Shooting vs clinch and trip/throw

N

Nozza

Purple Belt
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
1,527
Reaction score
0
Watching the UFC over the weekend it struck me how different the take down strategies seen in the Bendo/Thomson match were to the old shoot for a double approach which failed miserably for Gonzaga against Stipe.

Thomson was getting in and clinching and taking down from a more upright position rather than shooting from afar. Obviously Rousey uses this as her mainstay as do a few others.

As the UFC has progressed over the years, many of the strikers have become really adept at stuffing and sprawling against shots and often nullify anyone without an A1 shooting game. So I'm wondering why this still seems to be the dominant TD approach rather than the clinch and trip/throw game? I watch these guys' failed shots over and over thinking why the hell don't you close and clinch and go from there?

Is the old shooting game something they hang on to because it's sort of traditional now?

Or am I reading all this wrong?
 
that is the dumbest thing i have ever read ever, learn something about wrestling and you might understand takedowns
 
nohomark said:
that is the dumbest thing i have ever read ever, learn something about wrestling and you might understand takedowns
Click to expand...

Would you like to expand on why rather than just insult me?
 
Nozza said:
why the hell don't you close and clinch and go from there
Click to expand...

Its not as easy to close the distance as you're making it out to be. Its a bit like saying 'why don't all fighters just KO their opponent?''
 
A good double leg shot (with a fast crisp level change and penetration step) done from the appropriate distance (where you can touch the person) is still very effective. Especially if your opponent is very upright and moving towards you with punches. Problem is too many guys don't have a good level change and penetration, they just sorta dive at the guy, and they make it worse by doing it from too far out. Also, by the end of Bendo/Thomson, Bendo was doing a much better job of defending takedowns, meanwhile Gonzaga was gassing heavily and his shots were getting worse and worse as time went on.

I would think a good MMA fighter would want to be versatile with both types of takedowns and know when to use each.
 
Double leg takedowns are probably the highest % takedown in MMA
 
Pro Killer said:
Double leg takedowns are probably the highest % takedown in MMA
Click to expand...

Yeah at the moment. But the double has to be shot with excellent timing. I agree with OP though. Clinch based TD's should become the standard for BJJ guys. I'm thinking of Maia's recent fights. He closes distance, clinches, and either works a TD or goes to the back. Either way you're in his world. I feel like more grapplers need to adapt to bring the fight into their own world.
 
RTD1 said:
A good double leg shot (with a fast crisp level change and penetration step) done from the appropriate distance (where you can touch the person) is still very effective. Especially if your opponent is very upright and moving towards you with punches. Problem is too many guys don't have a good level change and penetration, they just sorta dive at the guy, and they make it worse by doing it from too far out. Also, by the end of Bendo/Thomson, Bendo was doing a much better job of defending takedowns, meanwhile Gonzaga was gassing heavily and his shots were getting worse and worse as time went on.

I would think a good MMA fighter would want to be versatile with both types of takedowns and know when to use each.
Click to expand...

yeah, and nowadays the guy shooting doubles needs to have pretty good striking in order to establish the appropriate distance and level change. a lot of the doubles that get stuffed are poorly set up.
 
nohomark said:
that is the dumbest thing i have ever read ever, learn something about wrestling and you might understand takedowns
Click to expand...

You are what's wrong with Sherdog these days! Unreal, the guy asks a legit question that is seems you may have some insight on and rather than share that insight you just insult him.

Kick rocks douche'
 
I think the reason for this is the cage. It certainly helps a lot in taking an opponent down if they are pinned against the cage and can't sprawl out. It also makes it easier to close the distance. You don't really see too much clinching off of the cage in MMA.

You still see a lot of shooting for takedowns, but its mostly based of timing the shot against your opponent's striking.
 
Fighters using more nogi judo / sambo moves is going to be the next major evolution in mma grappling.
 
The double leg takedown is the most effective takedown in all of wrestling. However, a lot of it comes from your stance. In wrestling your stance is very different from mma, basically a crouched stance vs an upright stance. To shoot a double leg from an upright striking position you must have excellent timing and excellent level changes. GSP and Sherk are excellent examples of these two skills resulting in excellent double legs from the upright striking stance.

