'Downed' - A Story of Semantics [Nerds Only]

[Dr Fong]

It was understandable for the UFC to conform to local ACs before the takeover, but now?

Utter bushleaguery

Have an actual unified ruleset & if Location X doesn't like it, fine, the UFCircus can head to Location Y. The locations need the UFC more than the UFC needs them (as evidenced by the comparable quality of Vegas v Canada cards, for example)

Aside from what to me is utter nonsense (it's fine to Thai clinch an opponent's temple onto my uprising knee, but not when they've got fingers on the ground?) it's just so amateurish to have different rules from here to there.

Champions can win a title under one ruleset but lose it under another? Make it make sense

Whatever 'grounded' rules we come up with, they will always be stupid. The lack of grounded knees fundamentally breaks MMA, basically making it an arbitrary and redundant sport.

MMA is not supposed to be arbitrary. It is supposed to be the closest thing to unarmed combat given certain constraints that conform with social norms and lessen the risk of permanent injuries.

There is no need to be dogmatic. Restricting soccer kicks and stomps sucks but it doesn't have that big of an impact as guys can usually use effective alternate offence in those positions.

But restricting grounded knees just completely distorts the 'fight'. It enables guys to be safe in positions they absolutely should not be safe in and allows them to spam shitty takedowns that they wouldn’t try if they knew they could get knee-murdered.

Really, what the fuck even is the point of MMA without them? May as well just go back to  watching boxing, wrestling and BJJ separately and arguing over who would win between Tyson, Karelin and Rickson without ever finding out.

 

[Safton]

Remember back in like 2017-ish, when they were talking about doing new rules that redefined a downed opponent to stop the 3 point stance thing and weight-bearing stuff you're talking about? But then not every state accepted it, so fighters and commentary kept getting confused what worked where?


That's STILL a thing, but I think after covid and a bunch of Apex cards / lack of diversity in event locations since then got people forgetting about it. Ontario is still old rules. The next event might be back in a place that uses the unified rules. We're not explicitly told and should look at the state commission pages if we're confused. The commentators seem to be not told either, and they will NOT look at state commission pages because they don't do their homework, even "I wish my height was measured in my IQ points instead of inches" Dominick Cruz. BUT the fighters are told before every event by the commission, and the refs should be informed too, since they're the arbiters of the rules. So the action in the cage really shouldn't have a problem.

I didn't really start watching until early 2018ish. But yeah, I remember around that time I remember "one hand versus two hand down" being a thing and a source of inconsistency/controversy depending on the venue (or rather, the commission). The source of my confusion is that a few broadcasts ago, they made it sound as if there was a brand new rule that had been incorporated into the Unified Rules across the board which now meant that in order to be considered "downed" the hand(s) had to be weight-bearing yada yada.

I'm not being facetious, I am legitimately curious. So I guess what I'm asking is: was this actually a new thing that was implemented? And if so, was it only at a few commissions, with Ontario not being one of them?

 

[Sasha]

man, the whole idea of the rule is pretty dumb. depending on the commission, its either one hand or 2. what if you are down, with one (or 2 hands) and u see someone winding up for a big knee to the head. you can either try to block and means your not grounded anymore; or you take it flush and maybe get the dq win or a point deduction. its so stupid.

I agree, in some cases, where the attacking fighter thinks he may have an opportunity, the hands-to-ground rule may indeed encourage the defending fighter to try and touch the ground instead of defending himself. I would argue that it's better for your health to try and defend/avoid knees to the head than to have won the fight by DQ after a full blown knee to the face, totally undefended.

 

[OldBoy91]

I didn't really start watching until early 2018ish. But yeah, I remember around that time I remember "one hand versus two hand down" being a thing and a source of inconsistency/controversy depending on the venue (or rather, the commission). The source of my confusion is that a few broadcasts ago, they made it sound as if there was a brand new rule that had been incorporated into the Unified Rules across the board which now meant that in order to be considered "downed" the hand(s) had to be weight-bearing yada yada.

I'm not being facetious, I am legitimately curious. So I guess what I'm asking is: was this actually a new thing that was implemented? And if so, was it only at a few commissions, with Ontario not being one of them?

It was implemented.

The issue is, the "unified rules" aren't unified at all. It varies from country to country and even state to state.

Ontario still uses the old, pre-ammended downed opponent rule where anything except the soles of the feet touching the canvas is considered to be grounded.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

I didn't really start watching until early 2018ish. But yeah, I remember around that time I remember "one hand versus two hand down" being a thing and a source of inconsistency/controversy depending on the venue (or rather, the commission). The source of my confusion is that a few broadcasts ago, they made it sound as if there was a brand new rule that had been incorporated into the Unified Rules across the board which now meant that in order to be considered "downed" the hand(s) had to be weight-bearing yada yada.

