The little rule change/paradigm shift that could radically change MMA

[joy2day]

Two threads about where MMA/UFC is heading towards AS A SPORT (I don't care about the business thing) have all derailed into... NBA topics, because that's the closest analogy that came across.
As this is not the Real GM NBA Board, I'm oversimplyfing a lot to get to the point:

Some dudes (D'Antoni, i.e.) realized that if their players improved just slightly his effectivity shooting 3s, they will outscore the other team most of the times.
And then comes the butterfly effect of playing with the intention of increasing the volume of 3s:
Possessions per game escalate. Higher pace. The court widens. (...)

Most of you being from the US, even if not huge fans of basketball, seem knowledgeable enough to know pretty well the huge transformation the game has gone through as a cascade of implications from a single change: going for the "7 seconds or less" 3 shot.

So I find interesting to speculate what could be that apparently minor rule change, or new approach to fighting, that could potentially shake everything.

And I'm just raising this topic to you because it's a somewhat a recurrent conversation with some of my pals, but we're not getting anywhere TBH.
Maybe I find most of the fighters show a big gap in G'n'P and clinch level in relation to the rest of their abilities, potentially fight ending moves with room to improve.

What you are talking about is more a change in the culture of the sport than a rule change. The distance of the 3-point shot was only moved in for a few years in the 90s; it was moved back to the same distance in the late 90s. Therefore, it wasn't a rule change that made people shoot more 3s. It's the same with the NFL becoming a passing league; these are changes in the culture of the sport.

I don't see anything like that happening unless, for example, they made a rule change that supported grappling or striking in particular. Aside from severe, consequential rule changes that really turn it into something other than MMA, I don't see anything like that happening- it's always a cycle in terms of which styles are winning. Wrestling is emphasized a lot on Sherdog, but that is not reflected in current champions and top fighters. Strikers have won a lot of titles even in recent times.

 

[JBJ was here]

Or maybe no saved by the bell, if you get rocked visibly or knocked down the round continues or same if you have a submission locked in.

Hmm . . . just make saved-by-the-bell an automatic 10-8 or better and you'll be amazed how violent fighters get towards the end of a round.

 

[BigTruck]

Hmm . . . just make saved-by-the-bell an automatic 10-8 or better and you'll be amazed how violent fighters get towards the end of a round.

Right, we have seen many times a fighter get rocked then the round ends and he recovers or same when a RNC or triangle or guillotine gets locked in and it's tight as fuck and the round ends and they have to let go when they were seconds away from winning.

 

[Pancake Sprawl]

Neither.

then guys will just stop grappling...

 

[Conan the K-9]

if you don't reward the guy holding his opponent down who do you reward? the guy being held down against his own will?

Only full mount and back control should be rewarded. No laying inside the guard, or silly wall hugging.

 

[Azure]

Bring in a little Sumo.. Throwing somebody out of the cage is an automatic win

 

[Oscar Madison]

First -- MMA Judges are the Decision fuckery of our "sport".

Second -- Refs are the immediate fuckery of in-cage implications and outcomes.

If you are going to Game the system as to what Players and Coaches schemes will work --

who knows how this will impact these other forces at play beyond the pure KO outcomes?

 

[World eater]

If we can just get refs to actually penalize fouls as in proper sports, it would already change the game in a big way.

 

[JKS]

I think knees to a downed opponent.

 

[Hairrow]

then guys will just stop grappling...

They might stop grappling as we know it and that would be a huge improvement.
No one wants to watch Merab kind of grappling. If it was Ortega, Oliveira, Jones kind of grappling etc—work towards finishing a guy, not just holding onto him— different story

 

[GluttonforPunishment]

Ooh I want to play this game! How about people stop crying and bitching about the product. Those 2 things work.

 

[Bend NvR Break]

You start the next round in the same position you ended the previous round in

 

[Bend NvR Break]

. Strikers have won a lot of titles even in recent times.

