Wednesday, August 14, 2013

In Defense of Defensive Fighting (don't leave it to the f*cking judges!)


I’d like to say a word on MMA judging, specifically in the UFC.



Judging has always been one of the most controversial aspects of the sport.  “Don’t leave it to the f*cking judges!” is a favored catch phrase of UFC boss Dana White, and with good reason.  As well trained and qualified as a professional mma judge may be (or not), scoring a bout is always going to be a subjective thing.  The judges’ angle and line of sight on the action, how well they know the sport and the specific fighters, what they notice and what they miss, their own interpretation of the rules and criteria, all these things will effect how a judge scores a match.  What may look on TV (and be called by enthusiastic announcers) as a beautiful headkick may actually have been effectively blocked or nullified.  When a flurry a punches flies back and forth, how well can a judge see exactly what landed and what did not, and how effective these strikes were?  Having competed in a tournament setting once or twice, I have had points called against me for strikes which did not even land.  I long ago accepted that the official outcome of any judged or scored fight does not truly reflect what happened.

 

And at a local rec-level karate tournament, that’s fine.  But on the professional or semi-pro level, where people’s livelihoods are at stake and the level of competition is more intense, this becomes a problem.  Because as much as you really don’t want to leave it to the judges, you really should be able to.  I mean, is the UFC not the world’s premiere fighting league?  Are these people not professionals?

These issues were brought to the surface by the recent Lyoto Machida / Phil Davis fight, which ended in what is being described as a controversial decision in favor of Davis.  I have not seen the fight myself, so while I cannot talk about the match specifically, recent comments on the matter by Phil Davis and Sal D’Amato have provoked me to response.

Phil Davis, on last Tuesday’s Gross Point Blank podcast, said that “accuracy is not the name of the game.”  In his attempts to justify his win over Machida, Davis did not talk about how he had effectively damaged Machida, only about how he had “kept more busy.”  Since when is “keeping busy” the goal?  I thought that the “name of the game” was to damage your opponent more than they damage you?  And while Davis had some very good points in his interview on The MMA Hour (which ran 3 and a half hours this week, which I'm totally into), he also repeated his assertion that “significant strikes aren’t significant” and what really matters is “who has their back to the center.”

I couldn’t disagree more.  We’re trying to determine who’s the better MMA fighter, not who’s better at walking forward while throwing punches that don’t land.  Octagon control counts, but effective striking and grappling should count more, especially since "control" can be a more subjective measure.  If I've lured you in, avoided your shots, set my range, and landed damaging strikes, haven't I controlled the match, even if your "back is to the center?"

I also think that if Phil Davis feels good about the win, then he shouldn’t feel the need to argue with his critics in public.  He should be telling everyone to kiss his ass and preparing for his next fight.

Similarly, perennial UFC judge Sal D’Amato, on MMAJunkies.com Radio, said that he does not score effective defense.  Sure, don’t give points for stopping someone, but certainly don’t give points for getting stopped.  If my defense stops your offense, there’s no way in hell that you should take the round, unless my offense was even less effective than yours.

Note that I said “effective,” not “busy.”

Personally, I think that judges shouldn’t be afraid to call a round 10-10.  Especially in a three round setting, winning or losing a round which in truth could have gone either way can decide the fight.  If the round was even, or if neither fighter really deserved to win, why give one guy the point?  Make them work for it.  Make a fighter show us that they really won the round in order to take a 10-9 scorecard.  No more squeaking by on controversial decisions, no more winning based on rounds in which you didn’t really outfight your opponent; if you don’t clearly show us your dominance, you won’t take the round.

Of course, I think Phil Davis said it best himself when he said, “There’s no pleasing everyone- I just get out there and do my job.”

Right on, Phil.  We’ll keep flapping our gums, you just keep bangin’.

Keep those hands up, protect yourself at all times, and don’t leave it to the f*cking judges!

This has been the Rabbit Punch.

No comments:

Post a Comment