ADCC point system kind sucks

I don't have a problem with points tournaments (although I prefer EBI rules). But what I don't like is what gets scored.

If you put a guy in a triangle for 90 seconds, his head is totally purple, his hand is poised to tap, but he escapes at the last moment, you score nothing. If you pass a guy's guard while he's trying to heelhook you, 2 points?

Positional points but no submission attempt points is what doesn't work. If you are going to give points for position you need to give points for a locked in submission. And you also need to award points for ALL dominant positions. Points for a truck, points for a crucifix.

I understand the theory behind points, and I don't think it's fundamentally problematic. It's the implementation of the points that's totally fucked.

And that no guard pulling rule is also pretty stupid if you ask me. This is an anti-stalling rule? I don't see people stalling by pulling guard in the first 5 minutes... guard is an inferior position, if you want into it, that should be totally fine. Most of the time someone pulling guard gets the action going.

I do like the rule where if someone is on their butt and you're standing, you cannot walk backward. That's a pretty sweet rule.

It is interesting watching the adaptation in style and strategies the competitors implement for the different competitions. You are right though it would be good to see points for dominant unorthodox positions and see how that changes the game, it may not work but it would be cool to see:-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Craig Murray

I don't have a problem with points tournaments (although I prefer EBI rules). But what I don't like is what gets scored.

If you put a guy in a triangle for 90 seconds, his head is totally purple, his hand is poised to tap, but he escapes at the last moment, you score nothing. If you pass a guy's guard while he's trying to heelhook you, 2 points?

Positional points but no submission attempt points is what doesn't work. If you are going to give points for position you need to give points for a locked in submission. And you also need to award points for ALL dominant positions. Points for a truck, points for a crucifix.

I understand the theory behind points, and I don't think it's fundamentally problematic. It's the implementation of the points that's totally fucked.

And that no guard pulling rule is also pretty stupid if you ask me. This is an anti-stalling rule? I don't see people stalling by pulling guard in the first 5 minutes... guard is an inferior position, if you want into it, that should be totally fine. Most of the time someone pulling guard gets the action going.

I do like the rule where if someone is on their butt and you're standing, you cannot walk backward. That's a pretty sweet rule.

---

The no guard pulling rule is stupid as fuck. But the it was a well intended rule in 1998. It used to be more of a mixed grappling competition and they wanted wrestling to be a big focus of it. There used to be a bigger mix of different grappling styles at ADCC in the days when it was actually in Abu Dhabi. But as things have evolved I agree that it doesn't make any sense anymore.

Implementing points for sub attempts is hard to do though. I agree it's a good idea. They did it at Rickson's Budo Challenge about 10 years ago. Same with the PSL that Eddie Bravo announced for. The problem is that some sub attempts are tight and some aren't and it's so subjective. You have really tight subs that don't always look tight, and tight looking subs that aren't doing shit. Tanquinho (that beat Eddie Cummings today) win the NoGi Worlds in 2012 on a no-arm triangle choke where he just used it to get a quick advantage point and JT was never actually in any danger.

Also some people are damn near impossible to tap with certain subs and someone could take advantage of that and lock them up just to get points for it.

ANY system can be gamed. I think awarding sub attempts with points could be dope but it would have to be done really carefully and by really well trained refs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Nall

The no guard pulling rule is stupid as fuck. But the it was a well intended rule in 1998. It used to be more of a mixed grappling competition and they wanted wrestling to be a big focus of it. There used to be a bigger mix of different grappling styles at ADCC in the days when it was actually in Abu Dhabi. But as things have evolved I agree that it doesn't make any sense anymore.

Implementing points for sub attempts is hard to do though. I agree it's a good idea. They did it at Rickson's Budo Challenge about 10 years ago. Same with the PSL that Eddie Bravo announced for. The problem is that some sub attempts are tight and some aren't and it's so subjective. You have really tight subs that don't always look tight, and tight looking subs that aren't doing shit. Tanquinho (that beat Eddie Cummings today) win the NoGi Worlds in 2012 on a no-arm triangle choke where he just used it to get a quick advantage point and JT was never actually in any danger.

