[cmeisenzahl]

I was not surprised at all that Hughes won. The game has evolved so much since the early 90s. And everyone trains in grappling now and is well-rounded. Unfortunately, the Gracies still seem to believe that BJJ is an unbeatable style.

It would have been nice if Royce had appeared to make a decent effort to get in shape and show some standup skills.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2TRf3hrGz8

Chris

[the_glassman]

I've always hated watching him fight, it's so damn boring. He gets the guy on the ground and spends the next half an hour using holds trying to get somebody to tap out. I remember my first UFC and watching him do that to an opponent. They kept talking about he was using his Gee, yada yada.
Stand up might not be the best, but it sure as hell a lot more fun to watch and beats wrestling around with another sweaty guy any day of the week.

[Kerrigan]

off topic: liked your blog entry on sustainable development

alright carry on

[James L]

Originally Posted by the_glassman

I've always hated watching him fight, it's so damn boring. He gets the guy on the ground and spends the next half an hour using holds trying to get somebody to tap out. I remember my first UFC and watching him do that to an opponent. They kept talking about he was using his Gee, yada yada.

Stand up might not be the best, but it sure as hell a lot more fun to watch and beats wrestling around with another sweaty guy any day of the week.

Fighters don't fight to be the most entertaining to a viewing audience. They first and foremost fight to prove themselves against their opponent.

If you find effective fighting methods that incorporate grappling unentertaining, don't watch mixed martial arts or vale tudo... watch boxing or the various forms of kickboxing.

True hand to hand combat is an anything goes affair, and grappling (or as you put it wrestling around with another sweaty guy) has proven to be head and shoulders above striking in terms of effectiveness.

Not one single pure striker has had any consistent success in mixed martial arts competition. They have all been beaten by grapplers.

Take the UFC last night as a classic example:

Hughes vs. Gracie: Hughes won, on the ground, after a superior display of ground fighting, and a very close submission attempt (armbar).

Mike Swick vs. Joe Riggs: Swick wins on the ground, via guillotine choke.

Vera vs Silva: Vera wins on the ground, via guillotine choke.

Dean Lister vs. Alessio Sakara: Lister wins, on the ground, via triangle choke.

Jeremy Horn vs. Chael Sonnen: Horn wins by armbar, on the ground.

Only two fights last night were won by knock out in the standing position.

One went to a judges decision.

I have trained in martial arts for a long time (over 20 years probably). I am the first to admit that ground fighting, wrestling, greco-roman wrestling, jiu jitsu, etc is difficult for a non fighter to watch, as the non fighter does not understand the remarkably high level of skill and detail that goes into submission grappling.

No one should ever apologize for its use in vale tudo and mma competition, however. It is a huge part of hand to hand combat.

I say again, audiences of mma should either become educated as to what techniques the mma fighters are using, or watch something that they understand more... such as stand up only events like boxing.

Personally, I'll grapple a skilled striker any day of the week rather than trade blows with them, and usually I will beat them that way too. Does it look impressive to people who are not knowledgeable in the martial arts? Nope. They probably wouldn't even see how the fight was won. Do I care? Not at all. I train to win, via the most direct method. When I lose (something which happens more often that I would like!), it is because I was out grappled, or a lucky punch dropped me before I could clinch and take my opponent down.

If you like striking events, there are lots to choose from. If you like mma, I encourage you to learn more about the styles involved so you can realize that ground fighting is MUCH more than wrestling around with sweaty guys.

Cheers,

James

p.s. You may or may not care, but it It is gi, not gee.

[the_glassman]

Originally Posted by James L

Fighters don't fight to be the most entertaining to a viewing audience. They first and foremost fight to prove themselves against their opponent.

If you find effective fighting methods that incorporate grappling unentertaining, don't watch mixed martial arts or vale tudo... watch boxing or the various forms of kickboxing.

True hand to hand combat is an anything goes affair, and grappling (or as you put it wrestling around with another sweaty guy) has proven to be head and shoulders above striking in terms of effectiveness.

Not one single pure striker has had any consistent success in mixed martial arts competition. They have all been beaten by grapplers.

Take the UFC last night as a classic example:

Hughes vs. Gracie: Hughes won, on the ground, after a superior display of ground fighting, and a very close submission attempt (armbar).

Mike Swick vs. Joe Riggs: Swick wins on the ground, via guillotine choke.

Vera vs Silva: Vera wins on the ground, via guillotine choke.

