Fixing MMA's Adopted Scoring System

Seemingly after every close or so-called controversial decision bestowed by a trio of MMA judges, certain events seem destined to follow immediately after. There is the inevitable paternalistic advice doled out by keyboard warriors, "shouldn't have left it up to the judges", as if somehow fighters enter a fight determined to win on the judges' scorecards. More frequently though, there is a demand to overhaul the 10 Point Must scoring system that MMA has adopted from her big brother, Boxing.

Consider that Sean Sherk was awarded a decision against Evan Dunham simply because he scored some takedowns, Dunham dominated the fight with excellent striking combinations. Or the first showdown between Rua and Machida. What was to most a clear win for Mauricio "Shogun" Rua, was scored in favor of Machida. Clearly the 10 Point Must Scoring system is not without its flaws.

In this article I will attempt to tackle that issue and actually make an attempt at offering a solution.

Before I can address why the scoring system and why an overhaul is needed, I will first briefly highlight some of the main aspects of the 10 Point Must Scoring system as it applies to MMA:

• 10 Points must be awarded to the winner of the round (before deductions).
• Judges will evaluate MMA techniques, aggressiveness, defense, control of fighting area, etc.
• If a round ends with a relatively even amount of standing and canvas fighting, striking and grappling are to be weighed equally.
• 10-8 rounds are scored if a fighter overwhelmingly dominates and 10-7 if a fighter totally dominates.
• If the majority of the fight remains standing, effective striking is weighed first then effective grappling is weighed (and vice versa).
• Effective striking is judged by determining the total number number of legal strikes landed by a contestant.
• Effective grappling is judged by considering the amount of successful executions of legal takedowns and reversals.

It is extremely important to note that the above merely is a summation of the rules most pertinent to the outcome of a typical MMA bout.

A key takeaway from that list is the fact that striking and grappling are considered equally unless one aspect dominates the round. Another key takeaway is that effective striking is judged by total number of legal strikes landed. However, are either of those actually enforced? Carlos Condit literally out landed welterweight champion Robbie Lawler by a historic margin for a title fight loss.

Maybe the problem isn't the rules itself, but the underlying subjectivity. Terms like "effective striking" is open to interpretation. How many jabs does a fighter need to land to overcome being knocked down? Does a takedown carry more weight than a 1-2 combo? There's currently no universal answer to such questions, and therein lies the problem.

Instead of a 10 Point Must system, I would propose just a point system. Every aspect of the fight can be assigned points and the fighter with more points at the end of the round obviously wins said round.
Possibly looking something like this:

Jabs- 1 point.
Leg kicks- 1 point
Body shots- 2 points
Takedowns- 4 points, etc.

Other aspects of the current system like aggressiveness and fighting area control could still be intangible factors that go into consideration. Undoubtedly a system like this would not be perfect either. Is a hard punch scored the same as a softer one? And if not, there is obviously no objective way to measure the intensity of any given blow. However there would be an increased list of objective measures for judges to use in determining the outcome of a fight.

MMA rules shouldn't be set in stone, especially since it is still such a young and growing sport. An overhaul like the one I'm suggesting certainly seems to veer more towards a statistical mindset, but why not? Often it seems like fights are judged with a bias towards a certain style more so than the actual fight itself. If a striker and a grappler execute their gameplans equally well, in theory it should be a draw; however, history shows that's unlikely.

A more technical approach can help modernize the sport and bring it to a place where controversial decision are at least a rare occurrence.

The truth about Jose Aldo vs Conor McGregor

As we inch closer to the much anticipated, and very heavily advertised UFC 194, MMA fans eagerly await  the showdown between the UFC Featherweight Champion and UFC Interim Champion.

Jose "Scarface" Aldo is the proven commodity, the methodical assassin in the Octagon capable of chopping opponents down with vicious leg kicks and cranium cracking jabs. The Interim Champion however is the flashy new kid on the block, snazzy dresser, accurate striker and bold trash talker. The consensus is that Conor McGregor may actually be a decent fighter but might not necessarily have the tools to deal with the wily Jose Aldo. This may very well be true, and honestly, it's my take as well, so let's analyse.

