Fighters Gassing

Training
81

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
drewh wrote:
you must not have rolled with good blue belts.

The kid wasn’t the best, I’ve definitely rolled with better people. But even he made a remark about how I was exerting a lot of force… and I was. I know that’s not what you’re supposed to do in BJJ, but being as I’m not overly skilled in it, I knew that i had to outmuscle him or I was fucked.

And of course, it was during a drill and I gassed pretty badly. But I still beat that kid because of strength.[/quote]
you are the guy everyone calls a douche after you leave class.

82

[quote]chap0808 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
drewh wrote:
you must not have rolled with good blue belts.

The kid wasn’t the best, I’ve definitely rolled with better people. But even he made a remark about how I was exerting a lot of force… and I was. I know that’s not what you’re supposed to do in BJJ, but being as I’m not overly skilled in it, I knew that i had to outmuscle him or I was fucked.

And of course, it was during a drill and I gassed pretty badly. But I still beat that kid because of strength.
you are the guy everyone calls a douche after you leave class.
[/quote]

That may be so. Anyhow, he’s the one who reality-checks the class.
You know that Wing-Tsun guy, Emin Boztepe? He and his teacher, Keith Kernspecht teach a style that is “independant of strength”. Still, they’re both pretty strong.

Now since they’ve propably won a few fights, people will believe it’s down to technical superiority, never realizing how much of a factor physical prowess is and always will be. Someone big and strong walks into class, beats their Chi-Sao with brute strength or just soaks up a couple of chain-punches before delievering a right cross will provide vasluable feedback. That kind of experience can’t be won in a secure, technical environment.

Same with Aikido. Next time I hear someone say how great and strong Aikido is as a means of self defense, because “duh, um, you don’t injure the other guy” I’ll propably beat him to death with the biography of Ueshiba, who had the nickname “the bonebreaker”. Guess that name came from his gentleness.

Especially in BJJ, where you just tap and start anew, some feedback is great for everyone. Considering just how strong an emphasis the Gracies put on proper conditioning might bring some light upon their take on that topic.

As long as no one gets hurt, thos experiences are invaluable.

Just my 2 cents.

83

[quote]FirestormWarrior wrote:
chap0808 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
drewh wrote:
you must not have rolled with good blue belts.

The kid wasn’t the best, I’ve definitely rolled with better people. But even he made a remark about how I was exerting a lot of force… and I was. I know that’s not what you’re supposed to do in BJJ, but being as I’m not overly skilled in it, I knew that i had to outmuscle him or I was fucked.

And of course, it was during a drill and I gassed pretty badly. But I still beat that kid because of strength.
you are the guy everyone calls a douche after you leave class.

That may be so. Anyhow, he’s the one who reality-checks the class.
You know that Wing-Tsun guy, Emin Boztepe? He and his teacher, Keith Kernspecht teach a style that is “independant of strength”. Still, they’re both pretty strong.

Now since they’ve propably won a few fights, people will believe it’s down to technical superiority, never realizing how much of a factor physical prowess is and always will be. Someone big and strong walks into class, beats their Chi-Sao with brute strength or just soaks up a couple of chain-punches before delievering a right cross will provide vasluable feedback. That kind of experience can’t be won in a secure, technical environment.

Same with Aikido. Next time I hear someone say how great and strong Aikido is as a means of self defense, because “duh, um, you don’t injure the other guy” I’ll propably beat him to death with the biography of Ueshiba, who had the nickname “the bonebreaker”. Guess that name came from his gentleness.

Especially in BJJ, where you just tap and start anew, some feedback is great for everyone. Considering just how strong an emphasis the Gracies put on proper conditioning might bring some light upon their take on that topic.

As long as no one gets hurt, thos experiences are invaluable.

Just my 2 cents.[/quote]

Strength is always an asset. The stronger the better. But standing and on the ground, if the guy you’re rolling with is using a ton of strength and you have to just to survive, then you’re not learning anything.
We have at least one guy at my gym, that standing, simply cannot go less than all out…he cant do it. Now the guy is good, so when i spar him I know that if I’m going to walk to my car after class…I have to use those things I’m good at…you cant work on anything or try something new or develop a skill that is lagging…
Samething on the ground…some guys cant (or have not learned the importance) of being able to turn it down a bit.

That said, I’m a little off topic. But my .2

84

[quote]chap0808 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
drewh wrote:
you must not have rolled with good blue belts.

The kid wasn’t the best, I’ve definitely rolled with better people. But even he made a remark about how I was exerting a lot of force… and I was. I know that’s not what you’re supposed to do in BJJ, but being as I’m not overly skilled in it, I knew that i had to outmuscle him or I was fucked.

And of course, it was during a drill and I gassed pretty badly. But I still beat that kid because of strength.
you are the guy everyone calls a douche after you leave class.
[/quote]

NO, he is new to BJJ and has a very typical attitude for someone who hasn’t trained that long especially for someone coming from a boxing gym where the mental winning and competitive attitude is driven into people.

The whole concept of submission is pretty alien to a boxer. During a boxing sparring session tapping out is just not an option. Everyone respects the guy who guts it out to get to the bell instead of taking a knee.

In BJJ the guy who refuses to tap and forces you to put him to sleep or snap something is a dick. This is a hard transition to make mentally.

85

[quote]Valor wrote:
FirestormWarrior wrote:
chap0808 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
drewh wrote:
you must not have rolled with good blue belts.

The kid wasn’t the best, I’ve definitely rolled with better people. But even he made a remark about how I was exerting a lot of force… and I was. I know that’s not what you’re supposed to do in BJJ, but being as I’m not overly skilled in it, I knew that i had to outmuscle him or I was fucked.

And of course, it was during a drill and I gassed pretty badly. But I still beat that kid because of strength.
you are the guy everyone calls a douche after you leave class.

That may be so. Anyhow, he’s the one who reality-checks the class.
You know that Wing-Tsun guy, Emin Boztepe? He and his teacher, Keith Kernspecht teach a style that is “independant of strength”. Still, they’re both pretty strong.

Now since they’ve propably won a few fights, people will believe it’s down to technical superiority, never realizing how much of a factor physical prowess is and always will be. Someone big and strong walks into class, beats their Chi-Sao with brute strength or just soaks up a couple of chain-punches before delievering a right cross will provide vasluable feedback. That kind of experience can’t be won in a secure, technical environment.

Same with Aikido. Next time I hear someone say how great and strong Aikido is as a means of self defense, because “duh, um, you don’t injure the other guy” I’ll propably beat him to death with the biography of Ueshiba, who had the nickname “the bonebreaker”. Guess that name came from his gentleness.

Especially in BJJ, where you just tap and start anew, some feedback is great for everyone. Considering just how strong an emphasis the Gracies put on proper conditioning might bring some light upon their take on that topic.

As long as no one gets hurt, thos experiences are invaluable.

Just my 2 cents.

Strength is always an asset. The stronger the better. But standing and on the ground, if the guy you’re rolling with is using a ton of strength and you have to just to survive, then you’re not learning anything.
We have at least one guy at my gym, that standing, simply cannot go less than all out…he cant do it. Now the guy is good, so when i spar him I know that if I’m going to walk to my car after class…I have to use those things I’m good at…you cant work on anything or try something new or develop a skill that is lagging…
Samething on the ground…some guys cant (or have not learned the importance) of being able to turn it down a bit.

That said, I’m a little off topic. But my .2[/quote]

You learn to survive. To use the stuff you’re good at even better. Mental fortitude. You lean stuff, just maybe not new techniques.

86

[quote]chap0808 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
drewh wrote:
you must not have rolled with good blue belts.

The kid wasn’t the best, I’ve definitely rolled with better people. But even he made a remark about how I was exerting a lot of force… and I was. I know that’s not what you’re supposed to do in BJJ, but being as I’m not overly skilled in it, I knew that i had to outmuscle him or I was fucked.

And of course, it was during a drill and I gassed pretty badly. But I still beat that kid because of strength.
you are the guy everyone calls a douche after you leave class.
[/quote]

I’m also the guy that doesn’t fuckin care. You don’t walk into a place to get your ass kicked- you do what you have to. I don’t think anyone expects someone to walk in not knowing much BJJ and not try to outmuscle people- it’s all you can do without technique.

And if the art is meant for use “in the streets” like everyone claims, they’d better fuckin be ready for it.

87

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
NO, he is new to BJJ and has a very typical attitude for someone who hasn’t trained that long especially for someone coming from a boxing gym where the mental winning and competitive attitude is driven into people.

