10-10 = Draw
10-9 = Close
10-8 = Clearly won round
10-7 = Dominant round

Just enforce those more loosely than the current scores are enforced. If its a slow round with not much striking but 1 fighter controls the other, then score it 10-9. If both fighters stand up and trade during the round with both landing solid shots but one was slightly more aggressive, dont be afraid to call it 10-10 considering nothing was really splitting them.

Being afraid of draws is short sighted. Sure, we may have a few draws, but pretty soon, people will realize grinding out cheap, slow unconvincing wins wont cut it and will seek to do more and hopefully aim to finish fights.

There are a bazillion, thats right, a bazillion different systems that could be implemented. Each has flaws, of course, but all are better than the current 10 point must system. It really is terrible.

Score a fight with the 10.0 or 100 point system and you will see that the score is a more accurate reflection of the fight.

If the round was close score the round 100-99 or 100-98.

Also the 100 pt system allows to spot corruption in judging if/when it exists. A corrupt judge can give a 10-9 to the wrong guy and clame he did so but it was a close fight. Knowing he did so because the guy needed his score to win. 10-9 10-9 9-10 dont look to suspecious. Just run of the mill split decision. But 100-99, 100-98, and 92-100 shows clear intent to over rule the other judges and effect the outcome of the fight. Said judge can no longer claim its was close but he picked the other guy.

The 10 point must system may as well be the 2 point must system with the winner getting 2 points and the other guy getting 1 or less. We’ve seen 10-8 rounds occasionally, but how many 10-7 rounds has there been in the history of major MMA? One or two…or less?

We need educated mma judges.

We need judges who can tell the difference between a guy who is counter fighting and a guy who is being backed up against his will in the case of machida in his shogun fight.

I was pulling for machida but I don’t think he won this fight.

there needs to be a way to differentiate the dominant 10-9 round from the close 10-9 round, whether that be by making the 1/2 point increment change, encouraging rather than discouraging 10-10 scores, or changing to the Pride method of judging based on an overall fight.

I don’t like how often my scorecard tells me fighter A won 29-28 when all other objective factors point in favor of fighter B.

I don’t really find the Spinal Tap analogy on point. Any of these scoring changes will in fact effect changes to the system, as opposed to, you know, turning it up to 11 on the stereo, man.

We’ve got plenty of room on a ten-point scale to produce more refined decisions. Ever heard of a 10-6 round? There just has to be agreement to do it and some reeducation of judges. Either way, if everyone’s playing by the same rules, I don’t think it makes any real difference.

Overall, educating judges in a reasonably uniform way is the bigger problem. The ABC is soliciting information on existing training programs for referees and judges with an eye toward promoting standardized curricula. With a little luck, we could see some results of these initiatives in next year’s rewrite of the “Uniform Rules.” From there they could move in the direction of more nuanced judging guidelines, whether that’s by adding half-points or spreading the range of the scale that’s actually used. It really doesn’t matter which. 11 isn’t louder than 10, and neither is 10-1/2.

HB

With some cards having nearly half the bouts going to the judges, and some of those fights ending in 29-28. The new point system could possibly result in several draws, meaning we would have several rematches or even worse. fighters not progressing in the ranks because of the new system. Also what would happen to bout purse’s? Also judges may feel obligated to use the new system and only award half points, meaning more possible draws

The new system sounds good, but we’re not looking at the real effects of it in use.