Kizer: There is no judging crisis in Nevada


There is an old unspoken, sometmes broken rule in boxing that in order to take a champions title, you have to beat him thoroughly. When Chris Weidman took Anderson Silva's UFC middleweight title at UFC 163, Silva was unconscious. When Alexander Gustafsson fought UFC light heavyweight champion Jon Jones at UFC 165, while some observers thought The Mauler did enough to get the judge's decision, there was no outcry, as whatever happened, Jones was not unequivocally beaten up. However, When UFC welterweight Georges St-Pierre retained his welterweight title Saturday night with a split decision, the outcry was fierce and prolonged.

There was complete accord with the judges about rounds 2-5, and with many onlookers as well. All three judges have GSP rounds 3 and 5, and all three judges gave Hendricks 2 and 4. The big question is round 1, which most observers gave to the challenger, but two judges gave to GSP.



Sal D’Amato

Tony Weeks

Glenn Trowbridge


Round 1:





Round 2:





Round 3:





Round 4:





Round 5:





The most prominent detractor was UFC president Dana White.

"It’s absolutely, 100 percent incompetence," said White at the post fight press conference," adding, "and it needs to stop. I’m f–-ing scared to come back here and (promote) fights. I’m afraid of this state.”

"This is our hometown, this is where we live, and our athletic commission is the weakest commission in the country. When you start looking at next year's schedule, how many events do you want to do in Vegas?"

However, when Cagewriter's Elias Cepeda, asked Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) executive director Keith Kizer if there was a judging crisis in Nevada, Kizer was unqequivocal.

"No," he explained.

"I don’t see controversy in the GSP-Hendricks decision. The media seems split on who won. The LA times scored it for GSP. All seemed to agree that Hendricks won rounds two and four and that St. Pierre won three and five. The first round could have gone either way."

"Even if you disagreed with the scoring, how is that something to criticize the commission for?"

"Before the fight, both the St. Pierre and Hendricks camps were fine with the proposed judges... [Vice President of Regulatory Affairs and former NSAC executive director] Marc Ratner and Dana White have also told me that they believe Sal D'Mato and Tony Weeks were two of the best judges, if not the best, in MMA. You can tell they feel that way by where the UFC has taken them."

Kizer also addressed White's frustration leading to less shows in Las Vegas.

"I don’t think it's likely," said Kizer. "I don’t think its what he meant but in any case, we are a public agency and so we are happy to hear everyone's comments and input."

Towards that end, Kizer has set a public workshop for Monday Dec 2 at 9:00 am to take feedback from interested parties.

The Nevada Athletic Commission is proposing the adoption of Regulations pertaining to chapter 467 of the Nevada Administrative Code. A workshop has been set for 9:00 a.m. on Monday, December 2, 2013, at the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, 555 East Washington Avenue, Suite 4500, Las Vegas, Nevada.

The purpose of the workshop is to solicit comments from interested persons on any matter related to contests or exhibitions of unarmed combat, or any other matter within the jurisdiction of the Nevada Athletic Commission, NAC chapter 467. A copy of all materials relating to the proposal may be obtained at the workshop or by contacting the Office of the Nevada Athletic Commission, 555 East Washington Avenue, Suite 3200, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101, (702) 486-2575.

A reasonable fee for copying may be charged.

Read entire article...


tags: UFC 167   Keith Kizer   Regulation   Nevada   Dana White   GSP   Georges St-Pierre (detail)  Johny Hendricks (detail)  


Get the MMA Underground app. for iPhone and Andriod devices.
iPhone Application Andriod MMA Underground Application

Recent Comments »

catbath site profile image  

11/19/13 10:55 PM by catbath

I'm a big fan of moving to five judges. Does anyone here follow diving, gymnastics or other subjective sports that use a five or more judging panel? I know there are differences (dropping lowest and highest score) but are there as many super-controversial decisions like in MMA?In the end, sports are not an intellectual exercise. The person whom the masses majority feels like one a fight should have their hand raised. Otherwise people will simply stop becoming emotionally invested… and then stop watching altogether.

t G G t site profile image  

11/19/13 10:34 PM by t G G t

Why not have 5 judges instead of 3.Think about it.....

Wicked smahtMF site profile image  

11/19/13 4:34 PM by Wicked smahtMF

way too reasonable/ concise. in for ban

snobordr site profile image  

11/19/13 3:20 PM by snobordr

I was similar. I felt RD 1 was really close, but I gave RD 1 to GSP based on scoring his submission attempt higher than the cuts Johnny inflicted. But I am not outraged that many people feel Johnny took it based on the damage.

UGCTT_EnderTL site profile image  

11/19/13 2:42 PM by UGCTT_EnderTL

Especially if you ignore all the fighters and media members with merit who thought GSP won. The majority is for Hendricks, but ignoring other valid opinions doesn't do your argument any good. Looking at the judging criteria it is easy to see how GSP won. Looking at the reactions of most of the people it is easy to see that the judging criteria does not always line up with popular opinion on who won the fight, including how fighters themselves think a fight should be won. This is the issue here, not corrupt judging. If you want to push the argument on corrupt judging it would be better to continue focusing on the Mayweather fight where EVERYONE disagrees with how one judge scored it. I want corrupt/incompetent judging to be fixed and I don't think using GSP/Hendricks as ammo helps that argument.

UGCTT_EnderTL site profile image  

11/19/13 2:35 PM by UGCTT_EnderTL

Judges gave round 2 to Hendricks based on damage. If they scored it by strikes landed then it would be GSP 1, 2, 3, 5.

TapThat site profile image  

11/19/13 12:23 PM by TapThat

There's an Executive Directorship issue in Nevada, Every time there's a judging stuff up Kizer comes out claiming there's nothing wrong. We need to start seeing "Fire Keith Kizer" shirts and signs pop up in the crowd at events.

Biggy site profile image  

11/19/13 12:02 PM by Biggy

Par for course with Kizer and what's worse is that he may be right this time.I have to say I did enjoy the time period after that last boxing fiasco where he was rather unsteady and even humbled in his comments. Might be a long while before we see that again.

JustPeed site profile image  

11/19/13 11:40 AM by JustPeed

When everyone with merit (other fighters, UFC Brass and even the ref ) think the decision was wrong then obviously there is an issue.

Dougie site profile image  

11/19/13 11:24 AM by Dougie

I scored this fight as follows. Round 1 = GSP (Difficult round but I felt that GSP eeks it out. However, had the judges gone the other way I would not have been surprised) Round 2 = Hendricks (Clear round for me) Round 3 = GSP (Clear round for me) Round 4 = Hendricks (Clear round for me) Round 5 = GSP (GSP stole this round with his preformance at the end imo) I also don't score damage super high because some guys walk into the wind and cuts open. For me it doesn't seal the deal like it does for most.