Georges St. Pierre Suggests Some Good Rules Changes
In the best making lemonade from lemons tradition, Team Greg Jackson has suggested some very good possible rules changes to address the possibility of fighters greasing themselves before or during fights. From MMA Weekly:
The statement suggests continuing the current pre-fight "touch test" to detect both the presence of water and petroleum based lubricants that could have been applied to the fighter's body hours before the bout.
In addition to that rule, they believe a pre-fight rubdown, excluding the face and gloves of the fighter, with a towel containing alcohol or another commission approved solvent to guarantee any lubricants applied before the fight are removed.
The team also mentions the possibility of rubbing the fighters down between rounds with a dry towel to remove any Vaseline applied that may have "migrated" to the fighter's body during the bout.
These are very solid suggestions. I think that implementing these and allowing Aoki pants will be entirely sufficient to keep the submissions game a full 1/3 of MMA and prevent the sports' degeneration into bad kickboxing.
Those who are opposed to allowing Aoki pants have argued that allowing equipment in the cage is a slippery slope. My counter is this -- we already have equipment -- four ounce gloves -- that makes it significantly harder to apply a rear naked choke. That and the rules against striking the back of the head have made taking the back much less than the utterly dominating position it is in a real fight. Add the rule against knees on the ground and wrestlers are getting more and more advantages by the minute.
What's wrong with submissions? Is there someone out there who doesn't enjoy seeing them? Aoki pants won't hurt the game, they'll improve it for the fans and fighters both.
131 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
My only thought on the Aoki pants
is that careful consideration needs to be paid to the idea of grabbing those pants.
Currently, grabbing a fighter’s shorts is illegal, however many grappling techniques involved grabbing legs to control your opponent in a variety of situations. I would not want to see “aoki pants” be used to eliminate a valid grappling techique through expansion of the “no grabbing the shorts” rule.
as long as you're not grabbing the seam at the waist or the ankles
and not grabbing bunches of spandex in your hands seems like it would be fine.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
And immediately whe go off topic
The rule changes suggested by Jackson/St Pierre were about greasing. Kid Nate suggested Aoki-pants. I think the headline of this piece should be
Kid Nate uses a some good possible rule changes as an opportunity to implying that GSP/Jackson likes Aoki-pants
But maybe that`s to long?
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Feb 27, 2009 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
guilty as charged
There wasn’t much to say about the GSP/Jackson suggestions beyond, I like them! Thought I’d weigh in with my own $0.02 on Aoki pants.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
by Kid Nate on Feb 27, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Heh. Honesty is an endearing trait.Must admit I like em too though.
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Feb 27, 2009 3:02 PM EST up reply actions
Grabbing Aoki’s pants would be blatantly obvious. How are you going to get away with grabbing into the inside of his pant leg from the bottom? Gripping onto a seam? You know how hard that would be to actually maintain. A slight movement would likely break the hold.
I think it’d be pretty obvious.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Feb 27, 2009 3:36 PM EST up reply actions
The gloves are there to protect the fighters’ hands from injury. “Aoki pants” would provide additional friction to the legs of a grappler beyond what is “normal”. In a way it is the exact opposite of greasing, and “cheating” in the other direction. I like a fight to progress as normally as possible. And if a good wrestler or striker can defend against submission in to the later rounds where sweat makes it naturally more difficult to apply a submission, well then that’s part of the game. Maybe the submission specialist needs to improve his stand-up game and become more well rounded.
by drightler on Feb 27, 2009 10:35 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
The idea of a “normal” fight went out the window as soon as the unified rules were implemented. Also in a normal fight people are usually clothed so sweat is not an issue. I don’t think this argument stands up.
I agree with Kid Nate, these rules currently favour wrestlers as the submission aspect of fighting is now becoming more difficult. When gloves were introduced it increased the chance of knockouts and made the sport more exciting. “Aoki pants”, I feel, would have a similar effect when a fight hits the ground. More submission attempts, close escapes and finishes would be a good thing, making the sport more entertaining.
Gloves provide an advantage to wrestlers (harder to submit people) and strikers (easier to knock people out), Aoki pants would even the playing field for submissions.
I believe you miss the point of the rules. They want to minimize the effect of equipment on the fight. The gloves are there for protection, not advantage. The same for the mouthpiece and cup. The shorts are there so people aren’t running around naked. The pants provide no protective purpose, only advantageous ones.
I think they need to do body swabs at the end of a fight when they do the urine test. Anything other than sweat comes back and you get fined and suspended. You need to eliminate greasing, not introduce advantages.
by drightler on Feb 27, 2009 10:59 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
I beg to differ.
Leg-locks seem to be a lot easier with aoki-pants. And if greasing increases the risk of injury (according to Penn), then I would like to say that making leg-locks easier to apply is just asking for a lot more damaged knee`s.
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Feb 27, 2009 11:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I understand that the point of the gloves was protection but the knock on benefit is advantageous to strikers, ie that they can punch a hell of a lot harder with less risk of breaking anything. There was an article I read a year or so ago which showed how the number of knock outs actually increased as a result of gloves being introduced. This rule provides a benefit to some fighters over others
Kneeing to the head of a grounded opponent, this too is advantageous to certain fighters, those with a strong wrestling base. But as a matter of safety I don’t think it should be allowed.
I was not arguing that the pants are a solution to the grease problem (although they would go some way to solving the problem). I was agreeing with Kid Nate, I think it would lead to more exciting fights. MMA is not a level playing field (between areas of speciality), the sport never will be when there are rules. Giving this slight edge to grapplers would be positive in that the sport would get more exciting. And I say this knowing full well that more lycra in the octagon is a very disturbing though!
