Do MMA fighters coast to victory with open scoring? New study says no
In both bouts, three rounds were pretty easy to score while one was debatable. If Shevchenko and Sterling had known they were up 3-1, would they have fought differently and taken less risks? It could be a wise thing to do, but then again, professional fighters probably are who they are because they don't approach risk the same way as us mere mortals. And what would Grasso and Yan have done? Turned up the screws even more and hunted for a finish?
Advertisement
While science can't tell us with certainty how two specific people like Shevchenko and Sterling would behave if their fights had open scoring, it can shed light on whether fighters in general tend to systematically change their behavior when scores are known in real time.
Max Holloway is one of many high-profile MMA fighters who has long advocated for open scoring.
(Jeff Bottari via Getty Images)
The answer for fighters in the lead might be surprising — they don't tend to coast.
Being ahead in the last round doesn't statistically change fighter behavior with real-time scoring. It's the trailing fighters who change. They tend to shift away from takedowns and submission attempts — likely in pursuit of a knockout — and end up losing the final round even more often, according to my study in the Journal of Sports Analytics.
Advertisement
High-profile fights with controversial endings get people talking and often stir up open-scoring debates. But the benefits and drawbacks of revealing scores in real time would apply to multiple bouts on every event card when one fighter has the lead and is a round away from victory.
Research breakdown
Ever watched a fight with friends and the round winner was so obvious you didn't need to ask who they scored it for?
Well, judges have the same thoughts, or at least I did as a judge for amateur MMA shows in Los Angeles. Sitting cageside at Metroflex Gym and the Coliseum, I'd sometimes wonder how the other two judges scored a round; other times, it was abundantly clear. Those moments were the spark for the first scholarly study of open scoring in MMA.
Advertisement
The Kansas Athletic Commission authorized open scoring in 2020, and Colorado's commission followed suit in 2021, then they studied the effects with available data. The big concern from critics of the model is always the claim a fighter who knows he or she is up two points or more heading into the last round will tend to disengage more and cruise to victory. Kansas studied this using Invicta and LFA events and found the fighter in the lead wins the last round even more often with open scoring — 11-12% more, to be exact. That doesn't look like leading fighters disengaging, though Kansas couldn't examine their actual statistical behavior in those final rounds.
That's where UFC data comes into play, since they track a broad range of fighter performance statistics. Even though the promotion has never used open scoring, some fights are effectively openly scored to anyone with the smallest bit of fight acumen. Other fights have legitimate ambiguity entering the last round.
After formalizing that idea, filtering 3,646 UFC bouts over a seven-and-a-half year period, and accounting for the fact that fight data comes from the real world instead of an experiment, what was left was something similar to a randomized controlled trial, except this one studied open scoring in MMA rather than the effectiveness of a medicine.
Would Valentina Shevchenko have regained her title a year earlier with open scoring?
(Chris Unger via Getty Images)
The study focused on aspects of fighter performance related to the action and activity in a round (jabs, power strikes, knockdowns, damage, takedowns, submission attempts, and clinch and ground control), since promoters are the ones who ultimately decide whether to use open scoring if an athletic commission makes it available, and they aren't in the business of dull fights or lackluster endings.
Advertisement
Similar to Kansas, the study found fighters in the lead win the final round 10.4% more often with open scoring. And that increased win rate came entirely from the judges. Ahead fighters don't finish their opponents more often in the final round, they win it on the judges' scorecards. And there's zero evidence they disengage, coast or run away from the fight. This doesn't mean that no fighter would ever disengage in the last round. It means that fighters making decisions under the UFC's incentive structure don't show signs of systematically cruising or running away from action.
The fighter with the lead likely wins the last round more often because trailing fighters change their behavior when they know they only have five minutes left to steal a win.
Turns out Din Thomas was on the mark when he spoke to The Athletic on the topic five years ago. 'I do know this,' he said, 'If you've got a lead on me and you're trying to avoid fighting me, I'm coming after your ass. … If I'm fighting a guy, it's a three-round fight, he won two rounds and I'm going into the last round, and he tries to coast on me? I'm going after that motherf***er. You can't coast on a guy if the other guy's coming at you because he knows he's losing.'
The 'coming at you' documented in the study is the trailing fighter reducing their rate of takedown attempts by 38% in the last round and a 49% reduction in their submission attempt rate, meaning they're likely hunting a knockout finish. Other performance metrics such as their rates of jabs and power strikes don't change, but the way they throw those strikes could change in a manner not well captured by fight statistics. Think of the combinations they throw, setups, timing and then the openings they leave for counters.
Advertisement
The story that seems to emerge from the data is fighters who know they're about to lose look more for a knockout, and they don't tend to get it. On top of that, judges notice degradations in their striking or strategy, so they end up losing the last round more often.
After reviewing the study, Adam Roorbach, former executive director of the Kansas Athletic Commission — one of the driving forces for regulatory acceptance of open scoring — commented to Uncrowned: 'What this study shows is what we at the KAC theorized when we developed the open-scoring system. Fighters will continue to fight and not run when ahead. They are overwhelmingly in favor of utilizing open scoring and deserve to know the score of their fight.'
Max Holloway scoffs at the idea of coasting.
(Jeff Bottari via Getty Images)
Why is it open scoring so rare?
When The Athletic conducted its anonymous fighter survey in 2020, they found that 80% of fighters supported open scoring. Nothing stands out from the data in terms of putting fighters at additional risk. And logistically, if Kansas and Colorado can handle it, surely other commissions can as well.
Advertisement
Wading into decision-making processes inside athletic commissions is a tricky task, but what's clear and straightforward is there's no decision for promoters to make if state and tribal jurisdictions haven't approved real-time scoring as an option.
In the U.S., open scoring is potentially available in four states.
