[Em]

I don't think either guy did enough to win. GSP did nothing with the control he had. B.J. looked to gas. This fight should have been five rounds. I beleive intent should be part of the scoring, when B.J. was not simply just getting up from the takedowns he was going for subs.

[350 lbs fist]

In the UFC it seems as takedown and top control even without significant damage or even action is King.
A fighter being active with scrambling and sub attempts from the bottom is mostly thought to be coming second to the top guy on the score cards no matter how inactive the top guy is.

That's a shame and it'll only reward fighters for stalling/slowing down the pace of the fight and not taking any risks by trying to finish the opponent.

Takedowns can be finishing moves in their own right but if they're not and if they're not utilized to go for finishes via sub or g'n'p they shouldn't count imo.
Nonslam takedowns and control without effective striking, subs or improvement of position is the MMA variant of the boxing clinch imho. A way of stalling and slowing down the fight either to negate a difference in skill or stamina or both between the fighters. The difference is that in the UFC you get points for it.

[MagicWand]

Originally Posted by Commissar

Valid point.

So, lets say standup is equal in that fight.

For each takedown St. Pierre got, Penn got up, so thats equal.

Oh, wait, Penn didn't get up from the takedown that last time. So, St. Pierre had one more takedown in that fight than Penn got up from.

So, all other things equal, St. Pierre would still have won.

are you forgetting that BJ almost subbed and did beat on gsp in that last takedown?

[mcflyguy]

Originally Posted by MMAGenius

Like Thousands of others I was a high-school wrestler, I thought points for takedowns then were lame, for me it was pin to win that's it. Now MMA fights are being decided on takedowns....WHAT!!! If fighters are getting points for takedowns, then great stand-up men need to get points for every sprawl and clinch that prevents the takedown. I understand the judge have to find some hard criteria to judge a fight on, but the way takedowns seem to control the ruling and commentating lately, I have to say I've seen enough..

i.e. PENN vs. St. Pierre... love beating the newest dead horse

you dont score points for defense......if someone has an excellent sprawl.....should points be awarded if their opponent can take them down?

[mcflyguy]

Originally Posted by MagicWand

are you forgetting that BJ almost subbed and did beat on gsp in that last takedown?

almost subbed? your dreaming buddy

[sodapop]

takedowns, smakedowns, doing a test for my avatar.

[biggy1]

Originally Posted by Luebbers

The standup fighter does get credit for takedown defense. In a classic striker vs. grappler matchup, if the striker keeps stuffing takedowns, he gets points for controlling the match. Just like a grappler gets points for controlling the match if he keeps taking the striker down.

Nope,that was the controversy in the Alessio fight.Octogon control to me not for the judges.

[bonesbrigade16]

Originally Posted by mcflyguy

you dont score points for defense......if someone has an excellent sprawl.....should points be awarded if their opponent can take them down?

dumbest thing I have read in a while.

It's controlling the fight. If you can stuff your opponent and keep it standing where you want it, then you are in control. Now if they wern't throwing at all and just cow-catching then I agree with you.

[mikecard37]

Originally Posted by MMAGenius

Like Thousands of others I was a high-school wrestler, I thought points for takedowns then were lame, for me it was pin to win that's it. Now MMA fights are being decided on takedowns....WHAT!!! If fighters are getting points for takedowns, then great stand-up men need to get points for every sprawl and clinch that prevents the takedown. I understand the judge have to find some hard criteria to judge a fight on, but the way takedowns seem to control the ruling and commentating lately, I have to say I've seen enough..

i.e. PENN vs. St. Pierre... love beating the newest dead horse

you are 100% correct, unless the takedown does damage, it should not be scored. Takedowns are a means to an end, not the end.

[mikecard37]

http://www.sherdog.net/forums/showth...51#post8651651