Should defense be scored?

[johnmangala]

Defense isn’t scored in MMA but it is in boxing. Floyd is undefeated because he scores so many points dodging punches. If you remember Paulie tried to box defensively against Artem in BKF but lost because the rules don’t score defense only aggression.

Should defense be scored in your opinion?

 

[kalabula]

Isn’t it, already? Hitting your opponent more then they hit you is essentially the same thing.

 

[youllneverwalkalone]

Hell, no.

The judging in MMA is pretty bad as it is, imagine adding more complexity to it.

 

[kuroro]

NUOOOOOH

 

[kuroro]

Isn’t it, already? Hitting your opponent more then they hit you is essentially the same thing.

no, thats offense because if you didn't hit the guy at all, even if he never hit you, he would win because he was at least trying to do offense.

 

[youllneverwalkalone]

Isn’t it, already? Hitting your opponent more then they hit you is essentially the same thing.

It's not the same thing. What he means is that effective defense would also be scored. Imagine a round where neither fights lands anything at all, if you score defense you would have to give the round to the guy who parried or slipped more.

 

[Fahcough]

Defense needs a lot more weight. Stuffing 13 takedowns is more impressive than them landing 1 with 3 seconds left trying to 'steal the round'.

 

[Deleted member 546119]

No....Matt Riddle would be undefeated if that was the case

 

[Hellowhosthat]

No, the idea of a fight is to beat the other person, not just to avoid getting knocked out.

 

[Mr.Maelstrom]

If all else is even, sure.

But that's rarely ever the case. One example is if I shoot 12 td's and you stuff 11 of them, I think it's fair to score those failed attempts against me honestly.

But blocking strikes or shaking off sub attempts... its gets a lot more nebulous

 

[campbecc]

yes it should and it was originally part of the scoring criteria, I don't know why they removed it.

 

[Freddy Fisticuffs]

I dint think so. Your not doing any damage or getting close to finishes (like attempting subs), and thats what ultimately wins fights.

 

[campbecc]

If all else is even, sure.

But that's rarely ever the case. One example is if I shoot 12 td's and you stuff 11 of them, I think it's fair to score those failed attempts against me honestly.

But blocking strikes or shaking off sub attempts... its gets a lot more nebulous

it never outweighs effective offense

 

[Hellowhosthat]

If all else is even, sure.

But that's rarely ever the case. One example is if I shoot 12 td's and you stuff 11 of them, I think it's fair to score those failed attempts against me honestly.

But blocking strikes or shaking off sub attempts... its gets a lot more nebulous

To me if there's a round where both guys are stalled up against the cage and one tries to take the other down but doesn't manage it and no strikes are landed then that should be a 10-10 round.

Defence needs to be used to setup offence, imo.

 

[MCS]

No. Clean shots matter. In a situation where neither one lands aggression should be scored, as that is an attempt of offense. If both guys defend it is basically stalling. See Adesanya/Romero round 1 (to an extent).

 

[Mr.Maelstrom]

it never outweighs effective offense

Agreed. Otherwise shit gets way to murky for these, uh, somewhat unreliable judges to get right

 

[slicebergjim]

And add more complexity to the scoring?

Would only make judging more of a shitfest. Every event we already see outrageous scorecards by some of these bum judges.

 

[Blayt7hh]

Should you score it in hockey if the goalie blocks the shot?

Defense doesn’t earn points, it keeps you from gettting scored on

 

[kuroro]

If all else is even, sure.

But that's rarely ever the case. One example is if I shoot 12 td's and you stuff 11 of them, I think it's fair to score those failed attempts against me honestly.

But blocking strikes or shaking off sub attempts... its gets a lot more nebulous

Defense needs a lot more weight. Stuffing 13 takedowns is more impressive than them landing 1 with 3 seconds left trying to 'steal the round'.

in a perfect world, we'd have judges who would look at takedowns in terms of whether they're offensive (trying to get the guy on the ground so you can pound or sub him) or defensive (just trying to hold the guy and lay on him.) the unified mma scoring criteria does not score for takedowns if they lead to no effective offense.

 

[Blayt7hh]

Defense needs a lot more weight. Stuffing 13 takedowns is more impressive than them landing 1 with 3 seconds left trying to 'steal the round'.

The problem there is that a lot of judges put to much value on takedowns that don’t mean anything. I don’t think you need to consider the defenses prior, just readjust how much a useless takedown scores.

That said, judges aren’t nearly as bad about that as they were in the past