I'm not being facetious, I am legitimately curious. So I guess what I'm asking is: was this actually a new thing that was implemented? And if so, was it only at a few commissions, with Ontario not being one of them?

Don't worry my guy, I know not to take you facetiously.

I think around 2022, there was a change being bandied about for the weight-bearing (I think the original rule change proposed was 2 instead of 1? Don't quote me), but both changes are just the ABC, so it would really only still apply to the thing they had already changed. Though I guess that change may make it more likely for some of the holdout states to accept them, it still won't affect the holdouts until they do.

Ontario very specifically cites that they use the NJ state rules, as adopted in 2003. And NJ is probably the STRONGEST disagreement with the changes. They not only didn't accept it, they were the ONLY ones to vote against the ABC trying to even write this thing in the first place AND wrote them again afterwards to get them to change it after a downed knee problem happened in an event that wasn't even in their state.

 

[Safton]

It was implemented.

The issue is, the "unified rules" aren't unified at all. It varies from country to country and even state to state.

Ontario still uses the old, pre-ammended downed opponent rule where anything except the soles of the feet touching the canvas is considered to be grounded.

Don't worry my guy, I know not to take you facetiously.

I think around 2022, there was a change being bandied about for the weight-bearing (I think the original rule change proposed was 2 instead of 1? Don't quote me), but both changes are just the ABC, so it would really only still apply to the thing they had already changed. Though I guess that change may make it more likely for some of the holdout states to accept them, it still won't affect the holdouts until they do.

Ontario very specifically cites that they use the NJ state rules, as adopted in 2003. And NJ is probably the STRONGEST disagreement with the changes. They not only didn't accept it, they were the ONLY ones to vote against the ABC trying to even write this thing in the first place AND wrote them again afterwards to get them to change it after a downed knee problem happened in an event that wasn't even in their state.

Thanks, very illuminating stuff! This kind of bureaucratic infighting between (and within) athletic commissions is the kind of stuff that doesn't make it into the general MMA sphere, especially since a large amount of casual fans still seem to be under the misguided impression that the UFC are responsible for the rules...

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

Thanks, very illuminating stuff! This kind of bureaucratic infighting between (and within) athletic commissions is the kind of stuff that doesn't make it into the general MMA sphere, especially since a large amount of casual fans still seem to be under the misguided impression that the UFC are responsible for the rules...

I know lots of people blame commissions, but international red tape in a non-monopolized sport is always gonna have difficulties with standardization. I put a large amount of blame on the UFC for not being informative, especially when it would be as simple as just telling the people behind the microphones, the only voices we're guaranteed to hear when we watch the events, what the hell is going on.

Instead we get DC vs DC playing their guessing games and dumb snipes back and forth, and we're left sitting there trying to figure out who's right.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

just make the fighters put their knees down. hands down don't count.

 

[TempleoftheDog]

I just live by the unified rules. Unless they change them. Which they’ve done a couple times.

If a hand is down don’t throw a knee, or kick to the head.

What I thought was funny was seeing big bad ped popping MBS. Laying on her back because she was too gassed to stand up.

I was very pleased for Rocky, and Tecia. A total mushy feel good moment for me.

 

[Safton]

I know lots of people blame commissions, but international red tape in a non-monopolized sport is always gonna have difficulties with standardization. I put a large amount of blame on the UFC for not being informative, especially when it would be as simple as just telling the people behind the microphones, the only voices we're guaranteed to hear when we watch the events, what the hell is going on.

Instead we get DC vs DC playing their guessing games and dumb snipes back and forth, and we're left sitting there trying to figure out who's right.

Oh, I fully agree. I am annoyed with the lack of standardization and I don't particularly like certain rules which exist in some venues versus others... but I recognize that that's the status quo for the sport we watch. The commentators, though, sometimes show a shocking lack of awareness about anything in the sport that isn't directly related to a technical striking or grappling exchange, especially once we start talking about rules and/or scoring. DC and Dom are probably some of the worst offenders, what with Cormier's "I swear I was just kidding when I insistently asked for five minutes if hair-pulling was actually a foul" and Cruz ranting for hours about "The judges look at CUTS! It's all about the CUTS, not who's actually winning the fight!!!"

But yes, if most of the color commentators would just shut up and Anik/Sanko would be provided a nice little sheet listing the particulars of that venue's ruleset for when/if any issues come up, that would be lovely.

 

[AmonTobin]

If they don’t change this dumb rule, then bring on the finger stomps and wrist kicks.