UFC's point system needs to be improved

[Harlekin]

- Yes it got improved with 10-8 and 10-7
- Yes we got better criteria now


BUT

It's still a system made for 6 - 15 rounds in boxing

That just doesn't work with 3-5 rounds.
Amateur boxing with 3 rounds doesn't have that system either.


Strickland vs DDP showed this.

Example:
Fighter A lands 20 more punches in round 1, but not enough for 10-8
Fighter B lands 1 more punch in round 2 and 3 and he wins.
Or even if fighter B lands 3 punches less in 2nd and 3rd, he still could get the win via judges.

 

[ferrisjso]

10-8s all but clinch fights and make draws much more likely thats why they are so seldom used.

 

[chinarice]

No more rounds, no more breaks.

1 fight for 15 or 25 minutes. Winner is determined based on who they believe won in those 15 or 25 minutes.

I know this way is flawed but really, there is a flaw in every way i've ever seen posted.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

Well, in an even striking situation like above, you are supposed to then go to aggression. Who was more aggressive in the round? That would have been DDP. Also, it's not about cumulative strikes but quality of strikes. Fighter A can land 10 strikes but if Fighter B landed 5 with more impact, they win the round.

I think the scoring criteria is written pretty well now. Judges and fans just haven't adapted and still score like the old days because that's what we were used to for a decade.

 

[World eater]

No more rounds, no more breaks.

1 fight for 15 or 25 minutes. Winner is determined based on who they believe won in those 15 or 25 minutes.

It doesn’t work so well as a TV product that way, but I do agree to some extent.
Giving bonuses for finishes would also be good. Not that they don’t very often, but make it a rule.

 

[sdpdude9]

The system they have is certainly not perfect, but every suggestion I’ve seen brings along another set of issues. Whether they are better or not is subjective, but there will still be plenty of complaining no matter what.

Reality is as long as you have humans judging, there will always be room for interpretation, subjectivity, and error. You can try to go for strict scoring rules or use some kind of technology to remove all human judgment, but in a multi-faceted sport like mma, that will quickly lead to issues too.

 

[HoelHomero]

No it doesn't, all it needs is judges that give close rounds a 10-10.
There is no winning a round or a fight because of a single takedown or a few strikes, that is borderline retarded. Such a round needs to be scored 10-10.

Try it, score very close rounds in recent controversial decisions a 10-10. You'll end up with far more satisfactory results.

 

[Harlekin]

No it doesn't, all it needs is judges that give close rounds a 10-10.
There is no winning a round or a fight because of a single takedown or a few strikes, that is borderline retarded. Such a round needs to be scored 10-10.

Try it, score close rounds in recent controversial decisions a 10-10. You'll end up with far more satisfactory results.

I absolutely agree with you here. That would definately improve the situation.

 

[orca]

rd 1 was not even a dominant rd for strickland
rd 2 strickland outstrike ddp by 1 jab
rd2 strickland backpedaling
ddp 18 powerstrikes > stricklands 19 defensive backpedaling strikes
rd3 and 4 clear ddp round
r5 stricklands backpedals the whole fight until the last 30 seconds still a close round

you have to give the edge to the aggressor and the more powerful bombs to ddp

rd 2 3 4 ddp
rd 1 was comeptitive strickland
rd5 was even a debatable round lmao

 

[jitzmonkey]

I’ve ranted on this subject way too many times, so I’ll keep it brief.
All 10-9s aren’t equal; which typically makes them inadequate for scoring, IMO.

Also, the idea of one fighter barely edging out the first two rounds but getting dominated, busted up, and nearly stopped in the 3rd and final round yet still not losing just doesn’t make sense to me.

 

[Elvis.]

- Yes it got improved with 10-8 and 10-7
- Yes we got better criteria now


BUT

It's still a system made for 6 - 15 rounds in boxing

That just doesn't work with 3-5 rounds.
Amateur boxing with 3 rounds doesn't have that system either.


