ULTIMATE CONFLICT 2

mark boyle

Just to let everyone know we're running with a new system for round times

C-class (semi-pro) 3 x 3 min rounds

B-class (pro) 3 x 4 min rounds

A-class (pro) 3 x 5 min rounds

the reasoning behind this is to make the fights more spectator friendly

UFR Management

We ran the same system at the last EFR and it worked very well,the shorter rounds made for more action and having three rounds as oppossed to two rounds at B and C class easier judged for the officals.

Drunkmonkey79

Seems fair for judges and better action for spectators.
Win/Win

Jason Mc

Oddly enough Chaos Fighting Championships are doing the same thing.

The show looks great. Last one ran particularly well.

I'll see you there at the weekend.

Roper

After seeing it at UOC I decided to run it at my show too. Gives the C class guys a bit of experience with mutliple rounds too.

Hail 2 Da Chimp

Ultimate Conflict is this Saturday right...?
Short notice changing to 3 rounds a few days before the fight?

Tim_Murphy

well 2 round fights and 10-9 scoring is not a good mix so this is a good move.

If this talked about governing body was to happen all well and good but failing that I reckon all promoters should sit down and hammer out a unified set of rules to be used on all shows. I don't think it should be all that hard to do really. The current system of constantly moving goalposts is great craic no doubt but it can be quite confusing for fighters. Or at least me anyway. People constantly ask me questions about rules (B class in particular) and I always feel like I'm giving me what is most likely slightly out of date information.

Martin Walker

Tim_Murphy wrote: »

If this talked about governing body was to happen all well and good but failing that I reckon all promoters should sit down and hammer out a unified set of rules to be used on all shows.

To be honest i think a unified rule set and a Pool of licensed officials is all we really need. Perhaps an all Ireland ranking system would be useful.
Ive been to lots of different promotions in the UK and Ireland over the years and ive never been to one that lacked the fundamentals ie Medics, Security, Quality Cage/Ring.
If we thrash out these things i will come away happy from the meeting.

cowzerp

Tim_Murphy wrote: »

well 2 round fights and 10-9 scoring is not a good mix so this is a good move.

If this talked about governing body was to happen all well and good but failing that I reckon all promoters should sit down and hammer out a unified set of rules to be used on all shows

Agreed Tim.

personally, i'd vote to make this standard across the board in ireland.
rules and rounds.

Tim_Murphy

Perhaps an all Ireland ranking system would be useful.

I'd say it would be more hassle than it would be worth. A database with a record of all fights and fighters, as I said on fighttalk, would be useful. It would take a bit of work to design and implement, plus you'd need somebody to keep it updated but I'm sure there'd be some volunteers to do that.

But standard rules are all that is really needed and that doesn't take a governing body as such. Having licensed officials would be great and all, but I honestly can't see it happening for the time being at least.

David Jones

Having licensed officials would be great and all, but I honestly can't see it happening for the time being at least.

Licensed by whom and to what end?
I actually think the standard of refereeing is pretty good

Tim_Murphy

David Jones wrote: »

Licensed by whom and to what end?
I actually think the standard of refereeing is pretty good

Indeed it is!

I just think it would be a good idea that before any new ref's got into the cage they did a bit of training for the job with somebody like yourself or Aidan Marron. It's not essential but it would probably improve the standard of new refs coming on board.

Clive

I think I may be alone in liking things as they are!

The more little rule differences the better I say. Some shows have elbows, some have heel hooks - there's something for everyone!

Raze_them_all

Clive wrote: »

I think I may be alone in liking things as they are!

The more little rule differences the better I say. Some shows have elbows, some have heel hooks - there's something for everyone!

It can be confusing for fighters though.
Some shows allow standing elbows in b class, some dont. Very easy to forget in the heat of the moment

David Jones

It can be confusing for fighters though.
Some shows allow standing elbows in b class, some dont. Very easy to forget in the heat of the moment

Totally agree. Personally I think we should just adopt UFC rules for A class and be done with all the other variations. For B class take out elbows on the ground and heel hooks and for C class take out striking to head on ground and heel hooks with everything else being common. Bloody easier to ref too!

Judomad

David Jones wrote: »

Totally agree. Personally I think we should just adopt UFC rules for A class and be done with all the other variations. For B class take out elbows on the ground and heel hooks and for C class take out striking to head on ground and heel hooks with everything else being common. Bloody easier to ref too!

dave has it spot on here, it makes the most sense to be honest, allow elbows on the ground and heel hooks in A, and take them out for B.

