n8rockerasu
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 52 (100%)
[quote name='paz9x']its the judging awarding "points" for securing a takedown regardless of what happens on the ground.
a fighter could be landing decently on the feet being cautious but scoring and lose a round by a single takedown with nothing done as a result of the takedown. its just annoying that takedowns are weighed so heavily. it allows fighters with no finishing skills to win fights by taking someone down. I know the counter arguement is TDD and i dont disagree, i just wish they wouldnt score takedowns so heavily on their own.[/QUOTE]
Ehh..that's a tough call because I do think takedowns are at least worth points. I think the problem lies in Fighter A getting a takedown, and a point, and then Fighter B is held on the ground for 2 minutes and doesn't have the opportunity to score points of his own. That's why you get so many rounds where all the judges have to go on is "Ok, Fighter A got one takedown...both fighters threw a few weak strikes, but no real damage was done...and there was a little scrambling, but no reversals. So, I guess Fighter A wins the round."
At least if they were stood up, Fighter B could work harder to get that point back. That would also be where TDD comes into play. If after a stand up Fighter B still can't stop the takedown, then he didn't prepare enough for the fight and has no business winning. That's my take on it anyway. Judging is never easy, but all they have to go on is what is allowed in the cage, and who is perceived to have been the dominant fighter. To me, the referees are making wrestlers look dominant by allowing them to lay on people for 2-3 minutes.
a fighter could be landing decently on the feet being cautious but scoring and lose a round by a single takedown with nothing done as a result of the takedown. its just annoying that takedowns are weighed so heavily. it allows fighters with no finishing skills to win fights by taking someone down. I know the counter arguement is TDD and i dont disagree, i just wish they wouldnt score takedowns so heavily on their own.[/QUOTE]
Ehh..that's a tough call because I do think takedowns are at least worth points. I think the problem lies in Fighter A getting a takedown, and a point, and then Fighter B is held on the ground for 2 minutes and doesn't have the opportunity to score points of his own. That's why you get so many rounds where all the judges have to go on is "Ok, Fighter A got one takedown...both fighters threw a few weak strikes, but no real damage was done...and there was a little scrambling, but no reversals. So, I guess Fighter A wins the round."
At least if they were stood up, Fighter B could work harder to get that point back. That would also be where TDD comes into play. If after a stand up Fighter B still can't stop the takedown, then he didn't prepare enough for the fight and has no business winning. That's my take on it anyway. Judging is never easy, but all they have to go on is what is allowed in the cage, and who is perceived to have been the dominant fighter. To me, the referees are making wrestlers look dominant by allowing them to lay on people for 2-3 minutes.