Wrestling is NOT boring

[brendan raedy]

Similarity to indigenous styles? I have no idea, but I've seen that in Judo where Georgians and Mongolians really take to it because it's pretty similar in many ways to native styles of jacket wrestling they grew up on.

Though Caucasians are just beasts. I once saw a Caucasian baby arm bar the delivery room doctor when he slapped him. True story.

LOL.

Ilias Iliadis, Olympic Champ representing Greece by way of Georgia went belt grip with a Mongolian and was on the losing end at the most recent Worlds. Here is the vid:

https://judo.com.gr/world-judo-championships-m-w-astana-2015-90kg-iliadis-ilias-gre-vs-lkhagvasuren-otgonbaatar-mgl/

 

[Uchi Mata]

LOL.

Ilias Iliadis, Olympic Champ representing Greece by way of Georgia went belt grip with a Mongolian and was on the losing end at the most recent Worlds. Here is the vid:

https://judo.com.gr/world-judo-championships-m-w-astana-2015-90kg-iliadis-ilias-gre-vs-lkhagvasuren-otgonbaatar-mgl/

I saw that. Iliadis is probably on the downside of his career, plus he's always been heavily strength dependent (watch some of his early career matches, he just beasts guys into hip and shoulder throws) and that's a hard game to stay competitive with as you get older. And any Mongolian is going to be a bad matchup for him as they tend to be suplex/hip throw machines against people who play a clinching style Judo game which Iliadis loves to do.

 

[Zankou]

It's no secret that they need to change the rules on the feet to prevent stalling and force the action, as is done in wrestling.

Part of the reason that stalling on the feet is so much more boring than stalling on the ground is that groundwork inherently can progress slowly over a sustained positional battle ... you can have guys working for three minutes as one slowly seizes and then exploits positional advantage.

On the feet, you don't even have that. You just have horrible hand fighting and repeated half-hearted shot defense. There's no asymmetric positional battle that's being waged over several minutes. It's just TDs and hand-fighting that keeps resetting to neutral over and over again. This is okay if the action is being forced, but when both guys are allowed to stall, it becomes intolerable.

Also, as Uchimata says, flying submissions should be allowed without negative points, and also I believe rolling leglock entrances should be allowed as well. This would make the standup much more interesting.

 

[BJJ_Rage]

Two guys refusing to take a shot or go for a throw, in other words refuse to wrestle, is boring. Here is just a glimpse of how entertaining wrestling can be:

Yes, submission grappling is about the SUBMISSION (just like wrestling is about the PIN), but unless you are a fan of the double guard pull or think matches should start on the mat, the rules and the manner in which they are enforced have to find a way to incentivize learning how to take your opponent from a standing position to the mat.

In wrestling, you let a guy escape for 1 point rather than give up a reversal for 2 points and get on with the match. If you want to pull guard, take the negative advantage (under ADCC rules) and show how great your guard is.

3 unanswered shots is stalling. Warn them, ding them with a negative advantage, then -2 points, then a DQ.

If neither guy is shooting, warn, neg adv, -2 points to them both, and ultimately DQ them both if neither will pull, throw, or shoot.

There have been boring matches and boring events under every ruleset we have come up with. Some do better than others at minimizing the boring matches, but athletes and coaches will ALWAYS find a way to manipulate the rules.

Stalling can at times be subjective, but compared to some of the alternatives I have seen from wrestling (clinch after a scoreless period, putting one person on bottom of par terre, ball grab) I think strictly enforcing stalling calls is the best bet. That, and shortening the matches.

tl;dr wrestling is getting a bad rap due to non-wrestlers refusing to wrestle

if you are going to give -1 to a guard puller, you should to the same with the person running across the mat avoiding the engage on the ground, that is a problem, you can pull guard and not even get to engange on the ground (well more like sit your ass on the ground). Also if you are going to penalize false tds, you should do the same when people are faking passes a la Rustam.

 

[brendan raedy]

if you are going to give -1 to a guard puller, you should to the same with the person running across the mat avoiding the engage on the ground, that is a problem, you can pull guard and not even get to engange on the ground (well more like sit your ass on the ground). Also if you are going to penalize false tds, you should do the same when people are faking passes a la Rustam.

Pretty sure current ADCC rules call for just that. Whether that is enforced is another issue.

There is stalling on both ends on the mat too. Some people "fake" pass, others play plenty of defensive guard and inversions but go long periods of time with no serious sweep or submission attempts.

If you are willing to take a -1 to pull, or get taken down for 2 points, the onus is on you to attack to even up the match, get ahead on points, or win by submission.

 

[BJJ_Rage]

Pretty sure current ADCC rules call for just that. Whether that is enforced is another issue.

There is stalling on both ends on the mat too. Some people "fake" pass, others play plenty of defensive guard and inversions but go long periods of time with no serious sweep or submission attempts.

If you are willing to take a -1 to pull, or get taken down for 2 points, the onus is on you to attack to even up the match, get ahead on points, or win by submission.

When yo u are playing guard the whple concept is that the person on top shpuld be trying to pass and you defending and while defending looking for openings to sweep or sub if the person on top is not trying to pass and just stays on the outside and as soon as you get close backs up to do the same over and over it's impossible to get anything going. If the rules say something about it they sure aren't implementing them.

 

[Badger67]

Greco is like watching paint dry at the elite level unless one of the contestants rhymes with Sarah Pin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dp9jnu8pLlg

This guy is always good.

 

[Uchi Mata]

It's no secret that they need to change the rules on the feet to prevent stalling and force the action, as is done in wrestling.

Part of the reason that stalling on the feet is so much more boring than stalling on the ground is that groundwork inherently can progress slowly over a sustained positional battle ... you can have guys working for three minutes as one slowly seizes and then exploits positional advantage.

On the feet, you don't even have that. You just have horrible hand fighting and repeated half-hearted shot defense. There's no asymmetric positional battle that's being waged over several minutes. It's just TDs and hand-fighting that keeps resetting to neutral over and over again. This is okay if the action is being forced, but when both guys are allowed to stall, it becomes intolerable.

Also, as Uchimata says, flying submissions should be allowed without negative points, and also I believe rolling leglock entrances should be allowed as well. This would make the standup much more interesting.

A big part of the problem is that no one has really come up with a good model for scoring submission grappling standing attacks as opposed to wrestling or Judo. ADCC uses (with some odd modifications) a wrestling scoring model of 'he who gets on top gets points'. But that's not really the most relevant thing for a submission grappling competition. The question should be who is proceeding more towards a submission with from standing. I'd argue that if you take someone down you're closer to a submission by virtue of being on top, but if you're aiming for a submission directly off the TD ala a flying armbar or even a rolling leg lock attempt that ends you in guard you should at least not be penalized as you were progressing towards a sub from standing. For pure guard pulling with no immediate sub attempt I can see a penalty as you're basically moving from an equal position to a 'worse' one (of course it depends upon the competitors but in general top > bottom), but should that be scored the same as attempting a sub and ending up in a worse position? It's not like ADCC would penalize you if you went for a mount arm bar and ended up on bottom closed guard.

I like the idea of a scoring system that rewards TDs and doesn't punish sub or sweep attempts, but does penalize guard pulls with no immediate engagement. Of course that would require both active and quality reffing, which is pretty rare in grappling. But in general I don't think Eddie Cummings should be penalized for pulling if he's doing it from a clinch immediately shooting a leg through to ashi garami...he's pursuing a submission about as directly as you can, and that should always be the goal. However, touching hands and immediately sitting to butt scoot could be penalized as you're basically refusing to engage and hence stalling. Judo has a similar system where false attacks meant just to burn time or avoid engagement are penalized while failed attacks are not and it mostly works fine.

I don't care how you engage on the feet, whether it's a wrestling style hand fight/TD battle or an immediate sub attempt directly from the feet, I just care that you do engage.

 

[brendan raedy]

When yo u are playing guard the whple concept is that the person on top shpuld be trying to pass and you defending and while defending looking for openings to sweep or sub if the person on top is not trying to pass and just stays on the outside and as soon as you get close backs up to do the same over and over it's impossible to get anything going. If the rules say something about it they sure aren't implementing them.

I don't disagree with you, but passing and playing guard you should have offense that works even if the other guy is not charging right into you. A guard player should not be allowed to sit back, defend, and wait for the guy trying to pass to make a mistake in order to sweep or submit him.

Again, I don't disagree with you that false passing is an issue, but playing guard flat on your back, circling your legs, and inverting if a person gets close to a pass without making any serious sweep or submission attempts is stalling too, but rarely is pointed out or generates complaints.