Dean Lister vs. Alessio Sakara: Lister wins, on the ground, via triangle choke.

Jeremy Horn vs. Chael Sonnen: Horn wins by armbar, on the ground.

Only two fights last night were won by knock out in the standing position.

One went to a judges decision.

I have trained in martial arts for a long time (over 20 years probably). I am the first to admit that ground fighting, wrestling, greco-roman wrestling, jiu jitsu, etc is difficult for a non fighter to watch, as the non fighter does not understand the remarkably high level of skill and detail that goes into submission grappling.

No one should ever apologize for its use in vale tudo and mma competition, however. It is a huge part of hand to hand combat.

I say again, audiences of mma should either become educated as to what techniques the mma fighters are using, or watch something that they understand more... such as stand up only events like boxing.

Personally, I'll grapple a skilled striker any day of the week rather than trade blows with them, and 9 times out of 10 I will beat them that way too. Does it look impressive to people who are not knowledgeable in the martial arts? Nope. They probably wouldn't even see how the fight was won. Do I care? Not at all. I train to win, via the most direct method. When I lose (something which happens more often that I would like!), it is because I was out grappled, or a lucky punch dropped me before I could clinch and take my opponent down.

If you like striking events, there are lots to choose from. If you like mma, I encourage you to learn more about the styles involved so you can realize that ground fighting is MUCH more than wrestling around with sweaty guys.

Cheers,

James

I'm well versed in tae kwon do and tang soo do, but would hardly consider myself a fighter. A newb to MMA, I'm not. When I pay good money to see something I want to see impact not rolling around on the mat. To each their own.

[shunt]

Originally Posted by cmeisenzahl

I was not surprised at all that Hughes won. The game has evolved so much since the early 90s. And everyone trains in grappling now and is well-rounded. Unfortunately, the Gracies still seem to believe that BJJ is an unbeatable style.

It would have been nice if Royce had appeared to make a decent effort to get in shape and show some standup skills.Chris

Funny, I had that exact same conversation with my brother today almost word for word. He's a third degree black belt in Kenpo, I attended many of his tournaments...he did pretty well in his prime.

We were talking about the dark beginnings of UFC etc., no rounds, no weight classes, bare fists, straight elimination and it's not done until someone taps out.

I didn't even know what grappling was back then, but in that environment it worked well. Some of the early participants were real characters.

[James L]

Originally Posted by the_glassman

I'm well versed in tae kwon do and tang soo do, but would hardly consider myself a fighter. A newb to MMA, I'm not. When I pay good money to see something I want to see impact not rolling around on the mat. To each their own.

I agree with you, but you are paying good money to see a sport that has ground fighting as one of its principle arts (along with wrestling, boxing, and Thai boxing).

"Rolling around on the mat" is inherently a huge part of what you are paying for. Look at the backgrounds of some of the most current, and recently retired, competitors in the UFC:

Randy Couture: Wrestling: three-time Olympic team alternate (1988, 1992 and 1996); a semifinalist at the 2000 Olympic Trials; a three-time National Collegiate Athletic Association D-I All-American; and a two-time NCAA finalist.

Matt Hughes: All American wrestling champion, currently trains in Brazilian Jiu jitsu amongst other arts.

Rich Franklin: Brazilian Jiu jitsu background.

Chuck Liddell: High school and College wrestler, I believe a purple belt in Bjj.

Tito Ortiz; Started out as a high school and college wrestler.

BJ Penn: Brazilian Jiujitsu black belt.

...

Submission grappling has been a key element of the UFC since its inception. When you pay for an UFC event, you are paying to watch fighters who have submission grappling as a key element of their fighting styles. Therefore when you pay for a UFC, you are paying to watch fights that will, in almost every case, involve ground grappling.

Submission grappling, bjj, wrestling, etc is not for everyone, but it is a key component of mma. I guess I just don't get how you can pay to watch mma fighters, then be upset when they fight like mma fighters.

But, as you say, to each their own.

Cheers,

James L

edit: I love watching good Tae Kwon Do at my friends dojang!

[James L]

Originally Posted by shunt

We were talking about the dark beginnings of UFC etc., no rounds, no weight classes, bare fists, straight elimination and it's not done until someone taps out. .

