Which takedown defenses are banned in UFC?

- Kneeing the opponent while he's attempting the takedown
- Any form of stand up kicks against a takedown
- Bruce Lee's backflip in ETD against O'hara (Just kidding)
- If you and your opponent are laying, it's illegal to still kick while you're on the ground?

I'm curious, I've seen lots of MMA matches but I've never seen anyone get kicked in the face when both challengers were on the ground. I've also never seen any sort of kneeing or front kicks to a takedown.

Is it against the rules?

So what are some stand up defenses against a takedown attempt if it WAS a UFC match?
And what are some stand up defenses against a takedown if it WAS a street fight?

 

Assume all strikes are legal with the exception that you cannot kick or knee your opponent in the head if they have one or both knees on the ground. It's more complicated than that, but it's a good place to start.

As such, no "takedown defenses" are banned in the UFC.

 

You can't kick to the head if you and your opponent are on the ground. Basically if your opponent is grounded no kick or knee to the head.
You can do any kick against a TD as long as they don't have a knee on the ground i.e. grounded. There have been plenty of occasions where a defender has kneed the attacker in the head as he attempts a TD. You could soccer kick him in the face as he shoots in as long as he doesn't have a knee down.

A good TD defence say like a clinch entry or a shot would be an uppercut but they are difficult to time and can leave you quite exposed if you miss.

 

But most matches I've seen grapplers sort of exploit the one knee down rule and they make sure that's the first thing that touches the ground when attempting a takedown, so that the opponent cannot do much attacks.

What else is banned? Apparently you can't strike the throat, or elbow bend their neck, elbow the neck, or do a chicken wing... right?

 

If only they had google where you are http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regulations

 

You know what isn't banned? Actual defenses that work like, you know, sprawling.

 

If someone shoots in on you then you absolutely can knee or kick them in the face as long as they are still on their feet "technically". If your knee lands the moment before or after their knee touches the mat for a double, you're fine.

If you're opponent is touching the mat with anything except the bottom of his feet, you can't kick him in the head, regardless of your position.


-source- about 3 dozen fighters rules meetings over the last 5 years.

 

Noahd Lahat got fairly brutally koed from a knee while shooting for a td on the Hendricks Thompson card.

 

Dennis Hallman's 2 takedown defences over Matt Hughes are pretty hard to get hold of...

Also, I think he had the right idea with the Speedo trunks... Nobody gonna be in a hurry to double leg a man wearing budgie smugglers... But they're banned now, so that must count?

 

The Bob Sapp patented piledriver defence

 

pretty sure we saw that in the UFC. maybe Belcher vs Cotê?

 

I wonder if you can knee someone in the head if they have one foot and one hand on the ground. Like say, you have them in a headlock and they put their hand down to form 3 points of contact. Could you theoretically transition to lift up one of their legs and knee them in the head? Im sure a really skilled Thai stylist could pull off the maneuver.

Also, Can you stomp on someones hand if they have it touching the mat? Can you stomp their feet if their hand is touching?

 

You cannot knee or kick the head if anything other than the bottoms of your opponents feet are touching the mat.

You can stomp the hands of an opponent. I've seen it brought up in a rules meeting specifically and then utilized later that night by a crafty journeyman named "animal" enouch wilson.

 

Even if there aren't 3 points of contact?

 

That's the thing though, must grapplers know this rule is only in their favor, so when it's almost like before they even attempt to takedown, they already have in their minds to drop one knee or arm onto the floor to be relatively safe when doing the takedown.

 

God damn that's a damn nice KO.

 

Correct. Anything but the soles of their feet is a grounded opponent.

 

Under unified rules, you're not technically allowed to spike people on their head or neck, but I've literally never seen a ref enforce that.

That will probably be the first really horrifying injury that gets MMA heavily regulated and ruins the sport.

 

That's not at all why grapplers drop a knee to the ground when shooting. Not even close.

 

Chicken wing? As in Kimura? It's a reasonably common as a defense, especially combined with a sumi gaeshi against a high crotch.



In general, the best way to stop (wrestling) takedowns, is to actually use and learn wrestling. Also the one knee down rule is not to stop strikes, but i'll get to that later. Trying to time a guy shooting with a punch or a knee is inherently risky and a good way to put yourself out of position and end up on your back. The reason we don't see it much isn't because of rules, it's because it just doesn't work that well.

As far as i'm aware, the rule is where the opponent is when you commit to the strike. So if you throw the knee before or during their transition to the three point stance it is legal. It's why you see refs warn people when they keep touching and releasing their hands from the ground to try avoid knees.

It's easier to lift the arm, it happens occasionally. I want to say I have seen Zingano pulling people up to knee them in the face from the front headlock.

Going to one knee is the correct wrestling way to shoot a single/double/high crotch. It is so you can easily get under your opponent. It largely isn't necessary in mma, usually because the stances are higher.



Usually you drop to a knee in grappling, because you need to get under an opponents hips. Going to one knee is slower, but it is harder to stop and offers the greatest ability to get under someones hips. It also allows you to cut the corner easier which means better defences against guillotines and better ability to chain wrestle.

The takedown you're talking about is the blast double, which definitely has its place but compare the stances of both gifs and notice how getting low works better against people in a low stance. Going to a knee has nothing to do with avoiding strikes, notice how kneeing someone in the face below would also be pretty tough.

If the person getting slammed can let go of something, technically it's not a spike. So if you're going for a submission and can let it go to avoid a spike it's not illegal (JDS vs Cain 3) I would also assume that the spike would also have to be intentional to be considered a foul, so if you land on your head from a suplex or something, I assume you're not gonna get called for it.

That wasn't a KO, Nogueira went on to win that fight.

Side rant not directed at anyone specifically: The idea that knees to a grounded opponent is kryptonite to a grappler is simply false, even in Pride/One FC we don't see it happen. You don't use striking offence instead of grappling defence, likewise you don't use grappling offence instead of striking defence. If you throw a right cross at me, I slip and then go for the takedown, I don't try arm drag your punch. Look at Holm vs Rousey, Holm used adequate grappling defence to stop Ronda's takedown attempts. Well executed wrestling defence beats poorly executed wrestling offence, just like well timed boxing defence beats poorly timed boxing offence, sure there are exceptions here and there, but for the most part it's true.

A lot of people have the misconception that the ruleset is unfairly tilted towards grapplers, which is simply not true. I could flip them and make arguments for how the rules can benefit strikers.



The idea that a grappler that has done this thousands of times, would be the one who would suffer if knees to grounded opponents were legal is laughable.