 

[brendan raedy]

A big part of the problem is that no one has really come up with a good model for scoring submission grappling standing attacks as opposed to wrestling or Judo. ADCC uses (with some odd modifications) a wrestling scoring model of 'he who gets on top gets points'. But that's not really the most relevant thing for a submission grappling competition. The question should be who is proceeding more towards a submission with from standing. I'd argue that if you take someone down you're closer to a submission by virtue of being on top, but if you're aiming for a submission directly off the TD ala a flying armbar or even a rolling leg lock attempt that ends you in guard you should at least not be penalized as you were progressing towards a sub from standing. For pure guard pulling with no immediate sub attempt I can see a penalty as you're basically moving from an equal position to a 'worse' one (of course it depends upon the competitors but in general top > bottom), but should that be scored the same as attempting a sub and ending up in a worse position? It's not like ADCC would penalize you if you went for a mount arm bar and ended up on bottom closed guard.

I like the idea of a scoring system that rewards TDs and doesn't punish sub or sweep attempts, but does penalize guard pulls with no immediate engagement. Of course that would require both active and quality reffing, which is pretty rare in grappling. But in general I don't think Eddie Cummings should be penalized for pulling if he's doing it from a clinch immediately shooting a leg through to ashi garami...he's pursuing a submission about as directly as you can, and that should always be the goal. However, touching hands and immediately sitting to butt scoot could be penalized as you're basically refusing to engage and hence stalling. Judo has a similar system where false attacks meant just to burn time or avoid engagement are penalized while failed attacks are not and it mostly works fine.

I don't care how you engage on the feet, whether it's a wrestling style hand fight/TD battle or an immediate sub attempt directly from the feet, I just care that you do engage.

I agree with you in principle, but at the same time I don't think a grappling sport should allow its athletes to be so lopsided in their skills that a BJJ player could not have a reasonable takedown exchange with another BJJ player. Unless we are going to start BJJ matches on the mat, we have to find some way to incentivize learning takedowns, and not penalizing the guard pull really diminishes that incentive.

Bottom line to me is that ADCC is not giving -2 for a guard pull. It's a negative advantage. Scoring literally one point would overcome that negative advantage, and yet we saw many matches where neither athlete could score a single offensive point.

If an athlete is trying for 8-9 minutes to heel hook and that does not seem forthcoming, perhaps they should vary their attack for the next 1-2, if not sooner? If you can't take someone down in 18 minutes, maybe try sweeping them with your remaining time?

Again, I don't think the rules are perfect, far from it. But you do have to put some responsibility on the training methods and tactics of the athletes themselves.

 

[vcmmafan]

It's incredibly boring 99% of the time.

But it's an important art.

 

[Uchi Mata]

I agree with you in principle, but at the same time I don't think a grappling sport should allow its athletes to be so lopsided in their skills that a BJJ player could not have a reasonable takedown exchange with another BJJ player. Unless we are going to start BJJ matches on the mat, we have to find some way to incentivize learning takedowns, and not penalizing the guard pull really diminishes that incentive.

Bottom line to me is that ADCC is not giving -2 for a guard pull. It's a negative advantage. Scoring literally one point would overcome that negative advantage, and yet we saw many matches where neither athlete could score a single offensive point.

If an athlete is trying for 8-9 minutes to heel hook and that does not seem forthcoming, perhaps they should vary their attack for the next 1-2, if not sooner? If you can't take someone down in 18 minutes, maybe try sweeping them with your remaining time?

Again, I don't think the rules are perfect, far from it. But you do have to put some responsibility on the training methods and tactics of the athletes themselves.

Well personally I don't see a lot of difference between a guard pull directly to a sweep and a takedown. In Judo in fact we have a name for that sort of thing: sacrifice throw. But in any case, this isn't pure wrestling. It's submission wrestling. Everything is subordinate to the submission. If there were some way in wrestling that I could pin you without taking your down, would you say that was a bad technique given that pinning is the ultimate aim? I doubt it. Because TDs in wrestling are just a route to pinning, and they're scored because they represent positive progress towards a pin. In Judo the TD is the thing, which is why it doesn't matter how you land or if you get rolled through to your back if you score ippon. The point is that the aim of the competition should help determine the rule set, and if the aim is submission then TDs are just one way of making positive progress towards a sub (I say positive because I feel like guard pulls without an immediate attack could be reasonable seen as negative progress, e.g. disengaging or going backward), and other ways of doing the same thing should also be legit moves.

