Media Aljo explains why fighters shouldn't get rewarded points for takedown defense

[NoBiasJustMMA]

I'm giving an argument for what I think should be the case, not what is the case according to the ruleeset now. You may disagree but a lot of people also seem to agree with me, whatever

You haven't thought your suggestion through, if they make the changes you want MMA fighters will be even more timid cause if their offensive grappling attempts fail their opponent is winning which is retarded.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Is a reversal offensive or defensive though.... Or both?

A reversal is an offensive move.

 

[sdpdude9]

It shouldn't be about scoring the attempt or the defense, but scoring what happens after the attempt. A takedown is basically a setup, you don't score setups, you score what happens after.

The attempt is only worth more that defending an attempt due to the octagon control and aggression criteria as it should be. Any moderately successful offense back quickly renders it meaningless. Calling attempts and defending equal/neutral or god forbid rewarding the defender only serves to discourage offensive maneuvers and encourage playing it safe.

 

[Safton]

Is a reversal offensive or defensive though.... Or both?

I personally consider it a bit of both. It's effectively a counter-action that actively has the ability to compromise the opponent rather than simply nullifying what they're doing to you. Sort of like the grappling equivalent of landing a check hook or intercepting elbow on an opponent charging you winging punches rather than merely parrying or slipping.

The Rules name reversals as an example of Effective Grappling, so they don't seem to consider them purely defensive either for what it's worth.

 

[mmainvestigations]

You haven't thought your suggestion through, if they make the changes you want MMA fighters will be even more timid cause if their offensive grappling attempts fail their opponent is winning which is retarded.

When you say fail, you mean they secure the takedown but they fail to advance or do damage ? In that case, no they wouldn't necessarily be losing, it would still be even since they didn't do any damage. Their opponent may do pitter patter strikes back against them in this situation but those don't count for much, so again, I don't see how they would be losing just because they aren't scoring for a takedown.

If they fail at securing the takedown it would also still be even.

And yes, the effect of this would be to dissuade fighters from attempting takedowns just for the sake of takedowns with no damage.

 

[killakillakilla]

I think it depends. If one fighter is spamming td attempts all fight and the other is successfully defending one after another then yes, I think the defending fighter should get points for defending the tds. This isn’t basketball, this is fighting, and the analogy comparing fighting to other sports is rarely a fair analogy.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

I think it depends. If one fighter is spamming td attempts all fight and the other is successfully defending one after another then yes, I think the defending fighter should get points for defending the tds. This isn’t basketball, this is fighting, and the analogy comparing fighting to other sports is rarely a fair analogy.

So you would score the fight in favor of the guy who isn't attempting any offense? Do you see how that doesn't make sense?

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

When you say fail, you mean they secure the takedown but they fail to advance or do damage ? In that case, no they wouldn't necessarily be losing, it would still be even since they didn't do any damage. Their opponent may do pitter patter strikes back against them in this situation but those don't count for much, so again, I don't see how they would be losing just because they aren't scoring for a takedown.

If they fail at securing the takedown it would also still be even.

And yes, the effect of this would be to dissuade fighters from attempting takedowns just for the sake of takedowns with no damage.

They fail to get a takedown. Scoring defense is retarded an I'll give you and example to show what I mean. Let's say 2 people fight and neither have any strike attempts or sub attempts but one goes for 5 takedowns a round but doesn't get them, nothing else happens. Do you score the fight for the guy who attempted offense or the guy who didn't attempt any offense?

If you score defense you are going to get more boring fights because if you're grappling attempts fail you are all of a sudden losing, that's stupid and would cause fights to be way more boring.

 

[Taric]

Offense scores you points in all sports, regardless of the sport
Defense prevents your opponent for scoring points in all sports, regardless of the sport

... this is universal in all individual and team sports, and honestly you need to be a bit of a dimwit to not comprehend it.

 

[trenton123]

The attempt is only worth more that defending an attempt due to the octagon control and aggression criteria as it should be. Any moderately successful offense back quickly renders it meaningless. Calling attempts and defending equal/neutral or god forbid rewarding the defender only serves to discourage offensive maneuvers and encourage playing it safe.

