As far as his technique, well is lacking, but it does not matter.
striking, again you don’t have to have too much Technique with “lunchboxes” and power.[/quote]
Here is the biggest flaw in your analysis. You are now claiming that the only reason that he can hit is because his hands are big. Yet, as I’ve pointed out, Bob Sapp and others too have large hands (and bodys) but do not strike effectively. Can you see why I think you have a built in biased against Lesnar? Lesnar knows how to hit and does so quite well. More importantly he gets better every time he sets foot in the Octagon.
[quote]His take downs - well they are tackles
and always have been, to my eye.
they work because of His speed, size, etc,
not because he is tactical or good with his setups etc.
I have never seen him attempt any throws, etc, but sticks to very basic doubles, and duck unders.[/quote]
Again, you attribute his ability to size and or speed alone. Can you see that others his size do not have the ability to take people down? You take credit away from his skill because of his size, that’s just not accurate
[quote]
His top control I have said is excellent, and its not by accident.[/quote]
Come on now finish your statement. It’s not by accident because he’s an effective ground fighter. Right?
[quote]as far as talking about other wrestlers, well they have not come up as often,
Lunch box hands seems to take the lions share.[/quote]
Because some critics like to persecute Lesnar for his size taking away any credit he deserves for his skill. Do you know anyone like this?
Coleman should retire now, I really worry about him being the first mma casualty. He’s taken a lot of punishment through the years.
I am willing to bet that barring injuries that put him out for half a year during 2010 Lesnar will lose to someone.
Yes he is big powerful and a handy wrestler. Yes his top control was impressive against Mir but on his feet he looks vulnerable and on the ground I still think he is susceptible to submissions.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
I am willing to bet that barring injuries that put him out for half a year during 2010 Lesnar will lose to someone.
Yes he is big powerful and a handy wrestler. Yes his top control was impressive against Mir but on his feet he looks vulnerable and on the ground I still think he is susceptible to submissions.[/quote]
I think everyone is susceptible to submissions or a knock out, that’s what makes the sport exciting. Will he lose in 2010? Sure that’s entirely possible. Could he fight three times in 2010 and win them all? Just as possible.
Yes, that’s it you’ve got it. It’s not that I like honest debate about a sport that I love and the respect that I have for the athletes involved. It’s the butt hurt thing, excellent job of analysis on your part. There might just be a position for you as an mma commentator. You’re going places kid.
(eye roll)
This is the annoying part about mma fans “a sport that I love and the respect that I have for the athletes involved” only in mma would you ever find fans this lame. I’m a big NBA fan and never would you hear fruity shit like that when discussing basketball NEVER, if someone said that I would burst out laughing. Dude it’s just a sport, and Brock Lesnar is just s super athletic big kind of good wrestler. He isn’t the second coming and he’s not the best fighter in the world. To add to this he has a tattoo of a dick on his chest, that alone makes you gay for liking him.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
edmondfightclub wrote:
I have to say this, Lesnar, to be honest, only has his speed and size.
Oh is that all.
If you watch him, he isnt that great a wrestler. Good enough to win an NCAA national championship at heavyweight, but then again everyone does that right?
His technical abilities seem to be limited to transitions on the mat. Do you want to see more wrestling moves? Would that impress you? Is it more wrestling moves you want to see from Lesnar?
I havent seen him attempt any submissions, Wait I thought it was more pure wrestling moves you wante to see, now it’s submission moves. Now tell me, how many people has Randy Couture submitted? Something like two in 12 years. But, you like him so all is well. Lesnar however must submit someone for you to respect him, I see.
all he does is drops those 2 inch hammer fists on your face. That actually worked for him when he did it. But, if you watch the second Frank Mir fight you’ll see him bring those ham hock fists far back and launch them.
And you can say that he beat Mir’s face in, which it did look bad, but did you hear Mir after the fight? He said that brock doesnt even hit hard. Really? Apparently he hits hard enough to rearange Mir’s face and knock down Couture and Herring. Ah, but none of that counts because you don’t Lesnar, I have to admit he is difficult to actually like with his abrasive personality and all “Budweiser don’t give me no money”. Yea, he’s easy to hate, we get it.
He was laying there getting hammered and looking at the ref like, “I cant move, I cant defend myself, are you serious?” He is just big and lays on the fighter.