Leg-locks increasing the risk of injury is a problem, but if a fighter struggles instead of tapping when they are caught they will get hurt just like with an arm-bar. The only way to solve this is to ban them, but this is a sport where people punch each other in the face…
by nidge on Feb 27, 2009 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Too costly...
You think a commission, that is already hard pressed for cash as it is, is going to swab every fighter and then have it analyzed? It’s too costly. It’s a great idea, but it’s way too costly. The CSAC and NSAC already bitch and moan about monetary funding.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Feb 27, 2009 3:39 PM EST up reply actions
Who’s pocket does the post fight urine tests come from? Tax payers? I would think it was built into the fighter/promoter license fees. As should be the cost of swabbing.
I would think so too, but this always comes up when a steroid test comes up positive and all sorts of people start bitching about testing. The more testing you do, the more costly it becomes, and if it goes to the actual fighters/camps, and ultimately to the promotions like the UFC paying for them, it’s going to be an even more hotly debated topic.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Feb 27, 2009 4:44 PM EST up reply actions
this ^
Aoki pants aren’t a good solution, they’re a compromise. Idealy, fighters wouldn’t grease and Aoki pants would remain unallowed. Realistically, there dosen’t apear to be a way to guarantee fighters grease (I’m referring to the ramblings going around about fighters taking oil baths and such) but I’m not so sure that allowing Aoki pants is the way to go. It sounds to me like fighting a problem by intorducing another problem. Also, no one ever talked about “leveling the playing field for submissions” via Aoki pants prior to GreaseGate..
Kuwabara Kuwabara
by J. B. Maddox on Feb 27, 2009 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
I’m wondering how close fighters could come to replicating “Aoki pants” even if the long tights themselves were in fact not allowed….
A fighter could wear the tight spandex “Vale Tudo” shorts to begin with, and could wear ones that extend nearly to his knees. Fighters can also wear neoprene knee sleeves. They can also wear neoprene ankle supports.
With these 3 items, which are all allowed, a fighter could nearly replicate the entire functionality of “Aoki pants”, in a piecemeal arrangement
by Hardcharger on Feb 27, 2009 10:42 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I`ve wondered too why this is not done.
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Feb 27, 2009 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
interesting to me that you bring in tennis
What you say about that game was a fear in the late 90s. However, the effect has actually been reversed. The ability to create more spin with graphite rackets, and hyper-friction string has actually created longer rallies, longer matches than those seen between icons like Connors and McEnroe.
Further, the total end of the game style known as serve and volley pure ‘kamikaze’ attack tennis is part of the same effect. Annually, longest-match records are broken, and conditioning has become a more important factor. This year, Novak Djokovic, ranked 3 in the world, had to withdraw from the Aussie Open in the semis because of a combination of this increasingly dominant game style of attrition and 130 degree heat on the surface of the court.
Tennis may be dying on the vine in the U.S., but that’s more because of the fact that here, as opposed to Argentina, Spain, Czech, Russia, Brazil, it’s a country club sport. In those countries it’s an opportunity to escape poverty and therefore the players are ‘hungry’. Explains why 80% of DI NCAA tennis scholarships are taken by foreign athletes. They’re hungry, we’re soft in that sport.
Andre Agassi’s Dad won a bronze medal in the olympics as a boxer, for Iran. Our greatest champions in tennis have been the children of first or sometimes second generation Americans, not country club punks.
Now call me a pussy for knowing about tennis.
Totally agree.
The top player`s like are good at everything. Ten or fifteen years ago there were players that basically had a good forehand and a serve, nowadays they have a very hard time.
Roddick for instance is way to much power-based. No finesse, no angles.
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Feb 27, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
oh my
we are discussing tennis now?
Read My Blog
"Life's tough, tougher if you're stupid."
by Brandon Jones on Feb 27, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
Im glad someone caught on to that remark about tennis. It’s actually one of the most watched sports worldwide, so i was amazed to hear tennis being described as “dying on the vine”. I mean “uber boring fast service game”??? Wow.
Besides the level of skill 20 years ago is actually laughable compared to the level of skill shown in tennis today. Like all sports, it is constantly evolving, and the change of the racket was in my opinion one of the best changes ever. Its incredible the amount of technique and difficulty that it brought out. And I would certainly not refer to modern day finals, such as the one held recently at the Australian Open as “uber boring fast service games”.
PS: If you ask me lcollins1, Djokovic quit. He’s done it before (sore throat), and I have a feeling he might do it again. It was disappointing to say the least. The heat was bad, but many players during the tournament put up with temperatures as high as those that day.
by iamtheoriginalchris on Feb 27, 2009 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
lol
I should stick to MMA!
Tennis has certainly died on the vine in my world, I guess I shouldn’t extrapolate from that rather unique instance.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
my bad
I lost interest in tennis back when it became giant goobers smashing thousand mile per hour serves down each others throats.
Maybe I should have used aluminum bats as my bad example.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
hey I appreciate the inclusion. FWIW, in the tennis community there is a lot of metaphorical commentary relating to combat sports. Tennis players see themselves as combatants, at least at the high level. making someone run = body blows. Stiff jab = big serve. Style match-ups are a huge part of the game.
