Man.. Jose Aldo was dry humped last night..

[Gilday]

Well that's not true. "octagon control is the third tier of scoring. That's just commanding the center. Grappling control time is part of "effective grappling." Granted, it should be scored at the lowest rate on the first tier, but it is scored on that tier right alongside striking.

Straight from the Unified Rules itself:

Effective grappling is judged by considering the amount of successful executions of a legal takedown and reversals. Examples of factors to consider are take downs from standing position to mount position, passing the guard to mount position, and bottom position fighters using an active threatening guard.

Judges shall use a sliding scale and recognize the length of time the fighters are either standing or on the ground, as follows:
i) If the mixed martial artists spent a majority of a round on the canvas, then:
a. Effective grappling is weighed first; and
b. Effective striking is then weighed

ii) If the mixed martial artists spent a majority of a round standing, then:
a. Effective striking is weighed first; and
b. Effective grappling is then weighed

There were zero successful takedowns, reversals or transitions on the ground. Therefore there was zero effective grappling from either fighter.
Not a single second of that fight was spent of the canvas, therefore effective striking is to be prioritised over effective grappling.

 

[NicholasJBasile]

Not particularly related to the thread, but Aldo looked off last night imo. I'm not sure he trained too hard for the fight.

 

[Gilday]

How do you define aggression? One can argue that grappling and clinching is a form of aggression. I would consider Merab's style of fighting is very aggresive.

Well interestingly in responding to someone else I looked up the actual unified rules, and the only mention it makes of aggressiveness being scored is "Effective aggressiveness means moving forward and landing a legal strike" which is actually surprising to me, because I would agree with you.

For me personally, I think aggressiveness means pushing the action in a way to implement effective striking or grappling. Someone like Merab who takes centre octagon and shoots in should absolutely be considered aggressive, even if the damage isn't always there. But according to the rules it's purely about striking, which should really be changed to encompass grappling too.

 

[IDGETKTFO]

Well interestingly in responding to someone else I looked up the actual unified rules, and the only mention it makes of aggressiveness being scored is "Effective aggressiveness means moving forward and landing a legal strike" which is actually surprising to me, because I would agree with you.

For me personally, I think aggressiveness means pushing the action in a way to implement effective striking or grappling. Someone like Merab who takes centre octagon and shoots in should absolutely be considered aggressive, even if the damage isn't always there. But according to the rules it's purely about striking, which should really be changed to encompass grappling too.

It absolutely should. Fights have been stopped when strikers throw strikes even when they are being blocked. One could argue if you are throwing punches and not landing, that should not win a fight.

 

[Gilday]

It absolutely should. Fights have been stopped when strikers throw strikes even when they are being blocked. One could argue if you are throwing punches and not landing, that should not win a fight.

Completely agree, for the past couple of months especially I'm convinced that the UFC stats that pop up during the fights are counting blocked or whiffed shots as landed. Looking over the scoring criteria it's actually crazy how subjective the whole thing is, there's nothing that outlines how I should compare a stiff 1 2 compared to a solid left hook. If a fighter gets cut open badly by an elbow, under damaged based criteria, do I score that higher than a knockdown?

The whole thing needs to be reworked IMO.

 

[7 others]

I get the argument for disliking when fighters clinch or take their opponents down and just lay on them

But why not look at it at, their opponents not being able to prevent these? Prevent the clinch, improve take down defense etc

If they can't prevent.. then it's time for them to retire or change sports

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Aldo should have won rounds 2 and 3. He landed more strikes holding someone against the cage shouldn't count more than more strikes and damage.

 

[mjoln]

When your goblin deck is countered by blue control

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Aldo won, the whole thing was beyond ridiculous.

Yeah, Aldo won rounds 2 and 3, landed more shots and did more damage. Not sure why holding someone against the cage somehow counts more than strikes landed and damage done.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Im not defending poor judging. Hosay failed to stop Bautista from hugging him. Judges award for octagon control, and thats what he did. He controlled Hosay.

Octagon control isn't supposed to count more than strikes landed and damage done.

 

[Slapjit]

Let me at him.

I'll teach u di 1 count no measure fam Marcus Batista nuh seen ting comin'

Enjoy di money broski

 

[Söze Aldo]

I get the argument for disliking when fighters clinch or take their opponents down and just lay on them

But why not look at it at, their opponents not being able to prevent these? Prevent the clinch, improve take down defense etc

If they can't prevent.. then it's time for them to retire or change sports

Aldo was able to shut down every take down attempt of Bautista, Bautista wanted to take him down, he couldn't and settled for rubbing up against him on the cage, which should count for nothing as it lead nowhere.

This is different then successful ground grappling. Wall and stall is purely a phenomena of the UFC deciding to use a cage as their fight platform.

 

[fedoriswar37]

Never thought aldo would have a shittier result then moraes

 

[biscuitsbrah]

Except volk and merab actually beat Aldo, and in those clinch positions they landed strikes, merab landed 52 strikes to Aldo’s 13 in the 3rd round for example, Bautista landed 19 to Aldo’s 20, and Aldo won the significant strikes with 17 to 10

Ok so he got robbed or it was a close decision. The approach is what I was getting at, not the decision which is out of the fighters hands

 

[7 others]

Aldo was able to shut down every take down attempt of Bautista, Bautista wanted to take him down, he couldn't and settled for rubbing up against him on the cage, which should count for nothing as it lead nowhere.

This is different then successful ground grappling. Wall and stall is purely a phenomena of the UFC deciding to use a cage as their fight platform.

But why did Aldo let Mario clinch him repeatedly? Is he unable to break free?

 

[maximus__]

Well that's not true. "octagon control is the third tier of scoring. That's just commanding the center. Grappling control time is part of "effective grappling." Granted, it should be scored at the lowest rate on the first tier, but it is scored on that tier right alongside striking.

No it isn't. Effective grappling doesn't include control time, the scoring criteria specifically mentions this and treats it as it's own criteria. The rules state that the person landing the offence is winning regardless of the position.

ABC Introduces MMA “Scoring Ladder”

How do you score an MMA bout? The Association of Boxing Commissions and Combative Sports rules subcommittee has created a visual aid called the MMA “scoring ladder” to help make it easi…

combatsportslaw.com

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

“Aggressively making attempts to finish the fight. The key term is ‘effective’. Chasing after an opponent with no effective result or impact should not render in the judges’ assessments.” Effective Aggressiveness is only to be assessed if Effective Striking/Grappling is 100% equal for both competitors.

Fighting Area Control

“Fighting area control is assessed by determining who is dictating the pace, place and position of the match.” Fighting Area Control” shall only to be assessed if Effective Striking/Grappling and Effective Aggressiveness is 100% equal for both competitors. This will be assessed very rarely.

Aldo was the one landing all the meaningful offence in round 2-3, therefore he won the fight. 29-28. You can't actually give the 3rd to Bautista unless you believe the striking was equal because he didn't land any meaningful offence from the clinch.

Clear 2,3 for Aldo based off the scoring.

 

[maximus__]

But why did Aldo let Mario clinch him repeatedly? Is he unable to break free?

He did break free during the fight and landed offence when it wasn't there. That's why he should have won that fight.

 

[markantony20]

Remember when everyone hated Volk for beating Aldo in identical fashion?

Volk has had multiple fights that made fans not like him come to think of it.

He had an uphill battle for fan approval.

 

[Iroh]

Thank Merab for setting this trend.

 

[13Seconds]

Thank Merab for setting this trend.

Volk!