Yes, that’s all it is, he’s big, and he lays on fighters and they can’t move. None of Mir’s Jiu-Jitsu skill could get him out of that problem he had with that big person, laying on him. Lesnar is going to have to teach others his “laying on” technique. It works well for him, he won an NCAA title just laying on guys. He was so big they couldn’t move. Many were even his weight or larger but with that special “laying on” technique well, they just can’t move. It isn’t fair I tell you, it just isn’t fair!
Carwin, now that man is the real deal. As opposed to Lesnar who is not real, just a big, fast, heavy person who lays on people.
No fight has gone past 2:30 in the first round with him. He is undefeated and just came off a big win over Gonzaga.
That means that he’ll be especially strong if the fight goes to 4 or 5 rounds. Wait, no it doesn’t. Darn. But, the man is good no question.
Carwin was a 2 time NCAA II Heavy weight runner up and a NCAA II Heavy weight wrestling Champion.
What was that? Division II? Hmm, that would be inferior to Division I where Lesnar ruled right? Yea, but he’s still good, division II is good.
Brock can take him down, no doubt, but can he keep him there?
You forgot about Lesnar’s special “laying on” technique won’t that work? I guess we won’t know until we see the fight. But Lesnar did manage to win a Division I HW wrestling title. I imagine he held lots of guys down his own weight who were equal to or better than Carwin(division II), on the mat.
I dont think so. My reasoning is because carwin is stupid strong and he is, in my opinion, a better technical wrestler than Brock.
And you base this on watching dozens of their matches right? No, probably not. You base it on the fact that you don’t like Lesnar. Let’s see how that thinking works out for you when they meet.
End:Lesnar throws that big right, Carwin steps right, and catches him in the chin with a vicious right hook. Brock down for the count!
And then you woke up.
[/quote]
Love the sarcasm Zeb…lol
As far as Carwin being a better wrestler and all that D-1 VS. D-2 shit. Even IF Carwin was capable of wrestling D-1, would his wrestling be better than Brock’s AND Brock’s training partner Cole Conrad? Conrad was also a gopher wrestler and TWO-TIME NCAA HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION…one upping Brock himself. So trust me, ANY skill that Carwin can muster in the area of wrestling Brock is more than ready for. End of discussion.
Size doesn’t really trump technique, check out Bob Sapp, he outweighs Lesnar by 80+ pounds and is a good 2" taller as well and he’s lost many times to smaller more skilled opponents. There are others out there bigger and taller who have not made an impact. But if you have both size and skill as Lesnar does then you are deserving of respect, even if you don’t like him personally, or should I say his persona.
I’m not saying the guy can’t be beaten because on any given night anyone can be beaten. But, he is a very skillful guy who has shown that he can get better with every fight. Keep in mind I don’t like his public persona. He’s an obnoxious ego driven moron, at least that’s how he acts, maybe in private he’s a different man. But, I will give him his due. Brock Lesnar is real force to be reckoned with and not only because of his size, strength and speed, but because of the skills he brings into the Octagon. It’s okay to boo your favorite villain, but try to use some analytical skill and give him credit for his ability while continuing to hate him for his obnoxious behavior.
As far as his technique, well is lacking, but it does not matter.
striking, again you don’t have to have too much Technique with “lunchboxes” and power.
Here is the biggest flaw in your analysis. You are now claiming that the only reason that he can hit is because his hands are big. Yet, as I’ve pointed out, Bob Sapp and others too have large hands (and bodys) but do not strike effectively. Can you see why I think you have a built in biased against Lesnar? Lesnar knows how to hit and does so quite well. More importantly he gets better every time he sets foot in the Octagon.
[/quote]
Sigh all the multi quotes.
His striking is effective Because of his speed not because of his accuracy or how his punches are thrown. He does’nt use hips or sit into his punches, his striking isn’t crisp nor fluid.
athleticism, the combination of strength and speed is what is fueling his ability- we have yet to see him use a combo, or footwork , or head movement well or keep his hands up for that matter.
all part of striking I said it before , it doens’t have to be pretty to work.
buts not based on striking acumen more like brute force.
that being all said, he can muster allot behind the punches, they dont have to be pretty.
Uhm yeah, he is like a Rhino no finesse. I did not compare him to other people his size, I said his takedowns are like tackles. Not allot of ways to dispute that. If he was slow, or weak, or small, they would not work.
He has a great Power double. Great but very very rudimentary.
I finished it. He has excellent top control, Ive said it many of the Brock threads.
I would not and will not suggest it makes him a complete ground fighter.