All I'm saying is that, for me, Merab won because he won the striking exchanges. He used his wrestling to help win the striking but he didn't really out grapple Yan.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

It would be like getting points for not getting hit. The reward is not getting hit. You don’t score on defense in any other sport. You are preventing the other team from scoring so you can get your own offense in.

Aljo is correct.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

he’s right. also the guy attempting the takedown and failing shouldn’t get any points either. if the defender can’t turn his defense into offense though, i understand edging the exchange to the guy who at least attempted offense.

 

[Poatan Power]

Idk about "get points," but, if you defend a high percentage of takedowns, you're the one effectively grappling (potentially).

It would be like getting points for not getting hit. The reward is not getting hit. You don’t score on defense in any other sport. You are preventing the other team from scoring so you can get your own offense in.

Aljo is correct.

But this isn't a tournament. Nobody is "getting points." If you make your opponent miss, you're effectively striking. Not sure why this would be any different

 

[mmainvestigations]

They fail to get a takedown. Scoring defense is retarded an I'll give you and example to show what I mean. Let's say 2 people fight and neither have any strike attempts or sub attempts but one goes for 5 takedowns a round but doesn't get them, nothing else happens. Do you score the fight for the guy who attempted offense or the guy who didn't attempt any offense?

If you score defense you are going to get more boring fights because if you're grappling attempts fail you are all of a sudden losing, that's stupid and would cause fights to be way more boring.

I'm not advocating for scoring defense. I'm saying takedowns shouldn't count as offense without damage or sub attempts.

So instead of scoring TDS for points or scoring defense for points, I'm saying neither should get points. Damage and/or sub attempts should be scored, positional actions like takedowns shouldn't be scored.

This is MMA, the goal is to finish the fight, it's not wrestling where you should score for taking someone's back or whatever.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

I'm not advocating for scoring defense. I'm saying takedowns shouldn't count as offense without damage or sub attempts.

So instead of scoring TDS for points or scoring defense for points, I'm saying neither should get points. Damage and/or sub attempts should be scored, positional actions like takedowns shouldn't be scored.

This is MMA, the goal is to finish the fight, it's not wrestling where you should score for taking someone's back or whatever.

They do and should count as offense, takedowns are effective grappling. You used grappling to put your opponent in a disadvantageous position, not scoring that makes zero sense. Takedowns alone don't score much but they do score and should score.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

All I'm saying is that, for me, Merab won because he won the striking exchanges. He used his wrestling to help win the striking but he didn't really out grapple Yan.

He outgrappled and out struck Yan.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

They do and should count as offense, takedowns are effective grappling. You used grappling to put your opponent in a disadvantageous position, not scoring that makes zero sense. Takedowns alone don't score much but they do score and should score.

yes and no. if the offensive fighter can’t make that position disadvantageous, it shouldn’t count as such. basically if they get on top and do nothing with it, and get torn open with elbows and punches from the bottom fighter, the bottom fighter is winning that position.

 

[sdpdude9]

he’s right. also the guy attempting the takedown and failing shouldn’t get any points either. if the defender can’t turn his defense into offense though, i understand edging the exchange to the guy who at least attempted offense.

This is pretty much it. Failed offense is worth almost nothing but should be worth more than defense. Look at it in striking, if one guy is throwing punches but not landing while the other guy just dodges/blocks the puncher should be given the edge. Any effective offense back nullifies it quickly though.

 

[mmainvestigations]

They do and should count as offense, takedowns are effective grappling. You used grappling to put your opponent in a disadvantageous position, not scoring that makes zero sense. Takedowns alone don't score much but they do score and should score.

You're entitled to your opinion.

 

[lepsahekim]

Fight starts standing, does a striker automatically get positional control at the start of a fight?

If the fight started on the ground, then sure, give the guy positional control for standing up.

Don’t be an idiot. Neither has positional control at the start, it’s judged during the fight like every other criteria.