If fights were judged based on final appearances, UFC 86 would have
been an easy call.
Luckily for Forrest Griffin, they're not. Despite looking as if he
had kissed a lawnmower, the challenger picked up a unanimous decision win over
Quinton "Rampage" Jackson, who left the Octagon with nothing more than a
pronounced limp.
However, something about the outcome of Saturday's thrilling battle
makes me wonder: Why is MMA still judged like boxing?
It's not that awarding Griffin the victory was necessarily wrong.
Jackson offered no complaints about the decision, even if his trainer, Juanito
Ibarra, had plenty. But looking at the judges' scorecards only reinforced my
suspicion that the scoring system in mixed martial arts is seriously
flawed.
Griffin-Jackson was about as close as an MMA fight could ever be; a
back-and-forth battle that pitted Jackson's damaging abilities against
Griffin's. The battle saw Rampage be out-worked by the understated Griffin
without the challenger ever coming close to putting his opponent
away.
Each man had his moments, his near misses and his squandered
opportunities. But at the end of the night, the scorecards told of a dominant
Griffin victory. One judge even gave all but one round to Griffin (Roy Silbert
tallied a 49-46 in favor of Griffin). The round he did give to Jackson -- the
fourth -- wasn't even the former champ's best frame.
Scroll back to the first round from Saturday's bout. The most
noteworthy thing to happen in that five-minute span was an uppercut from Jackson
that sent Griffin to the mat. Somehow, two of the three judges -- Adalaide Byrd
and Nelson Hamilton -- gave that round to Griffin at 10-9. Apparently, just
getting up from a knockdown is enough to win the opening round in a championship
fight.
That's not to say Jackson was robbed, though. At times, his power had
Griffin looking lost, though he was unable to capitalize on any of those
opportunities. At the same time, Griffin didn't exactly overwhelm his opponent.
What Griffin did manage to do, though, was stay busy. He controlled the center
of the Octagon and dictated the pace of the fight.
But is that enough to beat the champion? To the judges, yes,
yes it is. And by a healthy margin.
Of course, it's easy to blame the judges. All too often they are
boxing judges who don't understand enough about the ground game and the nuances
of MMA to make sense of what they see in the fight. But part of the problem is
that MMA is using a scoring system that was meant for a completely different
sport.
There's no such thing as a near submission in boxing. There are no
takedowns that only result in a man getting right back to his feet, there is no
meaningful equivalent to controlling a man in a dominant position on the mat. So
how can judges possibly be expected to make MMA action fit into a boxing
framework on their scorecards?
The outcome of the UFC 86 main event may not have changed, even
without the 10-point must system. And any time a fight goes to the judges, we
have to be prepared for the inevitable subjectivity that could potentially ruin
the day.
Still, the numbers should make us stop and think. MMA needs its own
scoring system tailored to fit the specific demands of the sport. It shouldn't
be satisfied to borrow one from boxing, just like it shouldn't be content to
borrow their judges.
MMA News 
