Isn't damage the #1 criteria used under the unified rules in scoring fights though? I understand your point in that Khabib controlled RDA, but saying "damage has nothing to do with any of this" seems wrong given the scoring system specifically points to damage as a main criteria. Neither fighter really did any in Khabib/RDA. So the #1 criteria almost needed to just be thrown out for that fight.
I also don't understand how landing 80 more significant strikes vs landing 14 more is irrelevant if damage is a criteria. Taking into account 3 rds vs 5, Ferguson averaged landing 16 more sig strikes per round than RDA, while Khabib averaged landing 5 more per round. Again, given that damage is specifically named as a judging criteria I can't see how that doesn't matter.
Me saying Khabib just laid on RDA is a bit of hyperbole, he did attempt to advance at times. My point was more that he didn't attempt to do much damage as he was far more concerned with control in that fight. Understandably so, RDA's defensive guard is terrific for sure.
I guess it's a matter of perspective, but to me this is still FIGHTING, not a grappling match. For sure you can win a fight the way Khabib did vs RDA but that doesnt really look dominating to me if we are calling it a fight. It looks like a clear win, a safe win, but not dominant. In a positional grappling contest? Yes, dominant.
The two main judging criteria are effective striking and effective grappling. Damage is the main thing that defines effective striking, I think there's a whole article on the topic by McCarthy, but I'm not going to search it now on a phone. Effective grappling is defined by damage on the ground, submission attempts, reversals and achievement of advantageous positions as well as takedowns that lead to an established offense.
On the feet, the fight was pretty much equal. Even RDA's corner commented on how they're equally matched on the feet, but this was only a minor portion of the fight. The fight was decided during grappling engagements that constituted the majority of the fight, engagements where Khabib displayed complete domination since he always had the advantageous position and was constantly trying to advance position. The only grappling engagement that might be considered "lay and pray" heavy from Kahbib's side is the one in the second round, where Khabib was putting his weight on RDA against the cage with RDA standing on all fours, but even during that engagement Khabib was trying to advance position by putting one of the hooks in and trying to take the back - something that was acknowledged by the commentators, it wasn't just lay and pray. In all other grappling engagements Khabib was landing strikes from top, some of them being heavy elbows.
Thus, for the effective grappling scoring criteria we have:
1. 6 takedowns for Khabib, zero for RDA.
2. Damage on the ground, however small it was, was completely in Khabib's favor. RDA did literally no damage on the ground.
3. Utter positional domination by Khabib, RDA was never in an advantageous position.
4. The only thing RDA did on the ground was attempt an ineffective guillotine which Khabib defended by doing virtually nothing: stayed in half guard and just waited it out only to pop his head out when RDA could no longer maintain the squeeze.
Essentially, the fight WAS a grappling match and Khabib utterly dominated RDA in the grappling department. It wasn't competitive. Since grappling constituted the majority of the fight, Khabib dominated RDA in the fight. I don't see how anyone could argue against this.
When it comes to Ferguson vs RDA, Ferguson did outstrike RDA and delivered more damage, but there were many moments in the fight where RDA was finding success and did damage of his own. He even managed to win 2 rounds, so the fight WAS competitive.
