Rules suggestion....

SBG Ireland

Pro A - Unified rules, ie UFC rules
Pro B - as above minus the elbows to the head, 3 x 4min rounds
Semi Pro - as B minus heel hooks 3 x 3 min rounds with 'sparring' mma gloves (6 or 8oz)

if you want any more rules then stick with mma league/grappling.

too simple?

_oveless

Undecided!

What's wrong with the rules as they are now?

Martin Walker

Undecided!

_oveless wrote: »

What's wrong with the rules as they are now?

Not a thing.

weemate

The rules we have in place at the minute work fine.
The show on saturday asked for a change to the usual system to allow heel hooks due to the scale of the main event and because heel hooks are allowed on the European shows.

da-bres

Undecided!

SBG Ireland wrote: »

Semi Pro - as B minus heel hooks 3 x 3 min rounds with 'sparring' mma gloves (6 or 8oz)?

I agree with this as c class, semi pro mma in Ireland is 'flawed',

Not accurate enough for the transition to pro rules.

My opinion.

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

no harm having a discussion is there?

anyway heres why 'imho'...

its a fact that ground grappling is the most boring part of mma to the casual fan (due of course to ignorance to small movements etc)....without headshots this becomes even more boring and can lead to stalemates...unhappy fans = not a good thing for 'entertainment' (its no longer just 'sport' when you are getting paid and 'performing' for a crowd imo)

so...if a fighter is not prepared to be able to go a 3min round with the possibility of taking a punch to the head on the ground with a 6-8oz 'sparring' mma glove on....then dont fight on shows which have paying customers on it. stick to mma league, training, grappling etc.

fighting at 'semi pro' or c class whatever does not go on your 'sherdog' record so they can fight/lost as often as they wish, gaining valuable experience in a safe environment that much more closely matches what they'll have to face when they step up to the 'pro' ranks.

i think if this change was to be brought in you would have much more exciting c class fights and 'c class' fighters would be gaining much more relevant experience...with no change to the level of danger to the athlete.

im interested in the opinion of other trainers/refs out there?

some might be interested to know that 'amatuer' fights in the states usually means FULL ufc rules....its just that you dont get paid...so right from ur first fight everything is legal!

one other rule change could be that if a promoter fails to provide a safe arena for athletes to compete in and then promises to compensate for their lack of planning they should follow through on it

calex71

weemate wrote: »

The rules we have in place at the minute work fine.
The show on saturday asked for a change to the usual system to allow heel hooks due to the scale of the main event and because heel hooks are allowed on the European shows.

Reading between the lines there maybe but was it a case of the camp asking for the change having a fighter who was a heel hook fiend?

Surely a well versed BJJ fighter would have plenty more tools in the box? Seems odd to me as an armchair commentator to request that change specifically

lukeyjudo

Undecided!

SBG Ireland wrote: »

i think if this change was to be brought in you would have much more exciting c class fights and 'c class' fighters would be gaining much more relevant experience...with no change to the level of danger to the athlete.
it

I agree completely. If this change was brought in 'C' Class fights would be way more exciting.

And definitely more realistic as to what a fighter is going to experience in the higher pro classes. No headshots on the ground isn't very realistic. It's basically a grappling match where you can put your head into certain positions that would mean the end of you in an A class or B class fight.

If your willing to trade blows standing with sparring gloves why not be willing to trade them on the ground? A lot more fun for all concerned!

Genki Sudo

Undecided!

I agree with JK. It's absolutely ridiculous that a fighter can drop his opponent with a punch but can't finish him.

Not allowing heel hooks in professional MMA bouts is also absolutely laughable.

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

hmmmm it would appear my suggestion is gaining momentum.....reminds me of 12 years ago when i started talking bout 'cage fighin'...:D

Killme00

Undecided!

Genki Sudo wrote: »

Not allowing heel hooks in professional MMA bouts is also absolutely laughable.

I disagree i think heel hooks should be banned altogether


agree on the c class semi pro rule sugesstion though.

Killme00

Undecided!

lukeyjudo wrote: »

I agree completely. If this change was brought in 'C' Class fights would be way more exciting.