Here’s a statement you may not agree with: There are very few games that have the same head to head format, where one opponent directly deals with the other opponent like combat sports and tennis. And, you’re on an island, alone in both.
that I think is an excellent point
tennis is like mma with weapons! too bad that net is holding them back.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
Tennis is actually one of the few sports I enjoy watching. Baseball, MMA and Tennis. Baseball has a team component, but all the juicy stuff is one-on-one.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Feb 28, 2009 12:05 AM EST up reply actions
“What’s wrong with submissions? Is there someone out there who doesn’t enjoy seeing them?”
I think when there is a lull in the stand-up they should reset the fight on the ground, the same way when there is no work on the ground they stand the fight back up.
But it is very striker biased still.
What position would you like them to be reset to?
Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Feb 27, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
This is the most relevant critique here; how do you decide who is in top position and who is in guard.
Coin flip.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Feb 28, 2009 12:05 AM EST up reply actions
Or Rock, Paper, Scissors.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Feb 28, 2009 12:06 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, it’s called a whole lot of casual fans… and all the morons who boo fights.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Feb 27, 2009 3:41 PM EST up reply actions
So. Small rule changes an make a difference, eh?
When people talk about Pride vs UFC the only rule that seem to matter is the steroid-testing?
THe fact that small diffenrences like no-corners, no kicks or knees to the head, fast stand-ups, the size of the fighting area, length of rounds, no elbowsw on the ground doesn`t seem to matter much when they compare Pride vs UFC performances?
I would like to see statistics on what kind of submissions are used in Japan vs UFC. My guess is that for instance guillotines are more common in UFC, while leg-locks are more common in Japan.
Elbows negate Cro Cops “holding on for dear life” ground game and how would Stevenson ever get a win if people never tried single`s or buried their heads at his side while delivering elbows?
"They called him the axe-murderer because he was murdering chumps. They should have been calling him the chump-murderer..." Rampage Jackson (commentating on the fighting abilities of Wanderlei "F#ck Chuck" Silva.)
by BlueberryMuffin on Feb 27, 2009 10:58 AM EST reply actions
I've been meaning to write a piece
comparing the different MMA rule sets/environments (ring vs cage) for a long time. Sadly I was going to use a tennis metaphor — like grass court, clay court, hard court — but clearly need to do research before I ever bring up tennis again.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
Ah, don't get gunshy.
As a combat sports analyst (competitor?) you’ve gotta know that you only have so many strengths. Don’t let someone bully you off of them because of one bad exchange ;)
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Feb 28, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions
lol
thanks for the encouragement! its mostly lazyness and figuring out what to say beyond the initial thesis.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
But that's the beauty of the interwebz.
All you have to do is post a thesis, with supporting information of whatever quality and/or quantity, and the hordes will discuss it. Generally this will result in calls for your head, censorship, and financial penalties, all of which are accompanied by the traditional pitchforks and torches.
But generally, people will make your supporting arguments for you in the comments section. At least, that’s how I do it.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Pants would equal more money fighters
Imagine how much more money fighters would make by endorsing products/clothing companies on spandex pants. The pants are roughly twice the size of shorts, and I would think it would stand to reason that fighters could effectively double, if not more than double, revenue dollars from the apparel.
by I don't wear mma t-shirts on Feb 27, 2009 11:06 AM EST reply actions
caption should read “…more money for fighters”
by I don't wear mma t-shirts on Feb 27, 2009 11:12 AM EST reply actions
Equipment...
If fighters had the option of wearing Aoki pants, others would start demanding that they get to accessorize for their particular martial art as well. Wrestlers wanting their wrestling shoes, jiu-jitsu purists demanding their gis. That might be fine to some, but I prefer seeing everybody on fair footing, in as pure a fight setting as possible. It’s the same reason I prefer the inclusion of elbows and knees to a downed opponent. If strikes to the back of the head were safe, I’d keep those too. MMA is the sport of fighting, pure and simple. I wouldn’t want to see a bunch of specialized equipment being introduced. The line would need to be drawn somewhere – better to say no equipment at all.
True Olympic Fighting
Here I go again, If it’s going to be even then your going to have to go pretty far back. Oiled Naked men in pure competition. It’s the great equalizer. You don’t have to worry about fighters grabbing shorts and using them. You don’t have to worry about sweat and greasing cause they are all greased. You don’t have to worry about low blows or all the other problems involved in today’s fighting.
My counter is this — we already have equipment — four ounce gloves — that makes it significantly harder to apply a rear naked choke. That and the rules against striking the back of the head have made taking the back much less than the utterly dominating position it is in a real fight. Add the rule against knees on the ground and wrestlers are getting more and more advantages by the minute.
Gloves = safety (no broken hands)
Striking to the back of the head = safety (punching to the back of the head is crazy dangerous)
Knees on the groud = safety (right or wrong it is seen as a dangerous technique)
Pants = give an advantage to one specific type of fighter
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 11:25 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Brent, you and I are on opposite sides of the pants debate, and that’s fine. But it’s driving me nuts that these threads keep repeating the same pattern: 1) You mention that pants give an advantage to one fighter; 2) I refute by noting that the pants disadvantage the wearer with respect to takedowns and some guard passing techniques; and 3) somewhere else you comment again that the pants only provide and advantage for one fighter. So let me say this again: grappling pants are a trade-off. Armbars and triangles from the bottom and some other submissions like gogos are made easier (and not even in an absolute sense; only in the sense that sweat doesn’t become a factor, and since sweat isn’t a factor for strikers you could make the case that it’s just being fair to grapplers, but I digress). Stuffing takedowns, avoiding or escaping leg submissions, reguarding, and avoiding having your guard passed are all HARDER because, for those techniques, the improved (or rather, un-decreased) amount of friction favours the person attacking the legs. In reality, all the pants do is keep the fight a bit closer to the “all things being equal” situation that exists when the fight starts, and may the most skilled fighter win.
