Should have been 10-6! The way scoring is in MMA is just horrible. The 10 pt must system doesn't even work that well for boxing. It's horrible in MMA.
Because the fights are much shorter and you can't put a guy 3-4 points in the hole because he had one bad round. Most fights are only 3 rounds, so if you award a 10-7 round to someone his opponent is ****ed even if he wins the next two rounds in convincing fashion, or gets a KO. 10-8 is fine for mma, IMO.
No, it becomes the other fighters responsibility to come back and either knock out, submit, or win another round in the exact same fashion as he lost the first. A dominant fighter shouldn't be penalized on the scorecards because it's a shorter fight. What's wrong with having to win by stoppage because you are too far down on the scorecards?
Because with so few rounds in MMA compared to 12 round boxing matches, the powerpunching type guy gets too much advantage. A natural heavy puncher gets a couple knockdowns and he's too far ahead for his opponent to have any chance of a comeback so he mentally quits and just survives to fight another day. The fans get ****ed. But if he figures at most I'm down two points then he gets his head together and fights like hell to get the draw or sneak out a win. 10-7 rounds would destroy MMA, especially 3 round contests.
If he gets the KO then he er wins by KO atsch Personally I wouldn't have scoring at all...just have the judges pick the winner at the end. But if you had more 10-7 rounds given I don't see how it disadvantages the person on the losing end - they can always come back and get a 10-7 round themselves. If they can't do that then that's their problem.
Why is that? When a guy is dropped multiple times and completely manhandled worse than any fighter who has ever actually finshed the round.... why on earth wouldn't it be a 10-6? Definitely no less than a 10-7. Pac got a 10-6 for dropping Marquez 3 times in round 1 of their first fight. If you are going to try to use boxings point system for MMA, then you should use it the way it is meant to be used. A fighter should be rewarded for dominating a round like that. The 10 pt must sytem is just ******ed in MMA. A fighter should get pts for what he does... not be awarded pts automatically. What the hell did Edgar do in round 1 to be awarded 8 pts? So... in your book... it should be that a fighter gets dominated like that, and barely wins each of the next 2 rounds on pts in rounds that are really close to call. It should be a draw or a win for the fighter who got absolutely destroyed in the first round? That's just silly. If they raised the pts awarded for such a beating,we would see more exciting fights. People wouldn't have to worry about punching themselves out so much. They would know that they could build a strong lead with a strong performance. Rather than doing just enough to win the round.
They still do the 10 pt must system in 4 round boxing matches. That argument doesn't hold water. Also, that doesn't give the power punching guy an advantage. That's like saying it's the same way in boxing. If you are more technical... then you better be on your game using your superior techincal ability. Also... don't forget that there is also grappling, wrestling. I am not just talking about Edgar being knocked down in that round. He was just absolutely slaughtered.
Exactly. I wonder if they could start using a half point, or changing it to a 20 point system. Even though it would be the same thing, the half point may be an easier sell. Use 10-8 as the largest deficit, because it is a near damning score in a 3 round fight. Use 10-8.5 for one sided rounds in which the loser of the round isn't nearly finished on numerous occasions. 10-9 can be the norm for a competitive round with a clear winner. Maybe even do away with even rounds, unless due to point deductions, and use 10-9.5 for close calls. It may **** things up even more, especially in the beginning; but that having the additional scoring options are fairer for mma. Look at Rampage vs Machida, and compare it to Edgar vs Maynard II. There is no way Rampage took the first two rounds against Machida as clearly as Edgar took the 2nd or 4th against Maynard. There is also no way that Machida took the 3rd against Jackson as big as Maynard took the 1st against Edgar.
10-7 round aren't the same in MMA & boxing. In boxing, you get the knockdown, the guy gets a chance to recover and you get another another kd. MMA it's a continuous flow of action that sees people going down & fighting w/o any chance to recover. I doubt anyone would score a boxing round 10-7 if no knockdowns happened but one boxer was battered from post to post. I'm also pretty sure that most people have scored rounds 10-9 that had one guy drop the other guy but not finish.
The thing is, in boxing it's really based on knockdowns or severe ass whoopings, which is what round 1 was. When you look at Pacquiao-Marquez I, the first round was a 10-6 round because of the three knockdowns, but in MMA it's harder to clarify because there's takedowns, punches, everything to choose from.
