Possible rules change for MMA (please check this out)

fightfankev · 10-13-2005, 11:03 PM

UFC 55 has made me think about some possible rules changes for MMA competition. I was kind of disappointed when I heard that Andre won in 15 seconds because people do not pay to see that happen. They want to see a war if possible. Maybe some of these rule changes could make fights more exciting to the fans. I would really like the feedback of any actual MMA fighters on the proposed rules here. I am no athlete so I don't know anything about what it is actually like in the ring. I am simply looking at this from a fans perspective and mean no disrespect to the fighters.

Rules change 1

A knockout counts as one decision during a fight. The fighter is given a designated amount of time to recover from a ko. If the referee feels that the fighter should not continue at any time during the rest period he can stop the fight. So fights could still be stopped by the ref at any time. This rule would make it possible for fighters who were caught with hard shots to recover and possibly come back to win the fight.

Rules change 2

Basically the same as one except this time with submissions. A submission counts as a decision and the referee can stop the fight at any time during a rest period or at the time of submission if he feels that is warranted.

This would allow for longer and more exciting fights. Are these rule changes realistic. Am I being to hard on the fighters here? I have seen quite a few fights where a fighter has been pummeled and knocked out only to be up a couple of minutes later to do an interview. Let me know what you guys think. Am I nuts?

AikaImmortal · 10-13-2005, 11:06 PM

Yes.. if you let a guy get knocked out, stood up, and knocked out again you are undermining the wellbeing of the fighter.

DrumzCT · 10-13-2005, 11:10 PM

Not to mention cheapening the the other fighters win. I get where you're coming from but this would never and should never happen in my opinion. A loss is a loss, that's what rematches are for.

Goeth27 · 10-13-2005, 11:22 PM

For rule two I would think that instead of trying to make the other man tap, many would just start trying to really injure them and break bones so they cannot let the other man recover.

TommyGunSexy05 · 10-13-2005, 11:27 PM

This is a great idea, but this is only a possitive change for the fans. first of jsut like previous posts stats, it is real bad for the fighter who caused the Ko..he deserves the win....2nd of all this is bad for the fighter who is kOed

sure u might see fighters get KO'ed an still do interviews 2 min later. but in most cases there is a possibility for internal damge of the brain...possible monor concosions and so on....I myslef used to belong to a fight club that had the same rules as u r proposing.. this causes big time injures...guy gets Knoked down, forces hes way back up and gets Koed again....this can cause seriosu brian damage..once u r knocked out it i really unsafe to keep getting hit...u neeed to stop.

thats why boxers have so amny brian problems later on in life. its cause of the repetive KO's aloud in one fight..

i do agree with u tho, sum fights r stopped premature. for instance the AA fight. I belive that AA should of been aloud to thro at least one more punch jsut to see how stable paul was cuz sumtiems u can get stunned and bounce back immediatly or 2-3 seconds later.. but this can also be very dangerous....

In addition, ppl saying that the gannon fight was stopped to late. no it wasnt to me, gannon was fully conscios, he deservesa chance to fight and try to get out of that horrible possiton. so yes i hate it when ref stop the fight b4 a Ko or b4 serios blood...but that jsut my opinino....me persoanlly when i yused to fight, i hated ref stoppage, pissed me off mroe than anything.
peace

DirtyChuckRulz! · 10-13-2005, 11:42 PM

in summation, you would most likely only cause brain damage with this rule change, which would intern bring negative publicity to the sport not to mention ruining fighters future. i hated paying that much money for a ****ty ppv but that was the chance i took. i know i wont be dissapointed when i get pride 30.

SmashingMachine · 10-14-2005, 12:03 AM

I think they should wrap there gloves in stick um and then dip their hands in sharves of glass...you know, like in Kickboxer.

T-Roll-U · 10-14-2005, 04:34 AM

in the streets there would be no mercy and once knocked out thats it the ring should be no difforent. it would seeem un natural

[Danny] · 10-14-2005, 09:20 AM

This is your opinion right? Or did you find this somewhere? Source?

I love the rules MMA has right now. Let's please not change them.

dannyholdensilvafan · 10-14-2005, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fightfankev

UFC 55 has made me think about some possible rules changes for MMA competition. I was kind of disappointed when I heard that Andre won in 15 seconds because people do not pay to see that happen. They want to see a war if possible. Maybe some of these rule changes could make fights more exciting to the fans. I would really like the feedback of any actual MMA fighters on the proposed rules here. I am no athlete so I don't know anything about what it is actually like in the ring. I am simply looking at this from a fans perspective and mean no disrespect to the fighters.

Rules change 1

A knockout counts as one decision during a fight. The fighter is given a designated amount of time to recover from a ko. If the referee feels that the fighter should not continue at any time during the rest period he can stop the fight. So fights could still be stopped by the ref at any time. This rule would make it possible for fighters who were caught with hard shots to recover and possibly come back to win the fight.

Rules change 2

Basically the same as one except this time with submissions. A submission counts as a decision and the referee can stop the fight at any time during a rest period or at the time of submission if he feels that is warranted.

This would allow for longer and more exciting fights. Are these rule changes realistic. Am I being to hard on the fighters here? I have seen quite a few fights where a fighter has been pummeled and knocked out only to be up a couple of minutes later to do an interview. Let me know what you guys think. Am I nuts?

nuts? your insane that would kill them

diablerie27 · 10-14-2005, 10:21 AM

i would have to agree to disagree with the original post. the reason the rules are the way they are is to make for exciting fights but also to make sure fighters safety is a priority. if you allow a fighter to 'recover' for five minutes and then let him take another beating you are going to get him killed.

besides, a quick KO is not allways a 'bad fight'. i didnt see the arlovski fight, but in general i have seen some quick KO's and SUB's that were still pretty exciting.

the only rules i think should be looked into are the rules about kicks and knees to a downed opponent (UFC) and the use of elbows (PRIDE).

Unknown · 10-14-2005, 12:11 PM

That rule change would be a bad idea. Once your out your out. And when you tap you quit. End of fight. Fighters would die and have their carrer ended if there was this rule change. MMA is exciting enought without killing the fighters.

And I like quick KOs I just like to see them the first time around so I know what happened.

JoeRoganismyhero · 10-14-2005, 12:22 PM

I like the MMA rules the way they are, you start having people get knocked out then back up to only get kn ocked out again, someone will Die in the ring or there will be fighters that suffer brain damage. That is what I like about MMA compared to boxing, at the end of the day everyone goes home, maybe some stiches, a little soreness,cauliflowered ear, or at worst a broken bone, but there have been no deaths in santioned MMA competition that I know of or anyone with brain damage.

fightfankev · 10-14-2005, 01:08 PM

Quick knockouts are not exciting. Neither are quick submissions. They are both more frustrating than exciting.

Seeing two men beat each other senseless or turn each other into pretzels for 25 minutes is exciting. They are going to have to do something to counter the possibility of a ten second knockout if they are ever going to reach the level of popularity they hope to achieve. I get very angry when fights don't last at least two full rounds. Looks like it's hand picked DVDs only for me.

And this is coming from a mainstream fan. I am basically a new fan to this sport and I think I represent a lot of people that have yet to be exposed to MMA. Thanks for listening and giving opinions.

Master Jones · 10-14-2005, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fightfankev

UFC 55 has made me think about some possible rules changes for MMA competition. I was kind of disappointed when I heard that Andre won in 15 seconds because people do not pay to see that happen. They want to see a war if possible. Maybe some of these rule changes could make fights more exciting to the fans. I would really like the feedback of any actual MMA fighters on the proposed rules here. I am no athlete so I don't know anything about what it is actually like in the ring. I am simply looking at this from a fans perspective and mean no disrespect to the fighters.