From a statistical standpoint, the single biggest disparity between these two fighters would be takedown defense. Jose Aldo is by far the better fighter at stuffing takedown attempts than Conor McGregor. Seeing however as both fighters tend to rely more on their striking game, that's probably a moot point to begin with. Below is a breakdown of Jose Aldo (on the left) and Conor McGregor respective striking games.

STRIKING (SIGNIFICANT STRIKES)
Strikes Landed per Min. (SLpM)	3.29	5.44
Striking Accuracy	43%	44%
Strikes Absorbed per Min. (SApM)	1.94	3.01
Defense	72%	64%

                                                                                                                             
   While their striking accuracy is remarkably similar, the numbers clearly demonstrate the tendency of Jose Aldo to be the more cautious and defensive fighter landing 2 fewer strikes per minute than McGregor. Clearly the increased "Octagon control" comes at a cost for "The Notorious", who takes far more damage than "Scarface". Of course these numbers are a bit skewed with Jose Aldo having a larger sample size to draw from, however they're still indicative of the styles of each fighter.

Truthfully when the fight was first announced I was in the camp of people that felt that the UFC was rushing their precious cash cow into a title fight that he was not ready for. Especially against a champion as methodical in his destruction of opponents as Jose Aldo. However, this match should come down to game plan implementation. Something Conor McGregor is deceptively good at. Should Conor successfully push the pace and pressure Aldo, he could ultimately walk away the victor.

On the flip side, Jose Aldo's best chance at success is slowing McGregor down and keeping him at bay with his signature leg kicks. Should the fight hit the ground I give a small edge to Aldo, however as previously mentioned, that's an unlikely scenario. With McGregor's superior reach, ability to push the pace and Aldo's sometimes suspect cardio, my final prediction is Conor McGregor by split decision.

Thoughts?

*Stats provided by FightMetric*

Follow me on Twitter

@TerrorFists


See you there!

Anderson Silva is a cheater. Does it matter?

Collectively, a sigh of disappointment could be heard around the proverbial MMA world as news broke that Anderson Silva failed a drug test. Not "The Spider", pretty much anyone but this guy. A huge part of what makes sports amazing is that we occasionally get to see a once in a lifetime talent awe us with their jaw-dropping abilities. Basketball had Michael Jordan, golf has Tiger Woods, boxing had Muhammad Ali, and MMA has or had, depending on your level of cynicism, Anderson Silva.

Much has been made on whether or not this tarnishes his entire legacy. Will he still be remembered as an all time great, or was he just a very good cheater? Honestly though, I think the more important remains, does it, or should it matter? Journalists and fans alike have participated greatly in the "cheating is worse in combat sports" argument. Understandably so, it's an easy argument to make, you get into a cage and try your best to literally beat your opponent into submission. Any chemical advantage can only increase the odds of a devastating finish to your opponent. The only trouble with this argument is its arbitrary nature. Is "doping" bad because it gives the cheater an advantage, or is because the advantage is "chemical"? If it's the former then why not ban caffeine, whey protein, and carbohydrates while we're at it? All of those are proven to enhance athletic performance, and if that's our main concern it seems hypocritical to ban some substances and not others. If doping is bad because it's a chemical enhancement specifically, then where do we draw the line?

Hypothetically if a fighter creates a concoction that enhances performance using ingredients that have not been previously discovered by scientists, is he/she cheating?

This is not to say that there shouldn't be rules, or even banned substances, but the stigma attached to cheating in athletics is a bit unfortunate. The media and society at large has the tendency to assign deeper moral implications with fighters and athletes in general that are caught cheating. Cheating in sports in the sense that the rules aligned with any particular endeavor are an arbitrary set of guidelines that its participants agree to. Breaking those rules is what we call unsportsmanlike behavior. However it's not as if they (said cheater) has violated an infallible set of rules written in stone.

