Why does it matter who moves forward?

[Ether13]

To avoid shit like this:

Kalib Starnes 1, 3

 

[johncola]

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.

Texas using the "old rules" refers to them not having the new rules on fouls in place. They use the new scoring criteria like everywhere else.

 

[JustBleed69]

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 doesn't matter in MMA judging unless striking and grappling are equal, which in the case of Reyes vs Jones it was not.

 

[johncola]

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?

In isolation it's a positive that he moved forward. You get more credit for moving forwards than backwards because you're more responsible for a fight taking place. 2 fighters moving forward = collision; 2 fighters moving backwards = no fight at all.

But damage is more important than that. If the fighter moving forward is taking more damage, then he's losing.

 

[mmasask]

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?

If both fighters moved backwards you wouldnt have a fight

 

[Karuzo]

If both fighters moved backwards you wouldnt have a fight

Yes but if both only moved forward without striking, they would kiss, which is pretty gay bro.

 

[panamaican]

Crazy, we've come a long way since Machida-Shogun I.

 

[mmasask]

Yes but if both only moved forward without striking, they would kiss, which is pretty gay bro.

If both moved backwards you wouldnt have a fight, might aswell not even get in the cage. Only a homo would be thinking they'd kiss. Why not headbutt? Do you want good fights?

 

[Karuzo]

If both moved backwards you wouldnt have a fight, might aswell not even get in the cage. Only a homo would be thinking they'd kiss. Why not headbutt? Do you want good fights?

Both moving backwards is about as likely as both moving forwards until they kiss: not very likely at all.

There is already a rule about timidity, a fighter can be DQ'd for it.

Fighting while going backwards is a legitimate fighting style. There's been plenty of KO artists who fight going backwards. It's ridiculous to punish someone for fighting in this style.

Conor McGregor and especially Anderson Silva to name a few.

 

[BabyBlue_Bomber]

Because “effective aggressiveness” is a judging criteria...

I would like to point out that you can be aggressive without being effective, so there’s more to it than just walking forward.

 

[mmasask]

Both moving backwards is about as likely as both moving forwards until they kiss: not very likely at all.

There is already a rule about timidity, a fighter can be DQ'd for it.

Fighting while going backwards is a legitimate fighting style. There's been plenty of KO artists who fight going backwards. It's ridiculous to punish someone for fighting in this style.

Conor McGregor and especially Anderson Silva to name a few.

I'm sorry but fighting is all about aggression, if any of these counter strikers didnt have an opponent who was initiating the fight how would you be able to counter? It takes two to fight. If you have someone running away you dont have a fight.

 

[Karuzo]

I'm sorry but fighting is all about aggression, if any of these counter strikers didnt have an opponent who was initiation the fight how would you be able to counter? It takes two to fight. If you have someone running away you dont have a fight.

You can bait someone to attack you instead of attacking them, it's part of fighting.

Mayweather does it all the time. Lean forward so your opponent thinks you are close, they strike, you pull back and counter.

Floyd literally moved backwards in all his fights in the 2nd half of his career, and he is considered to be one of the greatest.

 

[knock_you_out]

Constantly moving backwards is avoiding making contact, and MMA is a full contact sport.

 

[Towerworld]

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.

While moving backwards or laterally you can strike, Andy and Israel made their names off of doing that. Jones was also running away from Reyes for the first 3 rounds but was more importantly being out struck clearly which is a far more significant scoring criteria.

 

[Karuzo]

Constantly moving backwards is avoiding making contact, and MMA is a full contact sport.

Um what if you are constantly moving backwards yet constantly landing punches because your opponent is constantly running into them by walking forward? And you are outlanding your opponent by doing this?

I asked this in the OP, not sure how you missed it.

 

[mmasask]

You can bait someone to attack you instead of attacking them, it's part of fighting.

Mayweather does it all the time. Lean forward so your opponent thinks you are close, they strike, you pull back and counter.

Floyd literally moved backwards in all his fights in the 2nd half of his career, and he is considered to be one of the greatest.

Not by Mike tyson's standards. But really dude... you would really wanna watch a fight if both fighters are gonna wait it out till someone throws a strike so they can counter?

 

[Karuzo]

you would really wanna watch a fight if both fighters are gonna wait it out till someone throws a strike so they can counter?

That's when the ref calls for more action.

But if one fighter has no problem constantly moving forward, I don't see why the other should be punished for constantly moving backwards, especially if they are having success?

 

[mmasask]

That's when the ref calls for more action.

But if one fighter has no problem constantly moving forward, I don't see why the other should be punished for constantly moving backwards, especially if they are having success?

Because they are not initiating the fight. How dont you see this? You cant counter if nobody throws a strike. You cant have a fight with 1 person, it takes two.

 

[Karuzo]

Because they are not initiating the fight. How dont you see this? You cant counter if nobody throws a strike. You cant have a fight with 1 person, it takes two.

The fight is already being initiated by the guy moving forward.

 

[knock_you_out]

Um what if you are constantly moving backwards yet constantly landing punches because your opponent is constantly running into them by walking forward? And you are outlanding your opponent by doing this?

I asked this in the OP, not sure how you missed it.

LOL, no-one does this, and Reyes certainly didn't.