Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

Nate Diaz is tired of 'ridiculous' scoring in MMA

Print  
  Page 1 of 2     1     2  
Posted By Message

pmoney

P$ Pimpin'

pmoney Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,948
Career:1,557-943
Joined:Oct 2010
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,274
For as long as there has been judging in MMA, there has been complaining about judging in MMA. Now Nate Diaz is piling on with his critique of the scoring system currently in place. According to the "Kid from Stockton," all you have to do to win a fight is get on top of your opponent and hold him down. In the interest of full disclosure, it should be noted that Diaz was largely out-wrestled and controlled by Dong Hyun Kim en route to a decision loss at UFC 125 on Jan. 1.

Article

Post #1   1/16/11 2:12:00AM   

king_katool

MMA Sensei

king_katool Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,086
Career:325-231
Joined:Mar 2008
Chips:
200
You know for as "hard" as the diaz bros try to come off, they sure do whine like little girls

Post #2   1/16/11 5:25:51AM   

postman

Heavyweight Champ

postman Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:6,355
Career:746-420
Joined:Jun 2007
Chips:
1,062
I once saw a video with Nick Diaz saying its not about who won the rounds that took place, its about who would have won the fight if there was no time limit LOL I get what he is saying in a way but i can not belive he would say it on video. I feeling is 3 rounds is not enough time for real pros to get a proper fight in we need 5 round pro fights. at least at the highest levels.

Post #3   1/16/11 9:51:15AM   

sbulldavid

Heavyweight Champ

sbulldavid Avatar
3


 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,668
Career:1,468-851
Joined:Mar 2008
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
375
I believe in 5 round fights myself, but we'll never see them because three rounds is neat and convenient. I would be happy with a ten minute first round, I hate it when good wrestlers gas in the first five minutes and win the second round by lay and pray, wall and stall, when all they are doing is holding on for their life.

Post #4   1/16/11 11:28:17AM   

king_katool

MMA Sensei

king_katool Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,086
Career:325-231
Joined:Mar 2008
Chips:
200

Posted by sbulldavid

I believe in 5 round fights myself, but we'll never see them because three rounds is neat and convenient. I would be happy with a ten minute first round, I hate it when good wrestlers gas in the first five minutes and win the second round by lay and pray, wall and stall, when all they are doing is holding on for their life.



I'm a HUGE fan of 10 min first rounds

Post #5   1/16/11 6:06:44PM   

CCPRIDE99

Standup Guy

CCPRIDE99 Avatar
3


 
 
 


 
 
Posts:295
Career:1,224-710
Joined:Jul 2007
Chips:
27
Most people that complain about mma judging are retarded. There's not anything wrong with it. If you're losing fights because you're getting taken down, then you need to evolve and learn how to stop takedowns or get them yourself

Post #6   1/16/11 8:52:24PM   

xburbx

MMA Regular

xburbx Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:181
Career:645-394
Joined:Jun 2007
Camp: rafrojas
Chips:
13
diaz brothers are entertaining

Post #7   1/16/11 9:51:54PM   

Pookie

Remember Paul Herrera

Pookie Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:9,605
Career:1,910-1,061
Joined:Apr 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,787
You cant hate the player, you have to hate the game.

Takedowns are favored too much. Even by the unified rules of MMA, Diaz had a right to claim he won that second round. Not one judge gave it to him. Take-downs and top position IS favored too much by judges.

_______________________________________
BJ Penn beat Frankie Edgar more times than Benson Henderson beat Frankie Edgar.

Post #8   1/17/11 3:07:31AM   

pmoney

P$ Pimpin'

pmoney Avatar
8
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,948
Career:1,557-943
Joined:Oct 2010
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,274


What's all this crap I've been reading about the Stun Gun getting a "solid win" over Nate Diaz?

That was a PAPER THIN win, at best. He didn't do a damn thing to Diaz besides landing one good punch from top position in the first round.

Kim whined like a bitch over the knee, which should have been legal, and got a pretty good hurting put on him at the end of the third round.

