Takedowns overvalued in UFC? - Page 2 - MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos
UFC The Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) is a U.S.-based mixed martial arts organization, recognized as the largest MMA promotion in the world. The UFC is headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada and is owned and operated by Zuffa, LLC. This promotion is responsible for solidifying the sport's postion in the history-books. UFC is currently undergoing a remarkable surge in popularity, along with greater mainstream media coverage. UFC programming can now be seen on FOX, FX, and FUEL TV in the United States, as well as in 35 other countries worldwide.

Reply

Old 10-13-2009, 01:07 AM   #11 (permalink)
Middleweight
 
VolcomX311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: L.A.
Posts: 2,802
VolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He CrossesVolcomX311 Is Respected By All He Crosses
That's a good question and it can be argued to the death. TD vs TDD is a measure of talent from one point of view and from another, it seems like a cheap way to score points or a desperate means to lay on top and recover. You look at GSP and his TD's are precise and intentional, not random & desperate acts to lay on someone. On the other hand, Chuck Lidell almost never got taken down and when he did, he got right back up, so that shows TDD is also a legitimate measure of talent. Tito vs Lyoto is probably the best, recent example of TDD evasive talent vs a TD focused fighter, so TD's can look cheap, but if talented enough, it can be easily nullified (Brock/Couture is another good example).

If we're judging by damage done, then yes, TD's are more often then not, over-valued, but if we're judging talent, then it's forever a philosophical issue. I know I've wrestled with guys much stronger and quicker then I am and nailing a TD is rare and worth noting, cause the guy's TDD is no joke. On the other hand, I've also wrestled with guys where a TD is a free-bee, so it's very perspective.

Nailing a TD against someone with TDD skill is a strong talent, but it's not damaging, so again, it's philosophical and perspective at the end of the day.
__________________
CERTIFIED STRENGTH & CONDITIONING COACH - NSCA CSCS
VolcomX311 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 10-13-2009, 02:40 AM   #12 (permalink)
Amatuer
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 188
flexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura aboutflexor has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finnsidious View Post
I think takedowns are a little overrated, but why not look at the flip side of the coin? Takedown defense is undervalued. No one likes to see a guy win a fight by lay n pray, but the bottom line is, someone who can take you down multiple times is controlling the fight, and where the fight goes, even if they are not doing much damage. It is imperative that a successful fighter be able to control the fights location, and if he can't, he isn't successful.

Someone like Liddell is a guy who relied a lot on outsriking guys, he was a bit one dimensional, but he was a champion. He got away with it because his takedown defence was really good. (Then people figured out how to outstrike him and he got old fast) Then look at a guy like Houston Alexander. Strong and a very good striker, but his ground game and takedown defence are useless, so the result is, he is virtually a can. Matt Hughes is another good example, he sucked balls at striking, but won the takedown game bigtime, so he was a dominant fighter.

If you can't take someone down, you better be able to stop them from doing it to you, it is probably the single most important aspect of MMA. I hate lay n pray as much as the next guy, but either defend the takedown or lose, it's that simple. If a fighter can't defend it, he's not good enough at a crucial aspect of MMA.
This is a great assesment of the issue. I think you have to seperate TD's from lay n pray completely.

Guys like Alexander. Pat Berry, Drew Mcfedries, etc. can't beat you if you negate their striking ability by putting them on the floor. Thus TD's equate to solid defense and game plan. It's the ref's job to stand them up if their TD leads to no action. If a striker gets taken down 20 times and can't execute his strengths, then he isn't controlling the fight and should lose. I can't stand blanket parties with no offense, but i also don't care to see one dimensional strikers get their ass handed to them because they can't prevent their opponent from planting them on the ground.

The ref and the rules are what should be scrutinized when the fight devolves to a no offense affair. This is just as much the fault of a guy who can't stop TD's as it is the guy who can't do anything once he secures one.
flexor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 02:41 AM   #13 (permalink)
Featherweight
 
Iuanes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,164
Iuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A BallerIuanes Is A Baller
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropKick View Post
Why should a sub attempt be judged the same as a take down? A sub attempt is only an attempt, not a successful submission. That would be like saying you should get credit for a take down attempt because you tried it? Trying to work a submission and not getting it is like a punch that doesn't connect. It really doesn't matter. Also, what would constitute and effective / good attempt? There really isn't a way to gauge it. Now if you want to argue that the guy trying sub attempts is being more active than that's a different argument.
You have to define what a sub attempt is. Shifting your hips and trying to throw your leg over the face of your opponent and failing should not count as a sub attempt in my opinion. Getting both legs around the opponents arm and the opponent trying to stop you from isolating it further should count as an attempted armbar, and, assuming that your opponent did no damage after the takedown, count for more than the takedown itself. Also, you are equating a takedown to a sub attempt when they are different things.

It essentially comes down to, what is closer to finishing the fight/ what causes damage? Takedowns are a means to an end, and should not count for anything in themselves unless they directly cause damage (eg. Randy busting Gonzagas nose). For a round lacking any other scoring, or where the scoring is even, the round should go to the fighter with the most dominant positioning, whether it be on top or pressing against the cage or standing in the center of the ring. Otherwise dominance should mean nothing compared to damage/endangerment.

