GDT: UFC 251: Usman vs. Masvidal

[Perennial]

Here's something I'd like to see experimented with for scoring MMA fights...

Judges will award 0 - 3 points per round

If a round is too close to call, both fighters receive 0 points

If a fighter wins a round, but doesn't really do much damage, he is awarded 1 point

If a fighter wins a round convincingly while doing some damage, he is awarded 2 points

If a fighter completely dominates a round while doing significant damage, he is awarded 3 points


That way if a fighter wins round 1 and 2, but doesn't really do much damage, with a strong 3rd round his opponent can still win a decision, or have the contest scored a draw

 

[pistolpete11]

Reading online at the time, there were lots of people who called it a robbery. And I think like some others have mentioned, maybe the commentary helped biased that. I also think Max is just much more popular than Volkanovski.

Just more proof that Twitter is not real life.

Every person that I watched that gets paid to talk about this stuff said "it was close, but I gave it to Max." Luke Thomas, Brian Campbell, DC, Ariel, Big John, Thompson, Schaub, etc.

 

[pistolpete11]

I agree with how you broke down the fight. I did think Volkanovski won Round 4 clearly at the time as I remember thinking it was either 2-2 or he was down 3-1 after that round, but on re-watch my opinion might change. Close one, for sure.

As for changing the scoring system, I am fine with something closer to what Pride did. The one part of scoring that would be tricky is are you scoring it as an equal whole or are you weighing the end of the fight more heavily? To me there's an element of it being a replication of an actual fight, and in that case what is happening at the end of the fight is probably the most important.

For example under the current system, Rose definitely beat Andrade 29-28. But under a Pride system, would anyone give that fight to Rose? I would give it to Andrade. But then how much better do Rose's first two rounds have to be to win that fight and erase that last round?

What if you flipped around the rounds and Andrade's big round was the first round and then Rose came back and out-pointed her for the last two rounds? In that case, maybe you give it to Rose?

The one part about a new scoring system that I would welcome is more draws. It just seems that there are so many fights where both guys are pretty equal and you are just basically flipping a coin. Max/Volkanovski 2 could of been a draw. Hooker/Felder could have been a draw. Maybe it's unsatisfying to some but if both guys are equal then why not call it like it was?

I understand the logic, but I don't like weighing the later rounds more.

1. It's still a sport. You don't get extra points because you scored in the last period of a hockey game.
2. I think it could potentially make some of the earlier rounds boring because they are saving themselves for the bonus rounds. Not in every case certainly, but I think it would be noticeable in too many fights.
3. There are ebbs and flows in fights all the time. Just because a guy lost round 5 doesn't mean he'd lose round 6.
4. If you squeak out round 5, does that count as much as a clear round 1 win? I don't like that. Exactly like you said with Andrade-Rose. If Andrade did that damage in the first round, but Rose wins 2 and 3, I still think Andrade won.

If they used it as a tie breaker or something, I could live with that. And I'd still probably like it more than the current 10-point-must system, but I'd rather the fight be judged evenly.

My preferred method though, I think is just to loosen up the 10-point must system. Maybe Max wins Round 1 and 2 10-8 because of the knock downs. Round 3 is a 10-10. Round 4 10-9 for Volkanovski (to be generous, I'd probably score it 10-10). Round 5 is 10-9 for Volkanovski. Max wins 48-46. Maybe Rose-Andrade is 10-9, 10-9, and 7-10. Andrade wins 28-27. Why have it out of 10 if you are all but guaranteed 8 points if you make it to the end of the round? (I think they can score 10-7, but I'm not sure I ever saw one.)

I'd be OK with more draws, too, but as I've suggested, I don't think Max-Volkanovski 2 was a draw. I definitely think rounds should be scored as draws more often, though.

I'd also like there to be a little bit more guidelines on what scores and how that score compares to other scores. Like those pitter patter leg kicks Volkanovski throws, surely that is not equally to Gaethje trying to break guys legs in half. Because I agree people liking Max is probably influencing their opinions some, but I think the 'significant strike' totals are effecting other's for Volkanovski. Some of those kicks he landed had to have been counted as significant strikes, but were probably mildly annoying at best. But is it half? 25%? 10%? Same with those takedowns with no control. It's got to count for something IMO, but is it 25% of a takedown with control? 10% of a takedown with G&P? Or is it equal to a jab? Or 5 jabs? It's never going to be an exact science, but I think there is too much interpretation now.

 

[crazychimp]

If you want to judge the fight as whole it’s Max all the way with the two knockdowns, if you’re judging round by round you could say it’s close.