Post #9   1/17/11 3:59:30AM   

supatolacyl

MMA Regular

supatolacyl Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:238
Career:1,157-897
Joined:Aug 2007
Chips:
31

Posted by king_katool

You know for as "hard" as the diaz bros try to come off, they sure do whine like little girls



They from Stockton, don'tcha know they can't go out like that, nobody in Stockton ever loses a fight it gets stolen from them lol ONLY KIDDING!!!

I don't like the lay n' pray aspect of some wrestlers but take downs, slams, sweeps and trips are great and it's your obligation as a fighter to know how to defend the td or once on the ground you should be profitiant enough in sweeps, wall walking or escapes to get off your butt. I have no sypmathy for these guys that complain like this, because this is their job, this is what they get paid to do, they're professionals and spend more time in the gym then most of us do at work, so they should be able to get themselves out of any situation they find themselves in unless they are not the better fighter. Personaly I think takedowns should count as much as a knock down, as a fighter it's your responsibility to stay up on your feet (from a defencive stand point) if your oponant drops you on your butt then good for them and they should be rewarded weather it be an over-hand right or a double leg, the end results are the same you are on your backside.

From a point system that just scores strikes, then yes strikes from the bottom should count every bit as much as any other strike; However, we all know that all strikes are NOT created equal!! Can someone honestly say they would want a pitter patter arm strike from the bottom, to count as much as a full motion right hook that lands and sends a guy flying back on the stank leg? (not saying it happened in this fight just a general assesment question) Strikes from the bottom should count for something, but how much is the million dollar question, especially if the top fighter isn't throwing much, but in the current system (weather anyone likes it or not) octagon control is one of the main guidelines used in judging and if your on top you are generaly thought to be in a controling position and a weak strike from the bottom wont over take the minutes of a fighter being on bottom. It's not that flaud of a system, because atleast 95 percent of all decisions are probably scored correctly, but the scoring system isn't commended for all of those decisions. It's only condemend for that one decision here or there out of multiple events and often it's more of a judging error then the point system.

Last edited 1/17/11 4:19AM server time by supatolacyl
Edit note/reason: n/a

Post #10   1/17/11 4:13:32AM   

Lucas

MMA Regular

Lucas Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:77
Career:1,477-867
Joined:Feb 2007
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
32

Posted by supatolacyl


Posted by king_katool

Personaly I think takedowns should count as much as a knock down



I don't agree with this as a knock down 9 times out of 10 means you have hurt your opponent. Fair enough a takedown means you have out them in their back but it does not suggest you have hurt your opponent. I can see why the scoring is frustrating for well rounded guys because they train all element of mma where you could have someone who just trains wrestling and this gives hime the ability to keep winning fights by a decision because he is strong at 1 aspect of MMA. Having said this all fighters know that takedowns and top position play a massisve part in scoring so you have to be prepared for that.

Post #11   1/17/11 4:48:56AM   

landstander

MMA Regular

landstander Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:55
Career:51-32
Joined:Jun 2007
Chips:
13
Things that are legal in non-combat sports should not score points in combat sports.

When someone does a takedown that would be considered a legal rugby tackle they should not be given points. If i wanted to watch people tackle each other I would watch a rugby game. If they did a takedown that would be considered an ILLEGAL rugby tackle ie. trips, spear tackles, lifting the guy before taking him down ect. they should earn some points.

As for stand-ups.

if when it hits the ground your not scrambling, controlling one of your opponents limbs or hitting your opponent for 3sec then stand them up.

or

Don't have stand-ups.

either is fine with me.

I also think standing in the center of the ring should be considered a dominant position. That way you don't have to chase a guy around the ring, you just stand in the middle and he has to come to you and try to fight you or risk losing the round.

Post #12   1/17/11 7:57:19AM   

AchillesHeel

Heavyweight Champ

AchillesHeel Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,108
Career:845-448
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
603

Posted by Pookie

Take-downs and top position IS favored too much by judges.


