What would your MMA rules be?

Discussion in 'MMA' started by callsignfuzzy, Feb 12, 2008.

  1. february

    february Valued Member

    :topic:

    There better part of me is telling me that this shouldn't be dignified with a response, but.....

    LOLfreakinTASTIC.

    Seriously, this and your 2012 conspiracy theories make me think you're what's wrong with society today... :confused:
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2008
  2. MacWombat

    MacWombat Valued Member

    Go watch RioHeroes. Still no chunners though.
     
  3. callsignfuzzy

    callsignfuzzy Is not a number!

    Domino-

    I agree 100%. Every time Cecil Peebles is announced as a judge I pray that the fight doesn't go to decission.

    So you're satisfied with the current rules, weight classes, and judging format?

    Crap... I got pwned :D

    And they've still got some restrictions, such as weight classes and a few fouls. Apparently some MMA fighters and organizers are unhappy about it, including Wanderlei. Personally I'm not all that opposed to it, but I'm glad it's not happening in the States.
     
  4. Davey Bones

    Davey Bones New Member

    Overall, yes. I think it's a good ruleset, doesn't favour one style over another, and is as safe as possible while allowing for the use of the safest techniques possible. I don't watch and mutter about how I can come up with better rules than the NVSAC or the NJSAC or the unified MMA rules.

    I'd like to see more weight classes, sure, but we all would, and my position in regards to women's MMA is well-known.
     
  5. XT18

    XT18 Banned Banned

    yes no chunners they could care less about peoples opinions there is also no akido guys or clf guys or hun gar guys or any single kung fu styles in there so i guess its all ineffective :rolleyes: is there even much of kung fu in brazil? Besides why would i watch RioHeroes where there is enough bloody fights in local area that i could witness with my own eyes rather then watching them on screen.
     
  6. Davey Bones

    Davey Bones New Member

    that would be because if you're gonna get bled on, I'd rather be bled on by a guy who's been tested and declared clean as opposed to some freak on the streets who could give me three forms of Hepatitis just because he bled on me?
     
  7. february

    february Valued Member

    Dear God, please tell me you're a really comedy genius in disguise and are actually kidding about everything - I mean everything you post here?
     
  8. shift

    shift Valued Member

    Pro boughts would be the same as UFC

    Amateur bouts would same as UFC for striking but grappling and body strikes only on the ground (no face shots on the ground what so ever).
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2008
  9. Banpen Fugyo

    Banpen Fugyo 10000 Changes No Surprise

    Why make biting/pinching/scratching illegal? JW
     
  10. mai tai

    mai tai Valued Member

    or ethnicly cleansing the neighboring village in the name of religieon, tribe or political phylosopy


    ak machette and rpg is the weapon of choice.....not a death match
     
  11. february

    february Valued Member

    Nice balanced view of the 3rd world you've got there.....that's what too much TV will do to you. :rolleyes:
     
  12. Jason Couch

    Jason Couch New Member

    This is just my opinion from what I've been reading now that Maryland is looking at legalizing MMA.

    Right now most states have legalized MMA and within 5 years it will be "almost all" rather than today's "slightly more than half" the states.

    The NJ MMA Unfied Rules of Conduct will become the standard. The biggest issue facing most states is amateur MMA. States that have boxing or kickboxing and are looking at adding MMA are at a loss because many defer amateur competition regulation to the sport's national amateur association, which MMA does not have. Once a decent national amateur org. is created, the sport will benefit tremendously in both the quality of eventual pro fighters and ease of legalization.
     
  13. Hiroji

    Hiroji laugh often, love much

    Id have the same rules as the UFC right now.

    But i get rid of the Cage and replace it with a tudo type ring.

    I dont really mind the Cage, but i think from responses from the general public they seem to shudder when you mention they fight in a steel cage!

    "CAGE FIGHTER!" sounds a little more barbaric than "RING FIGHTER!"

    I think the ring might open it up more to the joe public. Could be totally wrong though!
     
  14. Korpy

    Korpy Whatever Works

    I just personally don't like it. And if you can't do any damage with the stuff I allow... then well, you shouldn't be fighting. lol :D
     
  15. Thomas

    Thomas Combat Hapkido/Taekwondo

    mmmmmm.... if I could make the rules....


    1. All strikes would be legal - I'd get rid of the forbidden targets like groin and would allow people to use knees/elbows where ever (get rid of the no knees to a downed opponent).

    2. All submissions and throws would be legal

    3. I would keep the "no eye gouges" and "no biting/fishhooking" restrictions.

    4. There would be two rounds - 1st would be 15 minutes, a 2 minute break, and the 2nd would go until a KO, TKO, or Submission (verbal or tap) with no time limit. If the referee felt they were just stalling s/he could give 1 warning and on the second offense stop the match and declare a draw.
     
  16. sliver

    sliver Work In Progress


    I'd personally Hate to see the cage go. It changes the strategy quite a bit and really changes up the clinch game vs. a ring. To me at least MMA is much better off in the cage than the ring. The ring was designed with boxing in mind, why try to shoe-horn our sport into something that doesn't fit as well?

    As for rules I like 'em fine as they are, though I'd get rid of the ungainly 10 point must system (another shoehorn from boxing that doesn't fit) and require all judges be trained specificly in MMA rather than just being boxing judges (there's that shoe horn agian, I'm seeing a theme here). Other than that I think the current rule set strikes about as good a balance as is possible between not biasing the sport toward one type of fighting or another too much (the above exceptions noted) while still making it as safe as possible and helping it keep legitimacy as a sport. Even though I don't care for the no kicking a downed opponent rule, if we had that here stateside, the screams of "human **** fighting" from the hand wringers out there would only grow louder and we'd be on our way toward getting banned entirely. A certian amount of managing the public perception is required untill the sport becomes a fully vested part of mainstream American culture.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2008
  17. Atharel

    Atharel Errant

    How dearly do you love bloodborne diseases?
     
  18. Banpen Fugyo

    Banpen Fugyo 10000 Changes No Surprise

    Thats how a real fight goes... I dont see why you would ban these if you want a truely real fight...
     
  19. callsignfuzzy

    callsignfuzzy Is not a number!

    Well it's never been a "real fight" in that sense, has it? Even as far back as early Vale Tudo, UFC's, and shoot matches, things like throttle-chokes, biting, and gouging have been banned. It still happened of course, but the point is that it's always been an *aproximation* of a "real fight", with rules that let fighters and martial artists test their skills with the fewest restrictions possible.

    And biting, scratching, gouging and pinching doesn't happen in every street fight. Based on experience and video evidence, I'd say you're more likely to encounter punches, knees, headbutts, tackles, headlocks and chokes. Much more likely, in fact.
     
  20. Doublejab

    Doublejab formally Snoop

    For personal preference UFC rules but legalise knees to the head of a downed opponent. I don't see why they aren't legal.
     

Share This Page