You’re right that judges DO play a significant role in how they judge a fight (as most of the time they have NFI), but they STILL can only go on the criteria set out by the Unified Rules, which I also find an equal problem. For example, they must score round by round using 10-point must, they can’t score the fight overall, and they must used aggression, effective striking, grappling and octagon control. Personally I think that those criteria also play a significant part in how the fights are being played out, and why the judges are screwing things. Control can actually outweigh damage should there be more control in a round than there is damage. That is a joke to me.
Personally “control” should only be a criteria used when other more important criteria are even. Damage and proximity to finishing the fight being first and foremost. Currently we have fighters going for control at the expense of trying to damage or finish because its much more effective at taking rounds away. Jardine just took Mousasi down for a breather, did no actual damage with either the takedown or whilst being down there, and did zero control, yet still was awarded control points.
That shows an incompetency in BOTH the judges AND the criteria for being exploitable. You can’t exploit damage or being close to ending the fight. I would be much MUCH happier with a complete re-vamp of the scoring system and methodology. No scoring system is perfect, but IMO the Pride criteria/methodology was 100 times better and aligned MUCH more closely with the spirit of fighting and Vale Tudo.
I’m glad more attention is put on judging, and I hope (even though so many noob fans still think that takedowns and ‘being on top’ is winning a fight) slowly things change and we get a reasonable, common sense scoring methodology that also encourages the right type of fight take place (i.e the primary mandate is to damage and finish your opponent).
BTW I think Ricardo will make an awesome judge. Much needed.
