One of the issues that always gets brought up in scoring MMA bouts is how to score submission attempts.  Should a guy constantly working for submissions off his back win a round?  Will judges almost always see the guy on top as winning even if he is the less active one?  I probably won't be able to sway anyone away from their stances on the subject but here's my 2 cents anyway.

The scoring of rounds in the UFC, for example, is based on effective striking, grappling, aggression, and octagon control.  Effective striking is easy enough to quantify.  Whichever fighter is dealing out more damage is the one with more effective striking.  If one fighter gets dropped by his oppenent but happens to win more exchanges there can be some agument as to who won the round, but by and large it's easy enough to figure out.  Aggression is another easy one.  Whichever fighter comes forward more and is more active wins this criteria.  To me, octagon control is a redundancy.  If you are pushing the other guy around the cage wouldn't it be because you are fulfilling the other criteria?  Regardless, the effective grappling is the hardest of these to quantify, and because of this there is so much disagreement as to what it means.

Effective grappling, to me, should be based on the ability to control and subdue the movement and ability to attack of an opponent.  Attaining a dominant position is a show of effective grappling.  For example, Lesnar smothering Mir and utterly nullifying him on the ground was extremely effective grappling.  Shutting someone down off the back is also a show of effective grappling.  Bas Rutten controling Randleman off his back and taking virtually no damage for over half of their fight while constantly doing damage was a show of effective grappling.  Just as Sanchez dropping vicious elbows on Guida's adamantium skull was.

Working for submissions and failing to pull them off is not a show of effective grappling.  Fighters should not get rewarded for failed submission attempts just as a fighter should not get rewarded for missing with a haymaker.  The reason they shouldn't get rewarded is the same for missing a haymaker; they didn't do anything to their opponent.  Working for submissions should be taken into account for rating a fighter's aggression, as working for a submission clearly shows activity, but to suggest as Mir was during Curran's fight with Mizugaki that Curran won the second round is ridiculous.  Working for, and failing to pull off, submissions is not equal to or greater than being punched in the face.  Submissions are very much all or nothing because if you fail to pull one off, you've done nothing to harm your opponent.

Now what happens if a fighter sinks a submission in on his opponent but fails to finish?  I had Curran winning round 3, Paulo Thiago winning round 1 against Fitch, and Tibau winning round 1 against Stevenson.  The reason for these is because while the opponent was obviously not finished, the winner of the round had their opponent in danger and in an inferior position where they could have potentially been finished.  To me this is an example of effective grappling that I mentioned above.  I score a submission that is locked in but not finishing an opponent similar to having someone mounted.  They're in a lot of danger, but any sort of substantial damage can easily sway the round in the opponent's favor.

So now that I've given my thoughts on the subject, what say you Internet?