Reply to Thread

Post a reply to the thread: Fighters: Brave vs. Smart

Your Message

Click here to log in

What is the last name of UFC's President?

 
 

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)

  • 10-19-2010, 05:35 PM
    rivethead
    Quote Originally Posted by dan the man 67 View Post
    Let me ask you guys this; what would you have more respect for, GSP getting KO'd by Alves because he engaged him in a full blown stand-up war and lost, or GSP winning by GnP or submission?

    Don't bother saying that you'd have the most respect for him if he won a stand-up war with Alves - it is NOT one of the options.
    First, I think that Alves is the only WW more softly ranked than Hardy, so I think Koscheck would be a far better example.

    Obviously, beating another fighter is more respectable than losing to them, so losing a stand-up war would have a more negative impact than positive. But to break your example down to specifics:
    *Factor in specifically that Alves' striking is very, very overhyped and that Georges has six + inches of reach on him, and a loss just looks terrible for Georges.
    *Factor in that it would be the second time GSP got KTFO'd by a guy he was a few inches taller and hald half-a-foot reach advantage on. So I can't see anyone seeing that as a respectable issue.
    *Then, factor in that he hasn't finished an actual WW-sized-WW for going on 3 years now, so actually finishing someone--softly ranked or not--is going to be a nice change of pace for him and polish up his already-sterling credibility.

    I simply can't see anyone thinking standing and banging and getting beat is more respectable than any win, whether it's a decision or not. Maybe some clueless mook who fights at barbecues or something...but I just can't see someone who actually is an MMA fan thinking that.



    Back to Koscheck...I think it will be interesting to see if Georges is willing to exchange standing at all, or if he gets in a situation like the first fight where he's clearly not going to be able to get one specific submission, whether he'll take any risks in transitioning to another position to attempt another one, rather than simply ride out the round in a dominant spot.

    If he's willing to trade, if he's willing to transition, that will be more respectable than simply riding to the most conservative win possible.

    rh
  • 10-19-2010, 04:48 PM
    Chute_Boxe44
    Quote Originally Posted by megamus View Post
    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.
    Of course its stupid, thats why the thread is titled "brave vs smart"

    What would you possibly define as being brave then?
  • 10-19-2010, 03:43 PM
    YukonJordan
    I don't know if I would imply it wasn't the smartest strategy. Keep in mind that Condit knew what Hardy would try, baited him into throwing the hook and threw his own shorter faster hook. This is the second time that a fighter training under Mike Winklejohn has clearly used his opponent's timing and tendencies against them with devastating results. The first one obviously being Rashad and Chuck.
  • 10-19-2010, 03:02 PM
    dan the man 67
    Let me ask you guys this; what would you have more respect for, GSP getting KO'd by Alves because he engaged him in a full blown stand-up war and lost, or GSP winning by GnP or submission?

    Don't bother saying that you'd have the most respect for him if he won a stand-up war with Alves - it is NOT one of the options.
  • 10-19-2010, 01:55 AM
    claycollett3
    Quote Originally Posted by noahm View Post
    I guess if it was called Mixed Fighting, I could understand your point, but it is in fact Mixed Martial Arts which have very different bases where some are quite defensive in nature and others offensive. Not being aggressive or avoiding confrontation do not necessarily mean a match that is not exciting. I highly doubt GSP is scared one bit of his opponents.

    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.
    Poorly worded on my part, but this is the reason I joined is to have conversations with other knowledgeable people and to help the sport and the publics perception grow.

    Thank you!!! ( I'm 100% serious)
  • 10-19-2010, 01:10 AM
    noahm
    Quote Originally Posted by claycollett3 View Post

    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 guess if it was called Mixed Fighting, I could understand your point, but it is in fact Mixed Martial Arts which have very different bases where some are quite defensive in nature and others offensive. Not being aggressive or avoiding confrontation do not necessarily mean a match that is not exciting. I highly doubt GSP is scared one bit of his opponents.

    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.
  • 10-19-2010, 01:03 AM
    Mac
    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.
  • 10-19-2010, 01:00 AM
    claycollett3
    Quote Originally Posted by dan the man 67 View Post
    To me, it would be equivalent to Thiago Alves pulling a triangle off on BJ Penn. .

    What are your thoughts on this comparison of mentalities?
    Sorry man but that is a horrible comparison!!!!!!! Alves subbing BJ? or anyone with BJJ skills?!?! Condit is known as a striker though not his primary strength. Aside from that good try. Sparking thought is what forums are for.

    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
  • 10-18-2010, 11:12 PM
    megamus
    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.
  • 10-18-2010, 10:40 PM
    rivethead
    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.

    rh
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
  •