this pretty much sums it up.
Tired of the Hating on Octagon Controllers
- Thread starter lordeventine
- Start date
this pretty much sums it up.
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 48,991
- Reaction score
- 311
but once someone has "control" surely they should do something with it?
tomgrappler
White Belt
- Joined
- May 31, 2011
- Messages
- 139
- Reaction score
- 0
get use to it. the people that boo are the ones that are just the casual fans who have no experience or education in the sport
Unbreakabull
Brown Belt
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 4,843
- Reaction score
- 0
When the audience starts booing you always have that one really loud guy from the front row and his single scream of "BOO!" chiming in right before he beckons the rest of the moo moos to join in and start a thunder of boos.
The only problem I see with booing is anyone flipping the channels on TV and they come across a FX card or TV card and there is all this yelling and booing while two guys writhe about on the ground? No one is gonna stick around on that channel very long.
Unbreakabull
Brown Belt
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 4,843
- Reaction score
- 0
It would seem MMA is the only sport where the casual fans are the ones who do all the showing up and vocalizing and all the spending. When choruses of boos rain down for a lackluster striking match then a take down occurs and a thunder of applause happens, are we going to say this is actually two different audiences at work here? Really? I'm open to this idea, but I don't buy it - mob mentality is funny in that way, all it takes is a few
ko1
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 833
- Reaction score
- 0
This. 100%
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 45,555
- Reaction score
- 12,423
Nothing is wrong with controlling if there is actual offense involved in it. The problem is some fighters chose to virtually stop the fight by holding a fighter against the wall and wait it out. That isnt fighting. They either should have referees break it up when there is stalling more often or have judges not favor that on their scorecards.
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 45,555
- Reaction score
- 12,423
Guard is a neutral position in BJJ and No-Gi Grappling. However, in mma when you add strikes into it, the top guy usually is favored for obvious reasons. Sure, sometimes the bottom guy does throw more strikes but in general, the top guy rains down more strikes which also can have more power due to gravity.
Punching up off your back isn't as powerful as the opposite. However, elbows have been a great offense from the back and to this point, I think it gets judged fairly in the fights I've seen.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 16,087
- Reaction score
- 220
I have no problem with strikes from guard being counted. Fedor destroyed people with gnp in the guard, Coleman, Tito, etc.
But when you get Guida v Pettis type of fight, where the guy on top isn't putting up any offense, just his position, that shouldn't be rewarded.
Being on top shouldn't be enough, but working on top should.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Messages
- 13,745
- Reaction score
- 298
Anyone who says the ultimate goal of MMA is anything other than effective fighting is completely and totally full of shit. I'm looking at you "finishing" and "entertainment" guys. you have no fucking clue.
If you can control a guy and he can't do shit to you even though he's a pro fighter then tough shit.
PS no current champ or all time great was a controller. So that says something about how effective it ultimately is. But it is effective for some guys and it does win fights, and appropriately so.
If you can control a guy and he can't do shit to you even though he's a pro fighter then tough shit.
PS no current champ or all time great was a controller. So that says something about how effective it ultimately is. But it is effective for some guys and it does win fights, and appropriately so.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2007
- Messages
- 12,709
- Reaction score
- 121
I don't blame the fighters or coaches, I blame the scoring criteria/judging methodology. The reason we see wrestlers take this route to "win" is primarily because of that. Its set up like a technical round/point scoring contest, rather than a real fight like it used to be when MMA was born - and how it still should be, but they needed to sanction it with a system. Unfortunately the system has flaws.
If "winning" was equated with pushing guys outside the central octagon lines, then we might see more sumo fighters.
Its just the way the scoring is set up. Change that to align with the spirit of FIGHTING, and the "control+run the clock down" fighters would have to adjust to actually try to do more damage or to get close to finishing before being rewarded. Being on top for X amount of time wouldn't really matter unless you DID something with that position. Until then, fighters will do what they gotta do to get the W.
I can see both sides of the argument, but its the system that's the problem, not the fighters, so haters of these control strategies should target the right thing in their rage.
If "winning" was equated with pushing guys outside the central octagon lines, then we might see more sumo fighters.
Its just the way the scoring is set up. Change that to align with the spirit of FIGHTING, and the "control+run the clock down" fighters would have to adjust to actually try to do more damage or to get close to finishing before being rewarded. Being on top for X amount of time wouldn't really matter unless you DID something with that position. Until then, fighters will do what they gotta do to get the W.
I can see both sides of the argument, but its the system that's the problem, not the fighters, so haters of these control strategies should target the right thing in their rage.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2007
- Messages
- 12,709
- Reaction score
- 121
No, position alone is only a means to an end, even in MMA. Yes its easier to do damage 'on top' or inside guard than it is on the bottom, but unless that damage is ACTUALLY DONE, you shouldn't be rewarded.
As you mentioned its easier to throw strikes from on top/inside guard, but conversely, for the fighter holding guard, there are many more submissions available and its easier to submit compared to their opponent inside their guard. Similarly, that "potential" shouldn't be rewarded alone.
So it should be seen as a neutral position.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2010
- Messages
- 2,840
- Reaction score
- 629
You mention controlling a guy, so he can't do shit as if it is a good thing.
This also means that now you have 2 guys not doing shit while they should be fighting and go for a finish.
MMA was much better and more importantly it was fair untill they brought rules, judges and timelimits to the game and made it possible to win fights with nothing more then control.
You should only win by finish and get a draw if it goes the distance,like it was when MMA started, that way it would be a fair and pure sport again.:icon_idea
And in both of your examples, the fighters needed to respect the fact that it was the option that just beat them, so rather than whine about it, learn to defend against it.
Agree 100%. The fight is all about controlling. You could land more punches and kicks and maybe even get a lucky takedown or two but if the other guy is backing you up landing the harder more significant strikes and showing he wants the win more (being more aggressive), or just doing the simple controlling stuff like taking you down, taking the back, and staying on top of you for the most of the fight. How could people hate on this? "Well he won because I like him more and landed a harder punch after getting backed up and taking 5 leg kicks" No, this means he lost the fight by not being aggressive enough, trying to be a counter puncher and being afraid to get hit or engage enough in any way.