Roper

I think the main problem with heel hooks is the potential for injury. With a heel hook, sometimes the damage is done long before the tap and it's very easy for someone to pretty much destroy their knee for keeps if they roll out badly. Now you might say that thems the breaks cos you got in to fight A and agreed to the rules but even though people will make that choice, there's nobody I know fighting A who could afford to be out of their job for 6 weeks along with surgery and physio costs.

For me it comes back to a cost/benefit thing. Does the benefit of allowing heel hooks outweigh the potential costs? Not really in my opinion.

As for rules differences, I think that could be ironed out pretty easily with a bit of a chat. After all fighters should know well in advance what times they're fighting, knees/elbows to the head etc. I think the real differences are at B class anyway. I don't see a problem with promoters picking the rules below A class so long as everyone agrees on some broad ones like no head shots in C.

cowzerp

Roper wrote: »

I think the main problem with heel hooks is the potential for injury. With a heel hook, sometimes the damage is done long before the tap and it's very easy for someone to pretty much destroy their knee for keeps if they roll out badly. Now you might say that thems the breaks cos you got in to fight A and agreed to the rules but even though people will make that choice, there's nobody I know fighting A who could afford to be out of their job for 6 weeks along with surgery and physio costs.

For me it comes back to a cost/benefit thing. Does the benefit of allowing heel hooks outweigh the potential costs? Not really in my opinion.

I agree, heal hooks are so dangerous and no 1 in the mma in ireland is earning money from mma where they could afford to be out of work for 6 weeks plus up to potentially 6 months depending on the job.

Raze_them_all

I dont think this has been mentioned yet... But weight classes....there should be the same weight classes across the board. some organisations have different weight classes to others, e.g. some are 65.8 while others are 65.

weemate

Personally I hate heel hooks,they can finish a career.I wont even have them in the gym.As a ref,they go on too fast to be stopped during a fight,hence why if Im taking charge of a show I ask the promoter to leave them out of the rules.

weemate

Tim_Murphy wrote: »

Indeed it is!

I just think it would be a good idea that before any new ref's got into the cage they did a bit of training for the job with somebody like yourself or Aidan Marron. It's not essential but it would probably improve the standard of new refs coming on board.

AHEM..............:mad:

Roper

weemate wrote: »

AHEM..............:mad:

Yes I agree Peter, you should train with Dave or Aidan :pac::D

weemate

yeah.........I asked for that!!!

Martin Walker

Raze_them_all wrote: »

I dont think this has been mentioned yet... But weight classes....there should be the same weight classes across the board. some organisations have different weight classes to others, e.g. some are 65.8 while others are 65.

Never thought of that you know. I agree.

When i said "licensed" before what i mean is we need a group of people that are recognized as quality Officials.
I dont have a problem with the standard of Officials in the country at the minute as i think they are all neutral and impartial. However as the sport grows and more Promotions start more Refs and Judges will be needed. What happens if there is a Show in Belfast a show in Antrim and a show in Dublin on the same weekend?

bilbo79

I'd say the standard of reffing is actually quite poor tbh, on 1 show efr you can elbow from your back at a 6-12 angle, then using efr rules on another show that is not allowed by officials! they simply dont understand the rules.

i've also seen refs stop fights when submissions are clearly not on, and letting people away with illegal moves or restarting fighters in wrong positions after restarts, aidan is a good ref but out of most the others i know i would not think there that great, there just appreciated because they are willing to do it. A training course for refs should be made and arranged by all the orgs to send 2-3 each to it. otherwise stupid arguments like is 2 points in contact with the ground etc.. will always be there.

Raze_them_all

bilbo79 wrote: »

I'd say the standard of reffing is actually quite poor tbh, on 1 show efr you can elbow from your back at a 6-12 angle, then using efr rules on another show that is not allowed by officials! they simply dont understand the rules.

This is a legal move actually. I used it in my last fight in Tribal Warfare. The 6-12 motion is from mount. You can do it from your back as it's not the same motion. Most organisations allow this AFAIK

Tim_Murphy

weemate wrote: »

AHEM..............:mad:

:pac:

I'd say the standard of reffing is actually quite poor tbh, on 1 show efr you can elbow from your back at a 6-12 angle, then using efr rules on another show that is not allowed by officials! they simply dont understand the rules.

i've also seen refs stop fights when submissions are clearly not on, and letting people away with illegal moves or restarting fighters in wrong positions after restarts, aidan is a good ref but out of most the others i know i would not think there that great, there just appreciated because they are willing to do it. A training course for refs should be made and arranged by all the orgs to send 2-3 each to it. otherwise stupid arguments like is 2 points in contact with the ground etc.. will always be there.