I understand that you’re critiquing Nate’s post, and I don’t disagree with you that the pants have nothing to do with safety. But beyond that, you don’t like the pants, and that’s fine. Just admit that you don’t have a problem with submission guys being unfairly disadvantaged after the first round when both fighters are sweaty. Don’t pretend that an alteration like this only works one way. There is always an equal and opposing reaction.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
Even if Brent won’t admit it, I will. If the guy is too sweaty to submit, oh well… you should have gotten it done earlier. Just like if a striker has punched himself out by round 3 and can’t bust a grape. Oh well. It’s all part of the game. And I’m not even anti-submission… I get just as excited over a slick submission as a spectacular knockout. But if it’s round three and a guy slaps on a triangle… with pants on… I’m going to attribute the win to the pants, not the skill of the fighter.
Doesn’t the gassing that goes on the in the later rounds account for some of this by diminishing one’s ability to power out of submissions like a strong/explosive guy can in the 1st?
2ndly, I’m now pretty interested in seeing the stats for this. It would be exceedingly difficult to get a good stat, but if we could, I’d love to see it.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Feb 27, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions
In general, wrestlers tend to some in with better cardio than submission guys as well.
by MonkeyCHops on Feb 27, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
That’s a problem of the submission guys rather than submissions.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Feb 27, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions
Also, your post made me think of something else I’ve been wondering about for awhile:
Is it imperative that we maintain the efficacy of submissions, or any other aspect of MMA, even if that requires giving them advantageous rules? Essentially, is the ultimate goal of the rules to insure effectiveness of all techniques and styles or is it to attempt to get to the least restrictive rules to allow the fight to progress as a fight (with safety concerns overriding these goals for obvious reasons)?
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Feb 27, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
This is something I was just thinking. Who cares if the BJJ guy has a disadvantage… or the wrestler… or the kickboxer. They all have the same 15 to 25 minutes to do the same thing… win the FIGHT. This isn’t wrestling, or kickboxing, or a BJJ tournament. It’s mixed martial arts. If you want to be a one trick pony, then you better be damn good at it.
Maybe submissions would be too powerful then and someone would suggest adding a piece of equipment to sway it back the other way a bit. This could continue to the point that both fighters are wearing robot suits. At least it would still be better than Nascar
by MonkeyCHops on Feb 27, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
submissions have been a key part of mma since the beginning
in fact in the early years they were the predominant style.
Ideally I’d like to see MMA maintain a nice balance 30% striking at a distance 30% clinch fighting/takedowns 30% groundfighting with lots of transitions back and forth between ranges.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
in fact in the early years they were the predominant style.
Exactly! Would it have been prudent to change the rules to address that and diminish BJJ’s dominance? Certainly not. Just because a style is dominant or certain techniques aren’t effective, that doesn’t mean that the rules should be changed to level the playing field.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Feb 27, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions
But they did change the rules. They outlawed gis and added gloves, both of which hurt submission guys.
Gloves = safety.
Gi = weapon
I really don’t see the equivocation on this particular one, and many people make the point.
A gi provides no benefit other than to enhance the array of submissions by providing what is simply, unequivocally a weapon to be brought into the cage/ring. Gloves protect fighters hands, and some would argue heads, from damage in striking exchanges.
This issue has been fairly well outlined in the above subthread: introducing Aoki pants is simply a way to provide a benefit for submission fighters. It does not address any safety, decency, or other regulatory necessity. Since there’s no benefit other than a tactical one, I don’t see the basis for a rules change like this. It just makes the sport more convoluted.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Feb 28, 2009 12:14 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Gi can be used as a weapon
But, in Martial arts did it start out that way? Every one wears clothes in our day to day lives for protection and safety. Martial arts is about using things that are at hand to win a fight.
There is definitely a safety benefit to a clothing. There are many ways to use it to avoid getting submitted and minimize striking attacks. Can it be used as a weapon sure, but so are gloves in that as a previous poster said that it allow people to punch harder and more recklessly (try punching someones forehead without gloves).
Even in the striking aspect of the game tights and long sleeved rashguards would be a big protection to fighters. There is big difference in cuts that will be caused by elbows and knees if you add just the thin layer of cloth. It’s pretty common knowledge that the glancing blows are the most conducive to creating and worsening cuts, but the spandex has a huge impact in minimizing these blows.
I’m all for the clothed fighter movement!
How many fights are stopped or affected by cuts to the body?
by dualdiagnosis on Feb 28, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions
I'm SO misunderstood!
I can’t think of any and now that you have me considering it I don’t want to think of any as a protrusion of bone would probably be needed which I have seen (and wish I didn’t ) in other combat sports stop fights.
I have seen many fights greatly affected affected and stopped by facial/head cuts caused by elbows and a few caused by knees. Tights and long sleeved rashguards while minimal provide the protection to the attacked not the attacker.
Again cuts are most often caused by combined friction and pressure of glancing blows to bone edges (ie. eye socket, cheekbones) a layer of cloth greatly lessens the friction of a blow. The “science” of cutting isn’t easily explained, but I hope if you just think about it as a protection for the opponent, and not the fighter throwing the elbow/knee, my arguement might make sense a little sense.
