Performance Evaluation and Favoritism

Abstract

This article investigates various types of bias and favoritism that may be present in the performance evaluations of state-licensed and state-selected judges for mixed martial arts (MMA) events. Using detailed fighter performance statistics collected from after-the-fact video analysis, I investigate live, round-by-round judging decisions for major MMA events held in Nevada and California from 2001 to 2012. Findings do not support hypotheses that judge favor titleholders or disfavor fighters given point deductions but do support bias toward larger betting favorites, those with insurmountable leads, and the fighter who won the previous round. Findings provide nonexperimental support for possible biases in a relatively opaque decision environment involving substantial complexity. The results also have strategic implications for MMA fighters and coaches as well as certified judge trainers the athletic commissions that license and oversee the judges.