In general, of the fights I've seen, I would say the standard is decent enough. But then I'm not at most shows.
Mistakes will always be made, its just a matter of trying to minimise them, and I think unified rules and ref courses would be a big help with that.

bilbo79

Raze_them_all wrote: »

This is a legal move actually. I used it in my last fight in Tribal Warfare. The 6-12 motion is from mount. You can do it from your back as it's not the same motion. Most organisations allow this AFAIK

Thats my point.

on tribal warfare it was not allowed as a 6 to 12 yet on efr,the elbow from below was not a 6-12 is, but just the same as the 1 allowed from mount but in reverse used in tribal warfare, even though they where the same rules been used it was not allowed, the officials where making the rules as they went or else where misunderstanding them.

Clive

I propose an A+ class with heel hooks and elbows included

Tim_Murphy

Clive wrote: »

I propose an A+ class with heel hooks and elbows included

Well proper A class rules already have elbows so A+ should surely have knees to the head on the ground! :cool:

Roper

I say A++ with stomps and soccer kicks.

Martin Walker

Roper wrote: »

I say A++ with stomps and soccer kicks.

2nd`d

Vale Tudo Rules all round.

David Jones

on tribal warfare it was not allowed as a 6 to 12 yet on efr,the elbow from below was not a 6-12 is, but just the same as the 1 allowed from mount but in reverse used in tribal warfare, even though they where the same rules been used it was not allowed, the officials where making the rules as they went or else where misunderstanding them.

Well if you have been to any shows I have reffed, I dont allow 12 - 6 elbows to the head at all. Illegal from mount, and too easy to infringe on the no strikes to the back of the head rule when your opp is in your guard (usually with his head buried in your chest) I do allow them to the legs of your opp when you are in his guard and also to his shoulder or collarbone when he is in yours. Hope that clarifies my ruling on it, and Im not making it up... :rolleyes:

mark.leonard

Could we be any more off topic?

We'll never have unified rules for all promotions, its a nice idea, but without incentive, why would one promoter use a rule set he isn't fully happy with, just for the sake of it?
Should I dis-allow elbows to the head on the ground because John does and then we'll be the same? Just an example but hopefully you will see my point.

6-12 is an elbow uppercut, so I am pretty sure any show allowing elbows allows that.
12-6 or a downward point of elbow strike is not allowed on TW or EFR, though I think the UFC is going to allow them in future, just not to the back of the head.

If you are lying on your back elbowing your partner to the top of the head your elbow travels from 3-9 and is not subject to the 12-6 rule by my reckoning.

That being said Dave has been TW chief official for the last two shows and what he says goes.

bilbo79, I am trying to figure out whether you are trolling or just airing genuine dissenting views.
Lets assume the latter (though I risk feeding you if you are a troll, I'll just have to chance it).
Do you train or are you just a spectator? Have you fought?
You suggest that the TW officials were making up the rules as they went or were misunderstanding them. Either aspersion offends me, I would suggest that you didn't understand the rules as they were explained to you, in which case why didn't you ask further questions?
There was some confusion during the rules meeting as at TW C Class allows knees to the head standing, which is not a standard ruling. Dave began to explain C class the usual way and we reminded him of the change and he explained it again for TW. The only fighters involved in that match up were clear about the rule set, as was the referee, so I don't see what concerns you.

weemate

Every show I have been at either as an official or coach [ usually both!! ] the rules are explained fully at the fighters meeting.If the promoter has any alterations they are discussed then.In fact they are discussed with the refs and judges before the fighters meeting so that everyone is on the same page.
Some promotions allow elbows,some dont,some allow heel hooks,some dont.All the officials are clear on which do and dont.
I can understand confusion by spectators who attend all the shows and see fights being stopped for things that are legal on a different event.That is why there will be hopefully a unified set of rules in place for all Irish mma shows in the future.

mark.leonard

weemate wrote: »

I can understand confusion by spectators who attend all the shows and see fights being stopped for things that are legal on a different event.That is why there will be hopefully a unified set of rules in place for all Irish mma shows in the future.

Interesting point Peter, though I wonder how many spectators who aren't fighters attend more than one show, possibly in NI where they are springing up so fast, but down here it is much less of a concern.

bilbo79

mark.leonard wrote: »

Could we be any more off topic?

We'll never have unified rules for all promotions, its a nice idea, but without incentive, why would one promoter use a rule set he isn't fully happy with, just for the sake of it?
Should I dis-allow elbows to the head on the ground because John does and then we'll be the same? Just an example but hopefully you will see my point.

