How to make MMA a more convincing "simulation" of a real fight (damage > everything else) ?

[JBJ was here]

I guarantee you Dricus had a sore head at the end of all that. It might not have looked like much but those blows (big and small) added up. I think the cumulative damage Khamzat inflicted, is being criminally overlooked.

The shots Khamzat threw were mostly short, weak punches, in MMA gloves, to the skull, with DDP's head firmly tucked so that there was no chance of his neck snapping. They probably did more damage to Khamzat's hands than to DDP. The only net-damaging shots he landed of any significance were the few occassions where he remembered that you can throw elbows from the crucifix.

Fortunately for Khamzat, damage you do to yourself does not count in your opponent's favor.

 

[jeff7b9]

First of all: apologies if my reply upset you.

You asked a question, I answered it with an actual solution (one of the only posts actually offering solutions to the problem and not just complaining) and you then came at me with a personal attack, that's why I responded as such.

I get it. I’m a lower belt.

i dont care about your belt color.

I have been judging based on the content of your posts all along.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean I’m an idiot,

not necessarily but I don't think we should rule anything out

only that I’ve posted less.
Just to be clear, and since I already watch boxing and KB, the MMA fighters I’ve enjoyed the most are JJ, Fedor, Khabib, GSP, and Islam. So no, I don’t have anything against wrestling/grappling.

Ok

I just think the UFC has absolute control over its rules:

They don't.

The UFC is a combat sport, mixed martial arts, which in the US and most countries means that they need to be sanctioned & licensed, which is a responsibility that usually gets handled by athletics commissions and in some cases boxing commissions (different states in the US have different governing bodies set up)

As such they are licensed based on the Unified Rules of MMA.
For any realistic change to take place these rules would have to be updated.

not over the referees and judges, but definitely over its criteria. And personally, and I don’t think I’m the only one, I’d like them to enforce an offensive obligation.
Of course, as I’ve already explained, this applies to all fight scenarios: a stinker between two point-fighting strikers would also be penalized.

You aren't really offering anything in the way of solutions.

that is a pet peeve of mine.


You are basically complaining :
"why dont the fights happen the way i want them to happen?"

without offering any sort of realistic solution of how to make that happen.

The fighter being dominated in the clinch or on the ground should also be constantly trying to reverse the situation and/or inflict damage from his position.
That offense and defense are interconnected is obvious: if the fighter on his back has to look for offense, he creates openings for the GnP or finish of the fighter in top control.
And if the fighter in control has to look for the finish or GnP, he creates opportunities for scrambles or escapes for the fighter being dominated.

Currently, the rules try to prevent passivity. Resetting the fight on the feet is one example, and Khamzat/DDP is in turn an example of how this measure doesn’t work if one of the fighters can return the fight to the ground at will.
Other sports (basketball, handball, football...) not only prevent passivity, they don’t allow it and penalize it as a foul. They force constant offense.
I know they’re team sports, but for this particular case the analogy holds.

Wouldn’t we prefer a UFC where offense (the pursuit of causing damage) was an imperative?

 

[Rubios]

^
"You aren't really offering anything in the way of solutions."

Hi. Don’t the last paragraphs you quote, in a way, propose a solution?
Ok, rather a new premise or paradigm shift.

The main idea is to penalize (and not only prevent/try to stop) passivity, forcing continuous offensive activity.

Such a penalty could be point deductions and a foul system in which, after three infractions (i.e.,), the fighter is disqualified.
Being disqualified also means losing completely or seeing their purse significantly reduced.

Point deductions alone are not, per se, a solution because DDP already knew he was far behind on the scorecards.

These penalties apply to any scenario of the fight: striking, clinch, ground.

Is this starting to look like a proposal?

 

[Rubios]

I think we need some sort of impetus for the person in control to actually deal damage. In the end, it's a fight, not a game. At the least, we try to market it as such, and that's what people pay to see.

A "fight" within a reasonably safe frame, but I agree with you 100%.

(OP) I advocate for fighters to compete more often, so this thread is not about fighters dealing with more damage or fights being more violent per se.
It would (should) increase the ratio of finishes and stoppages, though.

 

[empsim]

The closest to seeing somewhat decent fighters (obviously not good enough to go pro) fighting for real is King of the Streets.

It's only a matter of time before someone dies when they hit their head on the concrete though. Apparently biting is also allowed which just shows how little the organizers care about safety. Human bites are among the most dangerous in terms of infection risk.

 

[Rubios]

I don’t mean to sound like a douche, but this thread isn’t about that.
King of the Streets is a freak sideshow, I agree 100%
I don’t want fights to be more violent or for fighters to take more damage per se.
Just offense as an imperative, penalizing stalling -striking, clinch, ground- as an infraction.

I think this post explains it better than the OP:

Post in thread 'How to make MMA a more convincing "simulation" of a real fight (damage > everything else) ?'

Sep 11, 2025

Who gives a fuck if I have "tasted elbows" ?

Retard take because you can't formulate an intelligent argument on the topic your stupid ass brought up.

You are as dumb as I thought you were. Got it.

First of all: apologies if my reply upset you.

I get it. I’m a lower belt. But that doesn’t necessarily mean I’m an idiot, only that I’ve posted less.
Just to be clear, and since I already watch boxing and KB, the MMA fighters I’ve enjoyed the most are JJ, Fedor, Khabib, GSP, and Islam. So no, I don’t have anything against wrestling/grappling.

I just think the UFC has absolute...

• Rubios

• 

 

[Koro_11]

Go to youtube, search KOTS.

 

[Rubios]

Go to youtube, search KOTS.

See the post just above yours = )

This isn’t a criticism, just an observation: does this forum have a tendency to only read the titles, maybe?