How did you score Gamrot vs Tsarukyan?

[Mmmmmmma1234]

None of that happened how you are saying. Arman actually was on top of Gamrot with him doing his best sterling impression post knockdown. He did successfully wrestle up where they returned to the feet where he appeared to have recovered.

They they continued striking for a period before Gamrot secured a rear body lock and a nice takedown. Arman worked to the cage and took some light shots to the legs as he stood up. Arman was then returned to the mat and worked his way back up again. Gamrot got a single hook both times. Gamrot dragged him to the mat where we got some actual back control. Arman leg was under him and Gamrot threatened a one arm rear naked over Armans chin that was defended.

None of that equals the offence landed (including a knockdown) by Arman. Scoring criteria says Gamrot loses that round. 16-13 sig strikes with most of Arman's being big shots on the feet and a knockdown. Every argument for Gamrot is actually an argument for Arman to win the round.
1.5 mins control time does not beat 3.5 mins striking with a knockdown and massive strike differential until Gamrot landed knees against the cage.
A knockdown beats a one arm rear naked that was defended. Gamrot was face down under Arman. Arman was defending fine and the fight was no where near being stopped.
Gamrot most dangerous moment was when he had Armans leg trapped under him, you believe the knockdown counts less because Gamrot was on one foot.

It doesn't matter if Arman had his back taken at the bell. That is irrelevant or does a single second of the fight now count more because of when it happened?
Your argument contradicts itself and goes against how MMA is scored. Grappling only scores when it leads to fight ending moments within a fight. Knockdowns count as acute impact and score highly.

Arman should have won this round and the fight because all judges scored it the wrong way. I guarantee if the sequence of the round had been switched with gamrot winning the first 1;30 and Arman doing exactly what he did in the last 3;30, it would have been scored the other way. Judges just got it wrong as per the current scoring criteria.

You don't seem to understand thisisn't boxing any knockdown = / = winning.


Effective Striking/Grappling shall be considered the first priority of round assessments. Effective
Aggressiveness is a „Plan B‟ and should not be considered unless the judge does not see ANY
advantage in the Effective Striking/Grappling realm. Cage/Ring Control („Plan C‟) should only be
needed when ALL other criteria are 100% even for both competitors. This will be an extremely
rare occurrence.
PRIORITIZED CRITERIA:
Effective Striking/Grappling
“Legal blows that have immediate or cumulative impact with the potential to contribute towards
the end of the match with the IMMEDIATE weighing in more heavily than the cumulative impact.
Successful execution of takedowns, submission attempts, reversals and the achievement of
advantageous positions that produce immediate or cumulative impact with the potential to
contribute to the end of the match, with the IMMEDIATE weighing more heavily than the
cumulative impact.” It shall be noted that a successful takedown is not merely a changing of
position, but the establishment of an attack from the use of the takedown. Top and bottom
position fighters are assessed more on the impactful/effective result of their actions, more so
than their position. This criterion will be the deciding factor in a high majority of decisions when
scoring a round. The next two criteria must be treated as a backup and used ONLY when
Effective Striking/Grappling is 100% equal for the round.
Effective Aggressiveness.

Is how mma judges and knowledgeable fans should score. Effective grappling is right there at the top along with striking. There was nothing with a immediate impact on either side. The knockdown punch while a great cumulative shot wasn't close to putting Gamrot out or even stunning him beyond him going down, just like Gamrot attempts at choking were not immediate because they were not close.
Cumulative impact next: Arman's 16 strikes, Gamrot has 13 strikes and effective grappling with 2 choke attempts and never loosing an advantageous position for 1/3 of the round, his grappling did more damage to Arman's cardio then those 3 strikes can offset. Winner Gamrot.

Do read how there's nothing like what you believe in the wording for a knockdown.
To go back to your max/volk argument max also won because of cumulative impact not immediate impact as well because his knockdown also didn't do much.

 

[Uber_Noober]

Gamrot 1, 2, 5

 

[maximus__]

You don't seem to understand thisisn't boxing any knockdown = / = winning.


Effective Striking/Grappling shall be considered the first priority of round assessments. Effective
Aggressiveness is a „Plan B‟ and should not be considered unless the judge does not see ANY
advantage in the Effective Striking/Grappling realm. Cage/Ring Control („Plan C‟) should only be
needed when ALL other criteria are 100% even for both competitors. This will be an extremely
rare occurrence.
PRIORITIZED CRITERIA:
Effective Striking/Grappling
“Legal blows that have immediate or cumulative impact with the potential to contribute towards
the end of the match with the IMMEDIATE weighing in more heavily than the cumulative impact.
Successful execution of takedowns, submission attempts, reversals and the achievement of
advantageous positions that produce immediate or cumulative impact with the potential to
contribute to the end of the match, with the IMMEDIATE weighing more heavily than the
cumulative impact.” It shall be noted that a successful takedown is not merely a changing of
position, but the establishment of an attack from the use of the takedown. Top and bottom
position fighters are assessed more on the impactful/effective result of their actions, more so
than their position. This criterion will be the deciding factor in a high majority of decisions when
scoring a round. The next two criteria must be treated as a backup and used ONLY when
Effective Striking/Grappling is 100% equal for the round.
Effective Aggressiveness.

Is how mma judges and knowledgeable fans should score. Effective grappling is right there at the top along with striking. There was nothing with a immediate impact on either side. The knockdown punch while a great cumulative shot wasn't close to putting Gamrot out or even stunning him beyond him going down, just like Gamrot attempts at choking were not immediate because they were not close.
Cumulative impact next: Arman's 16 strikes, Gamrot has 13 strikes and effective grappling with 2 choke attempts and never loosing an advantageous position for 1/3 of the round, his grappling did more damage to Arman's cardio then those 3 strikes can offset. Winner Gamrot.

Do read how there's nothing like what you believe in the wording for a knockdown.
To go back to your max/volk argument max also won because of cumulative impact not immediate impact as well because his knockdown also didn't do much.

Your arguing against your own position again. It's in the wording above. The grappling does not score unless it leads to offence.
Under the very scoring criteria you posted only one sequence within that fight was a significant moment for Gamrot. You keep saying I think knockdown equals win, I don't. I think knockdown equals win in this round because it was so close.

Gamrot landed two takedowns that Arman got up from with no offence being thrown. Most of the control time was against the cage. He gets the last takedown and has some more offence towards the end of that sequence. The only sequence were Gamrot should have scored is when he had the one arm rear naked. The rest was just control time. You are arguing to decide the roundoff control time and a single low percentage sub that was easily defended. I am saying that a knockdown in a round that was so close, should decide the round. Arman landed the more effective offence throughout that entire round and was closest to finishing the fight. Gamrot just had some success towards the end.

Whole different conversation if Gamrot is landing brutal ground and pound that last minute, but instead he just eventually took the back and threw up a low percentage sub. Knockdown should beat that everytime under the sscoring criteria.