ADCC is arguably the pinnacle of submission grappling, and if you’re not convinced, rest assured that their marketing machine is working full time to have you believe it is. With infrequent tournaments over more than two decades, the anticipation and visibility to each event has been exponentially increasing. The 2022 ADCC stands to be the largest crowd of live spectators in the history of the show, and possibly one of the most viewed submission grappling events in general.
But as grappling fans stare blindly into the current pageantry of ADCC, many don’t understand the aged underpinnings of the event, and how some of those things have manifested over the years in controversy. While it is probably impossible to eliminate controversy, it’s certainly something any organization would want to avoid. With prestigious titles, prize money, and reputations on the line, expectations should be very high that everything goes smoothly. And if you’re an organization claiming to be the most prestigious grappling event in the world, then you’d better minimize mistakes, and certainly learn from the ones you’ve made in the past. If we look back through the decades, I draw attention to three times ADCC’s officiating has resulted into controversy, and point out that they may not have taken adequate steps to prevent similar occurrences in the future.
Marcelo Garcia vs Rolles Gracie.
In the quarter finals in 2007, Fabio Gurgel was coaching Marcelo, and Renzo Gracie was coaching Rolles. During a restart several minutes into the match, Rolles places his hand onto the floor while in Marcelo’s open guard, which results in a quick elbow lock ( Americana, similar to Mir Lock ). Rolles yells out and falls face down onto the mat in pain. The match is stopped and MG gets up as medical attention tends to Rolles for several minutes. Rolles initially acts like his arm is broken, but after the time out, he seems reinvigorated and appears to be normal and ready to resume. Initially, the two competitors are sent back to the center of the mat, and a hesitation ensues where they are not sure the proper restart position. Gurgel goes over and starts to yell at the judge’s table, disputing the resuming of the match, claiming that it was a verbal submission. Then, Renzo arrives also at the judges table, obviously offering his opinion as well. After some deliberation, the decision is made that it was a verbal submission and the victory is awarded to Marcelo Garcia by submission.
My humble opinion is that Renzo told the judges he thought it was a verbal tap and that they should end the match, but I can’t confirm, nor is it particularly relevant. The fact is that both coaches were allowed direct access to the judges, able to argue their case like at a trial in court. I would think this would be an absolute mistake to permit if you are to maintain officiating integrity.
On top of direct input from outside sources, there are already multiple judges involved in the match plus a referee. Because the judges all sit together at a table off the mat, they don’t have distinct or unique angles of view, like say in a three-referee format, where there is a center judge and two judges seated in opposing corners of the competition area. So if the referee, who has the best position, is outside the sphere of judging at ADCC, and the judges are seated together at a distance, then it does not allow for a particularly diverse or insightful view into the action. Basically, did anyone actually see what transpired to make Rolles yell in the first place? Additionally, a layer of anonymity exists because we don’t know which judges thought which action was most appropriate – it’s disguised as a unanimous collective decision – but is it? The collaborative nature of the ADCC judging is unique and somewhat suspect in the context of grappling competition. Usually grappling judge’s votes are made by public presentation; other martial arts have judges making public votes; even boxing and mma disclose judge’s scorecards. But for some reason, ADCC does not disclose judging decisions, which seems peculiar and archaic.
Another wrinkle in this scenario is the definition of a verbal submission. The current website listing says “If one competitor gives up or submits by tapping the leg, arm or verbally. (Tap, I give Up or Mate).” If we apply this definition from today to this match, is a scream or yell a verbal submission? It’s unclear now as it was then what the rule is about the definition of a verbal sub. And despite this match controversy, ADCC has never clarified the item nor changed their judging format to be more transparent and more credible in the face of coach’s challenges. In conclusion, it is unknown why ADCC officials were not able to arrive at the same decision awarding the win to Marcelo Garcia immediately without extra time and coach’s intervention, and instead serves as evidence of a larger officiating problem with the format.
Marcelo Garcia vs Ricco Rodriquez.
In the 2005 ADCC Absolute division, this infamous David-and-Goliath match proved to be as exciting as it was controversial. In round two of the match, Ricco stands from all fours to prevent a guard pass, and Marcelo jumps onto Rodriguez’s back, putting in both hooks and securing the over-under seatbelt control. Rodriguez walks to the center of the mat, then literally jumps off his feet, back to the mat, dropping his bodyweight back-to-chest right onto Marcelo, who hits the floor with a thud. Marcelo releases the hold and appears dazed, and Ricco scrambles and looks to gain side control. The referee stops the match to tend to Marcelo, who surprisingly seems uninjured. The ref then walks to the judges table for a discussion.
The rules on the website currently indicate “Slamming is allowed only if you are locked in a submission.”, and mirror the sentiment of the rules at this event in 2005. So while Marcelo was in a back control position, he certainly did not have a submission nor was attacking one, so this was a clearly illegal technique that should result in an immediate disqualification. No one really understands what happened that match, what was discussed, or who made the final decision to let them continue, again all part of the mysterious officiating that still lurks at ADCC. If slamming in general was legal, then there was theoretically no reason to stop the match, it was Marcelo’s decision to submit or continue, and the referee’s responsibility only to rescue an unconscious or incapable competitor. If slamming is allowed only for locked submission, then it’s a disqualification. So why was Rodriguez not disqualified?