I'd also like to point out that both c class fights on saturday night were better in quality than several of the pro matches.

However as it stands gaining mount in c class is a pretty bad position.

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

Killme00 wrote: »

I disagree i think heel hooks should be banned altogether

then our fighters will never be ready for pro shows anywhere in the world...

Killme00

Undecided!

SBG Ireland wrote: »

then our fighters will never be ready for pro shows anywhere in the world...

Thats an exageration, teach them how to apply and defend them for the promotions that allow them.

I do however think they should be banned altogether. Isnt the time difference between tapping and a potential rupture (ie serious long term injury) absolutely tiny for heelhooks.

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

Killme00 wrote: »

Thats an exageration, teach them how to apply and defend them for the promotions that allow them..

whats your experience as a coach might i ask?

Killme00 wrote: »

I do however think they should be banned altogether. Isnt the time difference between tapping and a potential rupture (ie serious long term injury) absolutely tiny for heelhooks.

how many 'long term injuries' have been sustained by heelhooks in promotions that allow them? more than from straight arm bars?

are they dangerous, yes. are elbows to the head dangerous, yes. are knees to the face dangerous, yes. are all of these allowed in every pro level fight, yes.
if fighters want to compete on the international pro circuit...then they have to train/compete like pros...if they are not prepared to then remain at C level

Killme00

Undecided!

SBG Ireland wrote: »

whats your experience as a coach might i ask?

zero experience

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

well ive coached multiple mma champions and am technical director of a large international mma/bjj organisation as well as being technical director of irish bjj assoc so maybe i know a lil bit more about what it takes to prepare a fighter for international pro rules fights than u

Killme00

Undecided!

SBG Ireland wrote: »

well ive coached multiple mma champions and am technical director of a large international mma/bjj organisation as well as being technical director of irish bjj assoc so maybe i know a lil bit more about what it takes to prepare a fighter for international pro rules fights than u

Congratulations on all your successes, i sincerely hope you have many more.

I honestly didnt realise that allowing or disallowing heelhooks in domestic competition would have such a major impact on the preparedness or ability of said fighters in international competition.

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

Killme00 wrote: »

Congratulations on all your successes, i sincerely hope you have many more.

thanks

Killme00 wrote: »

I honestly didnt realise that allowing or disallowing heelhooks in domestic competition would have such a majot impact on the preparedness or ability of said fighters in internation competition.

and now you do

its no more major than everything else....competing with elbows, competing in a cage, competing with knees to head, competing with heelhooks etc etc

our 'pro a' level fights should exactly mimic pro a level fights everywhere else....its too dangerous for you? then stick with c class...seems simple to me

ScareGilly

Undecided!

I don't have a clue about Irish MMA, but it seems there's arguments about striking on the ground?

Probably not a good solution, but what about Pancrase open hand strikes to a grounded opponent? Just to get them somewhat ready for the next stage up...

crosdad

Undecided!

totally agree with this! The rules at the moment for c class totally favour the striker. Why should he be able to knock me sensless on the feet but when i take him to the ground i cant throw strikes? even though i cant get much leverage from this postion to thow big shots.

i actually brought this up before but people didnt seem to agree.

weemate

Well maybe had some people got involved when the idea of standardising the rules came up a long time ago we wouldnt be having this discussion.
As a coach of some long standing,as well as also being involved in said Irish bjj association....and having a shade of experience in reffing,Im not in favour of heel hooks unless the fighter is getting well paid and is experienced enough to defend them or smart enough to tap out.
The difference in my eyes is simple..in Ireland the rate of pay for a fighter isnt enough to support him if he is out injured for however long it takes to recover from having an achilles tendon snap.Most fighters here only have martial arts insurance and not a medical plan that will compensate them for long term injury and theres no way a promoter is going to add that amount of cash to his purse or his coach is going to fork out a few weeks wages.
Its different for the guys who are fighting pro all the time,they should have said medical plans in place on top of thier club insurance.
In short,if you want to see full rules then get your fingers out and sort some sort of governing body that will standardise the ruling among the promoters because this is who is ultimately comes down to.It has fook all to do with coaches who sets the rules for tournaments.
Also lets get a course set up for proper officials....I tried once and was firmly put in my place..I think the words used were ' who gave you the right to put on a course '.
Ive said what Ive said.

Barry.Oglesby

Undecided!

I think we had this debate before.... a few times...

It does seem a bit off that there's no level of competition in Ireland equivalent to the highest stage, so I'd probably be in favour of allowing all leglocks in A competition.

B is B nothing wrong with it as it stands.

C class I'm not convinced but I can see the point. For me though the likes of my amateur show is really needed if this is to be the case, here's why:

I don't think the problem is with the classes of fight, I think when there is a problem it's with mismatches. Some lads take their first C class bout as a grappler with 4 years on the mat, some take their's as someone with 6 months training. Adding in head shots for C is not going to remove that it's only going to make it more obvious.

It is fairly ridiculous that in a C class fight mount is almost a bad position though, and definitely there's a massive jump between C & B but I'm not convinced that there's anything really wrong with the current system.

Jason McCabe

I do believe it's a bit odd at C that I can kick or knee someone to the head standing and knock them clean out but can't deliver some good old ground and pound.

With regards heel hooks I would be a little more cautious.

irishdownhiller

Go with suggested rules, Pro A,B semi pro and amateur

the only problem i have with headshots on the ground in c class is that i have a desire to compete, and the mma league just wouldnt be enough, coming from a kickboxing background and only recently starting mma i wouldnt be ready for rules allowing headshots on the ground, its just my impaitence to wait a while before i take my first fight that puts me off having head shots, but i do agree that it would make for more exciting fights, and prepare guys better for the transition to pro leve. On another note i know guys i train with who say they would never turn pro simply due to the damage you could possibly take while on the ground, but are willing to compete with current c class rules!

weemate

lets just cut to the chase.......all the promoters cast your vote....heel hooks or no for all A class match ups.
if you all agree on the inclusion of this technique then its up to the fighter if he wants to fight.
Its not even open to debate in fairness,the promoter makes the rules for his show but I'd rather have it set in stone than have to chop and change for every promotion.

OLDMAN1

weemate wrote: »

lets just cut to the chase.......all the promoters cast your vote....heel hooks or no for all A class match ups.
if you all agree on the inclusion of this technique then its up to the fighter if he wants to fight.
Its not even open to debate in fairness,the promoter makes the rules for his show but I'd rather have it set in stone than have to chop and change for every promotion.

i like SBG'S suggestion,one question, why give the promoters the power? your going to say that they run the shows but the coaches supply and train the fighters so again why?

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

just to change the wording slightly so as to highlight my point...

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

C class I'm not convinced but I can see the point. For me though the likes of my amateur show is really needed if this is to be the case, here's why:

I don't think the problem is with the classes of fight, I think when there is a problem it's with mismatches. Some lads take their first C class bout as a boxer with 4 years in the ring, some take their's as someone with 6 months training. Adding in head shots standing for C is not going to remove that it's only going to make it more obvious.

look at someone like keith coady that fought paul cowzer....if i had put him in a c class fight with a 'regular' guy training mma as long as him he would have seriously damaged him due to his boxing experience.

to echo jason's point its ridiculous that the 'striker' can KO someone standing but if the grappler works hard and gets mount he can....give him a dead arm??? as i said earlier if the athlete is not prepared to go 3 mins with the possibility of taking a head shot with bigger gloves then stick with mma league.

if i've a good grappler training with me looking to fight i have to rush him past C class to B so he can use his skill set effectively.

