Regression to the Mean: Looking Back at Submissions in MMA
by Mike Fagan on Jun 9, 2009 11:56 AM EDT
in News
62 comments
Back in March, I counterpointed a Josh Gross article about a trend of diminishing submission rates in the UFC. While performing some ego fulfilling self-Google searches, I stumbled on the article and figured it was a good time to see what's transpired over the past three months.
We concluded that the submission rate in the UFC rests somewhere between 25% and 27%. Gross made his point based on the outcomes of UFC cards over a period of a couple months, but even the most mathematically dunce of people should recognize there are serious sample size flaws with that view. So, we looked at the year prior (March '08 - March '09) and found that the submission rate came out to 23.1% over 204 fights. Adding a mere five submissions over that sample brought the overall percentage to 25.5%.
So, how have things played out since? Well, if we look back at the past year, the submission rate is 26.2% over 214 fights. If we look at March '08 - June '09, the rate drops drops slightly to 25.6% over 258 fights. And just for kicks, since March, nine of thirty-four fights have ended in submission for a rate of 26.5%.
I hate to say, "I told you so," but...wait, I love saying it. I told you so. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see a future period where the submission rate hits 35% over a few cards upon which I'll have to roll in and mow down the notion that BJJ is taking over the world (again).
Everything regresses back to the mean. Unless significant changes are made to the Unifed Rules of MMA, the submission rate will hover around that 25-26% mark. Random fluctuations make life interesting, but we can't speculate on some overall trend on the backs of 30-40 fights. So, relax. Grappling ain't going nowhere.
1 recs |
62 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
The simple truth is that it’s a lot easier to knock someone out than submit them. Because of that, I think the sub rate will stay around 25-30%. A KO takes one movement, whether it be a hook, cross or head kick. A submission takes several movements. To secure a simple guillotine choke, you need to use your arms, legs, shoulders, back and hips.
However, as long as MMA exists, submissions will be very important.
by MMAMoneyLine on Jun 9, 2009 12:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The gloves actually make submissions a lot more difficult in MMA relative to submission grappling. If MMA was bare-knuckle, BJJ guys would dominate.
by MMAEruption on Jun 9, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As long as they didn’t break their hands trying to punch.
I dislike Matt Hughes.
by MonkeyCHops on Jun 9, 2009 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One aspect of the MMA game that hasn't been thoroughly explored is career milage.
I think after a decade or so you might see submissions increase as people discover that standing and banging probably leads to shorter careers compared to taking a fight to the ground and going for a submission.
by Razreshat on Jun 9, 2009 12:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I plan on doing work on this over the next year.
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Jun 9, 2009 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too bad dustin hazelett got injured,
If he was fighting regularly, he wouldve been a good .5-1% change to the “I told you so” stat.
by Anton Tabuena on Jun 9, 2009 12:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
PS
I like stats and I always thought gross and the others were mistaken when they were panicking about fewer subs, so rec’d!
by Anton Tabuena on Jun 9, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yup…freaking sucks he is out. Only fighter other than Machida that I actively root for.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Jun 9, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey we have the same two favorite fighters!
phone five
by Anton Tabuena on Jun 9, 2009 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huzzah!
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Jun 10, 2009 1:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Phew, I’m glad we can move on from that and get back to the Kimbo Slice/Roy Nelson talk!
Seriously, as a wanna-be jiu jitsu player, I love the grappling game and never felt it had gone anywhere, and I’m grateful to Fagan for giving me the stats to back that up.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Jun 9, 2009 12:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dustin Hazlett will throw those numbers all out of whack
Once he starts fighting again. :) I’m still pissed he wasn’t on the 96 card. :(
by Dexerion on Jun 9, 2009 12:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Regression to the Mean
A wise man told me don't argue with fools
Cause people from a distance can't tell who is who
by thetakeover on Jun 9, 2009 1:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Can you address the lack of submissions in main card bouts, as a few people pointed out in your last post on this? I think it’s germane.
by former tuf noob on Jun 9, 2009 2:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What lack?
There were 2 out of 5 on the last WEC show, 2 out of 5 in the last Strikeforce show.
