[angelo8349]

After watching the Herring vs O'Brian fight, I pretty much understood what Nick Diaz was talking about when he was on beatdown. Im not defending Heath's performance the other night. He lost. What frustrates me is all these people acting like Jake was the shit because he beat Herring. But he didn't do anything to Heath except take him down. Or pass the guard. Not really a big deal in my opinion if you didn't do anything about it.


Heath didn't defend those takedowns well (due to injuries), but neither did Jake defend those punches that knocked him down twice very well. And in a fight, I think I would rather be taken down a hundred times than get knocked down by a punch.UFC just put too much emphasis on takedowns that result to nothing. I mean this is not a wrestling match. It's MMA and so knockdowns should be part of the scoring system too.

I just think that UFC favors wrestlers too much in their scoring system which results to boring fights. Remember when Mark Coleman introduced ground and pound to UFC? Now that was exciting. He would take people down and beat the shit out of them.

[steggeman]

Both of them sucked, Heath sucked more and he lost.
Let Heath fight again when he's at 100% and he will do much better.
As for O'Brien, I wish him the best of luck but he'll have to do more than have dominant position to be something in the UFC, he was like an even more boring ver. of Koscheck, although his shots were good.

[BoredAsFCKXx]

If you aren't a competent grappler you have no buisness in MMA.

[beamjayman]

It was just an all around crapfest that I would like to forget

[MJKerrigan]

isn't it the SAC that has the scoring system? I think successful takedown defense should score for snuffing shots, if it's not already. Do sprawls get points?

[vectorwega]

99% of the posters here think that O'Brien looked like crap, and Herring looked worse.

[angelo8349]

Originally Posted by MJKerrigan

isn't it the SAC that has the scoring system? I think successful takedown defense should score for snuffing shots, if it's not already. Do sprawls get points?

Sprawls should get points too

[ChidoriPOWAA]

Originally Posted by angelo8349

After watching the Herring vs O'Brian fight, I pretty much understood what Nick Diaz was talking about when he was on beatdown. Im not defending Heath's performance the other night. He lost. What frustrates me is all these people acting like Jake was the shit because he beat Herring. But he didn't do anything to Heath except take him down. Or pass the guard. Not really a big deal in my opinion if you didn't do anything about it.


Heath didn't defend those takedowns well (due to injuries), but neither did Jake defend those punches that knocked him down twice very well. And in a fight, I think I would rather be taken down a hundred times than get knocked down by a punch.UFC just put too much emphasis on takedowns that result to nothing. I mean this is not a wrestling match. It's MMA and so knockdowns should be part of the scoring system too.

I just think that UFC favors wrestlers too much in their scoring system which results to boring fights. Remember when Mark Coleman introduced ground and pound to UFC? Now that was exciting. He would take people down and beat the shit out of them.

I agree to a point, but the rules state that "Agressivess" and "Octagon Control" are two big parts of the scoring guidelines, which I think taking a guy down 100 times fall under. So, even if it was a boring fight and O Brien didn't do much he still controlled the fight and dominated Herring. Herring really needs to train som ground skills or he'll lie flat on his back several fights coming up. Surely those rocketing punches score alot on the "scoreboards" but he couldn't finish it more than O brien did on the ground, so why should Herring get more points for that?

[oldfirmhooligan]

points should be made on offense and although a takedown is an offence it cant be rewarded if u dont do much after.also,more points need to be given for making attempts to finish fights and keeping a good pace of attack

[BowserJr]

first off hh was injured. he shouldnt have fought and yes he has heart or else he would've pulled. also i think he was really itchin to fight after being off a yr. He's only been subed once and it was nog. So hh does have decent ground game.


the 10 9 must sux.

i'll put numeric values on the following techniques just to show how i believe these moves should count based on effectiveness to END the fight and Difficulty of the move (i.e. high kicks are more diffcult to land than a jab).



Punches (unblovked) landed standin or on the gorund-3
Heavy Punches landed (unblocked) standing or on ground- 4
Leg kicks(standing or ground)-3
High kick landed- 4.5
Heavy Leg Kicks (standing or ground) -4
Takedown- 2
Top control-2
KnockDown (punch, kick, knee, elbow)- 5

Nearly complete Sub (top or bottom) attempt-3.5
(ala barnett guillotine on Nog; the sub was sunk in and fight was near over) it should be similar to a Knockdown that doesnt lead to a fight ending but of course potentialy can

Knee to head - 4
Knee to body (standing or ground)-3
Elbow to head (standing or ground)- 4
Sweeps-3
Slams-4

Sprawl that stops fight from goin on ground)-2
(sprawling is the only defensive move that should count. the reason being that many times a Takedown is purely DEFENSIVE)

Point Deductions should also be implemented if the fighters constantly stall while standing or on the ground.

Pint Deductions for constant grabing of ropes or fence.


AGAIN THE NUMBERS I PUT NEXT TO THE MOVES ARE JUST TO MAKE VISUAL WHAT I BELIEVE SHOULD WEIGH MORE.

i'M NOT SAYIN THE FIGHT SHOULD BE SCORED WITH THOSE EXACT NUMBERS IN ANYWAY.
ITS SIMPLY A SCALE OF 1-5 ON HOW MUCH I BELIEVE EACH TECH. SHOULD WAY