# Question about a UFC rule



## joblo (Mar 15, 2008)

Why is it illegal to punch to the back of the head but OK to slam them to the back of the head from 4 ft off the ground. IE Hughes vs Newton? Where's the reasoning behind that?


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 15, 2008)

Because rules are made to make someone happy and to confuse everybody else.


----------



## theletch1 (Mar 15, 2008)

Just a guess here... slamming someone from any distance allows the head to bounce or at the very least allows some movement for the head to rebound off the mat.  Punching someone while their head is on the mat actually pins the head between the hammer and anvil as it were and allows no movement to dissipate the energy.  'Course I could be completely off but that would be the logical reasoning for it.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2008)

I think that you have a valid point.  Anytime force is delivered to points on the back of the head, this can be particularly dangerous.  My guess is that they are trying to "limit" the number of ways force can be applied to this target.  Partial protection is better then none.


----------



## MattJ (Mar 15, 2008)

I think theletch1 is in the right area. And while the overall impact is greater in a slam, at least there is a better chance of landing more on the shoulders as opposed to right on the back of the skull.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2008)

Haven't seen that particular slam but usually when someones slammed it's the back that takes the impact as it would when break falling. Yhe person being slammed usially manages to let their body hit the canvas first then the head as I said though I haven't seen that fight so this is 'in general'.


----------



## PictonMA (Mar 15, 2008)

I would agree - when slamming someone to the ground it is the back / shoulders that is primarily taking the force - it is illegal in most MMA competitions to 'spike' an opponent on the head - which would be the intended target of punches to the back of the head.


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 17, 2008)

Here are all of the rules for the UFC:

http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=LearnUFC.Rules

In the example of the Newton vs. Hughes fight, Hughes slammed Newton on his back NOT on his head/neck area.  I think the rules were changed after this fight that occurred in Pride ( I could be wrong, I just don't remember that rule until after seeing this fight).





 
It's the second slam at about the 17 sec. mark of the clip.  It's the Fedor vs. Randleman fight.


----------



## Odin (Mar 17, 2008)

i know in the ufc you are not allowed to 'spike' someone ( pick them up and drop them on their head ) but slams are legal, the thing is usaully with a slam you do not intend to slam someone on thier head, it is infact their back that should take the damage, if you dont break your fall is it the slammers fault?

Ps 

In that Newton fight,its a difficult one to call since Matt Hughes passes out which causes him to drop newton on his head, its not intentional...and caused many arguments, since if Hughes was out first Newton should have won....Hughes did get a rematch though and battered Newton into submission so i guess its not in question anymore.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 17, 2008)

Really it is like what Upnorthkyosa said in that they are just trying to limit it.  Also they adopted the rule from boxing (ie. rabbit punching to the back of the head) to placate the regulators. (this rule came into effect after the UFC became regulated) 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





It should be noted that this has been hard for multiple competitors to adapt to after having free reign for so long.


----------



## SensibleManiac (Mar 17, 2008)

For reasons stated above like there is more chance of landing on your upper back as long as you aren't thrown purposely on your head.
The chances of causing serious injury by directly striking the back of the head especially with elbows are far greater than merely slamming an opponent where most of the impact will be absorbed by the upper torso, your head still can take a hard impact but shouldn't be the only thing hitting the ground.
I guess the rule is there because in theory there is alot less chance of a serious injury from slams than directly targeting the back of the head.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 17, 2008)

In our rules it's also illegal to strike along the spine.


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 17, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> In our rules it's also illegal to strike along the spine.


 
In the UFC rules I posted it is against the rules as well to strike to the spine or the back of the head.


----------



## joblo (Mar 18, 2008)

punisher73 said:


> Here are all of the rules for the UFC:
> 
> http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=LearnUFC.Rules
> 
> ...


 

If Newton just landed on his back then why did it knock him out for 3 mins? He also lost the title to Hughes by Knockout, from the slam.  So all you guys actually think they are trying to slam them on their backs?


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 18, 2008)

joblo said:


> If Newton just landed on his back then why did it knock him out for 3 mins? He also lost the title to Hughes by Knockout, from the slam. So all you guys actually think they are trying to slam them on their backs?


 
Watch the fight in slow motion.  Newton lands on his upper back and his head was up and then SLAMS into the canvas which is what knocked him out.  Yes, he hit his head but he was not slammed on his head.  Watch the other video clip, that was a slam that was intended to put spike him on his head, which is illegal in UFC.


----------



## Odin (Mar 20, 2008)

joblo said:


> If Newton just landed on his back then why did it knock him out for 3 mins? He also lost the title to Hughes by Knockout, from the slam. So all you guys actually think they are trying to slam them on their backs?


 
of course they are, look at the technique of the slam its intention is not to slam them on the head the angle for that is wrong, it just so happens that if you dont bring your head forward you will end up hitting it against the floor...which can cause a knockout....the Matt Hughes fight and Jacksons arona slams are two very extreme cases, look at the height Matt had, not to mention newton was in a bad positon to start with his head was extended and at one point resting on the edge of the cage before he dropped.....and in Aronas case it was actually Rampages head/forearm that also strruck him on the way down....usually slams do not knock out..where as spikes do.


----------

