Call it the 120 rule (or when a bad-decision is actually a GOOD decision)

[Gunny]

I've been noticing something more and more frequently in MMA scoring and it happened twice last night. We all wish that damage was a criteria in MMA scoring and all see problems with the ten point must system. We also recognize that there are far too many bad decisions rendered. That said, I've been noticing more and more of a certain kind of bad decision that you'll never hear me complain about.

It happens when a point fighter, who otherwise should have won on the cards, takes a great deal of damage in an early/mid-round. When this happens, it seems to sway the judges against his point fighting style in later rounds. According to how TD's and ground control are usually scored, our point fighter should have taken more rounds than his opponent but having absorbed significant punishment in an earlier round, his TD's are scored as less valuable in later rounds. Happened with Mo/Page and Chandler/Brooks last night and, I have to say, it's a development in MMA scoring that I really like!

 

[Zarathustra]

Yeah, it's definitely a trend, but it's one I don't like. Mainly because "damage" is usually defined as having a marked up face rather than actually meaningful damage.

 

[ligthandshadow]

Damage is an interesting one to score, I've always interpreted it as creating the effect of diminished performance in your opponent.

For example, if you land body shots and they visibly slow from internal injuries... they are being damaged.

If you've landed strikes to their eyes and they can no longer see from the outside (vision impairment) then they have been damaged.

Cosmetic damage that doesn't affect performance, well, I don't count as much.
I may count strikes landed, but as far as damage I look at what has changed in a fighter due to the punishment they have received.

 

[Gunny]

Yeah, it's definitely a trend, but it's one I don't like. Mainly because "damage" is usually defined as having a marked up face rather than actually meaningful damage.

I don't deny that the criteria could use clarification and refinement but, even in this currently unauthorized state, if it causes fighters to rethink the strategy of riding out a boring decision with TDs then I'm all in favor.

 

[Gunny]

Damage is an interesting one to score, I've always interpreted it as creating the effect of diminished performance in your opponent.

For example, if you land body shots and they visibly slow from internal injuries... they are being damaged.

If you've landed strikes to their eyes and they can no longer see from the outside (vision impairment) then they have been damaged.

Cosmetic damage that doesn't affect performance, well, I don't count as much.
I may count strikes landed, but as far as damage I look at what has changed in a fighter due to the punishment they have received.

Absolutely true. Same goes for leg kicks. Depending on the shorts you may see zero cosmetic damage but we've all seen what they can do to a fighter's mobility