The thing that was lost in the controversy of the decision

Discussion in 'MMA, Boxing & Other Combat Sports' started by SeeSon, Oct 27, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SeeSon

    SeeSon New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,315
    The Machida/Rua fight was the best technical display of striking ever in an MMA fight in the UFC. It was just beautiful. It wasn't filled with sloppy wild looping punches. It was lovely.
    test
  2. Fag Sabbitch

    Fag Sabbitch Closet hetero

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    Barry-hardonk wasn't bad.

    I agree though, it was a pretty technical stand up fight.
    test
  3. .:Pain:.

    .:Pain:. Futurely J. Keeper

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    10,368
    I said this in the other thread.

    I think what I said exactly was, this was a perfect display of why MMA is just as much a sweet science as boxing...
    test
  4. OurSin

    OurSin lol @ equality

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    53,703
    yeah........

    at times i felt it was like pure muay tai vs karate........like if you got the grand masters from each discipline and had them fight it out kungfu movie style......

    i can't believe anybody found that boring *cough* rampage *cough*
    test
  5. SeeSon

    SeeSon New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,315
    hahahahahahhahahahahahahaahhaahhahahhahhahaha....NO
    test
  6. .:Pain:.

    .:Pain:. Futurely J. Keeper

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    10,368
    Care to elaborate?
    test
  7. OurSin

    OurSin lol @ equality

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    53,703
    this was an anomaly in MMA......MMA is not a "sweet science"...it's more of a fledgling sport that hasn't completely decided how to incorporate all the different martial arts yet...

    typical MMA, wrestler wins 99% of the time......

    if anything, this was a K1 match......despit the takedown attempts by shogun
    test
  8. Fag Sabbitch

    Fag Sabbitch Closet hetero

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    MMA is as much a sweet science as boxing, but only when you see all of the stuff incorporated. The stand up game isn't top notch, although there's something to be said for stuffing takedowns and kickboxing at the same time.

    Watch something like karo-sanchez for an example of what makes mma technical.

    It's the combinations of styles that makes mma worth watching.
    test
  9. jayoo

    jayoo new york representative

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    7,849
    typical? i guess you can say with brock.. but i think if he wasnt a wrestler and had another background he'd still be just as dangerous

    most the lb for lb best aren't even wrestlers

    fedor - sambo
    anderson silva - muay thai
    lyoto machida - karate
    nog - bjj
    bj penn - bjj
    rua - muay thai
    miguel torres - bjj


    the only people making the list as wrestlers these days.. gsp, lesnar, faber, maybe a couple more obviously i didnt go to in-depth with the list but most people i listed are easily on the top 10
    test
  10. OurSin

    OurSin lol @ equality

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    53,703
    Fedor - Sambo imcorporates Greco Wrestling
    Anderson - Lost to a wrestler
    lyoto machida - Uses takedown defense (wrestling) to stay on his feet
    Nog - True, we'll see how he does against brock though
    Bj - lost to gsp twice because of wrestling
    Rua - showed weakness against an aging mark coleman who took him down at will.
    torres - no clue who that is honestly

    wrestling isn't just takedowns and ground control......cats like liddel and lyoto use it to stay on there feet....

    and there are allways exeptions......but look at the majority
    test
  11. OurSin

    OurSin lol @ equality

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    53,703
    no it's not.......

    Boxing is an 100 year old sport, MMA is barely 20 and only been at the form it is now for a decade.

    there are sciences to each individual martial arts i agree, but the mixture of them all hasn't developed completely......
    test
  12. Fag Sabbitch

    Fag Sabbitch Closet hetero

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    MMA will never be a perfect mixture. it's impossible.

    what some people seem to expect is an organization with nothing but elite fighters. Will never happen. Like I said in the other thread, boxing only has a couple come along every decade despite being over 100.

    in a way, you have to lower your standards a bit. If you look at the definition of science, it's impossible to argue that MMA fighters are scientific in their approach.
    test
  13. Fag Sabbitch

    Fag Sabbitch Closet hetero

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    Basically what I'm saying is that the majority of mma guys are as good at mma as the majority of boxers are at boxing.

