Scoring Bias

[Papadoc60]

Round scoring is biased in favor of striking currently. There is very little if any points scored for takedowns and controlled time and damage is the most important thing to look at. The problem with this is that it's much easier to land damage on the feet vs on the ground and it's still not easy to take the fight there. Two players of equal skill level on the ground can likely stall and cause a standup before any significant damage occurs. There are so many facets of this game where grappling is made to be insignificant by comparison to striking and it has only changed slightly since the first patch.


If the scoring is meant to reflect the new rules where damage is more important, it should also include 10-8 grappling rounds. Yes, I'm talking about the rounds where your opponent gets 4 minutes of control time and outlands you 50 strikes to 3. That's a 10-8 round and it should be in this game. Can we also make control time and takedowns less pointless for scoring? If you're landing 3-4 takedowns in a round and you get several minutes of control time it should amount to something


To sum it up:

1. 10-8 Grappling rounds

2. Make takedowns and control time more significant scoring factors, as of now they seem useless and people wise to the scoring can attest to this

3. Note how easy it is to score on the feet vs on the ground and consider the additional penalty of takedowns and control time not being relevant

[MacGowan]

Re: Scoring Bias

How about making TDs easier, and making grappling strikes do more damage.

[Boiler569]

Re: Scoring Bias

Def. agree that ground control; transitions; and GnP need to be worth more in the judge's eyes.

Yes I know, DAMAGE is most important, and it should be.

But I've had fights where the damage was almost identical --- striking stats were nearly identical ---- could have been a split decision either way in that regard -----

except I was also 4/8 on takedowns with 5+ minutes of control time over 3 rounds, and opponent had no TDs or control time, only a couple successful escapes/stand-ups.


I end up losing 29/28 on all 3 cards

Yea Yea don't leave it to the judges

But it really seems that takedowns & control time have very little impact on the scoring, would love to see some 10/8 grappling rounds or other ideas come to fruition as well

[Poulpy]

Re: Scoring Bias

The problem is in real fight, guys do a lot of damage from guard or half guard.
See struve face with only few short punch..

In UFC you can only land baby punches who do what.. 1 or 2 pts of damage ? vs 50 for stand up strike..

[Thetruth11]

Re: Scoring Bias

The problem is the string and grappling stamina system

Sent from my SM-G920T using Operation Sports mobile app

[RomeroXVII]

Re: Scoring Bias

Round scoring is biased in favor of striking currently. There is very little if any points scored for takedowns and controlled time and damage is the most important thing to look at. The problem with this is that it's much easier to land damage on the feet vs on the ground and it's still not easy to take the fight there. Two players of equal skill level on the ground can likely stall and cause a standup before any significant damage occurs. There are so many facets of this game where grappling is made to be insignificant by comparison to striking and it has only changed slightly since the first patch.


If the scoring is meant to reflect the new rules where damage is more important, it should also include 10-8 grappling rounds. Yes, I'm talking about the rounds where your opponent gets 4 minutes of control time and outlands you 50 strikes to 3. That's a 10-8 round and it should be in this game. Can we also make control time and takedowns less pointless for scoring? If you're landing 3-4 takedowns in a round and you get several minutes of control time it should amount to something


To sum it up:

1. 10-8 Grappling rounds

2. Make takedowns and control time more significant scoring factors, as of now they seem useless and people wise to the scoring can attest to this

3. Note how easy it is to score on the feet vs on the ground and consider the additional penalty of takedowns and control time not being relevant

On top of that, if your opponent stages a comeback in the 3rd and manages to make it a 10-8 round despite you winning the first two rounds, they will win the fight instead of there being a draw.

[RomeroXVII]

Re: Scoring Bias

The problem is in real fight, guys do a lot of damage from guard or half guard.
See struve face with only few short punch..

In UFC you can only land baby punches who do what.. 1 or 2 pts of damage ? vs 50 for stand up strike..

Elbows do a great amount of damage in half guard, I love it.

[Poulpy]

Re: Scoring Bias

I dont think a Guy can take 3 or 4 elbow like we see in the game without being finished.

For now, only back mount flat is really good for finish but only because your opponent is frozen.

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Scoring Bias

I feel ya.

But I've read that this is in line with the new scoring system. So, you might want to anticipate that counter argument.

[Phillyboi207]

Re: Scoring Bias

I feel ya.

But I've read that this is in line with the new scoring system. So, you might want to anticipate that counter argument.

Damage being most important is

Damage, duration, dominance are all supposed to be considered

If damage is roughly equal you would look at the next 2.

You can also have 10-8 rounds without damage as long there is duration and dominance

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Scoring Bias

Damage being most important is

Damage, duration, dominance are all supposed to be considered

If damage is roughly equal you would look at the next 2.

You can also have 10-8 rounds without damage as long there is duration and dominance

Now spam this to Skynet.

[MacGowan]

Re: Scoring Bias

If damage is roughly equal you would look at the next 2.

But I don't think there's any "roughly" in the game. Either someone won the round on damage, or the damage has to be EXACTLY equal for it to go to duration and dominance

[Skynet]

Re: Scoring Bias

But I don't think there's any "roughly" in the game. Either someone won the round on damage, or the damage has to be EXACTLY equal for it to go to duration and dominance

There is a 'roughly'.

[MacGowan]

Re: Scoring Bias

I'm glad to hear that.

[Nugget7211]

Re: Scoring Bias

Damage being most important is

Damage, duration, dominance are all supposed to be considered

If damage is roughly equal you would look at the next 2.

You can also have 10-8 rounds without damage as long there is duration and dominance

You only look at the next criteria if the previous is "100% even/equal" (the criteria uses equal and even interchangeably)

http://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/juding_criteriascoring_rev0816.pdf

Duration and dominance only appear in the language for deciding between 10-9s and 10-8s, you still have to win the round on the actual criteria which are laid out on the first page of that document.

Also, just in case people are still looking at them, the criteria on UFC.com are 6-7 years out of date and are basically irrelevant to scoring fights today.