To bring it back to Anderson Silva, it is unfortunate for the fans that he cheated, or that he got caught cheating if you believe that ignorance is bliss. Many will replay his highlights in their mind's eye and wonder how much of that was steroid fueled? Is Anderson Silva a great fighter who just happened to take steroids on a single occasion? Is he just a pretty good fighter who propelled to greatness with the assistance of banned substances? Or is he, as he still claims, an innocent fighter that is the victim of a tainted lab test. Those questions may never be answered, but maybe it doesn't matter.

UFC164 Main Card predictions and iPad 4th Generation giveaway.

Before I begin, I should preface this by saying that it is not the purpose of this blog to bring MMA news. That are quite a few great sites that do that. Also, predictions are probably not going to be a regular thing, unless I am unusually accurate.

That said, unto the fun stuff! If any individual can correctly predict the outcomes of the UFC 164 main card in great detail, they will be the lucky winner of a brand new iPad!

Of course there are rules. The cutoff limit is Saturday August 31st, 2013 at 5pm EST.
Every fight must be predicted in great detail, i.e. which round, manner of victory. For example it is not sufficient to say Fighter X wins by submission in Round 2. They type of submission must be specified. Likewise, KOs and TKOs will nt be treated as synoynms.

Without further delay, here are my picks:

Anthony Pettis def. Benson Henderson after 5 rounds via unanimous decision
Frank Mir def. Josh Barnett in Round 2 via shoulder lock.
Chad Mendes def. Clay Guida via TKO in Round 3.
Ben Rothwell def. Brandon Vera via KO in Round 3.
Erick Koch def Dustin Poirier after 3 rounds via split decision.

Good luck to all and have fun! The winner will be announced on Sunday.

As always leave comments and e-mail me at mmaace@yahoo.com with questions.

5 Reasons Dana White and Bjorn Rebney need to play nice

It is no secret that The Ultimate Fighting Championships or UFC is the largest MMA organization in the world and Bellator MMA is a somewhat distant second. Also no secret to fight fans is the intense rivalry, if not borderline hatred UFC president Dana White, and Bellator CEO and founder Bjorn Rebney have for each other. And in a sport based almost entirely on rivalry, competition and one-uppance, their distaste for each other seems like a natural progression to some. Inevitable even.

I for one however, do not feel that way. I believe that there is room enough for them both, and additionally, they benefit each other. Wasting no more time or keystrokes, let's get into it, shall we?

1.)  Don't bite the hand that feeds- This must be a joke or typo, right? No. Truth is, as much as Bellator tries to separate itself from the UFC, they have recently started signing UFC washouts. And though this may seem like a hypocritical move on their part and as much as they've been lambasted in the media for it, it is actually quite the business savvy move. The casual fan is the gasoline that powers the engine of the still growing MMA industry. Attracting casual fans with highly recognizable fighters, albeit past their primes, will at least get more eyes on their venture into the realm of PPV shows. And once those eyes are there, they may like the whole package and return even if they don't see a former UFC fighter on the next card.
       That's great, but why should the UFC care? Because they will do the same. They've already signed former Bellator standout Hector Lombard as well Jessica Eye. Their bid for Eddie Alvarez failed, but they will likely land Ben Askren eventually. By absorbing the best talent from other organisations, the UFC can continually claim that their roster is home to the elite.

2.) It's lonely at the top- As mentioned previously the UFC is indeed the largest MMA organisation in the world. And perhaps yes, if all other MMA organizations ceased to exist, the UFC will march on largely unaffected. However, the number one spot is probably more satisfying than say...the only spot. The existence of inferior brands can only make the UFC brand worth that much more. As for Bellator MMA, playing second fiddle to the UFC can't be pleasant, but it has forced them to be more creative. The tournament style is certainly cool and if nothing else, is certainly more objective for creating title contenders than White's declarations.

3.) They are both passionate about MMA- Regardless of their many differences, Rebney and White both share a passion for mixed martial arts. It is their combined love and dedication to the sport that will continue to push MMA further away from the bloody memories of the days when the sport was oft-compared to "human cockfighting". While the UFC may enjoy the fact that many casual observers don't even know the difference between "MMA" and the the UFC as a brand it is important to the legitimacy of the sport that people understand that difference. The success of a "second rate" organization like Bellator will go a long way to making that happen.

4.) United they could stand- Remember when Frank Mir was supposed to face Daniel Cormier in Strikeforce? That fight was getting quite a bit of buzz, and though they would eventually face off in the UFC, it just didn't have the same novelty and luster. If Bellator MMA and the UFC played nice, the potential crossover opportunities would be a promotional godsend for both companies. Admittedly maybe a little more so for Bellator than the UFC, but still.

5.) Strength in numbers- As it is right now, all rules that govern MMA are dictated by the respective athletic commissions. Dana White is the biggest and most obnoxious voice campaigning change. Now imagine a world were Rebney and White stood united. Their considerable influences combined would yield such incredible power that a hole might be torn in the very fabric of the universe. Or not, but you get the point.

What's your take on the White-Rebney feud? Is White right about Bjorn Rebney? Is he in fact scum? Sound off in the comments below and be sure to subscribe,

E-mail suggestions to mmaace@yahoo.com for future blog topics.

Why Anderson Silva cannot beat Chris Weidman

It's been more than a month and a half since the knockout heard around the world. Anderson Silva did his dance and woke up on his back. The opinions have flowed non-stop since Weidman's left fist connected flushly on "The Spider's" face. Silva's diehard fans declare stubbornly that he was clowning around which allowed Weidman the opportunity to land a lucky punch. While Weidman loyalists will testify that Silva always clowns his opponents and Weidman had the answer.

As often is the case, the truth can probably be found somewhere in the middle. Indeed Anderson Silva was playing the fool, and regardless of how refined your skills are, in the dangerous game of mixed martial arts, that puts one at risk. However, to be fair, Anderson Silva often does clown his opponents and it has never before hampered his ability to totally obliterate his opponent. So, what  gives? Is Chris Weidman just that lethal of a striker? Is Anderson Silva just finally falling victim to father time?

To answer this question let's examine the situation fully. Few will argue that Anderson Silva won the first round. Chris Weidman scored an early takedown and inflicted some damage on his accomplished foe. However Silva was eventually able to get to his feet, and because Weidman failed to even attempt another takedown, Anderson realized that he definitely had an advantage in the striking game...as he usually does.

It was only upon realizing this advantage that Silva started to showboat and taunt his opponent. He knew he was faster and his strikes were more accurate. However his mistake was underestimating Chris Weidman's punching power. In an interview about his first fight with Chael Sonnen, he made the interesting if not self-serving observation that Chael Sonnen had top position for much of the fight and was unable to finish him. A testament to Sonnen's lack of knock out power perhaps.

Chris Weidman is no Chael Sonnen though. Though Weidman's strikes are rudimentary when compared to that of highly versed striking artists such as Carlos Condit, Anthony Pettis or Anderson Silva himself, his punching power is certainly no joke. It is a safe bet that Anderson Silva would outstrike Chris Weidman if  he so chose. But he didn't. He danced, swayed and feigned being hurt. The problem with that was that Weidman timed him perfectly and made his punch count.

Not only did Chris Weidman beat Silva at his own game but he did it convincingly. However the truth that evades most fans is the particular reason why Anderson Silva was showboating. It wasn't merely that he "always does", rather it had more to do with goading Weidman into a kickboxing match. Silva knew all too well that Weidman was capable of grinding him out much like Sonnen did. The key difference being that Weidman was less likely to make the kind of mistakes that Sonnen does from top position that got him submitted.

So yes, when Silva and Weidman square off for a second time my hypothetical dollars will be on Chris Weidman. Not because Chris Weidman is the more complete fighter, because he isn't. But MMA is a match ups game and Weidman has Silva's number. I'm guessing he's going to call again.