- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 43,309
- Reaction score
- 3,982
How many times have we seen a ridiculous decision win because of a takedown? What the hell is so special about a takedown if the fighter pops right back up? Its a massive blemish on this great sport of ours how judges can be swayed from a shitty tackle. If a fighter is taken down, controlled and inflicts damage, then sure. BUT NOT IF ANYTHING HAPPENS AND THE FIGHTER GETS BACK UP WITH EASE.
Shouldn't a fighter DEFENDING the takedown get awarded? Definitely. A defended attempted takedown should be equivalent to a takedown.
Anyways I think its a poison in judging mma.
What say you?
i agreed with everything you said, minus the part about a fighter being rewarded for defending a takedown.
in my opinion, a takedown that is attempted and stuffed, results in a stalemate for each fighter. no one gets rewarded. it's a neutral result. in theory, if a fight were to go this way all throughout, i'd call it a draw. aggression doesn't mean anything if nothing happens as a result.