Uncle Dana just confirmed it's Joanna vs. Andrade is next

HerpDerp said:
No.

I watch and dissect MMA for witnessing the development of a fighting meta-game, ie. to find quantifiable answers to which stylistic mashup combined with the unique physiological tools at an athlete's disposal prevails over all the others. Not a surprise that it was GSP who made me interested in the sport.

Women are inferior to begin with when it comes to athletic potential, so watching them slug it out does nothing for me in terms of finding out what's objectively the most efficient way to fight, since the physiological tools available to them are a restricted lite-version in comparison to what the top tier male fighters are working with.

I don't get excited over the notion of a fight being close and filled with what you'd call 'drama' in this context.
Click to expand...
j6JGLus.gif
 
HerpDerp said:
What a time to be alive.

giphy.gif



I envy your ability to find enjoyment in fights like that one. Borderline sleep-inducing for me personally.
Click to expand...

Why TF are you in this thread?
 
JJ will win this easily. Andrade is very easy to hit
 
Quietus said:
Andrade vs USADA is next. She has used something to be able to have that much upper body mass @110. it didn't even feel like a fair fight, she just used brute strength to overcome technique, like Cyborg has done to people.
Click to expand...


There were moments where she fought a lot like Cyborg.
 
Betting odds will not have big gap between fighters thats for sure.
 
Real shit, there's getting to be enough Polish star power that Joanna vs Andrade could headline a PPV in Poland. She's defended the title four times already, so it's about time she gets a shot at headlining a PPV. Think about it - Karolina could be on the card also, along with Krzysztof Jotko, Jan Blachowicz, and Daniel Omielanczuk - all of whom are within the top 15 of their respective divisions. Marcin Held could be on the undercard against Takanori Gomi. If the UFC really wants to push the Polish market, now's the time to do it.
 
Great fight .
I just can't wait to see JJ fight again .
Also glad to see andrade step up this time .
Hope JJ pick's her apart and remains champ
 
Last edited:
Andrade is the female version of Lineker
 
dro714 said:
Andrade is the female version of Lineker
Click to expand...
Lineker, or more appropriate, Wanderlei.
HerpDerp said:
No.

I watch and dissect MMA for witnessing the development of a fighting meta-game, ie. to find quantifiable answers to which stylistic mashup combined with the unique physiological tools at an athlete's disposal prevails over all the others. Not a surprise that it was GSP who made me interested in the sport.

Women are inferior to begin with when it comes to athletic potential, so watching them slug it out does nothing for me in terms of finding out what's objectively the most efficient way to fight, since the physiological tools available to them are a restricted lite-version in comparison to what the top tier male fighters are working with.

I don't get excited over the notion of a fight being close and filled with what you'd call 'drama' in this context.
Click to expand...
You sound a little off and incredibly pretentious.

GSP was amazingly exciting but the Andrade vs Hill fight put you to sleep?

With your amazing knowledge and "dissection" of the MMA "metagame" and in finding "quantifiable" answers, have you ever even taken a striking class? Please enlighten us with your wisdom and give us some technical analysis of the Andrade vs Hill fight and why it was bad.
 
Sano said:
You sound a little off and incredibly pretentious.

GSP was amazingly exciting but the Andrade vs Hill fight put you to sleep?

With your amazing knowledge and "dissection" of the MMA "metagame" and in finding "quantifiable" answers, have you ever even taken a striking class? Please enlighten us with your wisdom and give us some technical analysis of the Andrade vs Hill fight and why it was bad.
Click to expand...
Not sure where exactly you get the impression that I have some sort of "amazing knowledge" of MMA, or that the fact that I enjoy dissecting MMA means that I'm successful at doing so? I never claimed, nor implied, that I'm some sort of an MMA mastermind in the first place, but rather elaborated on what drives my interest for following MMA when the subject came up.