I see what you're saying...
but sweat is a natural occurrence in the sport, it is a legitimate part of the game. Adding equipment to alter a naturally occurring part of sport is a much different subject. It’s harder to knock a guy out who has a good sweat going also as a punch will slide off his face…etc.
I was simply explaining the difference between the equipment and rules Nate mentioned and the pants. Pants would be equipment not put in for “safety” but to alter the natural aspects of the sport as opposed to say…gloves…which exist in the ring/cage for safety reasons.
Don’t tell me to “admit” something, we’ve been clear in the past that one thing not allowed here is “telling someone what they mean” or “putting words in someone’s mouth(keyboard)” It’s not progressing the discussion to tell me or anyone else what they mean or decide that somehow you are the only one speaking on honest terms.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 3:58 PM EST up reply actions
My apologies, Brent; I never intended to put words in your mouth. What I was trying to imply was that there’s a logical or “strict continuum” point to the position that you’ve taken w.r.t. “Aoki pants” that just didn’t seem to be getting addressed. I wasn’t accusing you of lying, just frustrated that I felt like the conversation was going up to a certain point, then turning off in another direction or dead stopping, repeatedly.
Like I said, I KNOW that it’s not a safety issue. But we have both taken the position that it’s a fairness issue, and I think that “fair” falls on one side of the argument, and you think “fair” falls on the other. We can certainly both be right (and wrong) simultaneously, but when an argument (any argument) reaches that point, I think it behooves the debaters to fully follow their argumentation through. I just wanted to make the point that the wearing of pants cuts both ways in terms of an advantage, and to do so forcefully because it is a point that has repeatedly been ignored or unaddressed. It’s not about “you said this, but you REALLY mean that”; it’s about an uncontested point that makes a big difference (in my mind) to the argument that has been repeatedly left hanging.
Forgive me if I fall back into my habits from my days as a competitive debater, but I can’t handle points left on the table. I don’t need a resolution, just a completion. And that first paragraph about the effects of sweat is fine with me as far as addressing your position. Again, I don’t agree, but it logically follows now.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
That's cool...
I mean, I think you’re on to something with:
We can certainly both be right (and wrong) simultaneously, but when an argument (any argument) reaches that point, I think it behooves the debaters to fully follow their argumentation through
I haven’t meant to avoid following through it is hard for me to keep up with every single thread ongoing and a lot of times I start a line of thinking in one, move to the other, write a new article, start doing research on the next show..and it never gets done.
I guess my thing is that I like the sport to be as natural as possible and for the rules and equipment in place to be on the side of safety not “benefiting” a certain type of fighter. Now I get that you’re saying that there is a degree of “it’s hard on the guy wearing them too” but the truth is…a guy like Aoki wearing them doesn’t care if he can’t defend the takedown..he doesn’t want to anyway. On the ground I will concede that there is a bit of a give and take. That being said, I like that guys have to evolve their game for the rules of the sport. Wrestling is a dominant base right now but there has always been an ebb and flow to what is dominating at any given time. Strikers with good takedown defense (and an ability to ride out when they ended up on the ground) completely trumped wrestlers for a while until the wrestling evolved. BJJ has had periods of dominance.
I think right now it isn’t that “submissions are lacking” it is that guys haven’t been successfully translating their submission game to the sport. There are plenty of guys such as Maia, Hazelett, Aoki (who would obviously be successful with his ground game without the pants)…etc who have shown that a properly adapted submission game is an effective tool in MMA.
That is what the sport is about, it isn’t about being a great BJJ guy, great striker, great wrestler…it’s being a great mixed martial artist who is able to employ your preferred method effectively in the sport.
It’s like how the best boxer in the world may be able to walk in and KO a few guys in MMA but to be truly successful he is going to have to adapt his boxing to work in the context of a sport where he could get taken down, clinched..etc.
When we’re altering the sport to “promote balance” in such a way as the Aoki pants I see it more as we’re altering it toward not having to develop your game into something that works in the confines of the sport. It feels very artificial to me to add something in just to force a 33/33/33 balance.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 4:44 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Rec’d.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Feb 27, 2009 4:48 PM EST up reply actions
If they were introduced simply to restore a “0.333…” ballance, I’d be upset too. I really couldn’t care less for ballance cause, like you said, it ebbs and flows as people combine martial arts differently, develop new techniques, enhance old techniques with better training, etc. I’m also not one of the people who thinks that the submission sky is falling; some of the subs we’ve seen in the last year have been INSANE, and fewer subs generally probably has to do with the average fighter now knowing how to avoid a simple armbar, triangle, or guillotine. It could be (and has been) argued that submission artists were OVER valued in the beginning just because noone knew what they were doing; I think the submissions that we’re seeing now are just about in the right proportion.
I suppose where we diverge is that I just don’t see the pants as fundamentally altering the dynamic of the matchup. The way I look at it, a crappy grappler wearing the pants won’t get anything out of them and will be limited by the drawbacks of the pants. A good grappler will have to weigh the pros and cons and make a decision as to whether or not to limit their game that way. Honestly, while there are GREAT grapplers out there, very few are in the Maia/Aoki mold of almost “pure” grapplers and submission artists, which means that very few would actually be considering the switch, and those that did would still be just as likely to win/lose as if they didn’t have them (if you project out the odds over time and over a large number of fights I think you’d see a trend of the pants not really moving the bar one way or the other, but that’s honestly conjecture).
What it ultimately comes down to for me is that I really prize personal autonomy and the freedom of each individual to analyze a situation and make an informed choice. I’m generally for as little limiting as possible so long as a relatively level playing field is maintained and fighter safety is protected. Like I said, I don’t think that the pants fundamentally alter the match, so I’d rather shift the ballance towards that individual autonomy. For me, where that value ends is in the place where autonomous choices shift the underlying ground
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
I have to agree, I love aoki pants in theory and I think it would be really interesting to see what difference they would make for a fighter like forest griffin. However I worry that it might be taking it too far and giving too much of an advantage to submission fighters. Until we see some high level BJJ guys failing to control the guard on a slippery looking wrestler while wearing ankle/knee supports, I think the pants are definitely too much too soon.
by MonkeyCHops on Feb 27, 2009 12:24 PM EST up reply actions
Damn
Meant as a reply to Brent’s post above
Kuwabara Kuwabara
by J. B. Maddox on Feb 27, 2009 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
I agree with Brent on this one. The pants will really do nothing but give an advantage to a grappler, or bjj tactician. Some else noted that grabbing the shorts rule would not apply here. I fail to see how, if you’re going for a take down and grab someones calf, are you not going to grab a handful of material at the same time, and there by bring down the wrath of the referee? Also someone else mentioned swabbing fighters at the end of a fight, like a urine test. If you find trace amounts of a lubricant, can it not be theorized that this may have happened due to transfer in clinch and grappling? How many times have we seen people drive someone into the fence leading head first. By this one move alone you can transfer almost all of the vaseline from one side of your face to the side of the person that is being driven to the fence, and then from there all it takes is the back of the fighter taken to transfer “grease” to almost any part of the both bodies. Gloves were for safety, the pants are just a wish list that will lead to shirts and other types of clothing. This is all out of some fighters accusations that have yet to be proven. The sport is fine as it is, lets just move on, and watch the action. My apologies if my analogy is a little confusing, it’s the best way I could word it at the time.
As far as innocent grease transfer, I agree it could be an issue. However, there are most likely ways around it. One example off the top of my head would be to have all vaseline to be used be provided by the promoter/althletic commission. The vaseline could be doped with a trace substance which could then be used to see if the grease came from transfer during the bout or other sources. Have several difference trace substances which randomly chosen for for every event.
That is perhaps a one of the best ideas I’ve heard yet. Somewhat off topic, I spent over 5 years in the flooring industry and every maker of glue uses a tracer in their products for identification purposes. They could do the same with grease. It would make catching cheaters easier then going off on a which hunt through accusations of a beaten fighter.
in the spirit of preventing greasing, i’ll side with the aoki pants on this one…..more finishes, less guys just laying in the guard and pulling a Huggy Bear (ahem Clay Guida)
Gatti.
Dekkers.
Pele.
Tadahiro Nomura.
Hidehiko Yoshida.
Aoki.
Kang.
Vanderlei.
by theworldsoldestsport on Feb 27, 2009 11:44 AM EST reply actions
I’m ALMOST in agreement with Joe Rogan on this issue… if someone can take you down and hold you there and you can’t do anything about it then it sounds like you have some holes in your game that need to be addressed.
^this.
And not to get into the ‘purity’ of the sport, but really if this is a fight and you’re getting utterly controlled with no viable options for counterattack, you’ve lost the fight. It’s just a matter of attrition. So while it’s not as much fun as watching a great finish, positional dominance is a path to victory. Great boxers with long jabs and quick feet will attest to as much, as will their 94% win career marks.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Feb 28, 2009 12:26 AM EST up reply actions
No standups? If the ref is forced to stand up the fight for inactivity the fighter being controlled loses a point? Worth a thought.
by natyong on Feb 28, 2009 1:09 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
What you’re suggesting has serious merit, and it’s something I actually hadn’t considered before. But I worry about the subjective nature of defining ‘control,’ since a BJJ fighter will likely claim that he had control whilst laying on his back and hoping for a mistake to capitalize on, and the wrestler will claim control since he was, well, controlling position.
But you’re headed in the right direction, I think. There should be some sort of penalty system, or heck, the scoring system needs a complete and total overhaul. This 10 point must system needs to go as of yesterday. Each round needs to be scored based on a number of criteria, and each criteria needs to be awarded a number of points to the winner in that category. But that’s probably too complicated to introduce right now.
So yeah, somehow figure out how to penalize inactivity from the bottom, and you’re protecting the ‘integrity’ of the sport, at least inasmuch as MMA is generally considered to be as close to a ‘real fight’ as you can emulate with rules and regulations.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Ditto.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Feb 28, 2009 1:29 AM EST up reply actions
"If I Did It" by Georges St. Pierre
Isn’t it ironic how GSP and Jackson have suggestions for the NSAC on how to keep guys from greasing? Let me guess… if we were to cheat, this is how we would do it. It sounds as good as OJ Simpson’s book, “If I Did It.”
Jackson’s camp is scrambling because they know their camp is going to be under a microscope, and if their guys can’t cheat they don’t want any other camps to cheat. It’s only fair. Ha!
by Bruiser on Feb 27, 2009 11:48 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
That’s one of the most under-informed posts I’ve read lately.
Their suggestions are quite simple. The suggestions in no way detail how they would potentially cheat.
If people are worried about vaseline transfer, they have 2 suggestions. If people are worried about fighters “pre-greasing”, they have another suggestion. It can’t be much more simple.
