I imagine Lancashire coal miners had a slightly more bad-ass version of wrestling than in the land of Olive Oil and Bumming.
Don't forget about the Egyptians or Arabs who where also wrestling well before catch as catch can was developed. An English king even lost to a French king in a wrestling match at the Field of The Cloth of Gold pageant. The French were instrumental in Greco Roman wrestling being organized in Europe in the 1700's though, so they weren't unfamiliar with the martial art. Wrestling is just one of those things that developed all over the fucking place with all the folk styles and their influences. The Irish did pretty much bring catch wrestling to America though.
Raoulduke20 on
0
Options
DynagripBreak me a million heartsHoustonRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Anyway, my point was that for a nation that had some world class wrestling clubs and coaches 100 years ago (and up to the 70's) we seem to have really lost touch with the sport.
Anyway, my point was that for a nation that had some world class wrestling clubs and coaches 100 years ago (and up to the 70's) we seem to have really lost touch with the sport.
To be fair it isn't like ubiquitous here in America, at least not in most areas. It is offered in a decent amount of high schools but not all. I did it for my senior year but never before because it was the first year my high school had offered it since the late 70's. And I live in Ohio which is one of the bigger wrestling states. It's not uncommon, though, and when you do wrestle in school they push the fuck out of you, similar to American football, so it's a good introduction to things like combat sport training or full contact martial arts. For instance, it's against the rules to cut weight in certain ways but it was still encouraged to do in ways that wouldn't get you caught, like wearing a trashbag suit and jogging somewhere away from the school. I'm glad MMA seems to be giving it a bit of a shot in the arm, now. It's kind of shitty while you're doing it, but I feel like I learned a lot of useful stuff in only a year.
Raoulduke20 on
0
Options
SpectrumArcher of InfernoChaldea Rec RoomRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
Depends on the area.
Even in one of the richest, snottiest suburbs of New Jersey you can imagine, we still had wrestling in high school.
...hm, although I can't remember whether it was JV and Varsity or just Varsity...
I've always thought Overeem spoke in a very well thought out way. I've heard him a ton of times, from The Reem documentary to standard interviews, and his comments never seem off the cuff. He always sounds like he's already thought about whatever you're asking.
ChillyWilly on
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
Rogerio/Davis was okay. It was mostly Davis failing to take Nog down and then succeeding suddenly. It was fairly active on the ground though so it was not particularly dull.
What.
The 3rd round was excruciatingly awful. Like, worse than Fitch.
Fitch at least does his little pitter-patter ground and pound.
Davis wasn't even doing that. He was just camping out around Nog's legs. That wasn't even grappling, it was just sitting there and racking up points for "maintaining top control" or some other such BS - even though Davis wasn't actually on top of Nog. Amazed Herb Dean let Davis sit there the whole round.
Also, any one else tremendously impressed by Phil Davis? Sure, people are unimpressed by his performance, but this was only his ninth fight against Rogerio, who undoubtedly has been working his TDD. Plus, the same thing had happened to Jon Jones. He looked phenomenal against Stephen Bonnar, but then seemed a bit lack luster for a little awhile, and then he was suddenly the next biggest thing. I see Phil Davis's career taking the same approach, but faster.
When did Bones look lackluster? He hasn't been past the 2nd round since Bonnar, and dominated every fight in that time, including the "loss" to Hammill.
Bones also seems to show significant improvement from his last fight every time he steps into the ring.
Davis impressed me less vs Lil Nog than Jason Brilz. Zuffa might try to promote him as the Next Bones, but I'm not seeing it. Davis is older anyways, how can you be the Next of something that's newer (and already better) than you?
Rogerio/Davis was okay. It was mostly Davis failing to take Nog down and then succeeding suddenly. It was fairly active on the ground though so it was not particularly dull.
What.
The 3rd round was excruciatingly awful. Like, worse than Fitch.
Fitch at least does his little pitter-patter ground and pound.
Davis wasn't even doing that. He was just camping out around Nog's legs. That wasn't even grappling, it was just sitting there and racking up points for "maintaining top control" or some other such BS - even though Davis wasn't actually on top of Nog. Amazed Herb Dean let Davis sit there the whole round.
You can't completely blame Davis for that, though. For most of the fight, Lil Nog was on the bottom holding onto Davis' arm in a nigh-impossible submission attempt, while Davis was battering his ribs.
If Lil Nog wasn't holding on to that kimura for dear life with his robot grip strength, I'm sure Davis could have done more.
Actually, the real blame should lie with the UFC, for furthering the mentality that all you need is takedowns and submission defense, and no matter how many times someone can defend against your takedown, you can take them down just once per round and still win.
What's the solution, though? Better judging still gives Jon Fitch a 30-27 for showing up and using the rules to his advantage in a way people don't enjoy watching.
Do we try yellow cards? Give a fighter x seconds to gain a better position or do significant damage before a stand up? Disallow elbows on the ground to make the fighter on top have to create space to strike opening them up to submissions? Allow knees to downed opponents so a takedown isn't a defensive and offensive position at the same time? Call any fight that doesn't end in a finish a draw?
Also, any one else tremendously impressed by Phil Davis? Sure, people are unimpressed by his performance, but this was only his ninth fight against Rogerio, who undoubtedly has been working his TDD. Plus, the same thing had happened to Jon Jones. He looked phenomenal against Stephen Bonnar, but then seemed a bit lack luster for a little awhile, and then he was suddenly the next biggest thing. I see Phil Davis's career taking the same approach, but faster.
When did Bones look lackluster? He hasn't been past the 2nd round since Bonnar, and dominated every fight in that time, including the "loss" to Hammill.
Bones also seems to show significant improvement from his last fight every time he steps into the ring.
Davis impressed me less vs Lil Nog than Jason Brilz. Zuffa might try to promote him as the Next Bones, but I'm not seeing it. Davis is older anyways, how can you be the Next of something that's newer (and already better) than you?
The Jake O'Brien fight. It ended in a second round submission, but compared to his previous fight it didn't live up to the hype. Just saying.
I think you fail to see that while Davis may not do it spectacularly like Jon Jones, he's been significantly improving every time as well.
His fifth professional fight was against Brian Stann, then it was potential LHW prospect Alexander Gustafsson, and then you've seen the slick submission he used on Tim Boetsch.
Honestly, even Ryan Bader didn't look good against Rogerio, so why be so critical of Davis? When's the last time Rogerio got finished?
Also, it's called potential. Zuffa isn't promoting him, but they should be. You know why? Because who the hell thinks Rashad's going to win.
Also, any one else tremendously impressed by Phil Davis? Sure, people are unimpressed by his performance, but this was only his ninth fight against Rogerio, who undoubtedly has been working his TDD. Plus, the same thing had happened to Jon Jones. He looked phenomenal against Stephen Bonnar, but then seemed a bit lack luster for a little awhile, and then he was suddenly the next biggest thing. I see Phil Davis's career taking the same approach, but faster.
When did Bones look lackluster? He hasn't been past the 2nd round since Bonnar, and dominated every fight in that time, including the "loss" to Hammill.
Bones also seems to show significant improvement from his last fight every time he steps into the ring.
Davis impressed me less vs Lil Nog than Jason Brilz. Zuffa might try to promote him as the Next Bones, but I'm not seeing it. Davis is older anyways, how can you be the Next of something that's newer (and already better) than you?
The Jake O'Brien fight. It ended in a second round submission, but compared to his previous fight it didn't live up to the hype. Just saying.
I think you fail to see that while Davis may not do it spectacularly like Jon Jones, he's been significantly improving every time as well.
His fifth professional fight was against Brian Stann, then it was potential LHW prospect Alexander Gustafsson, and then you've seen the slick submission he used on Tim Boetsch.
Honestly, even Ryan Bader didn't look good against Rogerio, so why be so critical of Davis? When's the last time Rogerio got finished?
Also, it's called potential. Zuffa isn't promoting him, but they should be. You know why? Because who the hell thinks Rashad's going to win.