The fact that there were none on the main card of the last UFC show doesn’t mean it’s a problem. Looking at 1 or 2 cards is not going to prove anything. Submissions are happening just as often as they always have been, there wasn’t an issue in March, there isn’t an issue now, that’s the point.
by Phildo on Jun 9, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its a valid point. You are right that looking at one or two cards is the wrong thing to do, but I think answering the question do subs happen less on the main card? is important. Is there a bias to put stand up fighters on the main card? Fagan has good numbers showing no lack of subs, but is there a balance of subs on the main and under card?
by szucconi on Jun 9, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People will complain about main card fighters wanting to stand and bang. That is partly to blame, but submission defense is generally far better among the top-level fighters (part of what got them there in the first place).
by bigweeze on Jun 9, 2009 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is true, but I would like to see how the numbers play out. Its another way to slice it.
by szucconi on Jun 9, 2009 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Subs do happen on the main card. There were 4 this weekend.
UFC 98 had none on the main card and 3 on the undercard, but was anyone put on the undercard because they primarily win by submission? I don’t think so, I can’t see any fights on that undercard that should have been on the main card.
It would be an argument if there were BJJ guys that were being constantly put on undercards, but that just isn’t the case. Maia, Leites, Hazelett, the MIllers, they’re all constantly put on the main cards.
The best fighters and the best fights go on the main cards, there is no evidence of anyone (besides the Shaws) doing anything to push subs onto the undercard.
by Phildo on Jun 9, 2009 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am not saying it is so or isn’t so. I would just like to see the numbers. And there is a difference between main card and made the show. I don’t think that there is a bias, but I would like to see numbers that agree with me.
by szucconi on Jun 9, 2009 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Phildo, can you really say that there is no evidence? As of now, we’re just eyeballing fight records and calculating averages.
I think a better way to do this is would be to estimate a probability model of the form:
Pr(main card) = f(wins, finishes, finishes by ko, finishes by submission, etc….)
by former tuf noob on Jun 9, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough.
But it’s also fair to say that UFC is the most important promotion. Being on the main card for a UFC event must be a big deal. These facts should inform how we analyze the data.
by former tuf noob on Jun 9, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been keeping track of the stats based on the numbered UFC events since UFC 76. Between then and UFC 98 the results I have are as follows:
Total Events: 23
Total Fights: 228
The winning percentages are broken down as follows.
(t)KO: 40.4%
Dec: 39%
Grappling Submission: 20.6%
And to break it down a little futher into 3 periods between you get
UFC 76 – 83 – Grappling submissions – 18/75 = 24%
UFC 84 – 91 – Grappling submissions – 21/80 = 26%
UFC 92 – 98 – Grappling submissions – 8/73 = 11%
Make of those figures what you will, but its perhaps a little early for claims of “I told you so”.
by GeeDub on Jun 9, 2009 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
With all of the variables, it is still far too small a sample to be statistically significant.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Jun 10, 2009 1:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
25% of numbered ppv events is an insignificant sample size??!!
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In a word, yes. Take some stat courses.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Jun 10, 2009 4:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This isn’t a regression, so the standard errors aren’t being scaled down by that much….
The sample isn’t random, but I think we’re getting close to analyzing the population anyway.
by former tuf noob on Jun 10, 2009 6:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re missing the point. The stats I grabbed are trying to offer an indication of the current/recent submission rates. If I went back any further, the data would lose relevance to me.
The idea was to identify any trends…….in very simple fashion. Clearly the stats I posted show that for events between UFC 76-91 the submission rate is spot on with what Mike Fagan is suggesting. The most recent events however show a marked decline. Nowhere have I suggested that the stats show this trend is going to continue. It will be interesting to monitor though to see if this pattern of fewer submissions continues for more than just the most recent 70 fights and if so, how significant a reduction there will be and why.
Oh and Im no statistics professor but common sense is all thats required to understand what Im getting at here.
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why are you only using numbered events? Since UFC 76, I show a 26% sub rate when you don’t factor out taps due to strikes, and a 25% rate when you do. Over 359 events.
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Jun 10, 2009 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And since UFC 92, I show 21.4%. It’s really dishonest to not include Fight Nights since there were 6 subs at FN 17 (OMG JIUJITSU TAKIN’ OVAH) and 4 at FN 18.
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Jun 10, 2009 1:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Jun 10, 2009 4:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hahaha – How’d you get my book?!?!?!?! :P
The stats I gave are pretty transparent and clearly stated. If there is anything misleading about what I posted please let me know.
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 4:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is one of my favorite books, and when I read it way back when opened my eyes to a lot of bullshit advertisers and spokesmen were spitting out because the statistics they were quoting weren’t worth anything.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Jun 10, 2009 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because you’re arbitrarily selecting a particular type of event to analyze and asserting that it is indicative of MMA as a whole.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Jun 10, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you’re arbitrarily selecting a particular type of event to analyze and asserting that it is indicative of MMA as a whole.
