Judging critera, bias, or other aspects?

[Daffanka]

Starting off by saying I love the game.

However I've noticed that judging always leans towards control against the cage or holding someone down. If someone controls most of the round with jabs and maybe hits a big shot, but spends two minutes against the cage he's lost the round.

So I was thinking if you could give priority to strikes, submission attempts etc. for the judges to base their decisions on. This would of course only apply to unregulated territories where the company has its own judges, but perhaps you could work a bit of influence even with athletic commissions.

Let's say the criteria looked good on are strikes, knockdowns, and ground and pound, while clinch and ground control and submission attempts are worth less. This would lead to strikers who can keep it standing having quite an advantage.

Regarding bias, this would obviously only happen in unregulated areas, you could tell the judges to give more points to a certain fighter, the most popular fighter or other things. If a guy's getting annihilated but pulls through to a decision he's not going to win it, but in a close defeat he'd still be given a points victory.

I don't know how feasible any of this is but I thought I'd put it here.

[Adam Ryland]

I think what we'll do is that if there's a sequel there will be editable judges where you can set their preferences as to how they weight different action. That would solve your issue quite nicely.

[Daffanka]

Awesome, thanks. :)