In going for takedowns I think Shogun was keeping Machida off balance, and showing a broader toolbox while doing it. This is quite different than the fights you see where the striker is pummeling the grappler and the grappler simply cannot get the fight to the ground. In a situation like that I think it makes perfect sense to award “control” to the person keeping the fight standing because they are making the fight take place where they are winning.

Another interesting situation we sometimes see is a striker trying to “steal” a round by taking a fight to the ground. This is one of those situations where a takedown is *WAY* overvalued in my opinion. You have a striker winning the fight standing, now shifting the fight to a position they have a lower chance of winning and a higher chance of losing. This would be like Drew McFedries taking down Demian Maia and somehow thinking it was “good” for Drew. I’ve even seen fights where a grappler pulls guard! and people I’m with claim the fighter on top is “winning”. Since the fight is now taking place where one fighter choose, I think the fighter that put the fight there is the one in control. Others seem to think Standing > Top > Bottom. I really MMA is far too deep a sport for such a simplification.

The issue of “finishing the fight” is interesting as well because there is definitely a short term versus long time return to be analyzed. What has to be a concern though is if “immediate” finishes are preferred then you’ll see even fewer jabs, almost no teeps, and the death of numerous other techniques. If whiffed headshots outweigh landed strikes things go south very quickly.

As a final situation, I often think back to the Condit Vs Kampmann fight. In the third round I felt as though Carlos lost it on the judges scorecards because he was trying to actually win the fight. If you haven’t watched it I highly recommend it as it’s an excellent discussion piece for scoring in MMA. The way it plays out is that Kampmann gets top position and is staying fairly busy. There appear to be multiple points where Condit could get the fight back to standing if he chooses, but rather he opts to fish for submissions for a bulk of the round.

Although Kampmann was staying busy Condit wasn’t in a lot of danger and Condit obviously choose to absorb the shots in exchange for looking for the sub. Obviously the sub could have been reversed or whatever, a locked in sub though would have immediately finished the fight. However, the shots from the top that Kampmann were delivering simply were not going to.

I think the fight presents a pretty interesting situation where both fighters are where they want to be. Kampmann had “control” and was working, but Condit felt safe and was also working. If both fighters are where they want to be, then who really has control? If one fighter is going for a “finish” a submission in this case, while the other is “staying busy” then who gets it?

What we are talking about now is cross style jabs versus headshots. There are many more situations like this that can happen in MMA and it’s always interesting to see how it is scored, and then to ponder how it *should* be scored.

just two of my many cents. i love your ranking system and analysis. maybe the best i have seen. i hope it’s patented.