# I know how to get rid of lay and pray



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

:thumb02:

1. Get rid of judges. They're useless, anyway.
2. Change the rules. The only way a person can win a fight is via: KO, TKO or sub.
3. If the fight goes the distance without a KO, TKO or sub, its ruled a draw.

This would encourage fighters to take risks and finish fights. It would also get rid of lay and pray, controversial wins on points, and bad decisions by judges.

.


----------



## Rauno (Nov 20, 2009)

I say no, point 3 in particular. Let's take the Fitch-GSP fight for example, it went to the distance but could you say it was a draw?


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

this idea assumes that fighters would stop LnPing if they thought it would end in a draw. you'd just have more fights going to draw. it definitely would end bad decisions though, lol. since there would be no decisions.


----------



## hixxy (Sep 7, 2007)

I think that is a ridiculous idea.. And im not even going to waste my energy typing why.


----------



## enceledus (Jul 8, 2007)

Finally someone has solved all of our problems. :sarcastic12:


----------



## WestCoastPoutin (Feb 27, 2007)

4) Watch boxing.


----------



## hixxy (Sep 7, 2007)

So with this theory, GSP v Hardy was a draw then? Does that mean he gets a rematch?


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

Trix said:


> :thumb02:
> 
> 1. Get rid of judges. They're useless, anyway.
> 2. Change the rules. The only way a person can win a fight is via: KO, TKO or sub.
> ...


That a smooth idea, I mean you would lose being sanctioned in the USA but I hear mexico has some good venues.


----------



## Couchwarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

Art of War already uses the rule you're suggesting. I've never watched any of their events or followed their statistics though, so I can't tell if it's a good idea or not.


----------



## TraMaI (Dec 10, 2007)

hixxy said:


> I think that is a ridiculous idea.. And im not even going to waste my energy typing why.


pretty much this.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

I definately agree this is a rediculous idea. This is basically a throwback to the old days when MMA made a bad reputation and almost died under John McCain. We don't need that.


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

Rauno said:


> I say no, point 3 in particular. Let's take the Fitch-GSP fight for example, it went to the distance but could you say it was a draw?





hixxy said:


> So with this theory, GSP v Hardy was a draw then? Does that mean he gets a rematch?


Fights under different rules aren't good examples.

-To move to a higher pay grade, fighters need to win fights. Its a big part of how long time UFC fighters have big salaries. They have contracts that increase their wages everytime they win.

-Fitch vs GSP and GSP vs Hardy would have gone down differently under different rules. But, even had those fights been declared 'draws' GSP would still be champ. There would be added pressure for the challenger to finish the fight to win the championship. 

-Its possible, these factors could contribute to fighters adopting different strategies and approaches to fighting. Instead of Bisping and Forrest throwing conservative arm punches and being content to win via points, a different rule system which emphasizes finishes could lead to them planting their feet more and throwing bombs. It could lead to more exciting fights and less conservatism and borish wrestling smotherthons.



HexRei said:


> this idea assumes that fighters would stop LnPing if they thought it would end in a draw. you'd just have more fights going to draw. it definitely would end bad decisions though, lol. since there would be no decisions.


The thing is LnP and strategies which allow people to win on points, wouldn't allow fighters to be successful anymore. Only fighters who were exciting and finished fights would get ahead. Its a risk & reward thing.



Couchwarrior said:


> Art of War already uses the rule you're suggesting. I've never watched any of their events or followed their statistics though, so I can't tell if it's a good idea or not.


Cool, thx for the info. I didn't realize someone was actually crazy enough to do it. I'll have to check it out.


----------



## Machida Karate (Nov 30, 2009)

This would create a millon more rematches... What a dumb idea


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Yeah, this is basically a throwback to the older days. This just isn't a good system. If nothing else get rid of lay and pray by making changes to the Unified Rules judging system.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Trix said:


> :thumb02:
> 
> 1. Get rid of judges. They're useless, anyway.
> 2. Change the rules. The only way a person can win a fight is via: KO, TKO or sub.
> ...


I think there are other ways that would help getting rid of lay and praying:

1. Educating the judges that being on top does not necessarily mean it's a dominant position. As long as the fighter is in its opponent guard it should be considered a neutral position as is done in Jiu Jitsu. Only if one of the fighters takes action (bottom - "real" submission attempt; top - "real" ground n pound) that fighting sequence should be counted in the respective fighter's favor.

2. Allow 12-6 elbows (maybe with the exception that the face is an additional forbidden target to the back of the head, spine, kidneys and groin). It's one of the rare striking tools that also works from the bottom, without them the fighter on the bottom practically cannot apply any functional striking. So it's the rules that make the bottom fighter weaker, not necessarily the position itself. Fighters wouldn't feel comfortable lay and praying if they get constantly hit by elbows and therefore be willing to work on their position.

3. Get rid of the 10 point must system (not only in particular to prevent lay and pray, but a better scoring system in general could maybe also help in this aspect)

4. Differentiate between "finish" victories (KO,TKO,Sub) and "decision" victories. That could be done in the pay, similar to FotN, KotN and SotN. Something like "decision win"=regular pay, "finish win"=double pay (the exact amount of additional pay can be debated of course). In contrast to the FotN, KotN and SotN bonusses the fighter would know that he definitely gets more reward if he successfully takes more risk whereas with the other bonusses he doesn't know whether taking more risk would pay out even if he made a finish. But it could also play a role in the fighter's record and ranking.


----------



## Dr Gonzo (May 27, 2010)

Voiceless said:


> I think there are other ways that would help getting rid of lay and praying:
> 
> 1. Educating the judges that being on top does not necessarily mean it's a dominant position. As long as the fighter is in its opponent guard it should be considered a neutral position as is done in Jiu Jitsu. Only if one of the fighters takes action (bottom - "real" submission attempt; top - "real" ground n pound) that fighting sequence should be counted in the respective fighter's favor.
> 
> ...


Muuuuuch better idea than the other one. MMA needs to evolve. Not regress.


----------



## Lay'n'PrayNINJA (May 14, 2011)

Voiceless said:


> I think there are other ways that would help getting rid of lay and praying:
> 
> 1. Educating the judges that being on top does not necessarily mean it's a dominant position. As long as the fighter is in its opponent guard it should be considered a neutral position as is done in Jiu Jitsu. Only if one of the fighters takes action (bottom - "real" submission attempt; top - "real" ground n pound) that fighting sequence should be counted in the respective fighter's favor.
> 
> ...


Hi, new here. 1st post. Be gentle.

My understanding is that it is already allowed to throw any type of elbow off your back. You cannot technically throw from 12 to 6 off your back anyhow. Fighter regularly throw elbows off their back, that would be 12-6 if they were on top.

Think about a clock, and tell me how it is possible, off your back, to land a 12-6...?

Nice write up otherwise.


All that truly needs to change is to educate the judges better, as you said, AND remove the clear BIAS in the current scoring for the TD. When you let a wrastler like Jeff Blatnick write the scoring (for the most part), it is not shocking that the TD is scored MUCH more than it should be. A TD is nothing more than a forced change of level (where the fight takes place), yet fighters can "steal the round" by doing nothing with the TD.

Here is a great article for anyone interested in knowing exactly how biased the scoring really is:



> UFC 118 triggered another wave of fan outcry about the dominance of wrestling. Even the most elite of MMA purists would probably admit that watching Joe Lauzon devour Gabe Reudiger was more entertaining to behold than Gray Maynard muffling Kenny Florian. The sporting aspect of MMA rarely coalesces with business and entertainment, yet the triumvirate shares a symbiotic relationship and blossoms a variety of flavors for the consumer. Customers love options.
> 
> Pride FC was both adored and pilloried for “freakshow fights”; a hook the UFC has twice cast this year with Kimbo Slice and James Toney. Genki Sudo was celebrated for his creative individuality outside of the ring just as much as within it. Commanding 24-3 lightweight Antonio McKee, flawless since 2003 despite a soporific 25% finishing percentage, has prophesied retirement if he's unable to finish upcoming foe Luciano Azevedo.
> 
> ...


http://thegarv.com/Wrestling-Dominance-In-the-Cage-In-the-Rules.html

Cheers!


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Lay'n'PrayNINJA said:


> Hi, new here. 1st post. Be gentle.
> 
> My understanding is that it is already allowed to throw any type of elbow off your back. You cannot technically throw from 12 to 6 off your back anyhow. Fighter regularly throw elbows off their back, that would be 12-6 if they were on top.
> 
> Think about a clock, and tell me how it is possible, off your back, to land a 12-6...?


The clock image is not meant as an absolute orientation (ceiling to floor), but as a relative orientation from the fighter's perspective. The imaginary clock is not stationary in the building, but fixed to the fighter's body and thereby moves the 12-6 orientation according to the fighter's position. So for a fighter that would mean raising the elbow besides his own head (12) and from there pulling it down parallel to his own body to the point which is most far away from head in that motion (6). I guess it's meant to prevent downward elbow strikes that hit with the point of the elbow. Yes, fighters do that sometimes, but they also usually get warned for so they try to change the starting point of the whole motion, so it's not a 12-6 strike anymore but something like a 10-5 strike, but that costs the strike quite some power and makes it less effective.


And welcome to the forum


----------



## Lay'n'PrayNINJA (May 14, 2011)

Voiceless said:


> The clock image is not meant as an absolute orientation (ceiling to floor), but as a relative orientation from the fighter's perspective. The imaginary clock is not stationary in the building, but fixed to the fighter's body and thereby moves the 12-6 orientation according to the fighter's position. So for a fighter that would mean raising the elbow besides his own head (12) and from there pulling it down parallel to his own body to the point which is most far away from head in that motion (6). I guess it's meant to prevent downward elbow strikes that hit with the point of the elbow. Yes, fighters do that sometimes, but they also usually get warned for so they try to change the starting point of the whole motion, so it's not a 12-6 strike anymore but something like a 10-5 strike, but that costs the strike quite some power and makes it less effective.
> 
> 
> And welcome to the forum


Well, that's a nice thought, but that is not how the Unified Rules states the foul:

http://elitemmareferees.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=50&Itemid=63



> 13: 46-24A.15 Fouls
> 
> (a) The following are fouls and will result in penalties if committed:
> 1. Butting with the head;
> ...


