For those who think the current MMA rules favor the wrestler

[Poatan Power]

Disagree.

Control should score zero points. You should need to open up for strikes and submission attempts. Rabbit punches while holding don't count.

You should have to take risks on the ground to score points. But guys like Merab aren't interested in risks, because then you can lose control.

It's a two way street. The person in the disadvantaged position (O'Malley in this fight) took 0 risks to escape because of the inherent openings it creates for getting struck or submitted. So one guy worked for an advantageous position, one guy succumbed to it, neither one are doing anything that potentially loses ground. In my opinion, the fighter in the disadvantaged position has the responsibility to improve position -- the top fighter has the responsibility to be held to account for the rules of being stood back up.

Not for nothing, getting a takedown and keeping a guy down isn't easy, but playing defense and stalling hoping that the ref stands you up is the easiest thing you can do in fighting or grappling.

Should it get you points? Well, not over damage done. But Merab cooked O'Malley's cardio. Neutralized his offense. Turned him into a turtle that can't get up. Merab certainly won that fight.

He also made it painfully obvious that Sean had no answer to Merab and was incapable or unwilling to create the space/openings necessary to get back to his feet where he wanted the fight without getting finished.

 

[djason1988]

Been grappling for a long time, but there's a difference between a fight and a grappling match, or at least there should be. If you're holding while making no real attempts to do damage or submit, and you're still winning, then the rules need changed to encourage actually fighting.

 

[Fedorgasm]

Imagine an NFL football game that ends with a score of 0-0 and they award the victory to the team that had the higher time of possession.

It's dumb. Neither team scored, it's a draw.

Same thing in MMA. If neither guy gets damaged then it should be a draw.

 

[froggyluv]

No holds barred, no time limits, no judges, no drug tests, bare knuckles, anything goes. The only way to win is by knockout, submission or corner stoppage.

~ Real MMA

 

[Alpha_T83]

It's a two way street. The person in the disadvantaged position (O'Malley in this fight) took 0 risks to escape because of the inherent openings it creates for getting struck or submitted.

What you just described is exactly why MMA judging is so horrendous.

The solution is to score zero points for control. That way you land 1 takedown, maybe you get some points for the takedown, but that's it. And if you manage to hold them down all round, you win the round. BUT if they then take a risk, stand up, and land a few punches, they win the round.

I wish O'Malley had been able to press the attack. If he'd knocked Merab down in the 5th round and avoided getting taken down, having Merab run away all round, I think the 2 judges that scored round 3 for O'Malley would have given him a 10-8 in the 5th. Would have been hilarious as hell to see Merab get a majority draw.

 

[bjjwar]

Merab looked more banged up than Seana and they do only favor control over any kind of damage or sub attempt which is ridiculous scoring a FIGHT!

 

[BoomStronk]

If fighters aren't doing anything on the feet, will the ref put them on the ground?

The rules slightly favor strikers, and I don't even think it's debatable.

Lol, that would be funny. "time! alright fellas. This time it's a warning, but next time I'm taking a point. You gotta work. Now, both of you fellas, lay down and hug and wait for me to say 'go'!"

 

[Iroh]

Kicks and knees to a grounded opponent would change things up a lot.

 

[Doctor Grudge]

One other thing, you're allowed to start grounded in MMA. Some fighters like Jon Jones start crawling.

So, it's not even true that fights start standing. It's optional.

 

[Doctor Grudge]

Imagine an NFL football game that ends with a score of 0-0 and they award the victory to the team that had the higher time of possession.

It's dumb. Neither team scored, it's a draw.

Same thing in MMA. If neither guy gets damaged then it should be a draw.

Yeah, this is a good point actually. The fact that we have the "there has to be a winner" of every round in MMA leads a lot to these non-decisive rounds scoring wins for people.

 

[mister piscadinha]

you guys like to play retard

which part of "laying on top of someone without doing nothing should not score points" dont you guys understant?

if you get somebody down but cant do nothing with it in 30 seconds, you should be stand up

 

[TeenageMutantLesnarTurtle]

I think the rules are fairly balanced really. If you really wanted to give wrestlers/grapplers an advantage the rounds would be longer and headbutts and knees to the head of a grounded opponent would be legal along with more freedom in what you wear so you can get more grip, avoid slick sweat and blood etc.

