Is it Greg Jackson or Trevor Wittman?

Training
21

[quote]SILVERDAN7 wrote:

I think the major thing is the mentality, MT fighters often have a more traditional martial artist mentality, meaning they are not going into the ring to disembowel the other fighter like MMa fighters often are.
[/quote]

As far as Thai fighters…I agree that the major thing is mentality. But more in the sense of “if I don’t fight and make money…my family will starve.” That’s why they fight so much…and at an early age.

And as for not “disemboweling” their opponents…that may be true of exhibition-type matches…BUT Muay Thai is no less brutal than MMA.

22

I would like to see the top guys fight more often, boxing AND mma, it makes for more entertaining weekends for me, but I am a soft fat old guy sitting at a keyboard.

I find it a little redeculus for me to tell guys who FIGHT for a living to get in the ring more often and take that kind of punishment.

23

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
I would like to see the top guys fight more often, boxing AND mma, it makes for more entertaining weekends for me, but I am a soft fat old guy sitting at a keyboard.

I find it a little redeculus for me to tell guys who FIGHT for a living to get in the ring more often and take that kind of punishment. [/quote]

I bet most of them would be happy to fight more, especially the guys lower down, who aren’t making tons of money each fight.

With these promotions like the UFC, it’s a control thing. It allows the promoters to hand-pick all the fights, because not everyone will end up fighting everyone. It allows Dana White to pick the most marketable guys, and have them fight guys they can likely beat.

There’s probably very few guys in the UFC who, if I were intimately familiar with everyone on the roster, I couldn’t set up two or three fights that wouldn’t be almost a guaranteed win.

These sorts of “triangles” are classic in MMA, where skill-set x let’s fighter 1 beat fighter 2 with skill-set y who easily beats fighter 3 with skill-set z who beats fighter x.

24

Its almost like MMA and Boxing are a business like any professional sport… no… fucking… way…! What fighter is going to fight several times a year when they can fight a couple… promote it well… hype it up and take a pay day. No one likes getting punched in the face. Yeah your lower level fighters are willing to fight more often because they aren’t making anything and need to make a name for themselves… and at this time they are fighting much more often… so nothing really needs to change in that sense imo…

Would it be awesome If there was a fight every weekend and I could afford to watch it… yeah… would I honestly ask that of a prof fighter… no.

And as others have said… there aren’t enough high level fighters for that to not be a waste of time. I don’t even think I’d find the time to watch all of those… and I’m sure most other people are the same… so in the end the fighters make even less.

25

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
I would like to see the top guys fight more often, boxing AND mma, it makes for more entertaining weekends for me, but I am a soft fat old guy sitting at a keyboard.

I find it a little redeculus for me to tell guys who FIGHT for a living to get in the ring more often and take that kind of punishment. [/quote]

I bet most of them would be happy to fight more, especially the guys lower down, who aren’t making tons of money each fight.

With these promotions like the UFC, it’s a control thing. It allows the promoters to hand-pick all the fights, because not everyone will end up fighting everyone. It allows Dana White to pick the most marketable guys, and have them fight guys they can likely beat.

There’s probably very few guys in the UFC who, if I were intimately familiar with everyone on the roster, I couldn’t set up two or three fights that wouldn’t be almost a guaranteed win.

These sorts of “triangles” are classic in MMA, where skill-set x let’s fighter 1 beat fighter 2 with skill-set y who easily beats fighter 3 with skill-set z who beats fighter x.[/quote]

What’s wrong with a little cherry picking? I personally dislike it when they throw a potential future top dog to the wolves. On the flipside, I enjoy watching young prospects grow as fighters, as the UFC ‘builds’ them up with winnable fights (Phil Davis and G.Sot come to mind, Jon Jones too).

I can’t imagine anyone wanting to fight more than 6 times a year against challenging opposition. I imagine, from my limited competitive experience, that the body takes a beating after each bout. Plus, off time between fights can be used to work on weaknesses: strength, conditioning, skill work. Look at what GSP does with his off-time.

Another problem is that with more frequent fights, you either have larger cards, or less fighters overall.

26

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
I would like to see the top guys fight more often, boxing AND mma, it makes for more entertaining weekends for me, but I am a soft fat old guy sitting at a keyboard.

I find it a little redeculus for me to tell guys who FIGHT for a living to get in the ring more often and take that kind of punishment. [/quote]

I bet most of them would be happy to fight more, especially the guys lower down, who aren’t making tons of money each fight.

