Takedowns without much control time shouldn't get you the round

OldBoy91 said:
Takedowns where the opponent gets back up immediately is neither control time nor effective grappling, it does not score.

Evloev landing 13 strikes to Allen's 12 is completely irrelevant because stats are meaningless. Not even getting into the fact that the official stats the UFC and comubox put out are almost always wrong.

All of Evloev's strikes were jabs, many of which didn't even land cleanly. Allen landed his own jab which actually knocked Evloev's head back each time, sweeping left hooks to the body, left straights to the head and left overhands.

Those strikes were the difference maker in the round, not Evloev hanging on to Allen butt and tripping him only for Allen to get right back up and elbow Movsar in the head.
Click to expand...
Bro, I think you need to rewatch the 1st round again, because I just did and I believe you're remembering it wrong to say the least Lol

Either that or you have some sort of Arnold Allen bias
 
Striker Fox said:
Bro, I think you need to rewatch the 1st round again, because I just did and I believe you're remembering it wrong to say the least Lol
Click to expand...
I've watched the fight through all the way twice and the 1st round specifically 4 times.

More importantly I've actually read through the scoring criteria.
 
Paint said:
Click to expand...

Except Evloev threw Allen on his head which was the hardest shot by both guys the entire round, and was landing on Allen when he had his back. He didn't not throw anything when he was tossing Allen around. It's not like Evloev didn't land anything on Allen even before the grappling either.
 
Takedown takes away a lot of energy and requires skills, power, technique, control and brute strength to take another skilled opponent down. Strickland apologists want this to be judged as a boxing match and not an MMA and a striking match. It is so incredibly disappointing. Dricus was taking Strickland down at will for a total of six times and Strickland fans want the judges to ignore it. They dont award the round, but they definitely count towards winning the round. The fight was close standing up in 3 of the rounds and takedowns made the difference in those 3 rounds.
 
Fergelmince said:
You have to do something with a takedown to get points from a takedown


View attachment 1025633
Click to expand...
We all know not all judge read that shit.
They are heavily influenced with takedowns with no damage or control.
Dana needs to speak about this shit publicly in order for them to know this.
I view getting up quick is equally "offensive" on the defenders behalf and should be viewed that way.
 
Laheys'Liquorland said:
We all know not all judge read that shit.
They are heavily influenced with takedowns with no damage or control.
Dana needs to speak about this shit publicly in order for them to know this.
I view getting up quick is equally "offensive" on the defenders behalf and should be viewed that way.
Click to expand...

No, they read it. They have to take a course and pass a test to qualify as a judge. Same with referees.

Now, with regard to the people who talk to the audience, I'm sure Laura Sanko is probably the only commentator who's taken the course and pass the test.

 
Gamer2k4 said:
Next you'll say that a person should get credit for blocking strikes.
Click to expand...

Nope, Part of the scoring criteria is octagon control... You get credit for putting your opponent on the mat when he doesnt want to be there.. Why does the reverse not hold true.. why no credit for keeping it standing when your opponent wants you on the mat.
 
Azure said:
Many disagree with me here but stuffing a takedown for me should count.. You have a guy go 2 for 10 in takedowns and the guy gets credit for the 2 but no credit for the 8 stuffed takedowns. Getting a takedown or stuffing a takedown are both versions of controling where the fight takes place.
Click to expand...
Defending a takedown is the definition of a a defensive maneuver... in what sport does a defensive maneuver score points?

A reverse scores points because you go from being defensive to going offensive. Just a takedown is purely defensive. In literally no sport will that win you anything.
 
Hazuki Ryo said:
I'm good with the fact that takedowns should have an impact on judge scoring. It's not easy to execute, it's energy taxing, and there's no guaranteed success.

However, there needs to be at least some time spent on the ground. If your opponent gets up almost immediatly, it shouldn't steal the round.

Reminds me of Phil Davis VS machida where last seconds takedowns won Phil the fight with all the controversy

Anyway, DDP won with that
Click to expand...

That's exactly how takedowns work under the new unified rules of MMA. Takedowns are simply considered a change in position and don't count for anything.

