Question: UFC Rules Favoring Grapplers

[TrevorLahey]

I want them to legalize groin strikes, eye gouges, hair pulling, ear biting, nail scratching and every other possible way to hurt someone. Fuck them it's not me getting hurt.

 

[whougonnacall]

Some rules favor wrestlers, some favor strikers, etc...

It's a mixed bag that tries to optimize competing objectives (like excitement and realism).

The simple fact that standups exist should be indicate the rules aren't design to favor grapplers over all else.

This
Upkicks should be legal though its jist b.s

 

[SeattleFightFan]

Some rules favor wrestlers, some favor strikers, etc...

It's a mixed bag that tries to optimize competing objectives (like excitement and realism).

The simple fact that standups exist should be indicate the rules aren't design to favor grapplers over all else.

i agree. it's not clear to me whether pride rules (knees to the head are OK but elbows are not) necessarily favor wrestlers or not. nor is there any clear evidence to me that even if they are, it was intentional.

knees certainly favor top control during transition, north-south, and kicks favor standing fighters over downed opponents. but no elbows very clearly forces people to create distance in guard, allowing more bjj style action / grappling.

and of course we all know that takedowns / top control / hold downs DO in fact award close (or sometimes not close) rounds. that top control with no damage is not considered neutral is probably a bigger deal than any of the "rules" discussed so far in this thread, and that's not so much a codified rule as it is a tradition.

what IS clear is that fighting does somewhat evolve due to rules. so in the last 17 years, it's possible that systems have evolved to make the rules less favorable (if they were ever favorable in the first place) regardless.

 

[12ga.]

Every round, standup, temp stoppage, etc, begins with the fighters reset standing. Based on those facts I can't see how one can claim that the rules favor ground fighters.

Even having rounds favors strikers.

Pretty much all the rules do. Ask any wrestler they'd trade upkicks and soccer stomps for like the other 20 rules that diminish the wrestler/top control guy and wont let him fight.

 

[RAFI BOMB]

Knees on the ground favours grapplers buddy.

Good point. There is only part of grappling that is really unappealing to many mma fans and that is where there is a lot of inactivity. A grappler who is actively attempting to stop their opponents via submission or strikes is fine. So wouldn't these techniques help improve both the mass appeal and the entertainment quality of fights on average? I would think that these would eliminate the less action oriented grappling and lead to more frequent stoppages.

 

[Paradigm]

People in America favor striking over grappling...it's probably this way all over the world.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned that also favors striking is the mandatory use of gloves.

Getting rid of gloves probably wouldn't affect an MT based guy as bad but imagine Conor or Cody breaking both hands on a forehead in the first round of a five round title fight...