Ask the Torch
ASK MMATORCH: Penick answers reader questions on illegal blows in MMA, Pat Cummins, UFC in Toronto, and open scoring
Feb 17, 2014 - 11:45:40 PM ASK MMATORCH: Penick answers reader questions on illegal blows in MMA, Pat Cummins, UFC in Toronto, and open scoring

DISCUSS ALL THIS IN OUR NEW MMATORCH FORUM

...OH, ONE MORE THING - PLEASE BOOKMARK US & VISIT DAILY!

Welcome to another edition of "Ask MMATorch," where Torch Editor Jamie Penick and Torch Columnist Rich Hansen answer reader questions on the world of MMA. If you have a question you'd like addressed by either of them, make sure to send it in to askmmatorch@gmail.com. The more questions we receive, the more frequently we can run this feature!


Jeff Writes: After watching Machida v Mousasi and doing some quick reading on Wiki about Mousasi's history, I noticed something that I don't believe has been pointed out by the MMA community and was hoping you could perhaps discuss or answer it.

Including the latest fight with Machida, Mousasi has now used an illegal upkick in three of his last three non-wins (2 losses/1 draw). I don't recall the other 2, but in the case of the Machida fight, it wasn't even close to being a mistake.

While there is discussion about that up kick and the lack on consistency in regards to Mario Yamasaki and the low blow point deduction earlier in the card, what about the consistency from actions from the UFC?

Taking into consideration other repeat offenders of other rule violations, (Josh Barnett with PEDs, Rousimar Palhares with not letting go of submissions, Anthony Johnson in missing weight), do you think it's time the UFC perhaps at least acknowledge, and warn in the case of Mousasi to prevent further illegal strikes?

Alternatively, do you think the occasional illegal strike is simply part of the sport, and something that should be overlooked?

MMATorch Editor Jamie Penick Answers: To start off, when it comes to the blow Mousasi landed on Saturday night, it shouldn't be illegal in the first place. As the fighter prone on your back with a limited amount of options, any blows you can throw from that spot are not going to be with as much force as you can provide from more advantageous positions, and thus shouldn't be punished as harshly as others.

Now onto the questions themselves. There isn't much the UFC can do on minor infractions. There are varying levels of egregiousness when it comes to illegal blows in a fight and infractions in and out of the cage. Hitting after the bell, holding onto submissions, taking performance enhancers, etc., those are all worse than low blows in the midst of the fight.

That's not to say there aren't things that can be improved. Eye pokes, for example, are as prevalent as they are today because of the lack of punishment they receive. And when fighters don't get the same recovery time as they do from low blows, it leads to a situation where fighters are poking eyes with impunity and feigning ignorance. A majority of those are intentional, as the fingers are always out-stretched, and punishments could be levied to curb them.

As for the general idea of infractions in a fight, there aren't a ton of options for the UFC to stop them, and the biggest issue right now is addressing them in a uniform manner. That was Yamasaki's biggest blunder on Saturday, and the fact that there is such a wide variance of reaction from referees to infractions in a fight leads to fighters not knowing when what they've done - intentionally or not - is going to cost them a very important point.

===

Derek Writes: If Pat Cummins were able to pull off an upset over Daniel Cormier, where would that put him in the division? What type of opponent would you see him getting next?

MMATorch Editor Jamie Penick Answers: Cummins isn't breaking into the top end of the division no matter what happens here. He might get another top end opponent if he pulls off the upset, but he'd be likely to get beat off a full camp if put in with another top ten opponent.

He's got talent, no question, and on short notice he's a danger to Cormier, but gleaning any information other than him taking advantage of the situation will be reading too much into a win.

It'd be like Charlie Brenneman's win over Rick Story, where Story has shown to be the better fighter, but was caught off guard on just 24 hours notice for that fight. There's a week to work with here, but the idea is the same.

If Cormier loses - and that's highly unlikely - it will be more due to the circumstances of the matchup and not a sign he's better than Cormier overall. I don't think the upset is happening, but if it does, don't read too much into it.

===

Joel W. Writes: With UFC 174 coming to my hometown of Vancouver I will be attending for sure, my question is what do you guys think will or could be the main event?

MMATorch Editor Jamie Penick Answers: Given the title fights on the schedule this spring already, and the UFC's history with June pay-per-views, don't hold your breath for a ton of star power here.

The most likely headliner right now is Renan Barao. He left UFC 169 relatively unscathed, and the UFC Bantamweight Championship is important enough to headline a show anywhere, and Barao's worth watching enough to get that slot.

A wild card could be Ronda Rousey, depending on her fight with Sara McMann and how long she'll be filming the Entourage movie in March, but that's not as likely as a Barao title fight right now. It's all dependent on who the UFC can find as challengers, and whether or not they have someone in line by June 14.

===

Donald S. Writes: Obviously a hot topic in MMA has always been judges scoring. I was wondering if there is a reason fighters and fans can't get the round scores during the breaks? I believe this would motivate fighters in closely contested fights. Take Diaz vs. Condit for example. Diaz's corner told him he had almost every round. Had the actual scores been shown I believe after about the third round he would have seen he needed to step up the pace. Also with the Hendricks and GSP fight, had the scores been shown both fighters would have known that last round was going to determine the champion and most likely resulted in a more exciting final round for the fans. What are your thoughts?

MMATorch Editor Jamie Penick Answers: There are certainly arguments for and against open scoring, and it's something that boxing has experimented with to mixed results. In a three round fight, open scoring could be a beneficial tool in letting fighters know where they stand, but there are negatives in place as well.

The biggest issue against open scoring is it just doesn't guarantee the desired result in a final round. A fighter might know they're down two rounds to none, but that doesn't always lead them to being the most aggressive in the final frame, or to leaving everything in the cage.

On the other side of that, you could find fighters who know they're up two rounds to none playing it safe in the last round to secure the win. Those are very real possibilities in open scoring, and all it does is save fighters from their corners.

The biggest issue right now on that front is really cornermen not giving their fighters adequate advice. Too many times we see guys in the corner telling a fighter they've won a round or that they're up two when that's clearly not the case, and we get them playing it safe when the fight is still up for grabs. That needs to be addressed more than open scoring, and again, there's no real evidence open scoring would bring better results at this stage.