Opinion: Takedowns/Grappling Scoring needs to be changed

[markg171]

It means nothing in a fight if you can't capitalize on it.

Do you feel that way about punches that are successfully landed?

 

[Regal Boy]

We all love the Just Bleed fights, but this is such a ridiculous notion. For every takedown landed there by generally must've been a takedown defence that failed. The guy didn't take himself down unless he pulled guard. So how the fuck is it correct to say that a takedown shouldn't be scored over their opponents efforts when it literally beat theirs? That's ridiculous. Who gives a shit what happens afterwards, the event still happened.

I mean, no one goes around saying someone shouldn't get points for landing a punch their opponent didn't successfully block/dodge.

Because it didn't beat theirs. Pushing a guy over only for him to stand right back up and continue fighting you on the feet is not beating their efforts, it's just wasting time. You should be penalized for failing takedowns just like you should be penalized for having a low strike percentage.

 

[fightfan70]

panic wrestling definitely should not be rewarded.

 

[markg171]

Because it didn't beat theirs. Pushing a guy over only for him to stand right back up and continue fighting you on the feet is not beating their efforts, it's just wasting time. You should be penalized for failing takedowns just like you should be penalized for having a low strike percentage.

Someone getting up afterwards is completely irrelevant as to whether or not the takedown was positive for said fighter then. It obviously is, they attempted something and the other failed to stop it. They're obviously not equal.

If you want to say them getting up immediately after said takedown negates each other by both being positive for their respective fighters, then that's a completely different thing. Both fighters successfully pulled off an "Attack" on their opponent, thus both went up respectively at that time.

But to say someone landing an attack doesn't put them ahead is silly. If someone lands a punch the other fails to block, but doesn't obviously hurt them, are you going to say we should pretend it never happened?

 

[Regal Boy]

Someone getting up afterwards is completely irrelevant as to whether or not the takedown was positive for said fighter then. It obviously is, they attempted something and the other failed to stop it. They're obviously not equal.

If you want to say them getting up immediately after said takedown negates each other by both being positive for their respective fighters, then that's a completely different thing. Both fighters successfully pulled off an "Attack" on their opponent, thus both went up respectively at that time.

But to say someone landing an attack doesn't put them ahead is silly. If someone lands a punch the other fails to block, but doesn't obviously hurt them, are you going to say we should pretend it never happened?

No, someone getting up afterwards is not irrelevant whatsoever, because the martial utility of takedowns in a fight is to control and attack on the ground. If you don't do that, you aren't actually effectively using the takedown. The takedown doesn't exist outside of it's martial utility, if you are unable to use the takedown for it's purpose within the fight, you should be penalized for spamming a worthless invalid attack that doesn't actually work outside of a timed fight. You have not landed the attack if you can't convert it to control on the ground because that is what the takedown actually is. It is not an attack in itself, it never will be.

Spamming 10 takedowns that get the guy's ass to the ground but never control him serves no martial utility in a fight and should be punished just like stalling, because it doesn't work. All it does is tire yourself out, the reason that's not a big deal in MMA is because of the time limit. But if there were no time limit, failing dozens of takedowns would just cause you to gas before your opponent which should not be rewarded by the ruleset. Techniques that don't actually work and don't do anything but stall should be penalized so you don't even attempt them in the first place.

Khabib is the best example of a guy who actually uses wrestling the way it should be in a fight. He constantly controls, attacks, and looks for openings for submissions. If you failed 5 takedowns, attempting and failing another should pretty much be an automatic loss for the round.

 

[Migdagen]

I am with TS. Bringing someone down and doing no damage and no attempt for a submission should not be scored more than a little jab.
That said, judging did improve a bit with timer. Not so long ago, I remember that a fighter could be down in the striking department for a full round and still win because they pull a takedown at the very end.
We are in the fight game where Damage >>>> Position Control.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

I’m tired of seeing guys get credit and be given points by judges for takedowns when they abandon it, or don’t properly secure their opponent after the takedown. And I’m tired of someone leaning someone on the fence and getting credit for a “dominant position”.