I do think clinch throws/trips are very underutilized though. Look at Jon Jones, the throws that he hits are not only effective, but very unusual for mma. However, compared to Judo or Greco-Roman wrestling those throws are fairly common. Same with Rousey, excellent use of your opponents momentum resulting in less energy used in the takedown and greater overall positioning (for the most part).
 
Sharknado said:
The double leg takedown is the most effective takedown in all of wrestling. However, a lot of it comes from your stance. In wrestling your stance is very different from mma, basically a crouched stance vs an upright stance. To shoot a double leg from an upright striking position you must have excellent timing and excellent level changes. GSP and Sherk are excellent examples of these two skills resulting in excellent double legs from the upright striking stance.

I do think clinch throws/trips are very underutilized though. Look at Jon Jones, the throws that he hits are not only effective, but very unusual for mma. However, compared to Judo or Greco-Roman wrestling those throws are fairly common. Same with Rousey, excellent use of your opponents momentum resulting in less energy used in the takedown and greater overall positioning (for the most part).
Click to expand...

The bolded is not true.

As for the OP a lot of times you see sloppy shots because the guy shootin sin't able to close the distance even though he wants too. This leads to him taking desperation shots because he doesn't really have anything else.

Look at the way GSP and Edgar use theri boxing to close the distance to set up the shot and compare to guys who shoot from 5 feet away.

Taking guys down from the clnch is great but you want to have both of those in your arsenal and use them when the opportunity presents itself.
 
PolishHeadlock said:
The bolded is not true.

As for the OP a lot of times you see sloppy shots because the guy shootin sin't able to close the distance even though he wants too. This leads to him taking desperation shots because he doesn't really have anything else.

Look at the way GSP and Edgar use theri boxing to close the distance to set up the shot and compare to guys who shoot from 5 feet away.

Taking guys down from the clnch is great but you want to have both of those in your arsenal and use them when the opportunity presents itself.
Click to expand...

How is what I said not true? What do you think is the most effective wrestling takedown?
 
Alexcny said:
I think the reason for this is the cage. It certainly helps a lot in taking an opponent down if they are pinned against the cage and can't sprawl out. It also makes it easier to close the distance. You don't really see too much clinching off of the cage in MMA.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the opposite - that it can be hard to crowd in a clinch without a cage or ropes whereas a shoot is always an option. In Bendo vs Thomson I saw quite a lot of clinching against the fence leading to takedowns, but maybe that was because they both fancy their changes in these exchanges and allowed them to happen?
 
Nozza said:
Watching the UFC over the weekend it struck me how different the take down strategies seen in the Bendo/Thomson match were to the old shoot for a double approach which failed miserably for Gonzaga against Stipe.
Click to expand...
If you think a BJJ guy is going to be a great shooter, You're going to have a bad time...
 
Sharknado said:
How is what I said not true? What do you think is the most effective wrestling takedown?
Click to expand...
In the actual sport of wrestling you see far more singles at a high level. Just too hard to capture both legs for the most part. Unless you are Jordan Burroughs.
 
Double leg is the best takedown in MMA, but calling it a "shot" is a bit misleading as it's very often done from the clinch or in striking exchanges.

Shooting from far outside doesn't work very well in wrestling or in MMA or ... anywhere. It's a desperation move, akin to winging overhand rights from a distance. It's not that the technique is bad, it's that the key to success is all in the setup, and when guys are losing the overall setup/positioning battle, they can't hit the move. When guys are winning the setup/positioning battle, they can hit the move repeatedly.

This is why wrestlers and bjj guys with efficient striking/clinch skills can shoot double legs so effectively in MMA, while great pure wrestlers so often disappoint. They can't get their TD setup going because they are deficient in the basic MMA positional game. Shooting from outside is hapless by comparison.

Despite all the hype about throws, basic double legs and bodylocks are far and away the best MMA takedowns IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,651
Messages
58,307,761
Members
175,999
Latest member
joshvegas

Share this page

Back
Top