Joe rogan round one “wrestling ist teh greatest base ...”DC is on another level”

[Mike K.O]

Well yes, in a very casual sense every UFC fighter is also a striker or a jiu jitsu practitioner. The key modifier we're missing here is "good" right? Ben Askren getting knocked out, for example, does not demonstrate the anything concerning the importance or lack thereof of good striking because he is not a good striker. Now, Whittaker is a good wrestler. A Commonwealth games qualifier and Australian national champion. An 84% TDD average despite having fought against the likes of Yoel Romero (twice), Jacare, Derek Brunson and Rafael Natal is, I think most would say, a pretty impressive show of being able to control how and where the fight is being fought.

Nicely put
It depends on your (and mine) definition of a "wrestler"
For me, a champ to be called a wrestler has to use it as his primary offensive tactic
But you make a good point about Rob's TDD, it shows that he's a good wrestler and made it an important part of his skillset
So I think we agree, that Robert is very well rounded
Is he a wrestler? Yes
Is wrestling what makes him win fights? Yes, mixed with his striking
So I think you've proved your point, Robert Whittaker is a (defensive) wrestler

 

[Karelinator]

H
Also, I want to note something hilarious in your counting skills. Let's be generous and say that Whittaker "wasn't a wrestler", despite being a national team wrestler. Lets grant that you didn't know that.

Well, I guess it's semantics, but generally people use 'wrestler', 'striker' or whatever to refer to most 'base' part of skillset, background.

In Whittaker's case it's Karate and Hapkido, apparently.

Otherwise we would have to stop calling those guys any other names than 'MMA fighter'. They're all doing everything now.

Now, Whittaker is a good wrestler. A Commonwealth games qualifier and Australian national champion. An 84% TDD average despite having fought against the likes of Yoel Romero (twice), Jacare, Derek Brunson and Rafael Natal is, I think most would say, a pretty impressive show of being able to control how and where the fight is being fought.

Sure, but when you have guys like Yoel or Werdum who had been mostly striking for a long time now, for various reasons -

You still won't call them a strikers, no?

 

[The Half Blood Prince]

Why didnt DC try to to wrestle??
That was the game plan and he even said after he should have. If he did things could have been very different we saw how much control DC had when he got the takedown

 

[CorninginChristianburg]

Well, I guess it's semantics, but generally people use 'wrestler', 'striker' or whatever to refer to most 'base' part of skillset, background.

In Whittaker's case it's Karate and Hapkido, apparently.

Otherwise we would have to stop calling those guys any other names than 'MMA fighter'. They're all doing everything now.

As mentioned above, Rogan isnt talking about bases. That is a separate debate. He is talking about skills and their importance. And as mentioned above, they key modifier in question is "good." Yes, everyone trains wrestling, striking, and submission grappling. Everyone demonstrates elements of that in their fights. But that doesn't make everyone good (defined as above, perhaps significantly above, average) at that skill. Ben Askren losing on the feet is not a verdict on the effectiveness of striking. Glover Texeria being taken down and grounded and pounded isn't a referendum on wrestling. Because they may do these two things, but they are below average in the UFC at these two things.

I think it's worth noting that a fighter can demonstrate the importance of multiple styles. It is merely the case that many champions either do not at all or do not entirely. Sometimes a wrestler may perform better at striking because his opponent's hands are down, or a striker may get a takedown because he's softened up his opponent, or a jiu jitsu practitioner may get a submission off of a violent takedown. So a meaningful question to ask is, "how would X persons skill Y be if his A skill was average?" If Whittaker was an average striker, he would still be a very good wrestler. If he were an average wrestler, he'd still be a very good striker. The same may also be true for Jon Jones, for example. But is the same true for the other champions? If Khabib and Usman were average wrestlers would they be above-average strikers? Probably not. Stipe is a boxer, he is good at boxing but doesn't have good kicks and knees. If his wrestling were average, he might be an above average striker but likely nothing exceptional. Was DC a great striker without his wrestling? What about Henry Cejudo? Opinions on him may be changing, certainly, if he was an average wrestler it is indisputable that he would have lost to DJ both times. So the common thread you see here is wrestling. Two of the three interim champions are also very good wrestlers in Colby Covington and Dustin Poirier. So what is the most common denominator that these champions share? Generally speaking, good wrestling.

Sure, but when you have guys like Yoel or Werdum who had been mostly striking for a long time now, for various reasons -

You still won't call them a strikers, no?

Romero has actually wrestled more in the last few matches than I think people will remember. But in any case, its important to remember that wrestling isnt shooting for takedowns. Its isnt even just takedowns and forcing clinches. Wrestling is about dictating the location of the fight, than can be by takedowns, or initiating a clinch, or defending a takedown, or escaping a clinch. Some wrestlers may choose to fight from standing. But that is their choice. And that is the key. No one is imposing another will upon them, and if they are good enough, no one will be able to.

 

[Dbreiden83080]

You know there was a time Rogan was a pretty good looking dude... Looks like a Middle Aged pothead HGH abuser now..

 

[Which Doctor]

He got his head knocked off by another wrestler who also took him down. The ignorance here is truly fascinating.


This is just a lack of skill in counting. FW Cejudo - wrestler. BW Cejudo, same guy. FTW - Holloway - non-wrestler. Khabib - wrestler. Usman - Wrestler. Whittaker - this isn't well known but Whittaker is actually a wrestler for the Australian National Team as well, so wrestler. Jon Jones - Wrestler. Stipe - Wrestler. We haven't even gotten to the women yet and we already have 6 guys occupyng 7 of 8 possible slots.

Also, I want to note something hilarious in your counting skills. Let's be generous and say that Whittaker "wasn't a wrestler", despite being a national team wrestler. Lets grant that you didn't know that. Lets grant that the 3 female champions are also non-wrestlers, and let's actually count Nunes twice for holding two belts, despite the fact that you only counted Cejudo once for holding two belts. That still leaves you with only 6 non-wrestlers. So not only is the 5 off, the 7 is impossible. So I really have no clue what you're doing running out there with your incorrect stats. Let's keep thinking of ways you could have gotten your number. Maybe you meant "folkstyle" wrestlers. But then you're clearly shifting the goalposts. Fist of all, the quote you are attacking never sets those extra parameters, you're projecting that upon the quote yourself. Secondly, most of those wrestlers do not consider themselves folkstyle wrestlers, since many of them last trained freestyle. However, if you meant "freestyle" wrestlers, you'd only get 3 individuals with 4 titles. No matter what, you just threw an incorrect set of numbers out there and it's not clear what sort of manipulations you did to make the number make sense in your head.

Settle down Scott Steiner.