M
member 603
Guest
Any stories of how you've won or lost a match because of them?
1
1031
Guest
I was in a tournament in Poznan many many years ago and my opponent, who was very good, was playing the whole "I'll just try to look busy and wait to counter." It was frustrating because he was physically bigger and was allowed to use this strategy on the feet. No passivity calls existed so he could just back peddle and evade. Finally, at the end of regulation, we were told to go to our knees and continue for 3 minutes- well when your mobility against a larger opponent is removed, that's a fucking disadvantage to say the least. Anyhow, he had something like side control for a couple seconds before I worked him back up but in the end that was enough to award him the win.
I understand that based on the criteria (position) he deserved the victory but I believe how points are attributed sometimes show a lack of understanding on the part of the judges.....but that was quite a while ago and things change.
I understand that based on the criteria (position) he deserved the victory but I believe how points are attributed sometimes show a lack of understanding on the part of the judges.....but that was quite a while ago and things change.
M
member 603
Guest
I get them for near subs and take downs, but I don't always agree with them for sweep attempts (which is where usually the biggest controversial calls are IMO). Near guard passing advantages are 50/50 calls, I've seen them awarded where I'm in clear cut agreement, and others that til this day I'm still questioning
I lost a match a few years ago because the guard player made a piss poor armlock attempt which he got an advantage for, and I didn't get an advantage for the near guard pass where the only reason I didn't get the pass was that he crawled out of bounds as quickly as he could. I'm not necessarily for or against them in spirit, but they tend to reward guard players and punish guard passers. Any combat based sport should be the opposite.
I lost a match once because I scooped a guy up in a single and hoisted him into the air, but he wrapped his arm around me to attempt a guillotine. I set him down slowly because it was Grapplers Quest and I was wary of their no spiking/slamming rule then calmly worked my way out of the guillotine. At some point he swept me, but I swept him back.
At the end of the match they raised his hand and I was like "wut?" Turned out I didn't get the TD points because he had me in a guillotine and so he won by advantage. Dumbest experience I ever paid $70 for.
At the end of the match they raised his hand and I was like "wut?" Turned out I didn't get the TD points because he had me in a guillotine and so he won by advantage. Dumbest experience I ever paid $70 for.
1
1031
Guest
In some way, I feel like the point scoring system has rewarded the people who know how to adapt their style to the system. But if everyone is being honest, sport bjj is based on a real martial art. Let's ask ourselves what the point of learning a martial art is. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble but the point is not to put yourself in a vulnerable position. The only way that pays off is if you risk it and clearly defeat your foe. If you do not finish him (or her) then you have not succeeded. At the SAME TIME if you simply take someone down and commit to the lay'n pray or other similar stalling tactics, that is also a failure by the standards of a martial art.
Tough questions and honest answers are needed.
Tough questions and honest answers are needed.
The match I recounted started out in a similar fashion. I was looking for a double, he lazily pulled guard as I was on my way in. Advantage for attempting a takedown? Of course not, this is sport BJJ.
You did not get takedown points? If he was moving backwards when he pulled guard, you should be awarded the takedown (in many rule-sets anyways)
M
member 603
Guest
How in the blue hell was that not awarded a take down? You initiated, he pulled guard, 2 points you.
In local tourneys you often don't get the most discerning refs, and BJJ culture definitely has a pro-guard playing culture. In my experience it has to be a very clean, clear cut takedown for someone to get their 2 points.
M
member 603
Guest
This is one of the basics I go over with my refs every show no matter what state I'm in. That is a basic IBJJF rule, next time go right to the head official or tournament director and let them know. And put tournaments like that on blast... The only way it gets better is by weeding out bullshit like this.
A standard rule is, a competitor must first make contact before pulling guard (they can't just sit, or it will be considered stalling). If a competitor initiates a takedown, and the opposing competitor tries to pull/jump guard, as long as the first competitor (initiating the take down) makes contact first, they'll be awarded take down points.
I already know the rules. I'm simply telling you the way it is, and a competitor lodging a complaint with a head official or director is only going to make your life as a competitor more difficult.
M
member 603
Guest
I hear you, but as a tournament director, it's my job to ensure that my tournament runs smoothly and that the rules are being followed. Remember this, without competitors, a tournament is nothing... Tournament owners need to understand that fact and respect competitor's feedback and complaints (and address and if possible, rectify the situation).
You pay your hard earned money to compete, you train hard to get ready, diet and cut weight.... All you expect is a schedule that runs on time and officials who know their rules.... If you feel bullied by a tournament that doesn't care about you as a competitor, do not support that tournament (there are always other options).
Those things don't happen at the highest levels of the sport, and you expect them from white belt divisions at local tourneys? LOL
Seriously though. Everyone does the best they can, and that's all I think is fair to ask of them. They know the rules or they wouldn't be reffing, but sometimes people make mistakes. A big problem in BJJ is that coaches and players don't show the referees the respect they should. I've seen too many refs bullied off of correct calls by big bad BJJ black belts to want to be part of that scene.
M
member 603
Guest
That again goes against the Tournament Director, they should be also protecting their officials as well as ensuring the competitors get a fair shake. I've done anywhere from 20-30 events a year for the past 3 years as a TD, and more as a coach/competitor... I can't tell you how many times I've dealt with that "coach" all across the nation.
I'm sorry that you've had those experiences, I know how discouraging that can be to competitors. I hope that you still get a chance to compete, and seriously, in a respectful way, hold the tournaments to a higher standard
Imo td points should just be done away with. I like the idea of points for mount and back mount and that's it. Otherwise, you have to win by sub. If there are no points or finishes scored in that system, then it's a draw for 0 points. Only the top point getters advance and submitters automatically advance. Finals would be sub only. Sort of similar to Rickson's rules at Budo Challenge or that tournament Travis Lutter won, ultimate submission showdown.
I think this would incentivize better wrestling, better sweeps and more finishes.
I think this would incentivize better wrestling, better sweeps and more finishes.
1
1031
Guest
Oddly enough, that makes total sense to me.
As long as combat sports are supposed to represent a fight, you're doing everyone a huge disservice not to reward a takedown and support the notion that the top position is the ideal place to be fighting from. I personally think takedowns should be more highly rewarded than they are. Outside of that, I'm warm to the idea.
It's more of a strike against the sanctioning body than the director of a specific tournament. It's been an issue all the way from local tournaments right up to the ADCC and Mundials.
Well, I think modern grappling is pretty far from real combat anyway these days, but by rewarding what would be the most dominant positions in a fight, you incentivize people to develop strong defense against those positions and strong attempts to get to those positions. Or alternately, you incentivize people to finish, which is the ultimate goal of combat.
I think rewarding micro-aspects of the positional progression is actually more damaging to combat realism. In reality, I doubt it was done to make the sport more real, but rather to avoid draws. As we see in MMA, not much usually happens in side control and guard or half guard can be neutral. Mount or back mount are usually the end unless someone holds on for dear life to force a break, but in real life, there is no break. Also a mount/back mount reward system encourages ippons rather than takedowns that just get one's butt on the floor.
I'd be interested to see this idea in practice.
Ability to score a takedown dictates where a fight takes place. That to me speaks to dominance as much as mount or back mount. Like I said, I think takedowns should be rewarded but other than that, I like your idea.
Agreed, but in that regard so does a guard pull. My idea isn't so much about rewarding where the fight takes place as rewarding ending it.
Honestly though, people are just too good at defense today, so in a time limited match, I could see only 1 or 2 competitors advancing to a final. Maybe these would be good rules for white and blue belts to incentivize building strong offense and defense and then as you went up the ranks you could add other point scoring.