I do not want this post to go into too much detail explaining why many people think 10 point is a bad system, we all know its flaws and every time we see a fight that results in the fighter winning rounds over having the most impact in a fight winning we all get annoyed and say on reddit how it needs to be changed to pride rules or whatever alternative and there are plenty of alternatives but ive been wondering just how realistic is it to think we could see such a rework of our current rule set?

All the commissions would have to agree on rewriting the rule set and the original writing of it back when Dana and Joe had hair was like getting blood from a stone getting these same people to redo it all when in their eyes the system works just fine just as it has in boxing for donkeys years doesnt seem achievable to me without a lot of fighter pressure and public pressure at these athletic commissions directly. But even then commissions dont give a fuck and many dont know what they are even doing in the first place.

So do you think we could see a significant rule set change within the next 5 years?

I needs a change as soon as possible. Its incredibly bad. You see fighters "winning" fights getting losses every event.

How about this: Only way to win a fight is KO, TKO or submission. Otherwise the fight doesn't count. No judges needed. That would light a fire under the asses of the fighters and stop all the boring wrestling humping ala Usman/Khabib that nobody wants to see anyways. Worked great for The Contender series.

It's not the system. Its the judges.
Fighters know they have to win rounds. Its always been up to the judges to measure quantity vs quality of strikes, octagon control, etc.
For excitement level tho, I like the idea of no finish, no decision.

It's the system. You can land 100 leg kicks with zero power, that do zero damage against a guy that lands a single takedown in the last minute of the round and elbows you into oblivion, and the guy that landed the 100 leg kicks will win the round. It's a fine system for boxing because it has established and fundamental guidelines about what scores what, what's considered effective offense and effective defense, and a massive history of amateur boxing through the ages to stake it's basis upon, whereas in MMA a lot of subjectivity and background knowledge (or lack of) that the judges possess is required.

I also disagree with the idea of "no finish, no decision". That works for jiujitsu, because no-one is going to get concussed in the first 15 seconds and then have to go another 15 minutes being smacked in the head, leading to almost definite brain damage later in life. The paramount concern should be fighter safety, not entertainment. Yeah, they know what they're getting into, but that doesn't mean we throw all ethical considerations out the window, especially when it's their job.

In my opinion, the fight should be judged as a whole. If at that point there is a draw, say Judge 1 rules for blue corner, Judge 2 rules for red corner, and Judge 3 rules for a draw, then it should go to a tiebreaking round-by-round judging scorecard that each judge submits at the end of each round. I also don't think having the scorecards live and available for each corner to see would be a terrible idea.

Personally I don't love the 10 point must system, but I haven't seen any really solid suggestions for another system, so I think we may be stuck with it however I think that it could be seriously improved with competent judges. You are always going to have some idiot judges and refs, but if they were actual MMA judges instead of boxing judges that understood the rules and had some training I think it would make the 10 point must system decent enough to keep around. I also think that 10-10 and 10-8 rounds should be way more common. A close fight (at least a high profile one) is going to end in a rematch 80% of the time any way and an immediate rematch half of the time. So draws wouldn't create any problems we don't have. I think if 10-8 rounds were more common AND scores were given to corners live that would lead to different plans, strategies, etc. while also giving corners a little more support for throwing the towel in. If they know they already have a 10-8 and their guy is getting his ass beat they would be way more likely to throw the towel in.

agree with everything here.

why aren't they using fighters who have recently retired from the sport to judge?

I didn't really mean that I would prefer no finish, no decision above all, I was mostly exaggerating in frustration.

But I do think that a finish should be worth more then a judges decision. Right now it is not. It's just a win like any other win.

How about 11 points for a KO, TKO or sub, or something similar that would work towards the same goal?

What irritates me the most though is when a guy that has the whole face bleeding and cant hardly walk wins because he was "on top" for three rounds while the other guy looks like he didnt take any damage. I usually imagine a street fight or a non regulated fight where the audience are the judges and think that guy didn't f***ing win...

Watching Roy Jones Jr. vs Antonio Tarver and they announce that they will "go to the official scorecards" after 4 rounds. They never do in the broadcast but I like the idea.

I would love something like that in MMA. Show the scorecards before the final round.

Yeah why not, I mean, any change at all is an improvement by now...