Do Chael and GSP have it wrong?

nostradumbass

Titanium Belt
@Titanium
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
42,596
Reaction score
41,211
[YT]VML0vBKqU4g[/YT]

Does this seem ridiculous to anyone else? They don't expect you to go hard for 25 minutes, you decided the fight was 25 minutes. You can get out of there in 1 minute if you finished it then. The extra rounds are there in case you couldn't finish in 3 and only guys going for decisions would think they are expecting you to go 25 minutes. Can we not all agree that saying "they expect you to fight for eternity" when there were no time limits would be stupid? The point is, 25 minutes is when they cut you off, not how long they think the fight should go. Does Chael's argument seem silly to anyone else?

I know the video is old and am not posting it as news, just a discussion of fight duration.
 
Why does the 25 minute thing seem to affect GSP's strategy more than other champions then?
 
[YT]VML0vBKqU4g[/YT]

Does this seem ridiculous to anyone else? They don't expect you to go hard for 25 minutes, you decided the fight was 25 minutes. You can get out of there in 1 minute if you finished it then. The extra rounds are there in case you couldn't finish in 3 and only guys going for decisions would think they are expecting you to go 25 minutes. Can we not all agree that saying "they expect you to fight for eternity" when there were no time limits would be stupid? The point is, 25 minutes is when they cut you off, not how long they think the fight should go. Does Chael's argument seem silly to anyone else?

I know the video is old and am not posting it as news, just a discussion of fight duration.

It makes perfect sense, if you can't understand the common logic go sprint non-stop around a track for 25 minutes. You can't, that's why you pace yourself.
 
argument is valid for sonnen, he still explodes and attacks during that 25 minutes. Not so for GSP who never does anything but take a guy down and play patty cake
 
You can get out of there in 1 minute if you finished it then.

And what if you fail?

The argument is valid.
 
He does have a point, and maybe that was part of GSP's strategy when he first started doing 5 round fights.

However, now that he knows he can coast through 5 rounds fairly safely and secure a victory, would there be any incentive for him to change his game plan for a 3 round fight?

I don't think so, no point in putting yourself in high risk situations for any amount of time whether it be for 5 or 25 minutes, if you know you can fight safely and still win.
 
He makes the key point around 1:40 when he repeats the old boxing rule that, "if you go for the finish, you're going to lose the decision." The longer a fight is scheduled for, and thus the longer it has the potential of going if you miss your finish attempt, the more that rule holds. In a three round fight you can go harder because you know that even if you miss the finish you'll only be out there for a short while longer, whereas in a 5 round fight, you may be out there gassed for a very long time (see Hendo in rounds 4 and 5 of Hendo-Shogun for an example of why GSP doesn't go for finishes).
 
gsp wins and defends championship

chael not so much
 
You can try to finish in 1 rnd but what happens if the guy survives that rnd and youre completely exhausted at the start of the 2nd
 
Shael made that point about boxing on the rogan podcast a while back
 
Boxing boring! Olympic boxing GREAT!?

That killed his credibility right there!
 
Why does the 25 minute thing seem to affect GSP's strategy more than other champions then?

Because of the type of fighter he is, and his lack of easy finishing ability. He's actually not the only champ who is really affected, Bendo is, Cruz is, Edgar was, etc. It's largely because unlike Silva, Jones and Aldo, finishes don't come particularly easy to GSP. Where Jones, Silva and Aldo tend to be able to finish while barely expending extra energy, for guys like GSP, Bendo and Cruz, it tends to take a much harder push, so they hedge more and play it safer. To be fair, at times GSP, in particular hedges wayyyyy to much, and I think his transition to point fighting may have more to do with his loss to Serra than with the shift to 25 minute fights. But still, I find it hard to doubt that if he were fighting 3 round fights he wouldn't at least go somewhat harder and push for more finishes.
 
It makes perfect sense, if you can't understand the common logic go sprint non-stop around a track for 25 minutes. You can't, that's why you pace yourself.

Did you not read any of my post? 25 minutes is the time LIMIT, not the time required. If you want to compare running, then take running a mile. Some people walk it and take 15 minutes but some can go harder and do it in 5. You are given the time and not you aren't required to use it all.
 
1. Tyson won his share of decisions against taller boxers

2. Silva conserves his energy and finished a tone of championship fights in exiting manners.

3. Boxing is far from boring and the top guys throw many punches for a tone of rounds. even in it's hay days when they had 15 rounds.


It might be different for MMA though and I see what he's trying to say but I'm not sold
 
Judging by GSP's bank account, I'd say he's got it right.
 
You can try to finish in 1 rnd but what happens if the guy survives that rnd and youre completely exhausted at the start of the 2nd

Fights aren't guys in there alone. You don't have to last that long, you just have to last longer than your opponent which is the whole idea. Getting a guy to punch himself out and then finishing him is a valid strategy, riding out the clock is what gets gets you called boring.
 
Cain was sure looking for the finish in the first round. He couldn't but still took the decision. Hmm crap logic?
 
I don't see the mystery in what he says. Seems like common sense.

If you don't pace yourself for a 5 round fight when you are in one, then you're dumb and your lack of proper strategy will catch up with you sooner or later.

Going for the finish when opportunity presents itself is quite often worth the effort though. Calculated risk.
 
Back
Top