With these promotions like the UFC, it’s a control thing. It allows the promoters to hand-pick all the fights, because not everyone will end up fighting everyone. It allows Dana White to pick the most marketable guys, and have them fight guys they can likely beat.

There’s probably very few guys in the UFC who, if I were intimately familiar with everyone on the roster, I couldn’t set up two or three fights that wouldn’t be almost a guaranteed win.

These sorts of “triangles” are classic in MMA, where skill-set x let’s fighter 1 beat fighter 2 with skill-set y who easily beats fighter 3 with skill-set z who beats fighter x.[/quote]

What’s wrong with a little cherry picking? I personally dislike it when they throw a potential future top dog to the wolves. On the flipside, I enjoy watching young prospects grow as fighters, as the UFC ‘builds’ them up with winnable fights (Phil Davis and G.Sot come to mind, Jon Jones too).

I can’t imagine anyone wanting to fight more than 6 times a year against challenging opposition. I imagine, from my limited competitive experience, that the body takes a beating after each bout. Plus, off time between fights can be used to work on weaknesses: strength, conditioning, skill work. Look at what GSP does with his off-time.

Another problem is that with more frequent fights, you either have larger cards, or less fighters overall.
[/quote]
how are jo daddy and pellegrino easy fights

27

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

(1) LOL how is a guy a joke for beating one of the greatest fighters in the history of the sport?
[/quote]

Erm, who? I hope you don’t mean Mir. I’m going to assume you mean Couture, but uh, Couture isn’t one of the greatest in the history of the sport either. Good fighter? Sure. An icon like Chuck? Yeah. One of the greatest? Not by a long shot.

Not to mention he wasn’t young when he fought brock

28

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

(1) LOL how is a guy a joke for beating one of the greatest fighters in the history of the sport?
[/quote]

Erm, who? I hope you don’t mean Mir. I’m going to assume you mean Couture, but uh, Couture isn’t one of the greatest in the history of the sport either. Good fighter? Sure. An icon like Chuck? Yeah. One of the greatest? Not by a long shot.

Not to mention he wasn’t young when he fought brock
[/quote]

He’s certainly not who he once was. And I’m not going to derail this thread by going back and forth about this. But if you don’t call somebody who won or successfully defended the UFC belt 10 times in 2 different weight classes, “one of the greatest ever,” then perhaps you and I have differing versions of what “great” means.

29

yeah, it was… i just watched it again, and i think DFW was pretty shitty to say Marquardt choked. theroitically, that was #2 and #3 fighting, so what did he expect?

it appeared to me, that Marquardt had not prepared much for a southpaw. also, it seems that opposite stance figthers are far eaiser to attack with singles and clinch, but more exhausting to take down. also, it seems like the quicker more technical fighter will win in this envrionment. Marquardt tends to hold wins hands really low, so when he was swinging, he was telegraphing pretty much everything. maybe his camp will address his striking issues at some point…

i think Okami won, but it was a close, strategic fight.

30

[quote]sardines12 wrote:

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
I would like to see the top guys fight more often, boxing AND mma, it makes for more entertaining weekends for me, but I am a soft fat old guy sitting at a keyboard.

I find it a little redeculus for me to tell guys who FIGHT for a living to get in the ring more often and take that kind of punishment. [/quote]

I bet most of them would be happy to fight more, especially the guys lower down, who aren’t making tons of money each fight.

With these promotions like the UFC, it’s a control thing. It allows the promoters to hand-pick all the fights, because not everyone will end up fighting everyone. It allows Dana White to pick the most marketable guys, and have them fight guys they can likely beat.

There’s probably very few guys in the UFC who, if I were intimately familiar with everyone on the roster, I couldn’t set up two or three fights that wouldn’t be almost a guaranteed win.

These sorts of “triangles” are classic in MMA, where skill-set x let’s fighter 1 beat fighter 2 with skill-set y who easily beats fighter 3 with skill-set z who beats fighter x.[/quote]

What’s wrong with a little cherry picking? I personally dislike it when they throw a potential future top dog to the wolves. On the flipside, I enjoy watching young prospects grow as fighters, as the UFC ‘builds’ them up with winnable fights (Phil Davis and G.Sot come to mind, Jon Jones too).

I can’t imagine anyone wanting to fight more than 6 times a year against challenging opposition. I imagine, from my limited competitive experience, that the body takes a beating after each bout. Plus, off time between fights can be used to work on weaknesses: strength, conditioning, skill work. Look at what GSP does with his off-time.

Another problem is that with more frequent fights, you either have larger cards, or less fighters overall.
[/quote]
how are jo daddy and pellegrino easy fights[/quote]

  1. I didn’t say ‘easy’, building a fighter doesn’t necessarily mean giving him easy fights, unless you’re Michael Bisping :smiley:
  2. George’s first few fights weren’t at Kurt’s or Joe’s level (or his at the time). Hence why I think they ‘built’ him up.
31

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]sardines12 wrote:

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
I would like to see the top guys fight more often, boxing AND mma, it makes for more entertaining weekends for me, but I am a soft fat old guy sitting at a keyboard.

I find it a little redeculus for me to tell guys who FIGHT for a living to get in the ring more often and take that kind of punishment. [/quote]

I bet most of them would be happy to fight more, especially the guys lower down, who aren’t making tons of money each fight.

With these promotions like the UFC, it’s a control thing. It allows the promoters to hand-pick all the fights, because not everyone will end up fighting everyone. It allows Dana White to pick the most marketable guys, and have them fight guys they can likely beat.

There’s probably very few guys in the UFC who, if I were intimately familiar with everyone on the roster, I couldn’t set up two or three fights that wouldn’t be almost a guaranteed win.

These sorts of “triangles” are classic in MMA, where skill-set x let’s fighter 1 beat fighter 2 with skill-set y who easily beats fighter 3 with skill-set z who beats fighter x.[/quote]

What’s wrong with a little cherry picking? I personally dislike it when they throw a potential future top dog to the wolves. On the flipside, I enjoy watching young prospects grow as fighters, as the UFC ‘builds’ them up with winnable fights (Phil Davis and G.Sot come to mind, Jon Jones too).

I can’t imagine anyone wanting to fight more than 6 times a year against challenging opposition. I imagine, from my limited competitive experience, that the body takes a beating after each bout. Plus, off time between fights can be used to work on weaknesses: strength, conditioning, skill work. Look at what GSP does with his off-time.

Another problem is that with more frequent fights, you either have larger cards, or less fighters overall.
[/quote]
how are jo daddy and pellegrino easy fights[/quote]

  1. I didn’t say ‘easy’, building a fighter doesn’t necessarily mean giving him easy fights, unless you’re Michael Bisping :smiley:
  2. George’s first few fights weren’t at Kurt’s or Joe’s level (or his at the time). Hence why I think they ‘built’ him up.
    [/quote]
    ok i just wondered why you grouped him with greener fighters.
32

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

(1) LOL how is a guy a joke for beating one of the greatest fighters in the history of the sport?
[/quote]

Erm, who? I hope you don’t mean Mir. I’m going to assume you mean Couture, but uh, Couture isn’t one of the greatest in the history of the sport either. Good fighter? Sure. An icon like Chuck? Yeah. One of the greatest? Not by a long shot.

Not to mention he wasn’t young when he fought brock
[/quote]

I actually agree with you there, Couture was outmatched in the HWs against the new crop of guys (Brock, Shane, Cain, JDS). Too small and his striking, while good in MMA, isn’t sharp enough.

However, I think it’s a stretch to call Lesnar a joke because he got whooped by Mr. Velasquez. It’s not like he was outclassed by the entire division when he got his title shot. He laid a whooping on Mir before the sub and dominated Herring. Both Cain and Carwin were being fed easy opposition, as was JDS. The HW div just wasn’t as interesting.
Even now, with people talking up a rematch with Mir or a bout with Nelson, you’d have to be crazy to think he wouldn’t beat up either. Hell, I’d say the only people who could challenge or beat Lesnar are the above mentioned trifecta of big HWs.

33

[quote]Amiright wrote:

[quote]Spartiates wrote:

[quote]cycobushmaster wrote:
also another thing i just thought of…

the UFC has shown time after time that it will keeps guys around that are exciting fighter that look to finish the fight…i have no idea why some of these guys are so damn afraid to lose one fight.

it seems to me that most of really great UFC fights are non-title fights, with a few exceptions. i generally enjoy the WEC a lot more, but that might be due to more BJJ guys fighting there…[/quote]

They don’t fight enough IMHO.

1-3 fights a year? So yeah, they fight conservatively because every loss is a big deal. In my opinion, they should fight, recover, fight. GSP has a 20-2 record, 22 fights in 8 years, that’s under three fights a year. He’s lost two professional fights… which equals out to almost a year’s worth of loosing if you look at it like that.