"Well maybe had some people got involved when the idea of standardising the rules came up a long time ago we wouldnt be having this discussion."

not sure if thats a dig at me but i never heard about this till after it happened.
look a NGB is years away if it ever does happen...and i think would bring as many problems as it solves....so its discussions like this that can bring about a change

"Im not in favour of heel hooks unless the fighter is getting well paid and is experienced enough to defend them or smart enough to tap out."

well if he's not experienced enough then maybe he shouldnt be fighting pro? which is kinda my point. if the c class rules were more realistic people could stay 'semi pro' for longer and gain experience.

mir broke silvia's arm with an arm bar - should they be banned as that'd have you out of work for a long time
liddel broke franklin's arm with a kick - should they be banned?
i just dont see heel hooks being ALL that much more dangerous than any other technique.....however even if they were...it wouldnt change the fact that they are in every pro show so if you want to fight pro...

ok how about this....

Pro A - Unified rules, ie UFC rules
Pro B - as above minus heel hooks and elbows to the head, 3 x 4min rounds
Semi Pro - as B with 'sparring' mma gloves 3 x 3 min rounds



its up to the likes of you peter and the other experienced refs to bring something like this in....at the end of the day if yous are dead against it im going to go with your opinion, yous are the guys in the cage looking after the fighters...but if we dont 'debate' these things they'd never change...like women still wouldnt have the vote....ok thats a bad point but you get my drift

pablohoney87

Go with suggested rules, Pro A,B semi pro and amateur

One system that i think makes a bitto sense is to have striking to the head on the ground allowed when both opponents are grounded for C-class and only allow heel hooks and elbows in A-class.
I think one of the fears people have in C-class if strikes were allowed on the ground is taking unnecessary shots after a ko.(Like Hendo on Bisping)
I think only allowing strikes to the head if both opponents are grounded reduces the likelyhood of this. Just my 2 cents but i definitely agree the gap between C and B-class is too great.

_oveless

Undecided!

I git this from wikipedia, so it might not be 100% accurate but:

A semi-professional athlete is one who is paid to play and thus is not an amateur, but for whom sport is not a full-time occupation, generally because the level of pay is too low to make a reasonable living based solely upon that source, thus making the athlete not a full professional athlete.

So a semi pro fighter would be someone who competes in a sport under the same rules but not at a high level, so in terms of fighting semi pro should be the same rules as pro. In that case what would be the difference in C and B class? Shouldn't B class be semi-pro and C stay as amateur?

David Jones

Undecided!

Probably not a good solution, but what about Pancrase open hand strikes to a grounded opponent? Just to get them somewhat ready for the next stage up...

I fought a couple of fights in California in 2001 and 02 under those rules because close fist strikes to the head on the ground were outlawed except on Native American Reservations eg casino land.

1. Nightmare for fighters, try going from closed fist standing to open hand on the ground is actually quite difficult. Also in my experience more injuries to the eyes happen from open hands than from closed, I almost lost an eye from a finger in the eye whilst training.

2. Nightmare for referees, slaps are not palm shots and its very difficult to police fingers in eyes.

I would like to see full A class rules adopted by all promotions, now by full A class I mean UFC rules, as in heel hooks allowed, neck cranks, twisters etc all in. I would like to see the fighters
1. Well prepared for this, down to the club and coach and teammates.
2. Well rewarded for this, down to the promoters.

B class 1 step down from above
No elbows to head I would also have 3 x 5 Mins for B class
Rewards are less than A class but still adequate.

C Class
3 x 4 min rounds
No elbows to head, no heel hooks or neck cranks, heavier gloves but headshots allowed standing and on the ground.
Rewards are less than above but something towards fighters expenses etc and also any tickets sold % etc


D Class ( I dont think these should ever be included on a show where the public pay in by the way) (perhaps refs could get extra for reffing them, they are a ton of work!)
3 x 3 min rounds
No Heel hooks, neck cranks
No headshots on the ground
Gloves the same as C class

MMA league rules

They would be my choice for 5 classes of fights in this country. As John said most small shows and smokers in the states fight full rules.
Above is only my opinion both as a former fighter and now a coach and I have done a bit of reffing too :P

roo1981

I'd like to see elbows on the ground taken out on all levels, i.e Strikeforce rules. I just think the taking them out opens the ground game up a little more and makes it better to watch.

