[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyone else prefer it when fights go to a decision? My friends think I'm crazy for thinking this way.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF... did you see UFC 59? It went to decision and one judge scored it 30-27 Ortiz over Griffen. I quote Dana White, that they "should never be allowed to score a fight again".

Without a decision, you know damn well who won the fight. Close fights are fine, as long as someone gets KTFO by the end.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah they definitely have to work on their scoring system coz the winner doesn't seem the one who does the most damage or walks away the most energetic.

But,
"you have to remember that in the eyes of the UFC judges, takedowns are much more valuable than sprawls or submission attempts. A perfect example of this is a decision won by Matt Hughes over Renato Verissimo. Verissimo was dominating Hughes the entire fight throwing up submission after submission, but Hughes landed several takedowns and was in top position the whole time. Hughes scored a 30-27 unanimous decision." - MMAfighting.com

So the judges score according to the criteria they are given, thus the criteria has to be changed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would prefer it if all matches were 5 rounds so that endurance is a bigger factor and fewer decisions. If someone can survive a barage from an agressive opponent, they should have the opportunity to submit them later.