Is UFC too brutal for the fighters?

Seriously? Full guard? Butterfly guard? Bridge?

Point deducted from guy who has the mount? It's ****ing hard to get the mounted. It should be rewarded not penalised.

Fighting isn't the sport for you I'm afraid

 

Stomps will never be allowed in the cage. As for headbutts thats a thing of the past. You'll have to watch Vale Tudo if you want to see that amazing technique.

 

no, no. miscommunication. i meant that the guy being mounted should be deducted a point much like in boxing with a knockdown. it would be a 10-8 round in favor of the guy who gets full mount on his oppenent.

 

There is a lot a good fighter can do from being caught in a full mount. The **** are you going on about?

 

Full mount is a bit closer to something like having a guy on the buzzed and on the ropes.. Some guys can recover, some guys wilt, and it depends on the skill of both men in boxing..

It is similar in MMA... Depends on the guy who takes full mount, and the guy on the bottom.. Some fighters are just poor when they have dominant position, some guys are amazing at escapes.

Its just a painful thing that needs to play out.. Like, watching somebody finish the grip of a kimura or key lock.. There are ways out, sometimes just being able to grit through it. Sometimes guys will refuse to tap and have their shoulders destroyed, other times guys will refuse to tap and escape with some damage, but this part should be up to the fighter..

A lot like, watching someone like Malignaggi fight Cotto.. There was no point in that fight continuing past the 5th or so round.. Paulie was never going to knock Cotto down, or dominate rounds to win a decision.. No way in hell.. In this sense, boxing is more brutal than MMA..

Watching powerless fighters with good chins, have to go the distance with brutal fighters.. THIS is brutal.

 

well being a grappler and boxer, i find it easy to seperate the two, grappling is organic and boxing is rhythm and timing. for me and my growth in the sports, i keep them seperate.

 

to escape yes, to mount an offense from being fully mounted, tell me how. please.

 

well said, good argument, but some fighters can fight off the ropes, some can generate leverage off the ropes, others can counterpunch. basically an offensive attack can still be establish by the fighter on the ropes. but in full mount, how often do you see a grappler mount an offensive from being fully mounted. escaping is different. its much like being pinned in wreslting. it is a dominant position, shoulder blades on the ground for a second or two, and that type of rule changes the contest in to a artform

 

Well, that depends on how poor the person mounting the attack is.. From full mount, someone can be bucked off.. Someone inexperienced might lay an arm down and be reversed, and end up mounted themselves.

Don't get me wrong.. Not saying MMA is perfect, it is seriously flawed as it is.. Scoring and rules heavily tip the balance in favor of wrestlers, so I do see your point to a degree.

 

scoring is flawed, im just throwing it out there, because these talented guys need to get paid man.

 

Agreed. No reason guys shouldn't be paid more.

Dana White cares about profit, he cares about the mob, but he doesn't seem to hold fighters in the same regard. I wonder how much money he really saved by letting go of Hendo, or how much money he really saves when he pays guys less than 10k when they make it onto a ppv card.

 

What I'm not happy with, is that a fighter can slip on a logo and then get his knee ripped apart. Otherwise I pretty much agree with you. The logo's either have to go or they have to be designed not to impede a fighter. To a lesser extend the same thing happened to Courture.

 

What you're proposing is absolutely impractical and not the point of MMA.

Why is it impractical? Here's why:
So, if a Mui Thai fighter like Anderson Silva gets you into a mui thai clinch, he should release and the other guy gets a point deducted? Cause not a lot of people can escape from Silvas clinch, not to mention mount any real offense.
Same in mount, if you start giving out points for getting a mount, the whole sole puropose of a wrestler will become takedown, pass, mount. Stand up, takedown, pass, mount.

Why is it not the point of MMA? Here's why:
The point is to make the closest possible form of a fighting sport to that of a no holds barred. This means that the fight must be free flowing, with MINIMAL referee interference. Basically anything that ref. does shows interruptions in the flow(of course he also helps to keep the action going). They removed many things for few reason that could not have been overlooked. Obvious things like biting and eye gouging can simply put a fighter out of work in one fight. So they had to implement rules that will keep the actual athletes.
Things like headbutts or knees to the downed opponent are things that had to be removed to get past the commission. These things hardly change the overall flow of the fight and hardly separate it from it's natural no holds barred brutal fight. People like to talk about how, you don't see kimura's "in real fights", but do you really see eye gouging in real fights? I don't see that ever happening unless the fight is to the death. But, fortunately, that's still not the mentality of a regular douchebag in a bar.

Basically, you can't remove someone from the dominant position. He exploited his opponents weakness, he made his point, now he's going to show that in a close resemblance to a real fight, if you give up such a dominant position, and you can't even escape from it, you WILL LOSE the fight. At the same time, if he can't show that he can finish his opponent from the mount the fight goes on. As you might have noticed, if you've watched enough MMA, a lot of times mount doesn't really amount to anything.

 

I don't get why they don't use the technology used in the NFL where they show the first downs and ****. They throw whatever they want with computers now, and the same **** still happens in boxing.