Thats just a personal preference mind you-if the aim of Irish promotions is to produce fighters that can compete at the top level (i.e. UFC) it would make sense that our Pro A and B fights have the same ruleset as the UFC, with the B class having perhaps shorter rounds to differentiate. Fighters fighting at the Pro A & B levels should know escapes from heelhooks -if they dont they should have the cop on to know when to tap out. Live to fight another day and all that...

Barry.Oglesby

Undecided!

As a sometime promoter of wee shows:

A, B and C as far as I'm concerned should be considered pro in terms of whether they can be put on a "pro" show. Purses etc are between the fighters and the promotion but I would agree broadly with Dave's assesment.

It's mismatches that are the problem more than anything. Personally I would far prefer to go and see fights under the suggested format than regular C class fights. My opinion is still that people are thrown in too soon, even at C, so I would also like to see a minimum fight requirement for each class.

Tim_Murphy

Undecided!

As much as it pains me to agree with anything a dubliner says (:p), I would be in broad agreement with John on this. I think a change to the rules he is suggesting would work well, especially if more amateur shows like the one Barry ran were also going on.

Barry.Oglesby

Undecided!

Tim_Murphy wrote: »

As much as it pains me to agree with anything a dubliner says (:p), I would be in broad agreement with John on this. I think a change to the rules he is suggesting would work well, especially if more amateur shows like the one Barry ran were also going on.

Well mine will be on 4 times a year. I'd say if you fought twice under that ruleset you'd know enough about yourself to either stay at that level or move up a class.

TEAM RYANO

i had a good think about this spoke to a couple of coachs and 1 or 2 reffs
pro a full rules as UFC .we have guys fighting in the uk and around europe and this are the rules they fight under.
pro b take out the elbows take out the heel hooks dont pay them as much as pro a
c class head shots standing and on the ground no elbows or knees to the head no heel hooks neck cranks .....shorter rounds

we have 5 fighters fighting in chicago this weekend
they are fighting on an ameture show
3x3 min rounds no elbows no knees to the head every thing else goes
so if we want our fighters to be ready to fight people from out side this small island of ours we got to fight this rules

if guys want to fight pro A then they got to be willing to fight any one on any show with full proper rules

if a fighter was asked to fight in the ufc he would not have problem fighting under there rules and if thats our target to get irish fighters on to this big shows we need to train and fight like pros

cheers andy ryan
TEAM RYANO

lukeyjudo

Undecided!

TEAM RYANO wrote: »

i had a good think about this spoke to a couple of coachs and 1 or 2 reffs
pro a full rules as UFC .we have guys fighting in the uk and around europe and this are the rules they fight under.
pro b take out the elbows take out the heel hooks dont pay them as much as pro a
c class head shots standing and on the ground no elbows or knees to the head no heel hooks neck cranks .....shorter rounds

we have 5 fighters fighting in chicago this weekend
they are fighting on an ameture show
3x3 min rounds no elbows no knees to the head every thing else goes
so if we want our fighters to be ready to fight people from out side this small island of ours we got to fight this rules

if guys want to fight pro A then they got to be willing to fight any one on any show with full proper rules

if a fighter was asked to fight in the ufc he would not have problem fighting under there rules and if thats our target to get irish fighters on to this big shows we need to train and fight like pros

cheers andy ryan
TEAM RYANO

Well said Andy, well said. Best of luck in the States!

-Luke

Sid_Justice

What's the motivation for rule changes? Standardisation, to square up with what the majority are doing around the globe?

Do we want better rules to make fights more entertaining for spectators?
Do we want better rules to make fighters most suited for transition to the big leagues?
Do we want better rules to make fights safer for fighters?
Do we want better rules because we want to make fights fairer?

I'm not overly motivated by the first, I'm not a promoter.
I'm not overly motivated by the second because I think the % of guys who will potentially fight in 'big' shows is tiny and I won't be involved.
I'm interested in the third, I think elbows and heel hooks significantly raise the danger factor. But...
I'm interested in the last reason because fairness is something we should always strive for.

I'm not against rule changes if it ends up with some very clearly defined and logical rule sets, I think Dave Jones post above and Sbg_Ireland's latter post make sense.

