Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: Hendricks

Your Message

Click here to log in

What Is Quinton Jackson's Nickname?

 
 

You may choose an icon for your message from this list

Additional Options

  • Will turn www.example.com into [URL]http://www.example.com[/URL].

HTML

Topic Review (Newest First)

  • 03-20-2013, 01:07 AM
    joeodd2
    I think if a fighter lands more strikes on the bottom, sweeps, or goes for subs then he should be awarded more points than a guy who just gets a take down and does not attempt to do damage. you can easily tell when a guy is just doing "busy work" and not using real GNP to finish a fight. I think that garbage should not be scored. I'm in favor of more stand ups if a guy can't pass guard or isn't doing any damage. I think striking from the bottom is under scored, that's why you don't see a lot of it.
  • 03-18-2013, 10:29 PM
    rivethead
    Quote Originally Posted by Masscore View Post
    Score these takedowns like you would Jose Aldo's leg kicks. They probably aren't going to end the fight but the point of them is too keep the other fighter from effectively working their offense.
    I'm not talking about PRIDE vs. UFC scoring. I'm talking about actual fights.

    In a real world scenario, if Aldo keeps leg kicking his opponent, said opponent is going to eventually collapse and not be able to do anything while Aldo gives him a curb-job. In Hendrick's case, Johny is going to wear himself out shooting over and over for TD's that do nothing. If he does nothing with them, said opponent can simply wait till he's tired and hand him his teeth when it's convenient.

    The fact that Condit was far more effective in the third round--even if you, personally, can't admit he won it--is an illustration of that. If there were 4th and 5th rounds to that bout, I don't think Hendricks had a prayer...much like I don't think he's got a prayer against Georges unless he magically comes up with some offense from his right hand and significant grappling beyond the TD.

    So what we're left with is a scored bout with a limited amount of time where one fighter can "win" by simply scoring takedowns.

    Sorry, I don't really see that as a "fight."

    I understand that it's well within the qualifications set up by unified rules, and if one fighter can exploit them, his opponent is free to learn TD defense to deal with it. But the cards are billed as "fights," and when all aspects of MMA are employed, fans often get them. Which is nice.



    None of which changes my points:

    Implying Hendricks was more effective grappling than Georges because he scored more takedowns is inept. Shockingly so, coming from you and your grappling background.

    Using takedowns as a means to an end is far better than using them as an end in and of itself. The contest is both more exciting and more convincingly won if they are part of the goal, rather than the goal itself.

    rh
  • 03-18-2013, 10:24 PM
    goodtimes
    Quote Originally Posted by Masscore View Post
    The underlined statement is where you are wrong. Sadly these are not Pride rules where the fighter is judged on trying to finish the fight. No the point of a MMA fight is to WIN the fight. Sure a finish is a nice shinny bow on top the winning present but it is not the actual point. The point is the present which is the win.

    Score these takedowns like you would Jose Aldo's leg kicks. They probably aren't going to end the fight but the point of them is too keep the other fighter from effectively working their offense.
    This is getting into a sticky area. If you want it to be more sport less fight, then absolutely. Things like guard passes, takedowns, and control time being given precedence over damage makes sense. But I think the huge majority of fans/competitors want MMA to be about fighting.

    The difference with a Jose Aldo leg kick is that it absolutely can stop a fight. It's rare at such a high level, but I've seen several MMA fights stopped on leg kicks. A fight can also be stopped from a slam, but I can only think of a single fight that was stopped on ground control (Gracie/Jimmerson in UFC 1).
  • 03-18-2013, 09:47 PM
    Masscore
    Quote Originally Posted by rivethead View Post
    Mass, I'll offer a different perspective: Taking someone down "to simply let them get back up" is weak. It is a mutant behavior that can really only occur when you're trying to win on points. It has very little connection to actual combat.

    Further, you can't really say that Georges was less effective than Johny, in that Georges actually accomplished more on the ground once it hit the mat. It would be like saying Guida is a better grappler than Fitch or Shields, simply because he scores more takedowns. A guy can score one takedown a round, control the top, work submissions or punish with gnp and never come close to scoring 12 in a single fight...all the while controlling all of the action.

    If Hendricks [or Guida] actually accomplished anything after the takedowns, he wouldn't have to score so many.

    If the goal of a fight is to finish your opponent, a takedown is a means to an end, not an end in and of itself. If your goal is to win on points, the takedown is a end in and of itself.

    But then, you can't really call that an actual fight anymore.

    rh
    The underlined statement is where you are wrong. Sadly these are not Pride rules where the fighter is judged on trying to finish the fight. No the point of a MMA fight is to WIN the fight. Sure a finish is a nice shinny bow on top the winning present but it is not the actual point. The point is the present which is the win.

    Score these takedowns like you would Jose Aldo's leg kicks. They probably aren't going to end the fight but the point of them is too keep the other fighter from effectively working their offense.
  • 03-18-2013, 09:39 PM
    rivethead
    Quote Originally Posted by Masscore View Post
    That is more takedowns in 3 round then GSP scored in 5 with a better success rate.
    Mass, I'll offer a different perspective: Taking someone down "to simply let them get back up" is weak. It is a mutant behavior that can really only occur when you're trying to win on points. It has very little connection to actual combat.

    Further, you can't really say that Georges was less effective than Johny, in that Georges actually accomplished more on the ground once it hit the mat. It would be like saying Guida is a better grappler than Fitch or Shields, simply because he scores more takedowns. A guy can score one takedown a round, control the top, work submissions or punish with gnp and never come close to scoring 12 in a single fight...all the while controlling all of the action.

    If Hendricks [or Guida] actually accomplished anything after the takedowns, he wouldn't have to score so many.

    If the goal of a fight is to finish your opponent, a takedown is a means to an end, not an end in and of itself. If your goal is to win on points, the takedown is a end in and of itself.

    But then, you can't really call that an actual fight anymore.

    rh
  • 03-18-2013, 09:19 PM
    Masscore
    Quote Originally Posted by dbader08 View Post
    Yeah but is the martial art (wrestling) that is being displayed really very effective if a guy isn't advancing position much and isn't doing much damage? I mean it should count but I don't know that it should be deemed as significant as rocking someone or landing a bunch of solid jabs or some hard leg kicks.
    It was very effective. It kept Condit from generating any kind of real offense. The second he started getting into a grove he ended up on his back. Sometimes Hendrick took him down just to let him back up. The point of the takedowns didn't seem so much as to get him into position for GnP as they where to get Condit from getting his offense going.

    Plus you just can't ignore the sheer number of takedowns he scored. It wasn't like Hendricks scored only 2 or 3, he scored 12 over the course of the fight. 12, think about that for a moment. That is more takedowns in 3 round then GSP scored in 5 with a better success rate. Maybe if Hendricks only scored 2 or 3 I would but the arguement that they shouldn't have been scored that highly. But he scored 12.
  • 03-18-2013, 09:08 PM
    dbader08
    Yeah but is the martial art (wrestling) that is being displayed really very effective if a guy isn't advancing position much and isn't doing much damage? I mean it should count but I don't know that it should be deemed as significant as rocking someone or landing a bunch of solid jabs or some hard leg kicks.
  • 03-18-2013, 07:40 PM
    Masscore
    First this MMA not Kickboxing, if people do not want to score takedowns then go watch another sport. Takedowns are what make MMA different then all other combat sports.

    Hendricks clearly won this fight. Was it close and fun, yes it was. But did Hendricks cleary win, yes. If Condit could have acutally stuffed a few of the takedowns he might have won. But the fact is he was taken down 12 out of 15 times. How can anyone score a fight for a guy when he takendown that many times. Hell I thought the fight was 30-27 but I am okay with it being 29-28 cause I can see an arguement for Condit in the 3rd.

    Maybe takedowns are scored too high, but this is not the fight to make that arguement.
  • 03-18-2013, 04:42 PM
    rivethead
    Quote Originally Posted by mmawolverine View Post
    im okay with a painful slam getting an instant score but just a regular takedown that leads to nothing shouldnt be scored.
    I don't agree with that. I do think that it's totally out of whack here. I was talking to a regional judge, and right now TD's are scored the same as a knockdown, which I catagorically disagree with. I think a TD should count as a significant strike, and a stuffed TD should count the same for the opponent. I'd score a slam the same as a knockdown.

    I'd love for judging to someday get to the point of being able to differentiate between a contested TD and an uncontested TD--you've got some submission guys who don't even try to really resist a TD because they want the fight on the mat--but I think that's a pipe dream.

    But I wouldn't discount TD's where nothing happens afterward entirely, but I wouldn't weigh it as heavily as they're currently being weighed.


    rh
  • 03-18-2013, 03:28 PM
    cnlclink
    Those of you guys who are saying Georges doesn't have the killer instinct anymore I ask you how many times have Fitch, Kos, Condit, Diaz, Penn, Shields and Serra been finished?

    Diaz-2 (1 was for cuts)
    Condit-3 (all subs)
    Shields-2 (1 was Jake who is a bonafide destroyer with 18 [t]ko wins)
    Kos-3 (lawler...) one sub
    Fitch-3 (Hendricks ko and prior to that at lhw in 2002, 1 sub)
    Penn-2 (one of those St. Pierre)
    Serra-2 (one of those St. Pierre)

    Georges looked not bad in that fight at all. He was tired yes but so was the cardio machine Diaz so that is a testament to how hard Georges worked if Diaz was tired. I think that part of why people are kind of ragging on Georges for looking slow or tired is because how much we all expected that Diaz is easy to take down and really Georges landed a good pile of his attempts (fight metric won't open on this computer here at work for some reason so I can't get exact info.)

    As for all that, Hendricks deserves the title shot now even more than he did before. This event should have been Hendricks getting the title shot but it's over now and it's now Hendricks turn. Ellenberger is behind Hendricks there is no doubt. I think Hendricks has a good shot but I'm looking at him shaped somewhat like Alves, but I may be off here. Georges will have distance on him, and Georges has an excellent jab, so to land anything, Hendricks will have to get around the jab. I would imagine that Georges will stay at distance and stand with him as Hendricks has about as much technique as Kos has standing. I could be wrong here you striking afficianados but that's what I'm thinking. Either way Hendricks deserves that shot more than anyone else and I think it will be a tough fight for Georges.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •