Point MMA

[skribs]

As some of you may know from other posts I've made on the subject, I'm planning on opening a TKD school soon and integrating some of my BJJ training into the TKD classes. I like sparring in TKD and BJJ because they are arts where concussions are generally avoided by the rules, compared to arts where a desirable win condition is a KO, such as Muay Thai or MMA. However, I do like the idea of MMA combining striking and grappling, even if I don't like the idea of concussions.

My BJJ/Muay Thai/MMA gym has recently had our Muay Thai fighters sign up for the new MDL (Muay thai Development League) which is a point-fighting variation on Muay Thai. So I'm toying with the idea of creating a sparring ruleset that would utilize both striking and grappling (like MMA), but would focus more on points and avoid concussions in the striking phase (like TKD). The idea is to create something that might work for in-house tournaments, and if that is successful to open the tournaments to the local community.

There's one big issue that I have. If I take out KOs (and likely TKOs) as a win condition, then does that give grappling (where you can win by submission) an unfair advantage? This is something that may simply take some experimentation and lessons learned to get right.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Something like this? https://www.usjjf.org/uploads/5/2/4/8/52481119/usjjf_competition_rules_15_may_2021.pdf

 

[J. Pickard]

there are already point MMA rulesets. My school runs a youth point MMA program under the IMMAF and USFL rulesets. There is also a point MMA ruleset for the ISKA. The fun part about it is that the training is pretty much identical to MMA training, but the competition has a much lower risk of severe injury. All the fun with like 10% of the risk. One of the ways certain categories of Point MMA get around a submission being an automatic win is the advantage rule; if you get a submission, then you don't win you get advantage. If your opponent knocks the wind out of you and you are hunched over for the standing count (TKO) then you lose advantage and the results go by points. If your opponent submits you then you lose advantage and the winner is decided by points. If time runs out and you have advantage, then points don't matter and you automatically win. If you have advantage then land another submission, the round ends and you win. Depending on age and if its class A, B, or C rules, it's either one long round or 2 shorter rounds done in a bracket just like a karate or TKD tournament.

 

[skribs]

Something like this? https://www.usjjf.org/uploads/5/2/4/8/52481119/usjjf_competition_rules_15_may_2021.pdf

That is interesting. I was thinking 2 phases with 3 tiers of points, instead of 3 phases with 2 tiers of points. In TKD tournaments, it's typically 1 point for punches that have a significant effect, 1 point for body kicks, +1 point if the kick is to the head, +1 point for spinning kicks, for a total of 3 points on a spinning head kick. (Or some variation based on that theme). BJJ is similar with a 3-tier point system, the first tier (2 points) for take-down, sweep, or knee-on-belly, the second tier (3 points) for guard pass, the 3rd tier (4 points) for dominant submissions.

Adult black belts in TKD can usually go for a KO, which gives a non-point win condition, similar to a tap in BJJ.

This ruleset though is 3 phases, which means you can get a win in one phase without it being the determination of the fight. I like that. I'm not sure I like it for a TKD school that a single kick is enough to win the phase. But I can take the general idea and run with it.

 

[skribs]

there are already point MMA rulesets. My school runs a youth point MMA program under the IMMAF and USFL rulesets. There is also a point MMA ruleset for the ISKA. The fun part about it is that the training is pretty much identical to MMA training, but the competition has a much lower risk of severe injury. All the fun with like 10% of the risk. One of the ways certain categories of Point MMA get around a submission being an automatic win is the advantage rule; if you get a submission, then you don't win you get advantage. If your opponent knocks the wind out of you and you are hunched over for the standing count (TKO) then you lose advantage and the results go by points. If your opponent submits you then you lose advantage and the winner is decided by points. If time runs out and you have advantage, then points don't matter and you automatically win. If you have advantage then land another submission, the round ends and you win. Depending on age and if its class A, B, or C rules, it's either one long round or 2 shorter rounds done in a bracket just like a karate or TKD tournament.

It's the opposite of advantages in BJJ, lol. In BJJ, points are generally awarded when you score a technique and then secure the position for 3 seconds. For example, if Tony took me down and held me down for 3 seconds, he'd get the points. But an advantage is when you perform the technique, but don't get the points (or submission). For example, if Tony had me dead to rights in an armbar and decided, "nah, I'll get him with another submission later", or if he took me down and thought, "that was too easy, I'll let him get back up", then he'd get an advantage.

In BJJ if your opponent taps, you win. If there's no tap, it goes to points. If there's a tie on points, it goes to advantages and penalties, and if those are even then the ref just decides.

I'll have to look up the rules for those federations.

The ideas I had were to make it so that a tap is a significant advantage, but not necessarily a win. However, not to use it in a way to game the system. For example, if it would grant you 5 points, but reset the match on the feet, I didn't want there to be a reason for someone to just hold a dominant position for the entire round and wait to submit at the end.

Here's the ideas I had, which are similar to the ideas presented so far in this thread:

1. Multiple short rounds instead of one long round, victory is per-round and you go for a Bo3 or Bo5. Taps are harder to get in short rounds, and it means a single tap isn't going to win the match, even if it wins the round. This is similar to the USJJF phase system, although it's different in execution.
2. Somewhat apply the "golden snitch" rule from Harry Potter. In that series, collecting the golden snitch was worth 15x the points as a normal score and ended the match. There were times in the series where it was worthwhile to wait until you had enough points to win the league and not just the match, and other points where even catching the golden snitch failed to win the match. My execution would be to have a tap give a large number of points (let's say 5). Then, if the points put the scorer in the lead, they win the match. If the points leads to a tie or they are still behind, it resets on the feet. That way, there would be encouragement to get the tap both if you're ahead or behind, but there isn't a reason to just hold out if you're <4 points behind, tied, or ahead and you don't want to risk getting scored on in the standup. I think this is similar to your post about the advantages, although again it's different in execution.