That is the most blatantly incorrect and foolish comment on this thread.
1) The event type I selected is not arbitrary at all. I have clearly explained why I selected the events I did.
2) Where on gods green earth did I assert that the UFC 76 – 98 submission rates are indicative of MMA as a whole. My specific comment was “Make of these figures what you will”.
The whole point of my post is that the results of the recent numbered UFC events MAY suggest that perhaps Mike Fagans claim that UFC submission rates werent declining is a little premature.
This is some frustrating shit having to defend myself against nuf nuffs! Read all relevant comments, process the information then comment. Perhaps spend a little more time on step 2.
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But they aren’t on a decline when you factor in the FN events.
Earlier you said, “Im only tracking the numbered PPV events as my concern was that the drive for the big ppv FOTN bonus and main card status.”
Now you’re saying, “The whole point of my post is that the results of the recent numbered UFC events MAY suggest that perhaps Mike Fagans claim that UFC submission rates werent declining is a little premature.”
There’s a big difference between these statements.
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Jun 10, 2009 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
They are completely different statements. Of course there is a difference. One details why Im keeping records, the other why I posted those records on this thread.
Ive kept a record through curiousity of submission levels on numbered UFC cards because in my opinion, that is the big show and where the greatest pressure to deliver exciting fights is. FOTN bonus, title shot contention, fan favourite, biggest audience…..etc. I keep the records partially for shits and giggles coz I find it interesting and partially to see if the apparent ‘stand and bang’ mentality has or will have any effect of submission rates.
I then posted these results as I thought, and still think, they are relevant to a discussion on whether or not submission levels are declining.
Im not refuting your figures. Im not challenging the number you have gathered. Im not criticizing your abilities. You provide great info. Im just putting an asterisk next to the notion that “Submission rates arent declining”. All the asterisk says is “The main UFC events STILL have a very low submission rate. Of what significance is that?”
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
All I did was post the main UFC event stats and basically asked people to consider those figures. Then I get accused of being dishonest and lying with stats as well as some completely unfounded and fabricated remark that I was somehow suggesting the rates Ive kept are indicative of ALL MMA.
I dont know why everybody is getting there knickers in a twist and getting so defensive. ‘former tuf noob’ seems to understand what Im getting at. Im not sure why others cant.
If it helps, I understand and accept that UFN and TUF finale submission rates are high. I understand and accept that when they are combined with main card submission rates the combined rate is about 26%…….the app. historic rate. Acknowledged and accepted!
NOW, NEW FUCKING DISCUSSION!!!
Why the hell are main card submission rates so friggin low!!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Are main card submission rates on the decline and if so why????
Why are UFN rates so friggin high and why?!?!
Have they always been so high??
Are those rates increasing?
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A better way to analyze data
I’m sure this comment sounds “snarky,” but seriously, if Fagan’s going to say that he loves saying “I told you so” and then act insecure and defensive when people don’t agree with him, he’s kind of asking for it.
I understood what GeeDub was getting at because I’m more interested in what the data can tell us and less interested in “I told you so.” Sure, proving Josh Gross wrong (when you take his claim most literally) is fun. It’s more fun to make the most of the data. Comments from GeeDub and others help us get there, but Fagan doesn’t seem to listen to them (or calls what they do “dishonest”).
This isn’t the only place it’s happened. In the previous post on this, ‘Beau Dure’ both calculated percent submissions for a sample using main card bouts and raised further questions worth addressing. Not really sure why Fagan didn’t bother following up, at least in the comments. In the “Power Law” post, ‘the exit’ made two good points about system age and the proper transformation of the data, neither of which Fagan addressed. In both posts, he responded to a lot of other comments posted later in the day, so, no, there’s no way he just didn’t have time to address these comments.
So I’m not sure if he doesn’t understand what people are saying or would rather ignore people who bring up reasonable points that don’t dovetail with his views. Of course, there could be other, more charitable, reasons. But still, people who are serious about data analysis both deal with questions about their work all the time in a better way and actually use other people’s comments to improve their work. Fagan could do better, especially with respect to the latter.
by former tuf noob on Jun 11, 2009 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, I should have been so aggressive. Just a little surprised and frustrated at all the negativity when Im trying to contribute to discussions.