If Team Jackson’s success was due to past cheating, it would make no sense for them to be offering suggestions that would lessen their success and expose their fighters.
by Hardcharger on Feb 27, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
So Bruiser, what you’re saying is that Jackson’s camp making recommendations to prevent this sort of thing from happening, makes them guilty of actually doing it? How about the fact that they might be trying to better the sport as a whole. That is definitely one possibility to consider. Yes they will be under a microscope, but so will every one else.
Those are some good rule changes proposed by the Jackson camp. I can get behind all of ’em.
The Aoki pants, on the other hand, not so much. If greasing is largely mitigated by the introduction of these rules, why would we then need to go even farther and bring in Aoki pants? Also, I’m right along with Brent and others when they say that the pants aren’t about safety, which would seem to be standard used for other pieces of equipment in the cage. Lastly, I really don’t want fighters to start seeing equipment as part of their gameplan and ‘outfitting’ themselves accordingly.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
"Catch Me If You Can" starring Georges St. Pierre
How about the FACT that they got caught rubbing vaseline on GSP in the cage by the NSAC? That’s a FACT! Team Jackson is not, out of the blue, helping the sport with rule changes. They only bring these changes to the table because they got caught CHEATING!
They are leveling the playing field because they can not afford to get caught again. So they don’t want anyone cheating because they lost their cheating advantage.
They know how to make the rules because they know how to cheat. Just like the best criminals make the best police officers. He cheated, he got caught, and now he’s making the rules so others can’t cheat. Just like Leonardo in Catch Me if You Can. Don’t be so naive to think that GSP didn’t know he was being rubbed with vaseline!
What???
So it’s a fact that team Jackson got caught cheating? Unless I missed something, no verdict has been made either way. No one has been caught on tape or otherwise cheating. Look at the tapes again, the hand that rubs GSP’s back is not the same hand that applies vaseline. If that’s a fact then what about Franklins second fight with Silva. His corner man is seen on tape dipping his hand into vaseline, and then rubs Franklins shoulders and chest. That’s a FACT. Some rubbing GSP’s back with no vaseline on it because of a breathing technique is not cheating. I’ve seen the video many times. Yes the cornermans actions can be called into question, but it’s far from proof that the are cheaters.
please
let’s avoid going down the GSP cheated/did not/did so rabbit trail again.
thanks
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
UFC fights are either 3 five minute rounds or 5 five minute rounds. As the fight progresses, a good fighter should be prepared in advance for issues that will come up during the fight. Some of these issues include having enough cardio to actually last into the later rounds, being able to nullify the strengths of the other fighter, dealing with cuts, and… sweat making the other fighter slippery. Introducing pants provides submission fighters with a way to negate the sweat issue in the later rounds without any effort on their part. Sure, stop illegal, intentional greasing but stop or negate sweating? It’s a 3 (or 5) round fight. You can’t have ideal conditions ie) no sweat, no cuts, both fighters fresh with a full gas tank at the start of every round. People looking for that should watch the World Combat League with its 1 round fights. Fighters should be looking to gameplan and adapt to fight conditions, not look for artificial ways to negate unfavorable conditions their style of fighting may encounter during a fight. What’s next? Headgear for grapplers?
No Aoki pants.
Either everyone wears em or no one wears em.
by Derek Suboticki on Feb 27, 2009 1:56 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I completely agree.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Feb 27, 2009 2:03 PM EST up reply actions
Which pretty much splits the issue down the middle of the idealogical divide.
Why, subo…I didn’t know you had it in you ;)
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Feb 28, 2009 12:27 AM EST up reply actions
I love these suggested rule changes...
How hard is it gonna be to push these rules through a simple minded, and fully entrenched bureaucracy?
People need to come to grips with the fact that the rules are in place, for the most part, to keep fights entertaining. Currently, fights are degenerating into ‘baby glove boxing’ matches. Some people find this entertaining, I think it sucks. A rule that gives an advantage to someone who excels at JiuJitsu, is very welcome in my book. After all, gloves protect a strikers’ hands, this is an advantage for a stand up fighter — you could make the exact same argument against gloves as you can against pants. If you throw a punch, you should be risking hand breakage.
I'm just a dude who's trying to put it together.
by mma_dude on Feb 27, 2009 2:05 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
It’s not about changing or adding rules. It’s about enforcing the rules already in place. No vaseline anywhere on the body but the face. I believe GSP knowingly cheated when he got CAUGHT by the NSAC.
I’m sorry. Did GSP’s trainer not get caught doing something that is clearly illegal in the rules? That’s what I thought.
Georges St Pierre defeats BJ Penn by TKO, 5:00 of the fourth round, to retain UFC Welterweight Championship
See that? That’s going to remain in the record books. Hurts, don’t it?
by Derek Suboticki on Feb 27, 2009 3:01 PM EST up reply actions
UFC president Dana White was not as quick to dismiss the alleged misconduct, saying, “The guy rubbed (expletive) Vaseline on him.”
White said he wants all rules to be followed, and that St. Pierre’s corner needlessly caused a shadow to be cast over what otherwise would be a great victory for the fighter.
“I’m not trying to cover anything. I don’t want to taint Georges’ win,” White said. “At the end of the day, you put Vaseline on him when you didn’t (expletive) need Vaseline on him. He was winning the fight dominantly.”