The whole concept of submission is pretty alien to a boxer. During a boxing sparring session tapping out is just not an option. Everyone respects the guy who guts it out to get to the bell instead of taking a knee.

In BJJ the guy who refuses to tap and forces you to put him to sleep or snap something is a dick. This is a hard transition to make mentally.[/quote]

Right. And believe me, I’m not a dick at all in any class. I enjoy all martial arts, and respect all the guys who do it, regardless of style. Even Tae Kwon Do.

88

Stop that please. Every person new to BJJ or standup that I’ve ever rolled with or sparred uses muscle over technique, even me, ha ha. Didn’t work out for me too well against those big Texas boys. But it’s NORMAL, & every experienced person in the room expects it. And Cockney Blue is right, for a boxer to not to try to dominate would be…unnatural.

89

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

And if the art is meant for use “in the streets” like everyone claims, they’d better fuckin be ready for it.[/quote]

What I said.

90

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I enjoy all martial arts, and respect all the guys who do it, regardless of style. Even Tae Kwon Do.[/quote]

TaekwonDo must be practiced differntly than here in Europe… Everyone here seems to be bashing TKD… Over here, TKD fights - mind you, I’m talking open style or ITF TaekwonDo, not WTF - look a lot like full contact kickboxing, only with smaller gloves and on the mat instead of in the ring. Really need to go to the US one day and take a look at what you guys call TKD…

91

I should’ve bet on a few professional fights. I overheard a fighter (that people are giving excuses for) telling some friends that he really couldn’t train seriuosly because he didn’t give a fuck anymore. He made his money and gets more women then he could count, he could tell when he wakes up he just doesn’t have what it takes to train like like the competition.

92

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
I should’ve bet on a few professional fights. I overheard a fighter (that people are giving excuses for) telling some friends that he really couldn’t train seriuosly because he didn’t give a fuck anymore. He made his money and gets more women then he could count, he could tell when he wakes up he just doesn’t have what it takes to train like like the competition.

[/quote]

What did you expect? A bunch of supermans? Stuff happens, you know… in other lines of work, that’s called “burnout”. Maybe, just maybe even “success”. Once they start thinking like that, they go down and stop sooner or later anyways.

93

[quote]FirestormWarrior wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I enjoy all martial arts, and respect all the guys who do it, regardless of style. Even Tae Kwon Do.[/quote]

TaekwonDo must be practiced differntly than here in Europe… Everyone here seems to be bashing TKD… Over here, TKD fights - mind you, I’m talking open style or ITF TaekwonDo, not WTF - look a lot like full contact kickboxing, only with smaller gloves and on the mat instead of in the ring. Really need to go to the US one day and take a look at what you guys call TKD…[/quote]

As with anything else, it depends on the teacher. But here, predominantly, TKD is taught as an art reliant on flashy kicks that revolves around a point based sparring system that doesn’t replicate real life and teaches fighter to pull their punches/kicks.

I’m not saying that they’re all like that, but that is the general perception of the art.

I have no doubt that if trained differently, and adapted well, it could be a very good art for fighting.

94

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
MattyG35 wrote:
Its pretty obvious that Baroni is carrying too much ‘bodybuilder’ muscle and not enough ‘functional’ muscle.

What’s obvious is that you’re reading too much pop training information. Would you like to tell me what exactly “non-functional” muscle is?[/quote]

Well lets see here, Baroni used to be a bodybuilder, and bodybuilders develop more sarcoplasm, which for an mma fighter isn’t needed. Too much muscle mass uses a lot of energy to carry around without contributing enough towards performance in mma. Look at Sokoudjou(sp?), he carries too much non contributing muscle for his weight and it makes him tire quicker. If you don’t know the difference between myofibril and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy go read a fucking book and find out.[/quote]

Not so much addressed to MattyG, but to some of the better-informed posters on this thread.

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (err, yes Matty, we know the difference, thanks all the same). Why do many people consider this to be useless?

Sure, there is no addition to contractile tissue (nice phrase that), but essentially, the gaps inside muscle, between this tissue gets bigger (more fluid). So doesn’t this make it easier for that muscle to cope with larger amounts of waste by-products (eg: lactic acid)? So, you can do more “work” with that muscle.

ie: greater strength endurance

Or are we meant to believe that the human body has managed to retain, after millenia of evolution, a mechanism for hypertrophy that brings absolutely no benefits in any situation (which seems at odds with how the rest of our body works)

Anyway, more of a question than a statement. What do you chaps think?

