- Commissioner’s statement on Ventura, Marte
- Ronnie O’Sullivan: Masters champion ‘felt so vulnerable’ in final
- Arron Fletcher Wins 2017 WSOP International Circuit Marrakech Main Event ($140,224)
- Smith challenges Warner to go big in India
- Moncada No. 1 on MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- Braves land 2 on MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- Kingery makes MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- New Zealand wrap up 2-0 after Bangladesh implosion
- Mathews, Pradeep, Gunathilaka to return to Sri Lanka
- Elliott hopes for rain for Poli
New judging criteria of Unified Rules finalized, effective 2017 (Updated)
- Updated: August 6, 2016
Among the six changes to Association of Boxing Commissions and Combative Sports’ (ABC’s) Unified Rules of MMA on Tuesday was a rewording of the criteria by which judges are to score rounds under the 10-Point Must system. Bloody Elbow obtained a copy of the new criteria, which will be logged in to the Unified Rules and become effective on Jan. 1, 2017, from veteran MMA official John McCarthy.
It begins with a mission statement: “To evolve Mixed Martial Arts Judging Criteria to focus on the result of action (versus action itself), it must be stated that criteria is to be used in specific order. These criteria may not move from one to the next without the prior criterion being 100% even in the judges’ assessments.”
The document clarifies that an MMA fight should be judged on a single criterion: Effective Striking/Grappling. Only if Effective Striking/Grappling is 100% equal, would a judge move to the second criterion (Plan B) of Effective Aggressiveness. And only if Effective Aggressiveness is 100% equal, would a judge move to the third criterion (Plan C) of Cage/Ring Control.
In other words, fighter complaints about losing even though they were moving forward the whole time should be pretty much dismissed.
A 10-10 scoring option where all criteria are 100% equal is a necessity since incomplete rounds sometimes must be scored when there may have been little to no action. The new criteria make clear that at the end of a 5-minute round, “If there is any discernible difference between the two fighters during the round the judge shall not give the score of 10-10.”
Effective striking/grappling is defined with the word “damage” removed from the previous proposal. “Impact” is the substitute for “damage.” The definition is meant to train judges’ attention towards effectiveness over things like flashiness or top control without – dare we say – any damage.
Effectiveness in striking/grappling is about “impact with the potential to contribute to the end of the match,” with immediate impact receiving more weight than cumulative impact.
The new criteria also explain that, whether on top or bottom, fighters should be assessed more on the “impactful/effective result of their actions, more so than their position.” So if a bottom fighter’s throwing nasty elbows from guard while the top fighter’s hanging out with body, body, head every once and a while, the bottom fighter’s winning.
A 10-9 round is when a fighter wins by a close margin, “even if by just one technique over their opponent.” However, a judge must also consider whether the losing fighter was engaged in offensive actions during the round or just tried to survive the opponent’s offensive onslaught. This will be relevant to 10-8 / 10-9 …
continue reading in source www.bloodyelbow.com