[quote]Jarvan wrote:
there’s barely any real material to base it on especially because ronda finished most of her fights so fast.
[/quote]
Exactly! She finishes her fights so fast there’s no way to tell if she’s any good…[/quote]
Seriously?!
If you can’t see how good she is and her skill while she is dismantling the Bantamweight Division, then…you simply don’t understand what you are watching or what to look for.
I think that regardless of sex (and I mean that in the presence or absence of a Y chromosome way), Rousey has to be considered in the discussion of best P4P fighter currently active in MMA. I wouldn’t place her at the top, but excluding her from the discussion simply because she is a female is just sexist nonsense.
I agree that the overall level of competition in Women’s MMA is not yet at the level of Men’s MMA, but it’s also not like she is winning via close decisions; she is steamrolling everything that the world of Women’s MMA has to throw at her. She has finished every single person she has fought and only 1 fight has even made it to the second round since she came into the UFC. She has the best armbars in MMA period (regardless of sex), has outstanding (World class in fact as evidenced by her Olympic Bronze Medal and Silver Medal in the World Championships) takedowns and takedown defense, and her striking has drastically improved and continues to improve. So she is all around absolute top of the food chain to decent (at worst) in her skill sets; which when combined with record and domination of competition would be my two biggest criteria for P4P rankings. Level of competition would come into play as well, but she really has no control over that, has beat an Olympic Silver Medalist in Sara McMann, Kickboxing Champion in Charmaine Tweet (early in her career), the #2 Bantamweight (Meisha Tate) twice, and again only Meisha got out of the first round (the second time). That is total domination and none of the men on the P4P list can boast the same level of domination.
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
i dont watch much mma. a bit here and there. i hate it when a fight ends in submission.
i dont have much appreciation for grappling or that aspect - (not because it isnt skilled, just personal preference, ive never trained it and i just cant gel with it).
i think a submission, such as last night should win you the round, thats it, not the fight.
what do some of you ufc/mma guys thinks?
imo its a good idea. i arent saying it to be controversial. its just, when a fight ends with an arm bar, leg lock, its such an anticlimax.
fyi, yes, i am aware there are shit boxing fights, and there is alot can be improved. this isnt an mma vs boxing thing. [/quote]
I think if you were ever actually put in a submission that you would feel otherwise and that your perspective would be like a wrestler watching a kickboxing match and saying “I don’t think a knock out should win you a fight, maybe a round, but if you can’t control the person and hold them down on their back you didn’t really dominate them.”
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
Ok fair enough. I haven’t explained my self well. of course they are in pain. But I’ve seen a lot where they could and would continue next round.
I don’t wanna hijack this thread with opic topic stuff. Just wondered if anyone opposed/disliked submissions as much as me.
[/quote]
That’s because they STOP APPLYING THE SUBMISSION to avoid destroying the joint and potentially ending their opponent’s fighting career! Try having all of the tendons and ligaments in your elbow shoulder or knee torn to shreds and continue fighting. Yes, if it was truly life and death and you were under true adrenaline stress you might try, but MMA is not the Roman Colleseum where the fights are to the death (and rightly so as MMA wouldn’t last long if it was).
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
A KO is different because guys can not have recovered for the next round. A lot of tap outs are (obviously legit) but before the person has experienced that much pain. They just no they are, like you say, in the hands of someone who is in an utterly dominate position.[/quote]
Not quite.
Armbars are incredibly painful, even if not a lot of pressure is applied. UFC fighters and elite judoka/BJJ folks don’t tap because they know they can’t get out of an armbar- they do so because it hurts too damned much.[/quote]
It’s not even that. Fighters tap because they know if they don’t that they will be seriously injured and so they choose to “live to fight another day” and accept that they got caught. Joint locks like armbars, leg locks, shoulder locks, cervical locks, etc… are actually designed to destroy the joints of the body, not just to cause pain. It just so happens that many of them also can be trained safely without injury as the allow for enough notice (due to pain) to the opponent that the lock is on to allow a person to “submit” before they actually incur damage.