6-12 is an elbow uppercut, so I am pretty sure any show allowing elbows allows that.
12-6 or a downward point of elbow strike is not allowed on TW or EFR, though I think the UFC is going to allow them in future, just not to the back of the head.

If you are lying on your back elbowing your partner to the top of the head your elbow travels from 3-9 and is not subject to the 12-6 rule by my reckoning.

That being said Dave has been TW chief official for the last two shows and what he says goes.

bilbo79, I am trying to figure out whether you are trolling or just airing genuine dissenting views.
Lets assume the latter (though I risk feeding you if you are a troll, I'll just have to chance it).
Do you train or are you just a spectator? Have you fought?
You suggest that the TW officials were making up the rules as they went or were misunderstanding them. Either aspersion offends me, I would suggest that you didn't understand the rules as they were explained to you, in which case why didn't you ask further questions?
There was some confusion during the rules meeting as at TW C Class allows knees to the head standing, which is not a standard ruling. Dave began to explain C class the usual way and we reminded him of the change and he explained it again for TW. The only fighters involved in that match up were clear about the rule set, as was the referee, so I don't see what concerns you.

I just train but dont fight, i love it but not enough to get bashed-i was only a spectator but was explained the rules, i was also told they use efr rules which i know well: and they allow 6-12 elbows from your back, i thought maybe i took it up wrong but now dave has confirmed what i was told: he does not allow it, i thought ref's jobs where to enforce the rules and not to adjust them to his preferances, again maybe i'm wrong and you do not use efr rules, no biggy anyway, i just thought there was some mistake. Either way is fine once its clear. Show was great though.

David Jones

Sorry have adjusted my typo in my previous post, that should have read 12-6 elbows (Downward spike). 6 - 12 is indeed effectively an elbow upper cut unlikely to hit the back of the head and therefore perfectly legal.

cowzerp

David Jones wrote: »

Sorry have adjusted my typo in my previous post, that should have read 12-6 elbows (Downward spike). 6 - 12 is indeed effectively an elbow upper cut unlikely to hit the back of the head and therefore perfectly legal.

Dave the likely hood of it hitting the back of the head is irrelevant, its illegal to hit the back of the head with any move so if they use it and hit the back then punish them for it, its the fighters job to fight and the refs job to keep it within the rules.

punching is the most likely way of hitting the back of the head and we certainly wont ban punching!

bilbo79

David Jones wrote: »

Sorry have adjusted my typo in my previous post, that should have read 12-6 elbows (Downward spike). 6 - 12 is indeed effectively an elbow upper cut unlikely to hit the back of the head and therefore perfectly legal.

O.k fair enough, easy mistake.

weemate

In the North Mark,because it is usually myself or Aidan in charge of the event we try to use a common set of rules but there has been on occasion times [ usually the first show ] where the promoter has a different idea.For example the first Ultimate conflict allowed heel hooks.....that wont be the case this time.Cage Rage and ring of truth shows dont allow elbows which can be confusing for fighters coming down who have only fought on Northern shows.In saying that,the rules are fully explained as you know at the fighters meetings.Also the fighters and coaches will know when the fight is accepted what rules they are under as most promotions have a website where the rules are posted for all to see.Ultimate conflict and Chaos are among the promotions that submitted their rules to myself and Adian to have a look at before the event so we are up to speed.It's not a bad idea to be honest.

David Jones

Dave the likely hood of it hitting the back of the head is irrelevant, its illegal to hit the back of the head with any move so if they use it and hit the back then punish them for it.

Not sure what you are getting at because if the 12 - 6 is used in any position for head contact its a foul. My point is that 12 - 6 is illegal regardless but if used when opponent is in your guard with his head low, in all likeliehood it will be the back of the head it contacts, so therefore illegal on two counts.

The 6 - 12 is unlikely to ever contact the back of the head, possibly why it is left as a legal strike from that position.

cowzerp

David Jones wrote: »

Not sure what you are getting at because if the 12 - 6 is used in any position for head contact its a foul. My point is that 12 - 6 is illegal regardless but if used when opponent is in your guard with his head low, in all likeliehood it will be the back of the head it contacts, so therefore illegal on two counts.

The 6 - 12 is unlikely to ever contact the back of the head, possibly why it is left as a legal strike from that position.

I dont believe thats why the 12-6 elbow is illegal, its just because its a spike and with the power of gravity right behind it the impact potentially is huge, thats my take on it, anyway i was refering to from bottom, i dont think the head affects the law tbh. Back of the head strikes are illegal, end of.