UFC 118: BJ Penn, Frankie Edgar and Correctly Judging a Takedown

With the rematch of B.J. Penn and Frankie Edgar looming this weekend, many in the media and on the blogs are revisiting the original decision that prompted this rematch. 

A key factor that many are focusing on is Frankie Edgar’s takedowns of Penn. These discussions highlight one of the weaknesses in MMA judging, the overriding nature of a successful takedown in a judge scoring a round.

Taking the Penn/Edgar fight as an example, Edgar kicked Penn’s foot out from under him, Penn hit the floor and bounced right back to his feet.

Many felt, including the broadcast team, felt that constituted a takedown.

Later in the fifth round, Edgar scored a successful takedown, and ended up in Penn’s guard. While in Penn’s guard Edgar landed two strikes, and then was able to stand back up.

Many point to these takedowns as the ‘X’ factor that swung the fight for Edgar in the eyes of the judges. What they don’t point out is that it took Edgar 14 attempts to score those two takedowns.

It seems to me that from a judging perspective Penn seemed to have the edge in the takedown game.

Aside from the successful nature of the takedowns there is also the matter of effectiveness.

Penn briefly hitting the ground and bouncing right back up hardly has any real impact on the fight and should not be a ‘swing’ point in a fight. Likewise taking Penn down, ending up in his guard, landing two strikes and then standing back up hardly represents the significant factor of a round.

This is hardly the only fight that scoring situations concerning meaningless takedowns playing star roles in scoring. It is very clear that depending on the judges viewing a fight the takedown can be widely overvalued. How often has a fighter been getting bullied on the feet for the first four minutes of the round, scores a takedown, and then sits in half guard for the last 50 seconds of a round and you hear people say, "he may have stolen that round with that takedown?"

The most basic solution is more educated Judges in MMA. Judges should understand that Tim Kennedy’s high crotch lift of ‘Jacare’ Souza at the end of the fifth round doesn’t cancel out Jacare rocking Kennedy with a two-punch combo and out striking him for the entire round. 

While this solution is the most basic, it is in many ways the most difficult because it involves State Athletic Commission politics.

Another possible solution is to remove Takedowns as their own independent scoring category and incorporating it in with Effective Grappling. It seems odd that takedowns, which are an aspect of grappling, are given their own scoring category in the first place.

 Kicks and hand strikes aren’t given separate striking categories in scoring, so why are takedowns and grappling separate?

Incorporating takedowns into grappling helps make their scoring tide to the big picture grappling rather than just the moment a fighter’s back hit the mat. 

For instance, does the takedown allow the fighter to land in full guard, half guard or side control? If in guard, was the fighter able to pass the guard or do damage? Or was the fighter controlled in guard and then swept or threatened by a submission?

The answers to these questions put the takedown into large context of Effective Grappling and lead to a better scoring of the fight. The 10 must system has been hotly debated but it can work when it is used correctly and this addressing the overvaluing of Takedowns is one step towards using it correctly.

Originally Posted on:

Sprawl and Brawl MMA