your comment. It’s one thing to be puzzled by the scoring of a bout, but asking for a split decision is odd.

Here’s an example: Let’s say judge A scores a bout 29-28 for fighter 1, Judge B scores the bout 28-29 for fighter 2, and judge C scores it 29-28 for fighter 1. Fighter 1 has won via split decision. Now let’s also assume each fighter won a round decisively and the bout came down to a closely contested third round. Each judge must award a 10 point score to the fighter they thought won the round.

Reasonable people can disagree, but ultimately, you can only score the round for one fighter. It doesn’t make sense to ask judge A to score it for fighter 1 and judge B to score it for fighter 2. An individual can only score a bout one way, which to the individual is the only proper score of the bout. Therefore, it’s an odd thing to want other judges to score the bout differently, regardless of how close the fight is.

Remember, I’m not saying reasonable people can’t disagree. Rather, it’s simply a funny thing to ask a judge to score the fight against a fighter you think won or for a fighter you think lost. Hope that clears it up.

by Andy R on Jun 15, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Each judge must award a 10 point score to the fighter they thought won the round.

UNLESS there was a foul which the ref took a point for

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

WOW

I thought my brother was the only person who would argue that!

all you gotta do is...

by imapimp08 on Jun 15, 2009 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is because people don’t know the difference between a unanimous and a split decision.

They think that 30-27 is unanimous and 29-28 is split. They don’t realize that if every judge scores it 29-28, it’s still a unanimous decision.

by Phildo on Jun 15, 2009 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

is that what they think?

I’m always like what are you talking about

all you gotta do is...

by imapimp08 on Jun 15, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve seen people post, “how can you say it’s unanimous if fighter x won round y” so that’s part of it.

by Phildo on Jun 15, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ahhh! I'd never realized that!

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i've definitely been guilty of that!

but now i know. and knowing is half the battle!

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really? That’s hilarious.

Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken

by Richard Wade on Jun 15, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great article Brent, thanks for the link.

by LiuLang on Jun 15, 2009 9:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Great article.

Very insightful article. I have no problem with a close decision…and in the end it doesn’t hurt the losing fighter all that much. The perfect example of “Scoring Fallacy #1” is the first BJ Penn/George St. Pierre fight. St. Pierre was a bloody mess at the end of the fight because Penn had a good first round. However, St. Pierre controlled the last two and rightfully won a close decision.

by MMAMoneyLine on Jun 15, 2009 9:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Perfect example of robbery, in my opinion, was Holyfield vs. Valuev.

Follow my analysis of all things MMA on BloodyElbow.com

by Leland Roling on Jun 15, 2009 9:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Yes!

That is a scoring that you can not possibly make sense of

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep that had some corrupt judges...

There’s a lot of those stuff in boxing, zgorres/montiel, penalosa/ponce de leon (i thought penalosa won most of the rounds but if you score fights differently, maybe it couldve gone slightly in favor of ponce, but all judges have it at ponce winning by a HUGE margin)

But yeah, Holyfield was the most recent blatant robbery I watched recently.

weoweoweo .deviantart .com

by Anton Tabuena on Jun 15, 2009 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, it was merely kharma for the ridiculous draw he was gifted against Lennox Lewis*.

which coincidentally enough is the last time I ever paid to watch a boxing match.

by jebushchrist on Jun 15, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

actually the last one I saw watched too, until

Manny Pacqueio(SP) VS Ricky hatton

Hatton looked like he was in a different time zone or just woke up

all you gotta do is...

by imapimp08 on Jun 15, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve watched boxing since then, but never paid to see it. No PPV’s, no throwing a couple bucks in to watch at a buddy’s house, and no going to a bar to see a fight and spending $50 on drinks.

by jebushchrist on Jun 15, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if people are yelling about robberies, it means they care. better to see people care than be apathetic. thats basically my only take on it. plus you get to see people try and break fights down to justify their scores and i always like to see how other people watch the bouts and analyze them.

by nigelzackit on Jun 15, 2009 9:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I like to see break-downs too...

but again, we’re talking about the difference between a decision someone doesn’t like and a robbery…which is a decision that more or less is impossible to arrive at.

