Why do takedowns count so much?
Whay aren’t submission attempts pointed like a strike that almost KOs someone?
To takedowns really do enough damage to steal a round?
[quote]drewh wrote:
Why do takedowns count so much?
Whay aren’t submission attempts pointed like a strike that almost KOs someone?
To takedowns really do enough damage to steal a round?[/quote]
To your second question, I’ve always kinda struggled with that one in my own head. The obvious answer to your question is that landing a strike that almost KO’s someone favors one fighter quite clearly. The sub attempt is more subtle because even though it may have been a great setup, great sub attempt and near finish, there might be a great, technical escape too. Which one counts for more? It’s hard to say that one fighter is favored in that exchange. In fact, let’s say I use my escape from a triangle you have on me to pass your guard, you could argue that I actually won the exchange of submission and escape between us because I actually advanced my position. That said, my personal preference is go give an edge to the fighter who is consistently trying to finish the fight.
To you first and third, I think takedowns could for a lot for a couple of reasons:
1)They fight into two catagories. They count both as effective grappling and “octagon control” in the UFC, which gives them the double whammy.
2)They are easy to score. Sometimes seeing the subtleties of good striking and sub attempts is hard. Seeing me shoot and take you down is obvious, so judges jump on it. Think about the Machida v. Shogun fight again, there were many exchanges where I felt that Machida countered with punches that Shogun blocked while Machida ate a clean kick. But live, sitting cageside with all that noise it may be hard to see who is winning these exchanges. A takedown is so much easier to score.
[quote]danew wrote:
drewh wrote:
Why do takedowns count so much?
Whay aren’t submission attempts pointed like a strike that almost KOs someone?
To takedowns really do enough damage to steal a round?
To your second question, I’ve always kinda struggled with that one in my own head. The obvious answer to your question is that landing a strike that almost KO’s someone favors one fighter quite clearly. The sub attempt is more subtle because even though it may have been a great setup, great sub attempt and near finish, there might be a great, technical escape too. Which one counts for more? It’s hard to say that one fighter is favored in that exchange. In fact, let’s say I use my escape from a triangle you have on me to pass your guard, you could argue that I actually won the exchange of submission and escape between us because I actually advanced my position. That said, my personal preference is go give an edge to the fighter who is consistently trying to finish the fight.
To you first and third, I think takedowns could for a lot for a couple of reasons:
1)They fight into two catagories. They count both as effective grappling and “octagon control” in the UFC, which gives them the double whammy.
2)They are easy to score. Sometimes seeing the subtleties of good striking and sub attempts is hard. Seeing me shoot and take you down is obvious, so judges jump on it. Think about the Machida v. Shogun fight again, there were many exchanges where I felt that Machida countered with punches that Shogun blocked while Machida ate a clean kick. But live, sitting cageside with all that noise it may be hard to see who is winning these exchanges. A takedown is so much easier to score.[/quote]
Totally agree with your last point. As a judge you are looking for a reason to give one or other fighter the round, Takedowns are big, noisy and obvious.
When I am training guys I talk to them about selling their moves to the judges. It sucks but you have to make it obvious what you are doing to ensure it gets scored. It’s like the old trick of putting your rearview mirror slightly off centre when you take your driving test. It forces you to move your head to look in it, not just your eyes, this ensures the tester notices.