The history of how the rules gradually came into effect is pretty interesting.

http://www.extremeprosports.com/full...ry_of_ufc.html

http://www.extremeprosports.com/full...ough_2000.html

http://www.extremeprosports.com/full...ough_2005.html

[eldude]

I've always found grapplers to be absolute cowards. Watching someone like Royce take another man down and start punching him when he's basically defenseless, is pretty weak to me. I respect a man that is willing to stand up to his opponent toe to toe and fight him where both man are at equal chance. Also, I don't really consider grapplers to be real fighters at all. Some of the most cocky people that I've ever seen have been BJJ guys. I was watching the Ultimate fighter 3 a while ago when a BJJ guy was fighting a boxer. Here's what the BJJ guy said: "Ohh, he's a golden glover.. psss.. big deal." This kind of comments is what you hear a lot by grapplers. I'd like to see them take a shot at a sport as hard as boxing. They wouldn't survive past the 2nd round.

By the way, boxing was ranked the number 1 toughest sport according to a panel of destinguished scientist that did an analysis for ESPN.

[James L]

Originally Posted by Smileyfacedkiller

I've always found grapplers to be absolute cowards.

Don't confuse cowardliness with intelligent fighting tactics.

Skilled grapplers make an educated decision to position both themselves, and their opponents, in a manner where the grappler can not be damaged, but can strike his opponent at will.

This isn't cowardliness, this is intelligence.

And hey, if the opponent doesn't want to be taken down, then he should train to stop the takedown. Royce trained for winning fights, not for standup, rule filled events that utilized protective gear and time limits.

Boxing, as great a sport as it is, does not equal real fighting.

Watching someone like Royce take another man down and start punching him when he's basically defenseless, is pretty weak to me. I respect a man that is willing to stand up to his opponent toe to toe and fight him where both man are at equal chance.

Really? I think that man is a poor tactician.

The days of two armies, in colored uniforms, lining up on a field and shooting each other in turn are long gone.

If Royce's opponent was a skilled fighter, he wouldn't have allowed himself to be taken down by Royce in the first place. The simple fact that the grappler could take down his opponent, and position him like that, is a testimony to that grappler's skill.

Again, Royce trained for real fighting, not for a sporting event where two guys go toe to toe, but the rules stipulate that the only thing the two opponents could do is to punch each other. The street does not have rules, and mma comes from vale tudo, real life concepts.

If the other opponents couldn't handle the fact that the early UFC events where basically true fights (only two rules, no protective equipment, no time limits), then they shouldn't have gotten into the ring.

Also, I don't really consider grapplers to be real fighters at all. Some of the most cocky people that I've ever seen have been BJJ guys. I was watching the Ultimate fighter 3 a while ago when a BJJ guy was fighting a boxer. Here's what the BJJ guy said: "Ohh, he's a golden glover.. psss.. big deal." This kind of comments is what you hear a lot by grapplers.

Actually, I agree with you here. I have met a lot of as*holes training in bjj.

Although, the bjj guy did beat the boxer in under 3 minutes in their fight, iirc.

As to the real fighter comment...

The United States military chose to incorporate bjj into their hand to hand fighting curriculum due to its effectiveness.

The vast majority of people who have won major no holds barred events have wrestling or bjj as the base of their training, due to its effectiveness.

Regarding the "Golden Glover, no big deal" comment. In a mixed martial arts setting, that allows elbows, knees, leg kicks, high kicks, takedowns, chokes, submission locks, etc.... a Golden Gloves boxer, with no other cross training, is no big deal.

This is not to say that the Golden Gloves Boxer is not a skilled athlete and a great boxer under boxing rules. But....

Boxers do not train to protect themselves from leg kicks.

Boxers do not train to avoid being elbowed in the head or face while clinched.

Boxers do not train to avoid being struck with knees in the abdomen while clinched.

Boxers do not train to avoid being taken down to the ground.

Boxers do not train to avoid being choked, submitted, or ground and pounded while on the ground.

I LOVE boxing, but pure boxers, as skilled of an athlete as they are, have lost the vast majority of the time under mma rules. This isn't my opinion, this is fact based on the last 50 years of mma, vale tudo type events.

I'd like to see them take a shot at a sport as hard as boxing. They wouldn't survive past the 2nd round.

By the way, boxing was ranked the number 1 toughest sport according to a panel of destinguished scientist that did an analysis for ESPN.

As I said, I love boxing. I think it is a blast to do, and I respect competitive boxers a great deal.

When I have sparred with pure boxers, under boxing rules, I have lost to my friends many times.

