Mixed Martial Arts Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://www.mmafighting.com/2010/03/30/georges-st-pierre-s-dominance-by-the-numbers/

Twitterholic and UFC President Dana White said that during last Saturday's UFC 111 title fight between Georges St. Pierre and Dan Hardy, his Twitter feed – which is followed by over 1 million people – was blowing up with negative feeback on the fight.

The fans, it seemed, were not overly impressed by St. Pierre's systematic five-round beatdown of Hardy. Perhaps the fight was so dominant, so lopsided, that to them it bordered on boring. The somewhat absurd corollary to this is that people believe Hardy's stock shot up with the performance while St. Pierre's dipped.

Oh, really? The guy on the beating end gets a credibility boost for surviving while the guy on the business end of the punches somehow suffers? That's preposterous. Hardy does deserve credit, but if you think his survival was something to behold, it is only because of the attack that came his way. Either they both get credit, or neither does; I accept the former. St. Pierre's performance shows that he is true to his word of trying to break down a fight to a mathematical formula, and here are the statistics to prove it.

As the statistics – culled from our friends at Compustrike -- explain, he's simply on another level from the rest of the UFC's best welterweights, as evidenced by his last four performances, against Hardy, Thiago Alves, B.J. Penn and Jon Fitch. St. Pierre has dominated each of them.

First of all, let's put to rest the theory that says St. Pierre is afraid to stand up with strikers. The fact is that St. Pierre has easily out-struck his opposition in the standup.

In the four fights, St. Pierre landed 197 of 401 standup strikes (49 percent). His opponents landed 141 of 426 (33 percent). Most telling are the stats against Alves, who is considered the most dangerous striker of the bunch and had finished five of his previous six opponents with KOs or TKOs. GSP easily won the standup battle in a bout that had plenty of striking action. St. Pierre landed 62 of 132 standing strikes (47 percent) while Alves landed just 47 of 166 (28 percent). And there's no argument that St. Pierre blanketed Alves for the win. As the stats show, the fight was equally contested on the feet and on the ground; St. Pierre threw nearly half of his strikes on his feet (132 standing, 136 on the ground). Alves had his chances; he was simply out-classed.

That said, the building block of St. Pierre's attack is his wrestling. Based on near-perfect timing and seamless transitions, St. Pierre's wrestling continues to bear fruit with stunning effectiveness. In his last four fights, he's attempted 35 takedowns and completed 29, a staggering 83 percent clip. Against Hardy, he was a perfect 9-for-9. That wasn't the only jaw-dropping stat he authored against his recent British challenger. He avoided every single one of Hardy's standing arm strikes against him; Hardy was 0-for-17 in head-hunting. It seems likely that St. Pierre thought his ground advantage was so substantial against Hardy, there was literally no purpose to engaging him in the standup.

St. Pierre apologized for his performance after the fight, but he has nothing for which to be sorry. Football teams don't apologize for routing an opponent 42-0, neither do baseball teams for a rout or tennis players for steamrolling a foe in one-sided fashion. He simply dissected Hardy and overwhelmed him in his most vulnerable area. Everyone enjoys a good slugfest, but if you want MMA to be considered a sport, you can't complain about fighters employing actual strategy.

Many will complain about St. Pierre's lack of finishes (only Penn didn't make it to the final bell with him in that four-match stretch), but that's a function of the toughness of his opponents as much as St. Pierre's inability to close them out.

Think about the streaks that those opponents had been on before facing him:

• Hardy had won 12 of 13 (only loss coming via DQ) and hadn't been finished since 2005
• Fitch was on a 17-fight unbeaten stretch and hadn't been finished since 2002
• Alves had won 9 of 10 with his only loss coming to the aforementioned Fitch

That's a combined record of 38-2 just before facing St. Pierre, yet he steamrolled each of them. He knocked down Fitch four times during the course of the fight in a hellacious beating. He smashed Alves around for five rounds. He came close to submitting Hardy twice, and in truth, other fighters might have tapped from either the kimura or arm bar he applied.

St. Pierre hasn't lost a round on a judge's scorecard since round one against Josh Koscheck in Aug. 2007. That's 25 straight rounds of dominance, with no end in sight. If you criticize him for finishing only one of his four most recent opponents, you truly aren't seeing the bigger picture: he's fighting the best welterweights in the world and he's literally embarrassing them.
 

·
The American Dream
Joined
·
586 Posts
Was still a boring fight.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
nice post...i really dont know why they find GSP boring...hes trying to finish the fights always transitioning, GNP, even striking not much but when he does he outstrikes them. 170lb division has a lot of tough fighters that are hard to finish, GSP always goes in there and does his thing cant fault him for that get mad at his opponents that have no answer to his style.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,806 Posts
That explained it very well. Although GSP is one of the best WW if not the best, sometimes his fights could be a lot better if he made an honest attempt to finish like in the BJ fight. All in all this is an entertainment industry and sometimes he isn't all that entertaining although clearly dominant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
What the article says is true, but the information is skewed.

1) To my belief, fightmetric does not break down where a hit takes place. If GSP gains top control and throws a handful of punches from guard, do they count for the "head jab" total? I believe they do.

2) GSP transitions from a handful of jabs to the takedown. GSP does a one-two jab, backs out. One-two jab, lowers level, backs out. Feigns shot, jab jab, takedown.

Well, in the above scenario [which I made up, btw, but is how GSP has moved in the past], well, GSP just had a striking accuracy of 100%, and was 6/6. Damage? None.

GSP isn't as turtlish as people believe, but lets not get carried away and say he's a striking machine. GSP is a technical decision maker. He utilizes a solid gameplan where fighters fear his takedown, so GSP works them with hits until the opponent gets comfortable to start standing, in which case, GSP takes it to the ground.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
982 Posts
While I think that is a great article the cherry-picked win/loss numbers he throws out kind of annoys me. Picking their latest streak he could have said they were 30-0. Or he could just go by their real win/loss records and say at the time of facing GSP they were total 57-13. The ratios there are vastly different.

Other then that, awesome read and I completely agree. GSP faces only the best in a very stacked division and he dominates them completely. Even if he doesn't finish before the bell, he leaves no question.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
689 Posts
numbers don't make fights exciting everybody wants to see what they want not what someone else does so trying to get people to enjoy watching gsp is pointless
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
I have a few issues with this article:

1) I'd argue that the negative reaction isn't coming from "haters" so much as it is from dissapointed fans.

2) The striking stats are going to be skewed due to the fact that GSP's opponents aren't going to open up against him the way they would another fighter because they're so aware of the takedown threat.

3) I guess my brain is just having a hard time processing this. IMO if a fighter can get takedowns at will, "transition seamlessly", and dominate his opponent in every area including stand-up (nice stats)... then where the hell are the finishes? If asking that (in my mind, very logical) question means that I am a "hater" and I have to go "educate myself", then with all due respect to the author: Go screw yourself!

I know GSP is up against the best WWs in the world but the other champions in other divisions haven't had much problems putting the best in their divisions away as of late. Lyoto struggled against Shogun but he damn near killed Thiago and Rashad. Brock KO'd Couture and Mir; Carwin KO'd Gonzaga and Mir. Anderson Silva is arguably the scariest fighter on the planet and BJ has finished EVERY fight at 155 since going back down.

The author is looking at pure stats but if you look at the actual ebb and flow of the fights and the moments contained within, you'll see GSP had many opportunities to open up, inflict much more damage than he did and try harder to finish... but instead chose to play it safe. And that's the crux of the criticism; not "hate" but legitimate criticism.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
967 Posts
Agree with the article wholeheartedly. People can say GSP is boring to them if they want, they are entirely entitled to their opinion. The people I don't understand are those that believe not finishing opponents should have some sort of effect on Georges p4p status or ranking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I already stated that this article was for the haters who claim all GSP does is "lay n pray," or that he ONLY uses wrestling.

I'm not trying to convince ppl that he isn't boring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,079 Posts
Agree with the article wholeheartedly. People can say GSP is boring to them if they want, they are entirely entitled to their opinion. The people I don't understand are those that believe not finishing opponents should have some sort of effect on Georges p4p status or ranking.
Yup. See, "boring" is subjective, and will vary from person to person. If you find GSP boring, that's OK & I respect that. But it's not a blanket-statement "fact". Personally, I was pumped for that whole fight, and loved seeing him totally dominate yet again. But hey, that's just me.
 

·
NO. 1 *BONER*
Joined
·
7,727 Posts
Great find. I agree 100%. The fight wasn't boring. Maybe it's time for his opponents to learn some TDD. Why hasn't anywone asked themselves that question?
Take this in consideration. GSP hasn't wrestled profesionaly in his life. All of his wrestling skills are the results of thousands of hours of hard-hard work and dedication. He didn't get thos wrestling skills by mail or as a Christmas gift. Why aren't the others capapble of doing the same thing??? Maybe because they're laizy? Or they don't have the motivation? What is it?
He lost to Hughes and Serra and he evolved into a better fighter after those losses, but only because he had the ambition to do so. That's the reason i respect him more than anything.

2) The striking stats are going to be skewed due to the fact that GSP's opponents aren't going to open up against him the way they would another fighter because they're so aware of the takedown threat.
Well. In this case, it sounds like his opponents are the one who are scared of striking with him, and it's not GSP the one who is affraid of the striking. Isn't it?
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top