Rules change 1

A knockout counts as one decision during a fight. The fighter is given a designated amount of time to recover from a ko. If the referee feels that the fighter should not continue at any time during the rest period he can stop the fight. So fights could still be stopped by the ref at any time. This rule would make it possible for fighters who were caught with hard shots to recover and possibly come back to win the fight.

Rules change 2

Basically the same as one except this time with submissions. A submission counts as a decision and the referee can stop the fight at any time during a rest period or at the time of submission if he feels that is warranted.

This would allow for longer and more exciting fights. Are these rule changes realistic. Am I being to hard on the fighters here? I have seen quite a few fights where a fighter has been pummeled and knocked out only to be up a couple of minutes later to do an interview. Let me know what you guys think. Am I nuts?

If your into seeing people get brain damage and possably die from contutions. Then I guess that would be a good idea. An if you want the sport to be banned for life. If thats what you want then sure, I can't belive they haven't thought of that already.

Unknown · 10-14-2005, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fightfankev

Quick knockouts are not exciting. Neither are quick submissions. They are both more frustrating than exciting.

Seeing two men beat each other senseless or turn each other into pretzels for 25 minutes is exciting. They are going to have to do something to counter the possibility of a ten second knockout if they are ever going to reach the level of popularity they hope to achieve. I get very angry when fights don't last at least two full rounds. Looks like it's hand picked DVDs only for me.

And this is coming from a mainstream fan. I am basically a new fan to this sport and I think I represent a lot of people that have yet to be exposed to MMA. Thanks for listening and giving opinions.

Well then I don’t think that you will ever be a true fan of the sport. The UFC, Pride, KOtC, and others don’t have to do anything to make the sport more exciting. Even with a 10sec knockout it is still exciting, but as I said earlier you have to see it the first time not wait for a replay. I really can’t think of another sport that I would call more exciting even when the fights only last 15 sec. Don’t take this to harshly but in my experience ‘mainstream’ fans don’t know enough about the sport to make opinions on what MMA should become to make it more exciting.

I would rather have the UFC go back to the dark days and see the WWE walk all over it than have fighters dieing in the ring because it had to be more exciting.

If the rules change to like you said the sport will once again be considered barbaric and will disappear from the public view.

Weasel · 10-14-2005, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fightfankev

Seeing two men beat each other senseless or turn each other into pretzels for 25 minutes is exciting.

Maybe you should watch illegal streetfighting or something then.

I know you're not getting much sympathy here for your rules changes kev, but I think it's with good reason. The fighters safety has to be paramount, end of story.

AikaImmortal · 10-14-2005, 02:07 PM

Trust me, even with more rules, the UFC is more exciting than many IVC (International ValeTudo Championship) shows I have seen.. which are famous for thier lack of rules (no biting no eye goughing no groin attacks.. and no gloves)

fightfankev · 10-14-2005, 02:12 PM

I don't deny that fighters safety has to be paramount. If you really look at my rules suggestions the fact is that most fights would still be stopped by the ref the way they are now. The only time my rules would go into effect is when the ref truly felt that a fighter could continue after a knockdown or submission. That would not happen very often. My rules would only take effect if a knockdown or a submission really didn't harm the fighter or if a ref feels he stopped the fight prematurely. Refs can still stop the fights at any time.

Unknown · 10-14-2005, 03:11 PM

The fact is when you quit or get knocked out. Its over. No timeout. If you get knocked out several times in one night you will have brain damage. Even if you can get it back together. If a tapping out didn't end a fight you would have people tapping out all the time just to get a break and then come back and win. And most fighters would be much more aggressive with their submission moves and end up causing permanent damage. And If a fighter did get knocked out or submitted and came back to win his victory would not be looked on as well as if it was as it is now. I would defiantly feel for the guy that knocked out the other guy and then lost.

It has also been my impression that most fans would prefer a quick KO as opposed to a judges decision. I do.