I haven't even watched the fight. But just reading his intro into his nonexistant explanation of what he judged the fight on was like watching an episode of the twilight zone. i think this verifies, that even more than the refs, the judges need to be slected more carefully by the athletic commission. Anyone know the athletic commissions guidelines for selecting refs? Also wondering if maybe judges should have to present a short summary of their reason for judging the fight the way they did after the conslusion of the results? Only way of tracking inconsistent reasoning and filtering those people out.