Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurtis636
The problem is not that they give too much emphasis to the takedown, it's one fighter dictating where the fight is going to go, the real problem is that they don't score takedown defense in the same way or score offense from the bottom correctly.
An example: Tito wants the fight on the ground, but his shots are repeatedly stuffed by Forrest Griffin who dictates the location of the fight by forcing Tito to stand and trade. If a fighter is repeatedly stuffed I think it should be scored for the guy stuffing it, not just as a neutral position.
Another example: Last week's TUF. Dante should never have won that fight. The guy on the bottom outworked him. Yes, Dante was able to force the fight to the ground a few times, but once it got there that was neutralized by the fact that he got outlanded about 10 to 1 by the guy on the bottom who was constantly throwing elbows and eventually getting back to his feet.
|
Thats actually what i was thinking of when i wrote this thread.
Here the judges scored the takedowns higher then the actuall damages inflicted. Therefor i think that if you do nothing from you top position then you shouldnt be rewarded. Takedowns alone isnt a way to finish the fight or inflicting damage, therefor it shouldnt be rewarded with points.
Im not sure of this but do you get rewarded for going from guard to sideposition and back to guard? i dont think so (correct me if im wrong).
I think that this is the same thing as taking someone down, doing nothing and stand up again.
You improve your position in both cases but that alone wont end the fight, its what you can do from that position that could end the fight and then you can score points.
Maybe Im being alittle harsh in saying that you shouldnt get rewarded, maybe you should but not as much as today. Today takedowns is such a huge factor that its usually the deciding factor when considering who won the round.