Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums

Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/index.php)
-   MMA (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   MHF MMA Scoring (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9128)

PRShrek 02-04-2012 04:48 PM

MHF MMA Scoring
 
If anyone is going to come up with a new scoring system it should be we, the most knowledgeable and intelligent people on the internet.

I think attempts to cram the complexity of MMA into a scoring system designed for a single aspect sport are doomed from the outset. In my opinion if MMA is going to have a point system, the points should be awarded for things that we know from experience win fights. I think that if a behavior moves the fight forward, that is, an action that would contribute to eventually winning the fight if there were no time limit, that action should be awarded one point. For example:

Single strikes- Although these should generally not be scored, as landing one shot usually has little effect, I would score big leg kicks and body shots that land with audible or visible effect and any hit that stagers the opponent. Use of the jab, teep, or ground strikes to good effect throughout the round would also be worth a point.

Combinations- Good two or three strike combos should be worth a point, as these usually move the fight forward. I would consider scoring a solid combination even if only one or two land solidly.

Position control- Getting the takedown or dominant position does not by itself secure victory, and should not be scored as if it does, but being able to put your opponent where you want him to be should be scored as an advantage. I think shucking the takedown or immediately reversing or escaping from an inferior position should also be worth a point.

Active guard- If the fight goes to the guard, you can usually tell who will go on to win by whether the guy on the floor is moving and punching or just holding on and waiting.

Holding in check- I donít think submission attempts should automatically be awarded points, particularly ill advised attempts that leave the fighter in a worse position, but I think a submission threat that puts you in control of the fight should be worth a point.

I think this scoring system would reflect what is actually going on in the cage. Circling and pecking for five minutes and then grabbing a takedown in the closing seconds should not be worth ten points, and that round should not receive equal weight on the score card to rounds that contain actual fighting. The round itself should not have any weight on the score cards as it does now, rather the fighters actions over the course of the fight should be what matters.

At least, thatís my two cents.

rearnakedchoke 02-04-2012 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PRShrek (Post 184722)
If anyone is going to come up with a new scoring system it should be we, the most knowledgeable and intelligent people on the internet.

I think this scoring system would reflect what is actually going on in the cage. Circling and pecking for five minutes and then grabbing a takedown in the closing seconds should not be worth ten points, and that round should not receive equal weight on the score card to rounds that contain actual fighting. The round itself should not have any weight on the score cards as it does now, rather the fighters actions over the course of the fight should be what matters.

At least, thatís my two cents.

i hear ya, but circling and pecking and getting the takedown is better than circling and pecking and getting taken down ... right now the scoring does slightly favour wrestlers more, but if standups happen too fast (ie. rumble vs vitor), than the advantage does to the striker .. imo, the scoring right now is probably as good as its gonna get

PRShrek 02-07-2012 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke (Post 184729)
i hear ya, but circling and pecking and getting the takedown is better than circling and pecking and getting taken down ...

Yes, but only slightly, and the scorecards should reflect that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke (Post 184729)
right now the scoring does slightly favour wrestlers more, but if standups happen too fast (ie. rumble vs vitor), than the advantage does to the striker .. imo, the scoring right now is probably as good as its gonna get

A lot of people think the current scoring system is the biggest problem with MMA. My wish is for a scoring system that would not only reflect who is actually winning the fight, but would also be educational for new fans and would elevate the level of skill in the cage. The ten point system fails at all of those things, being often confusing even to the judges themselves let alone to new fans, and tends to encourage gamesmanship over everything else. I donít think stand-ups would happen often, if at all, if the scoring system didnít reward stalling.

rearnakedchoke 02-07-2012 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PRShrek (Post 184911)
Yes, but only slightly, and the scorecards should reflect that.



A lot of people think the current scoring system is the biggest problem with MMA. My wish is for a scoring system that would not only reflect who is actually winning the fight, but would also be educational for new fans and would elevate the level of skill in the cage. The ten point system fails at all of those things, being often confusing even to the judges themselves let alone to new fans, and tends to encourage gamesmanship over everything else. I donít think stand-ups would happen often, if at all, if the scoring system didnít reward stalling.

scoring is only a problem when fighters let it go to the judges .. if you don't want a bad decision, finish it in the cage ...

PRShrek 02-07-2012 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke (Post 184922)
scoring is only a problem when fighters let it go to the judges .. if you don't want a bad decision, finish it in the cage ...

In a perfect world, sure, but in this one we might have to settle for quantifying the things that win fights, so that after fifteen or twenty-five minutes of action we can say ďIím sixty-four percent certain fighter X was going to win.Ē

Llamafighter 02-08-2012 03:29 AM

Ideally retired or inactive (non-competitive) MMA fighters should be judging MMA. I think all true Athletes/competitors would give equal credit to the fighters. Qualification would be on a per fight basis. They wouldn't let certain refs work specific fight because of relationship to the fighters involved. Above all else,you HAVE to have people that know the sport. and in the case of MMA you are looking at a mixed bag of combative sports. All of which are judged on very different areas. Militech would be a fantastic judge.

VCURamFan 02-08-2012 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Llamafighter (Post 184943)
Ideally retired or inactive (non-competitive) MMA fighters should be judging MMA. I think all true Athletes/competitors would give equal credit to the fighters. Qualification would be on a per fight basis. They wouldn't let certain refs work specific fight because of relationship to the fighters involved. Above all else,you HAVE to have people that know the sport. and in the case of MMA you are looking at a mixed bag of combative sports. All of which are judged on very different areas. Militech would be a fantastic judge.

THISSSSSSS. +1

County Mike 02-08-2012 01:32 PM

I vote for no scoring.

If time runs out without a victory, just look at the two fighters. Whoever is more messed up loses.

Bella79 02-08-2012 04:34 PM

I say let em fight in a dark alley and see who comes out after.. :laugh:

flo 02-08-2012 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VCURamFan (Post 184952)
THISSSSSSS MY PRECIOUSSSSSSSS. +1

Fixed!

:)


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.