Fighters: Brave vs. Smart
After watching Condit knock Hardy out, I was thinking not only was this fight exciting, but Condit went in there knowing Hardy's only claim to fame is his stand-up, yet Condit fought him toe-to-toe, and knocked him out. Impressive? Very much so. Smart? I don't know about that. To me, it would be equivalent to Thiago Alves pulling a triangle off on BJ Penn.
Smart fighters are more likely to go on and have a long successful career, yet lack the excitement in a lot of their fights. Fighters like GSP come to mind here. On the flip side, you have the brave fighters who feel invincible, and will fight their opponents to their opponents' strength, and will have very exciting fights. Guys like Condit, or the modern-day Jorge Gurgel come to mind here.
What are your thoughts on this comparison of mentalities?
I think UFC have they fingers in it , I think they push fighters to fight excitement fight ,maybe Dana even spank them after fight if fight wasnt interesting enough...
Nick Diaz also comes to mind when it comes to beating someone at their own game...
To be considered the best fighter in the world, I think fighters should go and beat someone at their own game because if they do, they look all that more impressive...but in order to do that, they gotta be equally good in that certain aspect (Nick Diaz' stand-up vs KJ or even Lawler) at least to just stay competetive during the fight because if they are not, they get ko'd (Gurgel's stand-up vs KJ's)...Condit was able to stay tight and equally as dangerous with Hardy, which on paper, had the upper hand in stand up...Now when the KO came, I would say it was a combination of luck and skill...he was able to land his punch first before Hardy's punch connected...if Hardy would have landed first than Condit, instead it would have been Condit on the floor with Hardy finishing with strikes...
I guess my point is that if your gonna try to fight someone at their own game, you gotta know that you are equally or almost equally skilled in the disciplone and also have some luck...
Nice thread. I've always thought Hardy was overrated--I honestly don't have him top as 15 anymore--and felt Condit had much, much better skills everywhere but talking smack.
It only takes one mistake to make a brave fighter into a smart one.
Georges fought entirely differently after the Serra beatdown than he did previously.
I think a lot of young fighters are "brave" by default, in that they feel comfortable enough relying on adaptation/reaction and don't feel like they need to plan. That works great until you run into someone either better, or someone who has studied you and has a plan.
There is a fine line between "brave" and "stupid"
is it brave of gurgel to stand and bang with everyone when he is so talented on the ground, no i think its stupid, look where it has got him.
and what about BJ, while the man is a good boxer, he is so dangerous on the ground yet how often do we see that? I find it hard to label it brave for a fighter to not utilize their strenghts to the fullest.
Condit's KO of Hardy I dont think is him being brave and standing with a better striker and beating him at his own game. I think that it is a result of some great training and coaching, The man is no slouch on the feet.
Condit had a game plan and used his skill set, its not like he had a drastic advantage on the ground and supurb takedowns like GSP did against Hardy, i dont think it was expected of him to take the fight to the ground right away.
I think that fighters like GSP and Gray may not be "fighting" smart as they are scared shitless as to any type of MMA confrontation. Fighting is about taking risks. The bigger the risk, the bigger the reward. Ask Condit or Serra or Werdum. Aside from Lay and Pray, nothing is known til it's experienced and for fighters to never take risks leaves them at the local mma scene fighting in bars for $100. Being "brave" as you call it is why there is a sport in general. I would just like to see more risk across the board. IMHO
I think there is a little bit of a difference between Condit KOing Hardy and Alves subbing B.J. First off, I have always been of the opinion Hardy is very overrated and to this day don't understand his title shot. Secondly, there is a much better chance of a fighter landing a KO shot than subbing a BJJ black belt.
I don't think Condit got lucky with landing his shot but a lot of other fighters who KO their opponent do get lucky. Getting a top level BJJ guy in a triangle is going to take a hell of a lot more skill than that. You may see someone fall into a triangle but usually not a black belt.
Also, I don't know if it was intentional but comparing Hardy's standup to B.J.'s ground game is kind of funny.
Also, I do not understand your throwing Werdum in there as a risk taker. If you are referring to the Fedor fight, the only one taking a risk there was Fedor. There is a guy who would have made your point better.
Thank you!!! ( I'm 100% serious)
|All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:56 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.