MMA Judging is TERRIBLE

But Rashad's takedown & pace did have an effect.
It's because of this that Thiago was shot in that third round after he hurt Rashad & could do nothing but taunt.

I understand people might not be happy with the fight but seriously overlooking the effect of being repeatedly taken down & having to fight to get back up.

It's not like Rashad was running away from Thiago, he was taking the fight to him, deciding where the fight would take place & controling him comfortably & yet people still aren't happy???

I didn't see the fight (damn TV died), so I won't comment on the particulars of this fight. I will say that I read that Rashad was actually succeeding on takedowns, which is more than I can say for Couture in the Vera fight. I do think judging needs to be changed, though. The ten point system doesn't really effectively capture the multiple dimensions of MMA as compared to boxing, where you're really only scoring in one dimension, so to speak.

I guess there is a legitimate split when it comes to cage control. I think takedowns should score, of course, but I hate the "cage control" fighting style where you smother the guy without trying to do any damage to them. But even that's better than the dreaded cage lean when everyone can see you're actually avoiding the fight. Frustrating a guys attack is a part of fighting, but its really just successful defense, like blocking a punch or escaping a takedown. You shouldn't get a lot of points for it.

I'm a fan and student of grappling, so I hate when cage control fans say critics don't like or understand grappling. For me, grappling is about establishing position and looking to improve that position, while trying to damage or submit your opponent. If you're not trying to improve your position, damage them, or submit them, then you're just defending or stalling, neither of which should get you points. Tiring a guy out and keeping them from hitting you is an effective tactic, but you shouldn't score points from it. Score your points after they're tired, if that's how you want to fight.

I don't think you should get points for standing up, either. But the cage lean is not being dominant. It's stalling/defending. Dominant grappling is securing position, then advancing position. There's a difference between a positional struggle, which some people think is boring, and one guy getting a position and holding it because they're afraid of what might happen if they try to advance, which to me is defense, not dominating. If you keep smashing the other guy with takedowns, of course you should win, if nothing else happens. I wouldn't call what GSP has done recently, or what it sounds like Rashad did, "lay and pray." GSP at least has been clearly dominating.

That is different from the question of whether judging is fine in general. Under the 10 point must system, most rounds are judged 10-9, regardless of whether one fighter just stayed slightly busier, had one takedown, completely controlled the round with positioning and strikes, or almost submitted or KO'd the opponent. By weighing all those things equally (10-8 rounds are rare) you can eventually create a gap between actual performance over the 3-5 rounds, and what the score sheet says happened.

LMAO.

I agree with you for the most part. You shouldn't get points for blocking a punch, but by the same token, sometimes fighters get more credit for strikes than they deserve because some judges don't consider that the opponent blocked a lot of them.

Granted, if the entire round is one dude smashing another for 5 minutes, even if the opponent blocked 90 percent of the strikes, the guy throwing the strikes still wins the round based on pushing the action and the few strikes that connected. But I think judges need to give fighters more credit for things like blocking punches, checking kicks, etc. Not necessarily give them "points" for it, but at least take into consideration that the guy saw it coming and defended it.

Same with takedowns... I don't think getting up from a takedown is necessarily worth "points" (especially if your goal was to avoid/stuff the takedown and you failed at it... which excludes BJJ guys that pull guard on purpose, etc.). But I don't think a takedown should be considered as impressive if the guy doing them is consistently unable to capitalize on it, or is clearly doing it to rack up points.

I hate it when a guy shoots for a takedown with 5 seconds left in the round just to score points, because it's not plausible to believe that they really expected to do anything with it once they got to the ground.



I actually thought the judges had the right to score a round 10-10, but most of them don't because they feel obligated to pick a winner.