mvisit1

welcome back, Bro!

Who you backing on saturday night?

What I like about MMA is that there aren't 9 million weight classes like in boxing. I have a fav fighter at each weight class, BJ is my fav LW and GSP is my fav WW. But if I have to pick one, it's BJ. I lived in Hawaii when I was little and have lots of family there. He's the hometown hero. I also have a TON of respect for his BJJ abilities, earning his Black Belt in 3 years AND being the first non-Brazilian to win 1st place in the Black Belt Division at the Mundials? Ridiculous. He truly is a prodigy.

FYI it takes the average person 8-10 years to earn a BJJ Black Belt. You can do it in 5-7 if you're young, athletic, and a fast learner.

What's up guys? Sorry it's been a while. I kind of quit posting here when the Skins started laying eggs on offense week after week. I spend a lot of time on Sherdog now. Lots of guys trading experience/advice about gear and training methods, it's great. I stay away from the "Best P4P" and "Fedor Nuthugging" threads though, they're full of teenagers and ppl who don't train.

What's PTI?

It's something about that cage...Machida's other fights in rings were pretty damn good...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kptigxw1YI&feature=related

I don't see what the problem with Machida's stand up is. He hits you and then he's gone when you go to hit him back. Isn't that the idea? I personally don't like to stand there and get hit.

"its better to lose in a war, than to win a boring fight"

I like that, Joe Rogan should have said that instead of "putting on a show is just as important as winning" or however it was worded.

no one seems to want to take on Joe Rogans comment about losing and putting on a good show is as important as winning.

As much as I love this sport and what the UFC has done with it I still have reservations about the direction it is going. I love the "science" of the sport and the dedication these guys have to have to be at the top. I just want it to stay that way and not become a three ring circus where people are showing up just to see the blood and the fighters find themselves in a situation where the only way they're going to get a big payday is by either knocking someone out or getting knocked out just to make fans happy.

I honestly can't believe that none of you have this fear.

Joe's comment...hmmm...winning is important but so is putting on a good show so no argument there.

As for your fear, I'm not afraid as of right now. When the fighters stop training wrestling & BJJ and I see training clips of them just throwing haymakers on the mitts then I'll be worried.

It's a give and take with the whole "put on a show" thing. The better the show you put on, the more fans like it, the more PPV you sell, the more money you make. Tough to not want to put on a good show. Remember, this IS how these guys make a living. They're "Professional" Fighters. That's the difference between pro and amateur fighting, there's money involved.

Don't you go to work to make money to put a roof over your head, food on the table and clothes on your back? Don't you do the things that you do at work to try and get noticed to get that promotion/make more money than the next guy so that you can get a better house, better car/clothes and/or extend your lifestyle onto a spouse/kids? It's no different in the UFC, except their cubicle is an octagon.

What IS keeping the sport pure is the fact that these guys are really fighting! The blood's real, the strikes are real, and the winner isn't pre-picked. I'm happy with that.

LOL at the guy above me. However, it makes me feel like I'm the only person in here saying anything of substance. I dropped 2 pearls of wisdom on the previous page and I have yet to hear a response. I wanna talk MMA and all I hear is Brock this, whine that, and GSP is licking his nipples? LOL

Speaking of that, it often makes me wonder when you see guys go away from their gameplan if the fights may be orchestrated a little bit. Joe Rogan said it best when he said "it doesn't matter if you lose in the UFC as long as you put on a good show you'll be back". So, if the fight is not living up to the "hype" lets go away from what will win you fight so that you can pump up a rematch or put on a show for the company. It's about winning the fight, isn't it? Isn't that what MMA is all about? I guess not, I guess it's about going in the ring and getting KTFO so the crowd feels like they got their moneys worth keeping them coming back for more and dropping down the $$ for the PPV. Great business but do we really want the sport to go the direction of the WWF?

Just playing devil's advocate...

In boxing, the undefeated P4P kings like Mayweather and Roy Jones Jr. (undefeated until late in his career) were often criticized for playing it safe and not fighting the exciting fight. Fans love a war but bobbing, weaving, throwing pot shots, and out pointing your opponent wins fights.

In MMA, this makes me think of going for takedown points, "laying and praying" in someone's guard, and throwing little kidney punches hoping to grind out a decision.

Is this what you speak of?

I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this. I was watching a WEC Wreckage I had DVR'd last night, and there was a pretty good bantamweight fight on with some excellent ground fighting on it, and in the middle of it the crowd start booing becuase there is no "action"

I don't know about you guys, but every time that happens, even in slow fights, it pisses me off.

I understand that knockouts are exciting, but to me, the best part of MMA is the technical ground fights. The passes and counters until one of them makes a mistake and gets subbed or mounted and pounded out.

It seems that if they don't throw a punch within a 10 second period, people get restless and start booing. This is embarrassing to me for the fighters, and the sport, and makes us look like profesional wrestling fans (I have no problems with pro wrestling, but you're supposed to boo in that, it's part of the entertainment).

THANK YOU!

I feel the same way about the clinch. Educate yourselves people!

Pummeling

(action to achieve underhooks - best position for control and takedowns)

Whizzer (0:06)

(overhooks are not ideal, but if opponent is good at pummeling and getting underhooks, the whizzer is a good counter, especially when you're pushed up against a cage)

Plum - Muay Thai Clinch

(I wish I could have found you guys a better video. A correctly executed Plum uses the forearms pinched together under the jawbone to block the bottom door escape, but this is a good video of what to do against an incorrectly placed Thai clinch)

Karo Parisyan has some good Judo for MMA instructionals

(Uchi-mata)

(Seoi-nagi)

Vids are great but training is better. Go take a class! Boxing, Muay Thai, Wrestling, Judo, BJJ, it doesn't matter, just train! You'll get in great shape, have a better chance at defending yourself hand to hand if the situation presents itself, and best of all you'll be educated! Then go to every MMA PPV fight party you can and educate all of the idiots around you of all of the technique that's happening when all they see is a "brawl".

