I agree with the judging of the fight, I hate when guys fight and win 2 rounds where it could have went either way and the other other guys does damage and hurts his opponent but only wins 1 round. As a whole the guy who did damage and hurt the other guy should win the fight but the 10 point system let's couture pin Vera against the fence for 2 rounds and win the fight even though Vera had couture in trouble and not far form being finished and all Vera had was a sore back from being pinned against the fence.
Well theres a reason for rounds. If its all about who scored the most damage lets start doing 1 round for 15 minutes. MMA is just like Boxing or football or whatever you rack up the points quarter by quarter or in our case round by round.
So many rounds are so close that one guy really doesn't deserve to"win" the round and the next round a guy clearly wins the round but yet the score is tied because they have 1 round each but 1 fighter has clearly done more damage. Another example is the Kimbo-Houston fight. Houston won round 1 by running and giving Kimbo's leg's a few taps. Round 2 Kimbo dominated and did alot of damage. The fight is 1 round to 1 but yet Kimbo is clearly winning the fight as a whole.
forces inside mma need to decide if a. they are trying to simulate an actual physical confrontation b. they are trying to make money c. they are trying to determine the effectiveness of the various martial arts d. they are trying to put on a highly entertaining show e. they are trying to make progress with mma as a respectable sport All of these goals effect eachother, and in UFC's current state it is a blend of all of the above sacrificing a bit from each one (except maybe b. :yep) to make it successful. I do know that the viewing numbers will increase as the brutality increases.
As far as the rules go. I hate when elbows aren't allowed. I would like to see knees allowed on the ground though, but no kicks or stomps on a downed opponents head... that's just a good way to get the sport banned. When elbows AND knees aren't allowed on the ground, it pretty much makes ground and pound pretty ******ed. You have to give your opponent underneath of you too much space when you are only allowed to rain down punches. It really handicaps G&P fighters by limiting their ground striking options so much. I hate Strikeforce's G&P rules.
this is exactly right.. theyve taken fighting and tried to turn it into a sport but its getting further and further from what a real fight actually is. personally id like to see no rounds, just a half an hour time limit and lets actually see who the better fighter really is.
Your rule changes give too much advantage to wrestlers. I'm all for knees in the ground as it's basically the main weapon from side control. However, knees to a downed opponent and soccer kicks make taking a shot and missing it that much more dangerous. It'd make the whole sport that much more intense to include those rules. Won't happen though.
It would be much better for the fans if they decided, but they make more money letting everyone pretend that it's whatever they want it to be. That's why **** will be kept vague.
But also in boxing a fighter can win a fight with 1 round to 2 because his round may have been better than his opponents 2.
My rule changes?:huh I already said that I think that knees to a downed opponent should be allowed. However, soccer kicks and foot stomps shouldn't be. Soccer kicks and foot stomps are NOT a threat to a wrestler taking a shot. To be honest, knees aren't a big threat either. It isn't too often that you see fighters get knocked out with a knee when shooting in. It has happened... but it's not a big threat in general. In reality, the last thing that you should do when someone shoots on you is drive your legs or knees into them, that just gives them an easy takedown 99 out of 100 times. You should sprawl. Even if knees are going to be effective for stopping takedowns, it is when they are on the way down for the shot anyways... which is still legal to do because they aren't down on their knees yet. I think that the rules already clearly favor the strikers by a LARGE margin. Ground striking is very limited in under every set of rules. You either can't knee, can't elbow... or both on the ground. Taking away a HUGE part of ground and pound. If there isn't enough action for the ref on the ground, then the fighters are put back on their feet. Yet... when the fighters are boring as **** on their feet, they sure as hell don't put them on the ground. While fighting on their feet... strikers can use their entire variety of strikes with basically no limitations. The rules favor the strikers.
I think you are getting your terms muddled a bit. Limits on stomps and soccer ball kicks to downed opponents limit standing strikers. Limits on grounded knees/elbows limit GnP strikers, but they are both striking methods. A lot of time GNP comes from a knockdown from a strike, not just a takedown. The rules limit strikers as a whole more so than grapplers. Not to mention the fact that strikers are wearing gloves.
You are kidding, right? Wearing gloves hurts grapplers. Wearing gloves HELPS strikers. No, the rules certainly do NOT limit strikers more than grapplers. Especially grapplers who are ground and pound specialists. Striking is limited on the ground, but nearly without limits on the feet. The gloves protect a strikers hands... but really don't take away from the force of a punch. They actually allow the striker to punch HARDER and more often. You couldn't let your hands go like that without gloves on to protect them. However, it is a lot harder to wrestle, and ESPECIALLY a lot harder to slip in submissions with those gloves on. You have got to know this... I can't believe this is even being argued.
You can't disagree that Pride rules are more dangerous for grapplers simply because of the knee factor. This content is protected They really are a game changer.
force is not the only object in the equation to find damage. Both density of the objects, and the surface area over which the force is applied come into play. I could punch you at 500N with a pillow tied to my hand and it would not hurt nearly as much as being bare fisted. Because the surface area is increased and the density of the striking object is decreased. A study which is highly neglected in mma and boxing is a prime study in many so called 'traditional' martial arts such as karate and Taekwondo. I've seen a lot of mma people making fun of the practice of breaking boards, claiming it is irrelevant to combat. But the truth is you can condition your technique and even your knuckles to be able to withstand high force punching. It is something that doesn't matter in mma and boxing, but in an actual fight it is of supreme importance. If you don't know how to land punches properly you will shatter your hands. High level Taekwondo practitioners can condition their hands and knuckles to break granite slabs without hand wraps. The damage caused by a proper bare-fisted punch to the opponents face is absolutely decimating. Take all of the force which is exerted over a (guestimating) 6 square inch glove surface which is cushioned and soft, and condense it into two knuckles on the fist with the surface area of two nickels which are very hard. Not to mention the cuts it would cause. The threat of the properly-trained striker to the grappler is greatly reduced. you are not allowed to strike to the back of the head, this is a restriction against both standing and gnp strikers. Rules against small joint manipulation lesson the ability of the striker/inexperienced grappler to escape a hold. Strikers are far more restricted than grapplers.