I think unless they’re defending a title, they should be fighting every 8-16 weeks.[/quote]

Dude… they’re fighters not punching bags. A professional fighter fighting every 8 weeks?!? Regardless of if hes “recovered”… at least in my opinion thats retarded and pointless.
[/quote]

Couldn’t agree more. It is a business, they fight to feed their families. Teh top fighters are fortunate they don’t have to fight 100 times in their career.

Some people are just bloodthirsty.

34

Shinya Aoki has fought A LOT, I think 16 times in the last three years.
Of course he’s no standup slugger and submission artistry is a bit easier on jaw and joints but still, that’s unparalleled for a ranked top fighter.

Doable? Yes. But also unpractical and somewhat immoral.
Besides, MMA needs heroes as well as new fighters. Both would decrease if pro fighters “had” to fight more.

35

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

(1) LOL how is a guy a joke for beating one of the greatest fighters in the history of the sport?
[/quote]

Erm, who? I hope you don’t mean Mir. I’m going to assume you mean Couture, but uh, Couture isn’t one of the greatest in the history of the sport either. Good fighter? Sure. An icon like Chuck? Yeah. One of the greatest? Not by a long shot.

Not to mention he wasn’t young when he fought brock
[/quote]

I actually agree with you there, Couture was outmatched in the HWs against the new crop of guys (Brock, Shane, Cain, JDS). Too small and his striking, while good in MMA, isn’t sharp enough.

However, I think it’s a stretch to call Lesnar a joke because he got whooped by Mr. Velasquez. It’s not like he was outclassed by the entire division when he got his title shot. He laid a whooping on Mir before the sub and dominated Herring. Both Cain and Carwin were being fed easy opposition, as was JDS. The HW div just wasn’t as interesting.
Even now, with people talking up a rematch with Mir or a bout with Nelson, you’d have to be crazy to think he wouldn’t beat up either. Hell, I’d say the only people who could challenge or beat Lesnar are the above mentioned trifecta of big HWs.[/quote]

this makes sense to me…Lesnar got beat by a guy who has been billed as the best heavywieght prospect EVER. Many insiders have been referring to Cain V. as a “beast” and the “heir apparent” for some time now. Cain has handed a severe ass kicking to everybody he has fought so far.

to call Brock a “joke” because he lost to perhaps one of the top 5 heavyweights in the sport right now is just silly.

36

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

(1) LOL how is a guy a joke for beating one of the greatest fighters in the history of the sport?
[/quote]

Erm, who? I hope you don’t mean Mir. I’m going to assume you mean Couture, but uh, Couture isn’t one of the greatest in the history of the sport either. Good fighter? Sure. An icon like Chuck? Yeah. One of the greatest? Not by a long shot.

Not to mention he wasn’t young when he fought brock
[/quote]

I actually agree with you there, Couture was outmatched in the HWs against the new crop of guys (Brock, Shane, Cain, JDS). Too small and his striking, while good in MMA, isn’t sharp enough.

However, I think it’s a stretch to call Lesnar a joke because he got whooped by Mr. Velasquez. It’s not like he was outclassed by the entire division when he got his title shot. He laid a whooping on Mir before the sub and dominated Herring. Both Cain and Carwin were being fed easy opposition, as was JDS. The HW div just wasn’t as interesting.
Even now, with people talking up a rematch with Mir or a bout with Nelson, you’d have to be crazy to think he wouldn’t beat up either. Hell, I’d say the only people who could challenge or beat Lesnar are the above mentioned trifecta of big HWs.[/quote]

this makes sense to me…Lesnar got beat by a guy who has been billed as the best heavywieght prospect EVER. Many insiders have been referring to Cain V. as a “beast” and the “heir apparent” for some time now. Cain has handed a severe ass kicking to everybody he has fought so far.

to call Brock a “joke” because he lost to perhaps one of the top 5 heavyweights in the sport right now is just silly.
[/quote]
It’s more in the manner he lost and his previous fights. Frank Mir sucks, Randy was old, Heath Herring don’t fight no more, Carwin gassed blah blah blah. Really what I look at and if you watch all his fights except maybe Couture when he gets hit he immediately goes for a TD, he can’t deal with it. I see Fedor, JDS, Carwin, Overeem, Cain of course, Schaub, possibly Roy Nelson and fuck even Brett Rogers beating current Lesnar. Another problem is he’s so f’n big I don’t know how well he can move to avoid being hit, he’s this gigantic target that doesn’t like being hit.

37

Oh and Barnett and Arlovski would prolly beat him too.

38

[quote]sardines12 wrote:
Oh and Barnett and Arlovski would prolly beat him too. [/quote]

i real on another mma blog that no one in brocks camp for the Cain fight was allowed to hit him in the face. But he was allowed to go after them 100%.

Imo…everyone hates getting hit in the face, but thats why u train to get used to that.

Also…have u seen the last few Arlovski fights? Hes not what he once was. He has no jaw anymore. Ud have a fight between a guy who cant get hit and Brock who hates getting hit.

39

[quote]sardines12 wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

[quote]rundymc wrote:

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

(1) LOL how is a guy a joke for beating one of the greatest fighters in the history of the sport?
[/quote]

Erm, who? I hope you don’t mean Mir. I’m going to assume you mean Couture, but uh, Couture isn’t one of the greatest in the history of the sport either. Good fighter? Sure. An icon like Chuck? Yeah. One of the greatest? Not by a long shot.

Not to mention he wasn’t young when he fought brock
[/quote]

I actually agree with you there, Couture was outmatched in the HWs against the new crop of guys (Brock, Shane, Cain, JDS). Too small and his striking, while good in MMA, isn’t sharp enough.

However, I think it’s a stretch to call Lesnar a joke because he got whooped by Mr. Velasquez. It’s not like he was outclassed by the entire division when he got his title shot. He laid a whooping on Mir before the sub and dominated Herring. Both Cain and Carwin were being fed easy opposition, as was JDS. The HW div just wasn’t as interesting.
Even now, with people talking up a rematch with Mir or a bout with Nelson, you’d have to be crazy to think he wouldn’t beat up either. Hell, I’d say the only people who could challenge or beat Lesnar are the above mentioned trifecta of big HWs.[/quote]

this makes sense to me…Lesnar got beat by a guy who has been billed as the best heavywieght prospect EVER. Many insiders have been referring to Cain V. as a “beast” and the “heir apparent” for some time now. Cain has handed a severe ass kicking to everybody he has fought so far.

to call Brock a “joke” because he lost to perhaps one of the top 5 heavyweights in the sport right now is just silly.
[/quote]
It’s more in the manner he lost and his previous fights. Frank Mir sucks, Randy was old, Heath Herring don’t fight no more, Carwin gassed blah blah blah. Really what I look at and if you watch all his fights except maybe Couture when he gets hit he immediately goes for a TD, he can’t deal with it. I see Fedor, JDS, Carwin, Overeem, Cain of course, Schaub, possibly Roy Nelson and fuck even Brett Rogers beating current Lesnar. Another problem is he’s so f’n big I don’t know how well he can move to avoid being hit, he’s this gigantic target that doesn’t like being hit. [/quote]

Agree on Overeem, Carwin, Cain (dur), and the Reem, not on the rest. I think Brock can stifle the fuck out of Fedor on the ground, though the Russian will fuck him up horribly if he can avoid that take down within a round (okay, maybe I agree with this one, lol). JDS I don’t think so for the same reason people think Cain will beat him, he’s unproven against good wrestlers. Nelson will be severely overpowered in the clinch (Lesnar’s go to once he tastes damage in the face), and Schaub- well he’s green as hell right now (taking a pretty good decision against a Silverback who chooses not to shoot at all- you know.) Brett would get his ass kicked. Not strong enough, and honestly even his striking isn’t up to par.

After the Cain fight people talk of Lesnar like he’s a B-level scrub who cowers the second you touch his face. I get it though, he’s had two very suspect showings, but those showings were against pretty hard hitters who were dominant in the HWs. I think Lesnar’s next fight will determine whether he has the ability to improve on this obvious weakness and come back. To be honest, even after watching the Cain fight, I still think he has most of the tools to beat him albeit inconsistently. If Beast is right, and he never gets punched in the face, there’s our answer. He needs Urijah Faber to sock him in the nose till he gets used to it.

40

[quote]Beast Status wrote:

[quote]sardines12 wrote:
Oh and Barnett and Arlovski would prolly beat him too. [/quote]

i real on another mma blog that no one in brocks camp for the Cain fight was allowed to hit him in the face. But he was allowed to go after them 100%.

Imo…everyone hates getting hit in the face, but thats why u train to get used to that.

Also…have u seen the last few Arlovski fights? Hes not what he once was. He has no jaw anymore. Ud have a fight between a guy who cant get hit and Brock who hates getting hit.[/quote]
I heard it but I doubt it. It seems like he simply doesn’t like getting hit. Other guys out of his camp have better standup than him. Madsen and Conrad it’s really word. He needs to go train at Golden Glory or something.