Let’s be clear here, getting out of a takedown, or escaping from your opponents ground game, or reversing a position is just as much “grappling” as a takedown. Points should only be scored if the fighter not only uses the position or move, but also does something with it. Otherwise, in my opinion, the escape often times negates the “grappling advantage” gained on the scorecards and fighters should be considered equal.

What you are describing is giving points for defense, defense does not score in MMA, defense is it's own reward. Defense reduces how much the other guy scores so to give points on top of that would be ridiculous. You could have a guy do nothing but defend himself the whole fight with zero offense somehow win a fight.

 

[Gigaton Punch]

Feel like judging has mostly moved past this and we get people complaining in the other direction.

Look at the recent Black Beast/Ivanov fight for example

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

What you are describing is giving points for defense, defense does not score in MMA, defense is it's own reward. Defense reduces how much the other guy scores.

No, it’s a reversal, which is offensive. Defensive would be negating an attempt of the other fighter. A reversal or escape changes the position, the same way a takedown does, it’s just done from a different position.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

No, it’s a reversal, which is offensive. Defensive would be negating an attempt of the other fighter. A reversal or escape changes the position, the same way a takedown does, it’s just done from a different position.

A reversal is scored, defense is not. Defending a takedown is not a reversal. Getting back to your feet isn't offense either. Only one of those 3 things score.

 

[D4C]

Just read the current scoring criteria, it's completely fine. What currently sucks in MMA judging are the judges. I don't know if it's corruption, lack of fight education, or what, but MMA media seems to score fights "right" more commonly than official judges themselves.

 

[fiftywattmafia]

Fuck it just have ‘em box.

 

[markg171]

Spamming 10 takedowns that get the guy's ass to the ground but never control him serves no martial utility in a fight and should be punished just like stalling, because it doesn't work. All it does is tire yourself out, the reason that's not a big deal in MMA is because of the time limit. But if there were no time limit, failing dozens of takedowns would just cause you to gas before your opponent which should not be rewarded by the ruleset. Techniques that don't actually work and don't do anything but stall should be penalized so you don't even attempt them in the first place.

Khabib is the best example of a guy who actually uses wrestling the way it should be in a fight. He constantly controls, attacks, and looks for openings for submissions. If you failed 5 takedowns, attempting and failing another should pretty much be an automatic loss for the round.

So Khabib lost the Trujillo fight then?

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

So Khabib lost the Trujillo fight then?

View attachment 677879

In this example, even if you remove takedowns from the equation khabib wins on sig strikes

 

[markg171]

In this example, even if you remove takedowns from the equation khabib wins on sig strikes

He said they should be punished, so no. Khabib would lose like 30-20 under his proposed criteria of punishing takedowns that go nowhere. Which is ridiculous.

Trujillo wins the above exchange not for immediately escaping or Khabib losing points for not maintaining control, but for immediately going on the offence STRIKING ATFERWARDS. Which is a completely different thing. He went and scored more points elsewhere. Still not enough to win any rounds or anything though.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Feel like judging has mostly moved past this and we get people complaining in the other direction.

Look at the recent Black Beast/Ivanov fight for example

Same, judging has generally gotten much better since the recent scoring criteria revision

 

[Megatronlee]

It’s also hard to do a double back flip, that doesn’t mean it was an effective technique in a fight.

Not the same kind of analogy. If I can put you on your back and that’s all I’m doing and you can’t stop me that’s your issue. I’m winning the fight

 

[Legendary]

Yep, its just getting old to see people trying to steal a round with a BS takedown and then doing nothing with it.

Think Lawler vs Hendricks 1

 

[Megatronlee]

what if you get your ass beat for 4 mins and 50 seconds but get a takedown for 10 seconds?

because that’s how judges are scoring it right now.

once you land that last 10 second takedown you automatically win the round.

dont @Me

Well duh

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

Not the same kind of analogy. If I can put you on your back and that’s all I’m doing and you can’t stop me that’s your issue. I’m winning the fight

If you can’t stop me from flipping that your issue and I’m winning the fight.