Strickland vs DDP showed this.

Example:
Fighter A lands 20 more punches in round 1, but not enough for 10-8
Fighter B lands 1 more punch in round 2 and 3 and he wins.
Or even if fighter B lands 3 punches less in 2nd and 3rd, he still could get the win via judges.

I agree with basically everything you said , to me the bigger problem than the actual scoring system is that they keep hiring mental incompetents with little to no background or experience in combat sports to administer said system.

 

[BreatheSherBro]

All those guys working hard, training UFC, only to be screwed by the UFC scoring system. It's down right discouraging. It's a wonder that anyone even trains UFC at all.

 

[RonDante]

Why would they give him a 10-8 in the first if he didn’t have any big moments? Dricus landed an okay number of shots, sean landed more but never knocked down or rocked him. 10-8 is about impact dominance and duration

 

[The Boomerang]

Get rid of rounds

No more rounds, no more breaks.

1 fight for 15 or 25 minutes. Winner is determined based on who they believe won in those 15 or 25 minutes.

I know this way is flawed but really, there is a flaw in every way i've ever seen posted.

Fighting for that long with no breaks is crazy

While I fully support getting rid of round the time limit would need to be adjusted

Maybe 10 min for regular fights and 15 or 20 for title fights

As a result more fights on the card tho

PRIDE veterans used to talk about how they’d have to pace themselves early coz that first 10 min round was death

 

[chinarice]

Get rid of rounds

Fighting for that long with no breaks is crazy

While I fully support getting rid of round the time limit would need to be adjusted

Maybe 10 min for regular fights and 15 or 20 for title fights

As a result more fights on the card tho

PRIDE veterans used to talk about how they’d have to pace themselves early coz that first 10 min round was death

As long as we have rounds, this will always be an issue.

10-10 won't fix it
more 10-8s won't fix it.

Literally the only other way of fixing it is having a decimal system and that would require the judges being 100x better at their job than they currently are.

 

[chinarice]

I’ve ranted on this subject way too many times, so I’ll keep it brief.
All 10-9s aren’t equal; which typically makes them inadequate for scoring, IMO.

Also, the idea of one fighter barely edging out the first two rounds but getting dominated, busted up, and nearly stopped in the 3rd and final round yet still not losing just doesn’t make sense to me.

Only resolution i can see is having a decimal system. No idea how we could ever rely on judges to properly apply it though.

 

[AmonTobin]

The fruitless takedowns still scoring really drives me nuts. They’re not supposed to but they do.

 

[jitzmonkey]

Only resolution i can see is having a decimal system. No idea how we could ever rely on judges to properly apply it though.

Either that, or 10-6s or something

I think a complete overhaul is necessary, though.
-Judges need to be “trained.”
-Judges need to be held accountable and have the wherewithal to defend their scores.
-Immediate (except for in the most freak circumstances) point deductions for fouls.
“Control your weapons.”
-Instant replay on fouls
-Point deductions for passivity; especially if just an attempt to run out the clock

 

[jx820]

Example:
Fighter A lands 20 more punches in round 1, but not enough for 10-8
Fighter B lands 1 more punch in round 2 and 3 and he wins.
Or even if fighter B lands 3 punches less in 2nd and 3rd, he still could get the win via judges.

From a competitive perspective I think a quantitative system is better than a qualitative system. So you want some grounding in the numbers (allowing for some margin of error and for observable damage).

So assuming no one was severely damaged, if you're looking at the above example, and leaning towards Fighter A winning, the system would just be counting total strikes landed. If your leaing towards Fighter B it's total rounds won.

I'd personally favor the rounds won system.

 

[jx820]

Only resolution i can see is having a decimal system. No idea how we could ever rely on judges to properly apply it though.

For that you could have a 100 point system instead of a 10 point. But it wil just make scoring more wildly inconsistent and result in more indefensible scores, not less. It will create deficits that are far more difficult to come back from.