My concern is, and this is my opinion and I'm open to be told I'm completely wrong, that many guys are fighting at levels I don't think they should be fighting at. Every show I've been at in the last 2 years has had guys who, imo, should still be fighting <C. So if we implement A (UFC) B (~strikeforce) C (without elbows and heel hooks) the de-facto standard for the "Cage Fighting Promoter" is to have as many A and B fights as possible because they're "higher'" and "better" thus, I suspect to see even more guys fighting above their abilities.


If now again, there is a massive show such as cage contenders and there's 2 guys who are capable of fighting at A class and they're getting compensated properly for that risk and everything else, that's fine, sign the rules at A class. Other wise, keep the de-facto top level to be ~Strikeforce rules (no elbows, no heel hooks).

Jason McCabe

I think promoters should always be open to change if it makes sense, and I would go along with group concensus if everyone agreed to be on board.

Thats where the issue lays though. Getting people to sign up and not take short cuts because it is easier or costs less.

Fianna MMA

I had to create a new account, it was just so important that I log in and chronicle this amazing occurrence ...

I agree with Kav, Dave, Tim, and Andy.

That's like some sort of astronomical convergence.

Peace

P.S. Palm shots on the ground are frikin ridiculous.

cowzerp

Undecided!

Change once it's for the best is cool, i think this could come to something-but then again i think it might deter lots of people from fighting MMA, we dont have the solid wrestling base like the americans etc so might struggle with them rules at c class, also as far as mma universe etc goes if there is head shots on the ground it's considered pro by record, that has to be considered also..

i propose an actual meeting in the very near future in regards to this with promoters and coaches to try and confirm a few things such as this..

weemate

the idea of meetings has been tried before and not all the promoters etc showed....it was a meeting of promoters not coaches by the way.
So it looks like a new set of rules is being called for and in fairness to all concerned who have voiced an opinion on pro fights I can see your point if we are to get to the next level then we may as well implement the changes as soon as possible.
So correct me if Im wrong,heel hooks are to be allowed ONLY on pro fights...no heel hooks on any other level.
If thats the case and all coaches and promoters are happy with it then so be it.
In saying that,I would like it in writing please.

weemate

Something came to mind just as I posted that....it is the responsiblity of the coach/fighter to be properly covered by relevant insurance if these changes are to be brought in.which means..and I mean this in a good way.....that standards in promotions have to be raised,i.e it would be advisable for the PROMOTER to be properly insured and have the proper medical staff,signed waivers and experienced officials at their event just incase of serious injury........something good might come out of this in the long run.

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

weemate wrote: »

So correct me if Im wrong,heel hooks are to be allowed ONLY on pro fights...no heel hooks on any other level.
If thats the case and all coaches and promoters are happy with it then so be it.
In saying that,I would like it in writing please.

in writing from who?
nothing has been set yet peter, this is a discussion. a physical meeting between the experienced coaches is impossible due to the logistics of setting it up. so this is the 'meeting'.

without meaning to sound rude it would be better if this thread was only posted on by experienced coaches/refs etc. this thread is turning out to be quite important and may change how irish mma progresses. thanks guys.

Mrs Lynch

OK my penny:D

JK definately right in saying we are laggin behind and need to go forward by progressing the sport in the safest way possible! Ive been supporting MMA for a long time now and feel that although we have came on we still have a lot of work to do to prepare our fighters for abroad;)

Two of the most experience refs (and they're coaches) in the country have been on this thread and I would put trust that between them they could "draw-up" rules/ course etc then the lovely and talented Mr Ferguson (get me a bucket lol) may schedule some time in November at his next show (as it will have majority of clubs on it:D) for Dave and Peter to discuss with other refs and coaches the proposals???:cool: Its only a suggestion and no doubt there will be ppl on to say "wots she know about the sport etc etc" but I think it may get the ball rolling

Urs
x

p.s. JK as for woman voting - that is a deadly insult to us all lol;)

weemate

SBG Ireland wrote: »

in writing from who?

