Holly Holm lost because she doesn't have a jab

Naturally though, Nate is coming off a win and Holm is coming off a loss so therefore Nate destroys anybody and Holm loses to anybody in the top 10.
 
She lost because she's too much in her own head since she lost to Tate. I believe she's conscious of the idea that she's a "boring point fighter" and " One Hit Wonder" that people want to attach to her so she wanted to show a more aggressive component in the Valentina fight. If she could have drubbed Valentina early and in an aggressive fashion it could have drawn the UFC's eye back toward her and moved her closer to another title shot.

On the other side, I believe she was also overly conscious of the potential to get dropped by Valentina and sliding even further down the title contention ladder. That left her aggressively pursuing Valentina and initiating contact but too hesitant to really commit to getting into Valentina's space and putting real pressure on her.

If she wanted to play the counter-striker game, she should have really used her range over Valentina and simply kept back forcing Valentina to engage. It's potentially boring but eventually one of them gets frustrated and cracks.
 
Rico said:
From a broader sense, she lost because Shevchenko let her lead the whole fight. Holly is very similar to Anderson in that regard.

Holly should have looked to use feints to bait Shevchenko out of her shell and countered that. Counter the counter, so to say.
Click to expand...
Holm fan here. I have to disagree. Holly tried to feint a lot, Valentina just wouldn't buy it because she was controlling the distance perfectly. And when Holly slowed down Shevchenko was taking the initiative, she wasn't at all on the back pedal the whole fight.

Valentina is the superior MMA striker, it wasn't just strategy. As a Holm fan I'll deal with it.
 
Tormund said:
Nate would get killed by anybody even near the level of Holms caliber in a pure boxing match, you clearly don't understand the astronomical difference between strictly boxing and somebody like Val who keeps you in kick boxing range, in a boxing match Holm wouldn't have to worry about kicks, takedowns or spinning attacks. Nate would get worked over by an amateur journeyman.
Click to expand...

Tormund said:
NO, he isn't. It doesn't matter if the depth is shallow, Nate wouldn't even make it to European level. He literally only throws 1-2s, he has no footwork or lateral movement and he gets hit A LOT. Why is Nate all of a sudden the second coming of B-Hopkins? He's had his shit pushed in more often than not at LW and has never fought anybody of Vals caliber in the striking department. Nate is overrated. Until Nate actually steps foot in a boxing ring there's absolutely nothing to suggest he can even compete with a journeyman.
Click to expand...
Wait, you say we can't judge Holm's boxing by watching her match MMA against Val (because they're sooooo different, astronomically different), yet you use Nate's MMA matches to show us how terrible of a boxer he is?

Hmmmmm

HMMMMMMMMMM
 
Kawlinz said:
Wait, you say we can't judge Holm's boxing by watching her match MMA against Val (because they're sooooo different, astronomically different), yet you use Nate's MMA matches to show us how terrible of a boxer he is?

Hmmmmm

HMMMMMMMMMM
Click to expand...
Because Nate has no other form of boxing to analyze, dumbass.
 
Tormund said:
Because Nate has no other form of boxing to analyze, dumbass.
Click to expand...
So you're going to judge his boxing by watching him in a martial art that is astronomically different than boxing?

Sounds legit bruh... you watch tennis and pick the next basketball phenom too?
 
Kawlinz said:
So you're going to judge his boxing by watching him in a martial art that is astronomically different than boxing?

Sounds legit bruh... you watch tennis and pick the next basketball phenom too?
Click to expand...
Boxing is a martial art, tennis and basketball have no correlation so that's literally something a retard would say. If Nate actually had a boxing match then I'd be able to judge him off that but he doesn't, why is that so hard to understand? Get educated, you're too dumb to have a conversation with.
 
Mixed said:
Holly's striking isn't near the best in MMA, but at the same time it's more than good enough. Her problem is she doesn't realize that this isn't a kickboxing bout, and sprawl and brawl isn't enough to get it done these days. Wresting needs to be a part of anybody's gameplan; it's stupid to do otherwise.

