Nick Diaz Boxing style

[Barbadosdaluta]

Nick Diaz and high striking intelligent does not go together. He had cardio and chin, but he is a one dimensional brawler who know bodyshots but no footworks, no headmovement, no jab, and whenever people arent willing to dance to his tune he throw a tantrum instead. And even calling Diaz a brawler is making the people who know how to brawl like Marcos Maidana a disservice.

Then... Why does Nick whoop ass on the feet? Nicks boxing resembles old school bare knuckle boxing which is more effective for 4oz gloves. Nick has more realistic boxing than Maidana for actual fights.

 

[Nuclearlandmine]

Then... Why does Nick whoop ass on the feet? Nicks boxing resembles old school bare knuckle boxing which is more effective for 4oz gloves. Nick has more realistic boxing than Maidana for actual fights.

Man, I've ignored this thread for a while but if you are telling me that Nick Diaz's boxing resemble old school bare knuckle boxing then i will have to correct you a bit. Just because someone wrote that doesn't mean it is actually is:

Now, here's bare knuckle boxing's stances:

Look at their stance: weight on the backfoot, back straight, head pulled back, while the hand is around chest height. Their hands at that position because their stance already make their body skinny and their head off angle, providing a layer of defense in itself.

Now, look at Nick fucking Diaz's stance:

His stance is the modern boxing's stance, weight mainly at the front foot, his back is kind of shit, head is near the opponent.

Look familiar?

The stance alone tell you that his style isn't resemble old school boxing in any ounce. Old school boxers are way too smart to have "let me block punches with his face" defense that he used.....Like:

As for the kicking ass....you mean beating over the hill fighters, undersized fighters, and journeymen? Nick Diaz have one or two good wins, but he has had favourable match up over the years. He relied on his chin to out-tough the other guy in a brawl and it is literally his only gameplan. Remember how Diaz throw a tantrum when Condit wouldn't suck into brawl like his other opponent, or when GSP consistently tag Diaz with his jab even though people hyped Diaz's stand up as world class? Now i get that Diaz had a lot of following from being a guy with an exciting style, but it is getting to the point where he had been over glorified like a martyr, even though he's a depressive idiot who quit after getting thoroughly dominated by GSP.

 

[Discipulus]

In fairness Nuke, that article didn't compare Diaz's stance to Corbett's (who fought in the beginning of the heavyweight glove era), but to Daniel Mendoza's, arguably the first "scientific" boxer.

That's Mendoza's stance.

Now I don't agree that a passing similarity to Mendoza's stance means that Nick is fighting with the same scientific, thought-out approach as Mendoza, but there was a time when many boxers did not fight in the tall, back-weighted stance we usually associate with old-timey boxing.

I also don't think that there's NO science to what Nick does. His offense is pretty well thought-out, even if he is strategically limited by his skillset, particularly when it comes to cutting off the cage and, you know, avoiding punches. On the attack, though, he doesn't just throw things randomly. He comes in behind a jab, probes and feints to suss out openings, and mixes up the power and targets of his punches well.

 

[Nuclearlandmine]

I guess i'm just too pampered by watching boxing. Now watching MMA and talk about its fighters make me cringed because i can't look past their technical flaws. Oh well.

 

[TheFinerDetails]

I guess i'm just too pampered by watching boxing. Now watching MMA and talk about its fighters make me cringed because i can't look past their technical flaws. Oh well.

It's a whole different game when you try to assimilate straight boxing and kickboxing methods into a game where world class grapplers can take you down in an instant. Suddenly, throwing body kicks as often as a thai boxer doesn't look so good. Maybe what you see as a technical striking flaw, is actually perfect for the sport they are using it in.

Then again, there is always sub-par strikers.

 

[KennisTheMenace**]

It's a whole different game when you try to assimilate straight boxing and kickboxing methods into a game where world class grapplers can take you down in an instant. Suddenly, throwing body kicks as often as a thai boxer doesn't look so good. Maybe what you see as a technical striking flaw, is actually perfect for the sport they are using it in.

Then again, there is always sub-par strikers.

This! This is exactly why I keep boxing with no aspirations to ever compete in MMA, I don't want to deal with some guy wrestling while I'm punching! The two sports are just so different and I'm happy to have been a witness to both Diaz brothers making fights exciting with punches.

 

[Jukai]

Bringing up Condit for reasons why Nick Diaz is limited is not that great of an argument. Sure, Condit danced circles around Nick, but even with that limitation, Condit still wound up trapped in the corner in the first few rounds and got his body beat the hell out of. Condit gets more credit than he deserves, he killed Diaz in rounds 3-5 but that was mostly leg kicks taking its toll and Condit finding a rhythm. If it was a three round fight, Diaz woulda likely won against a "world class" striker in Condit.

Sure, GSP boxed the fuck out of Diaz's face, but Diaz had to worry about the never ending swarm of takedowns and GSP is also one of the best boxers in the UFC. OF course he is going to outbox Diaz.