The win will and should stay there, it’s too bad this happened and that the win has a shadow cast over it. I think everyone can agree going forward that the best thing to do is prevent it from recurring.
by dualdiagnosis on Feb 27, 2009 3:31 PM EST up reply actions
“This may have tainted [St. Pierre’s] victory in the eyes of many fans, and it’s his cornerman’s fault for that. It doesn’t take away his victory, but it does take away from his victory in the eyes of many fans, I believe.”- Keith Kizer
Let’s support preventing this from happening again.
by dualdiagnosis on Feb 27, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions
please stop rehashing the did he cheat or didn't he argument
we’ve beat that horse to death on many threads.
thanks
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
Kid Nate, you are the only MMA fan I've seen that wants the use of Aoki pants.......
And I personally don’t mind the use of those pants at all myself. I don’t think that it will detract fighting by having Aoki pants, but I feel that it is a bit of an over exaggeration to say that having them will “save us from MMA degenerating into bad kickboxing.” With collegiate wrestlers and BJJ practitioners transitioning into MMA, we will see more of the ground game for sure. Obviously, some fighters who are mainly grapplers will turn fights into bad kickboxing bouts (Sanchez vs Stevenson among many others), the ground game will still be prevalent regardless.
yes, Aoki pants went from being a means against greasing to saving MMA from degenerating. Funny how before GreaseGate nobody thought MMA was “degenerating into bad kickboxing”..
Kuwabara Kuwabara
by J. B. Maddox on Feb 27, 2009 4:30 PM EST up reply actions
I wouldn’t say “nobody”. Ironically, the guys at Fightlinker have been calling out sloppy kickboxing since the BJ Penn – Sean Sherk fight.
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
I will also say..
that I spend a lot of time going “oh god…the technique!” with the sport right now (from a striking point of view). There certainly has been a lot of “stand and bang” type fights lately that reflect a change in the typical expected fight. Wrestler vs. Wrestler matchups are very common “sloppy kickboxing” fights. Same with a lot of BJJ/BJJ fights (obviously not a Maia vs. JMac). A lot of fights that you expect to be one thing lately turn into sloppy striking duels. It is something that has been very actively lamented by a large segment of the MMA community for the past few years
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 4:55 PM EST up reply actions
I guess the real question is: why? What has happened that we’re seeing so many sloppy striking/grappling matches?
Theory 1: Do you think it has to do with what some people are calling the “Superbowl” phenomena? That is to say: great offence meets great defence, and end up cancelling each other out, and the game gets decided on whose secondary attribute is “less bad”. So, when a great grappler and a great grappler meet, their striking decides the bout as often as not. If that’s the case, we’re back to the old (yet true) adage that styles make fights.
A different theory: My trainer has the theory that one of the reasons we’re seeing so many sloppy fights these days (and you’re right – it’s in both realms; some of the ground work on the last UFC just made me shake my head) is that lots of guys are training “MMA” now, combining all their training from the outset rather than developing a “go-to” base and then adding skill sets. A guy like Maia, obviously, has the super BJJ, and is trying to add some striking and wrestling on top of it, but many young fighters are just mixing everything from the start.
A third theory: Fighters are too afraid to do anything safely and technically for fear of being booed and perceived as boring.
A fourth theory: The sport is growing faster than training centres have the ability to find and develop good young talent, so guys end up in front of the cameras while their games are still very raw in many respects.
One of the above? A combination of all four? Something else?
"I'm AJB and I endorse this nut-puncher."
it's all four
plus greasing. : P
kidding.
I think the theory about fighters training at MMA as a general style and not having a solid base is an excellent point.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
That is true...
I’m going back to training and there is ONE gym in this area and they have some BJJ training but it isn’t a “great” program and they have MMA training which is stronger than the BJJ training. Which a lot of places don’t even have a GREAT striking coach so you’re left with a hybrid of half developed skillsets by guys, especially striking.
It seems like the average striking training is this:
Day 1) How to throw a leg kick
Day 2) How to throw a big looping overhand right
Day 3) Three punch combination (which you will throw over and over without variety)
Day 4) SUCCESS!
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 5:36 PM EST up reply actions
Hit post earlier than I meant to...
so you have guys going into fights thinking “I’ve got a solid striking game now” when all they really have is a power punch and a novice level combination. Provided the other guy is willing to engage you get two guys standing there throwing crappy punches.
Add to that a “fight of the night” bonus for promotions like the UFC which has been shown to more than not reward stand-up fights creating fights like Stevenson/Sanchez where Stevenson did nothing but looping rights while “pumping the crowd up” rather than changing his gameplan mid-fight to try to find success.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
I've been bitching about bad kickboxing since Griffin vs Bonnar
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
Griffin/Bonnar...
had the element that makes it work though. Sloppy fighting can work brilliantly IF there is high drama as well. That fight had D-R-A-M-A which made it acceptable. Gatti/Ward wasn’t the best technical boxing I’ve ever seen…but c’mon….shit was amazing.
The problem is a fight like Diaz/Denny is just sloppy dramaless garbage.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 5:33 PM EST up reply actions
don't get me wrong
I enjoyed the shit out of Griffin/Bonnar but its not a model for the ideal fight I want to see.
To me Diego vs Karo was a much better fight that covered multiple ranges of MMA and had more technique.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
Oh for sure...
We’re on the same page. Griffin/Bonnar only works because of the amount of drama. It is going to be extraordinarily rare for there to be fights with that level of drama. So not much stuff can get away with that.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 27, 2009 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
If I can wear pants why can’t they? JUSTICE and pants FOR ALL!
by spectaa on Feb 27, 2009 10:31 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I work out of the house...
I don’t think I even remember what pants are.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Feb 28, 2009 11:12 AM EST up reply actions

by 























