Why does it matter who moves forward?

[King Joffery]

I don't understand.

If a fighter is moving forward the whole time but also walking into his opponents shots without landing much of his own, why is it a positive that he moved forward?

Agreed Brimage dominated Conor if we apply that logic

 

[Buff]

That fight existed while Ocaton control was under the judging criteria, so nothing was avoided at all.

Fine.

Be a spoil sport.

 

[TrainAllDay]

Its always a casual claiming that moving backward is running.

 

[Fatback96]

Even though it does technically count, effective striking and damage count more. That judge’s decision is not justified.

 

[blaseblah]

I don't understand.

If a fighter is moving forward the whole time but also walking into his opponents shots without landing much of his own, why is it a positive that he moved forward?

It isn't. Just a talking point for fans who haven't read the rules.

 

[Gilday]

Octagon control is only supposed to matter if you can't find a winner with effective striking, grappling and aggression

So octagon control should never have been in consideration the first 3 rounds of that fight

 

[SKITZADACTYL]

it shouldn't, but a lot of MMA judges and fans are stupid as fuck and think good footwork is " running ".

anybody can move forward in a fight, doesn't mean jack shit if they're getting outstruck. guess floyd has lost most of his fights that went to decision.

 

[TheAmericanGazelle]

It's good to reward forward movement and octagon control when the effective striking/grappling is equal (or approximately equal...the idea of it being literally equal is implausible).

It should be treated as a tiebreaker within a round. That's it. There was only one round in the Jones/Reyes fight where the offense was approximately equal (IMO). I think it was either R2 or R3 (I forget which).

 

[Leonard Haid]

But why? If a step forward results in you getting punched in the face, plus the step you took forward added more damage to the punch, how can that be a good thing?

But why? If a step forward results in you getting punched in the face, plus the step you took forward added more damage to the punch, how can that be a good thing?

I never said that it was a good thing for the guy moving forward; I said that maybe it's a good thing in the eyes of the judges, because even if it's not advantageous for the fighter to keep moving forward (another person on here gave the example of Diego Sanchez, who moves forward constantly only to get beat up, at least lately), at least the judges admire it, and maybe if it's a close fight then the guy who moved forward more will get the nudges from the judges. But I'm no judge, so I'm just conjecturing here.

 

[Karuzo]

It's good to reward forward movement and octagon control when the effective striking/grappling is equal (or approximately equal...the idea of it being literally equal is implausible).

It should be treated as a tiebreaker within a round. That's it. There was only one round in the Jones/Reyes fight where the offense was approximately equal (IMO). I think it was either R2 or R3 (I forget which).

Reyes landed 7 or more strikes in both rounds 2 and 3.

Jon landed 7 in the 4th and 5 in the 5th, so......... Idk what else to tell you, man.

 

[phoenixikki]

It should go both ways, Jones literally ran away from Reyes several times during the fight. Last time I checked that doesn't count as intelligently defending yourself.

 

[XRedStaRx]

If Reyes should win this fight because moving forward doesn't count, then so does Wonderboy vs Till, that also was a robbery.

 

[Karuzo]

It should go both ways, Jones literally run away from Reyes several times during the fight. Last time I checked that doesn't count as intelligently defending yourself.

A fighter can already be DQ'd for timidity by the ref if necessary, so there really is no need for this to be in the judging criteria.

 

[Karuzo]

If Reyes should win this fight because moving forward doesn't count, then so does Wonderboy vs Till, that also was a robbery.

Did WB really outstrike him? I remember that fight being a lot closer than this fight.

The only thing I really remember is Till knocking him down in the 5th.

 

[GordonMMARamsey]

It doesn't.

If a fighter is moving forward and getting hit more than he's landing..it's not scored the same as if he's moving forward and landing more than he gets hit.



Hope this helps.

 

[Sinthesized]

Because for a fight to take place offense must be initiated. Otherwise, it would be a 2-man game of tag where neither man is "It". Pointless.

I had Reyes, btw, but I've always understood why octagon control is awarded consideration, and often decides very close fights when there is little else. Running isn't fighting. You must attack.

In the new rules, octagon control doesn't win you the fight unless the fight is exactly even, which the first 3 rounds weren't. Luckily for Jones this was in Texas using the old rules, or he wouldn't be holding that belt.

 

[Candy Routure]

Diego and Guida should be winning 10-3 rounds everytime they fight.

 

[Taric]

Fine.

Be a spoil sport.

That's how I live life.

 

[Taric]

Diego and Guida should be winning 10-3 rounds everytime they fight.

I've always said Leonard Garcia should be undefeated.

 

[Candy Routure]

I've always said Leonard Garcia should be undefeated.

Lol it’s true!