If you actually read what I wrote, you would know that the level of technical execution displayed by the women is hardly relevant to my enjoyment levels of watching them in the first place. The fact that the vehicle putting the techniques into use doesn't represent peak athletic potential in humans (or atleast as close to it as I'm able to witness), already makes it boring and irrelevant to me.

Look at it like this: due to the radical differences in physiological dynamics, WMMA has an entirely seperate meta-game of its own. For example, what could objectively be considered an extremely threatening position in MMA, often isn't the same in WMMA. The threats a woman's body can present to another are different and more restricted than what a male's body is capable of doing to anothers'.

Oh, and the part about finding quantifiable answers? I was referring to the results, where one fighter representing a combination of a certain skillset and physique wins, and the one representing another loses. Quantifiably so.
 
Last edited:
HerpDerp said:
Not sure where exactly you get the impression that I have some sort of "amazing knowledge" of MMA, or that the fact that I enjoy dissecting MMA means that I'm successful at doing so? I never claimed, nor implied, that I'm some sort of an MMA mastermind in the first place, but rather elaborated on what drives my interest for following MMA when the subject came up.

If you actually read what I wrote, you would know that the level of technical execution displayed by the women is hardly relevant to my enjoyment levels of watching them in the first place. The fact that the vehicle putting the techniques into use doesn't represent peak athletic potential in humans (or atleast as close to it as I'm able to witness), already makes it boring and irrelevant to me.

Look at it like this: due to the radical differences in physiological dynamics, WMMA has an entirely seperate meta-game of its own. For example, what could objectively be considered an extremely threatening position in MMA, often isn't the same in WMMA. The threats a woman's body can present to another are different and more restricted than what a male's body is capable of doing to anothers'.

Oh, and the part about finding quantifiable answers? I was referring to the results, where one fighter representing a combination of a certain skillset and physique wins, and the one representing another loses. Quantifiably so.
Click to expand...
You started off with saying that you wanted to examine or find the objectively best way to fight. It always comes down to technique, exactly because physical tools or athleticism differs so much from each individual. Obviously it can take you far, but if you don't have technique to fall back on when you're tired or your reflexes dim, you will falter. That's the first thing any decent coach would teach you. There is also no one best style. Everyones frame, proportions, strengths and weaknesses are different and you have to tailor their style to them. Sure, there are basics and proven things for the most part, but however you choose to put them together, or what you have affinity for, varies.

I actually find WMMA fascinating in the sense that the game is a little different. They do have less power and strength, yet they have greater flexibility and often fight with tons of heart and emotion.

Chances are you're an average male that haven't tried any martial arts, haven't sparred and is not a physical specimen. Remember what made BJJ so popular? The "weak" overcoming the "strong".

Personally I'm more of a boxing guy, but I try to follow the same principles. If you can get good technically and THEN apply power and speed, then you can take it further.

In the end you're free to watch what you like, but I don't agree with your reasoning.
 
It'll be a bloody one since Andrade takes shots coming in and pushes through to land her own hooks on JJ. Andrade won't be as effective in the later rounds as JJ so JJ will probably take a hard-fought decision.
 
HerpDerp said:
No.

I watch and dissect MMA for witnessing the development of a fighting meta-game, ie. to find quantifiable answers to which stylistic mashup combined with the unique physiological tools at an athlete's disposal prevails over all the others. Not a surprise that it was GSP who made me interested in the sport.
Click to expand...


lol stopped reading at dissecting

Every sherdogger now thinks they're some kind of MMA analyst/expert of some sort.

Spare us the bullshit
 
L0ki said:
Solid match.

He's talking on the post fight right now.

She fought awesome tonight.

Reminded me a lot of Wand.
Click to expand...
I was saying the same thing. She fights a lot like Wanderlei. I was entertained. Hill is fuckin tough as nails though. Damn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shay Brennan
It's time for Jessica Andrade vs Rose Namajunas 3
Replies
4
Views
183
Connection Lost
Connection Lost

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,078
Messages
55,466,158
Members
174,785
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top