FightMetric Questions
What exactly does the FightMetric measure?
The FightMetric is a comprehensive score that measures a fighter’s total effectiveness in a fight that goes to a decision.
What do you mean by “effectiveness?”
The first principle of the FightMetric system is that the goal of every fighter is to end his or her fight. No one should come into a fight aiming for a decision, so a fight ending is the absolute desired effect. When a fight goes to a decision, neither fighter has produced the desired effect. The question then is, how well did the fighter use techniques that have proven effective in ending fights in the past?
Who cares what happened in past fights, isn’t every fight unique?
Every fight is dynamic, but that doesn’t mean it’s unique. The fact that a particular fighter may have won a fight by flying armbar does not change the fact that flying armbars are not a particularly effective way to end a fight, which is to say, very few fighters have been successful in ending fights with that technique.
What techniques does the FightMetric system track?
Strikes are tracked based on position (striking distance, clinch, ground), target (head, body, legs) and power (power strikes and jabs). Takedowns are tracked by power (regular takedowns and slams). Submissions are tracked in 10 categories that encompass the eight major MMA joint locks and chokes and two categories for miscellaneous locks/cranks and chokes. Guard passes are tracked as improvements both to and from guard, half-guard, side control, mount, and back control. Additional points are awarded for strikes that result in a knockdown and for strikes or submission attempts that cause visible damage. No points are awarded for purely defensive techniques.
How do you decide how much each technique is worth?
The fighters themselves determine the value of specific techniques. Values are tied directly to a database of fight endings. As an example, more fights have ended by kimura over the past few years than in the years preceding them. That being the case, kimuras have become a more effective technique in MMA and the value of kimura attempts has been recalculated accordingly.
Doesn’t this system favor (strikers/wrestlers/submission grapplers) over other styles?
The system favors those that work to end their fights. MMA has proven remarkably equitable to fighters of all styles. Nearly as many fights end by strikes as by submission and the gap between fights ending on the feet versus on the ground is not as wide as most would think. Therefore, the values determined by the historical data provide a level playing field to fighters of all disciplines.
Except for lay-and-pray fighters…
Exactly.
What about fights that end and don’t go to a decision?
Currently, the FightMetric algorithm is only able to provide accurate scores for fights that go to a decision. An equivalent system to measure fights that end is in the works. In the meantime, stats on strikes, accuracy, takedown and submission success rates, and guard passes can still be used to evaluate any MMA fight.
StrikeScore Questions
What do you mean by “Striking Distance?”
This is the name used for the usual stand-up fighting distance, known affectionately as toe-to-toe.
Why not measure the different kinds of strikes, like punches, kicks, elbows, and knees?
The data on that would be very interesting to have when scouting a fighter, but it wouldn’t shed any light on a fighter’s effectiveness in a specific fight. A high kick and a leg kick don’t accomplish the same goal, so lumping them together provides little useful information. That said, a knockout from a left high kick is worth the same as a knockout from a right hook. The common denominator in those cases is the target of the strikes, in both cases, the head.
How can you tell what is a power strike versus what is a jab?
In the clinch and on the ground it’s very easy. You can usually tell by the distance created between the fighters. Punches without distance rarely count as power shots. At striking distance the telltale signs are punch form. Uppercuts, for instance, are rarely thrown as jabs. In general, scoring errs on the side of caution and is judicious in counting strikes as power strikes unless it’s clear what the intent was.
How do you score strikes when one fighter is on the ground and the other is standing up?
Techniques are categorized by the location of the target, rather than the location of the fighter attempting the technique. So a fighter raining down punches while standing in his opponent’s guard is categorized as employing ground and pound, while a grounded fighter who knocks out his standing opponent with an upkick is considered to have gotten a knockout on the feet.
What is the purpose of measuring jabs in the clinch and on the ground, given that they will almost never end a fight themselves?
Scores for close-distance jabs are minimal, but become important when one fighter lands a distinctly higher volume of them than his opponent. In that case, the jabs can be seen as a way of measuring how much each fighter was “keeping busy.”
Why do you award extra points for knockdowns?
A knockdown is the single event that most frequently results in a fight ending. It is also a pretty good indicator of strike effectiveness.
GrappleScore Questions
If defense doesn’t win fights, why do you award points for getting out of positions like mount?
The system awards points for positional improvements that confer an advantage in winning the fight. If someone mounted gets back to guard, that doesn't need to be viewed as defensive. The positional change is an improvement that allows that fighter to be more effective in winning his fight.
Why don’t you award points for defending takedowns?
Defending a takedown is not a positional improvement. It is a technique used to maintain the current position. Keeping the fight on the feet may be more advantageous for the defending fighter, but he hasn’t put himself in a better position that he was in before.
Does a takedown into side control score more than a takedown into guard?
Yes. All takedowns are scored as if they are into guard, but a takedown into side control would score as an advance to side as well.
Why do you track clinch takedowns versus takedown shots?
They are scored exactly the same. The only reason they are tracked separately is to split techniques between striking distance and the clinch.
Damage Questions
Why do you award extra points for damage?
Like knockdowns, damage is a visible indicator of effectiveness. In addition, damage is an effective method of ending fights, either by doctor’s stoppage, or by negatively impacting the hurt fighter’s performance.
How do you award points for damage?
Damage is measured as light, moderate, or heavy. Each level of damage has a corresponding value that acts as a multiplier to augment a fighter’s StrikeScore (in the case of strikes) or GrappleScore (in the case of tight submissions). In this way, the number of points awarded for damage is variable, based on the fighter’s overall striking or grappling effectiveness. This rewards fighters who are the most effective and avoids overvaluing lucky shots that cause cuts.
How do you deal with the fact that some fighters are harder or easier to cut or knock down?
Damage and knockdowns are not a measure of effort, but rather of effectiveness. If a heavy strike that would knock down one opponent can’t floor a fighter with a great chin, then that strike was less effective against the hard-headed fighter.
General Questions
What is the point of all of this?
Having statistics will hopefully raise the level of discourse on MMA and grant it some more legitimacy. As a rule, sports are governed by numbers. It’s difficult to talk about a sport intelligently without any sort of numbers to inform discussion. Comparisons can be nothing but subjective until someone comes up with a way to quantify performance. MMA currently does not have any information past the simple win-loss columns.
Why now?
As a new sport, MMA has the unique opportunity to get its statistics right on the first try. As an example, it took 75 years before people starting analyzing baseball intelligently and created innovative, meaningful metrics. Because MMA has no statistics to date, it’s important to create the right ones from the start. To do otherwise would mean having to go back and re-watch every fight to track the really important things.
Is this supposed to be a replacement for the ten-point must system?
No, but it will hopefully lead to discussion about what a better MMA judging system might look like. The problem with current judging systems is that no one knows what techniques to value more than others. Perhaps the FightMetric system and its underlying data can inform that discussion.
So is this the final word on MMA scoring and statistics?
Not even close. FightMetric will be an evolving system, due to the recalculation of values as more data is acquired. In addition, the FightMetric system will continue to be tweaked to make it the most accurate statistical system MMA has to offer. The idea of putting it out right now is to start the dialogue, get people interested in measuring MMA performance in an intelligent fashion, and hopefully create something that really elevates the sport.
I see something that doesn’t make sense or could be improved.
That's very possible. The system was created neither by a fighter nor a statistician. It’s entirely possible that there are flaws that need to be corrected. If there’s something that seems off, please send your comments or critiques to us at info@fightmetric.com.
