On the First Day of Christmas, FightMetric Gave to Me...

by Mike Fagan on Dec 25, 2009 1:08 PM EST in News Comment 24 comments

Since we started producing in-depth fight reports way back in 2007, there has been one fight that is consistently our most requested: the controversial heavyweight championship match between Bas Rutten and Kevin Randleman from way back at UFC 20. And while we've had the stats compiled for that fight for quite some time, it just never seemed like the right moment to publish the report. But now, for those that have been clamoring for it, here is our holiday present to you.

Before I get into the fight, FightMetric's been around for two years now? Seems like yesterday that I first heard Rami on the Jordan Breen Show.

It's been awhile since I've seen the Rutten/Randleman fight, so I found some tape and rewatched it. Like most, I scored the bout for Randleman. I'm as big a proponent for viewing takedowns strictly as a means to an end and that a fighter can win a round or fight off his back as you'll find. That said, Randleman looked to have done enough to deserve the nod. While he became content to sit in Rutten's guard as the fight wore on, he did pass to half-guard and side mount two and three times respectively over the duration of the bout.

The big question in the fight, however, is how much do you value Rutten's activity? According to FightMetric's report, Rutten landed 180 strikes during the fight. It's safe to estimate that over 90% of those strikes were thrown off his back. Does that volume (which FightMetric scored mostly as head jabs) outweigh Randleman's grappling and positional dominance (and great volume of power strikes)?

Here's the full striking breakdown for the fight:

	Rutten	Randleman
Head Power	9 / 18	19 / 58
Head Jab	152 / 156	32 / 49
Body Power	6 / 7	1 / 3
Body Jab	10 / 10	4 / 4
Leg Power	2 / 2	0 / 0
Leg Jab	1 / 1	0 / 0

It's been ten years since Bas had his hand raised at UFC 20, and we still don't have a clear distinction of how to score striking vs. grappling in an MMA bout. On one hand, we can be upset that ten years has gone by with seemingly little progress. But on the other hand, we should appreciate the beauty derived from the rich, complex nature of MMA.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I’m as big a proponent for viewing takedowns strictly as a means to an end and that a fighter can win a round or fight off his back as you’ll find.

With you on the second part, but doesn’t Mark Hamill getting transformed into a helpless mewling kitten by a savage Jon Jones trip effect your opinion of takedowns at all?

by some schmuck in texas on Dec 25, 2009 11:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

affect, even.

Not to mention the fight leaving Gonzaga due to Couture’s slam, etc.

by some schmuck in texas on Dec 25, 2009 11:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he had the bread-and-butter strictly positional wrestling takedown in mind.

by capital L on Dec 25, 2009 11:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I think we need takedowns need to lead to damage for the most part. If the takedown does damage then that’s a major move.

by SES 84 on Dec 25, 2009 11:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I discussed this in my alternate Unified Rules article (in the comments, anyway). I believe FightMetric defines a slam as any takedown in which the opponent’s feet are removed from the floor and he/she is put on his/her back in one motion. It’s a quick-and-dirty definition, but I think it does a good job of covering most takedowns that inflict some sort of damage.

FightMetric didn’t score any slams for Randleman in this fight, for what it’s worth.

But yeah, I was speaking more so with your garden variety single, double, etc.

Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com

by Mike Fagan on Dec 25, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

fair enough

I don’t want to suggest that all transitions from standing to floor are equal, simply that in a lot of cases the attack is widely undervalued. I suspect that the next major advances in mma technique are going to be high impact takedowns gaining usage (Jones, judo guys) and more sophisticated footwork allowing strikers to control distance and opportunity better (Machida.)

I’ll have to go back to that previous post – I remember liking it generally, though.

by some schmuck in texas on Dec 25, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gotta love Koscheck's power doubles though.

Thought that Rumble was going through the cage…

"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe

by pdl on Dec 25, 2009 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by argyle on Dec 25, 2009 11:57 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs

I’m not sure I get the joke, but I like it.

Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com

by Mike Fagan on Dec 25, 2009 12:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

MATT Hamill got whomped by Jones. Not MARK Hamill.

He got whomped by a car.

by some schmuck in texas on Dec 25, 2009 12:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ufc 112: Jones vs. Skywalker

by amadeus on Dec 25, 2009 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs

Ewoks are such exciting competitors – its a damned shamed they’re only on WEC and Versus. If only more people could see them, I’m sure they’d get more respect and paydays commensurate with their talents.

by some schmuck in texas on Dec 25, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Anyone else watch all 3 movies on Spike last night?

Man that was fun

by Shaun32887 on Dec 25, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If your idea of fun is repeated eye gouges it was…

by Kefka on Dec 25, 2009 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No no no,

episodes 4, 5 and 6, not 1, 2 and 3.

by Shaun32887 on Dec 25, 2009 2:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

So True…

"In Russia, Hell goes to you!"

by actionbastard on Dec 25, 2009 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

aaaaaaaaand rec’d

http://mixedmartialartsblogger.wordpress.com/

by KrmtDfrog on Dec 25, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ahhhh. Good catch.

Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com

by Mike Fagan on Dec 26, 2009 12:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

DARR!

hahahaha

Yeah, just look what Jones did to his face!

by some schmuck in texas on Dec 25, 2009 12:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Bas got a gift-wrapped title win here

I was shocked at the time by the decision and appalled on re-viewing it a few years ago.
I’ve always wondered if Randleman’s race impacted the decision-making of the Alabama judges.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Kid Nate on Dec 25, 2009 1:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I’ve always attributed that win Bob Meywitz’s checkbook more than racial bias.

SEG REALLY wanted Bas to be their champion. The spent a ton of money to get him and hyped the shit out of his arrival.

by Steve4192 on Dec 25, 2009 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

El Guapo likes to dance

by milk72 on Dec 25, 2009 5:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah Randleman had the take downs, just did absolutely nothing with ‘em. I mean, you gotta work. Yeah Bas didn’t fight great. Do i think those palm strikes from the bottom should be grounds for winning a fight, hell no! Do i think Randleman dumping you then lying on you for 3-5 minutes should win the fight, f—ck no! I really don’t care who won. I’m not sure this fight is the one to have the grappling v striking argument with. I’de say Meywitz, i’de maybe say alabama, i’de say the “truly beat the favorite” argument (albeit a shitty argument), and the overall shitty fight were the reasons. Then again i havent seen the fight in years, and i just finished another cup of egg nogg ..

by MBreezy on Dec 25, 2009 8:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs