NSAC Considering Five Round Non-Title Fights

According to MMA Junkie, the Nevada State Athletic Commission will be looking to fine tune their ruleset when they convene on August 17th. NSAC has provided a copy of the potential changes here. Among the changes, NSAC proposes to increase leniency with regards to length of bouts. Here's the text (bold indicates proposed change):

STORY

I dont know if I would like that. Maybe for some fights but very few fights.

It would make sense for every main event, for a title or not, to be five rounds. There are some other fights upcoming that should get this nod as well (although, unfortunately, this will not happen in time). Silva vs. Griffin stands out; one's a current champion and the other is having his first fight since losing the light heavyweight title, so it seems awkward for these two who have fought for at least the last year in 25-minute contests to get one here.

I think this being localized to Nevada may confuse a lot of audiences. Hopefully it works at the big MMA events so that the idea of five-round non-title fights passes everywhere.

Good move by the NSAC.

I think it's a bad idea. It would be like going back to the old system of one incredibly long boring round. Shortening the time allotted for the fight forces the fighters to push the action.

This is good in some cases but only in hindsight when it's close after the fight, you cant just assume a fight (big names or not) is going to need 10 more minutes. I think it gives fighters more time to do less, conserve energy to make it five rounds and eek out a decision, im yawning just thinking about it. Not to mention less fghts on ppv, might be giving up two great fights for one snoozer.

Like Ive said in the past I believe something like this to be the right move for several reasons.

It's about time. Three rounds doesn't do it for me when the world's best fighters are competing. Seven round title fights should also be implemented.

---

Posted by Giant_Ochai

It's about time. Three rounds doesn't do it for me when the world's best fighters are competing. Seven round title fights should also be implemented.

---

Seven rounds..... ?

I hope you are just joking, even if your not the idea made me chuckle.

I like it. It seems like a lot of Main events have been ending in decisions--some of them controversial. I like to see a decisive winner in a main event--so way to go Nevada!

That is stupid, end of story.

5 rounds should be left for title fights.

3 rounds should be left for non-title fights.

The athletic commission is going to screw everything up.

honestly, i thin k mma is the best sport out there but I would have to say that fights that are boring usually go the distance. So though there have been many classics to go a full 3 rounds you are generally making the slowest fights 10 minutes longer for no reason.

Also, you are guaranteed to lose at lesat 1 fight from every tv card you see - and that would be bad.

no real upside to this, i love 3 rounds.

---

Posted by xdanish020

That is stupid, end of story.

5 rounds should be left for title fights.

3 rounds should be left for non-title fights.

The athletic commission is going to screw everything up.

---

Absolutely agree. I say the only non-title fights that should be 5 rounds are special fights or catchweight fights like Wandy/Franklin, GSP/Silva, ect...

In those scenerio's, I can see a reason for having them at 5 rounds. I would have loved to seen Wandy/Franklin 5 rounds.

Also, the increase in 5 rounds fights will decrese the number of aired fights. Most exciting 5 round fights dont go 5 rounds, I for sure dont want to watch a boring 5 round fight. Could you imagine a alib Stanres fight ( well run) for 5 minutes?

i dont wanna see every single lightweight fight go 25 mins. like someone said, only main events and possibly if it was a close 3 round fight

I don't see a problem with it. Lot of fights I would have rather been 5 rounds and not 3. I agree with everything the writer said and think this will help push the sport even more towards main stream.

His point are very sound.
More decisive finishes - The more time the guys have to fight the better the chance are for someone finishing the fight.

Less importance per round - This will help a little with problems MMA has been having with judging.

More quality at the top of the cards - Think of all the fights that ended at the 3rd and you wish they could have keep fighting.