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Holyfield-Valuev was payback for Holyfield-Lews 1. That was one of the worst decisions in combat sports history. Holyfield’s corner looked almost apologetic afterward.

by SlickRick00 on Jun 15, 2009 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

or the first ruiz fight too. or the fight with oquendo.

by nigelzackit on Jun 15, 2009 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

Holyfield has been in a really unbelievable amount of weird decisions.

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What I hate is when...

People blame Dana White or the UFC for what they deem is a bad decision. Really gets under my skin…

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 10:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

they did it with don king all the time. difference is that dana white picked out and paid the judges for the fights saturday night. don king never officially did that.

by nigelzackit on Jun 15, 2009 10:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Brickhaus is a serious pimp.

"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR

by Rundownloser on Jun 15, 2009 10:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It’s rare I see a straight robbery in MMA. There are decisions where I don’t understand why/how someone would score it one way but, at the same time, understand that they do. Then you have close calls which happen all of the time. Then you have, very rarely, a robbery. Ninja/Rampge, Ninja/Hendo, Gono/Hardy are the only 3 I can think of off the top of my head.

by VegasBatman on Jun 15, 2009 11:02 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

MMA is much harder to judge

There are so many more factors than boxing, I think it’s exceedingly difficult to say who won the round at times. I get frustrated with judges but I can’t imagine I’d do any better.

by jebushchrist on Jun 15, 2009 11:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

There are definately some fights where I've said

“I wouldn’t want to be judging!”

all you gotta do is...

by imapimp08 on Jun 15, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think part of the problem with this, especially in MMA, is that the only place to discuss MMA, for most of the sport’s existence, has been the internet. And we’ve all seen how difficult it is to have a rational discussion about anything on the internet.

Look at Sherdog or the underground, there’s no middle ground about anything. Everything is an absolute, and not up for debate. No one is reasonable, no one actuall listens to another person’s point and lets it effect their thinking, the only reason to read another person’s post is to find something to nitpick about.

It’s not a problem with mma fans, it’s a problem with the internet. If you tried to turn an internet thread into an actual conversation between to people in the same room, it would never work. That’s why every bad decision is a robbery. That’s why every time someone loses they suck and should retire. That’s why every time Wandy punched Rich it was because Pride was better than the UFC, but when Rich won the decision it’s because of the stupid, evil UFC judges, judging system or because Dana hates Japan and all of MMA.

by Phildo on Jun 15, 2009 11:18 AM EDT reply actions 4 recs

The internet ruins EVERYTHING!

…but yeah I totally get what you’re saying.

Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.

http://CurseOfRonKarkovice.blogspot.com/

by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 15, 2009 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I mean, saying that you think Rampage should have won but you understand how someone could have scored the fight for Forrest could generate a small, rational discussion. But saying, “OMG Rampage got screwed, the UFC is racist, worst decision EVAR” would make a 300 page thread on sherdog, why would you ever make the first post?

by Phildo on Jun 15, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"The internet ruins EVERYTHING!"

except porn…

starts humming “The Internet is for Porn”

I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup

by funnytiger on Jun 15, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's a must green post.

This explains a lot of problems in the community.

"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR

by Rundownloser on Jun 15, 2009 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought right after the fight

Marcus had this in the bag, I scored it same way I scored the Fisher/Uno fight and some people couldn’t understand how I called that right.

First fight I havent recorded in a long time so I haven’t re-watched it yet, but I remember hardy landing a knee and getting some sort of top control in the 2nd, but I still thought Davis did enough to win the round overall.

all you gotta do is...

by imapimp08 on Jun 15, 2009 11:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In the Hardy/Davis fight both rounds I had Davis winning were close and the round I had Hardy winning was a blowout, so with only one truly clear round I’m not surprised the winner of that round took the decision.

by Richard Wade on Jun 15, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs