MMA & UFC...what rules would you change/implement?

Fozzy

The CSAC allow elbows from all positions. Strikeforce don't allow them on the ground. The promotions are allowed to implement extra rules like that, but not get rid of any commission rules, ie. they can't decide to get rid of the commission's no knees on the ground rule but they can add a no headshots on the ground rule if they wanted

unknown13

Fozzy wrote: »

The CSAC allow elbows from all positions. Strikeforce don't allow them on the ground. The promotions are allowed to implement extra rules like that, but not get rid of any commission rules, ie. they can't decide to get rid of the commission's no knees on the ground rule but they can add a no headshots on the ground rule if they wanted

Didn't Elite XC not allow elbows on the ground aswell. They are allowed make it safer but they are the absolute minimum rules in place.

Is the length of rounds for women's fight the commision's decision or promotion's decision.

unknown13

Valmont wrote: »

Before we go guns blazing into the elbow-cut debate just take note that it rarely happens in the first place. I find arguments either way tend to give the impression that it's a common occurrence.

In the LW division it happens more than any other division for some reason but I do agree it doesn't happen enough for an argument against the action because standing knees do most of the cuts in MMA and they should never be an illegal technique because they make the fights better.

Fozzy

unknown13 wrote: »

Is the length of rounds for women's fight the commision's decision or promotion's decision.

I'm pretty sure there that the only regulation is that rounds must be at least 3 minutes

Charlie3dan

The UFC brought in a rule last year (I think it was) preventing fighters from covering each others mouths (smothering) on the ground.
Bring back the smothering!

Kazooie

Figure four leg locks, DDTs and Tombstone piledrivers all allowed. Oh and the stunner of course.

Pride rules rocked. The ring, 10 minute first rounds, knees on the ground and no elbows on the ground made fights much better in my opinion. Commisions in US will never accept those i a million years though unfortunately.

calex71

Charlie3dan wrote: »

The UFC brought in a rule last year (I think it was) preventing fighters from covering each others mouths (smothering) on the ground.
Bring back the smothering!

Didnt realize they had done that, and I only saw Matt Hughes do it to BJ Penn on the setanta show that has the old fights last night
Yes bring it back I say !!!!!

rovert

Charlie3dan wrote: »

Bring back the smothering!

And bring back Emmanuel Yarborough too!



:eek:

Fall_Guy

Kazooie wrote: »

Figure four leg locks, DDTs and Tombstone piledrivers all allowed. Oh and the stunner of course.

Pride rules rocked. The ring, 10 minute first rounds, knees on the ground and no elbows on the ground made fights much better in my opinion. Commisions in US will never accept those i a million years though unfortunately.

I liked alot of Pride rules (knees to the head of downed opponents, ten minute first round, Yellow cards for inactivity etc...) but I do not see how the use of the ring could be seen as superior to the cage for MMA. Using a ring means constant repositionings are needed and theres always the possibility of people falling through ropes. The cage eliminates these issues and adds an extra dimension to the fight as a fighters use of the cage can become an important factor in how the fight plays out.

Kazooie

Fall_Guy wrote: »

I liked alot of Pride rules (knees to the head of downed opponents, ten minute first round, Yellow cards for inactivity etc...) but I do not see how the use of the ring could be seen as superior to the cage for MMA. Using a ring means constant repositionings are needed and theres always the possibility of people falling through ropes. The cage eliminates these issues and adds an extra dimension to the fight as a fighters use of the cage can become an important factor in how the fight plays out.

As in pushing someone up against the cage and stalling for 5 rounds?

They both have their pros and cons and to be honest I'm not completly in favour of either one. I just think the ring adds more legitimacy to MMA as a sport. It takes away some of the 'human cock fighting' element that MMA begrudgers harp on about.

cowzerp

The cage is safer for fighters, i think the ring can be better for fans though, both been used is good..

calex71

More in favor of the cage over the ring as a fan myself, nothing more annoying than someone going for the ropes and the constant repositioning that breaks the flow of the fight.

Depends on the promotion though i guess, for example maybe my memory is fading but i dong remember the ring being that bad in pride days, but in the last 2 dream events it bugged me i have to admit. Dont think ring was an issue at all from what i remember of affliction and other us ones.

As for the stalling against the cage , if that happens then the referee is the one to blame there i guess for allowing it to happen.

Fozzy

Sokodjou seemed to be trying to dive out of the ring at every opportunity on the last Affliction card. I don't like the ring

super ninja

unknown13 wrote: »

What are you on that was a F**king horrible rule and what made cage rage a complete joke.

10 point must system works IMO but fights are judged by boxing judges everywhere other than New Jersey, who have different judges for boxing and MMA.

I would bring in a 10 count for a knockdown because if its a standup fighter against a grappler he may not want to go to the ground if he has put the fighter down because the grappler could do something if he isn't that hurt.

Also a standing count would be nice to see aswell

i quite liked the open guard rule, and a ten count is crazy this isnt k1 or boxing.

colinlaird000

Hi guys, I dont post on here much, but i found the topic interesting, so heres my tuppence worth.
I would agree that "finishing" on the ground is one of the more dangerous aspects of the sport, and reffing it must be a nightmare. A lot of us "lucky" enough to fight pro will understand the merits and issues surrounding strikes on the ground. The problem lies with a guy who is knocked down, and then "finished" with gnp. Is he unconscious when he hits the ground? Should be be given a standing count, or be the victim of a good savaging? It does encourage the fight moving to the ground, so long as the fighter on bottom is capable of defending himself.
We shouldn't be considering how pretty it is for the guy in the Tapout hoody to watch on tv, but rather the safety of fighters on the recieving end of knees and elbows on the ground.
Speaking from personal experience, general striking on the ground didnt bother me that much. It certainly inspires you a bit more active from bottom to get the escape.
In conclusion - smothering is mean, but makes sense. Cage rage rules are funny and a bit dangerous. Cages are better to fight in and safer. Standing count is a good idea if it can be applied fairly.

colinlaird000

And ten minute rounds are all well and good until you have to fight one. And then another 2 five minute rounds after that. I reckon theyre more a favourite of armchair warriors. Maybe the length of rounds should be based on the time it takes on average to drink a pint of beer..