What's ironic is that having top position is judged more favorably in American MMA than it is in wrestling. In the NCAA, a "near fall" (a pin, basically) is worth 2 to 4 points, takedowns and reversals are each worth 2 points, an escape is worth 1 point, and penalties for things like unsportsmanlike conduct or stalling are worth 1 point (yes, you read that right, you get penalized for stalling in wrestling). Holding top position for 1 minute longer than your opponent does - and it doesn't matter how much longer - is worth only 1 point. Go figure.

Post #13   1/17/11 8:44:56AM   

landstander

MMA Regular

landstander Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:55
Career:51-32
Joined:Jun 2007
Chips:
13

Posted by supatolacyl


Posted by king_katool

You know for as "hard" as the diaz bros try to come off, they sure do whine like little girls



They from Stockton, don'tcha know they can't go out like that, nobody in Stockton ever loses a fight it gets stolen from them lol ONLY KIDDING!!!

I don't like the lay n' pray aspect of some wrestlers but take downs, slams, sweeps and trips are great and it's your obligation as a fighter to know how to defend the td or once on the ground you should be profitiant enough in sweeps, wall walking or escapes to get off your butt. I have no sypmathy for these guys that complain like this, because this is their job, this is what they get paid to do, they're professionals and spend more time in the gym then most of us do at work, so they should be able to get themselves out of any situation they find themselves in unless they are not the better fighter. Personaly I think takedowns should count as much as a knock down, as a fighter it's your responsibility to stay up on your feet (from a defencive stand point) if your oponant drops you on your butt then good for them and they should be rewarded weather it be an over-hand right or a double leg, the end results are the same you are on your backside.

From a point system that just scores strikes, then yes strikes from the bottom should count every bit as much as any other strike; However, we all know that all strikes are NOT created equal!! Can someone honestly say they would want a pitter patter arm strike from the bottom, to count as much as a full motion right hook that lands and sends a guy flying back on the stank leg? (not saying it happened in this fight just a general assesment question) Strikes from the bottom should count for something, but how much is the million dollar question, especially if the top fighter isn't throwing much, but in the current system (weather anyone likes it or not) octagon control is one of the main guidelines used in judging and if your on top you are generaly thought to be in a controling position and a weak strike from the bottom wont over take the minutes of a fighter being on bottom. It's not that flaud of a system, because atleast 95 percent of all decisions are probably scored correctly, but the scoring system isn't commended for all of those decisions. It's only condemend for that one decision here or there out of multiple events and often it's more of a judging error then the point system.



I disagree with a lot of what you are saying.

If you think a standard no frills takedown should count the same as a knockdown from a punch then you have never been punched in the liver. Get one of your friends to take you down with a standard tackle and then stand up and get them to punch you hard enough in the liver to knock you down. then stand up again and you can choose between them taking you down with the tackle again or another liver punch.

You say it's not the fault of the system and that the system never fails it's the judges but there is no system for the judges to work with. there is nothing written down saying whoever gets the most takedowns wins the round. they aren't even allowed to use it fully(you never see a 10:4 or 10:3 round).
they can only score 10:10 if they think it's a draw, 10:9 if they think some one won the round, 10:8 if they think someone got their ass kicked or 10:7 if someone looked spectacularly bad or good. and I don't think 95% of rounds are scored correctly I think about half of the rounds I see should be scored 10:10 like they are in boxing where they got the system from. If a round could be called either way or nothing happened then it should have been called a draw.

I think more draws in the sport would be a good thing as it would give the matchmakers more options to match make exciting fights, fighters who fought a good fight wouldn't be set back with a loss and fighters who didn't really better their opponent wouldn't move up the ranks with a win.

Post #14   1/17/11 9:08:13AM   

Sir_Karl

MMA Sensei

Sir_Karl Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,127
Career:2,275-1,535
Joined:Sep 2007
Chips:
217
I would have to agree with Nate 100%. I feel his comments are "right on the money".

Post #15   1/17/11 3:12:39PM   
 
  Page 1 of 2     1     2