The MMA ruleset that the UFC uses is strongly biased towards wrestling and BJJ. Dana needs to change it. Here's why. (1000 post special)

[BowserJr]

Remember when Igor kneed the shit out of Kerr? Man that dude was 5'8! The hero of us manlets!!!

And Wand vs Saku.

Knees to the head would help some grapplers but many would get tkoed

 

[StonedLemur]

Yeah that was a weird moment indeed, I puked mushrooms everywhere a few moments later.

Damn, for some reason I was reading the thread from bottom to top (seriously, I don't know why I do that) and was surprised when I saw your name over that post, I'm not used to seeing you annoyed like that !

But to be fair I don't think I've seen TS' posts before (although I've seen some sad comments after Volk's loss and the thread you mention kinda sounds familiar lol).

Take care my friend !

I don't get annoyed easily but when I do it's generally for a reason sir lol.

Much love brother.

 

[DagOban**]

I mean refs stop fights based on damage don’t they? So clearly damage can be a criteria.

And you can see how well that goes. Imagine if they factored in actual Points for that. It would be hell.

The reason is simple: you cannot evaluate damage simply by looking. You need a medical examination. With tests.

 

[iwannabeadored]

Strikers are already heavily favored. Make it fair, and do 1 30 minute round. Your favorite striker might never get up again

 

[iwannabeadored]

Coleman vs Igor in PRIDE is why you can't knee grounded opponents... because it favors wrestlers. The unified rules are there to save the strikers, not vice versa.

Khabib literally would have murdered Conor if he was allowed to knee Conor while Conor was grounded. The rules are in place so Conor gets the chance to get stood up and get a standing knockout lol

It’s how you know most sherdoggers don’t train at all.


Let someone get side control and they are going to rain hell with knees to your skull. It would be quick.

 

[TheMaster]

Weird... with hedbutts and knees to the head from north/south, let alone strikes to the back of the head, neck and spine, wrestlers would absolutely dominate.

Downward elbows to the spine and neck makes shooting a much more dangerous proposition as well, and knees to the head makes it more so if the shot fails and they sprawl. It goes both ways.

 

[mister piscadinha]

The What? Everyone is talking about damage as main critieria which heavily favors strikers.

what? most fights are NOT won based on damage at all

 

[WoozyFailGuy]

The What? Everyone is talking about damage as main critieria which heavily favors strikers.

If judges are competent, yes.
And therein lies our problem. We still have split decisions where one judge must have confused the shorts, because they inexplicably give the guy that got the shit kicked out of him 30-27.

 

[Igot99problems]

I agree with a couple points -- not being able to knee a grounded opponent is lame. However, I feel wrestlers and grapplers are and always have been at a huge DISadvantage in MMA. Every time there is no action, a fight is stood up. If there is no action when standing, the fight is not brought to the ground. After every round, the fighter on their back is rescued and the fight is stood up. The grapplers have the odds against them when the fights start sincce the burden is always on them to bring the fight to the ground. In a street fight, no one is going to separate them from inactivity or when the fight has gone 5 minutes. In the affirmative, not being allowed to knee a grounded opponent is a big hinderance for wrestlers too.

But if you're a wrestler you can fail throughout the entire fight and still win because failing takedowns still counts as control but if you're failing as a striker you won't win (unless you're Leonard Garcia).

 

[NicholasJBasile]

But if you're a wrestler you can fail throughout the entire fight and still win because failing takedowns still counts as control but if you're failing as a striker you won't win (unless you're Leonard Garcia).

That's a fair point, but I still feel it's far less of an advantage to get to go to your feet. It's an absolute luxury to be able to start fresh standing after ending a round on the bottom while getting punched or being put in a submission hold. The rules are an absolute savior for those that don't have a ground game. Plus, it sometimes takes a few minutes to even set up a good takedown, so to be able to take someone down is a huge deal sometimes and imo should be rewarded at least a little bit.

I do, however, like that judges are now looking more at overall damage more. As much as I am biased towards wrestlers as a fan, I think it's ridiculous that someoine be awarded a win just for taking someone down without landing significant offense, or in some cases not even getting a takedown but pushing someone against the fense while the opponent lands clean striking.

 

[Megatronlee]

No it’s fine

 

[Hdfi]

Probably not. Almost all champions are strikers...

HW: Jones - wrestler, Aspinall - striker
LHW: Poatan - striker
MW: DDP - striker
WW: Edwards - striker
LW: Islam - wrestler
FW: Topuria - striker
BW: O'Malley - striker
FLW: Pantoja - grappler

 

[Sean_wongster_wongmastter]

And you can see how well that goes. Imagine if they factored in actual Points for that. It would be hell.

The reason is simple: you cannot evaluate damage simply by looking. You need a medical examination. With tests.

So what? Never stop fights unless a person is out cold cause you can’t tell if someone is damaged?

Being out cold is also damage, just to the extreme. I mean, how do refs tell if someone is unconscious?

Technically you need a medical test to see if someone is unconscious.

 

[Poirierfan]

Knees to a grounded opponent benefit wrestlers, you dingleberry.

 

[Mike]

Um the very fact that stand-ups still exist should be enough to show you the rules favor strikers. That's not even getting into no grounded knees.