True or false: WMMA today is about at the same relative skill level as MMMA was during chuck’s era

[Luvhawky]

Hmmm.... Evolution of BJJ. Can you tell me 10 chokes today that didn't exist 10 years ago?

Is that the only criteria to evolution? Have you not seen how creative BJJ transitions have gotten, how prevalent the 50/50 game is? The more people you get doing something the higher the quality. Are you suggesting BJJ is immune to that? Or are you suggesting there are less participants than 10 years ago?

 

[Drew Peasack]

It makes me feel old that "Chucks era" is now some mystical ydistant time to new fans were you had to look at cave paintings to get reports on the sport.

I'd say back then(assuming you mean the mid 00's) the better divisions(HW, LHW and LW) had achieved skill levels similar to today. Womens MMA is more like the mens sport in the late 90's I would say, some talented people from other sports involved but often with big holes in their games.

Chucks era wasnt even the ufc’s peak. There was a point when the UFC’s WW division considted of:
Prime GSP prime hendricks, paul Daley, prime condit, prime saffedine, woodley, nick Diaz, robbie lawler, rory macdonald, thiago alves, prime fitch, bj penn, and jake shields

 

[YeahNo]

I know I am in the minority, but I do think the whole "MMA has evolved so much from 10 years ago" argument is slightly overplayed. Yes, as time goes on, sports improve because of training and strategy etc. There are plenty of fighters who are successful now who really don't look any different from 10+ years ago. I think Woodley today is worse than GSP was. I don't think Whittaker/Rockhold/Weidman are any better than Anderson. I don't think Stipe or Cormier are lights years ahead of Brock or Rampage/Chuck.

Sure, I would say on average the fighters are better today, but in a sport like MMA that could end up not meaning anything. Being more well rounded does not always = victory. If we are talking the early and mid 90's, then sure, the game was completely different. But the mid 00's until now I don't see a massive change. I just see guys training more disciplines opposed to mastering 1 or 2.

I think it's more than slightly overplayed. I haven't see much evolution at all since the early 2000s. I think there are more (but not a lot more) fighters today that don't need a second job, so they're able to spend more time training. Somebody needs to point out these revolutionary new techniques that have changed the sport. It's a neat bit of propaganda, but that's about it.

As another poster mentioned, if anything, I see guys who give up more today than what we saw a decade ago.

 

[moreorless87]

But that's just it. These people are better mixed martial artists, rather than masters at a specific craft. Anderson Silva was a wonder to behold, but he was also fairly one-dimensional. Once he ran into people who didn't blindly chase him and could wrestle, he was in trouble. So Whittaker/Rockhold/Weidman may not be as spectacular as Silva, but they're better fighters all-around.

Another thing to consider is that as the talent level grows, fighters can look more mundane because there's less of a gap between them and their competition. It's why fighters often go on a finishing streak on their way to a title shot, then once they have the title, they get "boring." Sure, part of it may be playing safer, but another substantial part is that they're now consistently facing the absolute best in the world.

Honestly though the latter argument for me most often seems to be a bit of a copout, basically "Yeah I know these fighters don't LOOK great but believe me theres some super special hidden talent here that wasn't around in the past".

At HW for example I think its become MUCH easier to get finishes against high level opponents, high quality defence(Reem is good at range I spose but poor close in) is almost non existant today. Equally across the sport as a whole I think we've seen a reduction in the number of really dangerous sub grapplers, that's given rise to a lot of tactics(ironically that Chuck helped pioneer with his "just stand up" style) that make things seem a lot easier. When you have someone like Maia turn up though suddenly a lot of fighters who are used to easier escapes end up looking silly.

 

[Cold Front]

There are women, like Rose Namajunas, Tecia Torres, etc. who spent their entire lives in combat sports. Both of those women started training at a very very early age.

They are exceptions. Name a single prominent male fighter in Chuck's heyday who only seriously took up a combat sport in his adulthood, which we can define as after graduating high school.

The Prodigy? Maybe. I can't remember exactly when BJ started fighting jujitsu, but it was pretty close to his high school graduation age. So let's count him.

There might be one or two others. For example, college football players who decided to cross over to MMA but who never wrestled in high school or took karate or judo in their youth. But other than those few exceptions, men's MMA has been populated by guys who have loved to fight in some organized fighting activity since they were young teens.

Women mixed martial artists? Not so much. Which is why the few women who did train in some combat sport from an early age - Ronda Rousey in judo, Meisha Tate in wrestling, Joanna J. in Muay Thai, etc. - tend to do so well in it. Their skill level, not their athleticism, is higher.

 

[Cold Front]

Why? Nobody trained mixed-martial arts back then (Royce Gracie era)... mixed martial arts--back then--meant facing off one style against another. Nobody trains or fights that way now.

Nobody in the US, maybe.* But even before the UFC, there were organizations in Japan and Brazil which featured a variety of martial arts in events.

One of the reasons the Gracies came to the US is because they recognized it was a place where they could showcase their jujitsu against other fighting styles and still get away with it - something they were no longer able to do in Brazil.