Franklin vs Henderson
Franklin vs Silva
Condit/Kampmann
Chuck vs Silva
GSP vs BJ Penn 1
Griffin vs Bonnar
Machida vs Tito
Griffin vs Tito
Chuck vs Jardine
Marquardt vs Leites
Lawler vs Lytle
Sanchez vs Guida
Sanchez vs Parisyan
Sanchez vs Diaz

and there is a ton more fights I would have loved to have been 5 rounds.

---

Posted by telnights

I don't see a problem with it. Lot of fights I would have rather been 5 rounds and not 3. I agree with everything the writer said and think this will help push the sport even more towards main stream.

His point are very sound.
More decisive finishes - The more time the guys have to fight the better the chance are for someone finishing the fight.

Less importance per round - This will help a little with problems MMA has been having with judging.

More quality at the top of the cards - Think of all the fights that ended at the 3rd and you wish they could have keep fighting.

Franklin vs Henderson
Franklin vs Silva
Condit/Kampmann
Chuck vs Silva
GSP vs BJ Penn 1
Griffin vs Bonnar
Machida vs Tito
Griffin vs Tito
Chuck vs Jardine
Marquardt vs Leites
Lawler vs Lytle
Sanchez vs Guida
Sanchez vs Parisyan
Sanchez vs Diaz

and there is a ton more fights I would have loved to have been 5 rounds.

---

you cant foresee this, it's all hindsight (come on 20/20), those fights would have been great 25mins but you can predict that otherwise your just taking a chance.
"I don't see a problem with it. Lot of fights I would have rather been 5 rounds and not 3. I agree with everything the writer said and think this will help push the sport even more towards main stream."

---

Posted by slapshot

---

Posted by Giant_Ochai

It's about time. Three rounds doesn't do it for me when the world's best fighters are competing. Seven round title fights should also be implemented.

---

Seven rounds..... ?

I hope you are just joking, even if your not the idea made me chuckle.

---

Why would that be a joke? It seems completely logical that if you are going to raise non-title fights to 5 rounds that you should also raise title fights an extra 2 rounds as well. I don't see how you could be in favour of one and find the other ridiculous.

I'd like the idea of special fights like main event, superfights or similar to have AN OPTION to go 5 instead of 3 rounds. If the Judges declare after the 3 rounds there would be a split decision or it is too close to call, then they could call for another 2 rounds for a more explicit decision if there's still no stoppage. Similar like it is in K-1.

That way you could have the best of both. If it's a clear dominated fight by one fighter it's decisioned after 3 rounds, no need to extend something what is already clear-cut. If not and the fight is very close, there's a good possibility it's being stopped in the next 2. The fighters still need to push the pace to not lose the 3 round decision, so there would be no holding back either.

A good way to keep it more out the judges hands, and in addition, judges could be more encouraged to count more 10-10 draw rounds when it's very close!

---

Posted by scobac
you cant foresee this, it's all hindsight (come on 20/20), those fights would have been great 25mins but you can predict that otherwise your just taking a chance.
"I don't see a problem with it. Lot of fights I would have rather been 5 rounds and not 3. I agree with everything the writer said and think this will help push the sport even more towards main stream."

---

That's kind of the point taking a chance. Fans and the UFC know most of the time which fights are going to be good and which ones will be slow. Now there a few fights now and again that are shockingly good and no one expects it but they aren't the norm. Like everyone knew
Franklin vs Henderson
Franklin vs Silva
Chuck vs Silva
GSP vs BJ Penn
Machida vs Tito
Griffin vs Tito
Chuck vs Jardine
Sanchez vs Guida
Sanchez vs Parisyan

would all be great fights.

Why fix whats not broke?

3 rounds is perfect for MMA, it keeps the time down forcing the fighters to try to finish or be exciting while also allowing decisive winners.

Adding 2 more rounds for non title fights just maddens the unhelpful.
A close fight will still be a close fight an split decision will still be a split decision but the pace of the fight will slow and it will put newer fighters at a huge disadvantage coming from the amateur leagues to the professional and having to just be ready to be able to go 5 rounds.

Even main events don't really need it. I say keep the 5 rounds for title fights.

---

Posted by SmileR

Why fix whats not broke?

3 rounds is perfect for MMA, it keeps the time down forcing the fighters to try to finish or be exciting while also allowing decisive winners.

Adding 2 more rounds for non title fights just maddens the unhelpful.
A close fight will still be a close fight an split decision will still be a split decision but the pace of the fight will slow and it will put newer fighters at a huge disadvantage coming from the amateur leagues to the professional and having to just be ready to be able to go 5 rounds.

Even main events don't really need it. I say keep the 5 rounds for title fights.

---

Well, you have 2 more rounds where anything can happen and the chances of a fight being stopped or at least letting one fighter doing more for the score cards then the other is also bigger, and yes, more depening on the fighters conditioning. Of course the outcome still can stay the same, but the chances are better the fight ends prematurely.
Don't get me wrong, i'd only like that OPTIONAL 5 rounders for special fights. And that would not including fighters just coming from lower level leagues.

And what about all these bad jugde decisions? unless there someone coming up with a scoring system that fits better to mma, i say alot of fights are too much depending on the judges. we all know the commissions are full of bs judges. So everything that makes the outcome of an important fight (like nr. 1 contender spot, main event or similiar) more reasonable i would welcome.

I like the idea of a 5 round fight if it is deemed to be a contender fight, such as the swick vs kampmann fight in september, maybe these fights do deserve 5 rounds, but at the same time this may comprimise alot of ppv time and cause less fights per ppv, which in turn sucks, but contender fights deserve 5

---

Posted by matt_black

I like the idea of a 5 round fight if it is deemed to be a contender fight, such as the swick vs kampmann fight in september, maybe these fights do deserve 5 rounds, but at the same time this may comprimise alot of ppv time and cause less fights per ppv, which in turn sucks, but contender fights deserve 5

---

yeah, the ppv time is a problem there, definitely. i already dislike if a title fight takes 5 rounds and you get to see less fights from the undercard. But easy way out of that: extend ppv time now!!! And while you're at it, show the prelims on spike tv too!

dude a 10 fight fight card is 5 hours long that is long enough, i can't imagine a 5 round boring ass fight

Part of what people need to consider is that the difference between a 5 round fight and a 3 round fight isn't just + 2 rounds. What I mean by this is that you can't look back at a close 3 round fight and say that it would've been more definitive, that 5 rounds would've been more enjoyable, or anything else.

A fighter is going to approach a 5 round fight completely differently. If the same great close 3 round fights had been 5 rounders maybe the first 2 rounds would have been a slow feeling out period and the fight actually wouldn't have been any more entertaining. Maybe the fight would have taken an entirely different course because fighter A builds his strategy around tiring the guy out slowly instead of attacking him forcefully.

There are way too many variables to claim that fights we wish were longer would have been improved by 2 extra rounds. Looking at title fights the 2 extra rounds don't really seem to increase the action, they slow it down quite a bit because the fighters realize they have a lot more time to find their range and pace their attack. I'm not arguing that this is better or worse, there are positives and negatives of course. This allows for more strategy, but it also slows the pace of the fights.

For me personally, I think that it would create a lot more boring slow fights overall. Yes, I think there would be certain fights that would benefit, but I think the majority of fights would simply get slower in pace. I don't believe it would really bring much more resolution to decisions. Judges would simply have a larger number of rounds to score subjectively. If the scoring is such that 3 people can look at the same round and all come to different decisions, adding rounds won't solve this problem. It will actually increase the variability of decisions. In theory it should give the fighters more time to finish, but looking at Title fights, how many actually end in rounds 4/5? Not many, and if they finish in these rounds one fighter is almost always being clearly dominated.

I would like this...a lot.

i dont like this at all, like people said before me, it will slow things down because they have to pace themselves for 5 and know that they have a lot of time to get going. on top of that it screws up ppvs. theres no reason for this.