A universal set of MMA rules?

[jmt225]

Do you think there should be a universal set of MMA rules for EVERY Mixed Martial Arts promotion to follow? If so, if you were able to choose the set of rules for the promotions to abide by, what would they be?

For instance, what would your time limits be for each round? Would you allow shots to the back of the head? Would elbows to the face on a grounded opponent be legal? What about knees, kicks, and stomps to a grounded opponent? Would a hand or knee on the ground count as a fighter being grounded? What would be means for a point to be taken away? What would be means to a disqualification? Would stalling, or being inactive get a fighter a point taken away or disqualified? Would you imply instant replay for "Early Stoppages" or something like a low blow/eye poke? Should fights be contested in a ring or octagon? Etc.

Anything else you can come up with, please share.

.....................................................................​

First of all, yes... for MMA to truly become a legitimized sport, then there needs to be a set of uniform rules abide by every promotion in the sport. It's just too confusing for someone to watch Strikeforce and see that this and that is illegal, and then watch the UFC and see that the shots that were illegal in Strikeforce are legal in the UFC (elbows to a grounded opponent for example, among other things).

So, with that said, here are the rules I would use for every Mixed Martial Arts company to follow, if I were put in charge of putting them together:

For starters, the only blows I would make illegal to a grounded opponent are kicks and stomps. Though I don't think they're necessarily that dangerous, it just looks too brutal and would turn a good hand full of people away from the sport. Knees and elbows, however, fair game. Though, I would not allow downward elbows where you hit your opponent with the point of your elbow to his face, as those are just way too dangerous.

An opponent with his hand or knee on the ground, thus making him technically a grounded opponent is simply ridiculous and a rule I absolutely hate. The only way someone would be counted as being grounded is if they're truly laying on the ground. Their back, stomach, and/or ass has to be on the mat, not his hand or knee.

Time limits... while I love the 2 round 10 minute time system most Japanese promotions use, I think I would still stick with what the UFC and most American promotions use with 3 5 minute rounds, 5 rounds for a championship fight. Sometimes it feels like 5 minutes isn't enough time for a lot of fighters to accomplish their game plan, but 10 minutes just seems so long not to go for a rest. I don't think that would make the sport look good at all.

Ring or octagon... I think rings are great for the fans in attendance since you can see the action much better than you can in an octagon, but I would still have to force promotions to use an octagon instead of a ring. With an octagon, there's much more room, and there's no way for a fighter to fall out into the audience from a takedown or getting knocked out towards the ropes. Moreover, fighters getting tangled in the ropes and the fight having to be stopped is a pain in the ass as well. Also, from a television standpoint, there are more options for different camera angles and what not for a fight in an octagon than a ring. So, octagons should remain the standard place for Mixed Martial Arts fights to take place, for sure.

I firmly think instant replay should be used in MMA, and with it you could really start to lay down the law as far as illegal shots are concerned. If let's say Matt Hughes get hit with a low blow, the ref can stop the fight right away, look at the replay, and determine for himself whether or not Hughes got hit or is faking. If he got hit legitimately, then his opponent gets a warning. If that or ANY other type of illegal happens again, then Hughes' opponent gets a point taken away. And if ANOTHER illegal blow happens, Hughes wins the fight via disqualification. With instant replay, you can make decisions like this without any controversy, and set a ground rule on what gets a point taken away and gets someone disqualified. Plus, the ref wouldn't have to call something he didn't see. It would also help if a fighter can't continue because of an illegal blow for a ref to be able to look at a replay so he can determine whether or not the shot was truly illegal to the point where the guy couldn't be able to continue. If so, then the person who made the illegal blow get disqualified.

As far as instantly replay for early stoppages... man, I would love to have it, but you can't. Once a fight is over, it should be over. It would be completely unfair to the person who won the fight for it to restart, since all his momentum is gone by that point and since if they fight hadn't been stopped in the first place, then he would have been able to most likely put his opponent away more convincingly. So, I do believe instant replay should be brought in to MMA, but not used on something like an early stoppage or if someone truly tapped out or not.

Finally, inactive and stalling... Japan has the yellow card system, but I cannot implore that into a universal set of rules Mixed Martial Arts, as I think it would be confusing to the American audience. What I would do though is put an official on the outside, and let's say Jon Fitch takes Thiago Alves down. The ref on the outside would have a stop watch, and if Fitch remains in Alves full guard for let's say 45 seconds, and doesn't throw one hard shot or even attempt to get out of Alves guard, then the ref on the outside should signal the ref on the inside to stand them up. However, this rule should only happen while a fighter is stuck in full guard. Half guard, side control, or having an opponent's back, then the person with the upper hand should have as long as he needs to catch his opponent with something. But as soon as you get into someone's full guard, you have 45 seconds to make something happen. Either improve your position to half guard or side control, or consistently rain down HARD punches and elbows. If you don't, then the fight gets stood up.

And lastly, if a fighter doesn't want to fight, then end it. What I mean by that is, if someone is constantly running away from his opponent, and refusing to engage, then stop the fight and give the win to the person trying to engage. The fighter running away should get 2 Warnings about not fighting, but if he continues to run and avoid confrontation, then he should be disqualified. Simple as that.

So, those are the rules I would implore for all MMA promotions to follow. Now, let me hear yours.

 

[INDYjon22]

I would most certainly eliminate the stupid fucking rule that allows a fighter to put on hand on the mat and be considered grounded. Personally, it is a cheap way out of getting kneed in the face. If they are on both knees on the mat then that is another case all together but, if they are still standing and have a hand on the mat to balance themselves then I think their face should be open to knees. The fighter on bottom can protect themselves by simply putting their hands up to protect from the knees but the current rule only helps fighters out in a cheap manner.

The elbow to a grounded opponent rule should also be fixed. The elbows the Jon Jones was throwing on Matt Hamill should be legal. Sure they looked nasty, and I am sure they were, but they weren't anymore dangerous then any other elbow or punch coming down. They looked bad and probably hurt like hell but any elbow, forearm, or fist hitting you in the face is going to hurt. The 12-6 elbow should be allowed.

I like the idea of a universal set of rules but I think it would be damn near impossible seeing as different officials and companies view things differently. They will all want to do things how they think it should be done and no one would be able to come to terms on a set set of rules for the entire MMA world. It would be nice because it would help with fans not needing to know all the different rules for every promotion but I just don't see it happening, at least not anytime soon.

 

[Mufasa]

What I most want is a change in the scoring system. I hate the heavy emphasis on takedown's. I hate that fighters can win through lay and pray. I would like something closer to the pride scoring system. I don't think fights should be scored round for round, but rather scored by the totality of a fight. Football games aren't decided by who won the most quarters, MMA fights shouldn't be decided by who won the most rounds. I think the most important aspect of scoring should be who came closest to finishing the fight. Whoever came closest to finishing the fight should usably be the winner. It's the fighters who come closest and the fighters who do the most damage that should be getting victories. No one should be able to stall to a decision. Deliberately stalling should quickly result in a point deduction. I think you should be allowed to score points even if you are on your back if you somehow are able to clearly out strike your opponent or are attempting submissions. Something should be done about low blows, but I'm not sure what. The Gonzaga kick for example completely decided the fight. I like the instant replay idea, but not sure if it should be automatic point deduction if it's an accident.

I think elbows should be allowed from any angle, the only restriction on elbows should be no elbows to the back of the head.

I would also prefer kicks and knee's to the head from any position but if I can't have that, then at the very least I would like it to be that if a fighter intentionally downs himself by dropping to a knee for any reason, then that fighter should be allowed to get kneed in the face. I hate that a wrestler can drop down to one knee and just drag an opponent down to the mat with impunity because all you can do to defend that is sprawl and punch from awkward positions.

 

[The Roid Rage]

what would your time limits be for each round?

3 minutes is the perfect amount of time. It's not too long and it's short enough that you know you have to get something done, it gives the fighters a greater sense of urgency when they know there is less time to get the job done. I think this would really up the activity and make mma the high action sport it says it is and wants to be but isn't.

If you take the time limit for the rounds down to 3 minutes, you also must make the fights scheduled for more rounds like in boxing. In boxing the number of rounds you fight even at the pro level depends on how good you are, and how good your record is and I think the same philosophy should apply to mma so that you get better competition and better fights from better matched opponents. In this case mma needs to be as much like boxing as possible to help legitimize itself. Imagine if they could say "Our guys fight 12 3 minute rounds just like they do, only we allow this and this and this." It would help legitimize the sport dramatically.

As an example of what I mean lets say you have two fighters who are just turning pro. Well in the amateurs headgear is required, and up until last year you went four 2 minute rounds, now it is 3 three minute rounds in mens seniors(above 18) competition. So, going into pro competition you are going to start off at 4 three minute rounds, after a few fights if you look good going 4 rounds you'll get bumped up to 6, then eventually 8, 10, and 12 as you progress. This keeps people fighting within their skill set, and helps develop the fighter better at a smooth pace. You don't get thrown in with someone who is way more experienced and way more skilled, you are always fighting people closer to your experience and skill level.

Would you allow shots to the back of the head?

Absolutely Not. That's unnecessarily violent and too dangerous. You hit someone in the right spot in the back of the head and you can cause them some serious damage that is not necessary to prove who is the better fighter. It doesn't matter if they give you their back or not, you hit someone in the back of the head, that's a warning, then a point, then a dq, just like in Boxing.

Would elbows to the face on a grounded opponent be legal?

If I were making the rules I would say that the ground game should be free of any punching, kicking, or elbows and reserved for grappling and submissions only. There is no need to punch and kick and elbow anyone on the ground. That's just violent and doesn't take any real skill to do once someone is in a compromising position. Getting them into that position isn't difficult either.

Leave that area to what it's actually meant to be. If you want to punch of kick someone you should only be allowed to do it to a standing opponent because of how badly you can beat a man on their back. If someone is pinned down like that anyone can punch, kick, or elbow them. That doesn't prove anything, just that one guy was able to get on top of the other and pound him in the face. Lets give this "sport" some dignity, respect, and class and get these guys off the ground beating each other like cavemen, honestly.

If the fight is going to the ground it should be so that you can wrestle and work a man into a submission nothing else that compromises their safety and health at no gain.

What about knees, kicks, and stomps to a grounded opponent?

I already covered this a bit, but in the situation where one man is standing and the other one is down I'd say that the man standing should not be able to hit the man when they are down. That is what I am talking about when I talk about putting some dignity, respect, and class into the sport. Don't make it about guys being as brutal as possible, make it about them being as sportsmanlike, and skilled as possible. Don't promote beating a man when he's down, that's what people do when they can't win any other way, they take a low road.

We want to eliminate any perception of the mma fighters going in those directions. In this case the grounded fighter should be forced up unless the standing fighter decides to go to the ground as well. I think they should be encouraged to be on their feet as well so that a more decisive win can occur.

Would a hand or knee on the ground count as a fighter being grounded?

Good question, and one that has already been answered by Boxing, bring up yet another policy they should adopt from the sport. This all depends on how the knee or glove touches. If your knee or hand touches the canvas because of the way you are standing than no obviously you aren't a downed opponent and you are still fair game. However, if your knee or hand touches the canvas as a result of a punch that would be ruled a knock down.

In boxing that constitutes a mandatory 8 count but that is because there is no ground game. So here, the rule would be that you can go after an opponent who is technically downed, but not with punches, kicks, and elbows. There must be a transition from standing and striking standing up, to grappling, wrestling, and submission attempts on the ground. One area for striking specifically, although grappling would of course be allowed standing up, and on the ground is where the striking stops and the BJJ, Wrestling, etc begins.

What would be means for a point to be taken away?

The point deduction would come after 2 warnings on the following criteria.

1. intentional or repetitive low blows, head butts, rabbit punches.

2. intentionally striking a downed opponent.

3. excessive holding and inactivity.

4. intentional failure to obey the referee.

5. any form of unsportsmanlike conduct.

Simple as that.

What would be means to a disqualification?

Repeated violations of the rules laid out above.

Would stalling, or being inactive get a fighter a point taken away or disqualified?

Also covered above. After repeated warnings, and a point deduction, if the fighter continues to be unreasonably inactive, holding excessively, or using any other tactics to blatantly stall the fight after repeated warnings and a point deduction.

Would you imply instant replay for "Early Stoppages" or something like a low blow/eye poke?

Boxing already uses instant replay to determine if cuts are caused by head-butts or punches when in question. This happens especially if the fight is stopped as a result of a cut before the 4th round, because the fight then goes to the scorecards and that determination can change the judges decisions on the fight. After 4 rounds if the cut is determined to be from a punch or head-butt and the fight is stopped it is ruled a TKO. Sometimes it is also used to determine intentional or unintentional head-butts to see if a point deduction has been warranted as well.I think the same standard should be upheld in mma.

Should fights be contested in a ring or octagon?

I think that mma needs to get itself as close to boxing as possible, and as far away from it's origins as possible meaning out of the octagon and into the ring you go just like K-1 and Pride FC did. The octagon makes it look like the same old cage fighting that was frowned upon, and equated to glorified tough man contests.

If mma wants to improve it's image I think that is what they must do, they must look as similar to a legitimate widely accepted sport like Boxing as they can. That octagon just keeps them looking like a bunch of club fighters. Also, the risk of falling out of the ring, or getting tangled in the ropes would encourage the fighters to keep in as much in the center of the ring as possible also forcing more action. It's a good idea and it's worked for a long time, no need to change a good thing.


That pretty well covers it, I look forward to your feedback. I think these changes would make mma a lot more credible, a lot more appealing, and also make the fighters stock raise as they would be winning fights more clean and clear. This would also help reduce injury as you kept people from taking unnecessary punishment on the ground. Under this set of rules I think it would be deserving of being called a real competitor to boxing but the athletes would have to prove it in the ring most of all and show that they can go the same distance, and fight at the same level still.

 

[antfarm612]

-- There would be no rounds, just a time-limit (fifteen minutes for most, twenty/twenty-five for big fights, and thirty minutes for big fights that have already gone the distance).

-- Since there are no rounds, fights would have to be judged in their entirety, the way they should be. Winners would be declared based on clean and effective striking, and controlling the fight. Submission attempts wouldn't count, because the submission-escape would cancel the submission attempt. Effective striking would be worth more than effective wrestling.

-- Knees/kicks to the head are the strikes that would not be allowed to a grounded opponent

-- One hand on the mat would not count as 'grounded'. I would leave the call to the referee to decide if the fighter is grounded, and if he is, the referee would yell 'grounded' to make sure the other fighter knows.

-- I would have the fights take place in a ring. This gives fighters incentives not to back up, as they don't want to get caught in the corner. In an octagon, you can move from side to side almost forever and not be cornered. Also, the ropes allow for flexibility when there is a clinch on the edge of the ring.

-- STALLING. One of my biggest issues with MMA. In wrestling, you stall once, you get warned, you stall twice, you lose a point, you stall again, lose another point, then you get disqualified. I would go a step further, and say after three stalling calls you lose the fight.

-- Strikes to the back of the head of any kind would not be tolerated.

EDIT -- I really like the OP's stop-watch idea. The guard is pretty much universally accepted as the most boring position in MMA. If you can't do something after 45 seconds, stand up.