End the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts
July 29, 2015
By Ryan Porzl
In most parts of the world, Mixed Martial Arts is usually contested under The Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts and it's very unfortunate. Since the unified rules came about in the early 2000s, they have been extremely flawed as it resulted in many fighters not putting their on their best performances along with bad, controversal judging. We'll take a look at the problems with the Unified Rules and why they need to go.
Before I begin, I must lay out the Unified Rules before explaining why they are a detriment. Along with the usual MMA rules which include no low blows, no hits to the back of the head, no eye pokes to name some, the following are the rules in Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts but not in other rule sets.
1. Fights are judged using the 10 point scoring system that is used in boxing and kickboxing along with judging fights round by round. If a round is considered a draw then both fighters get 10 points. The winner of the round gets 10 points while the loser gets 9 points or even less. Fighters can be deducted a point for fouls. Three fouls will result in disqualification.
2. Kicks and knees to grounded opponents is considered illegal. A grounded opponent is a fighter with their back on the canvas, sitting down, has one knee or both on the canvas, or even one hand on the canvas.
3. Elbows are allowed on the ground except the point or 12 to 6 angle (as in 12 o' clock to 6 o' clock).
4. Fights are judged by effective striking, grappling, aggression, and cage/ring control in that order.
Having gotten that out of the way, let's take a look at the downside of the rules.
At times, the Unified Rules' can be very vague and illogical. For one, a fighter can throw a kick or knee as hard as they can to their opponents face as long as the opponent is standing. However, kicks and knees to the head are not legal if the opponent is on their back, sitting down, have one or both knees on the canvas, and even one hand on the canvas. Not only does this not make any sense but some of it is downright laughable. A person's skull doesn't soften if they touch the canvas with anything else but their two feet. Not only does it not make any sense but it also affects fighters since they can't focus solely on winning when they have an opponent beat. In the heat of battle, they can accidentally throw a knee or kick when the opponent is down and that can cost them as they can get a point deducted or the fighter may not be able to continue which will mostly result in a no contest. This is bad since the fighter has to keep reminding themselves as they're trying to finish that they can't throw a knee or kick when their opponent is in certain positions. Another factor to think of is if a fighter is on the verge of losing but takes a knee or kick while down then they can take advantage of the rules, take the easy way out, and say they can't continue so they'll get a no contest on their record instead of a loss. Good example was a fight less than a month ago between David Rickels and John Alessio at Bellator 140 back on July 17. The fight saw Rickels on the verge of scoring a TKO against Alessio only to accidentally knee Alessio in the face. After being checked on by a doctor, Alessio claimed he couldn't continue and the fight was ruled a no contest. Anybody who saw it can't deny that Rickels was absolutely ripped off and it was all because of the rules.
Judging is also extremely difficult because of the rules. In boxing and kickboxing, the ten point scoring system works for a variety of reasons. One being that boxers and kickboxers don't have as many tools and weapons at their disposal. Boxers can only punch the face and stomach while kickboxers can only punch and kick the face, stomach, and legs. Neither can use elbows, knees, or grappling. Scoring is easy for the most part. A round that was very close can be scored 10-10 for both fighters. If a fighter clearly won one round then they get 10 while the opponent gets 9. If they get one knock down in the round then it's 10-8. Two knock downs in one round is 10-7. Three knock downs in one round is a TKO. In MMA, things are much more complicated. MMA fighters can punch, kick, elbow, knee, and grapple. As a result, there's more things for a judge to look at when scoring fights. If a fighter gets knocked down then either the other can go for the finish or the referee stops the fight. There is no ten count and the rules don't clearly state what makes a round a 10-9, 10-8, or 10-7. No amount of knock downs or submission attempts guarentees the round is 10-8 or 10-7. In the end, it depends on what the judges think and that's not only right but also unfair to the fighters or to fans who bet on fights as you may have a situation where a fight should've went to a draw but the judges didn't score it that way. In a lot of cases, a fighter probably deserved a 10-8 score but the judges may not have seen it like that and only gave the fight 10-9. Then there are times when a fighter clearly should've won but was only given a razor thin decision which can undeservingly hurt them because it'll always been on their record so people can get the wrong opinion thinking the fighter had a hard time winning when they didn't. There's also guarenteed controversy when there's a split decision so fans see that and think that the fighter probably didn't deserve the win when they did.