sorry I should've been more specific.I would like any rule amendments to be agreed to and witnessed [ signed ] by all concerned i.e promoters and coaches to clearly state that from whatever date certain changes have been agreed to the different classes of fight.
Scheduling a face to face meeting is pretty much impossible as we already know,unless it is done at one of the shows when everyone is there.
What I propose is that IF we can all agree on the unified rules,I will arrange to visit all the northern clubs that I can get to and go over the changes with the fighters and coaches.
That way,hopefully,everyone will be on the same page....or...both myself and Dave will arrange a get together with all coaches on the weekend of a show and go over in detail any changes.

weemate

however,I dont think we can just jump in to the rule change overnight.I think that pro rules,if they are to be changed,as well as the other classes should be eased in.
I do agree on the c class changes.Heavier gloves would make a difference and make the fights more exciting...but.....in the interest of safety there should be an age limit for anyone wanting to fight from c class upward.I propose only allowing fighters to take part in c class through to a class from the age of 18.

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

ok looks like we are getting somewhere with this now

so after reading through this and talking to a lot of coaches in the mean time what do people think of this...

Pro A - simply UFC rules

Pro B - as above minus elbows to head, heel hooks and neck cranks.

initially i was going to suggest this just be called 'semi-pro' however there are a number of large organisations out there, strikeforce for example, and a number of UK based promotions that use these as 'pro' rules so although its a bit messy its necessary.

Pro A and Pro B fights go on your record

Semi Pro - same as pro b but 3x3min rounds minus knees to head and heavier 'sparring' mma gloves.

semi pro fights dont go on your record

now imagine for a moment these were the only rules sets on all irish mma shows. how easy and clear would that be?? with the rate that mma in ireland is growing and with no sign of a NGB for the forseeable future we need to do something like this to bring ourselves up to date with the rest of the world...now is the time

people who are saying guys wont be ready for this are missing the point. if they are not ready for pro a or pro b then they dont fight those rules, they stick with 'semi pro' until they are. if they are not ready for semi pro then they stick with mma league, grappling or something like what barry is doing.

if we do get agreement on these rules from the majority of the gyms/refs then i propose putting up a page 'Irish MMA rules' on fight.ie, mmaireland.org and any other websites like this. all promoters can then direct coaches to this when they are setting up fight cards and see what rules athletes wish to compete under.

paul brought up a good point about mmauniverse seeing any fight with headshots on the ground as 'pro'. i have emailed sherdog/mmauniverse for clarity on this as this would obviously change things a lot! afaik its not the case, it is instead down to what the promoter sends in as 'pro fights' but i will post up when i get replies.

on the subject of money - this is purely between the promoter and the coach/athlete, nobody elses business.

on the subject of insurance - do you really think somebody is 'insured' to fight what is now considered pro rules? so if somebody was to get their arm broken, end up hospitalized, break their neck from a suplex they are covered and will be compensated adequately? if so please let me know who your insurer is!!

better we keep this thread just on 'rules' - reaching agreement on that topic alone would be a HUGE step forward

OLDMAN1

SBG Ireland wrote: »

without meaning to sound rude it would be better if this thread was only posted on by experienced coaches/refs etc. this thread is turning out to be quite important and may change how irish mma progresses. thanks guys.

IS IT OK IF I READ THE THREND? SIR

weemate

The subject of insurance is important in my eyes.I imagine your gym is insured as well as your students pay member to member insurance.I recently changed my insurance company because they would only insure my students for training and not for competition.As you say,Im sure there is a lot of guys out there who will fight without it but all I can see is lawsuits if it goes wrong.
Anyway,age limits.....whats your view??

SBG Ireland

Undecided!

i thought you're last 3 posts were spot on, especially the age limit thing. and the fact your willing to visit different clubs shows your commitment to mma in ireland!! fair play to ya

quick idea....how about a rules meeting once or twice a year that all coaches must attend (or at least all gyms must send a representative) given by someone experienced like you and/or dave and then we no longer have the need for rules meetings at shows....lets be honest if you need to hear the rules a few hrs before going into the cage there's a major problem! what do you think?

the insurance point is very valid peter, just maybe a different thread/discussion on this?