Yeah but that UFC has intentionally gone out of their way to sign strikers over grapplers.
Let's be honest. Gane, Potan and others wouldn't have been champ back when the UFC was grappling heavy. They (the UFC) made a conscious decision to make the product "more entertaining" from a layman's POV.

 

[Ian]

You have to fight with your donger out

Only in title fights or rematches. The challenger/loser has to fight naked.

 

[Pancake Sprawl]

They might stop grappling as we know it and that would be a huge improvement.
No one wants to watch Merab kind of grappling. If it was Ortega, Oliveira, Jones kind of grappling etc—work towards finishing a guy, not just holding onto him— different story

but if you don't get the finish it just counts as "holding the other guy down". guys would just not grapple and look to KO everyone. grappling is too energy intensive to risk not getting any points for it if you don't get the finish. nobody wants to watch Sean Strickland jab somebody for 25 minutes straight but nobody is talking about making striking null unless you get a stoppage.

 

[Rubios]

What you are talking about is more a change in the culture of the sport than a rule change. The distance of the 3-point shot was only moved in for a few years in the 90s; it was moved back to the same distance in the late 90s. Therefore, it wasn't a rule change that made people shoot more 3s. It's the same with the NFL becoming a passing league; these are changes in the culture of the sport.

Exactly, this exactly.
I meant, what *new* (probably it's not new at all, just prioritizing some aspects and discarding others) fighting approach do you sense MMA could be heading towards.

Implying a cascade of consequences like the % of 3s rising and the possession times going down.

Most of you have proposed some rule changes, some of them already banned from the former ruleset or largely discussed before. I am pro implementing some of them.

I'm more focused into the "culture of the sport" as you have perfectly defined it.

 

[Pancake Sprawl]

Only full mount and back control should be rewarded. No laying inside the guard, or silly wall hugging.

they already have a rule for that. it's called stalling. if the person on top is throwing strikes however, it still counts as laying inside the guard or wall hugging?

 

[liner]

This is an interesting thing to think about.

I feel like I've seen a lot more body triangles in the last few years. Pretty tough to get out of. Easy round win if you lock that triangle v just getting hooks in

I wouldn't mind seeing a lot more 12-6 elbows from full guard. Maybe 12-6s to the body.

 

[joy2day]

Yeah but that UFC has intentionally gone out of their way to sign strikers over grapplers.
Let's be honest. Gane, Potan and others wouldn't have been champ back when the UFC was grappling heavy. They (the UFC) made a conscious decision to make the product "more entertaining" from a layman's POV.

I would say yes and no. If they had a choice between signing a striker or a grappler, they would probably sign the striker if all else was even. I don't think in the bigger picture that matters all that much though. The reason strikers are winning is because they are better than the grapplers they are fighting. Yes, there were once grapplers that would beat most of the HWs now, but that is not because the UFC is secretly hiding a bunch of HW grapplers- it's because the ones that do exist don't want to fight MMA right now; same with LHW. You can bet that if a world champ BJJ or Olympic wrestler were available, the UFC would jump all over it.

 

[Rubios]

Just to throw something to the table.

I found the jab of most, most fighters to be flawed -understand me, as flawed as the jab of an elite of the elite pro MMA fighter can be-.

"Just" improving the jab, don't overextend and throw the weight to the front leg but having a highly mobile, back-foot driven fast, straight and sharp jab to close the distance safely...

...and implement a good technique KB 101 jab-low kick, setting up the kick properly to hit with full power, but aiming for the calf instead of the thigh.

This could be the next go-to move in my eyes, because landing just two/three of them vastly cripples the opponent's leg/s.
If he is a striker, his footwork and explosiveness is pretty much gone.
Maybe even needs to change guard.

If he is a wrestler/grappler, his lower body is "compromised" to shot and exert full force on the TD attempts.

This "just" means a leap in the training priorities, just as D'Antoni asking his team to "just" improve his 3s rate by 10%.