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
edit*** shouldn’t have been so aggressive
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, yeah, whatever.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
by AJB on Jun 10, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Im only tracking the numbered PPV events as my concern was that the drive for the big ppv FOTN bonus and main card status etc was potentially influencing the way the fights were going. Sean Sherk ignoring his ground game in favour of the ‘crowd pleasing’ stand up wars and others making gentelmans agreements that the first fighter to take the fight to the ground is a pussy. I didnt see those things happening or the same pressures in the UFN events.
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 1:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, you didn’t state why you were only including numbered shows in your original reply. You just threw the data out there and then made some snarky statement refuting my figures.
There are plenty of other possible explanations for why the submission rate is lower on PPV cards as opposed to free TV cards without factoring in FOTN bonuses. It’s late though, and I’ll explain further tomorrow.
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Jun 10, 2009 2:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was hardly a snarky remark Mike and I wasnt refuting your figures at all. I have no idea about UFN, TUF or WEC submission rates. All I know is the type of finishes for the main UFC events, as I posted. I just felt it was a bit premature to be playing the ’I told you so" card when the numbers I have on the most significant events were in conflict with your claims.
Also, Im not saying FOTN bonus is the sole cause for lower submission rates at the main events, but I do feel the fighters desire to put on a good show for the fans (ie. Stand and bang) to boost their value in the eyes of the boss has certainly had an impact.
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 3:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m with GeeDub on this one. It’s possible you’re right, but it’s not yet clear.
And Gross aside, there are more interesting things to look at now anyway. It would be interesting to calculate these statistics using disaggregated data, i.e. in numbered events vs. non-numbered events and main card status vs. non-main card status.
by former tuf noob on Jun 10, 2009 7:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whilst Im trying not to, Im getting more sucked into this which is really quite pointless as I have no real goal and am purely driven by curiosity!!
I just looked into all the non numbered events from UFN11 – UFN18 including the Fight for the troops and the TUF finales. This is over the same time period as UFC 76 – 98.
Of the 111 fights in those 11 events, a whopping 36.9% finished via grappling submission. Im not sure what, if anything, these figures tell us, but its certainly interesting!
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you not have 228 fights recorded with 47 grappling submissions between 76 and 98?
by GeeDub on Jun 10, 2009 2:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What’s really disappearing in MMA is the one-dimensional striker. Just look at the Strikeforce card. Baroni, Smith, and Lawler all lost due to limited skillsets.
by MMAEruption on Jun 9, 2009 2:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
“While performing some ego fulfilling self-Google searches”
Haha aren’t they all?
Ufc 99 has quite a few fights that could end in submission.
by DirtyML on Jun 9, 2009 2:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
They’re hardly ego-fulfilling if nothing comes up.
Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Jun 9, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I hate to say, “I told you so,” but…wait, I love saying it. I told you so.
Life is so much sweeter when you’re right. :)
I love me some Sexyama!
by pud333 on Jun 9, 2009 2:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But it’s not clear he’s right.
by former tuf noob on Jun 9, 2009 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even 214 fights is a relatively low sample size. Over the course of a year a couple small changes can affect the outcome quite a bit.
Things like Hazlett being injured and Werdum being cut.
Also if there happens to be more overseas shows in a given time span, that might mean fewer subs. I could be wrong but I don’t think there are quite as many good grapplers on those shows as they tend to load them with local guys which usually means kickboxers.
I dislike Matt Hughes.
by MonkeyCHops on Jun 9, 2009 3:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Werdum being cut means less earflapping KOs
by bigweeze on Jun 9, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I could have sworn that in one of Danas last Vlogs he was talking to all the fighters and said that aside from the regular Fight of the Night Bonuses he would be handing out 10K bonuses for every submission win. Thats pretty sweet incentive right there.
I really don’t see a lack of subs these days anyway.
Mike Goldberg: "You know Joe, growing up as a child Kimbo Slice was never given any bread with his meals. This is why he insists people give him his bread."
by xFenixKnightx on Jun 9, 2009 4:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
At UFC 94 he told the fighters that they’d get $20,000 per submission.
It’s in here somewhere (Fitch and Machida are a couple of the fighters being addressed): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMKHsw8wV4U
by bigweeze on Jun 9, 2009 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sweet
Mike Goldberg: "You know Joe, growing up as a child Kimbo Slice was never given any bread with his meals. This is why he insists people give him his bread."
by xFenixKnightx on Jun 9, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did he really offer guys 20k for any submission win?!?!?!!?!?
by GeeDub on Jun 9, 2009 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