Against Bones? I don't think Rashad's going to win, but I sure don't think Davis will ever beat Bones either. I said in the previous thread that the guy with the best style to beat Bones at 205 right now is Machida. He's a better counter-striker than Shogun, and probably has the best TDD at 205. Jones has the reach advantage, but his striking is still a bit wild and loopy, and Machida should be able to effectively counter it.
I'm not trying to hate on Davis as a fighter (though I am fully hating on that awful 3rd round, where Davis wouldn't even get into Nog's guard). I just don't get the hype behind him as the Next Bones. Bones appears to be an actual, BJ Penn-esque prodigy. Davis' progress appears to be more along a King Mo-type track at best.
Davis is improving, but not like Bones was. If Davis is significantly improving each fight, then Bones is spectacularly improving each fight.
On a side note, if Nog stays on his back at the end of the 2nd round instead of trying to scramble and giving Davis his back, I give Nog that round and the decision. Scrambling is the best part of Davis' wrestling game, so that wasn't a smart move on Nog's part. But considering the judges somehow gave Davis round 1 unanimously, I doubt it would have made any difference in terms of the actual judging results.
BubbaT on
0
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
Michael McDonald: $65,000 (includes $5,000 win bonus, $55,000 Fight of the Night bonus)
def. Edwin Figueroa: $61,000 (includes $55,000 Fight of the Night bonus)
Christian Morecraft: $12,000 (includes $6,000 win bonus)
def. Sean McCorkle: $10,000
Johny Hendricks: $99,000 (includes $22,000 win bonus, $55,000 Knockout of the Night bonus)
def. T.J. Waldburger: $8,000
Also, any one else tremendously impressed by Phil Davis? Sure, people are unimpressed by his performance, but this was only his ninth fight against Rogerio, who undoubtedly has been working his TDD. Plus, the same thing had happened to Jon Jones. He looked phenomenal against Stephen Bonnar, but then seemed a bit lack luster for a little awhile, and then he was suddenly the next biggest thing. I see Phil Davis's career taking the same approach, but faster.
When did Bones look lackluster? He hasn't been past the 2nd round since Bonnar, and dominated every fight in that time, including the "loss" to Hammill.
Bones also seems to show significant improvement from his last fight every time he steps into the ring.
Davis impressed me less vs Lil Nog than Jason Brilz. Zuffa might try to promote him as the Next Bones, but I'm not seeing it. Davis is older anyways, how can you be the Next of something that's newer (and already better) than you?
The Jake O'Brien fight. It ended in a second round submission, but compared to his previous fight it didn't live up to the hype. Just saying.
I think you fail to see that while Davis may not do it spectacularly like Jon Jones, he's been significantly improving every time as well.
His fifth professional fight was against Brian Stann, then it was potential LHW prospect Alexander Gustafsson, and then you've seen the slick submission he used on Tim Boetsch.
Honestly, even Ryan Bader didn't look good against Rogerio, so why be so critical of Davis? When's the last time Rogerio got finished?
Also, it's called potential. Zuffa isn't promoting him, but they should be. You know why? Because who the hell thinks Rashad's going to win.
Against Bones? I don't think Rashad's going to win, but I sure don't think Davis will ever beat Bones either. I said in the previous thread that the guy with the best style to beat Bones at 205 right now is Machida. He's a better counter-striker than Shogun, and probably has the best TDD at 205. Jones has the reach advantage, but his striking is still a bit wild and loopy, and Machida should be able to effectively counter it.
I'm not trying to hate on Davis as a fighter (though I am fully hating on that awful 3rd round, where Davis wouldn't even get into Nog's guard). I just don't get the hype behind him as the Next Bones. Bones appears to be an actual, BJ Penn-esque prodigy. Davis' progress appears to be more along a King Mo-type track at best.
Davis is improving, but not like Bones was. If Davis is significantly improving each fight, then Bones is spectacularly improving each fight.
