...OH, ONE MORE THING - PLEASE BOOKMARK US & VISIT DAILY!
By: Matthew Stefaniak, MMATorch Contributor
With so much controversy surrounding the final round of Dan Henderson and Mauricio "Shogun" Rua's main event at UFC 139, a closer look at what constitutes a 10-8 round according to the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts may be helpful to those who are confused and frustrated by Saturday's results.
To explain what a 10-8 round means to the Unified Rules, we first have to look at what the committee (including Nevada Athletic Commission Executive Officer Keith Kizer, New Jersey State Athletic Commision representative Nick Lembo, and Association of Boxing Commisions Disciplinary Chair Michael Mazzulli and other prominent athletic commission figures) presented to the aforementioned Association of Boxing Commissions in 2008 as the updated Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts.
In the document, the committee broadens the scope of scoring from the UFC's traditional stance (effective striking, grappling, and Octagon control) to "effective striking, effective grappling, control of the fighting area and effective aggressiveness and defense."
The committee goes on to define some of these criteria:
"Effective striking is determined by the amount of legal strikes landed by a contestant and the significance of such legal strikes.
Effective grappling is judged by considering the amount of successful executions of a legal takedown and reversals. Examples of factors to consider are take downs from standing position to mount position, passing the guard to mount position, and bottom position fighters using an active, threatening guard.
Fighting area control is judged by determining who is dictating the pace, location and position of the bout. Examples of factors to consider are countering a grappler's attempt at takedown by remaining standing and legally striking; taking down an opponent to force a ground fight; creating threatening submission attempts, passing the guard to achieve mount, and creating striking opportunities.
Effective aggressiveness means moving forward and landing a legal strike or takedown.
Effective defense means avoiding being struck, taken down or reversed while countering with offensive attacks."
As you can see there are several peculiar anomalies.
The criteria for judging striking is determined not by who strikes more, but by the overall effectiveness of the striking.
Grappling is not judged based on submissions at all, the considerations are made for takedowns, moving into advantageous positions, and having an active guard.
Passing guard is then also associated with fighting area control which is the area in which judges are supposed to be considering submissions (shouldn't submissions be included in grappling?).
Chasing an opponent and trying to initiate (think Anderson Silva vs. Thales Leites) has no bearing on aggressiveness according to the rules unless you land a legal strike or a takedown.
Defense is then defined as avoiding attacks while attacking. So you have to provide offense to score points in the category of defense. (???)
After specifically defining how to judge the five criteria, the Unified Rules then go on to explain even more specifically how round scoring should be judged:
"The following objective scoring criteria shall be utilized by the judges when scoring a round;
1. 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;
2. 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;
3. A round is to be scored as a 10-8 Round when a contestant overwhelmingly dominates
by striking or grappling in a round.
4. A round is to be scored as a 10-7 Round when a contestant totally dominates by
striking or grappling in a round."
Again we have issues. According to the document, to avoid a 10-10 round "dominance" has to be exhibited by a fighter. Fans should expect to see many 10-10 rounds if that is the case, at least many more than we have seen.
Strangely, a 10-9 round specifically is to be scored if one fighter wins the round by a "close margin." Judges are supposed to only give 10-10 rounds unless one fighter shows dominance, but also score a 10-9 round if there is a close margin of victory.
Hmm. It gets better.
A 10-8 round is then defined as "overwhelmingly dominant" and a 10-7 round as "totally dominant." Yet there is no specific definition of what "overwhelmingly dominant" or "totally dominant" are at all.
Even more disturbing, the Unified Rules also state that "Training (for judges) should include comprehensive discussions surrounding what constitutes a 10-8 round while also noting that 10 10 rounds are available under the current scoring criteria." So, basically absolute definition isn't needed because the judges will all chat about it when they're being trained. Great.
We may never know if Shogun Rua was entitled to a 10-8 round in the fifth at UFC 139. No one can accurately define if he was "overwhelmingly dominant" or "totally dominant." Since nothing he threw was all that effective, we may never know if he only won by a "close margin," all three judges score cards seem to think so. One thing is clear; this document cannot continue to be retained as the rules in which MMA is governed by.
Until these rules are defined better, by experts, we should all expect to see the silliness and frustration continue because that's the way the rules are written.
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.
