Juurikin noin itsekkin ottelun näin.
1-3 Machidalle, viimeiset 2 shogunille.
Oikeasti siis 0-2 Shogunille, mutta säännöt on säännöt ja olen sitä mieltä että tasaisen erän on aina mentävä mestarille.
Tuo on todennäköisimmin se mikä sotkee ihmisten pakkaa. Ei oteltu priden kokonaisuutena, vaan ufc:nä ja on hyvä ettei mestaruutta voiteta tekemättä ratkaisuyrityksiä(ne oli kuitenkin kaikki harvat Machidalla, Shogunin paras tilaisuus oli kun Machida liukastui, mutta sekään ei vaikuttanut kovin pahalta tilanteelta).
Jännittävää tässä on se että kun matseja voitetaan LnPllä niin huuto on hurjaa siitä miten tylsää paskaa taas. Jos ottelussa ollaan liikaa bjj tilanteissa, se nostetaan vähän väliä ylös, mutta pystyssä kun vain seisoo ja välillä heittää potkun jalkaan niin sitten on voitto ylivoimainen ja suorastaan mestaruus ryöstetty...
Säännöillähän ei tässä tapauksessa ole mitään merkitystä, eikä tässä niistä edes keskustella, vaan siitä millä perusteella Machida julistettiin ottelun voittajaksi. Alla kohtuullisen pitkä lainaus NSAC arvosteluperusteista. Näiden perusteella ottelissa julistetaan voittaja. Shogun vs Machida -ottelussa ei jostain syystä näin tapahtunut. Se käsittääkseni tässä on aiheuttanut polemiikkia. Korostukset tekstissä ovat omiani, koska mielestäni ne vaikuttavat keskustelua aiheuttavan ottelun arvosteluun. Saa sieltä toki jokainen korostaa mitä haluaa, mutta se ei lopputulosta muuta. Ehkä scorecard procedureissa on sitten tullut joku virhe, jossa ottelun voittaja on vaihtunut..
E. Judging Criteria
1. Judges are required to determine the winner of a bout that goes to it's full time limit based upon the following criteria:
-Clean Strikes
-Effective Grappling
-Octagon Control
-Effective Aggressiveness
F. Clean Strikes
1. The fighter who is landing both effective and efficient clean strikes.
2. There are two ways of measuring strikes:
-the total number of clean strikes landed (more efficient)
-the total number of heavy strikes landed (more effective)
G. The heavier striker who lands with efficiency, deserves more credit from the Judges than total number landed.
1. If the striking power between the fighters was equal, then the total number landed would be used as the criteria.
2. The total number of strikes landed, should be of sufficient quantity favoring a fighter, to earn a winning round.
H. Strikes thrown from the top position of the guard, are generally heavier and more effective than those thrown from the back.
1. Thus a Judge shall recognize that effective strikes thrown from the top guard position are of "higher quality", than thrown from the bottom.
2. The Judge shall recognize that this is not always the case.
However, the vast majority of fighters prefer the top guard position to strike from. This is a strong indication of positional dominance for striking.
I. Effective Grappling
1. The Judge shall recognize the value of both the clean takedown and active guard position.
2. The Judge shall recognize that a fighter who is able to cleanly takedown his opponent, is effectively grappling.
3. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter on his back in an active guard position, can effectively grapple, through execution of repeated threatening attempts at submission and reversal resulting in continuous defense from the top fighter.
4. A Judge shall recognize that a fighter who maneuvers from guard to mount is effectively grappling.
5. A Judge shall recognize that the guard position alone shall be scored neutral or even, if none of the preceding situations were met.(items 2-4)
6. A Judge shall recognize that if the fighters remain in guard the majority of a round with neither fighter having an edge in clean striking or effective grappling, (items 2-4), the fighter who scored the clean takedown deserves the round.