For example, I remember in the BJ vs Kenny fight Rogan was talking about the pressure Florian was putting on BJ against the cage. What he said was that even if BJ landed just a couple shots, and Florian did nothing but put pressure in the whole round, BJ would win the round. I think this is fair and should apply to takedowns-- that is, worth nothing in themselves but would be part of considering dominant positioning in case of a 'draw'.

Though more subjective, I think really close sub attempts should count more than takedowns. For the reason that failing to stop a takedown does not mean the fight is over, merely that the position is different, whereas failing to stop a sub attempt means the fight is over. You can also say that the 'level of dominance' is greater in a tight sub attempt,than say from full guard, in lieu of the fact that the defending fighter is confined to a narrower range of options/movements if he is trying to defend the submission.

Like I said, sub attempts are more subjective, which is why I think it is necessary to get more learned MMA people to do the judging.

Personally, I would gauge a sub attempt on how reactive the opposing fighter needs to be to defend it, how long the attempt lasts, and how restricted the opponents is. Of course, only experts would and should be the judges based on the knowledge of positions themselves.
Iuanes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 02:49 AM   #14 (permalink)
It's Hammer Time!
 
Hammerlock2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 8,317
Hammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings SystemHammerlock2.0 Is Beyond A Rankings System
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropKick View Post
Why should a sub attempt be judged the same as a take down? A sub attempt is only an attempt, not a successful submission. That would be like saying you should get credit for a take down attempt because you tried it? Trying to work a submission and not getting it is like a punch that doesn't connect. It really doesn't matter. Also, what would constitute and effective / good attempt? There really isn't a way to gauge it. Now if you want to argue that the guy trying sub attempts is being more active than that's a different argument.
The guy with the Aoki avatar whose name I forgot said it in another thread and I agree with him: a sub attempt is the equivalent of rocking somebody and should be counted as such. I'm not talking about the 'I touched your arm for a second, so it's a kimura attempt', but the really tight ones as seen in the Cerrone/Henderson fight. If you don't score a good submission attempt like a good strike that rocked your opponent the whole system is just not fair for BJJ guys.
Hammerlock2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 02:55 AM   #15 (permalink)
Amateur
 
Devil_Bingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wales,UK
Posts: 173
Devil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the roughDevil_Bingo is a jewel in the rough
What about a take down and the guy on bottom is doing more that guy on top? how does the point scoring work then?
Devil_Bingo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 03:57 AM   #16 (permalink)
of Nazareth
 
Soojooko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Moon
Posts: 7,814
Soojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF Material
Some damn fine points being bought up. The scoring system certainly leaves lots open for debate.

Personally, I don't like the whole LnP thing, but I don't see any other option. In my eyes its no different to the pitter-pat hit and run jabs that many stand up fighters go for. If we stop scoring for takedowns if they dont result in any damage or dominant positions, then we also need to stop scoring strikes that do no damage. This, my friends, is a can of worms we really don't want to open!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Devil_Bingo View Post
What about a take down and the guy on bottom is doing more that guy on top? how does the point scoring work then?
I think the recent Guida vs Sanchez was a good example. Diego was very active off his back in the last round which he won. The round saw Guida fighting off a serious submission attempt ( from the top ) for the last minute of the round which certainly did him no favours. Fights can be won off your back if the guy on top isn't doing enough and you are, thats for sure.

Last edited by Soojooko : 10-13-2009 at 04:02 AM.
Soojooko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 04:21 AM   #17 (permalink)
KO artist
 
Liddellianenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Iowa
Posts: 4,036
Liddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings SystemLiddellianenko Is Beyond A Rankings System
No, takedowns are very valuable and should be weighted heavily in scoring. IMO it all comes down to the roots of MMA... essentially, MMA was designed to be the closest thing to real combat. In the beginning, there was no judging or time limit, no standups, and a whole lot more things you could do to a guy once you took him down. In such a situation, as in a real fight, the guy on top is at a heavy advantage. I mean if you get taken down on the streets and don't have buddies around, you're ****ed pretty bad even with subs ... the guy can hit so many cheap spots, you're pretty much done.

As MMA evolved, time limits and judging were introduced, and more and more areas were made off limits. Now if you got mounted, you could just turn over, and voila, you're magically protected from punches to the back of the head, neck, or spine, by the rules. This kind of thing would get you killed in real combat. Or some dude could have you in side control, but you could chill out and catch your breath, maybe even "be active" from that position because the guy on top isn't allowed to knee you in the head anymore, or stand up and stomp etc. This kinda thing would never work with old rules or in real fighting.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad MMA evolved and became a safer sport... I don't think I would've ever trained it if it meant getting my nuts smashed and never having kids. But I think the scoring should continue to reflect how effective something would be in the absence of all these restrictions. Takedowns SHOULD score huge, because in the absence of all these restrictions and standups, a guy on top could've done a ton of damage. It shouldn't automatically give you the win or be overweighted, but the current scoring system is fine. And they should definitely be scored more than sub "attempts" .. because a sub attempt is just that, something attempted and failed. If you land a sub, great... but the restrictive rules on striking only allow you to take ridiculous unrealistic risks with subs anyway, you shouldn't be rewarded for essentially failing.

