Is the UFC encouraging fights to stay standing up?
by kdog on Dec 28, 2008 5:34 PM EST
Email
Print
A bunch of my friends gathered to watch ufc 92 which was awesome and we had a really good time watching the action. Many of us had the same thoughts and I was looking for feedback on this awesome mma site to an observation we had about the ufc 92 and more recent ufc events.
Is it just me or do many of the fights stay standing much longer than in years past? I've been watching ufc for about 8 yrs and I never can remember this many fights not going to the ground. Last night's fights consisted of exactly 0 tapouts I believe from submissions... Correct me if I'm wrong but what I'm seeing lately are stand up kick boxing matches. Has anyone else noticed that many recent fights this year have stayed standing up and relatively little jiu-jitsu has been used on the ground? MIr-Nogeira featured two BJJ black belts known for their submissions yet they stayed standing up the whole fight? Also, Evans-Griffin took three rounds to finally hit the mat. Why wouldn't have Evans taken Forrest down much earlier in the fight to stay away from the leg kicks which were hurting him.
Now I know many fans like to see the action stay on the feet but my quesiton is do the fighters intend this to be the case? As many of you are probably aware elite xc was caught encouraging fighters to keep the fights standing especially against Kimbo Slice etc. They encouraged fighters to keep the fight standing by increasing their payouts at the end of the fights. Now I'm not saying this is the case in the ufc at all it's just that I am thinking out loud of why so many more fights stay standing nowadays.
Other reasons could be the style of today's fighters and the desire to have the best knockout of the night to gain recognition etc. I'm perplexed as you can tell and I would really appreciate any thoughts out there on this subject.
The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No. They are not.
We had evidence that EXC was rewarding fighters for not going to the ground – not the case here.
by Derek Suboticki on Dec 28, 2008 5:50 PM EST reply actions
Did you watch UFC 91?
Here ya go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFC_91
3/5 main card fights ended in submission, and 2/4 dark matches.
To answer your questions:
1: Its common when 2 ground guys come together that they stay standing, especially when one of them (Mir) knows that if he goes to the ground he will lose. So he stood up where he had the advantage, and he won.
2: Evans probably waited until the third round because he wanted to box (you may have noticed that he is pretty good at it?), but when Forrest was out boxing him, he decided to go to the ground.
Every fight made sense last night, imo.
by mythbuster on Dec 28, 2008 5:51 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
myth pretty much nailed it.
1-Absolutely. Often we see guys ground games canceling each other out. Last night, we saw Nog, with a reputation for good boxing, stand with Mir, a guy with a reputation for not being a striker (deserved or not). Mir had a good game plan and I’m sure Nog did as well, but Mir just proved to be better that night. It would have been much riskier on the ground, where even a badly beaten fighter can pull out a sub.
2-Forrest is much bigger than Rashad, stature wise and has good td defense. It would have been bad for rashad to expend that much energy to try and try to take him down. Instead, he waited for the right moment and when it went to the ground, implemented his gnp. And, quite frankly, Rashad is far more dangerous standing than Forrest is. Evans has a ton of KO power in his hands, Forrest is more of a chip away type of striker.
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
Yep.
1. See Nog/Werdum or Sherk/T. Griffin for Ground + Ground = Strikes
2. I suspect Evans wanted another highlight KO against Forrest and when he saw it wasn’t happening, used scary GnP.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 28, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks for the responses
Maybe it is was just last night’s card or some previous fights I had anticipated going to the ground earlier and they didn’t. I do think this is something worth noting and discussing further as MMA evolves. It may be that fighter’s overall are becoming much more multi-faceted and that if someone feels they have a striking advantage all they will concentrate on is sprawling or take-down defense to keep the fight on the feet.
I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it. ~Rogers Hornsby
I think it is just natural to think that 2 bjj guys will turn into a ground fight or 2 wrestlers will end up grappling or working for takedowns. Just once you think it through some you realize that the way to beat the same style of fighter, is to go against the grain a little.
Eliot Marshall: Bader won. Like I said in the episode, I'm not going to make any excuses. It's my job to be able to deal with when somebody's doing that. It's not his job to change up his tactics.
http://eliotmarshall.com/
I think maybe you’re grasping at straws here. I don’t believe there’s some conspiracy to keep fights standing. I think that fighters who prefer to stand have much better takedown defense than in years past.
True this. I also suspect that the evolution of fighting styles contributes heavily to style matchups staying on the feet. It’ll balance out some more as they keep evolving, but right now there are a LOT of style matchups that contribute to fighters remaining standing.
by Michaelthebox on Dec 28, 2008 7:23 PM EST up reply actions
Correct.
The current point in the evolutionary timeline of MMA contributes to these tactical stand-up battles, often finished with severely brutal GnP (exactly as we saw from Kongo and Rashad in 92). Submissions generally happen, at this point in time, when one fighter makes a mistake or is clipped/stunned and the opponent decides to go for a choke or something while he’s still seeing stars.
I love watching good grappling matches, but I’m afraid that the overall striking ability of MMA fighters has gotten good enough that many fighters are more comfortable taking style matchups in the standup game, rather than rolling the dice on the ground. Things are much more volatile on the ground than in the standup.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
But..
How much of it involves fighters avoiding the the idea that being on top = winning and being at the bottom = losing? I know BJ Penn stated once before that he’d rather stand than fight from his back and get submissions in order to get a favorable judge’s decision, since, judges today still lacks the ground/BJJ knowledge that they ultimately end up scoring fights from fighter’s position (top=dominant..) and completely disregarding their attempts at or escape from submissions.
I think this factors a lot in the evolution of MMA right now.
I don't think judges are necessarily oblivious to the BJJ elements
of a fight. Far from it. I think they may understand its place and application inside the MMA arena better than most BJJ fans…
BJJ is what it is: a defensive fighting style. A beautifully simple, and horrifically lethal one, but a defensive style nonetheless. A fighter is judged partially on aggressiveness and octagon control, and I really don’t think of a guy laying in his guard, waiting for an opening as driving either component. Occasionally you’ll see a guy who, once he latches on, is absolutely dominating from the bottom (think someone like Maia, or Palhares) and controls the fight once it’s there, but the vast majority of the time most fighters are on their backs, they’re merely defending themselves while providing the threat of finishing the fight.
I have nothing against BJJ fighters. I am absolutely thrilled when I see two guys rolling through transitions and fighting for ‘sweeps’ and reversals, as this is a far more technical and observable method of conflict than striking often is. But I believe the point stands. Wrestling is about controlling the opponent, and driving the action in a given direction. BJJ is about reacting to your opponent and finding a way to finish him. They’re two sides of the same coin, and I believe it’s because of this simple difference that BJJ fans often feel slighted when it comes to the judge’s scorecards.
And I understand that many BJJ enthusiasts will feel obligated to correct my ‘misconceptions’ of BJJ, but I would remind those people that I’m not talking about BJJ in its pure form. I’m talking about it as it fits into the MMA game.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