Since there is no way to throw a "downward" elbow off your back, you will never see someone penalized for it. The rule doesn't clearly state what "downward" actually means, but there are dozens of examples of fighters throwing elbows, with the point coming down from by their head, that have never been called a foul. 

Goldie has even made a comment about how he thought that was a 12-6 elbow, and Rogan has corrected him saying that it needs to come from above (12) to below (6), and that you cannot do that off your back.

:thumb02:


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

^^^those rules are not the entirety, they are the simplied version.

http://www.ultimate-fighter.ca/Forum/viewtopic.php?id=25431

The Unified Rules used by Nevada lists 31 fouls. â€œStriking downward using the point of the elbowâ€ is listed as number 10, but doesnâ€™t mean exactly what it says.

Taken from the Nevada State Athletic Commission website, hereâ€™s the official wording of the rule.

â€œNAC 467.7962 Acts constituting fouls. (NRS 467.030)

10. Striking downward using the point of the elbow. All elbow strikes are legal except for an elbow that is thrown in a downward trajectory (hand traveling from 12 oâ€™clock to 6 oâ€™clock). Any elbow thrown with an arc is a legal elbow. The point of the elbow may be used as striking instrument as well as the forearm or the tricep area of the arm.â€

In a February 2006 interview with MMAWeekly Radio, legendary referee â€œBigâ€ John McCarthy explained why the rule was made and the back history that led to itâ€™s initiation.

â€œWhat it was, was when the Unified Rules were put together they took all the organizations. You had the UFC, Pride. You had the IFC. You had Hook-N-Shoot at the time. There were various organizations that all met together in New Jersey. Larry Hazzard is the one that put it together so he could clarify his rules. Marc Ratner was on a phone line for it, and they ended up having everyone sit there and try to come together with what they could be happy with,â€ explained McCarthy.

â€œOne of the things that happed was there was an IFC show that happened before that meeting occurred. There were a couple of fights, and because New Jersey wasnâ€™t comfortable with Mixed Martial Arts at the time, there were a couple of fights that went on to change things as far as what they were going to permit and not permit,â€ added McCarthy.

â€œYou have all these different organizations, and you have all these people with what they want to be able to do, so itâ€™s tough to get people to agree on things. Finally, one of the things that was brought up is in one of the fights a fighter took another guyâ€™s back and tried to sink in a choke. He couldnâ€™t sink in the choke, so he started taking his hand and bringing it up and elbowing to the back of the guyâ€™s head and neck.

â€œThe doctor from New Jersey had a conniption about it. He said I will never ever pass something that allows that type of strike. That could be life threatening, and he started going into his thing, and so the one elbow they took out was that elbow, that type of position. The way that they wrote it up, you could interpret it a ton of ways, but the true position they were talking about was the hand coming up to twelve oâ€™clock to six oâ€™clock.â€


----------



## Lay'n'PrayNINJA (May 14, 2011)

HexRei said:


> ^^^those rules are not the entirety, they are the simplied version.
> 
> http://www.ultimate-fighter.ca/Forum/viewtopic.php?id=25431
> 
> ...


This still only references the clock being 12-6, and the rules clearly state that using the point of the elbow IS legal. Knowing that, and using those words literraly, there is no way to land a 12-6 off your back.

Again there have been elbows thrown from the back that WOULD be 12-6 if they were on top starting towards the ceiling, and coming straight down, that were LEGAL and not penalized/punished in many many fights.

Take a look at the part I highlighted, you can see what Big John says alligns with the point I am making.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

I didn't say it was possible to throw a 12-6 frm your back. You'd have to have broken your arm or have an extra joint or something to throw a downward/12-6 from your back. I was just pointing out that those rules aren't the full story.



> Striking downward using the point of the elbow. All elbow strikes are legal except for an elbow that is thrown in a downward trajectory (hand traveling from 12 oâ€™clock to 6 oâ€™clock). Any elbow thrown with an arc is a legal elbow. The point of the elbow may be used as striking instrument as well as the forearm or the tricep area of the arm.â€


----------



## Lay'n'PrayNINJA (May 14, 2011)

HexRei said:


> I didn't say it was possible to throw a 12-6 frm your back. You'd have to have broken your arm or have an extra joint or something to throw a downward/12-6 from your back. I was just pointing out that those rules aren't the full story.


Coolio. No worries. Thanks for the full rules....:thumb02:

I couldn't access the NSAC from work for some stupid reason.


----------



## UKMMAGURU (Nov 15, 2009)

The simplest way would be to encourage the Referees to stand up LNP more often and possible penalise persistent LNP.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Lay and pray is penalized in Japan. When it comes to the Unified Rules I think the only thing to do is encourage refs to stand fighters up. I don't think lay and pray should be penalized.


----------

