Are Decisions on the Rise in the UFC?
by Kid Nate on Feb 17, 2010 5:50 PM EST
in MMA News
Email
Print
MMA Fighting's survey of the 130 fights since UFC 100 finds some alarming indicators:
According to the numbers, UFC fights these days are most likely to go to the judges' scorecards. Sixty of the 130 bouts did so, with 41 unanimous decisions, 16 split decisions, one majority decision and two draws.
Combining knockouts and TKOs is the next most common fight finish, with 41 of 130 bouts (31.5 percent) concluding in such a manner (15 KOs, 26 TKOs).
Submissions closed out 28 of the bouts (21.5 percent), while there was only one disqualification.
The 46% decision rate MMA Fighting has found breaks from the historic 30.9% of fights that went to the judges from UFC 1 to UFC 100. Mike Chiappetta finds this to be cause for alarm:
According to Sherdog.com's historical stat archives, only 17 percent of all fights in MMA history have ended via decision. While UFC has always had a slightly higher rate of decisions, the rise to nearly half of all matches is alarming.
Our own Mike Fagan has deconstructed previous statistical claims that the sky was falling in the past but there seems to be a bit more data behind this trend.
138 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Call it the Sonnenizing of the UFC
Or maybe the Maynardizing?
Tatum: I think he's a good man. I like him. I got nothing against him, but I'm definitely gonna make orphans of his children.
The last 3 Fight Night cards on Spike have featured 9 decisions and 3 submissions on the main card.
The Seattle Times linked to my website in June 2009. I wasn't aware of this until January 2010.
Time to whore myself out and lash out an old post
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2009/12/31/1227520/ufc-fight-cards-in-2009-the-numbers
The Seattle Times linked to my website in June 2009. I wasn't aware of this until January 2010.
Its a small sample. 130 bouts and the diff is 16%? thats not impressive or scary. You could call it better matchmaking or wrestlers who have fought in the last 6 months. But is not a big enough sample to waste time on.
Some people think I am a dumb, ugly human being, but really I am a beautiful ape, with exceptional verbal skills.
It's 10%
of the fights in the companies history! Thats a big enough sample.
by Johnnynumber5 on Feb 19, 2010 9:36 PM EST up reply actions
Wait. So the sky IS falling??
First Snowpocalypse 2010 and now this…
Interesting stats though. But my question is why is thus “alarming”? Are more decisions bad? Is that why it is alarming?
I don’t think it’s a negative per say…
I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup
by funnytiger on Feb 17, 2010 5:53 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Guida/Sanchez decisions > Silva/Leites decisions.
The Seattle Times linked to my website in June 2009. I wasn't aware of this until January 2010.
Me neither. Some of the most exciting fights of the year went to the judges cards. Conversely, I like a good KO as much as the next guy, but finishes don’t always mean great fights.
Gonzaga vs. Jordan.
The Seattle Times linked to my website in June 2009. I wasn't aware of this until January 2010.
I tend to argue that there’s usually a certain level of ambiguity to a decision outcome that does not exist in a finish outcome. This is not ENTIRELY true, as the referee can make a poor stoppage. But if we assume all referee stoppages are sound, finishes are an game-ending state and decisions are way of determining a winner where there is no endgame.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
by loboplata on Feb 17, 2010 5:59 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Good point!
Very good point actually.
I'm the kind of girl who loves to watch a GOOD fight!
--------
Join the DC Area UFC Meetup Group
http://www.meetup.com/DCUFCGroup
by funnytiger on Feb 17, 2010 6:02 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Thanks. :)
I think I should clarify that though I believe a finish to be the ideal OUTCOME of a fight, it doesn’t necessarily effect the QUALITY/ENTERTAINMENT VALUE of a fight. Great fights end in decision, and some finishes aren’t terribly spectacular. In that sense, there isn’t anything really alarming about an upward trend in decision outcomes.
I just hold that a finish outcome is the ideal outcome for ending the game and determining a winner.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
I saw this earlier today
But I am still skeptical. And my blood sugar is too low for a thoughtful response. I’m hoping Fagan has eaten something today. I’d like to hear what he thinks.
My delirious questions would include whether or not the decision rate is concentrated someplace, whether it’s an upward trend over time, or whether it’s spread evenly across the period.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
Fagan was eating maple syrup.
The Seattle Times linked to my website in June 2009. I wasn't aware of this until January 2010.
There are also other things to look into like style matchups (wrestler vs wrestler, BJJ practitioner vs BJJ practitioner), but it could also just mean that fighters are getting so much better that they are getting harder to finish. I don’t mind decisions except with what I find to be snoozer fights.
by chrisbboy82 on Feb 17, 2010 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
Probably more like the "Fitch itch"
But I commented on this awhile back. It would make good sense that as fighters learn more, become more well rounded, that they will nullify each other the point that a stoppage becomes less and less likely. Barring the occasional freak injury and similar occurance.
Boxing has followed the same basic trend, and in many cases a famous boxers decisions were also considered their best performances.
The interesting part to me is...
The article says that the UFC has a higher decision rate overall compared to mma outside of the UFC. Think about it this way. If you are in the UFC do you not maybe take less chances than if you were in say StrikeForce or some other promotion? You know how hard it is to get there and also how much a loss can hurt your chances of staying. I guess the point I am trying to make is that maybe guys are playing it safer in the UFC. Just trying to make sure they get wins and not open themselves up by throwing bigger shots or trying for crazy submissions.
It could also be that the matchmaking is more competitive in the UFC so it’s just that much more difficult to finish the opponents you have been matched with.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
This was my thought as well. Look at strikeforces last card; most of those fight outcomes were expected and the ones that surprised us did so through catching someone in a finish. Looking at some of what I see in Japan and in some of the now collapsed orgs, there were a lot more uneven matches booked than I see in the UFC.
but that’s just me I guess
"A champion is someone who gets up when he can't." - Jack Dempsey
I think that’s the fault of strikeforces roster. They have talented fighters, but not enough to fight each other. So the miss matches are more frequent which helps higher KO and submission rates.
"So I put 2 and 2 together and decided that your pissing me off" "Here. Its a fruit roll up. I was gonna make you a casserole for your loss but uh... I didnt"
"So its sorta like that movie the predator, except for hunting people hes takin a crap" - Carl from ATHF
by II SMASH II on Feb 17, 2010 6:18 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Most Strikeforce matches are mismatches. The “just bleed” fans don’t really care. They just want to see a ko. I’ll take a close back and forth over a quick ko any day.
by snakecharmer1340 on Feb 17, 2010 7:18 PM EST up reply actions
To be fair:
There were two competitive fights on the last SF card: Lawler vs. Manhoef and Diaz vs. Zaromskis. Both were finished by the end of the first frame.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Cyborg/Coenen
That fight was competitive on paper and in practice. Marloes is a hell of a fighter. She just got beat.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 17, 2010 10:23 PM EST up reply actions
I think of that fight as being like Hardy vs. GSP.
There are avenues to victory for both fighters, it’s the best matchup that can be made, and we all but know how it will end. I find no fault with the matchmaking, but didn’t find it to be particularly competitive.
Or, maybe I’m confusing the word competitive with compelling. That could be the disagreement.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Probably...
I mean, it was a case where the heavy favorite won, but the underdog deserved to be there.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 18, 2010 8:52 AM EST up reply actions
Fights are more competitive.
Overall fighters are getting better and you dont get a lot of the one sided destructions that UFC was setting up for a bit. When was the last time you saw a freak nasty ko like we used to see a couple years ago?
by snakecharmer1340 on Feb 17, 2010 6:01 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
Nail on the head
but Daley tightened up McLovin like he was a member of Archie Bell & the Drells at 108
Walking the line between intelligence and ignorance since 1985
@deowade
Goldie: "Michael Jordan-esque in his grappling skills is Travis Lutter."
Rogan: "No, no he's not. No."
Even that was in the second round; you aren’t getting the “high level fighter vs. random tough dude” fights anymore. The worst thing about that fight wasn’t the KO; it was Bisping’s game plan!
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
i was just responding to the freak-nasty KO bit. also, if anyone hasn’t seen the up-close and personal, live, full-speed video of that KO, it’s freakin awesome
Goldie: "Michael Jordan-esque in his grappling skills is Travis Lutter."
Rogan: "No, no he's not. No."
link here
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8908cxTexCk
Goldie: "Michael Jordan-esque in his grappling skills is Travis Lutter."
Rogan: "No, no he's not. No."
Heh, yeah. Especially the part where Hendo kisses his glove between the standing shot and the follow-up on the ground. That makes it SUPER bad ass.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
*Insert here Monthly article of UFC failing* sigh.
by snakecharmer1340 on Feb 17, 2010 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
More like weekly or daily...
The whole “UFC on the Decline” articles have been getting a lot of love lately it seems. And with the economy as shitty as it is (and will continue to be for years) I have a feeling that’s only going to add fuel to the fire with lower buy rates and the like.
I think y’all are projecting the whole “decline” thing. Nobody made the claim that the statistic even indicated something bad, only that it was significant. Chiappetta’s only really alarmist claim is that IF more matches go to the judges then we better be making DAMN sure those decisions are sound. I don’t think anyone can really argue that conclusion even if the premise is false.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
blah blah blah
UFC most of the best fighters so yes the fights are competitive and sometimes that results in a decision. Doesn’t mean it results in a boring fight.
by Lunchbox15 on Feb 17, 2010 6:12 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
Rec'd
for effectively summarizing all that needs to be said.
Top competition fighting top competition = fights not always being finished, featuring the Kenny Florian exception. He finishes fights!
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
So, what's the (arguably necessary) solution?
Longer fights? Quicker stand-ups?
Use all ten points.
Does there need to be a solution?
The sport is evolving. People are canceling each other out. In order to be in the UFC you need to be an elite fighter, as such you’re going to face similar competition. Not every baseball game is a no-hitter. Nor does every NBA game have a highlight reel slam dunk. I think people need to change their expectations of the sport versus the other way around.
exactly. how is this arguably necessary at all? the sport is perfect, just because nate chose to complain about something that merits no complaint. bad decisions, yes, boring decisions, yes, but decisions in general? WTF?
by Austin Martin on Feb 17, 2010 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
Why would you say that the sport is perfect?
Isn’t it our job as fans to discuss how it can be better — or should we just accept whatever it is that exists now?
I'm just a dude who's trying to put it together.
I agree and disagree with parts of that. If the sport is evolving, then how it evolves and what direction it takes is something all fans are interested in. Im cut from the ‘pride’ cloth in that I believe the goal of each fighter is to finish his opponent by (t)KO or submission. A decision is somewhat of a stale mate, even a failure of sorts. So from where I sit, I see an increasing number of decisions as an area of concern as the evolution of the sport is changing what I love about the sport, that being the risks fighters take to finish the fight.
Sure, there are exciting fights that go to a decision, but there are also fights where the winner doesnt ever look like he actually wants to finish the fight. Whether its LnP or using elusive technical boxing the entire fight to score points and avoid damage (Bisping v Leben), thats not what I enjoy about the sport.
I wanna see guys looking for gaps in a fighters game like Lawler against Manhoef. I wanna see guys give up a dominant position to go for an armbar or roll for a leg.
There are many factors that influence the direction and evolution of the sport, the UFC in particular, and I’d like to see a few more factors that encourage the reduction of fights that end in decision.
by GeeDub on Feb 18, 2010 5:33 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
the removal of time limits, clearly
eventually someone will pass out due to exhaustion, then they will all be finishes!
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
by loboplata on Feb 17, 2010 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
solution is:
kick out Jon Fitch, Gray Maynard, Sean Sherk, Tyson Griffin, Jake O’Brian, Brandon Vera, Keith Jardine and Frankie Edgar. Those guys are doing nothing but bringing the % up.
by virginiatech on Feb 17, 2010 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
1. why does it matter, and how is this cause for alarm?
2. why is the UFC being segregated in this, except for the people who consistently bash the org being enabled to do so yet again.
3. I would presume it’s because competition is leveling off or people are becoming more rounded, or too timid to have L’s on their record now because they’ll be written off from contendership, only to have a person that’s on a one fight win streak get the fight for nothing.
4. In any case, does more decisions mean less exciting fights? I don’t personally think so. As someone said, finishes like the Rolles embarassment vs. decisions like akiyama/ belcher, fisher/stout, or gsp/alves? Yeah i’ll take the decision.
here's the chunk of chiappetta's article that (I think) matters
The trend of going the distance makes it all the more crucial that athletic commissions be proactive in selecting judges with an open mind towards continuing education and betterment of their craft.
As the sport grows larger and opportunities increase, there is simply too much at stake for fighters to suffer at the hands of inexperienced judges not capable of being fair and objective under pressure.
Which, of course, is important whether or not decisions are on the rise.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
by loboplata on Feb 17, 2010 6:39 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
thats true for places like the VA commission and such, and yes bad decisions happen in the UFC, but the title “are decisions on the rise” followed by evidence that they are? is this even a topic of argument?
Nate, usually i’m a proponent of your writing but why wouldn’t you say “proof that decisions are on the rise.” Its clear that mathematically they are, but i don’t see why its important, or matters in any way.
by Austin Martin on Feb 17, 2010 6:43 PM EST up reply actions
well, because it isn't proof
the statistic is that the rate of decision for UFC events past 100 is greater than the historical average. It’s the difference between “There are more” and “they are increasing”, which is subtle but important.
This CAN be a meaningful number. It CAN indicate an upward trend. It CAN mean the number will continue to rise. That comparison doesn’t really tell us much more than the thing itself. The only real significance of it is that it’s worth looking into with greater granularity.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
This might be of interest to you and others. A 10 fight rolling window of finish types from UFC 50 – UFC 109. Make of it what you will:
by GeeDub on Feb 18, 2010 5:42 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I see a rising trend in decisions
A lowering trend in submissions
KO’s are steady at 40%
Based on this, submissions are being replaced with decisions.
I'm just a dude who's trying to put it together.
2 great fights that went to a decision
Griffin/Bonnar
Machida/Rua
Wouldn’t say there was anything wrong with that. Two amazing fights that were just never finished.
Watching someone like Randy Couture fight to a decision is painful, though:
Square up>attempt takedown>stack against the cage>dirty boxing
Rinse and repeat.
But for the most part, decisions aren’t a problem, just another part of the game.
griffin bonnar, for all the hype it got as the “#1 ufc fight ever,” was actually a terrible, terrible, sloppy brawl with very little technicality and a whole lot of toughness. It was great if you like seeing dudes “standing and banging,” not if you like crisp striking or actually utlizing the ground.
by Austin Martin on Feb 17, 2010 6:38 PM EST up reply actions
I completely agree
I never said that griffin bonnar was a technically sound bout.
Granted, I watch it now and i cringe at how terrible it is in retrospect. But when I saw “amazing” in regards to that, I’m speaking from the sense of pure entertainment.
Yeah, it wasn’t a showcase of indomitable skill, but dammit, it was fun to watch!
I don’t like sloppy strike fests.
What was great about griffin bonnar was the heart both men displayed, not the brilliant martial skills on display. Thats why Arturo Gatti had a rabid following- not because of his skills, but because of the heart he displayed everytime he walked into the ring.
Ricky Hatton came closer to beating Manny Pacquiao than Marquez did to beating Floyd.
-SC
by The Lethal Haze on Feb 18, 2010 10:52 AM EST up reply actions
I might be wrong.
But doesnt “Most likely” mean is the majority. There is a 51% (or so) percent chance the fight will be a stoppage. To me, thats the most likely.
And the game has changed since back in the day. Fighters had a lot of holes in their games and a knockout or a Sub was almost unavoidable depending on the fighters styles.
Now there are schools that train fighters to be well rounded. Fighters are getting better and the UFC has the best fighters in the world. is anyone really surprised they end in decisions?
Fights that go to decisions doesnt mean they have to be boring either.
No. “Most likely” means “with the highest occurrence” or " with the highest likelihood of occurrence". If any option holds a majority of occurrences it would obviously be the most likely, but it doesn’t have to have a majority. A plurality that is higher than every other option is sufficient.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
Semantics
Finishes are split in half in this article where decisions (which could be split in 3) are grouped together. So in the context of the wording they are correct in saying most likely because of the imbalances wordplay, bit a finish is actually the “most likey” outcome and not a decision, as stated.
Better matchmaking between better fighters who are better prepared defensively and fighting smarter because staying in the ufc actually means something has contributed as others have said . 5 round main events and more rewards for finishing are both good ideas but fighters are soon going to learn that a boring decision will lose you a title shot and hurt your earnings, that should turn the trend around so I don’t see this being a long term pattern.
Paniczoo reincarnated.
by ziiiiing on Feb 17, 2010 7:30 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Uh
That’s like when your girlfriend/wife tells you she wants to cut back on sex to make the times you do it more “exciting and special”. I don’t see the logic.
by virginiatech on Feb 17, 2010 6:51 PM EST up reply actions
are you saying fighters are going to have to finish themselves off a lot more?
by TLow on Feb 17, 2010 6:54 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
For these types of statistics, I don’t think think a “percentage of fights in mma history” means anything, because there still isn’t a standard for rules, scoring, timing, and decisions. Also, The data from UFC 1-100 would be more useful for a discussion if you cut out the stuff pre-unified rules. Counting fights that can’t end in decisions skews the numbers.
All non-title fights should be four rounds. You might say, but wait, they’ll be hella draws because of the even round total! But if judges weren’t so dogmatically hesitant to award 10-10 rounds the argument is mooted. So, non-title fights should be four rounds.
Secondly, wrestlers are learning how to avoid submissions which leads to the perception that the closed-guard or bottom-game of Jiu-jitsu is possibly growing antiquated. I can get behind that argument a bit, too. Anyways, this leads to more decisions.
Well, a couple of things.
I don’t get why people are lumping this in with “The Sky is Falling” articles. It’s an interesting bit of statistical research. Make what you want of it.
I think it just shows how the sport has evolved. It’s no longer the idea of “simulation of a real fight” as much as it is a sporting contest. Because in a real fight if you control a guy without finishing him or hurting him its basically worthless. In a sporting match it matters.
Other thing that needs mentioning is the long training camps. Now guys know their opponents months and months in advance, at least in the UFC, and there’s tons of tape out there on virtually every UFC fighter. So you know his strengths, and have time to work on avoiding them. Nobody’s going to go into a fight against a Nogueira or a Maia and not work his BJJ defence, just as Koscheck is probably drilling hard to avoid Daley’s striking. So I think that plays a huge part of it.
I like finishes are much as the next guy, and would pick Fedor-Rogers over Sanchez Guida just for the awesome finish, but it is what it is. UFC is damn exciting to watch, and that’s not changing…
I'll go read through the comments shortly...
but this is what happens when fighters become more skilled. As more fighters learn better technique standing and on the ground, less fights will be finished. It’s part of a better quality sport. Maybe not desirable…but expected
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 17, 2010 6:59 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
Hooray!
Crazy day today so didn’t have time to read the comments as much as normal
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 17, 2010 7:01 PM EST up reply actions
As fighters get better and better...
it might be necessary to change the rules in such a manner that stimulate more entertaining and/or definitive fights
I'm just a dude who's trying to put it together.
Its all because fighters just want the W and not the finish, and wrestlers are very capable of that. if the future of fighting is Chael Sonnen or gray maynard, there goes my favorite sport.
by pandaboy99 on Feb 17, 2010 7:00 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
The more competitive a matchup the more likely it will go to a decision… if you dont like decisions shitfarce has a ton of “Bobby lashley vs – on a week notice – Wes Sims” for you.
Moreover fighters at the top level are improving defense… The biggest hole used to be sub defense now it’s standup… wait until the Machida esque or boxing counter fighting takes route in MMA. The trend will not only continue but increase.
As MMA evolves the gaps close… there are still non-athletes (forrest Griffins, etc) competing at the top level – this too will fade away and competitiveness in matchups will increase. Guys with poor training habits (anthony johnson) will fade away and finishing them will be alot harder
The good news is every fight in the WWE is a “finish” so you can always go back to that.
by mmalogic on Feb 17, 2010 7:01 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
i think what he is trying to say is: Forrest Griffin isn’t “great” at anything. He’s just average/good at everything.
by virginiatech on Feb 17, 2010 7:07 PM EST up reply actions
He's not a great athlete...
he’s a hard working guy who was able to develop a well rounded game. But he’s not the kind of guy you look at the physical skills and are blown away.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 17, 2010 7:07 PM EST up reply actions
I agree that he is not the most physically skilled guy in the world but I just find it dumb to call him a non-athlete.
It’s kind of a term that’s thrown around a lot. It doesn’t really mean he’s unathletic. People use it in team sports all the time.
The man known simply as "Christmas Cheesesteak"
Yeah, it’s a sort of “expected use” term. I myself am a complete non-athlete; doesn’t mean I’ve never made anyone tap at jiu jitsu; it just means that I have to work twice as hard to get there as the athletic guy with the same amount of training. And that I run like a retarded duck.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
The UFC is too good.
The better the fighters are, the more respect they have for each other’s abilities, and the more cautious they are of getting caught. Instead of going for the highlight reel knockout or miracle submission that may leave them open to counters, fighters take a more conservative approach which ensures a victory (and a fat win bonus check).
I thought PRIDE had a great solution to this problem by fining the fighters who stalled. And nobody wanted to get their paycheck reduced, so the fights were action packed.
UFC decisions
I think that not only are there more decisions, the decisions are usually bad and those bad decisions are leading to wrestlers taking people down and just laying on them. I believe Evans vs Silva is a prime example of this.
People don’t want to stand and trade because even if they win they can lose the decision so they decide to just lay and pray because it’s more likely that you will get the win that way.
First priority is to win.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 17, 2010 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
This is definitely true, that’s why I think the UFC seriously needs to evaluate their judging system or they should add PRIDE’s card system
But letting
someone like Cecil Peoples determine how much pay a fighter loses scares the fuck out of me.
If anyone is interested...
Tapology has a Fight Stats column by month.
by Steven T. Kelliher on Feb 17, 2010 7:08 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Oh, nice!
Thanks!
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
No problem. Figured it would be interesting to look at the trend on a month-by-month basis.
by Steven T. Kelliher on Feb 17, 2010 7:13 PM EST up reply actions
That was exactly one of the things I wanted to look at
To summarize, across the major promotions there is an upward trend in decision finishes by month from October to January.
Oct – 37% decision
Nov – 38%
Dec – 41%
Jan – 45%
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
Really as much as I like to see finishes, it is realistic that there will be more and more fights going to decision as fighters get better.
Also its probably better for their health.
It’s actually probably much worse for their health.
by George Lucas on Feb 17, 2010 7:13 PM EST up reply actions
Really I just think this makes some people more impressive
Silva, BJ, Florian, and Lesnar all have great finishing rates. Against really really tough guys. They don’t just win, they finish fights.
The man known simply as "Christmas Cheesesteak"
Good & Bad sign
THE GOOD: this shows that fighters are better at defending themselves, that current fighters have more even skill levels, and that fighters are strategizing more instead of just going for finishes right off the bat.
THE BAD: this shows that most fighters are, in some way, clearly fighting for the decision rather than the finish, and that if you have two similarly talented combatants who have strategized for each other, then 3 rounds or even 5 is just too short a time for one fighter to assert an advantage over the other. 3 rounds is like the pitcher’s mound being too high in baseball, or the 3 point line being too close in basketball— it’s a fundamental hindrance to a sport that has outgrown its original intention.
by Trust Doesn't Rust on Feb 17, 2010 7:15 PM EST reply actions
Exatly
This why the UFC needs to implement extra rounds more often. They used to do them more, and PRIDE used them a lot, and they were really good for getting another round of action to score the athletes and to give them one more opportunity to finish the fight decisively. If I’m watching an awesome, close fight, and they say “we may need to do another round, a sudden death/victory round..” I am like ecstatic! Especially for the 3 rounders, where the guys aren’t even tired or beat up by the end of the 3rd round. When those fights are close, a 4th sudden-victory round is perfect.
It's called parity
I would be interested to see a statistical breakdown that shows what difference (if any) there is in the finishing rate between two ranked opponents, two non-ranked opponents, and one ranked vs. one non-ranked.
Since the UFC has a higher proportion of ranked fighters, a correlation between skill level (based on rank) and decision rate could explain what’s going on in the organization.
Very sound point.
Presumably, the UFC has the highest level of competitors throughout their five weight classes. Higher mutual skill levels between the opponents is IMO the most likely culprit to blame for an increased decision rate.
by Steven T. Kelliher on Feb 17, 2010 7:19 PM EST up reply actions
I disagree with the comments saying that better fighters make more decisions. I think the fighters are looking at it logically, you can go for the win and get subbed or knocked out (or lose the fight because of a bad decision) or you can just grind out a decision on the ground. It just seems like a good strategy to lay and pray in the UFC right now.
Clay Guida.
