Brawling: is it worth it?

[LamaIronFist]

Most of us expect a lot of action whenever we watch the UFC or smaller shows like Bellator.

Part of us like the technical stuff to some extent but a jab clinic or to much time along the fence can be a bit boring at some point. Most usually like it when both fighters are trading in the pocket.

In fact, some fighters are great brawlers, one of the best these days has to be Matt Brown. Note: by brawler, I don't mean that the guy can't do anything else like BJJ, wrestling. I am talking about a guys who like to slug it out almost like a hockey fight. The stand and bang approach.

Is this worth it?

Though fighters who like the "brawling mode" bring a lot of excitement, is this really worth it for them mid to long term (career longevity- chance at the belt?)

Many who brawl take a fair amount of shots in return. As GSP mentioned a while back, trading in the pocket is like flipping a coin.

It seems also that many of those guys are neglecting other aspect of the game like their ground game, wrestling, etc.) Though there are exceptions with Sam Stout for example who improved his wrestling and takes guys down here and there.

Even a guy like Hendricks who seem to like brawling went back to wrestling fairly quickly once Condit started to get his striking game going. This was a smart choice as straight trading with a pumped up Condit could have been problematic for him.

Are their any guys out there that you see other than Matt Brown that seem to rely mostly on brawling and that have a got shot at a title in their next few fights?

 

[iNoScopedJFK]

How many of the champions are brawlers?

 

[AmericanMMA]

Would Leonard Garcia be in the UFC as long as he was, if he were not a brawler?

I think not, maybe he would have won more, but I doubt it.

He was so much fun to watch, even while getting he ass kicked

Now look what happened to Jon Fitch, who NEVER brawled

I think it can be worth it, yes

 

[FenoxSky]

Sometimes it is, some guys are good at striking from the distance but get really sloppy at brawls, while others less polished strikers are very good at reacting and getting the best of wild exchanges.

 

[Phil Galdong]

Only if you are the inferior fighter.

Like Leben vs Wanderlei.

 

[Mikeyz]

How many of the champions are brawlers?

This

 

[Vividsbricks23]

I think its fun, but not the type of fights I want to see time in, time out. I want to see evasiveness, while committing to your attacks. Technique and skills is what I want to see.

Guys brawling is only entertaining for the moment, but is not what will take them to the belt.

 

[trane]

people have different styles

 

[Concrete]

It's worth it if your skillset matches up well with brawling. Look at Matt Brown. Keeps winning, keeps getting bonuses, if he were wall and stalling he'd probably be losing fights and not getting bonuses.

 

[Straight G]

If you have the chin to do it & are matched correctly you can be a fan favorite. If they feed you to grapplers you're gonna look stupid.

You're unlikely to ever be a champion though, a decade ago you could be, today is a different ball game.

 

[Bigj383]

I can be if you are technically deficient and getting beat anyway. No help in trying to fight a technical fight with a more technical fighter. Boetsch resorted to brawling in rd 3 of the Okami fight and it paid off. You aren't likely going to be a champion but you could become a fan favorite.

 

[ShreddinMMA]

"Brawlers" are getting better at adding striking tactics to their game to make them truly effective. The days of the Chris Leben type brawler is really over.

And it depends on the fighters intent and style. A fighter like Wanderlei's game has always revolved around intensity and he had the physical tools to make it work. In that case, yes, it was worth it.

Now someone like Cro Cop would have done himself many disservices fighting as a brawlers, his style never really fit that bill.

Brawling is an easy way to excitement, but only people who know how to brawl well (like Wanderlei or Matt Brown) are the ones who capture the fans interest. Brawling well is an art in itself.

 

[Mikeyz]

"Brawlers" are getting better at adding striking tactics to their game to make them truly effective. The days of the Chris Leben type brawler is really over.

You can add Jens Pulver to that list as well

 

[TFanatic]

It's worth it if your skillset matches up well with brawling. Look at Matt Brown. Keeps winning, keeps getting bonuses, if he were wall and stalling he'd probably be losing fights and not getting bonuses.