 

[mister piscadinha]

Growing up wrestling "ride time" accumulated, and points were rewarded.
And for wrestling that's fine, but in MMA control time should only define a round if there's nothing else to score.

Like @Nobru said, damage/meaningful strikes and or subs should be attempted since stand ups are so rare for inactivity nowadays.

What Merab does is play with his food, much like Colby.
They know they have the cardio advantage so they fuckin drown you...yet never go for the kill, even after they've broken you.

I also believe you need to have the skills to get the fuck up, or attempt a sweep.
Sean did fuck all, nor did he look like he had a clue as to what to do in that situation.
He looked like he had never wrestled before.

I would say stand ups for inactivity could fix the issue, but all that's doing is rewarding the guy on bottom for lacking the skills to get the fuck out of there.

Im a huge fan of GNP so guys who are good at wrestling and are shit at it fuckin kill me.
That's MMA though I suppose.
I do wish knees to a grounded opponent would be a thing again, I guess I'll cross my fingers sir.

control time should NEVER decide a round
otherwise things will stay as they are, where a guy can take you down, do absolutely nothing for 5 minutes and half, but win on "control"
using control time is as dumb as using walking forward as a deciding factor on who wins rounds
get ups is not "rewarding the guy on the bottom" is punishing the guy on top for trying to game the system

 

[StonedLemur]

control time should NEVER decide a round
otherwise things will stay as they are, where a guy can take you down, do absolutely nothing for 5 minutes and half, but win on "control"
using control time is as dumb as using walking forward as a deciding factor on who wins rounds
get ups is not "rewarding the guy on the bottom" is punishing the guy on top for trying to game the system

Then maybe these guys are going to have to learn TDD and getting up.

Sean laid there like a Thai hooker and didn't even try to do anything.
That's Merabs fault sir?

 

[empsim]

The scoring does favor grapplers.

If you neutralize someone with grappling while doing zero damage and zero submission attempts, you win. The same does not apply to striking.

 

[Poatan Power]

wn in the 5th round and avoided getting taken down, having Merab run away all round, I think the 2 judges that scored round 3 for O'Malley would have given him a 10-8 in the 5th. Would have been hilar

Well, "octagon control" is really bottom of the totem pole for scoring, it's if all else is equal essentially. I'm not really sure what you're trying to advance here. Surely you don't think Sean did enough to win that fight? I mean, sure, Sean landed a few useful strikes, but Merab certainly dominated the action.

Call it "control," or whatever you will, but asserting your will, your pace, your positioning, etc. on the opponent does have to count for something. Sean got handled that fight, even if he landed a few good shots.

I'm not a fan of someone getting someone down, inside their guard, head down and holding them in place. That doesn't really seem to be what happened.

 

[TheTickG]

They don’t. The rules favour cardio. But they always have.

We can debate about how control time is scored or not scored, but keep in mind:

The fight has a mandatory stand up to start each round. Not only that, but if the wrestler still has his opponent pinned or grounded at the end of the round, he doesn't get to keep that position and that momentum, going into the next round.

The bottom line is MMA fighters need to learn how to deal with a wrestling/grappling threat, just like the successful wrestlers learned how to deal with the striking and the submission grappling. It goes both ways.

You could add that damage is the most important criteria for judging. In recent years, Val won a decision while being taken down repeatedly and won a decision by doing the takedowns.

 

[Lee Danger]

Everyone likes to say that the current crop of sticky wrestlers "exploit the Unified Rules" but they never manage to explain how or why.

 

[CorninginChristianburg]

I agree that rules don't favor the wrestler.

BUT START NOVEMBER 1ST

Things will get so much better with 12-6 elbows.

 

[StonedLemur]

TS argument is that rounds start on the feet. A decent wrestler can change that in about 3 seconds, followed by 4:57 of blanket humping.

Then maybe the guy on the grounds needs to learn how to stop takedowns, or learn bow to fight off his back...maybe a sweep attempt?

The guy on top earned that position, the guy on the bottom has to do something about it.
Im no fan of LNP trust me but you can't blame a guy for staying where hes best sir.