On a side note, if Nog stays on his back at the end of the 2nd round instead of trying to scramble and giving Davis his back, I give Nog that round and the decision. Scrambling is the best part of Davis' wrestling game, so that wasn't a smart move on Nog's part. But considering the judges somehow gave Davis round 1 unanimously, I doubt it would have made any difference in terms of the actual judging results.
Personally, I feel that Machida doesn't stand a chance, and I'm looking at this through a style v.s style perspective. I don't think he'll be able to utilize his shotokan karate effectively, and in a champion ship fight of five rounds, it's only a matter of time before he's taken down to the ground, and forced to exhaust himself to escape like Rua was. Jon Jones won't let Machida play his game.
The reason why most people, or just me, support Davis because he is an athletic specimen just like Jon Jones. Every one else would just get over powered or out maneuvered by him. Experience doesn't mean anything to him. So, I put my eggs in one basket. Davis can nullify Jone's physical advantages and turn the fight into one of pure technique and ingenuity, which both have shown in their respective fights aka the modified kimura Davis went for on the spot and the guillotine choke by Bones that he saw GSP do. Mr. Wonderful cannot stand with Bones Jones on the same stage because obviously, he's still getting it together, but he's getting there, and he's getting there fast. There is no way any one should be falling asleep on Davis. This was only his nineth fight.
Even in one of the richest, snottiest suburbs of New Jersey you can imagine, we still had wrestling in high school.
...hm, although I can't remember whether it was JV and Varsity or just Varsity...
I'm not that surprised wealthier areas have wrestling, it's the poor areas that tend to have less variety in their sports. My county was one of the poorest in the state, so it wasn't that surprising that they constantly cut programs. If one of my friends hadn't went to state they probably would have canned the wrestling program after that first year since not that many people signed up. It's taken off some since then, though, so it's not at risk right now, but if it ever dips too much in popularity it'll be gone indefinitely I'm sure. Basically around here the only sports guaranteed to be offered are football, basketball, and baseball/softball, so it's hard for me to gauge what the average school district has. My only point, really, was that it's not as culturally ingrained a sport as some make it seem. I'd wager most Americans think of WWE almost exclusively when they hear the word.
What's the solution, though? Better judging still gives Jon Fitch a 30-27 for showing up and using the rules to his advantage in a way people don't enjoy watching.
Do we try yellow cards? Give a fighter x seconds to gain a better position or do significant damage before a stand up? Disallow elbows on the ground to make the fighter on top have to create space to strike opening them up to submissions? Allow knees to downed opponents so a takedown isn't a defensive and offensive position at the same time? Call any fight that doesn't end in a finish a draw?
Or do we arm the fighters with swords? :^:
I was thinking about this during the fights:
Award points for takedown defense. Count it as effective grappling. Now, you shouldn't be able to win a fight based on sprawls; it would be ridiculous if a fighter was losing in striking, but came back because they defended numerous takedowns in a round. Still, I think this would be a good method, at least under the current judging "system".
...and man, what the hell is wrong with the forums? I'm waiting for minutes to post this one message.
Award points for takedown defense. Count it as effective grappling. Now, you shouldn't be able to win a fight based on sprawls; it would be ridiculous if a fighter was losing in striking, but came back because they defended numerous takedowns in a round. Still, I think this would be a good method, at least under the current judging "system".
Whenever it comes up, I always go with takedowns not scoring points unless they're damaging in themselves (slams) or they lead to something. If you take a guy down three times but he pops right up? No points. You're never going to stop someone from Fitching a fight if he's good enough to keep the guy down, but at least he has to pop off some strikes to make sure that it counts as an effective takedown.
David_T on
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
Since there's no way we'll ever have a card system, identifying a takedown as a "neutral" position is probably the best solution.
Hell, I'd be in favor of making everything except a damaging strike or near-submission as "neutral". I don't care if you're in full mount - if you can't use that position to move yourself closer to actually finishing the fight, then it's meaningless. And not all takedowns are the same. Some of them cause serious damage in and of themselves, while those, "I'm gonna smother you against the cage until you fall down" takedowns are just a waste of time unless you can actually do some damage from the top. In a good scoring system, the judges would recognize these differences, and note that a decent single-leg takedown with no follow through is about equivalent to getting a few jabs through - it does something, but you aren't going to finish someone anytime soon.
