Seems like every time a striker is matched with a wrestler, we all know what the outcome would be? The wrstler holding down the striker for 3 rounds or worse, 5. thoughts?>
true in 99/100 cases. wrestling is the worst thing to happen in mma. well at least the lnp. since we dont see much slams or suplexes in bigger divisions, its boring. like olympic wrestling or olympic judo, UUUULTRA boring.
remember when chuck liddell used to get a hard time for 'only beating wrestlers'? times have changed!! i don't think this rule is always true (the main event was too one sided to be properly 'enjoyable' but it was not a snoozer!) but certainly there have been many examples of it lately..
Strikers need to work their TDD. That's my thought. If they know it's coming and they can't stop it, is that anyone's fault but there own?
You know, there are sports where strikers fight strikers (boxing, K-1, muy thai for instance), and sports where wrestlers fight wrestlers (freestyle, folkstyle, greco-roman). If you don't enjoy strikers fighting wrestlers, why not pick one of them to watch?
I do not se a problem with strikers vs wrestlers, I see a problem in the scoring system. I thought the last UFC was great, out of a mma sporting view. but still the rules should be more focused on actual fighting. It is called Ultimate FIGHTING Championship. The only match, who actually had both guys wanting to fight was miller vs louzon. It would be interesting if, lets say takedowns would not give any points, and also pressing opponent against the cage wouldn
if you thought okami/belcher was a boring fight then you aren't a fan of mma. it may have been slow, and it wasn't action packed, but it was a good fight.
just let them stand up like in pride when the wrestler goes for lay n pray. but if they did this, there wouldnt be many us fighters left :icon_chee