This exactly. As a counter point, look at Schaub when he tried to brawl with Rothwell.

 

[hydingjekyll]

Would Leonard Garcia be in the UFC as long as he was, if he were not a brawler?

I think not, maybe he would have won more, but I doubt it.

He was so much fun to watch, even while getting he ass kicked

Now look what happened to Jon Fitch, who NEVER brawled

I think it can be worth it, yes

There are many more ways to be exciting than to brawl, and it was the lack of excitement that got Fitch cut. He was also pretty one-sided, so he struggled when he couldn't stick to his predictable smothering approach.

Brawling might be effective if it screws up the opponent's game plan - like if you're fighting an elusive technical striker and your sheer aggression keeps him from finding a comfortable rhythm, or if you're fighting a grappler and she just can't get you to the ground because you're always in her face with punches. Anyone really good would probably implement his/her game plan anyway, though.

 

[crysis]

i think brawling is the foolish choice to make, basically because you leave yourself more vulnerable in getting tko/ko'd.

even if your a great striker (silva, lidell, rampage, ect), everyone increases there chances of getting caught and losing the fight.\

i'm a fan like most to see a finish, whether that be submission or ko/tko...but i also accept the fact that this is a sport and fighters don't need to brawl to entertain fans, if you take sportsmanship with respect and honor then you would try to achieve greatness or be the best you can, even if that means using strategies, gameplans and taking less risks to assist in becoming the winner in your fights.

from a fan perspective, ko and tko's are great, but this is a sport and when someone becomes champion your goal is to keep winning and remain champ, taking a risk in which you know might cause you to lose would only allow you to blame yourself in the end...if your opponent is a better striker than you then you don't brawl with him, you fight smarter or use more logic with your approach towards that fighter....i'd rather lose a fight giving a 100%, then lose by brawling hope i get the better of my opponent but then losing by getting caught, better striker gives greater confidence in the stand up but doesn't mean you can't get hit on the right spot and lights out.

people bash gsp for not brawling but he comes in with a good gameplan and usually dominates his opponent by pretty much utilizing all aspects of mma, even though his wrestling is the strong point. if he were to throw all those skills aside and decided to brawl he would be vulnerable just like anyone else, because you leave yourself open for more attacks, if your champ even more of a reason to be aware and cautious as a fighter.

 

[ShreddinMMA]

You can add Jens Pulver to that list as well

I think Pulver's striking deserves a bit more credit than that. He has shown moments of good boxing.

Leben's striking entirely revolves around using his chin to block and trying to land a sloppy haymaker.

But yes, point taken.

 

[Reanimated]

For a fighter coming up or fighting on the lesser/under cards, there's probably more job security going out there fists a flying. A guy who goes out there throwing 50 punches a minute will have people talking about him... so even if he loses, he'll probably get another fight or 2 before they decide to cut him. The cautious grappler really has to watch his ass if he's boring people to death, they might just cut him after 1 loss, even if he had a win or 2.

So in some ways, yes, being a brawler can be worth it.

Edit: And as proven time and time again, the UFC just isn't always about who the best and most deserving fighters are. It's about the ones who will sell the tickets and PPV's. Dana would probably deny that up and down, but it's true.

 

[leosgf]

Only if you are the inferior fighter.

Like Leben vs Wanderlei.

Exactly what I think.

 

[MontrealMauler]

How many of the champions are brawlers?

As a striker, Shogun is the only brawler that became champion in the UFC....but about half of all wrestlers have been brawlers. Hendo isn't a UFC champion but he's the most notable wrestler/brawler there is....when you have takedowns as your backup, brawling is a perfectly legitimate style because it's not really 50/50....if the guy clocks you, you drop levels and take him down so it's really more like 50 vs 40/10....where 40 is takedowns and 10 is you get hurt. Those are good odds.

I love good technical striking but I also love to see a technical striker who doesn't have the skills to do it get punked by a brawler.....brawlers are like those wreckless players at the poker tables who will consistently call you on the bluff whenever they have something halfway decent. You need to have cards to beat them.