It doesn't matter the show, UFC, EliteXC, or some other up and comer...their owners will all tell you they have the best fighters. It would be a conflict of interest for them not to.

You guys raised some interesting points, but I don't hear about how you would have run UFC differently and still been as successful if not more than Dana, while not pissing off all of the idealists.

What's with all the Dana bashing? IMO he's running his business the way it should be run. Think like an EMPLOYER for once and not an EMPLOYEE, would you run UFC differently than he does and still be as successful as he is?

Let's be grownups. If you want to quote me and respond use facts and support your statements.

On a sidenote...

One of my fantasy football league's is drafting tomorrow @ 9pm and I won't be by a computer so I have to pre-rank my pics. Anyone wanna PM me or post a link to a good draft list?

Damn Micah got KO'd...Maybe Mike Brown will do better???

ATT! Go Micah!

I love the Diaz's. They are so damn scrappy and are full of heart. I also love their attitude.

You love their attitude? I can see someone liking Nick, but Nate is a huge d-bag. He talks and acts like those uneducated punks you see at clubs/bars/parties always trying to start something because someone looked at them the "wrong way".

I know that there's always going to be people that act like that, but a professional fighter?

No dissing Nick Diaz :kungfu:

It looks like he was talking **** to that guy before their fight (during the referee review of rules/staredown) the other night on Elite XC...what was all that about? Looked pretty classless to me.

Isn't Big John retired?

I'm Filipino so I'm pulling for Vera.

I think some of you are forgetting the TRUE meaning of what the term "best pound for pound" fighter is. Someone does not actually have to fight at different weight classes to be considered for the title of p4p best. It has to do with skillsets and hypotheticals, NOT weight.

It's not about who moved up/down in weight, was impressive in one weight class but not another, etc. The talk should be about who's boxing is better, who's better in the clinch, who's a better wrestler, who has better BJJ, etc.

For example, Tim Sylvia would kill Urija Faber in a real match due to the size and strength difference. BUT, it's not hard to see that despite the size and strength difference, Faber is easily the better fighter. His pace and cardio are far better than Sylvia's, as is his ground game. Therefore, pound for pound, Urijah Faber is a better fighter than Tim Sylvia.

Dennis Kang? ATT!!!

Look at GSP vs. Penn. GSP took Penn down at will i.e. effectively controlling the fight even though his face looked like road rash after the bout and he won because he was a) the aggressor and controlled the majority of the bout.

I don't like takedown points. Yes, I acknowledge accomplishing a takedown is you imposing your will over your opponent, HOWEVER this is only to a certain extent. The point of a takedown is to 1) cause damage to your opponent by slamming them 2) get them on the ground so you can GnP them or 3) get them on the ground so you can submit them. This is MMA not wrestling. If all you're doing is taking your opponent down for the sake of taking them down and not accomplishing any of the 3 aforementioned goals, a judge should no longer be impressed. This is also not to mention the "desparation takedown". Judges should not be impressed by someone haphazardly getting a takedown because they got rocked by a punch/kick and grabbed onto a single/double leg to keep from falling over.

Look at Chuck vs. Jardine. Keith Jardine's face looked like hamburger because he got hit with just a few of Chuck's power shots but in the end he leg kicked Chuck way more than Chuck landed shots to his face (and landed a few power shots of his own), that's why judging on damage is decieving. Jardine clearly won that fight but if you had to decide the winner by damage then Jardine would've lost.

I wasn't just talking about damage to the face, I like leg kicks and I acknowledge solidly landed ones as scores even though you can't see the damage done by them as easily as punches to the face. If you eat too many leg kicks you can't put your weight on that leg as easily to put power in your punches, shoot for a takedown, or chase down a stunned opponent. Looking back at Rampage vs. Griffin, I can think of at least 3 times in the later rounds where Rampage got the better of a punching exchange, stunned Forrest, but couldn't chase him down and capitalize because of his bum leg. I believe that punches to the face are harder to land than leg kicks and therefore should take precedence over them when comparing what each fighter landed when trying to score a round.

They don't judge based on damage, it's not in the rules.

The rules may not specifically say it in so many words, but I think it's common sense. If you're roughed up and I don't have a scratch on me, doesn't mean that I'm landing more and you're not? Isn't landing more techniques on your opponent then he lands on you the way you get a 10 instead of an 8 or 9?

Anyone else notice Forrest's few weak and improperly thrown knees from the clinch?

Destruction of a knee, a fierce GnP, and at least 2 sub attempts.

Sorry dude, but I have to disagree with the "fierce GnP". Forrest spent a lot of the 2nd round in the mount but I don't think he did any REAL damage. Yes, Forrest landed A LOT of leg kicks BUT with the 1st round uppercut that nearly ended the fight and the later round cut, I felt that Rampage did more damage than Forrest did. Rampage's post fight facial condition looked the same as it did pre-fight.

I'm not sure how I feel about the scoring of sub attempts. Although it wasn't the case in the Forrest-Rampage fight, I don't believe that any advantage should be given to a fighter who has guard that continually throws there legs up looking for triangles and armbars that end up being unsuccessful. Let's say the guy with guard goes for 15 sub attempts that are all unsuccessful but the guy on top lands 3 big clean punches to the face, who should get the advantage on the scorecards?