Ive said he can use his size, weight and balance very well from the top
he is good at being on top.
and to throw you a bone, I imagine he might eventually be decent on the bottom,
in his college days he did very well from the bottom with scoring.
Gee actually the fans, outnumber the critics by and large. Some are informed and that’s great.
But if you go back and sort through the many many threads you will see brotards and WWE fans galore.
I can refrain from saying nuthugger- and say fans Or fandom.
Sure I got stories, I’ve posted plenty about training with the big boys at the OTC,
ask any time.
I try to stay away from the who’s whos type stuff, because too much of it is self inflation
but being exposed to people who are actually world class- either my coaches, stable mates, or people who whooped my ass.
makes me a little over the willing use of the phrase on people who might not exactly have that skil-set.
Ill agree with you on this.
Lesnar works hard. Super hard. Ill give him that.
He is a phenomenal athlete. I have never said he isn’t.
I just think his athleticism is the corner stone of his ability.
Think of what a let down he would be if he wasn’t as fast or as powerful at his size.
I just want to say, I’m really enjoying the mma discussion here on T-Nation much more than the juvenille, nut-hugging commentary I so often see on Sherdog.
Someone start a thread on Cain Velasquez…lol I for one don’t think he’s proven anything yet, but so many seem to think he’s ready for a shot at Brock.
Yes, that’s it you’ve got it. It’s not that I like honest debate about a sport that I love and the respect that I have for the athletes involved. It’s the butt hurt thing, excellent job of analysis on your part. There might just be a position for you as an mma commentator. You’re going places kid.
(eye roll)
This is the annoying part about mma fans “a sport that I love and the respect that I have for the athletes involved” only in mma would you ever find fans this lame. I’m a big NBA fan and never would you hear fruity shit like that when discussing basketball NEVER, if someone said that I would burst out laughing. Dude it’s just a sport, and Brock Lesnar is just s super athletic big kind of good wrestler. He isn’t the second coming and he’s not the best fighter in the world. To add to this he has a tattoo of a dick on his chest, that alone makes you gay for liking him.
[/quote]
One more post by drewh and still nothing said. Nice.
His striking is effective Because of his speed not because of his accuracy or how his punches are thrown. He does’nt use hips or sit into his punches, his striking isn’t crisp nor fluid.[/quote]
Yet, people fall down, or get their faces messed up, go figure huh? How can he do that with all the haters saying he can’t strike? I guess maybe he just doesn’t read the commentary. Anyway, If you go from one side of town to the other in a bus instead of a limo, you’re still on the other side of town.
Ali had some “pretty” punches Joe Fraxier not so pretty, both effective.
Take a look at one of his takedowns on slo mo, you might change your mind. You just don’t pull off 90% of your takedowns in division one wrestling without having great skill in that area, it doesn’t happen.
This is bordering nonsense. Tell me how many wrestlers who are slow or weak have good takedowns? Come on, stop it, really.
Or as skillful, then he would be more like a Bob Sapp. A very large fighter with not as much skill as he needs to climb the ranks. Sapps strength and size didn’t seem to get him as far as Brocks, why is that? Could it be because Lesnar has skill as well?
His striking is effective Because of his speed not because of his accuracy or how his punches are thrown. He does’nt use hips or sit into his punches, his striking isn’t crisp nor fluid.
Yet, people fall down, or get their faces messed up, go figure huh? How can he do that with all the haters saying he can’t strike? I guess maybe he just doesn’t read the commentary. Anyway, If you go from one side of town to the other in a bus instead of a limo, you’re still on the other side of town.
can muster allot behind the punches, they dont have to be pretty.
Ali had some “pretty” punches Joe Fraxier not so pretty, both effective.
Uhm yeah, he is like a Rhino no finesse.
Take a look at one of his takedowns on slo mo, you might change your mind. You just don’t pull off 90% of your takedowns in division one wrestling without having great skill in that area, it doesn’t happen.
If he was slow, or weak,
This is bordering nonsense. Tell me how many wrestlers who are slow or weak have good takedowns? Come on, stop it, really.
Ill agree with you on this.
Lesnar works hard. Super hard. Ill give him that.
He is a phenomenal athlete. I have never said he isn’t.
I just think his athleticism is the corner stone of his ability.
Not a bad cornerstone. I also thinks he deserves credit for constantly improving, don’t you?
Think of what a let down he would be if he wasn’t as fast or as powerful at his size.
