In MMA they say takedowns build up points?

but if I am a much greater striker but my opponent is a little better at take downs and I get myself back to my feet why doesn't that build up points. I mean that would be the better position for me right. maybe its just me but it seems the judges are a little biased to grappling based fighter then a striking based fighter

In MMA they say takedowns build up points?
The truth is....... you never know what the judges will do.





You could dominate striking, or getting lots of takedowns, and still lose the fight, because of the judges.
Reply:Unless you're landing strikes, no. You can't just say "he's a striker, therefore he wins on the feet." It's not the same as being controlled on the ground. If you just keep standing up from takedowns and not doing anything, 3 things will happen. 1: You'll lose the fight because your opponent is the aggressor. 2: The crowd will become the aggressor. 3: If the fight is a snoozer, you might not be invited back.
Reply:what are you talking about? striking gets plenty of points. you just have to land your hits and you get points. but you gotta understand that its alot easier to just throw a punch and hit the guy than to grab them and take em down. thats why. but if you land a big shot that makes the other guy see stars, youll get a lot of points for that. probably more points than a slam
Reply:Ah Haa grasshopper you have nearly reached enlightenment of the whole MMA illusion. The rules are designd that way. In true no rules open martial arts the bouts are often so short as to be too boring fot TV.
Reply:Usually you get marked on these catagories





stand up


takedowns


ground


aggression


damage





judges will actually be biased towards a striker because there style is more aggresive and damaging

dress shoes