MMA Judging: How Do You Fix The Problem?

Let me start off by letting you all know that my friend and GTS contributor, Bryan Peden, has started his own MMA website called "MMAtters." You should all check it out at www.mmatters.weebly.com. Feel free to check out the site as well as "like" MMAtters on Facebook. GTS will be getting it's own Facebook page in the very near future so keep an eye out for that as well.

I guess what really inspired this next post was the absolute robbery of a decision that was awarded to Sean Sherk over Evan Dunham at UFC 119. I definitely believe that Sherk won the first round thanks to his takedowns, ground control, and the cut he gave Dunham, but I thought Dunham overwhelmed Sherk with strikes in rounds 2 and 3, defended the takedown well, got up quickly when he was taken down, and even had several close submission attempts. At the end of the fight, though, Sherk was announced as the winner via split-decision, an announcement that was followed by a deafening chorus of boos. Dunham has taken the high ride since the loss and has blamed himself for not finishing the fight, despite the fact that even UFC President Dana White has stated several times that Dunham won that fight. Unfortunately, this isn't the first time a decision has been botched, and it certainly won't be the last (see Leonard Garcia's last 3 fights), but the question is ... How do you fix MMA judging?

GIVE THE JUDGES MONITORS: This seems like a pretty easy fix to me. Judges, despite sitting cage/ring-side, simply are not going to have the vantage points that are made available when watching the fight on a TV/monitor. Between the cage itself, camera crews, referees, and the position of the fighters, it is impossible for a judge to see everything from their seat with their own eyes. If the judges had monitors placed in front of them, then they could easily see every punch thrown(and whether it actually lands), every small transition made on the mat, etc. Monitors simply would allow judges to see everything they are missing by giving them angles and close ups that they are just not going to get otherwise. The scary thing, though, is that at a lot of events, monitors are placed in front of the judges, but they are never plugged in a turned on. That, to me, is completely asinine. I mean if the monitor is there and it gives you a better opportunity to make the right call, then why not use it?

TRAIN THE JUDGES: The worst part about most MMA judges, is that they really have no idea what they are watching. Most of these judges are coming over from boxing, and don't understand the intricacies of the clinch, takedowns, ground control, transitions, submission attempts, takedown defense, fighters working off their back, leg kicks, etc. If judges actually knew what they were watching, then rounds can be awarded to fighters based on actual knowledge versus awarding rounds based on personal belief. I've read articles in the past where a fighter would be working a submission, and a judge would ask someone close to them, "what is he trying to do?" Occurrences like that are inexcusable and are costing fighters fights, which in turn affects their purses and their livelihood. If Athletic Commissions could start bring in MMA instructors to do simple work shops for judges, then maybe the judges would be able to gain the proper knowledge of the sport to judge it correctly. I think it's also important that fans of the sport look into getting into judging as well as a casual UFC fan likely has a better understanding of the fight than most judges.

TWEEK THE POINT SYSTEM: Tweeking the current point system used to score MMA may be difficult, but I do think it is possible. Currently MMA is using the same 10 Point system used in boxing where the winner of the round is awarded 10 points and the loser of the round is awarded 9 or less. While it might be the best system at the moment, I still find it strange that a scoring system for one sport (boxing) is being used for one that not only includes boxing, but kickboxing, muay thai, wrestling, judo, BJJ, etc. Bryan and I had a discussion regarding scoring, and we both agreed that certain techniques are being given too much weight over others. For example, one takedown should not be given more points than a solid punch to the face. This likely goes back to training and educating the judges, but a takedown that results in the downed fighter immediately getting to his feet should not be given more deference than a solid leg kick, because when you actually think about it, which technique actually caused more damage? I think judges need to not be afraid to score a round 10-10 and I also think adopting some idea from Pride/Japanese MMA would work as well. What I like about that particular scoring system is that at the end of a fight, the judges would pick a winner based on you that they won the "fight", not who won the most rounds. I like to use the Michael Bisping/Wanderlei Silva fight as an example. Under the current system Wanderlei won a decision as he was awarded rounds 2 and 3. Bisping won round 1, but round 2 was very close, and round 3 ended with Silva knocking Bisping down and nearly finishing him. In what was a close decision under the current system, under a system like that used in Pride, Silva would've have been awarded the decision because at the end of the fight he was standing over Bisping raining down punches. The fight may have been close based on singular rounds, but when the final bell is rung and Wanderlei is standing over a nearly unconscious and bloody Bisping, it's pretty clear who just won a fight.

These are just a few things that I've thought about that could fix judging, so feel free to agree or disagree with me and sound off in the comments section.