Elbows to a downed opponent's head, statistics

[NickNick]

Originally Posted by turbozed

Did you count the times where an elbow opened a big gash and changed the course of a fight without it being officially stopped?

So you are against it because it can be used to wear on a opponent?

Well I guess we should get rid of leg kicks to, seeing how they hurt fighters mobility.

[S. Carter]

Originally Posted by ckm

oh, and knees should be allowed too. I am up in the air about soccer kicks and stomps, just because i think some serious brain damage could result from it, and id like to see MMA stay death-free. Knees really need to be allowed though... a knee on the ground is probably less damaging than a knee from standing.

i like knees on the ground, too. kicks and stomps shouldn't be allowed if they have wrestling shoes on. in some states that would be considered assault with a deadly weapon on the street... the shoe is a weapon.

[Jerome_1]

List of people who have stated they don't like elbows.

Frank Trigg
Vitor Belfort
Josh Barnett
Joe Rogan

These are just the people iv'e seen asked about it. I'm sure if a poll was taken, the vast majority of fighters would prefer Pride rules. Their opinions are the ones that count afterall.

[Hellscream]

Originally Posted by Jerome_1

I'm sure if a poll was taken....

That'd be fair. Let the fighter's decide

[mike p]

Excellent first post.

[Jerome_1]

Originally Posted by Hellscream

That'd be fair. Let the fighter's decide

From what i have heard fighters say, i think that the Pride rules basically suited everybody. That includes the Pride ring also.

I think i remember Vitor Belfort say that he didn't like stomps either though.

[Jack10Suited]

Originally Posted by Jerome_1

List of people who have stated they don't like elbows.

Frank Trigg
Vitor Belfort
Josh Barnett
Joe Rogan

These are just the people iv'e seen asked about it. I'm sure if a poll was taken, the vast majority of fighters would prefer Pride rules. Their opinions are the ones that count afterall.

Good point, but it depends on why they don't like them. If you're a guy that doesn't utilize elbows, why should you care if they are taken out? Also, if you are a guy that has a defensive hole that elbows can exploit, of course you would want them out. I mean, Trigg probably wouldn't mind having the RNC banned, but that doesn't mean there is no place for it in the sport.

I'm not saying that's the case with the guys you talked to, I'm just throwing it out there as something to think about when polling fighters. When deciding about what to have in order to have an entertaining show, you have to consider more than the fighter's wants. You also have to think about what fans want to see as well as, maybe most importantly, what will allow you to still be sanctioned.

[turbozed]

Originally Posted by Vox

I'm pretty sure you are right...unless we count things like Gonzaga's KO of CroCop as beginning with the elbows he landed when on the ground...CroCop said the elbows got him woozy and he didn't see the kick come...and I'm pretty sure he's not the only one who has been knocked out or submitted with ease after a few hard 'bows to the head.

I'm not contending that they're not effective, all I'm saying is that, as a strike, there is a much higher chance of cuts with elbows than any other. TS and some here seem to think that the concern of cuts through elbows is somehow grossly overstated. It isn't. Many fighters and commentators (even Rogan, recently) seem to think that there is a legitimate problem.

[HEIST-420]

Good Job, elbows should stay.

But knees to the head of a downed opponent should be added as well

[Teknik]

This is actually a really good thread. Everyone should bookmark this and refrence it whenever someone bitches about "too many fights being stopped due to cuts".