    Just in boxing, there are less variables so it's easier to master in ways.
    test
  14. Tha Cunnysmythe

    Tha Cunnysmythe Unsavoury Negroid

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    14,737


    Silva losing to a wrestler once a long time ago doesn't make wrestling dominant. He's crushed several wrestlers since then. Most everyone has lost to a wrestler and a BJJ player.

    Takedown defence =/= wrestling. Wrestling can be incorporated into it, but I have decent takedown defence and I've never wrestled a day in my life. You're conflating wrestling with grappling.

    BJ lost partially because he went up to WW. His cardio was shit and he had a big size disadvantage.

    Rua was recovering from surgery, he wasn't half the fighter he can be.

    It's also worth mentioning that people don't do BJJ as part of college. Americans are going to be more likely to wrestlers simply by virtue of them being American. Wrestlers will largely outnumber practitioners other grappling disciplines, so they're bound to get a lot of wins purely based on statistical likelihood.
    test
  15. Fag Sabbitch

    Fag Sabbitch Closet hetero

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    I don't really understand the argument. Yes, wrestling is an effective base, but it has to be built upon just like anything else.

    Machida beat tito ortiz with very little takedown defense. It was basically effective striking and trips.
    test
  16. OurSin

    OurSin lol @ equality

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    53,703
    My point, wrestling is dominate.

    i don't consider a fighter siting on top of another fighter for 3 rounds to victory a "sweet science" atleast not in a good way......


    you only get close to something like boxing, when you have two fighter with strenghts in the same disciplines or similiar ( like machida and shogun).

    90% of the time they are sloppy or medicore in every thing else........like you get two elite wrestlers, standing and throwing haymakers all fight to please the fans. Or a mua tai fighter get taken down and finished in 5 sec's. most typically, a wrestler sitting on a guy for 3 rounds to victory.

    you can say there is a science to muay tai, a sceince to wrestling, or jujitsu....but MMA isn't it's own entity yet.....even though it's evolving, it's not there yet
    test
  17. OurSin

    OurSin lol @ equality

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    Messages:
    53,703
    my only argument is MMA is not the "sweet science" or any where close to it
    test
  18. Fag Sabbitch

    Fag Sabbitch Closet hetero

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    127
    lay and pray is no worse than boxers who make a living outpointing competition and winning via decisions.
    test
  19. SeeSon

    SeeSon New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,315
    The two aren't comparable. When a boxer outpoints another boxer, they are both on their feet and neither fighter is in a disadvantageous position. With Lay n Pray, even if its BJJ standards, being on the bottom is a disadvantageous position.
    test
  20. SeeSon

    SeeSon New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,315
    Sure.

    MMA is not and probably never will be a sport that is known as a "sweet science". I've read the debate in the previous post, and I think there are some points that are being left unsaid. Boxing is considered the sweet science because of how precise and deliberate that each participant has to be just to set up shots. There may be anywhere from 3-8 factors that goes into setting up a straight cross. Boxing matches are similar to chess matches. One guy will have one thing working, the other guy will adjust, and then fighter A will have to figure something else out, all throughout the course of a fight. With MMA, if you guys are honest, this is a rarity. MMA is mainly a jack of all trades, master of none type of thing. The way the rules are set up, it favors whoever is the better/stronger grappler. In order for MMA to be a sweet science, in my opinion, what you would have to see is a situation where either two guys have the same strength and attempt to fight with that strength, or two fighters are essentially even everywhere. When you have two high level grapplers, you normally see guys just concede that the other guy is his equal and we see 3-5 rounds of sloppy wild haymakers. We rarely see a fight where two fighters can win no matter where the fight goes.

    The script for an MMA fight is usually, the guy with the grappling advantage takes the other guy down and then either finishes him or wins a decision. Too many guys have holes and we normally see match ups where the entire strategy is to just get the fight where you want it to go. With a cage and rules it makes it harder to defend the takedown, for those that will ignorantly say, its the weaker grapplers job to stuff the takedown. When a fighter can simply go for a takedown when a fight isn't going well, that in and of itself, prohibits the sport from ever being a true science. That's not a sweet science, that's common sense. Fighters never have to figure it out, they will simply clinch, pull guard, shoot for the takedown. The boxing equivalent would be if Ricky Hatton types were allowed to just clinch for the duration of the round and never had to break. If boxing were like that, it would cease to be a sweet science and would just be a strength/power type of sport.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)