Also some people are damn near impossible to tap with certain subs and someone could take advantage of that and lock them up just to get points for it.

ANY system can be gamed. I think awarding sub attempts with points could be dope but it would have to be done really carefully and by really well trained refs.

---

I think the idea with most rule sets is to take the Referee out of the equation. The rules can't be subject to the Referees discretion or opinion. There isn't anyway around that sometimes but giving points for sub attempts leaves it too much in the refs hands as to what is deamed a threat. If you don't do this then you'll have refs getting accused of favoritism and such.

EBI rules are the best sub grappling rules out there.

You are right though, when the ADCC rules were conceived the UFC was still pretty new and so ADCC was supposed to be the Grappling version of the UFC. Well.... The same thing has happened to ADCC that happened to the UFC. We went from a competition of style against style to everyone using the same style. I think we that happens it's time to freshen things up with some rule adjustments.

Yeah you guys both have great points. I can see the issues associated with ref judgment on what is a "locked in submission". At the same time, guys often win matches because of a couple guard passes, or a takedown. Is that any worse than a guy winning because of a submission attempt that wasn't actually that tight?

Rethinking it, I agree sub-attempt points might not really help that much. The philosophy does need to be, "take the ref and judges out of it". At the same time, EBI rules would not totally fix the issue either. Guys will still stall or game it into OT because they think they have a better chance that way. Still EBI is the best ruleset we have, by a large margin.

Eddie needs to befriend a billionaire who falls in love with grappling and wants to make EBi into a yearly event with 10 million in prizes and all weight classes (and women) represented. :)

It doesn't matter what rules you use... Someone will game them.

The ONLY bullet proof way is true no time limit submission only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff Baldwin

It doesn't matter what rules you use... Someone will game them.

The ONLY bullet proof way is true no time limit submission only.

---

Do you think this will ever happen Jeff? It would be great!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luke Noormets

Do you think this will ever happen Jeff? It would be great!

---

Not Jeff, but US Grappling already does this (first one was back in 2008) and it works great. They post the data for their matches on their website. Average match time works out to about 8 mins.

https://www.usgrappling.com/events/submission-only/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotReady

Not Jeff, but US Grappling already does this (first one was back in 2008) and it works great. They post the data for their matches on their website. Average match time works out to about 8 mins.

https://www.usgrappling.com/events/submission-only/

---

^^^^

This. My buddy, Andrew 'Goatfury' Smith, runs those tournaments. He has stats for every event. I'm pretty sure he told me the average match is 8 minutes. Yes, some matches have gone well over an hour but many of them are finished in under a minute as well. So, it all balances out in the end.... at least it has so far.

Naga gives points for Sub attempts so long as they are good attempts. Yes it is subjective, but I like the Naga point system the best as far as point systems go so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff Baldwin

I think the idea with most rule sets is to take the Referee out of the equation. The rules can't be subject to the Referees discretion or opinion. There isn't anyway around that sometimes but giving points for sub attempts leaves it too much in the refs hands as to what is deamed a threat. If you don't do this then you'll have refs getting accused of favoritism and such.

EBI rules are the best sub grappling rules out there.

You are right though, when the ADCC rules were conceived the UFC was still pretty new and so ADCC was supposed to be the Grappling version of the UFC. Well.... The same thing has happened to ADCC that happened to the UFC. We went from a competition of style against style to everyone using the same style. I think we that happens it's time to freshen things up with some rule adjustments.

---

I agree with all of that but a cool thing that I do like about ADCC is that the ref has no decision making power. I believe the judges at the table make all of the calls and the ref is only able to make a call based on what the judges say. the ref mostly serves as someone to start and stop the match sort of like Eddie at EBI.