The difference, as I see it, is that the takedowns are effectively defensive as well. Once the person's down their striking game is nullified until they can get back up. The struggle to get up at least wears the person down some, so I don't think it should be treated as nothing at all. I think scoring takedown defense is a pretty good solution for the current system and it wouldn't be that difficult to do I wouldn't think. You can tell when a guy has great td defense, or at least much better than their opponent, and the attempted shots failing are demoralizing and can end up wasting a lot of gas and putting the shooting fighter in some compromising positions, so I think it's effective in some offensive ways even though it's just defensive grappling. It would make judging things more complicated but I think that's actually good, MMA is pretty complex. This would all still be for naught since the judges would just make horrible fucking decisions anyway.
Raoulduke20 on
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
The problem with making a successful takedown defense equivalent to a successful takedown is that it rewards passive, defensive behavior. Let's be honest here - we want rules that primarily keep fighters safe, but also push the action towards a finish. Rather than equivocate between which moves are worth what, why don't we just mark a clear line in the sand and say look, these things finish fights: strikes and submissions. If you aren't successfully striking, and you aren't attempting potentially successful submissions, then you aren't doing anything significant in terms of finishing the fight.
This would push low-risk, low-damage techniques into where they should be - as tools in a long-term fight strategy - rather than how they're currently used - as a means in and of themselves to win fights.
Inquisitor77 on
0
Options
SpectrumArcher of InfernoChaldea Rec RoomRegistered Userregular
Posts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAIAmfUY5L4
Don't forget about the Egyptians or Arabs who where also wrestling well before catch as catch can was developed. An English king even lost to a French king in a wrestling match at the Field of The Cloth of Gold pageant. The French were instrumental in Greco Roman wrestling being organized in Europe in the 1700's though, so they weren't unfamiliar with the martial art. Wrestling is just one of those things that developed all over the fucking place with all the folk styles and their influences. The Irish did pretty much bring catch wrestling to America though.
hi5
You know what? I haven't heard much things from this guy I can actually disagree with.
It's a dream that won't be realized for at least a few years, but it'll be legendary when it happens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=877EVKalozY&feature=player_embedded
Anyway, my point was that for a nation that had some world class wrestling clubs and coaches 100 years ago (and up to the 70's) we seem to have really lost touch with the sport.
To be fair it isn't like ubiquitous here in America, at least not in most areas. It is offered in a decent amount of high schools but not all. I did it for my senior year but never before because it was the first year my high school had offered it since the late 70's. And I live in Ohio which is one of the bigger wrestling states. It's not uncommon, though, and when you do wrestle in school they push the fuck out of you, similar to American football, so it's a good introduction to things like combat sport training or full contact martial arts. For instance, it's against the rules to cut weight in certain ways but it was still encouraged to do in ways that wouldn't get you caught, like wearing a trashbag suit and jogging somewhere away from the school. I'm glad MMA seems to be giving it a bit of a shot in the arm, now. It's kind of shitty while you're doing it, but I feel like I learned a lot of useful stuff in only a year.
Even in one of the richest, snottiest suburbs of New Jersey you can imagine, we still had wrestling in high school.
...hm, although I can't remember whether it was JV and Varsity or just Varsity...
John Hathaway used to play almost professionally and for a 23 year old Brit he has some decent wrestling / TDD / TD's.
He even comes off as pretty friendly.
I've always thought Overeem spoke in a very well thought out way. I've heard him a ton of times, from The Reem documentary to standard interviews, and his comments never seem off the cuff. He always sounds like he's already thought about whatever you're asking.
What.
The 3rd round was excruciatingly awful. Like, worse than Fitch.
Fitch at least does his little pitter-patter ground and pound.
Davis wasn't even doing that. He was just camping out around Nog's legs. That wasn't even grappling, it was just sitting there and racking up points for "maintaining top control" or some other such BS - even though Davis wasn't actually on top of Nog. Amazed Herb Dean let Davis sit there the whole round.