The rules also greatly affect fighters performances and not in a good way. Because of the judging and ruleset, fighters can play safe and be more concerned about not losing instead of winning. You have fighters who just jab and score points standing up while taking opponents down and doing just enough to keep the fight on the ground all the while making no attempt to either go fot a knockout or submission. Because fights are judged round by round, if a fighter is confident they won the first two rounds, then they usually feel the need to coast and not take chances to finish the fight. Meanwhile, if a fighter believes they're losing then they'll emotionally give up most of the time which means they'll make no effort to dig deep and finish the fight but rather go the distance so they'll get a moral victory. These type of performances are awful and boring to watch as a fan and don't do the sport any favors. Nobody wants to watch a fight where both participants are clearly not doing their best and just putting on a half ass performance.
There's also problems in the Unified Rules regarding grappling. Fighters can earn points and be in a position where it looks like they're winning the fight by successfully getting takedowns and remaining on top even if they're not doing much. Meanwhile, blocking takedowns aren't considered as important and the rules make the judges consider them meaningless. If a fighter gets taken down, it's bad in the eyes of the judges and in the rules. When a fighter is on their back then they're losing the fight even if they're more busy in the fight with strikes or submission attempts. If a fighter is someone who is used to grappling off their back then they have to adjust their style and leave their comfort zone because if they don't get a submission then the judges have to look at it as they're losing the round. As for fighters who prefer to fight on top, then the rules heavily benefit them because they can take someone down, do almost nothing, and still have done enough to win the round. The only thing they have to worry about is doing enough so the referee doesn't stand them up. Obviously, this makes for fights that are unfair since it should be balanced instead of benefiting one side.
In the end, the best rule set is the one previously used in Japan and currently in ONE over in Singapore either considered PRIDE rules (based on the famous Japanese promotion) or Global rules (the name of the ONE rule set). The judges determine a winner by judging the entire fight instead of round by round. They also look for things such as which fighter came the closest to winning. Kicks and knees to grounded opponents are legal which makes sense since fighters can already kick and knee opponents standing up. With these rules, it makes it easier for judges to decide who won fights which can prevent a lot of controversy. Fights are more exciting because fighters can't afford to coast since they can out strike or grapple their opponent in the first two rounds only to lose the fight because the opponent came close to knocking them out or briefly caught them in a submission hold during the third. If anything, trying to coast gives the opponent more time to get the finish. The playing field is also fair as takedowns don't mean a fighter's winning and opponents on the ground can still win by attempting submissions. There's also a yellow card system. Whenever a fighter is stalling or refusing to engage, the referee will eventually pull out a yellow card and point it to a fighter or both fighters. If a fighter gets a yellow card then they're deducted 20% of their paycheck. Yellow cards are also given for fouls. Three fouls will result in a disqualification. Because of the possiblity of losing a percentage of their pocket book, this results in more action as fighters can't risk putting on lazy performances and have to engage more instead of grinding out decisions. The only negative to the rules is damage is also judged which isn't right since certain fighters bleed or bruise easier than others. It's not right to lose a fight because someone may get cut easy or bruise easier than a peach.
At the end of the day, no rule set is perfect and each have flaws. However, it's become clear that the unified rules are the most flawed and need to go. They are ridiculous, illogical, and frustrating. They are too vague at times for judges to use effectively while providing many ways for fighters to take the easy way out. Like any other tumor, they need to be removed from the body before taking it down.