For example, Valentina even mixed in takedowns effectively which opened things up for her. Holly is probably one of the strongest girls at 135 yet she doesn't use her physicality and wrestling.

And while she needs to wrestle, the problem is she is absolutely terrible on the ground. She has no idea what she is doing when it hits the ground. She probably has cues in her head of things to do in certain situations, but she doesn't understand grappling at all.

So basically her main problem is the ground game. Because she is so bad on the ground, she doesn't even think to use her wrestling, which in turn makes her a completely one-dimensional fighter. Probably one of the most one-dimensional fighters in MMA. Funny how Ronda has been considered a one trick pony when Holly is the exact same.
Click to expand...

Yeah we mock Rousey's boxing but Holm's ground game is equally as bad, which is expected since both have only been training for like 6 years.
Once the fight hits the ground she has this panicked face, like she is not comfortable in there at all.
Unlike Rousey, Holm already has a lot of mileage so she might never develop any sort of takedown threat.
 
Tormund said:
NO, he isn't. It doesn't matter if the depth is shallow, Nate wouldn't even make it to European level. He literally only throws 1-2s, he has no footwork or lateral movement and he gets hit A LOT. Why is Nate all of a sudden the second coming of B-Hopkins? He's had his shit pushed in more often than not at LW and has never fought anybody of Vals caliber in the striking department. Nate is overrated. Until Nate actually steps foot in a boxing ring there's absolutely nothing to suggest he can even compete with a journeyman.
Click to expand...

You guys should listen to Tormund-- he's usually spot on with his striking analyses. Here, look at him break down holly vs. Val before the fight:

Tormund said:
This would be a much tougher fight if Shevchenko was taller, she's simply too small to beat the top 5 of the division, if you know anything about diferent striking styles you should know that this is going to be a fight where Shevchenko tries to close the distance but Holm will use lateral movement and footwork to avoid Shevchenkos strikes and return 2-3 punch combos.
Click to expand...

I'm just glad that he shares his knowledge with us because
Tormund said:
Sherdog is so uneducated when it comes to boxing.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
fortheo said:
You guys should listen to Tormund-- he's usually spot on with his striking analyses. Here, look at him break down holly vs. Val before the fight:



I'm just glad that he shares his knowledge with us because
Click to expand...
Wow, because nobody was ever wrong on sherdog. Better than not offering an opinion and just sitting around starting pointless arguments to act tough, most people were picking Holm to beat Shev and I don't really care that I was wrong. A simple game plan can change everything.
 
Tormund said:
Wow, because nobody was ever wrong on sherdog. Better than not offering an opinion and just sitting around starting pointless arguments to act tough, most people were picking Holm to beat Shev and I don't really care that I was wrong. A simple game plan can change everything.
Click to expand...

If you had half the striking knowledge that you feigned to have, then you would have never said that the fight would have been about Val trying to close the distance. Either that, or you made that prediction with close to zero knowledge about how Val fights.

Also, Nate has more variation in his jabs than you do in your posts. I'm not even a Nate fan and I can see that. He throws off speed jabs to keep people from getting his timing, and obviously mixes in full speed ones. He'll start his jab from various heights--from his normal guard, or with his arm slightly extended so that his jab has less distance to travel, or from a lower position in order to get a different angle; he'll throw retreating jabs, step in jabs, and occasional pivot jabs.

He also has a good check hook. so no, he doesn't only have a 1-2.
 
fortheo said:
If you had half the striking knowledge that you printed to have, then you would have never said that the fight would have been about Val trying to close the distance. Either that, or you made that prediction with close to zero knowledge about how Val fights.

Also, Nate has more variation in his jabs than you do in your posts. I'm not even a Nate fan and I can see that. He throws off speed jabs to keep people from getting his timing, and obviously mixes in full speed ones. He'll start his jab from various heights--from his normal guard, or with his arm slightly extended so that his jab has less distance to travel, and from a lower position in order to get a different angle; he'll throw retreating jabs, step in jabs, and occasional pivot jabs.