The other problem with negative points for all guard pulls regardless of intent is that it gives the top guy a huge incentive to stall, and it gives a guy with good TD defense a perverse incentive to try and outwait his opponent hoping he'll get impatient and pull guard after which the now top man can just stall to win. I like direct sub attacks, I don't like having them disincentivized and allowing someone like Orlando Sanchez who just wants to get on top and stall to win ADCC. To me something like a rolling kneebar is a purer expression of submission intent than a double leg and I'd like for people to be able to go for such moves and not risk losing the match to a staller.

 

[brendan raedy]

Well personally I don't see a lot of difference between a guard pull directly to a sweep and a takedown. In Judo in fact we have a name for that sort of thing: sacrifice throw. But in any case, this isn't pure wrestling. It's submission wrestling. Everything is subordinate to the submission. If there were some way in wrestling that I could pin you without taking your down, would you say that was a bad technique given that pinning is the ultimate aim? I doubt it. Because TDs in wrestling are just a route to pinning, and they're scored because they represent positive progress towards a pin. In Judo the TD is the thing, which is why it doesn't matter how you land or if you get rolled through to your back if you score ippon. The point is that the aim of the competition should help determine the rule set, and if the aim is submission then TDs are just one way of making positive progress towards a sub (I say positive because I feel like guard pulls without an immediate attack could be reasonable seen as negative progress, e.g. disengaging or going backward), and other ways of doing the same thing should also be legit moves.

The other problem with negative points for all guard pulls regardless of intent is that it gives the top guy a huge incentive to stall, and it gives a guy with good TD defense a perverse incentive to try and outwait his opponent hoping he'll get impatient and pull guard after which the now top man can just stall to win. I like direct sub attacks, I don't like having them disincentivized and allowing someone like Orlando Sanchez who just wants to get on top and stall to win ADCC. To me something like a rolling kneebar is a purer expression of submission intent than a double leg and I'd like for people to be able to go for such moves and not risk losing the match to a staller.

See, I think that point is a worthwhile debate. Is it wrestling with submissions or SUBMISSION wrestling with those submissions being the be all, end all. Is a match a failure if there was no submission? As others have mentioned, my understanding of the ADCC ruleset is that it was intended to be somewhat neutral so that all types of grapplers had a good chance of success. With some notable exceptions, the results suggest the rules favored Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

The pin is the ultimate goal of wrestling but many great matches end without them and if the match was exciting, I never sense any great sense of loss if there is not a pin.

At a certain level and with time restrictions, you can't expect a submission in every or even most matches.

BJJ is another topic, but also a complex one. Clearly, the submission is the primary goal here. But given the vale tudo roots, does the double guard pull really fit belong here either?

This isn't a new thing, either. These type of issues have been around since the first ADCCs. Remember Kareem Barkalaev trying to, um, "Homer Simpson" choke everyone from their closed guards in 1999?

 

[Uchi Mata]

See, I think that point is a worthwhile debate. Is it wrestling with submissions or SUBMISSION wrestling with those submissions being the be all, end all. Is a match a failure if there was no submission? As others have mentioned, my understanding of the ADCC ruleset is that it was intended to be somewhat neutral so that all types of grapplers had a good chance of success. With some notable exceptions, the results suggest the rules favored Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

The pin is the ultimate goal of wrestling but many great matches end without them and if the match was exciting, I never sense any great sense of loss if there is not a pin.

At a certain level and with time restrictions, you can't expect a submission in every or even most matches.

BJJ is another topic, but also a complex one. Clearly, the submission is the primary goal here. But given the vale tudo roots, does the double guard pull really fit belong here either?

This isn't a new thing, either. These type of issues have been around since the first ADCCs. Remember Karimula Barkalaev trying to, um, "Homer Simpson" choke everyone from their closed guards in 1999?

I see it as submission wrestling, where submission is the goal. It's the only way to end a match early, which pretty much makes it the point ala the pin in wrestling and the ippon throw in Judo. Certainly you can have great BJJ matches that don't end in sub, great wrestling matches that don't feature a pin, etc, but in each case all the actions of the competitors are oriented around getting to that goal even if they don't achieve it. You take sport BJJ, the reason certain positions are scored more highly is not for their own sake but because they bring you closer to a sub. Even in MMA, you get points for doing damage and octagon control because those things bring you closer to a KO or sub, not because it's inherently great to control the octagon.