Unless the ref is the one that decides stalling calls? I don't know how that works but they were very inconsistent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joey Wren

Naga gives points for Sub attempts so long as they are good attempts. Yes it is subjective, but I like the Naga point system the best as far as point systems go so far.

---

My problem with that is, whether its an advantage or 2 points, they are being given because an athlete has to react to the submission attempt, not necessarily that it was a near submission. How do you really gauge a near submission? If someone tries a bad footlock that was nowhere near causing any discomfort and you pull your foot out, should they be rewarded?

The last NAGA I was at seemed to have some good refs. They only awarded points for close submission attempts where the opponent was in danger. I saw some subs thrown up that never really had a chance that weren't awarded points, but yeah it can get murky depending on the refs.

What if the points at ADCC were given in the first half instead of the second? The guy ahead on points would want to stall in the second half but at least the other guy would be going all out for the Sub.

How long before the Shiek catches on the sub-only EBI overtime is the way to go ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joey Wren

The last NAGA I was at seemed to have some good refs. They only awarded points for close submission attempts where the opponent was in danger. I saw some subs thrown up that never really had a chance that weren't awarded points, but yeah it can get murky depending on the refs.

---

I guess I just don't like the idea of "almost" points. Imagine if the NFL gave you one point for getting in the red zone. You either score or you don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotReady

I guess I just don't like the idea of "almost" points. Imagine if the NFL gave you one point for getting in the red zone. You either score or you don't.

---

I get you. But at the same time, the goal is different. The football game isn't over because one team got a touchdown.

I would consider near submissions to be more similar to significant strikes in striking arts. The end goal of a boxing match is to get the KO. But if you don't get the KO, they reward you for significant strikes and tally up the score. They even give you 10-8 rounds for "almost" knock outs. I think that's a decent approach to sub only comps. Basically, who threw the most heat? Who had who in the most trouble? And this give incentive to be more submission aggressive.

Honestly, I respect all different kinds of rule sets because I get their philosophy. For entertainment purposes, sub only is still the best for sure. Some styles will fare better in points tourneys. Some fare better in sub only. It's all jiu jitsu. And I think that if you want to be the best, you should be able to adapt your game to every rule set.

And this is why Marcelo is a BJJ god. His style translates perfectly to all rule sets. He would be a killer in sub only. He was already a killer in points tourneys. And this is why Eddie's game + philosophy is so important because it highlights the importance of the kill and throws away the limitation of silly rules like no neck cranks and heel hooks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Nall

I agree with all of that but a cool thing that I do like about ADCC is that the ref has no decision making power. I believe the judges at the table make all of the calls and the ref is only able to make a call based on what the judges say. the ref mostly serves as someone to start and stop the match sort of like Eddie at EBI.

Unless the ref is the one that decides stalling calls? I don't know how that works but they were very inconsistent.

---

In Judo the center Referee is part of team of Referee's the others sit at a table ring side with a few monitors to view replays of certain techniques and can order the center Ref to give a score, subtract a score, change a score, etc.

I think it would be good if we could come up with a serious solution to ADCC's rules while still maintaining it's balance towards all Grappling styles.

I've been thinking that perhaps taking the EBI overtime rules and adding a 3rd position, similar to the old 'forced leg clinch' rules from Freestyle Wrestling where one gets to start in basically a single leg.

They can score from that position... or not

The other two positions you have to get the sub or they escape.

Or something along those lines.


Then we can create a Petition and send it to the powers that be at ADCC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jason Mallory

What if the points at ADCC were given in the first half instead of the second? The guy ahead on points would want to stall in the second half but at least the other guy would be going all out for the Sub.

How long before the Shiek catches on the sub-only EBI overtime is the way to go ?

---

Sadly the Shiekh isn't involved anymore, but I'm sure there's some governing body you could try to contact.

I'd post on their Facebook page and try to get as many people as you know to do the same