I will tell ya something though, under mma rules, where I can repeatedly thai kick their legs, knee and elbow in the clinch, take them down, and choke them out.... I have never lost to them.

This isn't to say that I won't lose to a boxer tomorrow. Everyone has a punchers chance, and no matter how tough your opponent is, one well placed punch is often all it takes (hence the success of the sucker punch on the streets).

...

My personal opinion:

When I fight someone (I spar under mma rules), I am going to fight them in a manner that puts me in an advantageous position over my opponent.

If my opponent is a skilled striker, why on earth would I go toe to toe with him? That is only playing to his strengths. Why would I risk taken shots like that? Does one become "more manly" because he ate his opponent's shots? Nope. He becomes more injured and more stupid.

A 3rd grader can face off with his opponent and go toe to toe with him. Anyone can do it. It makes little use of strategy and self preservation, however.

I will take the skilled strike down to the ground, where it is safer for me to be. His mobility is compromised. His weight advantage, if he has one, is compromised. And, I am now in an environment I am very comfortable in.

Conversely, if my opponent IS a skilled grappler, then I would most likely try to strike with him, and to keep the fight on its feet. Again, make the opponent play MY game, not the other way around.

And let us not forget that on the true street, ALL training is beat by the guy with a knife, or the dude with 4 friends!!!

....

I always tell people that don't like grappling to become boxing fans. Great sport, with some great athletes in it.

I always tell people who don't like boxing, but enjoy grappling, to wrestle or do judo or bjj. Great sports, with some great athletes.

I always tell people who are looking to become proficient in self defense to cross train. Putting artificial limitations on yourself, such as only training your hands, or only training groundfighting, will get you killed on the street against an opponent who is willing to do whatever it takes.

It is all about why you train. If you train for sport and fitness, then any art that only works certain tools, such as punching in boxing, or throwing in Judo, is perfectly fine.

I train because I love it, because I am interested in fitness, and because at the end of each day, I want to go home safely to my family. Cross training in grappling is one of the most effective way to accomplish this.

Cheers,

James L

[shunt]

Originally Posted by James L

...Boxing, as great a sport as it is, does not equal real fighting.
James L

That's why it's a sport.

Track and field does not equal running from the cops. (although, that's an event I'd love to see in the Olympics.)

I've been to a MMA's and also some top rank boxing events. The boxing was 10 times more entertaining. It's really about show business anyways.

Anyways, that's as far as I read into your post. Sheesh, have you ever heard the saying "less is more" ?

[James L]

Originally Posted by shunt

Track and field does not equal running from the cops. (although, that's an event I'd love to see in the Olympics.)

[shunt]

Originally Posted by James L

...haha, much better.

Have you seen any of those "Pride" fights? Man, that stuff is a little unsettling.

[Jawbone54]

If you don't enjoy good grappling skills, then don't watch the UFC. Just because you'd rather see two guys punch each other until one collapses unconcious to the floor every single fight doesn't mean that grappling is a style for "cowards." You could easily break an arm, wrist, ankle, and more while grappling. It requires just as much, if not more, strategy and training than boxing does. Don't diss what you don't understand.

[shunt]

Uh, that wasn't me that said those things. I just went to an MMA match last month, and I did enjoy it.

what sucks is, when the guys hit the ground....you're looking at an empty cage with a few elbows and asses popping up occasionally.

On TV it's awesome, live is a different story.

[Jawbone54]

It was a general statement. Wasn't calling anyone in particular out on it.

I can see how it would be difficult to see anything at a UFC event live. I wondered one time just how much people could see there, unless they were right against the octagon and the fighters happened to fall right in front of them.

[James L]

Originally Posted by shunt

what sucks is, when the guys hit the ground....you're looking at an empty cage with a few elbows and asses popping up occasionally.

On TV it's awesome, live is a different story.

I can see how it would be difficult to see anything at a UFC event live. I wondered one time just how much people could see there, unless they were right against the octagon and the fighters happened to fall right in front of them.

Interesting.... I never really thought about that.

I wonder if the bigger events (Pride, UFC, etc) have a video screen somewhere for you to look at when it goes to the ground?

[shunt]

Yup, they did have a large video screen...problem was it wasn't viewable from most of the good seating.

If you were willing to give up your seat, and alot of people did--then it was ok, but there was a standing crowd even in front of the screen.

Kind of defeats the purpose of a live event, but hey sometimes it's just nice to go out with your friends regardless.

