[Leagon]

Chuck Liddell has crappy takedown defense.

Just kidding. But the people who only read the first sentence in a post will probably have some pretty funny replies.

Anyway, this thread isn't about Chuck. Its about takedown defense in general.

From a physical standpoint:

We have to look at Chuck who has possibly the best takedown defense in MMA. He uses a quick, clean sprawl to keep himself from getting to the ground. Physcially, Chuck isn't some incredible specimen. He's not monstrously powerful and, in terms of technique, there are much better wrestlers.

Let's look at another person who isn't some physcial demigod in Anderson Silva. For all of you who say he's so easy to takedown and dominate, his record says otherwise. If he was that easy to takedown and keep there, he'd have much more losses. Anyway, he uses a different kind of takedown defense, as evidenced in his first fight with Okami: Range. He knows how long his arms are and he knows how far you can shoot from. He stays at a point through a whole fight where you cannot shoot without him first being able to sprawl and push you away.

Then there are the people with the physical gifts:

GSP. We all saw what he did to Hughes. Instead of using specifically sprawl or range, he simply kept moving so much and in so many directions that Hughes had no chance to set up a shot. When Hughes did manage to get his arms around him, he used his physcial size and strength to keep the fight where he wanted it.

Now the person who is arguably the most talented fighter in MMA. BJ Penn uses a completely unique blend of balance and flexibility to avoid the takedown. His legs can pretty much go to whatever angle they want and he seems perfectly balanced in any position. This is best evidenced in the two Hughes fights. Matt is a master of the takedown, but, especially in the first fight, he had a hell of a time getting BJ to the ground.

I think something about the first two examples lies in the mental edge. When you aren't a physical freak like BJ or GSP, you have to rely on mental factors. Both Anderson and Chuck put the fear of the punch in you. In Anderson's case, its the fear of the strike in general. With Chuck, a fighter may actually go in andhave a takedown, but they push away when they feel they've been too close for too long. Rampage did this a few times in their first fight. He'd have Chuck's hips or the small of his back wrapped, but he knew that, at any second, the punch could come in and end it all.

All of Anderson's opponents seem to be too wary to fully commit to a takedown. Any wrestler will tell you that commitment is a key ingredient to any good shot. The slight hesitation Anderson causes in his foes is enough to give him time to sprawl adjust in general. Again, the Okami fight is a perfect example. Yushin was shooting from entirely too far away due to range then, when he was close enough, hesitated too long to finish.

So, which defense do you guys think is the best? Sprawl, range, footwork, flexibility? And how important is the mental edge in takedown defense?

[prgrappler]

sprawl and using ur weight to ur advantage.. hands down next flexibility.. look at BJ penn

[prgrappler]

IMO i would only shoot to counter jabs or hooks

[Leagon]

With my personal build, I'd prefer what Chuck or Anderson have. I'm not physically impressive enough to overpower someone and I have long limbs, so they're easy to grab. Probably what Anderson has. Keep them far away. Gives me more time to work out a gameplan, too.

[Lummox]

Personally I avoid takedowns by staying out of the octagon.

This is an interesting post. It's also interesting watching any fight between a taker-downer and a stander-upper. When the striker relies on sprawling, sometimes he gets too jumpy at the first sign of a shoot, dropping his arms and jumping his feet backwards.

In those fights I have wondered whether the shooter should just do a little downward fake and then step forward & up with a massive uppercut as the other guy is dropping to sprawl. Kaboom.

[Leagon]

Originally Posted by Lummox

Personally I avoid takedowns by staying out of the octagon.

This is an interesting post. It's also interesting watching any fight between a taker-downer and a stander-upper. When the striker relies on sprawling, sometimes he gets too jumpy at the first sign of a shoot, dropping his arms and jumping his feet backwards.

In those fights I have wondered whether the shooter should just do a little downward fake and then step forward & up with a massive uppercut as the other guy is dropping to sprawl. Kaboom.

That's exactly what J-Lau did to Jens.

I've always wondered why its not utilized more often. Though I don't think it'd work as well against Chuck because he tends to do a little backpedal until he sees you're commited to the takedown.

[jaywest]

I think a lot if it has to do with having a good amount of body control. Feeling what your opponent is trying to do and shifting your body to counteract that. A good example of this is Rampage/Arona. Arona is known for amazing takedowns but Rampage (who isnt even known for his takedown defense) used body control and strength to get away from the takedown. I think a lot of what Chuck does is in the mental game which you brought up. Most people are scared to shoot because they know he has good defense, and that if they get close he can clock them.
As far as what you were saying about Rampage/Liddell I, Rampage got in tight to Chuck and did body takedowns. There really isnt a good defense for getting body locked and lifted... THis is why I see Rampage/Liddell II ending with elbows from Rampage in side mount. Chuck has great wrestling takedown defense, but the way he got taken down in the first fight wasnt so much wrestling.

[Lummox]

Dang. I coulda knocked out Jens and then got on TUF.

[Lummox]

Originally Posted by jaywest

I think a lot if it has to do with having a good amount of body control. Feeling what your opponent is trying to do and shifting your body to counteract that. A good example of this is Rampage/Arona. Arona is known for amazing takedowns but Rampage (who isnt even known for his takedown defense) used body control and strength to get away from the takedown. I think a lot of what Chuck does is in the mental game which you brought up. Most people are scared to shoot because they know he has good defense, and that if they get close he can clock them.
As far as what you were saying about Rampage/Liddell I, Rampage got in tight to Chuck and did body takedowns. There really isnt a good defense for getting body locked and lifted... THis is why I see Rampage/Liddell II ending with elbows from Rampage in side mount. Chuck has great wrestling takedown defense, but the way he got taken down in the first fight wasnt so much wrestling.

Regarding this (sorry to double post), yes, I think takedowns from the clinch are a critical skill. Lutter is a guy seems very comfortable and methodical in this. You can't solely rely on shooting; some guys are too effective nullifying the shoot. The brazilian guy Kampman beat recently spent the whole fight getting stuffed and should have tried this, I thought.

[Leagon]

Originally Posted by jaywest

I think a lot if it has to do with having a good amount of body control. Feeling what your opponent is trying to do and shifting your body to counteract that. A good example of this is Rampage/Arona. Arona is known for amazing takedowns but Rampage (who isnt even known for his takedown defense) used body control and strength to get away from the takedown. I think a lot of what Chuck does is in the mental game which you brought up. Most people are scared to shoot because they know he has good defense, and that if they get close he can clock them.
As far as what you were saying about Rampage/Liddell I, Rampage got in tight to Chuck and did body takedowns. There really isnt a good defense for getting body locked and lifted... THis is why I see Rampage/Liddell II ending with elbows from Rampage in side mount. Chuck has great wrestling takedown defense, but the way he got taken down in the first fight wasnt so much wrestling.

True. I think Rampage may have a pretty unique takedown defense himself. It like a mixture of GSP's without the angles and BJ's without the flexibility.

And I agree with you about how Rampage took him down. I was referring to the times, early in the fight, when he was close enough to go for the takedown, but seemed to hesitate for a split second that allowed Chuck to move out of range. Other times, he was close enough, but simpl decided against it. Though, oddly enough, I think it was that sense of patience that won him the fight.

Dang. I coulda knocked out Jens and then got on TUF.

Heh...I wish it were that easy. I'd have a 40-0 record. All by fake takedown to KO.