Or as skillful, then he would be more like a Bob Sapp. A very large fighter with not as much skill as he needs to climb the ranks. Sapps strength and size didn’t seem to get him as far as Brocks, why is that? Could it be because Lesnar has skill as well?
Okay.[/quote]
Dude, You are a Lesnar fan, cool that. But you arguing with kmc about wrestling takedowns and what not is ridiculous. The guy has more wrestling knowledge and experience than most likely the rest of the forum combined.
Lesnar is big, very fast for his size, freaky strong, and has great conditioning, aka he’s a freak athlete. But come on, he’s not a technical wrestler, his takedowns are pretty much tackles, and his striking is still far from devastating (yet admittedly improving).
Yes, there have been other big strong guys in MMA who haven’t gone as far. But dare I say none who are as big, strong, fast, well conditioned and athletic as Lesnar. He has great top control and obviously has some wrestling skill, but he’s far from a technically superior wrestler. That doesn’t mean that he’s any less effective or dangerous of a fighter. It’s just calling things like they are. Attributes win a lot of fights, and Lesnar has them in spades.
I wouldn’t have called George Foreman a technically superior boxer in his prime, but that doesn’t mean that he was any less effective. Dude didn’t need to be technical, because he hit like a freight train. Lesnar is very similar.
You are taking this like we are putting Brock down, when we aren’t. We’re just honestly evaluating what we’ve seen of him up to this point.
Sentoguy just hit the nail on the head - and is also the reason I said I cant see Brock losing any time soon. With all the attributes and the speed that he is improving, he should be a serious force. Doesnt mean he WILL be, but using all the available information, he’s coming out on top everytime imo.
As far as his technique, well is lacking, but it does not matter.
striking, again you don’t have to have too much Technique with “lunchboxes” and power.
Here is the biggest flaw in your analysis. You are now claiming that the only reason that he can hit is because his hands are big. Yet, as I’ve pointed out, Bob Sapp and others too have large hands (and bodys) but do not strike effectively.
[/quote]
Really?! Perhaps you can explain how he beat Ernesto Hoost, arguably one of the best K-1 fighters ever, not once but twice in 2002. Not saying Sapp is a technical striker, but to discount what that much power can make up for in terms of lacking technique is just wrong.
Does Hoost fight anymore? I know he’s still about training people and can be seen in gyms, but did that skin condition ever get sorted out? He was a beast.
Hoost was a beast in his day though, thanks for filling me in.
At the end of the day, if he has great speed and power and can take someone down with it, I dont see where the problem is or why people should dislike him for that. It’s like saying someone with great technique isnt that good because he’s not strong and fast enough - The desired effect is still the same.
Winning is winning. Fighting is not pretty, the takedowns dont have to be pretty. I’m 100% that lesnar put in a lot of hardwork to be that big and fast. Like I said before, I hate him as a person. He’s ugly. I absolutely hate the way he acted after he beat Mir, who is one of my fav. fighters. I dislike how easy it was for him to get a title shot.
Despite that he’s still a monster in the cage and will kick some serious ass for a good while if he continues with the effort he’s put in.
His striking is effective Because of his speed not because of his accuracy or how his punches are thrown. He does’nt use hips or sit into his punches, his striking isn’t crisp nor fluid.
Yet, people fall down, or get their faces messed up, go figure huh? How can he do that with all the haters saying he can’t strike? I guess maybe he just doesn’t read the commentary. Anyway, If you go from one side of town to the other in a bus instead of a limo, you’re still on the other side of town.
can muster allot behind the punches, they dont have to be pretty.
Ali had some “pretty” punches Joe Fraxier not so pretty, both effective.
Uhm yeah, he is like a Rhino no finesse.
Take a look at one of his takedowns on slo mo, you might change your mind. You just don’t pull off 90% of your takedowns in division one wrestling without having great skill in that area, it doesn’t happen.
If he was slow, or weak,
This is bordering nonsense. Tell me how many wrestlers who are slow or weak have good takedowns? Come on, stop it, really.
Ill agree with you on this.
Lesnar works hard. Super hard. Ill give him that.
He is a phenomenal athlete. I have never said he isn’t.
I just think his athleticism is the corner stone of his ability.
Not a bad cornerstone. I also thinks he deserves credit for constantly improving, don’t you?
Think of what a let down he would be if he wasn’t as fast or as powerful at his size.