* EDIT : I wrote "maybe" because even in the US there were fledgling attempts to showcase cross-over fights before the Gracies made it more mainstream.

 

[RiotWyatt]

This is a joke right? Sure MMA is “new” but the individual martial arts that make up the sport have been practiced and refined for decades before.

You’ll find better, more well-rounded strikers and grapplers in the early 2000s than today. The only change is that there is a deeper talent pool, more weight classes and larger fighters cutting more weight now.

 

[613]

I was thinking more UFC 3-4.

 

[A.S. Deep]

I'd say it's still in the late 90s period of men's MMA. There are a bunch of bums with shit athleticism, but there are also a few gems. Like a powerful puncher with BJJ skills (Vitor/ Nunes), a roided out monster who wins via size and strength (Kerr/ Cyborg), a few technical strikers (Maurice Smith and other male kickboxers/ Holly, Shevchenko, GDR, JJ), and other fighters who are pretty good for their era (Tank, others /Andrade, Thug Rose, a few other 115ers). There are also a few well rounded fighters (Ruas, Randy, Vitor/ Nunes, JJ, Shevchenko). The main thing lacking in WMMA compared to 1990s MMA is
1. A large number of high level wrestlers. Problem is not many women wrestler
2. The lack of KO power. Problem is women are just too small on average.

 

[613]

In chucks prove we had guys like Fedor, Penn, young GSP. No one in WMMA is a tenth as talented as any of them

 

[YeahNo]

Is that the only criteria to evolution? Have you not seen how creative BJJ transitions have gotten, how prevalent the 50/50 game is? The more people you get doing something the higher the quality. Are you suggesting BJJ is immune to that? Or are you suggesting there are less participants than 10 years ago?

No, I have not seen any real changes or startling new creativity in BJJ transitions. For every throw/mid air armbar this year, I can show you a chonan flying heel hook from the early/mid 2000s. No real evolution. There may be some more people doing it, but I have yet to see real improvement.

 

[marvinparsons]

False. The women get modern training so it isn't like 2001 era knowledge is being taught to them. Rose Namajunas has better training than 2000 Mark Coleman.

The best comparison for women's MMA is modern male fighters in local or regional shows. Many of them train at top gyms but aren't amazing athletes or have poor skills, same as a lot of WMMA. Only difference is that the woman may train more as paid better and don't all have day jobs.

 

[Sakuraba7]

The reason Ronda Rousey could dominate WMMA for a period of time, and then be dominated by other women in such a quick turnaround to the point where she left the sport, was because the women's skill level and talent pool simply aren't anywhere close to the level of men.

Also she was a judo Olympic medalist, and these other bitches were picked up from the streets. Ronda was nowhere the "knocks out professional boxers in training" and "could beat Mayweather" level of talent. She was just Queen of the trash heap.

 

[Cold Front]

False. The women get modern training so it isn't like 2001 era knowledge is being taught to them. Rose Namajunas has better training than 2000 Mark Coleman.

That's because of Mark Coleman, not the state of MMA in 2000.

Mark Coleman wouldn't have taken advantage of the state of training today if he were still fighting.

 

[Cold Front]

Also she was a judo Olympic medalist, and these other bitches were picked up from the streets. Ronda was nowhere the "knocks out professional boxers in training" and "could beat Mayweather" level of talent. She was just Queen of the trash heap.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would say that when the talent pool is small it's easier for mediocre talent to look awesome in any sport - from Ping Pong to Shuffleboard.

 

[YeahNo]

False. The women get modern training so it isn't like 2001 era knowledge is being taught to them. Rose Namajunas has better training than 2000 Mark Coleman.

The best comparison for women's MMA is modern male fighters in local or regional shows. Many of them train at top gyms but aren't amazing athletes or have poor skills, same as a lot of WMMA. Only difference is that the woman may train more as paid better and don't all have day jobs.

Bingo. Wow, someone who actually gets it.

 

[Luvhawky]

No, I have not seen any real changes or startling new creativity in BJJ transitions. For every throw/mid air armbar this year, I can show you a chonan flying heel hook from the early/mid 2000s. No real evolution. There may be some more people doing it, but I have yet to see real improvement.

You're too focused on flash. What about sound defense. For example, how often do sweeps work today? Much less often. The game is different. If you can't see it, and refuse to hear that it may be, then that's on you. Keep an open mind is all I'd say when watching BJJ of the past and now.

 

[runnpray]

False.

The WNBA is not at the level of the NBA in the 70s.....

Right, the NBA has been filled with A level athletes for some time now. WNBA to mens basketball in the 50's? Getting close.

 

[Shaddows]

Theres no doubt that there is a lack of skill in wmma. Alot of 2 dimentional fighters. What era would you say wmma is in relative to the history of men’s MMA? Id say there in a similar position as men’s mma during Chuck Liddell’s prime

Disagree.
There is a disparity, and not many women goes pro.
But some of them are great technically, and the more it grows, the better it gets.

Just remember that not long ago at one point, bar brawlers would have real good chance of doing good in men's MMA...and plenty did.

 

[Bill Laimbeer]

I think it’s far below that of Chucks era. Roxanne Moddafari is a contender for fuck sakes.