After the UFC bought Pride they should have read there rulebook and implemented those rules into there organization, Pride judged fights as a whole, I was also a fan of the 10 minute first rounds.

As a long time fan, it’s time to have an athletic commission that specializes in MMA. Judges who strictly judged boxing fights for years and years that have no knowledge of MMA should not be judging MMA fights period.

 

[pistolpete11]

Here's something I'd like to see experimented with for scoring MMA fights...

Judges will award 0 - 3 points per round

If a round is too close to call, both fighters receive 0 points

If a fighter wins a round, but doesn't really do much damage, he is awarded 1 point

If a fighter wins a round convincingly while doing some damage, he is awarded 2 points

If a fighter completely dominates a round while doing significant damage, he is awarded 3 points


That way if a fighter wins round 1 and 2, but doesn't really do much damage, with a strong 3rd round his opponent can still win a decision, or have the contest scored a draw

I'd be OK with this, too. It's essentially the same as the loosened 10-point system that I suggested above. You should be able to score a round as a draw and there needs to be more separation between a round won and an ass beating.

 

[m9]

If you want to judge the fight as whole it’s Max all the way with the two knockdowns, if you’re judging round by round you could say it’s close.

After the UFC bought Pride they should have read there rulebook and implemented those rules into there organization, Pride judged fights as a whole, I was also a fan of the 10 minute first rounds.

As a long time fan, it’s time to have an athletic commission that specializes in MMA. Judges who strictly judged boxing fights for years and years that have no knowledge of MMA should not be judging MMA fights period.

The UFC didn't buy Pride to turn themselves into Pride.. they just wanted their fight library and a few contracts. Pride did a few things well but aside from scoring/judging there aren't many other things that Pride did better than the UFC.

 

[m9]

My preferred method though, I think is just to loosen up the 10-point must system. Maybe Max wins Round 1 and 2 10-8 because of the knock downs. Round 3 is a 10-10. Round 4 10-9 for Volkanovski (to be generous, I'd probably score it 10-10). Round 5 is 10-9 for Volkanovski. Max wins 48-46. Maybe Rose-Andrade is 10-9, 10-9, and 7-10. Andrade wins 28-27. Why have it out of 10 if you are all but guaranteed 8 points if you make it to the end of the round? (I think they can score 10-7, but I'm not sure I ever saw one.)

I'd be OK with more draws, too, but as I've suggested, I don't think Max-Volkanovski 2 was a draw. I definitely think rounds should be scored as draws more often, though.

I'd also like there to be a little bit more guidelines on what scores and how that score compares to other scores. Like those pitter patter leg kicks Volkanovski throws, surely that is not equally to Gaethje trying to break guys legs in half. Because I agree people liking Max is probably influencing their opinions some, but I think the 'significant strike' totals are effecting other's for Volkanovski. Some of those kicks he landed had to have been counted as significant strikes, but were probably mildly annoying at best. But is it half? 25%? 10%? Same with those takedowns with no control. It's got to count for something IMO, but is it 25% of a takedown with control? 10% of a takedown with G&P? Or is it equal to a jab? Or 5 jabs? It's never going to be an exact science, but I think there is too much interpretation now.

I agree with all this. The annoying thing is, they've seemingly tried to initiate some of these changes over the years but it's never really happened. Pretty much any system offered would be better than what they have.

Literally off the top of my head as I'm typing, what if there was 10pts available for the two fighters in each round and then judges had to hand them out depending how the round was.

So Rose/Andrade:
Round 1 - Rose - 6, Andrade 4
Round 2 - Rose - 6, Andrade 4
Round 3 -Rose - 2, Andrade 8
Total: Andrade wins 16-14

Max/Volk
Round 1 - Max 7, Volk 3
Round 2 - Max 6, Volk 4
Round 3 - Max 5, Volk 5
Round 4 - Max 4, Volk 6
Round 5 - Max 4, Volk 6
Total: Max wins 26-24

To me that system that I have spent literally 0 minutes of thought on is better than what they've done forever.

 

[I am not exposed]

There aren’t really any robberies in this dumbass scoring system since they assign numerical values to something that’s subjective but idk, there’s a reason why a significant majority of people thought Max won. He landed the damage in the fight and I thought he won round 3. Helwani and one of the judges said he won round 5 (idk about that one).

The fight was basically Reyes-Jones 2.0 now that I’ve had time to reflect on it

Yeah, I said the same thing earlier in this thread.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

To those people who thought Max won and point towards the two knockdowns as the reason why, watch the tape again.

Volk popped back up each time after the knockdown and didn't look hurt or wobbly.

I'm not saying that Max shouldn't score points for the knockdowns, he obviously did and rightly was awarded rounds 1 and 2. But i think the impact of the knockdowns as a reason why Max should win the fight was very overstated.

My opinion that the 2 knockdown by Max and the 2 takedowns by Volk largely cancel each other out. Both of them got up straight away after it happened.

I think the judges got it right. Volk won the last 3 rounds albeit closely than the first 2, and won the fight.

 

[pistolpete11]

I agree with all this. The annoying thing is, they've seemingly tried to initiate some of these changes over the years but it's never really happened. Pretty much any system offered would be better than what they have.

Literally off the top of my head as I'm typing, what if there was 10pts available for the two fighters in each round and then judges had to hand them out depending how the round was.

So Rose/Andrade:
Round 1 - Rose - 6, Andrade 4
Round 2 - Rose - 6, Andrade 4
Round 3 -Rose - 2, Andrade 8
Total: Andrade wins 16-14

Max/Volk
Round 1 - Max 7, Volk 3
Round 2 - Max 6, Volk 4
Round 3 - Max 5, Volk 5
Round 4 - Max 4, Volk 6
Round 5 - Max 4, Volk 6
Total: Max wins 26-24

To me that system that I have spent literally 0 minutes of thought on is better than what they've done forever.

That works too. Anything with the ability to call a round a tie and at least a couple degrees of separation between a win and an ass beating I could get behind.

Unfortunately, I think the UFC is at the mercy of the commissions in the US and they aren't the most competent groups of people. I'm not sure how you change that. Luke Thomas suggested that the UFC experiment with different scoring systems when they go international, but I actually don't like that idea. I think the UFC needs to be consistent no matter where they are. Fights are already crazy enough so to throw another factor into it seems like it could be unfair to the fighters.

I don't know. I think they should try to find some commissions and smaller promotions that are willing to work with them to try out different systems. If it's successful, which how could it not be more successful than the current one, maybe you can convince other commissions to adopt it. I also don't think the UFC really gives a shit unfortunately. They are going to make whatever fights they want anyway (see Jose Aldo) and all the controversy and debate about it isn't really a bad thing.

 

[crazychimp]

The UFC didn't buy Pride to turn themselves into Pride.. they just wanted their fight library and a few contracts. Pride did a few things well but aside from scoring/judging there aren't many other things that Pride did better than the UFC.

I disagree, it was a much more exciting product, kicks and stomps on the ground, you’re allowed to up-kick even if your opponents in your guard, no elbows which resulted in less cuts, although I would allow elbows standing, on the ground I would like it to be nonexistent, Josh Thomson made a good point on Rogan’s podcast a few months back, he’s says their’s more opportunities for Jui-Jitsu guys who are fighting off there back and more movement and better opportunities for transitions, if not, knee’s to the grounded opponent should be allowed, if a fighter stuffs a takedown why is he not allowed to knee the other fighter? But if a wrestler gets a takedown he’s allowed to go haywire with elbows? I truly believe the rules set out favour wrestlers more than anyone. Even there gloves were better with a little bit more padding plus a forced curve which I believe resulted in less eye pokes.

 

[pistolpete11]

To those people who thought Max won and point towards the two knockdowns as the reason why, watch the tape again.

Volk popped back up each time after the knockdown and didn't look hurt or wobbly.

I'm not saying that Max shouldn't score points for the knockdowns, he obviously did and rightly was awarded rounds 1 and 2. But i think the impact of the knockdowns as a reason why Max should win the fight was very overstated.

My opinion that the 2 knockdown by Max and the 2 takedowns by Volk largely cancel each other out. Both of them got up straight away after it happened.

I think the judges got it right. Volk won the last 3 rounds albeit closely than the first 2, and won the fight.

I disagree. A knockdown is far more damaging than a take down.

 

[pistolpete11]

I disagree, it was a much more exciting product, kicks and stomps on the ground, you’re allowed to up-kick even if your opponents in your guard, no elbows which resulted in less cuts, although I would allow elbows standing, on the ground I would like it to be nonexistent, Josh Thomson made a good point on Rogan’s podcast a few months back, he’s says their’s more opportunities for Jui-Jitsu guys who are fighting off there back and more movement and better opportunities for transitions, if not, knee’s to the grounded opponent should be allowed, if a fighter stuffs a takedown why is he not allowed to knee the other fighter? But if a wrestler gets a takedown he’s allowed to go haywire with elbows? I truly believe the rules set out favour wrestlers more than anyone.

Much like the scoring system, it's not really up to the UFC. They need to get the commission's buy off. Big John's told the story of outlawing the 12-to-6 elbow who knows how many times, but one of the commission members saw a video of a guy breaking a bunch of bricks with a 12-to-6 elbow. And that's why it's not allowed. No matter how much they argued it, the commission wouldn't accept it. Now, nobody wants to take on the responsibility of removing a rule, so here we are.

Stomps and soccer kicks are probably the same reasoning, which I'm probably OK with. You could literally kill a guy with one of those. I know it's a dangerous sport and you could end up killing a guy other ways too, but those seem a step too far for me.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

I disagree. A knockdown is far more damaging than a take down.

Agree to disagree. We have seen takedown slams that have ko people.

You got to judge every action on its merits.

If the opponent pops back up straight away from a knockdown then the damage impact is low to medium.

Same criteria should apply to a takedown.

 

[m9]

I disagree, it was a much more exciting product, kicks and stomps on the ground, you’re allowed to up-kick even if your opponents in your guard, no elbows which resulted in less cuts, although I would allow elbows standing, on the ground I would like it to be nonexistent, Josh Thomson made a good point on Rogan’s podcast a few months back, he’s says their’s more opportunities for Jui-Jitsu guys who are fighting off there back and more movement and better opportunities for transitions, if not, knee’s to the grounded opponent should be allowed, if a fighter stuffs a takedown why is he not allowed to knee the other fighter? But if a wrestler gets a takedown he’s allowed to go haywire with elbows? I truly believe the rules set out favour wrestlers more than anyone. Even there gloves were better with a little bit more padding plus a forced curve which I believe resulted in less eye pokes.

I agree that the emphasis is on wrestling in the UFC can lead to things be not as exciting at times. I think there are other ways to incentivize action than the other things you mentioned which honestly I don't really care about or miss from the product.

Pride had a fun format, interesting fighters, and questionable matchmaking that made the end product exciting. I don't think the rules had much to do with it, in my opinion.

 

[pistolpete11]

Agree to disagree. We have seen takedown slams that have ko people.

You got to judge every action on its merits.

If the opponent pops back up straight away from a knockdown then the damage impact is low to medium.

Same criteria should apply to a takedown.

You're reaching. A takedown is not a slam. A slam is a slam.

A takedown is changing the position of a fight. OK, great. It deserves to be scored. But, for however brief of a period of time it is, a knockdown is disconnecting your brain from your body. If you get taken down, you could spend nearly the entire 5 minutes on your back and they won't necessarily stop the fight. You spend more than a few seconds with your body disconnected from your brain, they'll stop the fight. There's a reason that the record for most takedowns in a fight is 21 and the record for most knockdowns is 5.

 

[CDJ]

Agree to disagree. We have seen takedown slams that have ko people.

You got to judge every action on its merits.

If the opponent pops back up straight away from a knockdown then the damage impact is low to medium.

Same criteria should apply to a takedown.

how many takedown slams have you seen KO A person vs how many people have you seen dropped and stopped by a punch?


Pretttttttty big margin there I would imagine. Ones far better at finishing people while the other is kind of flukey. On the flip side you can take somebody down and have it mean absolutely zero And do absolutely nothing (hell it could even gas the person going for it out), but if you’re knocking somebody down (NOT a slip) then that’s very real damage and I don’t see how that’s disputable

I think you’d be hard-pressed to find somebody inside the sport say that a takedown should be equal to a knockdown punch/combo. I don’t even think Ben Askren would say that tbh


Edit: one last thing- you only have so many knockdowns in your career before your brain is mush. I think that in itself shows you which one is more dangerous and should be taken more seriously by the judges

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

Hey guys How does fight island work? so if the fights are at 7 am Abu Dubi time do the athletes have to get up at 3 am? Or do they just stay on NA time while over there?


This is very confusing

 

[m9]

Hey guys How does fight island work? so if the fights are at 7 am Abu Dubi time do the athletes have to get up at 3 am? Or do they just stay on NA time while over there?


This is very confusing

Ultimately it would just be up to the fighter. Lots of guys are coming from all sorts of different timezones as well so they may do things differently.

But yeah, I would say for the North American fighters they probably just stay on NA time.

 

[pistolpete11]

I'd guess every fighter has an idea on how much sleep is optimal for them and how many hours after waking up they are at their best. Then you just back calculate it from when you expect to fight. Regardless of where the fights are.

But yeah, I mean, there is no way anyone is adjusting to UAE time and then waking up in the middle of the night to fight. Even that Lazzaz guy that fought last night who trains in UAE had to have adjusted his sleep schedule.