Or as skillful, then he would be more like a Bob Sapp. A very large fighter with not as much skill as he needs to climb the ranks. Sapps strength and size didn’t seem to get him as far as Brocks, why is that? Could it be because Lesnar has skill as well?
Okay.
Dude, You are a Lesnar fan, cool that.[/quote]
No actually I’m not, still cool? I don’t like his obnoxious persona and wouldn’t mind seeing him get beat sooner rather than later. But, as I’ve already stated, one doesn’t have to be a fan in order to give correct analysis, something sorely missing from many posters on this board. The usual stance is “I like him therefore he’s great”, or vice versa.
[quote]
But you arguing with kmc about wrestling takedowns and what not is ridiculous. The guy has more wrestling knowledge and experience than most likely the rest of the forum combined.[/quote]
That’s a good reason for me to never wrestle him, and I won’t. But being the smart guy you are I know that you realize analysis is quite different than the actual possession of skill. Some of the very best mma fighters make lousy ring side analysts, or writers. Others who have some skill and experience seem to be able to figure out fact from fiction. I’ve enjoyed my debate with kmcnyc, but he’s made some very obvious errors regarding his assessment of Lesnar, I’ve pointed them out.
I would offer you the same advice that I did to kmcnyc, take a look at his takedowns in slow motion and tell me they’re not technical. As to his striking ability, I never said that it was “pretty” I’m sure you read my posts. However, they are quite effective. I also agree with you they are improving.
But in an earlier post (I believe it was you) you claimed that there were others just as big and powerful, which is it?
That depends on who you are comparing him to doesn’t it? Many seem to want to take away his great skill BECAUSE he has such great size speed and power, but the skill is still there regardless. You don’t win an NCAA division I title in wrestling and get 90% of your takedowns with no skill. Furthermore, He has demonstrated that skill in every mma fight that he’s had thus far.
It’s actualy laughable how many penalize him for his size. He hits people and knocks them down-“That’s because he’s so big”. He takes people down with ease- “That’s beacuse he’s so big”. He has total control on top- “That’s because he’s so big”. Yet, during his wrestling career he wrestled guys just as big some bigger and took them down with ease. How big was Frank Mir for his fight with Lesnar? Sherdog has him at 240lbs. but I think he was slightly larger for the Lesnar fight. Heath Herring is 6’ 4", one inch taller than Lesnar, and weighs in at 250-260 Lesnar mauled him. Did he do this because he weighed 10-15 pounds more than him, or was it because Lesnar was technically superior?
Really, give it some thought, yes Lesnar is physically superior to most guys, but it’s his tremendous skill which causes him to be so very dominant.
[quote]
You are taking this like we are putting Brock down, when we aren’t. We’re just honestly evaluating what we’ve seen of him up to this point.[/quote]
Putting him down is unimportant to me, it’s your evaluation that’s wrong and what I’m actually interested in. As I stated earlier I could not care less if Lesnar loses his next 5 matches and we never see or hear of him again. I have no emotion attached to my review. As I’ve stated if anything I don’t really like the guys public persona, I don’t think it’s good for the sport, but that’s another debate.
As for this debate, claiming that he’s just winning because of his size, or shear physical capacity is wrong minded. There have been plenty of athletic fighters (strength, speed, highly coordinated) who never obtained a UFC championship belt. Also, as I’ve already proven, there are others who are larger and most likely stronger who have not achieved a UFC championship belt. Could it be that Lesnar possess all of the qualities (strength, speed, skill etc.) and that’s what has propelled him to the top? It’s either that or he’s the luckiest man on earth. Now which do you think it is?
As far as his technique, well is lacking, but it does not matter.
striking, again you don’t have to have too much Technique with “lunchboxes” and power.
Here is the biggest flaw in your analysis. You are now claiming that the only reason that he can hit is because his hands are big. Yet, as I’ve pointed out, Bob Sapp and others too have large hands (and bodys) but do not strike effectively.
Really?! Perhaps you can explain how he beat Ernesto Hoost, arguably one of the best K-1 fighters ever, not once but twice in 2002. Not saying Sapp is a technical striker, but to discount what that much power can make up for in terms of lacking technique is just wrong.[/quote]
If you notice I said it’s not “the only reason he can hit”. Yes Sapp has great power and has relied on it greatly to make himself a lot of money in mma. But I don’t see him at the top of the heap, do you? That’s because he lacks the skill of a Brock Lesnar. But by no means do I underestimate size and power as a valuable tool.
