Scoring rounds can lead to a lot of controversy.. the criteria can be interpreted in different ways and personal preferences of the judges often seem to play a big role in scoring. So let's say we have rounds like described underneath... how would you scrore them? 1 Dominating but getting caught Fighter A is dominating the full round with standup. Not rocking his opponent but simply outstriking / outpointing him. Never the less, Fighter B seems unaffected and manages to hit fighter A with only one good shot at the end of the round, but rocking him with it and almost finishing him... then te bell goes. 2 Takedown versus takedown defence Fighter A is taking fighter B down several times. But at the same time, fighter B is defending just as much takedowns while standing. Also, fighter B manages to stand up after every takedown withing 30 seconds. At the same time, he is taken down within 30 seconds everytime he stand up again. No one is really doing damage, not in the standup, not on the ground. 3 Offensive versus defensive BJJ This round takes place completely on the ground after fighter A pulls guard soon after the round starts. Fighter A and B switch between mount and guard evenly, so no advantage there. The only difference: fighter A keeps trying to submit, but fighter B keeps defending the submissions. No further damage is done. I understand there are a lot of other factors, but this is all just hypothetical. Just simplified versions of rounds that occur in the MMA and have been scored in different ways. I'm curious to see if we all agree or not. As always: English is not my native language so please ignore grammar errors etc.