Takedowns to steal a round is a cheap tactic

[Tito Tapped]

Problems are the rules, not the fighters.

Dana doesn't feel like rooting out the real problem, so he takes it out on the fighters.

What exactly is the problem with the rules as it applies here?

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

I feel like this strategy hasn't worked in a long time, despite the commentators ALWAYS talking about it

 

[MRT]

Well, it is not a 'cheap tactic' so much as it is an indication of incompetent judging.

Many fighters have exploited a weakness in the judging process. the solution is to educate and hire competent judges, rather than criticize a successful tactic.

I've used this example for years as an indictment of the 10pt system of scoring MMA fights. The 10pt, round by round, system has always promoted points fighting. Nothing is worse than a guy looking at the clock and shooting for a do-nothing takedown with 10-20 seconds in a round thinking it will win it for him.

Start scoring fights as a whole, similar to the way Pride did and make damage the main scoring criteria and you won't see shit like that.

MMA is the only sport that took it's scoring system from a different one, boxing. In boxing they have many more rounds to make up for poorly scored or extremely close rounds.

I agree the scoring the fight as a whole would be better...but that still only addresses the shitty scoring system and not the other half of the problem, which is too many incompetent judges.

If a judge is so inept that they are swayed by meaningless TDs in the last 20 seconds, then they are unlikely to properly score fights as a whole either. So many of the refs (especially the good ones) have trained in various disciplines or even competed...it would be nice if some of the incompetent idiots scoring the fights had similar backgrounds. The commissions should be hiring more ex-fighters, trainers, etc.

 

[WhuffieCollector]

I don't fault the fighters for trying to win, it's the fault of the organizations and commissions for not getting the scoring correct.

If a round is close, and a takedown secures it, why not? You'd be dumb not to do it.

Takedowns alone are incredibly overvalued in terms of scoring. A takedown is exploiting a weakness in your opponent's defense, of course, but so is squeaking a jab through a good boxer's guard. And those things should be scored about the same. A takedown on its own is at best equivalent to a significant strike landed.

Now, if they use that advantage to go for subs or deal punishment on the ground, then sure give more credit for the takedown, just as a 4 or 5 punch combo that leaves the opponent reeling should be worth more than 4 or 5 independent strikes that don't do much damage.

Ground control should score highly (wears down the opponent, usually leaves the top fighter in a position to attack and the bottom fighter in a position where they have to defend), but the takedown on its own isn't any more valuable than landing a strike, and the scoring should reflect that, but currently it does not.

 

[Threetrees]

Well, it is not a 'cheap tactic' so much as it is an indication of incompetent judging.

Many fighters have exploited a weakness in the judging process. the solution is to educate and hire competent judges, rather than criticize a successful tactic.

 

[FlyingDeathKick]

TD's shouldn't win rds or do much of anythibg unless they are slams that do visible damage. When it comes to the end of a rd or a fight, fighters no exactly what they are doing so it shouldn't be looked at as a dominant thing where if they had more time they could do damage and maybe finish the fight. Maybe if they took it to the ground earlier they could have but the takedown was soley for points. People mention it in the Diaz Mcgregor 2 fight as well. Could he have finished, maybe but he went for the TD to steal the rd.

Conor went for a last minute takedown first though which is what led to him being taken down himself. So both Conor and Nate tried to steal the rd with a takedown. So by Dana's own logic they should both be cut. Make it happen Dana!

 

[Taric]

Instead of getting taken down maybe you should have punched your opponent in the face. I feel that would've won you the round instead.

 

[RonniePickering]

I remember when GSP wanted no part of Shield's ground game, but would take him down when there was 10 seconds left in a round

 

[koquerelle]

Not really. It’s exploiting a flaw in the rules. It’s not totally like guys going for a flurry at the end of a round, but it’s close. You win at all cost.

 

[momchamp]

How would a fight be called off then? I've always liked the idea of most fights getting 1 15 minute round while main events get 1 25 minute round.

Single rounds would be way better and would embrace high fight iq unlike now ur corner just tells u what to do between rounds also corners shouldn't be allowed to talk during fights. MMA fighters also have terrible cardio so I dont know how would 15 or even 25 minute rounds do, maybe one 10 minute then one 5 minute round.

 

[ignorant MMA fan]

I mostly agree. I don't mind the TD to secure a round. For example, if Jimmie Rivera had scored a couple of late round TDs vs Petr Yan, I'd have been cool with it. If both fighters are landing, and the TD is kind of a defensive tactic, I'm OK with that. If it's a snooze fest and some wuss shoots with 30 seconds left, then lands no GnP and has no further offense, then it's ghey.

 

[egk]

One was to work through this is to have fights be 5- 3 minute rounds as opposed to 3- 5 minute rounds. It won't stop last minute takedowns. But It will give stand-up fighters more opportunities.

Standup fighters often points fight too though. They look to land a few jabs than run away a lot of the time. Winning a couple of close rounds with little action often counts more than an opponent winning a 3rd round big but not getting 10-8 scores for it.

In boxing they have many more rounds to make up for this but in MMA they often don't. I've always said judging fights as a whole would be way better.

 

[egk]

I agree the scoring the fight as a whole would be better...but that still only addresses the shitty scoring system and not the other half of the problem, which is too many incompetent judges.

If a judge is so inept that they are swayed by meaningless TDs in the last 20 seconds, then they are unlikely to properly score fights as a whole either. So many of the refs (especially the good ones) have trained in various disciplines or even competed...it would be nice if some of the incompetent idiots scoring the fights had similar backgrounds. The commissions should be hiring more ex-fighters, trainers, etc.

I agree about judges in general but as long as we watch sports where human beings are judging, there's always going to be problems and controversy. Pride had it's share of bad decisions too whether because of bad judging or the fights were fixed.

I'm taking more about the fighters themselves. They've learned to game the 10pt system. They notice what sways judges so that's what they look to do. If you remove the round by round scoring in favor of judging as a whole, it removes the ability to game the scoring system. If damage is the primary goal, I think they'd change how they fight.

An extreme example is the recent bare knuckle fight. I didn't give two shits about it myself but obviously a lot on here did. One guy looked to fight for points and should have won if that's how they score it. The other guy was trying to finish a fight.

 

[DaWrassler007]

GreaseSP

 

[DagOban**]

What exactly is the problem with the rules as it applies here?

Perhaps more judging criteria than rule, but if the system favors fighters doing a TD at the end of the round, change the system. Don't punish the fighter.

 

[rjmbrd]

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

If we had consistent, competent judging, this would not be any issue at all. Considering its all over the place, if you are heading for securing a clean 10-9 round, and end up 9-10 because of a last 20 second TD that did no damage, that is unfortunate.

Point fighting is part of ALL combat sports and always will be. The 10 point must system as we know it isn't really ideal for MMA and even worse, its not consistently applied.

 

[xMaxPower]

a takedown should be its own reward.
youre in a position where you can inflict damage and not be damaged yourself.

damage should be the only criteria.
if X lands one clean punch, and Y takes him down and but literally lays on him for a whole round without landing one significant strike, Ill still give it to X. If Y lands 2 significant strikes with equal weight as the clean punch that X landed, than I will give it to Y.

 

[thobra]

People seem to think the judges make mistakes in every card.

That means that scoring a fight must be too difficult. We just need to change the rules to make scoring easier.

 

[MRT]

I agree about judges in general but as long as we watch sports where human beings are judging, there's always going to be problems and controversy. Pride had it's share of bad decisions too whether because of bad judging or the fights were fixed.

I'm taking more about the fighters themselves. They've learned to game the 10pt system. They notice what sways judges so that's what they look to do. If you remove the round by round scoring in favor of judging as a whole, it removes the ability to game the scoring system. If damage is the primary goal, I think they'd change how they fight.

An extreme example is the recent bare knuckle fight. I didn't give two shits about it myself but obviously a lot on here did. One guy looked to fight for points and should have won if that's how they score it. The other guy was trying to finish a fight.

this is it...the problem is the scoring system and the judging.

it is logical for fighters (the smart ones, anyway) to adjust to the scoring and judging, especially under the 'show + win' pay structure that exists in the UFC.

if fans don't want to see point-fighting, round-stealing TDs, etc. then their problem is with the rule set and/or judging, not with the fighters doing what they need to do to win, right?

 

[Where you at Georges?]

A takedown can be a tiebreaker if the round was dead even (example Hendricks-Lawler 1 5th round) , but I don't think a TD should "steal" a round. For example Lawler-Hendricks 2, Robbie started fast and was handily winning the round but Hendricks got a very brief takedown at the end of the round. But all three judges and most of the smart fans give that round too Robbie for the early onslaught and striking.