My whole take on judging is that if MMA gets too far removed from it's roots and becomes completely unrealistic, it goes the direction of boxing and becomes a pointless boring endeavor. A couple of dudes that throw one punch an hour from behind giant pillows and then hug each other for an hour as soon as the other guy throws. This rule based drag is not what Boxing was meant to be, it was meant to be something that could actually work to some extent in real life, a "combat" sport and not just a sport for it's own sake.
Liddellianenko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 04:44 AM   #18 (permalink)
of Nazareth
 
Soojooko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Moon
Posts: 7,814
Soojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF MaterialSoojooko Is Future HOF Material
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liddellianenko View Post
No, takedowns are very valuable and should be weighted heavily in scoring. IMO it all comes down to the roots of MMA... essentially, MMA was designed to be the closest thing to real combat. In the beginning, there was no judging or time limit, no standups, and a whole lot more things you could do to a guy once you took him down. In such a situation, as in a real fight, the guy on top is at a heavy advantage. I mean if you get taken down on the streets and don't have buddies around, you're ****ed pretty bad even with subs ... the guy can hit so many cheap spots, you're pretty much done.

As MMA evolved, time limits and judging were introduced, and more and more areas were made off limits. Now if you got mounted, you could just turn over, and voila, you're magically protected from punches to the back of the head by the rules. This kind of thing would get you killed in real combat. Or some dude could have you in side control, but you could chill out and catch your breath, maybe even "be active" from that position because the guy on top isn't allowed to knee you in the head anymore, or stand up and stomp etc. This kinda thing would never work with old rules or in real fighting.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad MMA evolved and became a safer sport... I don't think I would've ever trained it if it meant getting my nuts smashed and never having kids. But I think the scoring should continue to reflect how effective something would be in the absence of all these restrictions. Takedowns SHOULD score huge, because in the absence of all these restrictions and standups, a guy on top could've done a ton of damage. It shouldn't automatically give you the win or be overweighted, but the current scoring system is fine. And they should definitely be scored more than sub "attempts" .. because a sub attempt is just that, something attempted and failed. If you land a sub, great... but the restrictive rules on striking only allow you to take ridiculous unrealistic risks with subs anyway, you shouldn't be rewarded for essentially failing.

My whole take on judging is that if MMA gets too far removed from it's roots and becomes completely unrealistic, it goes the direction of boxing and becomes a pointless boring endeavor. A couple of dudes that throw one punch an hour from behind giant pillows and then hug each other for an hour as soon as the other guy throws. This rule based drag is not what Boxing was meant to be, it was meant to be something that could actually work to some extent in real life, a "combat" sport and not just a sport for it's own sake.
I enjoyed reading that. Thanks.

Taking a guy to the ground is a very big thing in real world combat. It's good to remember this once in a while.
Soojooko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 06:53 AM   #19 (permalink)
MMA Fanatic
 
mmamasta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Baltimore, Md
Posts: 94
mmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the roughmmamasta is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by DropKick View Post
Why should a sub attempt be judged the same as a take down? A sub attempt is only an attempt, not a successful submission. That would be like saying you should get credit for a take down attempt because you tried it? Trying to work a submission and not getting it is like a punch that doesn't connect. It really doesn't matter. Also, what would constitute and effective / good attempt? There really isn't a way to gauge it. Now if you want to argue that the guy trying sub attempts is being more active than that's a different argument.
No, I don't think you should get credit for a takedown attempt. And no, I don't think you should get credit for EVERY weak sub attempt. But, I think it goes without saying that an oma-plata that's really tight early on in a fight can mess up a fighter's shoulder for the remainder of the fight. When it comes down to it, close submission attempts are far more dangerous than lay'n'pray takedowns, and should be scored as such.

I'm not asking for bjj to be scored more heavily than wrestling, just equally. I think mma scoring needs to get closer to what is more damaging, dangerous, and threatening, and try to get away from the positioning/points battle it is (because THATS why alot of used-to-be boxing fans are mma fans, myself included)
mmamasta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2009, 09:06 AM   #20 (permalink)
Middleweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,615
TERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of KnowledgeTERMINATOR Is True Champion Of Knowledge
If takedowns are in your strategy to win then I would say no takedowns are not overated.
__________________
Grinding Gears
TERMINATOR is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

VerticalSports
Baseball Forum Golf Forum Boxing Forum Snowmobile Forum
Basketball Forum Soccer Forum MMA Forum PWC Forum
Football Forum Cricket Forum Wrestling Forum ATV Forum
Hockey Forum Volleyball Forum Paintball Forum Snowboarding Forum
Tennis Forum Rugby Forums Lacrosse Forum Skiing Forums
Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2
Powered by vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2009 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios