Strategy has no place in MMA? - Page 8

dugtheoub · 08-11-2008, 05:35 PM

Strategy is a good thing, but the strategy has to include finishing the fight. Simply outpointing opponents doesn't impress me.

Authority 51 · 08-11-2008, 05:36 PM

"You CANNOT equate what Ali did to Foreman with what Florian did to Huerta."

I'm not equating the two. I as simply using it as an example of how a famous strategy was used to overcome a powerful opponent and how the people who say that they are MMA fans agree that the rope-a-dope was awesome, but they then say that counter punching and jabs are for pussies.

Authority 51 · 08-11-2008, 05:36 PM

"You CANNOT equate what Ali did to Foreman with what Florian did to Huerta."

I'm not equating the two. I as simply using it as an example of how a famous strategy was used to overcome a powerful opponent and how the people who say that they are MMA fans agree that the rope-a-dope was awesome, but they then say that counter punching and jabs are for pussies.

BABYGECKO · 08-11-2008, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asuop

Win by any means necessary. If you can't make a guy fight your game, and you can't beat him at his, you lose and can't complain.

agree!!

Lakehead · 08-11-2008, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authority 51

"Kenflo ran." "Machida is a coward." etc

Have any of you MMA EXPERTS ever heard of boxing? Have you ever heard of classic bouts like Muhammad Ali vs. George Foreman?! If you people were asked on the street what you thought about Ali's famous "rope-a-dope" strategy you would say how great it was. How smart it was to allow a big brawler (with a 40-0 win record, 37 by KO) to tire himself out and stick and move. But when KenFlo avoids Huerta's big punches and using smart striking combined, smart take downs combined with an evasive style...you say that he is running. Yes, Ali KO'd Foreman in the 8th round, but even if the fight went to a decision it was all Ali.

Boxing must be outside the 51 things your an authority on. I love boxing and I've seen Ali-Foreman, recently. It's on youtube for gods sake. For you to say Ali-Foreman would have gone to Ali on the cards deflates any other point you were trying to make. Foreman was PUNISHING Ali and Ali was getting in virtually no offense, that was the point of the rope-a-dope and is a big part of the reason the Foreman KO was so shocking. (The other part being Foreman was the heavy favorite)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authority 51

Now that we have the evolution of MMA and multiple disciplines fighting one another, you dismiss any fighter that isn't a KO specialist and call fighters that employ a strategy based on their physical strengths/weaknesses and their opponents strengths/weaknesses a "runner" or a "pussy?"

Nobody dismisses those fighters, that is how GSP fights, but he is locking to inflict damage in order to finish. He is not hitting his opponent for points alone, he is hitting him to hurt him so he can get into a position to finish the fight. People who hit for points alone and avoid punishment for the rest of the fight are boring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authority 51

If you want to see two dudes throwing bombs at one another till someone gets KO'd, you should stop watching MMA, and certainly stop considering yourself a "true fan."

/rant

The point of a fight is to finish the fight. People who aren't looking for a finish, who want to win a fight on points and don't even attempt to finish a fight because "that is not their style" are boring fighters. Don't tell me I'm not an MMA fan because I said that.
Wanting to see every fight end with a sub or a KO is not the same as wanting to watch two chumps throw bombs at each other, and your post makes it seems as though there's a connection there.

Authority 51 · 08-11-2008, 05:45 PM

"The point of a fight is to finish the fight. People who aren't looking for a finish, who want to win a fight on points and don't even attempt to finish a fight because "that is not their style" are boring fighters. Don't tell me I'm not an MMA fan because I said that."

Remember this?:A fighter that hits an opponent ONE time and then runs for every round that follows just to win a decision on points is a coward. Someone that sticks and moves and employs a solid game plan against a strong brawler is a SMART FIGHTER!

XtraTrstrL · 08-11-2008, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KurtDee2000

I just thought it would be a better fight the way they both talked. I mean if you are going to call yourself "the finisher" you better back it up. It was a good fight I just thought it would be a great fight. FOTN it certainly wasn't. Great card really enjoyed it overall.

I gotta agree there, K-Flo is constantly saying "I finish fights", but he gladly kept his distance, though he came in at the end and unloaded on Huerta. He still didn't finish it, Roger is hard to finish to Kenny's credit though. Kenny needed to submit Roger to finish him I say, and Roger needed slightly better technicality in his charging approach to take it.

Machida is kind of annoying when he is literally running around the ring to get away from his opponent. Other than that, he's a very technical fighter I have no problem with. There's nothing wrong with sticking and moving, but when you are actually running away, like Tito did from Chuck, or from Wanderlei way back when, it's kind of lame.

Authority 51 · 08-11-2008, 05:48 PM

"Nobody dismisses those fighters, that is how GSP fights, but he is locking to inflict damage in order to finish. He is not hitting his opponent for points alone, he is hitting him to hurt him so he can get into a position to finish the fight. "

Read the post again.

This post was for the people who dismiss fighters like Kenflo and his performance against Huerta. Or Machida against Tito. Are you those people? If so, then make an argument. If not, then agree.

aeroguibn · 08-11-2008, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Authority 51

It's a rant about how idiotic it is to only credit a fighter that goes toe-to-toe and not the fighter that uses tactics and strategy. I thought that was pretty clear. You want a diagram?

I agree with you a lot. But I would actually like a diagram anyway. That would be pretty cool. I don't know exactly how you'd do it, but you offered, so obviously you already have some ideas in the works. I'm waiting eagerly.

Authority 51 · 08-11-2008, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lakehead

Boxing must be outside the 51 things your an authority on. I love boxing and I've seen Ali-Foreman, recently. It's on youtube for gods sake. For you to say Ali-Foreman would have gone to Ali on the cards deflates any other point you were trying to make. Foreman was PUNISHING Ali and Ali was getting in virtually no offense, that was the point of the rope-a-dope and is a big part of the reason the Foreman KO was so shocking. (The other part being Foreman was the heavy favorite)

Wrong. Foreman was not "PUNISHING" Ali. Ali would lean back on the ropes and any damage to the head was minimal. Foreman landed heavy shots to the midsection. That is it. The fight was so demoralizing that Foreman retired in his prime.

**When Foreman did throw a punch at his face, Ali was able to lean back or move his head just enough that the blow missed or had little impact. This was a special skill Ali had through most of his career. He would often hit an opponent while pulling back to avoid a counter punch.**

Strike two, Lakehead.