-
Registered Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Sep 2007
- Location
- New Jersey, USA
- Posts
- 927
- Points
- 7,251

Posted On:
4/07/2010 12:53pm

Style: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu--
The back of the head has been clarified and defined in the Unified Rules, but it's still pretty much a ref's judgment call to determine a deliberate foul as opposed to an accident caused by defender's head movement.
Kurt's throw against Camoes was not an illegal spiking. The spiking in the Unified Rules refers to piledrivers. Any arcing throw, and any slam as a submission defense, are legal maneuvers.
Throwing in the Towel is illegal as only the referee is permitted to stop the bout. If a fighter cannot continue, it is the ref's responsibility to end it.
--Joe -
All Out of Bubblegum
Achievements:- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 10,519
- Points
- 18,590



Posted On:
4/07/2010 1:03pm -
Registered Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Location
- Waterloo, Ontario
- Posts
- 188
- Points
- 305


Posted On:
4/07/2010 1:35pm -
12th level logic wielder
Achievements:- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Vancouver, BC
- Posts
- 1,956
- Points
- 3,572


Posted On:
4/07/2010 2:35pm
Style: BJJ, judo, rapier--
There was an extensive discussion about downward elbows, what, a couple of months ago? Unfortunately I can’t find it at the moment, but if your search-fu (or available time) is greater than mine, digging through the archives might be productive.
[ petterhaggholm.net | blog | essays ]
[ self defence: general thoughts | bjj: “don’t go to the ground”? ]
“The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data.” -
Registered Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 606
- Points
- 773



Posted On:
4/07/2010 2:42pm
Style: mma--
Thank you for the clarification. Pile drivers and other techniques designed to intentionally spike the head makes sense.
I'm not sure either. I saw John "Bones" Jones get DQ'ed in a match that went on his record as a no-contest against I think Matt Hammill. I'm not sure if it applies to standup fighting at all (ie, a downward arcing elbow to the temple or cheekbone).
I think what Joe Rogan said during that match was it was put in place in order to appease some politicians in some stat that were concerned because they had seen a karate ice breaking demonstration. Ironic thing is that an arcing elbow is likely to be no less hard. -
STOP POSTING!
Achievements:- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- New Zealand
- Posts
- 8,100
- Points
- 12,535


Posted On:
4/07/2010 2:53pm -
Registered Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Ontario
- Posts
- 606
- Points
- 773



Posted On:
4/07/2010 2:55pm -
Registered Member
Achievements:- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- Memphis, TN
- Posts
- 806
- Points
- 3,040


Posted On:
4/07/2010 3:51pm
Style: Muay Thai--
I think that was the fight everyone was discussing. i remember some explanations against downward elbows because of strikes to the kidneys etc., plus it's considered more dangerous (some **** about the added force of gravity, IIRC). I don't believe that (gravity adding XS speed), but some of the arguments about damage limitation made sense.
I think the point was that sometimes it would be OK, sometimes it's too dangerous, but it's hard to legislate for a "sometimes" move (although knees etc. they do...)
**** that's incoherent. -
POWERRR!
Achievements:- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- England
- Posts
- 2,744
- Points
- 293



Posted On:
4/07/2010 5:32pm



Reply With Quote
















Registered Member
Posted On:
4/07/2010 12:41pm
Style: mma
UFC Rules questions...