Kansas and Colorado have authorized it. Wyoming has had two bare-knuckle shows with open scoring and would also allow MMA promoters to use it, according to executive director Nick Meeker, but hasn't received a request yet. And New Mexico informed Uncrowned that open scoring 'would be decided on a case-by-case basis,' per communications director Andrea Brown.
The open-scoring system changes fights — just not in a way that would disappoint many fight fans.
We already know a Max Holloway will keep pressing with a surefire lead toward the end of a fight. Now there's statistical evidence about how numerous fighters within the UFC ecosystem generally behave when they know the score.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Has Jon Jones already ended his retirement?
This retirement decision by Jon Jones might be even shorter than his previous one. The former UFC heavyweight and light heavyweight champion claims he has re-entered into the drug testing policy. What has sparked this move by Jones? It would appear the recently announced UFC event that is expected to take place in Washington, D.C. from the White House in 2026. Advertisement "Fighting at the White House?" Jones posted on social media with an emoji of two wide-open eyes. MORE: President Donald Trump reveals UFC event at White House in 2026 He added "Just re-entered the testing pool, that lasted for about two weeks. Figured we'd keep everyone's options open." Jones, the heavyweight champion at the time, announced his retirement late last month. The promotion moved quickly to promote interim titleholder Tom Aspinall to the undisputed champion. President Donald Trump stated recently that he wants the UFC on the grounds of the White House for an event to celebrate America next year. Jones greeted Trump Octagon-side after defeating Stipe Miocic in his last match. Advertisement MORE UFC NEWS:


New York Post
6 hours ago
- New York Post
Emma Raducanu calls out Wimbledon for ‘disappointing' electronic line calling: ‘So wrong'
It's clear that Emma Raducanu was not happy about Wimbledon's electronic line calling on Friday. During her tightly contested defeat to top seed Aryna Sabalenka in the third round, the 22-year-old called out to the chair umpire over a line call, asking, 'You saw it out as well, right?' The controversial call, which Raducanu questioned, was a first serve by Sabalenka at 2-4, 15-0, which did appear to miss the line upon replay. 3 Emma Raducanu plays a backhand against Aryna Sabalenka on day five of Wimbledon 2025. Getty Images The serve ultimately led to Sabalenka going up 30-0 in a pivotal set during the match, helping her stage a comeback after going down early. 'That call was, like, for sure out,' Raducanu said in her press conference after the match. 'It's kind of disappointing, the tournament here, that the calls can be so wrong, but for the most part, they've been OK. 'It's just, like, I've had a few in my other matches, too, that have been very wrong. So yeah, I don't know. Hopefully, they can fix that.' Raducanu ultimately lost to Sabalenka 7-6, 6-4, and showed her frustration after the match. 3 Emma Raducanu against Aryna Sabalenka on day five of Wimbledon. Getty Images 'I don't think I've really had a loss like this in a long time, where I feel like I maybe had chances and didn't take them,' said Raducanu. 'I think usually I'm pretty good at converting.' 'I'll probably find it tough to sleep tonight,' she added. 'It's going to take me a few days to process. But at the same time, it really motivates me. 'It could be a good thing that I'm like, 'OK, I want to get straight back to work.' I want to solidify my game so that in the big moments I can back myself a little bit more.' 3 Emma Raducanu reacts against Aryna Sabalenka on day five of Wimbledon. Getty Images As for Sabalenka, she'll face off against Elise Mertens on Sunday in the round of 16.


New York Post
7 hours ago
- New York Post
Bill Belichick nearly made ex-Patriots star Stephon Gilmore cry in front of team
Bill Belichick is not afraid to rip a player a new one, and Stephon Gilmore was apparently no exception. Gilmore, 34, recalled a time when Belichick lashed out at him during a team meeting not long after the cornerback first arrived in New England in 2017. 'He killed me one day, bro. It was when I first got there,' the five-time Pro Bowler said during an appearance on The Money Down Podcast on Thursday. 'I was pressed down on the receiver. It was a bunch route. …And I got picked. Bro, he killed me the next meeting. Advertisement 3 Head coach Bill Belichick of the North Carolina Tar Heels coaches at Kenan Stadium on April 12, 2025 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Getty Images 'I almost cried, how he did me. I ain't going to lie to you. I went to the bathroom, like man, bro. I can tell you one thing: I ain't never got picked again after that.' Gilmore, who wound up spending four years with the Patriots, was named to two All-Pro teams and took home Defensive Player of the Year honors for 2019 during his tenure there. Advertisement 3 Stephon Gilmore gestures during the first half against the Philadelphia Eagles at Lincoln Financial Field on November 17, 2019 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Getty Images The South Carolina alum was also a member of New England's Super Bowl championship squad in 2018. Despite Belichick's apparent outburst toward Gilmore, the cornerback has always talked highly of the legendary coach, calling him the 'greatest' he's ever been around while criticizing the portrayal of him in the 'Dynasty' docuseries, which aired on Apple TV+ last year. 'Just watched The Dynasty. Bill was the greatest coach I've ever been around. Don't let that fool you. I'll never forget we were a predominantly man team during the 2018 season all the way up to the Super Bowl. When we played the Rams we switched to Zone,' Gilmore posted on X then. Advertisement 3 Stephon Gilmore warms up before the game against the Las Vegas Raiders at Gillette Stadium on September 27, 2020 in Foxborough, Massachusetts. Getty Images After spending this past season with the Vikings, Gilmore finds himself without a team in NFL free agency. Gilmore has made clear, however, that he hopes to be on a team for the upcoming season. Advertisement 'I wanna play this year. It's just gotta be the right situation…I'm not just going to sign anywhere, it gotta be the right situation,' Gilmore said during the podcast. 'I still love the game. I still can contribute. 'It just gotta be the right place.'