ABC Adopts Overhaul to MMA’s Unified Rules

Posted: August 2, 2016 in Uncategorized

Further Update August 3, 2016 – Today the ABC unanimously agreed to aim for January 1, 2017 as the target date for each commission to get these new rules in force

________________________________

Update – The rules voted on were revised at the last minute and replaced the word “damage” to “impact” in the revised judging criteria.

The full rule-set went to vote and passed unanimously with the exception of New Jersey objecting and Tennessee abstaining.  For those interested I have obtained a copy of an e-mail from Nick Lembo detailing New Jersey’s opposition to the rules

Nick Lembo New Jersey Objections to Unified Rule Changes

It is worth noting that this near unanimous vote in and of itself does nothing to how MMA is regulated.  The ABC’s position is little more than a political statement.  It is up to each individual Athletic Commission to overhaul their regulations to adopt these changes.

Given New Jersey’s strong opposition it is unlikely they will be adopting these.  Of note, my home Province, British Columbia, by Regulation automatically follows New Jersey’s lead so BC will need to expressly overhaul their regulations, just as every other State and Province, should they choose to adopt these changes.

___________________________

Today the Association of Boxing Commissions is voting on several changes to the Unified Rules of MMA.

The changes include an overhaul of judging criteria (detailed here) along with the below changes.  I apologize for the sideways photo.

I will update this article once the votes are in.

rule changes one

rule changes 2

 

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Martin says:

    I have three questions regarding the ABC’s unified rules of MMA.

    1) How do these changes to the ABC’s unified rules affect UFC’s own rules? On the UFC’s website, they have a “rules and regulations” section. My understanding is that the UFC adopts the ABC’s Unified Rules, but I could be wrong here.

    2) Suppose there is a UFC event held in New Jersey and the New Jersey’s State Athletic Commission doesn’t adopt the new definition of a “grounded opponent”. If the UFC decides to hold an event in New Jersey, does the New Jersey State Athletic Commission’s rules trump the UFC’s own rules? My understanding is that each individual state athletic commission’s rules dictate the judging and scoring of MMA bouts in their home state regardless of what the UFC’s own rules are.

    2a) If I’m correct that each state athletic commission can dictate its own rules and trump UFC’s own rules, then what’s the point of the UFC having its own rules?

    I apologize if any of my questions are confusing.

    • EMagraken says:

      Thank you for your question.

      You are correct that the UFC’s own rules are not binding in any way. Whatever jurisdiction they are competing in they need to follow the rules of that governing athletic commission.

      When the UFC is hosting an event in a jurisdiction with no athletic commission then they, by default, adopt the rules of the Nevada State athletic commission.

      I hope this answers your questions. If you have any further questions please don’t hesitate to contact me.

  2. […] made its objections known to certain proposed changes, re-iterated and read verbatim the contents of an e-mail which was sent out earlier in the day. New Jersey objected to the inclusion of the word […]

  3. […] made its objections known to certain proposed changes, re-iterated and read verbatim the contents of an e-mail which was sent out earlier in the day. New Jersey objected to the inclusion of the word […]

  4. […] In August 2016 members of the Association of Boxing Commissions overwhelmingly voted in support to a…. The ABC aimed for a timeline for the new rules to come into force on January 1, 2017. […]

  5. […] Last year the vast majority of Association of Boxing Commissions and Combative Sports voted to overh…  A time-frame of January 1, 2017 was agreed upon to bring the changes in. The changes include an overhaul of MMA’s judging criteria, allowing heel strikes to the kidney, prohibiting reaching towards an opponents face with an open hand and, most importantly, redefining grounded fighter. […]

  6. […] the British Columbia Athletic Commission released a position paper confirming that all of the changes to the unified rules adopted by the ABC at the 2016 convention are not being […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s