When did Bones look lackluster? He hasn't been past the 2nd round since Bonnar, and dominated every fight in that time, including the "loss" to Hammill.
Bones also seems to show significant improvement from his last fight every time he steps into the ring.
Davis impressed me less vs Lil Nog than Jason Brilz. Zuffa might try to promote him as the Next Bones, but I'm not seeing it. Davis is older anyways, how can you be the Next of something that's newer (and already better) than you?
If Lil Nog wasn't holding on to that kimura for dear life with his robot grip strength, I'm sure Davis could have done more.
Actually, the real blame should lie with the UFC, for furthering the mentality that all you need is takedowns and submission defense, and no matter how many times someone can defend against your takedown, you can take them down just once per round and still win.
Do we try yellow cards? Give a fighter x seconds to gain a better position or do significant damage before a stand up? Disallow elbows on the ground to make the fighter on top have to create space to strike opening them up to submissions? Allow knees to downed opponents so a takedown isn't a defensive and offensive position at the same time? Call any fight that doesn't end in a finish a draw?
Or do we arm the fighters with swords? :^:
The Jake O'Brien fight. It ended in a second round submission, but compared to his previous fight it didn't live up to the hype. Just saying.
I think you fail to see that while Davis may not do it spectacularly like Jon Jones, he's been significantly improving every time as well.
His fifth professional fight was against Brian Stann, then it was potential LHW prospect Alexander Gustafsson, and then you've seen the slick submission he used on Tim Boetsch.
Honestly, even Ryan Bader didn't look good against Rogerio, so why be so critical of Davis? When's the last time Rogerio got finished?
Also, it's called potential. Zuffa isn't promoting him, but they should be. You know why? Because who the hell thinks Rashad's going to win.
Against Bones? I don't think Rashad's going to win, but I sure don't think Davis will ever beat Bones either. I said in the previous thread that the guy with the best style to beat Bones at 205 right now is Machida. He's a better counter-striker than Shogun, and probably has the best TDD at 205. Jones has the reach advantage, but his striking is still a bit wild and loopy, and Machida should be able to effectively counter it.
I'm not trying to hate on Davis as a fighter (though I am fully hating on that awful 3rd round, where Davis wouldn't even get into Nog's guard). I just don't get the hype behind him as the Next Bones. Bones appears to be an actual, BJ Penn-esque prodigy. Davis' progress appears to be more along a King Mo-type track at best.
Davis is improving, but not like Bones was. If Davis is significantly improving each fight, then Bones is spectacularly improving each fight.
On a side note, if Nog stays on his back at the end of the 2nd round instead of trying to scramble and giving Davis his back, I give Nog that round and the decision. Scrambling is the best part of Davis' wrestling game, so that wasn't a smart move on Nog's part. But considering the judges somehow gave Davis round 1 unanimously, I doubt it would have made any difference in terms of the actual judging results.
I must ask, where in NJ are you referring? I live in a place that can be described as just that (Moorestown) and we also had a wrestling team.
that's pretty fucked up
pay below
def. Antonio Rogerio Nogueira: $90,000
Anthony Johnson: $40,000 (includes $20,000 win bonus)
def. Dan Hardy: $25,000
Amir Sadollah: $40,000 (includes $20,000 win bonus)
def. DaMarques Johnson: $14,000
Chan Sung Jung: $65,000 (includes $5,000 win bonus, $55,000 Submission of the Night bonus)
def. Leonard Garcia: $18,000
Mike Russow: $28,000 (includes $14,000 win bonus)
def. Jon Madsen: $10,000
Mackens Semerzier: $12,000 (includes $6,000 win bonus)
def. Alex Caceres: $8,000
John Hathaway: $26,000 (includes $13,000 win bonus)
def. Kris McCray: $10,000
Michael McDonald: $65,000 (includes $5,000 win bonus, $55,000 Fight of the Night bonus)
def. Edwin Figueroa: $61,000 (includes $55,000 Fight of the Night bonus)
Christian Morecraft: $12,000 (includes $6,000 win bonus)
def. Sean McCorkle: $10,000
Johny Hendricks: $99,000 (includes $22,000 win bonus, $55,000 Knockout of the Night bonus)
def. T.J. Waldburger: $8,000
Aaron Simpson: $30,000 (includes $15,000 win bonus)
def. Mario Miranda: $10,000
Nik Lentz: $30,000 (includes $15,000 win bonus)
def. Waylon Lowe: $12,000
Personally, I feel that Machida doesn't stand a chance, and I'm looking at this through a style v.s style perspective. I don't think he'll be able to utilize his shotokan karate effectively, and in a champion ship fight of five rounds, it's only a matter of time before he's taken down to the ground, and forced to exhaust himself to escape like Rua was. Jon Jones won't let Machida play his game.