So you’re answer is you disagree. fair enough. I take on board your comments. I did say, as you pointed out, as I haven’t wrestled, practised mma I don’t have a first hand appreciation for that aspect.
I think your analogy is slightly wayward. But the point is evident. .
It’s a spectators point of view from me. And your comments are fair. But the majority of people watching mma won’t have grappled or placed in submission. And I wondered if they felt similarly disappointed with a submission. Whereas anyone can have an appreciation for a big punch etc. I refer back to my comments about the most popular videos fights on he internet
I feel like I’m using too many words. Not speaking succinctly so you’ll have to forgive me.
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
Ok fair enough. I haven’t explained my self well. of course they are in pain. But I’ve seen a lot where they could and would continue next round.
I don’t wanna hijack this thread with opic topic stuff. Just wondered if anyone opposed/disliked submissions as much as me.
[/quote]
That’s because they STOP APPLYING THE SUBMISSION to avoid destroying the joint and potentially ending their opponent’s fighting career! Try having all of the tendons and ligaments in your elbow shoulder or knee torn to shreds and continue fighting. Yes, if it was truly life and death and you were under true adrenaline stress you might try, but MMA is not the Roman Colleseum where the fights are to the death (and rightly so as MMA wouldn’t last long if it was).[/quote]
Sure. I get that they could kill these people or tear their limbs offs. I specifically meant though. When they tap and are let out well before that happens. Carry on the fight the next round. I understand if they wanted to inflict a huge amount of pain they could. But when it is stopped at the right time, Call it one round to the submissioner)?)
It’s not even that. Fighters tap because they know if they don’t that they will be seriously injured and so they choose to “live to fight another day” and accept that they got caught.[/quote]
Ya, that’s what I intended to insinuate.
The few elite grapplers I met knew just how much pain/fight they could endure before they got into the “danger zone”, so to speak. I’d imagine all elite fighters know what their body can handle, and will let themselves go right before that point.
Sure. I get that they could kill these people or tear their limbs offs. I specifically meant though. When they tap and are let out well before that happens. Carry on the fight the next round. I understand if they wanted to inflict a huge amount of pain they could. But when it is stopped at the right time, Call it one round to the submissioner)?)
[/quote]
Why? Again, this is roughly equivalent to saying that a guy who got KOed during a boxing match loses the round and not the entire match.
Do you agree that a guy who got KOed should just lose the round and go onto fight in the next round?
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
So you’re answer is you disagree. fair enough. I take on board your comments. I did say, as you pointed out, as I haven’t wrestled, practised mma I don’t have a first hand appreciation for that aspect.
I think your analogy is slightly wayward. But the point is evident. .
It’s a spectators point of view from me. And your comments are fair. But the majority of people watching mma won’t have grappled or placed in submission. And I wondered if they felt similarly disappointed with a submission. Whereas anyone can have an appreciation for a big punch etc. I refer back to my comments about the most popular videos fights on he internet
I feel like I’m using too many words. Not speaking succinctly so you’ll have to forgive me.
[/quote]
As a fan you are entitled to preferring striking finishes to submission finishes, I personally appreciate both but am not suggesting that your preference for method of victory is any less valid than mine; my contention is with arguing that submissions shouldn’t count as victories. Fine, you prefer victories via KO/TKO, fair enough, but you are just flat out uninformed/misinformed about the nature of submissions to suggest that they don’t constitute victories.
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
Ok fair enough. I haven’t explained my self well. of course they are in pain. But I’ve seen a lot where they could and would continue next round.
I don’t wanna hijack this thread with opic topic stuff. Just wondered if anyone opposed/disliked submissions as much as me.
[/quote]
That’s because they STOP APPLYING THE SUBMISSION to avoid destroying the joint and potentially ending their opponent’s fighting career! Try having all of the tendons and ligaments in your elbow shoulder or knee torn to shreds and continue fighting. Yes, if it was truly life and death and you were under true adrenaline stress you might try, but MMA is not the Roman Colleseum where the fights are to the death (and rightly so as MMA wouldn’t last long if it was).[/quote]
Sure. I get that they could kill these people or tear their limbs offs. I specifically meant though. When they tap and are let out well before that happens. Carry on the fight the next round. I understand if they wanted to inflict a huge amount of pain they could. But when it is stopped at the right time, Call it one round to the submissioner)?)
