Fighting Fair: A case study of Judge Bias in Mixed Martial Arts

As an avid follower of both traditional martial arts and combat sports, I have been greatly interested in the developing Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) scene in Vietnam. In recent weeks, the online community has been united by controversy surrounding the alleged unfair judging of a recent contest (not for the first time). This has led me to question possible bias in MMA judging both in Vietnam and beyond, raising important questions about integrity in the sport.

 

How is MMA scored?

In unified MMA rules, the scoring typically uses a 10-point system. Judges score each round with the winner receiving 10 points and the loser 9 or fewer, based on striking, grappling, aggression, and octagon control. A 10-10 score indicates a draw, 10-9 a close match, and 10-8 a dominant victory. Fights typically last for three rounds, with championship bouts usually lasting five. The round-by-round scores are then added together to provide a total, e.g., “29-27” for a close win or “30-26” for a more dominant victory.

 

Why was this fight controversial?

The fight in question occurred during the main event of LION Championship 15 in Hanoi on July 13, 2024. It was a women’s 56kg title defense between Vietnamese champion Duong Thi Thanh Binh and Hungarian challenger Bianka Balajti.

After five rounds, the judges unanimously scored the fight in favor of Thanh Binh (48-47, 49-46, and 48-47), allowing her to retain her title. However, the decision immediately drew criticism from the MMA community. Many observers felt that Thanh Binh’s performance did not warrant a victory on points, suggesting that Balajti may have been the rightful winner or, at the very least, that the fight was much closer than the scores indicated.

Even the referee was shocked at the announcement – Photo Courtesy of https://mansionsportsnews.com/vn

The controversy escalated to the point where the Vietnam Mixed Martial Arts Federation (VMMAF) issued a statement acknowledging potential errors in judging:

“There were professional mistakes made by the judges involved in the fight’s evaluation. This is an undesirable result from VMMAF’s professional team. VMMAF recognizes the seriousness of the issue, which directly affects the match, the achievements, and the spirit of the fighters. VMMAF will work with relevant parties to come up with a resolution as soon as possible.”

This incident mirrors a similar controversy from June 2023 involving Brazilian fighter Robson De Oliveria, who lost to fan-favorite Tran Ngoc Luong in a split decision. While that case attracted less controversy due to a less decisive win, the result was eventually retracted and an offer of a rematch was given to De Oliveria. However, the loss remained on his record.

 

A confusing result for De Oliveria

 

Bianka’s coach and current lightweight champion, Kamil Van Nguyen, has expressed hope that the decision will be overturned, and the fight listed as a no contest. He stated, “Bianka was extremely disappointed with the results, as she was confident that she had won the fight. Hundreds of MMA fans on social media, from professionals to casual MMA fans, recognize that this decision was wrong.”

Kamil has gone to great lengths to examine the fight, breaking down each individual interaction to create a complete analysis of the bout, which has been examined by various professionals against unified rules of MMA. I have had a chance to review his results myself and agree that Bianka showed dominance in striking, takedowns and ground control.

He emphasizes, “As Bianka clearly won, ideally we would like the financial compensation and the on-record win that they mistakenly gave to her opponent. However, I know that is not likely, so even if we could just the fight recognized as a ‘no-contest’ it would show things are fair.

Gilberto Bottiglieri, coach at C88 Martial Arts Club in Ho Chi Minh City, voiced his concerns in an online statement with Mansion News Vietnam, stating: “I want to express my concerns as a supporter and fan of the Vietnamese MMA community. We definitely need a fair international referee team for professional MMA matches. Having all referees and judges of the same nationality as one of the fighters is completely unprofessional and biased.”

Kamil echoed this sentiment, noting that while the judges are “experienced working with various other organizations,” he believes “this decision is beyond pure skills.” He also mentioned encountering similar problems in his own fighting career, suggesting that local fighters may even attempt to use such scoring to their advantage by fighting defensively, confident they will be awarded the win if a fight goes to a decision.

While both fighters took damage, the challenger certainly landed more significant strikes – a total of 116 to 76 according to the fight breakdown.

Why is judging bias an issue and what are possible solutions?

While judging bias has long been an issue in combat sports, it is usually related to factors such as betting odds, fight location, and disciplines – with striking generally favored over grappling by judging panels.[i] However, in this case, the primary issue is likely the fact that all judges share the same national background as the majority of the fighters.

While there’s no suggestion of deliberate judging against foreign fighters, unconscious bias affects everyone and must be addressed in all professional organizations to ensure fairness and equality. Some reasons for such scoring could stem from factors like national pride, awareness or preference of certain criteria, and pressure from local organizers, sponsors, or social environment.

Several possible solutions to judge bias that could help in future cases in Vietnam and beyond include:

  1. Implementing more diverse judging panels, ideally for all fights, but starting with championship matches if there’s a lack of qualified international judges.
  2. Utilizing consensus judging in cases where one judge disagrees with the others, although this will only be effective if the other judges don’t exhibit the same bias.[ii]
  3. Continuing ongoing training and development for local judges, highlighting the possible ramifications of unconscious bias in the decision-making process.

 

 

Conclusion

As this story develops, it will be interesting to see how it impacts the growing MMA scene in Vietnam and whether it leads to significant changes in the sport’s governance within the country. This incident serves as a reminder of the crucial role that judging plays in combat sports and the need for transparency, diversity, and accountability in the decision-making process.

Implementing international judging panels could be a positive step towards ensuring fair and unbiased outcomes in Vietnamese MMA. In the meantime, Bianka, Kamil, and the entire MMA community eagerly await the VMMAF’s next steps and any potential resolution to this contentious decision, particularly regarding the change of the result to a “No Contest”.

The resolution of this case may also set a precedent for how similar situations are handled in the future. Hopefully, it will lead to more rigorous training for judges, increased transparency in the decision-making process, and perhaps even changes in how fights are scored, thus allowing MMA in Vietnam and globally to continue to develop effectively.

 

Further Reading

You can read more about the fight in Vietnamese here or see the event in its entirety here.

To learn more about traditional Vietnamese Martial Arts, you can pick up my award-winning book “The Martial Arts of Vietnam” from Amazon or YMAA Publishing.

 

 

You can also see a video of my lecture on the evolving Vietnamese MMA scene and local culture at the from the Martial Arts Studies Conference 2024 at the University of Cardiff here:

 

 


[i] Feldman, Todd (2020) “The Way of the Fight: An Analysis of MMA Judging,” Journal of Applied Sport Management: Vol. 12 : Iss. 2.
https://doi.org/10.7290/jasm120205
Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/jasm/vol12/iss2/5

[ii] Berthet, V. (2024). Improving MMA judging with consensus scoring: A Statistical analysis of MMA bouts from 2003 to 2023. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03280. P5.