 

[Discipulus]

Let's be real, though: Condit is about as a good of a striker as Diaz is, and has succeeded in MMA for more or less the same reasons: world class jiu-jitsu, a granite chin, and unstoppable cardio. Take away any one of those aspects and both Condit and Diaz would be completely mediocre. The only advantage that Condit had in that fight was better coaching--without that strategy he would have done his usual thing against Nick and Nick would likely have worn him down like he does every other fighter with less-than-good defense/stamina.

A striker like Robbie Lawler (the current iteration) would ruin Diaz's shit. If you can slip punches, throw kicks, and go to the body, you'll beat Nick on the feet. You just have to fight back and not get sucked into Nick's game. Easier said than done, but there it is.

 

[Jukai]

A striker like Robbie Lawler went 2-2 against Johny Hendricks, who was beat up by Condit on his feet (Hendricks took the fifth against Lawler too, but I won't count that because he won with that last minute takedown). I guess you could say Lawler had to respect the TD threat and couldn't put all of his efforts into striking, but I'm not as impressed with Robbie as you are. He tends to slip a lot without countering, against a swarmer like Diaz, I dunno if that would hold up. It got him tagged big time against Hendricks a few.

 

[Discipulus]

Hendricks was much better against Lawler than he was against Condit. There was seriousand obvious improvement in just about every aspect of his striking.

I also find it strange that you chose to measure Lawler's performance against Hendricks by Hendricks' performance against Condit, rather than Hendricks' fight with GSP, in which Hendricks arguably outstruck the greatest welterweight in MMA history. If Hendricks can win at least 2 rounds in a fight with GSP and convince most of the world that he's won the whole thing, I don't think Robbie should be embarrassed about having a close fight with him, in which he came this close to knocking Hendricks out. "Hendricks, who was beat up by Condit" sounds a little too agenda-driven when you could have said "Hendricks, who beat up GSP."

I also wouldn't venture to say that Condit beat Hendricks up on the feet. In fact, he got his ass whooped for a round and a half until Hendricks, unpolished as he was at the time, gassed badly and had to resort to his wrestling to secure the win. If Condit didn't have an unbelievable chin he would have been leveled in the first two minutes of the first round, when Hendricks was all but sending his head flying into the stands with constant left hands.

And, personally, I thought Lawler drew with Hendricks (I scored the first round a 10-10), and that's being kind to Hendricks for not scoring round 3 a 10-8.

 

[Jukai]

Hendricks was much better against Lawler than he was against Condit. There was seriousand obvious improvement in just about every aspect of his striking.

I also find it strange that you chose to measure Lawler's performance against Hendricks by Hendricks' performance against Condit, rather than Hendricks' fight with GSP, in which Hendricks arguably outstruck the greatest welterweight in MMA history. If Hendricks can win at least 2 rounds in a fight with GSP and convince most of the world that he's won the whole thing, I don't think Robbie should be embarrassed about having a close fight with him, in which he came this close to knocking Hendricks out. "Hendricks, who was beat up by Condit" sounds a little too agenda-driven when you could have said "Hendricks, who beat up GSP."

I also wouldn't venture to say that Condit beat Hendricks up on the feet. In fact, he got his ass whooped for a round and a half until Hendricks, unpolished as he was at the time, gassed badly and had to resort to his wrestling to secure the win. If Condit didn't have an unbelievable chin he would have been leveled in the first two minutes of the first round, when Hendricks was all but sending his head flying into the stands with constant left hands.

And, personally, I thought Lawler drew with Hendricks (I scored the first round a 10-10), and that's being kind to Hendricks for not scoring round 3 a 10-8.

Whoaaa there. We remember these fights wayyyy differently... and if I remember correctly, you've changed your opinion on the GSP fight too.

In the first round, GSP took most of his damage against Hendricks failing to find better angles against that southpaw stance and GSP wound up getting his head smashed in with short punches and elbows while grabbing Hendrick's leg or pushing him against the fence. My computer hates the hell out of FightMetric's new blog format, but I remember GSP being the only one to actually land any strikes of note at distance that round, most of Hendrick's shots were in the wrestling clinch. Obviously in the second, Hendricks rocked GSP with that killer left and beat the hell out of him, but in the third through fifth rounds, it was GSP nailing Hendrick's head and body with jabs and kicks. Hendrick's took the fourth round because of a takedown and had GSP on his back for a long time.... but I don't think Hendricks "outstruck" GSP in the classical sense at all. Keep in mind I've seen this fight more recently than it was aired.

In the Condit v Hendricks fight, I remember Hendricks nailing Condit with a ton of lefts in the beginning of the fight but Condit was rather unphased and began teeing off on Hendricks until Hendricks began spamming takedowns on Condit, taking him down a ton of times that won him rounds 2 and 3. Keep in mind I haven't seen this fight in forever, so don't quote me on this as much as the GSP one.

Regardless, in both fights, I would say it was Hendrick's wrestling that won him the fight. These examples weren't agenda driven, I didn't bring up GSP v Hendricks because I didn't think Hendricks outstruck GSP on his feet at all with the exception of rocking GSP in the second.