MMA & UFC...what rules would you change/implement?

nomorebadtown

I'm an avid spectator of most types of MMA, UFC, K1 etc

Was just wondering what extra rules would you add (or take away) that you think would benifit the sport?

Personally i'd like to see the "finishing" on the mat head strikes abolished...you know when a guy takes a hefty KO strike with fist, elbow, leg and goes down like a sack and the opp is allowed jump in and work some ground n pound when the guy is already practically unconscious....to me its just needless and gratuitous and it is this type of activity which causes the majority of the oppsoition to the sport.

Fozzy

In a lot of cases I don't think that the head shots after a knockdown are too bad, but there have been a lot of cases where it's been unnecessary and obviously very dangerous. It's probably the one aspect of MMA that I can think of that is unique to the sport and not a part of any of the individual martial arts that help make it up

I'd like to see a different scoring system in the US. The 10 point must system suits boxing, but not MMA where there's so much more to it. I think that scoring should take the whole fight into account and not break it up into rounds. As it is now, fighter A can just barely sneak the first two rounds by being slightly better and fighter B can totally dominate the last round but A will still win, even though B has done more damage in one round than A did in the whole fight

I prefer the 10 minute first rounds that they had in PRIDE and have now in DREAM. Ideally I'd like no rounds at all, but I'm not sure if that's practical. The thing that mainly annoys me about rounds is that one fighter may have been struggling for a takedown for four and a half minutes, then when he finally gets it he can do nothing because the round's over

roo1981

Id agree with Fozzy, the Pride rules kicked ass. Id like to see elbows on the ground gone-I just dont think they add a lot to the sport. Nothing worse than seeing a fight being stopped before it starts cause a fighters been sliced by a crafty bow during GnP.

Pride style GnP was great, not allowing bows left the guy on the bottom a bit more able to work escapes and subs, and allowing knees to the head on the ground prevented fighters turtling for prolonged periods...may be a bit dodgy but I'd like to see it reintroduced. The only thing I'd have a problem with is stomps and soccer kicks, they look pretty ropey.

The 10 min first round is a good idea too...no rounds would be a bad idea though. The pace of the fights would end up ways too slow (Royce\Sakuraba being an example)

The scoring system should be more transparent for sure...the current system in the UFC is a joke, a lot of the judges appointed by the commission are boxing judges, which just doesnt work. The 10 point system could work, it just needs to be clarified or the judges need to be from an exclusively MMA background-id like to see the commission appoint retired fighters as judges for instance.

Kent Brockman

No heel hooks for me -- but we've been down that road here before.

cowzerp

The ground and pound after a heavy knock down is just bad reffing in most cases and very hard to stop unless you brought in a rule where there was no gnp for 5 seconds after a knock down or something and thats not practical for mma.

i would not care if elbows on the ground where removed but at the top level fighters should be good enough to defend them so either way really!

PADRAIC.M

i say bring back greasing! :-) and i also agree about the ten point system they def need a system unique for mma and maybe a similar rule for ufc as cage rage with the open guard rule?

Fozzy

PADRAIC.M wrote: »

and maybe a similar rule for ufc as cage rage with the open guard rule?

I never saw many shows from the period that they were using that rule, but they dropped it after a while so I can only assume that it wasn't working for some reason

PADRAIC.M

it was slightly safer for the guy on bottom but it did pause the action for a moment and give the bottom guy recovery time but it wasn't much of a crowd pleaser maybe that was why they dropped it, also has anyone noticed in the ufc if a guy gets caught and dropped the aggressor isn't trying to kill the guy on the ground either, he just does enough to get the job done/ref stoppage compared to a few years ago they would throw bombs

Valmont

I would like to see extra heelhooks and knees to the head on the ground. Then I would be a happy fan. I miss the old pride rules and I'll never forget Phil Baroni stomping a guys head for the TKO. Ah well you can't have everything.

bjj-fighter

Would'nt change any.

I like having it vary between America and Japan aswell,gives it a change

PADRAIC.M

yeah knees to the head are way better than elbows on the ground for the spectator alright,wasn't there a few heel hook attempts in the last fight night and first episode of tuf?

unknown13

PADRAIC.M wrote: »

a similar rule for ufc as cage rage with the open guard rule?

What are you on that was a F**king horrible rule and what made cage rage a complete joke.

10 point must system works IMO but fights are judged by boxing judges everywhere other than New Jersey, who have different judges for boxing and MMA.

I would bring in a 10 count for a knockdown because if its a standup fighter against a grappler he may not want to go to the ground if he has put the fighter down because the grappler could do something if he isn't that hurt.

Also a standing count would be nice to see aswell

unknown13

PADRAIC.M wrote: »

yeah knees to the head are way better than elbows on the ground for the spectator alright,wasn't there a few heel hook attempts in the last fight night and first episode of tuf?

