|
|
Post by xx - Team GAP on Nov 22, 2013 3:25:07 GMT -5
i disagree.. i believe there are many ways to win a fight. By damage, By controlling a fight, By striking, By grappling, By takedowns..by submission, by ko.. for a few examples.. the point of MMA is.. you are supposed to use all of these to win a fight. You use diffent forms of martial arts to defeat your opponent.. The easiest way to win is to KO your opponent.. but some people are not KO specialists.. others are BJJ specialists or wrestlers.. so you need a way that is fair to all forms of martial arts. By giving a extra bonus to people who do more damage it really gives an advantage to ko specialists. Hendricks was a threat to ko GSP before he ever entered the cage.. so does that mean hendricks should have an advantage before the fight starts? i don't think so..
Let's say I am fighting Phoenix.. and I control him for the entire 3 rounds (or 5 in a championships fight)so that he can not do anything to me but i do no damage to him. Who wins? It may be a boring fight but it is a technical fight.. technical fights are not usually the most exciting.. They can be exciting but not usually... unless you know what they are doing and what they are trying for.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Nov 22, 2013 10:36:57 GMT -5
No, Sandman is fucking spot on.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Nov 23, 2013 0:32:42 GMT -5
i disagree.. i believe there are many ways to win a fight. By damage, By controlling a fight, By striking, By grappling, By takedowns..by submission, by ko.. for a few examples.. the point of MMA is.. you are supposed to use all of these to win a fight. You use diffent forms of martial arts to defeat your opponent.. The easiest way to win is to KO your opponent.. but some people are not KO specialists.. others are BJJ specialists or wrestlers.. so you need a way that is fair to all forms of martial arts. By giving a extra bonus to people who do more damage it really gives an advantage to ko specialists. Hendricks was a threat to ko GSP before he ever entered the cage.. so does that mean hendricks should have an advantage before the fight starts? i don't think so.. I agree with the broad core of what you are trying to say, but disagree with what you are actually saying. There are only 3 ways to win a fight. (T)KO, Submission, Cut/Ref/Doctor stoppage. Those are what you are trying to do. No one goes into a fight saying, "Man, I can;t wait to get into the cage with this guy and control him long enough for judges to give me a win". Everyone wants a finish. And all 3 of those are based on damage. That is the nature of MMA. YOu are to use the mixed disciplines you mentioned to damage your opponent and win. A decision is a judge's criteria for determining who did the best job of trying to finish (whether by skill, technique, damage, control, what have you). But still, the only difinitive ways to win are damage, whether we like it or not. MMA is not about self defence - it's about beating someone at all disciplines of martial arts. Let's say I am fighting Phoenix.. and I control him for the entire 3 rounds (or 5 in a championships fight)so that he can not do anything to me but i do no damage to him. Who wins? It may be a boring fight but it is a technical fight.. technical fights are not usually the most exciting.. They can be exciting but not usually... unless you know what they are doing and what they are trying for. I have seen lots of really exciting technical fights that are exciting because guys are trying to finish. Sub chaining, position battles, etc. Attempts to finish! Technical fights are not the problem. Hell, I love a great ground fight better than a great stand up fight. There is so much more to it, and the high level guys are amazing...But that's because they are trying to finish! If a guy takes you down and literally just major-transitions all over you, sure, he gets a decision win, but did he really just beat you at anything? Not really. No more than a boxer would win a boxing match for out-dodging someone. It's a small part of a larger body of the sport that is Mixed Martial Arts. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Team GAP on Nov 23, 2013 18:00:03 GMT -5
i agree alot with what your saying.... but... i do think some people do think about controlling their opponents and being defensive.. it's a tactic.. some times you need to have a tactic to beating your opponent... and gsp wants to finish his fights but it ususually end up with just controlling his opponents... maybe due to his opponents being quite good at avoiding his finishes. just a thought
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Nov 23, 2013 19:07:02 GMT -5
Yes, and I agree with that...but it should not be weighted as highly as finishing tactics. Control is a step towards finishing. It's a means to an end. If a guy controls you for 2.5 minutes, then you put him in a series of submission attempts for 2.5 minutes, the round should undoubtedly go to the guy who was attacking for 2.5 minutes - it should not be an even round. The weight for control should be SOMETHING, but no where near the offensive tactic of trying to finish a fight, and coming close (like knocking a guy down, or almost locking in a submission).
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Team GAP on Nov 25, 2013 2:34:48 GMT -5
i just don't agree. finishing a fight is finishing a fight.. almost finishing a fight is nothing without the finish. Controlling the fight is a defensive way to fight but it is still just as viable a tactic as I'm gonna knock the piss out that guy. It's called mixed martial arts. Using your brain to fight instead of muscles is a much better way to fight. When comparing a ko or a submission to controlling sure.. Ko or submission wins.. but cmparing controlling to almost ko'ing or almost submiting your opponent.. controlling wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Nov 25, 2013 3:23:56 GMT -5
In wrestling, sure. The object of wrestling is to pin and control. As you keep saying, its MIXED martial arts. And wrestling is practically the only discipline (aside from cage clinching) that is about control. Everything else is a means to an end - that end being a finish. Two guys stand at centre ice in a hockey game. Sure they are "playing hockey" but neither is trying to score a goal, so are they really playing hockey? Yes....but to no real end...They are both just not moving so the other guy doesn't score.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Team GAP on Nov 25, 2013 3:46:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Nov 25, 2013 9:51:40 GMT -5
i stopped caring about gap's responses when he wrote this: "finishing a fight is finishing a fight.. almost finishing a fight is nothing without the finish."
Keeping in mind that GSP hasn't finished a fight in like half a decade.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Nov 25, 2013 16:16:05 GMT -5
Haha
But GAP, BJJ is not about control, it's about finishing. Proof of this being that the Gracies have fought since UFC started to have unlimited rounds...so they can FINISH their opponent. Judo and wrestling IN MMA are about getting an advantagous position to finish the fight. Rousey = Judo master...but she doesn't just try to control her opponents, she finishes. Same with Fedor and Sambo, fuck even Ben Askren's been finishing. The goal of anything is to finish what you start, not just kinda let it end somehow eventually...sort of...
|
|
Have 9 points in celebration of this monumental achievement!