Is there a solution to the problem of Holding Someone against the cage to win?

[Tweak896]

On the feet, the fighter backing up is losing. On the ground the bottom position fighter is losing. On the cage the person with the back to cage is losing. These are positional points that you have to give credit for.

I won't say stalling on cage matches are my favorite, but you can't discount position because it's boring. Fighters need to reverse. Most of the time strikers will back up to cage to help them with their TTD, like Anderson Silva did, but if you don't give them hell from there and get held then you're losing the fight. It becomes a stall when the defending fighter doesn't want to risk advancement.

 

[theincognito]

Barbed wire fence

 

[Fahcough]

Every section should have lock pin release. After 10 seconds, pull the pins and let both of them fall off the octagon. Close wall and restart them standing.

 

[Mentallooser]

Up to the ref and the fighters. Not much else needs to be done

 

[aerius]

And when one guy double legs the other onto the cement beyond the mat?

Clearly, we need a moat filled with alligators around the fighting platform.

 

[skobydog]

Barbed wire fencing

 

[Krimzon]

assuming striking is even, score it 10-10.

For the record, im totally for 'cage controlling' as long as a controller displays sustained aggression, say 5 toe stomps/minute, that's enough to win via cage control to me

Fighting like the objective of the fight is to hold your opponent is a 10 10 to me. Feels more like a neutralization than fighting to me. Most fans arent there to see the best guy at neutralizing the fight. Alot of dudes will disagree with my views, i think it comes down to what one considers to be a fight. More activity is good for a spectator sport.

I for one, was really happy to see Tony get the decision over Castillo by out working Castillo even though Castillo was racking up 'octagon control time', and even though in prison Castillo would be considered the winner.

 

[maximus__]

The issue being that controlling someone against the cage is winning the fight because you are imposing your will on the other person.

he doesn’t want to be held against the cage. You have the ability to hold him there.

So you have to be the winner of the round.

Fight back if you can.

Controlling a killer like Sandhagen or Masvidal in Usman 1, or any other fight is a feat.

Even if there’s no damage. Imposing yo ur will is winning.

I don’t know if it proves who the better fighter is though.

Is there a solution to this?

Breaking them up or standing them up is not cool as it interrupts the natural flow of the fight.

Award whoever is landing the offence with the points. You hold me against the cage, but I am landing punches, knees etc and I should still win. This should also apply off the back. Control should not score at all unless it involves strikes, subs or similar.

 

[kuroro]

he doesn’t want to be held against the cage. You have the ability to hold him there.

Or... you DON'T have the ability to stand and fight him so you hold him against the cage. Same principle as MacNuggets running circles around Diaz. It's unreasonably difficult to fight someone who refuses to engage and they shouldn't be rewarded for it.

 

[kuroro]

If you are in a position you don't want to be in, do something to change the situation.

If you won't fight in a fight then don't fight.