On Tuesday, the state of Colorado passed something that many fans and journalists have been calling for in combat sports for years: open scoring. Colorado isn’t the first state to allow for open scoring in combat sports, as Kansas beat them to the punch last year. But we’re talking about different leagues here – while Kansas has hosted just one UFC event ever, Colorado has hosted 10, including the very first back in 1993.

Judges and scorecards weren’t an issue back when the UFC was born in Denver’s McNichols Arena 28 years ago. But Denver has remained a place the UFC likes to go, when it can. And Colorado has expressed interest in changing the way the entire sport works.

That’s in more respect than one. The Colorado State Boxing Commission, which sanctions MMA as well, also voted recently to allow ONE’s ruleset in MMA bouts, with grounded knees to the head legalized. Both of these rule changes are optional, meaning the UFC doesn’t have to utilize grounded knees or open scoring if it’s to come to Denver in the future. But it should.

The grounded knee debate is one for another time, and has raged for years. I think it makes for a better product and reduces a lot of fuckery. But I think it’s unambiguous that open scoring – where fighters, coaches and fans are allowed to see the judges’ scorecards in real time after each round – makes for a much healthier, fairer sport. I hope this is a development that lights that debate up again.

Combat sports are the only sports where you don’t know where you stand until the end. Imagine a baseball player hitting a home run in the bottom of the ninth inning, the crowd cheering raucously thinking that he’s just won the game, only for him to touch home plate and learn that they’re still losing 5-4. There’s a reason this shit doesn’t happen anywhere else!

Why shouldn’t a fighter be able to know where they stand as the fight progresses, and be allowed to adjust accordingly? How many fighters have been screwed over by bad corner advice, stemming directly from not knowing the score? We just saw an example last week: flyweight Tim Elliott played the third round safe against Matheus Nicolau, after coach James Krause told him he was up two rounds. Krause was wrong, and Elliott lost.

I’ve never seen a convincing argument in favor of closed scoring. Think that fighters knowing they’re up two rounds will lead to passivity? This happens anyway, even when fighters don’t know for a fact – if you’re especially worried, implement the yellow card system that ONE adapted from Pride. And on the flipside, fighters who know they’re down deserve the chance to leave it all out there and turn the tide. That just adds to the drama. Like a trailing football team throwing the ball more, or a losing basketball team pushing the pace and shooting more 3-pointers, a fighter with their back against the wall produces more action and more excitement.

And it’s the least you can do when the judging is going to be this bad. MMA judging has reached a crisis point in recent years – it seems we’ve achieved critical mass in robberies and bad decisions. Colorado has mandated continuing education for combat sports judges, which I think is a nice move, though I’m doubtful of the effect it will have. But at the very least, open scoring is a gesture of fairness towards the fighters so often getting screwed.

At least a fighter can be alerted that a robbery is incoming, or that things are closer than they appear, and do what they have to. The fight game is unlike any other, mostly for worse. Open scoring is just one way to make it a little bit fairer and a little bit better – and we should hope that this is just the very first tiny step towards making it a standard.