[blackthorne]

I asked the question- purely ironic- in another thread as to why Maia didn't stand with Herman and the most typical (and correct) response was:
-Maia is a great BJJ expert
-Herman isn't as good on the ground and should have therefore exploited Ed's deficiency

I wasn't being serious with the question of course. But it's a question that's been sincerely posed to GSP in the wake of his Serra fight by some posters. That anyone is actually dumb enough to qualify it as a criticism is beyond dispute.

What I don't understand though is how these principles- fighters capitalizing on their advantages, exploiting opponents' weakness- are often disregarded when it comes to wrestlers? Some people complain "so and so doesn't mix it up enough/he should have at least stood with his opponent for a bit/etc"

What makes what Maia did, in principle, any different from say, someone like Ishida exploiting his opponents' inability to defend the takedown, and likewise for others like Fitch and Sherk? The "wrestling doesn't finish fights" defense holds little weight IMO. If you get outpointed in boxing but don't get KO'ed you're still a beaten man, and likewise in a typical ADCC contest.

For the record, I prefer when fighters mix it up, but that's only because it usually makes the fight more enjoyable, and this isn't to say there's no such thing as "lay and pray" either. Alavarez' fight with Dida is a perfect example of someone using wrestling to finish a fight (switching position to more effectively ground and pound), more or less. But that doesn't mean I can't appreciate craft and ability. I realize it would make Sean Sherk more cool if after every victory his opponent could be dropped 100 feet into a pit filled with spikes or a pool of acid, but let's be fair and avoid the stereotype people have of "us" as bloodthirsty savages.

If wrestling is as much a part of MMA as striking and BJJ, why should there be any less emphasis on one particular component than the other?

[scorpipede]

Not sure if this answers anything but the only aspect of wrestling in MMA that I don't enjoy is the "lay and pray". Active fights, wether on the ground or standing, put asses in the seats.

[blackthorne]

Originally Posted by scorpipede

Not sure if this answers anything but the only aspect of wrestling in MMA that I don't enjoy is the "lay and pray". Active fights, wether on the ground or standing, put asses in the seats.

It depends on your definition of "lay and pray", which people seem to have diverging (often retarded) definitions of.

Plus another MAJOR problem with the term "lay and pray" is that it often avoids the clash of styles problem, in which neither guy is really guilty. When Edgar fought Fisher, for example, nobody mentioned that Spencer's guard was in fact quite good, and he was doing excellent at maintaining it even when Edgar would move to side control.

I guess the common counterpoint might be that wrestling is too inherently neutral, and that takedowns are not significant enough. There's some validity to that, and I don't think it should ever be the difference in a fight if ONE takedown is muscled out by a fighter, especially on a point system, but a guy that scores takedown after takedown without getting dealt much damage absolutely deserves credit. What the hell has the other guy done to avoid criticism when his takedown defense is shit?

[aolverizon]

It's because they see Andy Wang on tv and Andy Wang stands and bangs like a true warrior every time.



In all seriousness, most of the people saying how they were disappointed in GSP for not standing with Serra were just angry idiots who wanted a reason to bash GSP.

[vangor]

Because the ufc is mostly a grappling and submission league, and they've been brain washed by all of the bjj nuthuggers who ramble on and on and on about they're overrated art.

[blackthorne]

Originally Posted by aolverizon

In all seriousness, most of the people saying how they were disappointed in GSP for not standing with Serra were just angry idiots who wanted a reason to bash GSP.

Yea but that's not the point of this thread.

Although yes they were angry idiots who have, for the sake of humanity, avoided reproduction up to this point.

[mercy_flush]

Casual fans(the majority of sherdoggers despite what we say) like to see fights finished plain and simple. Most people can't see the beauty or technique in a well executed wrestling plan in an MMA match. Definitely agree with your stance.

[blackthorne]

Originally Posted by mercy_flush

Casual fans(the majority of sherdoggers despite what we say) like to see fights finished plain and simple. Most people can't see the beauty or technique in a well executed wrestling plan in an MMA match. Definitely agree with your stance.

This is what I suspect too, and it still boggles my mind. Some of the absolute best fights (Shogun/Nog, Edgar/Griffin, etc) in the history of the sport went to decisions. And some really great fights were essentially glorified wrestling matches; Guida/Griffin, Ishida/Melendez.

But put Sherk up against a guy like Franca who can't defend a takedown and all of a sudden it's "goddamn Sherk can't finish/he's boring/bla bla bla".

I'm not saying there's something wrong with you if you don't find certain fighters exciting, but this hardly warrants the criticism commonly leveled at these guys, and it highlights the double standard mentioned above.

[vangor]

Not allowing knees to grounded opponents in mma has made for all of the boring ground fights. I can't believe they'll outlaw knees, but allow elbows which are far more dangerous becaue they cause the majority of cuts.

[Duped]

wrestling is not a finishing style

if their opponent is an over matched midget maybe they'll finish them

but if things ever don't go their way they will not hesitate to lay and pray the FUCK outta their opponent

cage + unified rules = wrestlers' paradise