The man has dropped his last two fights but he always puts it on the line so I don’t expect the UFC to let him go anytime soon. I hate the term “lay and pray”. it’s such a fanboy term.
by snakecharmer1340 on Feb 17, 2010 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
What are you even talking about? Clay Guida has nothing to do with my argument and I’ve never seen him lay and pray. He’s always attacking, always looking to advance, and always looking to finish.
I’m talking about fighters like Rashad who have all the skills necessary to make an exciting fight but choose to take people down and lay on them instead. Rashad threw 3 strikes on the ground in his fight against Thiago Silva. That is just unacceptable as far as I’m concerned.
Your argument is that some fighters go the safe way to avoid losing their job. I used Clay Guida as an example of a fighter who assures his job by putting it all on the line.
I think a lot of fighters put it on the line. I don’t agree fear is the cause for the rise of decisions.
by snakecharmer1340 on Feb 17, 2010 7:42 PM EST up reply actions
You're on to something here...
But if you accept that the main goal is to win as opposed to finishing the fight, then it would make sense that more fights go to decision because all fighters are getting better. For example, if a good fighter takes a risk at finishing a fight with a strike, he will leave himself open for a counter that will be capitalized on by another good fighter — this pretty much sums up the success of guys like Anderson Silva, Machida, all the really good fighters finish their opponents once they see a mistake.
I'm just a dude who's trying to put it together.
For me
a great fight is a great fight. I don’t need to see someones head knocked off or an arm broken to be entertained. My first love in combat sports was boxing so maybe the ebb and flow of a fight interests me more.
My favorite fights are tactical battles where fighters are both attempting to impose their wills on one another. Sanchez vs Diaz is one good example of this. I do like KOs and subs but it is nice to see the fighters employ their crafts at a high level.
Some of the best fights in MMA went to decision, I love a good fight that goes the distance (not Kimbo vs Alexander).
Bored at work,
Here are some quick stats from over the last 10 UFC events:
By weightclass, the percentage of number of fights has been
LW: 30%
WW: 26%
MW: 17%
LHW: 15%
HW: 12%
Off hand, one would say that the number of decisions is a function of there being more fights at lighter weight classes, as conventional wisdom is that lighter weight fighters don’t have as much KO power and are more likely to have the cardio to last 3 full rounds.
But that is not necessarily the case. Of those fights, the percentage that went to decision, by weightclass breaks down like this:
LW: 44.3%
WW: 35%
MW: 44.4%
LHW: 56%
HW: 31%
overall average % of decisions: 42%
So we see that heavyweights do tend to finish fights disproportionately compared to other weightclasses. But decisions in the lightheavyeight class have been more common than in other weight classes, and middleweights go to decisions slightly more often than lightweights. Clearly, the idea that lighter weight classes → more decisions is not supported by reality, on the caveat that this only looked at 10 cards.
As a side note, on 4 out of those 10 cards, decisions were given the Fight of the Night.
A few more stats for those interested
UFC Decision Rates By Year (year -- # of fights - % going to decision)
1998 - 25 - 32%
1999 - 42 - 21%
2000 - 42 - 38%
2001 - 39 - 31%
2002 - 52 - 29%
2003 - 39 - 31%
2004 - 39 - 26%
2005 - 79 - 24%
2006 - 158 - 33%
2007 - 169 - 36%
2008 - 201 - 32%
2009 - 214 - 43%
2010 - 31 - 55%
Takeaway: There was definitely an increase in decision rates in 2009 and so far in 2010. No mistaking it.
UFC Decision Rates by Weight Class (2007 - 2008 - 2009)
155 LW: 41% - 46% - 42%
170 WW: 31% - 39% - 50%
185 MW: 28% - 26% - 37%
205 LHW: 30% - 21% - 50%
265 HW: 56% - 13% - 26%
Takeaway: Increase in decision rates wasn’t from one or two weight classes. It happened in all weight classes except for lightweight. As a side note, lightweight+welterweight fights do not make up a larger slice of the pie in the past couple of years. From 2007 to 2008 to 2009, LW+WW was 55%, 51%, 53% of all UFC bouts. Pretty consistent.
UFC Decision Rates Main Card vs Undercard (2008 - 2009)
Main Card: 36% - 44%
Undercard: 29% - 41%
Takeaway: Main card fights more likely to go decision, but that’s not what caused the increase in decisions from 2008 to 2009. Both main card and undercard fights had a big increase.
WEC Decision Rates:
2008: 27%
2009: 54%
Takeaway: It’s not just the UFC.
You can go ahead and draw your own conclusions, but the theories about the skill level and quality of competition increasing sound logical to me. And I agree with some other posters that decisions are not necessarily a bad thing. Just trying to share some facts.
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
by GregS123 on Feb 17, 2010 11:50 PM EST reply actions 6 recs
Anyone who thinks the increase of decisions in the UFC reflects badly upon them is a fucking idiot. An idiot who pretends to enjoy MMA but really doesn’t.
That may sound troll-ish, but it’s the truth. Simple as that.
Aside from the obvious correlations with more competitive fights being made in the UFC, decisions tell us more about individual fighters than a finish does. It can reveal a fighter’s stamina, their resolve, and we get to see how fighters react if Plan A fails. A good example was Faber/Brown II: Faber’s hand was fucked, so he got creative when the feet stayed on the feet and began throwing nice inside elbows. Effective ones at that.
by David Castillo on Feb 18, 2010 12:10 AM EST reply actions
Anyone who thinks the increase of decisions in the UFC reflects badly upon them is a fucking idiot. An idiot who pretends to enjoy MMA but really doesn’t.
Personally I would say people who attack others viciously and make incredibly broad and unfounded generalisations are closer to being “fucking idiots” than people who like to see a good sub or KO.
I'd say people who passive aggressively insult one person
using a flimsy premise and shaky logi- you know what, fuck it. I’m gonna go read my sig and remember why I use it.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
decisions tell us more about individual fighters than a finish does.
No. GOOD decisions where the right guy actually wins tell us more about the individual fighters than SOME finishes do.
Bad decisions, and there were quite a few in 2009, DO reflect badly on the UFC and the sport. More decisions correlate to more bad decisions and I think that is what is being over-looked here. A clear, decisive finish is almost always going to be better than a decision in my book.
Things that could be done to reduce decisions-
1) Add two rounds to main event fights.
2) Add knees on the ground to reduce stalling.
3) Add yellow cards to reduce stalling.
"It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear".- Doc Holliday
by MyFistYourFace on Feb 18, 2010 1:00 AM EST up reply actions
Pride style rounds?
I’ve always wondered if a 10 minute first round like Pride had would produce more finishes. Anyone know if the unified rules even allow it in the US?
One would think that as the round wore on and both fighters are worn out and take a beating it’s more likely one will get a knock out, tko, or submission. Worse case is you have 5 extra minutes of blue balling his leg.
Except that Fagan’s earlier analysis doesn’t support your hypothesis. Fagan’s numbers showed, if I’m not incorrect, that the longer a fight goes on, the less likely a finish is. If the first 10 minutes are all one round or split into two shouldn’t matter – tired fighters does not equal finishes. In fact, without the minute of rest, you almost are guaranteed to have five minutes of time (the second half of the first round) where finishes are less likely.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong here…?
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
those numbers just showed that there weren’t a lot of finishes in the 4th and 5th rounds.
To answer this question you need to look at the rate of finishes in the last 5 minutes of 10 minute rounds.
A quick look...
I went through the last 6 Pride events and tallie dthe results so this is by no means conclusive.
In the last 6 events there were 56 fights and out of those 37 were stopages. That makes the rate 66%.
Out of the 37 stopages, 11 came in the last 5 minutes of the first round which is 29.7%
Again, the sample data is so small the percentages really mean nothing but I don’t have time to go through all of them.
by Roll for Life on Feb 18, 2010 1:51 PM EST up reply actions
Is this a big time mma blog? I thought it was until I saw this post. Decisions are bad for the sport?
I’m not trying to be a jerk here but maybe Joe Rogan is right when he talks about the fat short order cook mma fans.
Just my opinion on decisions
I don’t think they are necessarily a bad thing for the sport but I do like having a clear cut winner. With close split decisions or even a mistake in judgeing the victory can feel a little hollow.
One of the things that annoys me the most are fighters who lose a close fight and as soon as they get on the mic they start rattling off excuses and then say how they really won. *cough*Tito*cough*
by Roll for Life on Feb 19, 2010 11:12 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bloody Elbow
Related FanShots on Bloody Elbow
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