[eldude]

James, what I meant by the golden gloves comment is that it's upsurd for someone to say that a golden glove boxer is no big deal, because it takes a hell of a lot of work to get to that point.

But hey, I disagree with you. It may be intelligence for the grappler to take down the striker, but it doesn't make it any less cowardly in my opinion to go into a fight with the mentality of taking down your opponent in order to fight them.

Try standing up to a man that is throwing blows at you. Now, that takes a hell of a lot more balls in my opinion to do.

And to the other guy, ohh I plenty much understand it. I understand when a guy needs to put their opponent to the ground, where they can't mount much of any solid offensive attack, in order to fight them. I understand it well, and I understand that I don't care much for it.

You show me ANYTHING that shows that grappling is more dangerous than striking. All you have to do is look at the magnitiude of injuries, and deaths that occur in boxing to know that those guys have a lot more balls than some pussy take you to the ground and hurt you coward.

[James L]

Originally Posted by Smileyfacedkiller

James, what I meant by the golden gloves comment is that it's upsurd for someone to say that a golden glove boxer is no big deal, because it takes a hell of a lot of work to get to that point.

You and I both agree that boxers should be respected for what they do in the boxing ring. I am with you 100%.

I still think that someone who enters a fight (either on the street or in the ring) that has wide open rules, and who has only trained 1 area (his hands in the boxers case) is at a MAJOR disadvantage. That person is not going to fair well against a mixed martial artist. This was the context that the comment was made. A highly trained person, who has trained all ranges of combat, does not really need to fear the person who has an incomplete game. Any 1 dimensional fighter, no matter how skilled in their area of expertise, is at a disadvantage against someone who can strike from all ranges, grapple to negate the threat of strikes, and apply submission holds and chokes on the ground. There is always a punchers chance, but it is small.

Let's just agree that boxers are to be respected in the boxing ring, and as high class athletes.

But hey, I disagree with you. It may be intelligence for the grappler to take down the striker, but it doesn't make it any less cowardly in my opinion to go into a fight with the mentality of taking down your opponent in order to fight them.

Try standing up to a man that is throwing blows at you. Now, that takes a hell of a lot more balls in my opinion to do.

See, with no disrespect, I think it is nothing but classic male ego to think that it takes more balls to stand up to a man who is throwing blows at you.

Ego has no place in a real fight, unless you enjoy being damaged, and on the street, possibly killed.

How is it cowardly to clinch an opponent, who is bent on injuring you? How is it cowardly to work your way through a barrage of strikes aimed at you, to obtain the clinch required to complete the takedown?

It is all tactics. Any successful strategy should involve taking your opponent to a place where he cannot injure you. That may mean keeping him on the ground. It may mean keeping the fight standing.

The only thing that blinds people to this is ego, imho.

And to the other guy, ohh I plenty much understand it. I understand when a guy needs to put their opponent to the ground, where they can't mount much of any solid offensive attack, in order to fight them. I understand it well, and I understand that I don't care much for it.

You show me ANYTHING that shows that grappling is more dangerous than striking. All you have to do is look at the magnitiude of injuries, and deaths that occur in boxing to know that those guys have a lot more balls than some pussy take you to the ground and hurt you coward.

So, let me get this straight. You are saying that boxers are violent and skilled enough with their punches that it causes a "magnitiude of injuries, and deaths".... and you feel the best (most manly) strategy to fight them is to stand in front of them and go toe to toe?

Let me guess... you aren't that good at chess, either.

...

When I am involved in an altercation at work, grappling gives me the confidence to feel safe from a threat, without having to injure the assailant. When I spar in the ring, I enjoy working all of my skills, be it punching, kicking, kneeing, elbowing, grappling, etc.

Let's look at this from another perspective. Fights aren't always about the complete debilitation of your opponent. Sometimes the fight is about avoiding the knife long enough to run away from it. Sometimes the fight is about subduing your drunk uncle at a house party, without injuring him with strikes. Rarely, but unfortunately, sometimes the fight is about the complete domination of your opponent.

You need tools, and strategy, to win under these various situations. Often times, the best tool and strategy is grappling.

In my experience, the only people who don't see that are either people who are controlled by their ego, or people who have been beat by a grappler.



p.s. Although you may feel that using a comprehensive fight strategy, as opposed to going toe to toe with someone, makes that fighter a "pussy", with "no balls" (to use your words).... a real man, imho, is the one who goes home safe to his family each night, without being injured.