Do you honestly know what your talking about because I would prefer 5 elbows than 1 knee when grounded .

Also I would make leglocks an illegal technique because they are just too dangerous particulary if there cross the opponents body.

roo1981

Naaa standing counts would be a diaster. They'd totally break up the flow of a fight, and in the long run would be worse for fighters. If a fighters be clocked clean enough to go down and cant use grappling to defend himself then the fights over...if the striker doesnt have the skills to move in and finish him, well thats a crucial part of the game, if the guy on the bottom can still defend then the fights still on.

Im not a big fan of leglocks and heelhooks, but I dont see any reason they should be taken out...their as valid a sub as an armbar in my book. Most top level fighters should know the escapes for them anyways, and would know to tap if their caught tight in one...

Martin Walker

I would like to see knees to the head on the ground introduced to mainstream MMA.

I would hate to see elbow strikes banned.
Elbow strikes, if used properly, are not meant to smash your opponent. They are meant to cut.
Alot of MMA fighters use elbow strikes to hurt the opponent. Thats why we see lots of bumpy heads. If you throw an elbow properly you can cut your opponent and finish the fight before it starts.

Dunno about "open guard"....... seems too much like a street fight to me.

PADRAIC.M

unknown13 wrote: »

Do you honestly know what your talking about because I would prefer 5 elbows than 1 knee when grounded .

Also I would make leglocks an illegal technique because they are just too dangerous particulary if there cross the opponents body.

I would rather get knocked out from a knee(to stop stale mate positions from turtle position) than fight stopped due to a cut from an elbow, inverted leg locks are dangerous alright but straight you should be able to defend them/escape or tap.

AlanSparrowhawk

unknown13 wrote: »

What are you on that was a F**king horrible rule and what made cage rage a complete joke.

10 point must system works IMO but fights are judged by boxing judges everywhere other than New Jersey, who have different judges for boxing and MMA.

I would bring in a 10 count for a knockdown because if its a standup fighter against a grappler he may not want to go to the ground if he has put the fighter down because the grappler could do something if he isn't that hurt.

Also a standing count would be nice to see aswell

you 'aving a laf?

Fozzy

Martin Walker wrote: »

I would hate to see elbow strikes banned.
Elbow strikes, if used properly, are not meant to smash your opponent. They are meant to cut.
Alot of MMA fighters use elbow strikes to hurt the opponent. Thats why we see lots of bumpy heads. If you throw an elbow properly you can cut your opponent and finish the fight before it starts.

Well...that's the reason people would rather see no elbow strikes. If you manage to cut your opponent bad enough for the fight to stop it doesn't necessarily mean that you're a better fighter than your opponent, as he's usually still well able to defend himself when the doctor stops it

Martin Walker

Yeah i know. And i fully understand why people dont like to see fighs ended with cuts. But i like to see someone with the skill to use there elbows this way. As you say Fozzy it dosnt mean that your the better fighter. But it can be used as a smart way to end a fight early if implemented right.

Raze_them_all

Fozzy wrote: »

Well...that's the reason people would rather see no elbow strikes. If you manage to cut your opponent bad enough for the fight to stop it doesn't necessarily mean that you're a better fighter than your opponent, as he's usually still well able to defend himself when the doctor stops it

Thats one way of looking at it, If a fighter throws a punch and sparks someone out everyone will be ok with it, if a fighter throws an elbow and cuts a guy and the fight stops it's the same result, he threw it to cause damage/stop the fight, it's the same thing but everybody always complains about cuts.

If it's an accidental clash of heads then yeah I hate cuts but if it was meant I dont see the problem

Pride Fighter

Swords on the side of a cage, also a trident and net;)

Seriously the 10 point must is gack. They should make it a 20-19 must where they dock more points off the more you dominate. Hardly any 10-8 rounds in the 10 point must and there should be way more.

pablohoney87

I think that in most cases the ten point scoring system works. The publicity on it lately seems to mainly because of the condit kapmann fight.
Personally I think the best rule introduction would be that Cecil Peoples sholdnt have anything to do with a fight decision. Hes not allowed ref in the ufc anymore because of constant mistakes but judges on nearly every card.
The majority of confusing split decisions are caused by him.

RealJohn

unknown13 wrote: »

What are you on that was a F**king horrible rule and what made cage rage a complete joke.

10 point must system works IMO but fights are judged by boxing judges everywhere other than New Jersey, who have different judges for boxing and MMA.

I would bring in a 10 count for a knockdown because if its a standup fighter against a grappler he may not want to go to the ground if he has put the fighter down because the grappler could do something if he isn't that hurt.

Also a standing count would be nice to see aswell

I'd like to see a 10 count for a knockdown if the fighter who scores the knockdown steps back. If the other fighter doesn't get up before the count of 10, he's out. This means a stand-up fighter doesn't have to go to the ground to finish a fight and it also means a lot of fighters won't take those shots they take before the ref manages to step in.

