...OH, ONE MORE THING - PLEASE BOOKMARK US & VISIT DAILY!
By: Jason Amadi, MMATorch Columnist
Jack writes: Is it as clear to you as it is to me that the 10-point must system has never been the problem? Clearly it's just a case of needing more 10-8 and 10-10 rounds. Remember Siver-Wiman? That fight could have been scored 10-10 in the first round, 10-8 in the second and 9-10 3rd or 9-10, 10-8, 9-10.....but because they almost never give 10-8, guys get robbed.
Also, if the UFC can get Fedor cheap and without co-promotion, shouldn't they? If they don't isn't that just Dana White being stubborn? Fedor's stock has fallen but he is still a name. That said, it seems sort of unfair to Cain to have him fight Fedor and unfair to other HW's to be skipped for a guy who is 1-3 in his last four.
A: The problem with the 10-point must system for most people seems to be that it isn't written in crayon. As far as I'm concerned, everything needed to properly judge rounds in a mixed martial arts contest is present in the Unified Rules.
Here's a look at what the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts has to say about scoring:
* A round is to be scored as a 10-10 round when both contestants appear to be fighting evenly and neither contestant shows dominance in a round;
* A round is to be scored as a 10-9 round when a contestant wins by a close margin, landing the greater number of effective legal strikes, grappling and other maneuvers;
* A round is to be scored as a 10-8 round when a contestant overwhelmingly dominates by striking or grappling in a round.
* A round is to be scored as a 10-7 round when a contestant totally dominates by striking or grappling in a round.
According to the Unified Rules, you're right; there are just not enough rounds are scored 10-10 or 10-8. A lot of state athletic commissions tell judges not to score 10-10 rounds and feel as though it's the obligation of judges to pick a winner, even if there isn't one. MMA judges are also hesitant to mark down 10-8 scores out of fear of causing draws.
All you need to understand about the 10-8 debate in MMA is that it comes down to "overwhelming dominance" vs. damage; or in other words, what's actually in the rules vs. what isn't. To be fair, at the time the Unified Rules were written, there was such intense political pressure put on the sport that including a word like "damage" just wasn't an option.
Now, you can argue that damage should be mentioned, but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't. To me, the word "damage" introduces exactly the type of subjectivity that people seem to want to do away with.
In the first round of Diego Sanchez's classic bout with Clay Guida a few years ago, Sanchez was overwhelmingly dominant and his performance (despite the fact that it didn't get one) warranted a 10-8 score under the Unified Rules. Guida was clearly out landed, ate the bigger shots and was even dropped for a split second by a head kick. However, if you really believe in judging 10-8 rounds on damage, by what metric was Clay Guida really "damaged?"
Conversely, you have fights like Brock Lesnar vs. Shane Carwin where one fighter turns tail and runs, while his opponent follows up with ground and pound. That round was universally scored 10-8, but how much damage was really done? Carwin was overwhelmingly dominant in his performance, but outside of a small cut above the eye Lesnar wasn't put in any significant danger after the initial barrage.
MMA is just too complex and dynamic of a sport for those kinds of labels. At this point, I'm mostly content with the Unified Rules as they are; the judges are another matter altogether.
As far as the Fedor question goes, the UFC pursued Fedor Emelianenko for years and co-promotion was always the sticking point. It isn't anyone's expectation that M-1 is just going to completely cave on that front, but even then the services of "The Last Emperor" come at a high price. I can't imagine a scenario in which the UFC could get Fedor "for cheap," but I don't see why they would be interested in him at all at this point.
Imagine a scenario where he gets signed by the UFC and loses again. Zuffa would have presumably signed him at a high price, marketed him, he would have lost four of his last five fights and they'd have to release him. Signing Fedor at this point would just be flirting with disaster and that just isn't how the UFC does business.
Feel free to follow me on Twitter @JasonAmadi. I made a Molly Hatchet reference in an MMA column. Be jealous.
DON'T GO YET... WE SUGGEST THESE MMATORCH ARTICLES, TOO!
Jamie Penick, editor-in-chief
(mmatorcheditor@gmail.com)
STAFF COLUMNISTS: Shawn Ennis - Jason Amadi
Frank Hyden - Rich Hansen
Chris Park - Matt Pelkey
Interested in joining MMATorch's writing team? Send idea for a theme to your column (for Specialist section) or area of interest (i.e. TV Reporter) along with a sample of writing to mmatorch@gmail.com.