The reason why most people, or just me, support Davis because he is an athletic specimen just like Jon Jones. Every one else would just get over powered or out maneuvered by him. Experience doesn't mean anything to him. So, I put my eggs in one basket. Davis can nullify Jone's physical advantages and turn the fight into one of pure technique and ingenuity, which both have shown in their respective fights aka the modified kimura Davis went for on the spot and the guillotine choke by Bones that he saw GSP do. Mr. Wonderful cannot stand with Bones Jones on the same stage because obviously, he's still getting it together, but he's getting there, and he's getting there fast. There is no way any one should be falling asleep on Davis. This was only his nineth fight.
Bader would body him.
Also, do you own a red hat?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PMUJ_eF6g0
I'm not that surprised wealthier areas have wrestling, it's the poor areas that tend to have less variety in their sports. My county was one of the poorest in the state, so it wasn't that surprising that they constantly cut programs. If one of my friends hadn't went to state they probably would have canned the wrestling program after that first year since not that many people signed up. It's taken off some since then, though, so it's not at risk right now, but if it ever dips too much in popularity it'll be gone indefinitely I'm sure. Basically around here the only sports guaranteed to be offered are football, basketball, and baseball/softball, so it's hard for me to gauge what the average school district has. My only point, really, was that it's not as culturally ingrained a sport as some make it seem. I'd wager most Americans think of WWE almost exclusively when they hear the word.
I was thinking about this during the fights:
Award points for takedown defense. Count it as effective grappling. Now, you shouldn't be able to win a fight based on sprawls; it would be ridiculous if a fighter was losing in striking, but came back because they defended numerous takedowns in a round. Still, I think this would be a good method, at least under the current judging "system".
...and man, what the hell is wrong with the forums? I'm waiting for minutes to post this one message.
If Bader wasn't fighting Ortiz, this fight would happen.
Great job on Shield's part. Now there's a good reason to be confident in him at winning.
*submit reply* The server is too busy at the moment. Please try again later.
Whenever it comes up, I always go with takedowns not scoring points unless they're damaging in themselves (slams) or they lead to something. If you take a guy down three times but he pops right up? No points. You're never going to stop someone from Fitching a fight if he's good enough to keep the guy down, but at least he has to pop off some strikes to make sure that it counts as an effective takedown.
Hell, I'd be in favor of making everything except a damaging strike or near-submission as "neutral". I don't care if you're in full mount - if you can't use that position to move yourself closer to actually finishing the fight, then it's meaningless. And not all takedowns are the same. Some of them cause serious damage in and of themselves, while those, "I'm gonna smother you against the cage until you fall down" takedowns are just a waste of time unless you can actually do some damage from the top. In a good scoring system, the judges would recognize these differences, and note that a decent single-leg takedown with no follow through is about equivalent to getting a few jabs through - it does something, but you aren't going to finish someone anytime soon.
This would push low-risk, low-damage techniques into where they should be - as tools in a long-term fight strategy - rather than how they're currently used - as a means in and of themselves to win fights.
I think someone mentioned that overseas fighters usually get more money under the table or something?
Some people shop on Amazon. Me? I watch grown men fight in the burning sands of Abu Dhabi.