A standing count would be awful though.

I wouldn't like to see anything taken out. Cutting your opponent is no fun for the viewing public but it's a legitimate way to win so elbows are fine by me. I'm also ok with heel hooks and neck cranks. Learn to tap or face the consequences. If you're a pro, it's up to you to make those decisions. If you don't like it, don't fight pro.

Not sure about knees to the head on the ground but I'd be inclined to allow them if we could be sure that the referee would protect the fighter on the receiving end. Less sure about soccer kicks and stomps because if you catch someone right with either of those, you can really mess them up.

As for the 10 point must system, it'd be fine if it was better applied. In theory, it allows for 10-8, 10-7, 10-6 rounds but in practice, we rarely see anything other than 10-9 in mma (and we rarely see 10-10 either - sometimes rounds are even). If judges were more inclined to give wider margins when they're deserved, it would receive much less criticism I think.

PADRAIC.M

Raze_them_all wrote: »

Thats one way of looking at it, If a fighter throws a punch and sparks someone out everyone will be ok with it, if a fighter throws an elbow and cuts a guy and the fight stops it's the same result, he threw it to cause damage/stop the fight, it's the same thing but everybody always complains about cuts.

If it's an accidental clash of heads then yeah I hate cuts but if it was meant I dont see the problem

Yeah I agree about the point that if the shot be it a punch or an elbow are thrown but thrown with conviction to end the fight or inflict damage, thats the main reason they are in mma still today as it does take skill to land them clean in someones guard,
Not mad about the point of the elbow strikes to the top of the head from bottom guard though...

cowzerp

RealJohn wrote: »

I'd like to see a 10 count for a knockdown if the fighter who scores the knockdown steps back. If the other fighter doesn't get up before the count of 10, he's out. This means a stand-up fighter doesn't have to go to the ground to finish a fight and it also means a lot of fighters won't take those shots they take before the ref manages to step in.

I dropped an opponent and knew he was hurt so stepped back to allow him up, he took about 20 sec's and i could not do anything because i chose to stand it up, he recovered loads in this time, a count would be fair in this circumstance..in hindsight i should off jumped on him but i knew i'd take him out standing if he stood up the way he should of had to.

Fozzy

If a fight can be finished then it should be finished I think. When a fighter goes down and is allowed the time to get back up and recover he'll usually end up taking more damage than he would have if the fight had ended with his opponent following him down and making the ref stop it

Think of the last Matt Brown fight in the UFC. I forget the opponent, but Brown had him knocked down and the ref stopped it. Then the ref changed his mind. Brown's opponent ended up taking a lot more damage on the feet than he would have if the ref had just stopped it after a few more punches on the ground. I know that it was the ref's fault in that case but the result was the very same as if Brown had been the one who had decided to let his opponent stand up

The reason that many studies have shown MMA to be safer than boxing is due to the nature of the blows to the head. The repeated strikes in boxing have been found to be more damaging than the harder but fewer strikes that occur in MMA. If standing counts were to be allowed then that would eliminate that part of MMA. Every time a fighter goes down and is dazed then he has suffered a concussion, and it's the blows that come after a concussion that do the worst damage. That's why I prefer to see a fight finished quick after a heavy head shot

Valmont

Before we go guns blazing into the elbow-cut debate just take note that it rarely happens in the first place. I find arguments either way tend to give the impression that it's a common occurrence.

cowzerp

The thing with elbows is they suit lay and pray fighters which should be discouraged, its boring and elbows give them a tool to use that system.

calex71

people get cut regardless if elbows are allowed or not, look at strikeforce last night , no elbows or forearms where permitted but there where still cuts.

I think with cutting and elbows its far more obvious when watching a fight that the elbow has caused the cuts as they seem to open you up fast and bleed quickly especially when the camera is close to the action and a fighter is mounted on the ground, it sometimes takes longer to notice cuts when fighters are standing.

It would be interesting to see some stats on the subject regarding damage and cuts caused by elbows vs fights being ended as a result etc. As it is i can see an argument both for and against their use.

In terms of the rules i like the knees being allowed in dream , it would never happen in the US i dont think, i also like their yellow card system for stalling and the loss of 10% of the purse if you get a yellow card.

Professey Chin

calex71 wrote: »

people get cut regardless if elbows are allowed or not, look at strikeforce last night , no elbows or forearms where permitted but there where still cuts.

There wasn't?
Since when do the CSAC not allow elbows and forearms

calex71

Ultimate Chin wrote: »

There wasn't?
Since when do the CSAC not allow elbows and forearms

I know i had to do a double take when i saw that at the start of the show , must be their decision and not the csac

edit there was some debate on that very subject over on sherdog