7. A clean reversal is equal to a clean takedown in effective grappling
J. Octagon Control
1. The fighter who is dictating the pace, place and position of the fight.
2. A striker who fends off a grappler's takedown attempt to remain standing and effectively strike is octagon control.
3. A grappler who can takedown an effective standing striker to ground fight is octagon control.
4. The fighter on the ground who creates submission, mount or clean striking opportunities
K. Effective Aggressiveness
1. This simply means who is moving forward and finding success.(scoring)
2. Throwing a strike moving backwards is not as effective as a strike thrown moving forward.
3. Throwing strikes and not landing is not effective aggressiveness.
4. Moving forward and getting struck is not effective aggressiveness.
5. Shooting takedowns and getting countered and fended off is not effective aggressiveness.
L. Criteria Evaluation
1. Each judge is to evaluate which fighter was most effective. Thus striking and grappling skills are top priority.
2. Evaluating the criteria requires the use of a sliding scale. Fights can remain standing or grounded. Judges shall recognize that it isn't how long the fighters are standing or grounded, as to the scoring the fighters achieve ,while in those positions.
3. If 90% of the round is grounded one fighter on top, then:
-effective grappling is weighed first.
-clean striking is weighed next. If clean strikes scored in the round, the Judge shall factor it
in. Clean Striking can outweigh Effective Grappling while the fighters are grounded.
-octagon control is next (pace, place & position)
4. The same rational holds true if 90% of the round were standing. Thus:
-clean striking would be weighed first (fighter most effective)
-clean grappling second (any takedowns or effective clinching)
-octagon control which fighter maintained better position? Which fighter created the situations
that led to effective strikes?
5. If a round was 50% standing and 50% on the ground, then:
-clean striking and effective grappling are weighed more equally.
-octagon control would be factored next
6. In all three hypothetical situations, effective aggressiveness is factored in last. It is the
criteria of least importance. Since the definition calls for moving forward and scoring, it is
imperative for the Judges to look at the scoring first.
7. Thus for all Judges scoring UFC fights, the prioritized order of evaluating criteria is:
-clean strikes and effective grappling are weighed first.
-octagon control
-effective aggressiveness
M. Domination Criteria
1. A Judge may determine that a fighter dominated his opponent in a round. This can lead to a two point or more difference on a Judge's scorecard.
2. The definition of a dominating round is a fighter's ability to effectively strike, grapple and
control his opponent.
3. A Judge may determine a round was dominating if a fighter was adversely affected by one of the following:
-knocked down from standing position by clean strike
-by submission attempt
-from a throw
-from clean strikes either standing or grounded.
N. Judge's Scorecard Procedures
After each round:
1. each Judge will determine and record a score each round
2. a MMAC official will collect the scorecard after each round
3. the MMAC official will track and add each Judges score by round
4. If the fight goes the time limit, the MMAC official will add each Judge's scorecard and double check total
5. the fighter with the greater number of points wins the fight on each Judges scorecard
6. the fighter who won on the majority of the Judges Scorecards, wins the fight
7. the MMAC official will hand the decision to the PA announcer
O. Types of Judge's Decisions
1. If all three scorecards agree Unanimous
2. If two of three scorecards agree Split
3. Two scorecards agree and one draw Majority
4. two scorecards agree on draw Draw
5. all scorecards different Draw
IX SCORING SYSTEM
A. The MMAC and UFC have adopted a 10 point must system.
The Judge will use the criteria to determine a winner each round. The three step procedure per round is as follows:
-determine winner of round (can be draw)
-determine if winner dominated round
-fouls then factored in (subtract one point per foul from fighter)
B. Draws are again acceptable in MMAC events
C. Point Totals
1. two fighters who draw are given a score of 10-10
2. the fighter who wins a round is given a score of 10-9
3.The fighter who dominates a round is given a score of 10-8
(a score of 10-7 is possible for a dominant round)
4.For each foul a fighter commits, a point is subtracted. This deduction can change a winning round to a draw. 9-9
En ainakaan löydä tuolta yhtään kohtaa, jossa sanotaan, että tasaisen erän pitää mennä mestarille. Se on jonkun mielipide. En myöskään löydä tuolta yhtään kohtaa, jossa sanotaan, että alapotkuilla ei ole arvoa. Se on jonkun mielipide.
Lopputuloksena en edelleenkään ymmärrä miten noilla arvosteluperusteilla Machida saatiin ottelun voittajaksi. Tueksi voi ottaa vielä eräkohtaisen statistiikan ja itse ottelun. Nämä kun yhdistää yllämainittuihin arvosteluperusteitiin, ei käsittääkseni voi tulla muuta kun yhteen lopputulokseen.