Perhaps only worse than letting the match continue, the referee recreates the position ( with the help of a judge going onto the mat ), and it does not resemble the last reasonable position as you would expect. Usually, when an illegal technique occurs and is rolled back, the competitors are put into the last position from just-prior to the foul. In this case, you would expect Marcelo to be returned to his backpack position on a standing Rodriguez, or even on his back in a seated position with hooks in. Instead, Marcelo is lying flat on his back, and they have Rodriguez lie on top back-to-chest while perpendicular to him. Basically, a somewhat odd if not ridiculous restart.
So with no public explanation, this instance also serves as a blemish on the officiating format of this event. If an organization doesn’t follow their own rules and procedures, then how can competitors, coaches, and fans feel the competition is fair and equitable?
David Avellan vs. Rousimar Palhares
In the quarter final in 2011, ‘Toquinho’ had gotten a hold of Avellan’s foot and went for a heel hook at the edge of the mat, onto the different color safety border. As Avellan defended by turning away one revolution, they went off the mat and the referee clearly shouts ‘Stop’. Palhares, whose reputation proceeds him, continued and cranks for another second or two, only to have Avellan and the referee yelling at Palhares to stop. Well, since the heel hook was on, Palhares assumes it was a tap and the end of the match. He makes an awkward congratulatory hug to Avellan, which looks more like a smack so it creates tension, exasperated by the language barrier.
The referee goes into an explanation to Palhares’ coach ( Murillo Bustamante ), and then Marcos Avellan feels obligated to come over and get into the mix. Basically, the referee clarifies that he yelled for action to stop immediately out of bounds, and that Palhares stopped but then continued, causing him to stop the action a second time, making Palhares think it was for a tap and not for the boundary. The question that has to be asked here is why was Palhares allowed to do something he has a bad reputation for – ignoring referee commands and continuing submissions?
Currently the website reflects a generic rule that might have applied back then “Fighter will be disqualified by the Referee for breaking forbidden rules.” Forbidden rules? Sounds interesting. I think the translation is ‘rules indicating illegal activities’ as in things-that-are-forbidden, so is ignoring the ref’s command and trying to injure your opponent a disqualifiable offense? Well, based on this event it wasn’t, and as you can tell, we won’t know what future ADCC’s might do since it’s not been adequately addressed.
Avellan indicates that his leg popped during this initial out-of-bounds exchange, but wait, there’s more. After several minutes of discussions and explanations, the match is resumed in the Ashi Garami position with Palhares’ massive arms locked around Avellan’s heel. With little surprise, Avellan barely has a second to try and defend before the heel hook converts to a straight kneebar and Palhares violently finishes the submission, leaving Avellan screaming a verbal tap as his knee hyperextends.
This match saw a fierce competitor with a reputation for poor sportsmanship be allowed to ignore referee’s commands in an effort to finish his opponent, followed only by ADCC putting his opponent directly in harm’s way with a locked-in heel hook restart. There’s currently no evidence that this match has caused a change or reevaluation into rules, border enforcement, commands and gestures, or policy on recreating submissions. The current officiating trend at ADCC is to allow action to continue out of bounds, often rolling onto concrete and under tables, as well as still recreate locked submission positions.
HONORABLE MENTION – THE WORKS.
Inevitably in grappling, there are instances where teammates may face each other, and with money or titles involved, they may collaborate and predetermine the outcome. The biggest dust up I have seen was when the ADCC organizer called out Robert Drysdale for a fake match against Andre Galvao from 2007. Years later, Andre had made a social media admission about throwing his match with Drysdale and the ADCC organizer somehow seemed to confirm it despite Drysdale’s vehement denial. The origin of his dust up was at the suggestion by some, including Drysdale, that the 2019 match between Garry Tonon and Gordon Ryan seemed fake. While Tonon and Ryan are friends and did have an instructor-student relationship before the event, it’s unclear it was a dishonest match considering the larger Ryan was the easy favorite to win. Back further in history is the match between Jeremy Horn and Matt Hughes, where it was believed they worked the match to get a payout bonus for fastest submission. Also in that era, Renzo Gracie and his student Matt Serra were both believed to have worked matches against Marcio Feitosa. I believe there has been a bracketing change made that has known teammates fight in the first round rather than the money rounds, but otherwise there’s currently nothing clear on how ADCC could or would discourage or prevent fake matches in the future.
These examples are just a few of the controversies noted over the years at ADCC. An event considered the pinnacle of submission grappling deserves the highest level of scrutiny, and should serve as a model of professionalism and excellence for the rest of the grappling community. At some point, ADCC may shift focus away from concerns about ticket sales and savvy social media to making sure the core tournament is as tight as it could be. This means focusing on fairness, safety, transparency, and the highest quality presentation for fans around the world.
Author David ‘Silverfox’ Karchmer was awarded his black belt in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu in June 2012 and has been training for more than 21 years. In addition to training and instructing, David has focused the last thirteen years on officiating grappling competitions and has officiated more than 4500 gi and no-gi matches at over 90 events for multiple organizations. He was a previous head referee at Grapplers Quest, Tap Cancer Out, FIVE Grappling, UAEJJF New York Open, Copa NoVA, Hudson Valley Invitational, and Rollmore SuperComp tournaments, and routinely officiates events in North America. For more about David, go to: www.facebook.com/thegrapplingreferee
The post ADCC: 3 Times they got it wrong – but did they fix it? appeared first on Bjj Eastern Europe.