95

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]FirestormWarrior wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I enjoy all martial arts, and respect all the guys who do it, regardless of style. Even Tae Kwon Do.[/quote]

TaekwonDo must be practiced differntly than here in Europe… Everyone here seems to be bashing TKD… Over here, TKD fights - mind you, I’m talking open style or ITF TaekwonDo, not WTF - look a lot like full contact kickboxing, only with smaller gloves and on the mat instead of in the ring. Really need to go to the US one day and take a look at what you guys call TKD…[/quote]

As with anything else, it depends on the teacher. But here, predominantly, TKD is taught as an art reliant on flashy kicks that revolves around a point based sparring system that doesn’t replicate real life and teaches fighter to pull their punches/kicks.

I’m not saying that they’re all like that, but that is the general perception of the art.

I have no doubt that if trained differently, and adapted well, it could be a very good art for fighting. [/quote]

You bet ;).

96

[quote]isr wrote:

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
MattyG35 wrote:
Its pretty obvious that Baroni is carrying too much ‘bodybuilder’ muscle and not enough ‘functional’ muscle.

What’s obvious is that you’re reading too much pop training information. Would you like to tell me what exactly “non-functional” muscle is?[/quote]

Well lets see here, Baroni used to be a bodybuilder, and bodybuilders develop more sarcoplasm, which for an mma fighter isn’t needed. Too much muscle mass uses a lot of energy to carry around without contributing enough towards performance in mma. Look at Sokoudjou(sp?), he carries too much non contributing muscle for his weight and it makes him tire quicker. If you don’t know the difference between myofibril and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy go read a fucking book and find out.[/quote]

Not so much addressed to MattyG, but to some of the better-informed posters on this thread.

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (err, yes Matty, we know the difference, thanks all the same). Why do many people consider this to be useless?

Sure, there is no addition to contractile tissue (nice phrase that), but essentially, the gaps inside muscle, between this tissue gets bigger (more fluid). So doesn’t this make it easier for that muscle to cope with larger amounts of waste by-products (eg: lactic acid)? So, you can do more “work” with that muscle.

ie: greater strength endurance

Or are we meant to believe that the human body has managed to retain, after millenia of evolution, a mechanism for hypertrophy that brings absolutely no benefits in any situation (which seems at odds with how the rest of our body works)

Anyway, more of a question than a statement. What do you chaps think?[/quote]

Couple of points of information here. Lactic Acid is not a waste product of muscles working. Lactate is actually an integral substrate in the Krebs and Cori cycles. Lactic Acid doesn’t form in human muscle tissue under normal conditions.

Next, just because evolution brought about the hypertrophy mechanism it doesn’t mean that you cannot trick the process. Being obesely fat serves no biological benefit to an individual but it is clearly possible.

97

[quote]isr wrote:

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
MattyG35 wrote:
Its pretty obvious that Baroni is carrying too much ‘bodybuilder’ muscle and not enough ‘functional’ muscle.

What’s obvious is that you’re reading too much pop training information. Would you like to tell me what exactly “non-functional” muscle is?[/quote]

Well lets see here, Baroni used to be a bodybuilder, and bodybuilders develop more sarcoplasm, which for an mma fighter isn’t needed. Too much muscle mass uses a lot of energy to carry around without contributing enough towards performance in mma. Look at Sokoudjou(sp?), he carries too much non contributing muscle for his weight and it makes him tire quicker. If you don’t know the difference between myofibril and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy go read a fucking book and find out.[/quote]

Not so much addressed to MattyG, but to some of the better-informed posters on this thread.

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (err, yes Matty, we know the difference, thanks all the same). Why do many people consider this to be useless?

Sure, there is no addition to contractile tissue (nice phrase that), but essentially, the gaps inside muscle, between this tissue gets bigger (more fluid). So doesn’t this make it easier for that muscle to cope with larger amounts of waste by-products (eg: lactic acid)? So, you can do more “work” with that muscle.

ie: greater strength endurance

Or are we meant to believe that the human body has managed to retain, after millenia of evolution, a mechanism for hypertrophy that brings absolutely no benefits in any situation (which seems at odds with how the rest of our body works)

Anyway, more of a question than a statement. What do you chaps think?[/quote]

Excellent post.