To be honest with you, I don't fully understand all the fight metric jumble that always seems to surface on the Internet after close fights are called wronged.
For me, a fan first and statistics calculator second, I can see just fine. I know when a guy wins and when a guy loses. It's as plain as day.
Sure some fights are incredibly close, but based on damage, durability throughout the fight, combat initiation, takedowns and strikes, I know who won.
For UFC judges, it's becoming a taxing job to stick to a point system in which every single facet of a fight is graded on an already predetermined scale. They aren't judging fights, they're calculating them. Now I realize some sort of system needs to be utilized, but to what extent?
Are judges being too strict? Are decisions being awarded to guys who land two more takedowns than to guys who inflict 10 times more damage to their opponent?
Unfortunately, yes they are. Not every fight is close and not every fight goes the distance, but when those two aspects of MMA line up, I'd say 20 percent of the time judges get it wrong.
That's way too high for a sport that's completely based around fighting. It's simply an outdated source for making decisions. It's judging, not a systematical biopsy of percentages. There's only one thing to determine.
Who beat the crap out of who.
For more UFC news and coverage,