What would you change/fix if you could? My post is about rules and judging criteria, but feel free to talk about whatever you think would make things better. - - - - - added to post - - - - - PRIDE rules + elbows would be the absolute shit, imo. That's how I would make it if I could. Although I might keep round-by-round scoring (to make it less subjective/corruptible), I would just have the criteria be more damage/finish oriented 1, PRIDE style. Side note: 1 - technically the unified rules' judging criteria wouldn't even have to change to accomplish this. It would just take a minor shift in the interpretation of the word "effective" (i.e "effective striking" would mean who did more damage and thus came closer to finishing [knockdowns/stuns/significant strikes/volume/accuracy/etc.] while minimizing their own risk, "effective grappling" would favor the one threatening with more/closer submission attempts and/or dominating position IF it leads to damaging GnP or sub attempts, and "effective aggression" would go to the one who's offense accumulates in more damage/consistently comes closer to ending the fight [consistently cleaner/more significant strikes and/or consistently closer submission attempts] while minimizing their own risk. And for the sake of completeness, Octagon Control would be the one who dictates pace/decides where the fight takes place/controls range/etc [takedowns/takedown defense, footwork, ring generalship, etc.]). [HR][/HR] TL;DR - MMA/Combat sports exist to mimic real fights in a safer/more controlled environment. The real goal of a fight is to incapacitate your adversary. Point fighting serves no practical purpose. So it stands to reason that the scoring criteria should reflect the goal of the exercise (finishing), or the purpose is defeated.