As for ADCC favoring BJJ guys, yeah, it does. Always has. It's always been open to all sorts of grapplers and being no-gi before there really were no-gi tournaments it gave wrestlers a better shot, but you've never been able to win ADCC without significant submission grappling knowledge and you never will be able to. ADCC was really meant IMO to be a showcase for BJJ more than a truly equal playing field. If it was supposed to be equal you would have been able to win by pin of some sort, or major throw, or whatever.

And to be honest with you double guard pulls don't even bother me that much when all leg attacks are legal. They tend to be very exciting and often resolve quickly when heel hooks are on. IBJJF rules are why 50/50 and double pulls are so boring, not the positions themselves. 50/50 is dangerous as hell without the gi and two good heel hookers.

After thinking about it, I'm going to revise my position. I don't think guard pulling in ADCC should be an automatic point deduction, I think the ref should observe if that guard pull is being done to refuse engagement on the feet, and if it is, then call the guy for stalling. If he's working directly towards a sweep or sub, I'm fine with it. Yes, this puts the points at the ref's discretion, but that's essentially always the case anyway and it would make timid guard pulls much riskier which is a good thing. Attacking sweeps and subs directly from a pull strikes me as a legitimate aggressive path to a sub, just as much as a double or single leg, and as such I have no problem with them if they're not being used just to stall. But the onus needs to be on the puller to engage, and if the top guy is able to disengage right off the pull then the puller was probably not going to guard aggressively and most likely should incur a penalty.

 

[BJJ_Rage]

I don't disagree with you, but passing and playing guard you should have offense that works even if the other guy is not charging right into you. A guard player should not be allowed to sit back, defend, and wait for the guy trying to pass to make a mistake in order to sweep or submit him.

Again, I don't disagree with you that false passing is an issue, but playing guard flat on your back, circling your legs, and inverting if a person gets close to a pass without making any serious sweep or submission attempts is stalling too, but rarely is pointed out or generates complaints.

have you try to sweep or sub someone who is not willing to engage no gi? have you seen shaub vs cyborg? well that is exactly what happnes, is it not possible to play guard and attack in no gi if the other person doesnt want to grapple, because unlike gi, theres are no grips to be hanging on. Rustam wasnt doing much more than what shaub did, he was pretending better though.

Circling your legs around and inverting is not stalling, is defending or in any case, attacking (berimbolos attacks come from inverting), when you are playing guard (thus the term guard) you are coinciding the offense to the other person, yes you can start butscooting your way in and initiate an attack, it is however almost impossible to do something if the person does not want to grapple, again you cant get a hold of him (unlike gi). Ironically, probably the best way to start attacking someone who does not want to engage is to resort to inverted techniques, you sure as fuck are not going to be arm dragging anyone whos that defensive, you are not going to get under either, and even if you get in close guard, stalling is soooo much easier that in the gi.

 

[brendan raedy]

have you try to sweep or sub someone who is not willing to engage no gi? have you seen shaub vs cyborg? well that is exactly what happnes, is it not possible to play guard and attack in no gi if the other person doesnt want to grapple, because unlike gi, theres are no grips to be hanging on. Rustam wasnt doing much more than what shaub did, he was pretending better though.

Circling your legs around and inverting is not stalling, is defending or in any case, attacking (berimbolos attacks come from inverting), when you are playing guard (thus the term guard) you are coinciding the offense to the other person, yes you can start butscooting your way in and initiate an attack, it is however almost impossible to do something if the person does not want to grapple, again you cant get a hold of him (unlike gi). Ironically, probably the best way to start attacking someone who does not want to engage is to resort to inverted techniques, you sure as fuck are not going to be arm dragging anyone whos that defensive, you are not going to get under either, and even if you get in close guard, stalling is soooo much easier that in the gi.

Yes, I have. It's no fun. But I took it as my cue to get better at attacking from bottom rather than complain about the rules. There are plenty of holds and handles no-gi, just not gi grips, obviously.

Cyborg should have stood up and wrestled with Schaub, not butt scooted.

Exciting matches are a two way street. There are some guys that are just about impossible to pass unless they open themselves up trying to sweep or submit. Even then it is hard. An intelligent competitor that is winning is generally not going to overextend themselves and thus give their opponent and opportunity to gain the lead or end the fight. A competitor that is down on points is forced to extend themselves to score or submit, otherwise they will lose. Seems obvious to me.

