New Rules, Part One: Methods To Improve The Judging System In MMA

Of course, striking on the ground can be just as effective as grappling and should rightly be scored if it is effective and efficient enough to make a sizable difference in the outcome of the round.

My proposition attempts to eliminate theoretical cases where fighters would try to abuse the system, such as by stuffing a weak takedown attempt, getting fifty points from effective grappling and octagon control, and thus winning the round, despite getting out-struck by a more aggressive fighter (this is a hypothetical example, because in the above situation the striker would win all of the criteria, but I’m just trying to make a point).

This system also attempts to eradicate lay and pray, whereby rabbit punches do not equal superior striking on the ground and the bottom fighter can still win via threatening submission attempts and near-finishes for superior grappling; by reversals and sweeps for octagon control; and through scoring points for aggressiveness in trying to improve position and attacking the opponent.

There is one last point that I would like to make about the situation. The fighter on bottom should be able to win a match, as several contests in PRIDE FC showed. Indeed, in the NSAC rules the guard is counted as a neutral position, though one could not tell this through simple observation since the man on top is so often favored.

The problem under the current judging rules (if they were flawlessly adhered to) is that if a fighter scores a takedown and lands in the top guard position, but little else happens, then the top man takes the round.

Interestingly enough, the reverse is also true so if a fighter pulls guard, which counts as a takedown, and nothing significant happens in the round, then the bottom man takes it on the scorecard.

So this is a note to all you Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu competitors and other grapplers: make sure you are the one who scores the takedown if you want the judges to be on your side!

What I have outlined above is just a basic sketch of a scoring system that is probably in need of some refinement, but my point is that using an objective scheme whereby fans can determine precisely how a judge scored a round in favor of a certain fighter would go a long way towards removing ambiguity and prejudice when it comes down to defining the winner of a fight. 

Stay tuned for part two next time where I reveal further ways to rectify the judging situation in MMA.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?