[/quote]
No, that is ridiculous. That would be akin to making TKO’s or anything short of a completely out cold twitching on the ground KO (where there was no chance of continuation) only worth a round. Not only would that be extremely dangerous for the fighters long term health (there is a reason why MMA went away from the standing 8 count), but it would also likely result in many more acute injuries.
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
So you’re answer is you disagree. fair enough. I take on board your comments. I did say, as you pointed out, as I haven’t wrestled, practised mma I don’t have a first hand appreciation for that aspect.
I think your analogy is slightly wayward. But the point is evident. .
It’s a spectators point of view from me. And your comments are fair. But the majority of people watching mma won’t have grappled or placed in submission. And I wondered if they felt similarly disappointed with a submission. Whereas anyone can have an appreciation for a big punch etc. I refer back to my comments about the most popular videos fights on he internet
I feel like I’m using too many words. Not speaking succinctly so you’ll have to forgive me.
[/quote]
As a fan you are entitled to preferring striking finishes to submission finishes, I personally appreciate both but am not suggesting that your preference for method of victory is any less valid than mine; my contention is with arguing that submissions shouldn’t count as victories. Fine, you prefer victories via KO/TKO, fair enough, but you are just flat out uninformed/misinformed about the nature of submissions to suggest that they don’t constitute victories.[/quote]
Gotta agree. As I understand it, the origin of most common submissions was to ground an armoured opponent on the battlefield and either render him unconscious or establish such a position of dominance/control that you could kill him at will.
Stopping short of this (or the complete destruction of a joint/limb) I’m not sure how much more of a “victory” one could hope for.
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
i dont watch much mma. a bit here and there. i hate it when a fight ends in submission.
i dont have much appreciation for grappling or that aspect - (not because it isnt skilled, just personal preference, ive never trained it and i just cant gel with it).
i think a submission, such as last night should win you the round, thats it, not the fight.
what do some of you ufc/mma guys thinks?
imo its a good idea. i arent saying it to be controversial. its just, when a fight ends with an arm bar, leg lock, its such an anticlimax.
fyi, yes, i am aware there are shit boxing fights, and there is alot can be improved. this isnt an mma vs boxing thing. [/quote]
You would have to do that for every referee stoppage though. If you get an opponent in a choke but they pass out before tapping, you get a submission, even though they didn’t technically “submit”. The ref stops the fight so the guy doesn’t die or get brain damage from oxygen deprivation (this all occurs a lot faster with artery chokes). The match ends so someone doesn’t get seriously hurt.
What about TKO’s in boxing? Don’t refs in some federations call a TKO if you get knocked down 3 times in one round? or if you ever fall 15 points behind? This has the same anticlimatic quality to me
Sure I can see where you’re all coming form. It isn’t viable solution. I understand know why it isn’t possible to implement my suggestion which is fair enough. It does seem a little silly. So to yous who no more about it, it wil seem out right stupid.
I guess I’ll have to gain an appreciation for submissions.
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
Sure I can see where you’re all coming form. It isn’t viable solution. I understand know why it isn’t possible to implement my suggestion which is fair enough. It does seem a little silly. So to yous who no more about it, it wil seem out right stupid.
I guess I’ll have to gain an appreciation for submissions. [/quote]
Playing devil’s advocate here, but…
If I was a competitor with no morals (think Gerard Gordeau) and they implemented this rule, I would just tear the limb off when I get a submission. This way, I could guarantee that the fight is over instead of just winning one round.
[quote]CarltonJ wrote:
Ok fair enough. I haven’t explained my self well. of course they are in pain. But I’ve seen a lot where they could and would continue next round.
I don’t wanna hijack this thread with opic topic stuff. Just wondered if anyone opposed/disliked submissions as much as me.
[/quote]
They wouldn’t move onto the next round if the armbar/leg lock was finished. They are only still in one piece because they submitted.
I may well look more intoy the training.