He also has a great check hook, so no he doesn't only have a 1-2.
Click to expand...
A great check hook? I never new slaps counted as check hooks, I underrated Val and she got the upset, big deal. His defensive boxing skills are absolutely atrocious, even when he attempts to roll punches he gets clocked once or twice each time. I really don't think we're talking about the same Nate, he has a DECENT jab but it rarely has snap and he throws it kinda retarded, he doesn't let his arm fully extend.
 
Holly lost because of poorer technique, being slower and getting older.
 
Zefram Cochrane said:
Holm fan here. I have to disagree. Holly tried to feint a lot, Valentina just wouldn't buy it because she was controlling the distance perfectly. And when Holly slowed down Shevchenko was taking the initiative, she wasn't at all on the back pedal the whole fight.

Valentina is the superior MMA striker, it wasn't just strategy. As a Holm fan I'll deal with it.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your honesty.
Val was not going to bite on the feints because she was quick enough to deal with them if they turned out to really be strikes.
Either that, or she exited the range, and reset. Taking nothing away from Holm, Val definitely had Holly figured out on the feet, and executed a game plan perfectly.

The closest comparison I can think of to this fight and strategy off hand, is Edgar vs Aldo, without the threat of takedown.
 
Holly has a decent jab. She lost to Valentina because she didn't make adjustments to avoid the overhand right and Valentina was too quick for her. The stuff she was getting hit with she normally can skip out of the way of. Valentina is simply a better striker.

Also Holly lost because she's a 1 dimensional fighter. If she spent the last 3 or 4 years training her wrestling and grappling instead of trying to perfect her oblique kicks she could have used her tremendous size advantage to suffocate Valentina.

Holly is a good fighter but her inability to adjust to what her opponent is doing and her reliance on the jab...jab...oblique kick...skip away...rinse and repeat formula has been exposed her in her last 2 fights. If her opponent doesn't play her game, she's lost and it's not due to having a poor game plan, it's due to not being well rounded enough as a fighter to try something different.

She needs to do what Ronda has done for the past few years and train exclusively to improve her biggest weakness. She'll never be a top notch wrestler, as Ronda will never be a top notch striker but she might be able to improve enough to make herself a threat to take someone down or be able to hold her own on the ground. I think she needs a new camp that will emphasize more wrestling and grappling.
 
Tormund said:
A great check hook? I never new slaps counted as check hooks, I underrated Val and she got the upset, big deal. His defensive boxing skills are absolutely atrocious, even when he attempts to roll punches he gets clocked once or twice each time. I really don't think we're talking about the same Nate, he has a DECENT jab but it rarely has snap and he throws it kinda retarded, he doesn't let his arm fully extend.
Click to expand...

You never knew slaps counted as check hooks? Wow, displaying your knowledge again. Have you ever watched a boxer named Ali?

Slaps absolutely do count as check hooks and boxers will use them because the inside/wrist portion of the boxing glove has less padding and thus they hit their opponent with harder/lower part of the palm. In an mma context slaps or palm strikes are significantly easier on the hands , plus they gave the added bonus of frustrating their opponents.

Nate's defence could use some work for sure, but I wouldn't call it atrocious. He had technically better defense than Conor in their fight.
 
fortheo said:
You never knew slaps counted as check hooks? Wow, displaying your knowledge again. Have you ever watched a boxer named Ali?

Slaps absolutely do count as check hooks and boxers will use them because the inside/wrist portion of the boxing glove has less padding and thus they hit their opponent with harder/lower part of the palm.

Nate's defence could use some work for sure, but I wouldn't call it atrocious. He had technically better defense than Conor in their fight.
Click to expand...
Ali actually had boxing gloves though, Nate literally open hand slaps in the face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,998
Messages
55,460,218
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top