For some odd reason, Toronto was actually following an outdated MMA ruleset from 2003 (!) at UFC 297. That might have influenced the judging in favor of DDP and possibly Evloev.
 
Azure said:
Nope, Part of the scoring criteria is octagon control... You get credit for putting your opponent on the mat when he doesnt want to be there.. Why does the reverse not hold true.. why no credit for keeping it standing when your opponent wants you on the mat.
Click to expand...

Because octagon control ONLY matters if effective striking/grappling and effective aggression are equal. And if you're at the point where you're hoping for credit for stuffing takedowns, you're already losing on aggression.
 
How many strikes did DDP land on the ground?

Also how many times did he corner Strickland at the cage?
Strickland was playing matador, having control over the footwork.
 
Zanmato said:
Where does it stop though? If a takedown doesn't score because it doesn't lead to anything fight ending, why is holding the centre of the ring / forward advancement score? Why does an unsuccessful guillotine score? Why does holding someone against the cage score? Why does holding someone at bay with a few jabs score? Why does sitting with back control doing a bit of hand wrestling score?

If you use a technique within the rules that your opponent has been unsuccessful in defending against and it presents a chance of being in a dominant or fight ending position for a time (even if unsuccessfully) it should score

I don't think it should be a significant/decisive criteria but if everything is more or less even then it's hard to argue against someone being unable to stop another man from lifting him off his feet and dumping him onto the ground as being in a lesser position score wise

Successful manoeuvre Vs unsuccessful defence is a point scoring advantage whether it's fun or exciting or not
Click to expand...
That's not what i said. I didn't say it shouldn't score. I said it shouldn't steal the round. It shouldn't cancel what the other guy has done before that.

The thing is judges are more influenced by a TD, whether it is followed by time control or not, than jabs for instance, even if these jabs do have an impact for 4 minutes straight
 
Hazuki Ryo said:
I'm good with the fact that takedowns should have an impact on judge scoring. It's not easy to execute, it's energy taxing, and there's no guaranteed success.

However, there needs to be at least some time spent on the ground. If your opponent gets up almost immediatly, it shouldn't steal the round.

Reminds me of Phil Davis VS machida where last seconds takedowns won Phil the fight with all the controversy

Anyway, DDP won with that
Click to expand...


The Championship fight before that when Shogun had octagon control and was landing effective strikes is what pursuaded people to believe Davis beat Machida. So after the Shogun-Machida fights you had a fighter like Davis standing in front of Machida yet incapable of mounting offense. In total Davis clinching and taking down should not have been enough, I scored it 11 minutes of Machida engaging with offense vice like 4 minutes of Davis engaging with offense
 
Last edited:
ddp stalked and move forward like a predator
landing poweful leg kicks and punches

im gonna give the round to the dude who stalks his opponent like a prey
rather than give it to the prey who backpedals and basically is just trying to defend himself

btw sean landed more strikes but ddp landed the harder ones
total strikes where close but im gonna give it to the one who hits hard
1 powerstrik from ddp > 2 defensive jab from strickland

easy
 
In a close fight sub and TD attempts count because aggression counts. Actively trying to win as opposed to walking backwards jabbing.
DDP was fighting to win, Sean was mostly just fighting not to lose. DDPs pressure slowed him down. Although I do appreciate a good jab it can't be your only attack.
 
an old sentiment, to be sure. people been sayin that for years. problem is that in a round where nothing happens, you give it to the guy on top rather than the guy on bottom. nothing else to base it on really.
 
Taric said:
in what sport does a defensive maneuver score points?
Click to expand...

MMA when the old 2003 NJ rules are in play, like they were for 297.

d. judges shall evaluate mixed martial arts techniques, such as effective striking, effective grappling, control of the fighting area, effective aggressiveness and defense
h. fighting area control is judged by determining who is dictating the pace, location and position of the bout. Examples of factors to consider are countering a grappler‘s attempt at takedown by remaining standing and legally striking
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Legendary
Takedowns with no damage wont win the round
Replies
0
Views
203
Legendary
Legendary

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,265,047
Messages
57,318,945
Members
175,637
Latest member
Schizo

Share this page

Back
Top