 

[BJJ_Rage]

See, I think that point is a worthwhile debate. Is it wrestling with submissions or SUBMISSION wrestling with those submissions being the be all, end all. Is a match a failure if there was no submission? As others have mentioned, my understanding of the ADCC ruleset is that it was intended to be somewhat neutral so that all types of grapplers had a good chance of success. With some notable exceptions, the results suggest the rules favored Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

The pin is the ultimate goal of wrestling but many great matches end without them and if the match was exciting, I never sense any great sense of loss if there is not a pin.

At a certain level and with time restrictions, you can't expect a submission in every or even most matches.

BJJ is another topic, but also a complex one. Clearly, the submission is the primary goal here. But given the vale tudo roots, does the double guard pull really fit belong here either?

This isn't a new thing, either. These type of issues have been around since the first ADCCs. Remember Kareem Barkalaev trying to, um, "Homer Simpson" choke everyone from their closed guards in 1999?

Its submission wrestling, the objective is to have the best submission wrestler, if you turn this to wrestling with subs, then it ends up being 2015 ADCC.

Also, I dont know where the hell are you getting that this rules favored bjj guys, they dont, bjj guys have been winning this tournament because the best bjj guys are in there, unlike the best wrestlers (we all saw what keer did). Any mediocre wrestler would moop the floor with 100% of the competitors righ now under the current rules set, and not because they are the best sub wrestlers of the planet, but because of the rules set favoring them.

 

[brendan raedy]

Its submission wrestling, the objective is to have the best submission wrestler, if you turn this to wrestling with subs, then it ends up being 2015 ADCC.

Also, I dont know where the hell are you getting that this rules favored bjj guys, they dont, bjj guys have been winning this tournament because the best bjj guys are in there, unlike the best wrestlers. and any mediocre wrestler would moop the floor with 100% of the competitors in there.

Have you seen the late 90s and early 2000s ADCCs? Kareem, Sasha, Mark Robinson, Monson, Kerr? The issues you take with ADCC 2015 have been around since 1998.

Otto Olson, Matt Lindland, Ben Askren, and many other better than mediocre wrestlers have entered and come away without a medal, let alone mop the floor.

A ruleset that does not give positive points for takedowns still favors BJJ players.

 

[BJJ_Rage]

Yes, I have. It's no fun. But I took it as my cue to get better at attacking from bottom rather than complain about the rules. There are plenty of holds and handles no-gi, just not gi grips, obviously.

Cyborg should have stood up and wrestled with Schaub, not butt scooted.

really? I dont want to disrespect you, because I dont know who you are, but you should give tips to cyborg keenan vinny on how to grapple from the guard with someone whos not willing to.

Sorry is just not possible or it extremely hard, and cyborg stood up many times just to have shaub again stalling, hell cyborg was shooting getting sprawled and shaub then backed up, if you think that wasnt bad, then there no point on keep going in this thread.

Exciting matches are a two way street. There are some guys that are just about impossible to pass unless they open themselves up trying to sweep or submit. Even then it is hard. An intelligent competitor that is winning is generally not going to overextend themselves and thus give their opponent and opportunity to gain the lead or end the fight. A competitor that is down on points is forced to extend themselves to score or submit, otherwise they will lose. Seems obvious to me

.[/QUOTE]

I agree, but is your bias wrestler/judo whos talking here. I dont see why the heck you are suppose to give and advantage to a person whos cleary only be looking for to stall later, you are giving a fictitious advantage to one style over the other. You are already giving points for tds. Is it frustrating for someone that wanst to wrestle to have someone infront sitting on his ass neglating his skills? yes, well then the wrestler should get better at pressuring from top position so the bjj guy has to hail his attacks and be force to run, or forcing to stand up, there he can proceed to use his tds skills... seems ridiculous right? well at least will avoid the travesty we had on the weekend.

 

[BJJ_Rage]

Have you seen the late 90s and early 2000s ADCCs? Kareem, Sasha, Mark Robinson, Monson, Kerr? The issues you take with ADCC 2015 have been around since 1998.

Otto Olson, Matt Lindland, Ben Askren, and many other better than mediocre wrestlers have entered and come away without a medal, let alone mop the floor.

A ruleset that does not give positive points for takedowns still favors BJJ players.

yes, Arona did the same, the negative point for tds wasnt given I believe untill after 2005. And there have always been postive points for tds.