Tweet
also i ment to say that a throw is just one way to create a gap. anything damage the imminent threat and get you passed the initial assault works
-
-
Originally posted by fleetgunz
so how do you like the murder stroke?Comment
-
All you have to do is watch any MMA event and you'll see dozens of guys attempting to use techniques that they are not proficient in. No one in MMA has proficient boxing skills. Very few in MMA have proficient judo throwing skills. All the throws look like wrestling throws or BJJ sacrifice takedowns which are throws at all. Why the whole concept of crosstraining stresses practicing much but becoming proficient at nothing. Unfortunately what they haven't figured out yet is that there has to be some level of mastery. The best are those who are usually from TMA's because they choose to master a particular range or tool. BJJ is a TMA. Muay Thai is a TMA. Boxing is a TSA(Traditional Sports Art). But the people like Nogueira and CroCop who master a range or strike usually on get to do that because they focus on prefecting something. Crosstraining damn nearly forbids it by pushing you to another range by the second or third day of training.Originally posted by fleetgunz
People use techniques that they know they're not well practiced in all the time. Which is why I advocated not using throws in a situation where your ass is on the line unless you are at a higher level of proficiency. If you don't know how to throw properly your throw:
Will be muscled and lack any element of surprise
Will not hurt the man but simply be a takedown
Will put you into a vunerable positionComment
-
"No one in MMA has proficient boxing skills."
Id like to refute that point there Uke, I may be nit picking, but here me out.
You mentioned Big Nog, while he's known for his ground game (best in mma)... He's also a brazilian heavyweight boxing champion, brazil might not be a boxing mecca, but I'm sure youd have to have proficient boxing skills.
Vitor Belfort is another who recently had a pure boxing match.. he destroyed his opponent in the first round... yet says he wants to get back into MMA.
Even people like Stephan Bonnar, 3 time Chicago Golden Gloves champ? I'd say hes a proficient boxer....
I understand your point, and for the most part I agree with it..but I like to nitpick...
"Variety leads to mediocrity" - SamuraiGuy.Comment
-
wrestling in a pure sence is a martial art. Roman legions, knights saracens, turks mongols ....though competitive wresting is a sporting art..look at the techniques that are against the rules...they are fairly simple providing you have adiquate strength. though i stress do not use any technique that you leave your feet...i think we can all agree on that.and im not saying to use a throw or sweep alone it is couple with a strike to vital areas or is done in a way that will break or dislocate bones or joints or kill... i agree that stikes should be short and fast....that pretty much goes for any self defence senario..hard and fast.....Comment
-
wrestling in a pure sence is a martial art. Roman legions, knights saracens, turks mongols ....though competitive wresting is a sporting art..look at the techniques that are against the rules...they are fairly simple providing you have adiquate strength. though i stress do not use any technique that you leave your feet...i think we can all agree on that.and im not saying to use a throw or sweep alone it is couple with a strike to vital areas or is done in a way that will break or dislocate bones or joints or kill... i agree that stikes should be short and fast....that pretty much goes for any self defence senario..hard and fast.....Comment
-
Vitor Belfort has great boxing skills. So does Don Frye. Remember when Don knocked out the 400-lb street brawler/ kung-fu guy in Puerto Rico? He knocked him out with a jab...Originally posted by Uke
Belfort and Frye are both Golden Gloves boxers.
Christoff Leninger (a 2nd dan BB in judo) fought Ken Shamrock. Leninger got owned, but Leninger hung in there.Comment
-
Well allow me to reply, my nitpicking friend.Originally posted by SamuraiGuy
I have no intentions or desire to insult anyone, but if anyone here claims that they've seen proficient boxing skills in MMA then they do not have an idea of what proficient boxing skills are. Even lower C level fighters like Arturo Gatti would put tons of punishment on MMA's best punchers. Its a question of class and discipline. Years ago, one of the Toughman Tournament fighters who had been knocking people out left and right thought he could make it in boxing among professionals who have spent years honing their skills. He quickly found out that while he was able to know toughman out at an astonishing rate, he was way out of his league in the pros. His name was ButterBean. He was definitely the best puncher of the toughman.
People who haven't trained or haven't been around training don't realize that there is an echelon that exists. Just because the average guy can punch and kick, and his punches and kicks sort of resemble a pro's punch and kick, doesn't mean that the average guy can get the same desired effect.
Look at Nogueira. He's dedicated his life to grappling with the best ground grapplers in the world. And that's why he excels at grappling, not striking. Mirko Filipovic had spent most of his years developing his left roundhouse kick in muay thai and kickboxing type matches, which is why he excels in that one strike, and not boxing or grappling. These guys are now trying to plug the holes in their MMA game by taking crash courses in other ranges, but its clear that when they deviate from what they specialize in, they lose or expose themselves for a loss.
Mirko boxed with Randleman and BOOM! ... he got knocked out by a wrestler who is not even close to having a decent hand game. Mirko got into a ground grapple with Nogueira, and got armbarred. When he sticks to using what he mastered, it looks like what he did to Igor. The longer Nogueira stand on his feet in the ring, the better chance he has of losing. He knows this, and that's why over 90% of his wins come from him being on the ground.
It would be a mistake to believe that MMA fighters are the best at anything. Pure BJJ players are much better than the any one of the grapplers you'll see in MMA. Nogueira is not the norm but the exception. Pure disciplined boxers are much better at punching, finding angles and slipping punches than anyone in MMA. Most MMA strikers can't slip punches and have no footwork. Pure kickers or kickboxers like CroCop are hardly ever seen in MMA. You'll find them in K-1, but not in Pride or UFC.
MMA is basically just a crash course to get fighters ready to rumble in the ring. The focus on perfecting any one skill isn't practiced. The time that it took someone like Crocop to learn how to kick like that, or for Cus D'amato to teach a young kid like Mike Tyson to be devastating doesn't appeal to people who participate in these kinds of tournaments. They just don't feel like investing the time. They want to believe that there is a "just add water" solution to the fighting arts, despite all the legends who have shown that you can only achieve greatness by giving your life to something.
They could just as easily have joined a boxing gym, or a really good muay thai gym or a karate dojo. Don't be fooled. Its the TMA guys that most of you here look down on that have the disciplined, hard hitting strikes, even if they lack the training to deal with grapplers and MMA cage fighters. CroCop is a TMA. Nogueira is a TMA. Ernesto Hoost is a TMA. There are men out there who can strike as hard as the top MMA guys, because they've spent years and years developing those strikes. Not just six months training with people with impressive credentials. Do you think that because Nogueira spent a year training with the Cuban national boxing team that it was going to springboard him up to the level of a teenager who's spent the last 10 years learning all the nuances, footwork and timing of the science of boxing? Of course it wouldn't. He wouldn't even be close. Just because he excels at ground jujitsu doesn't mean that he will excel at any other range. But I do applaud him for recognizing his weaknesses and attempting to strengthen them.
So SamuraiGuy, I'd like to nitpick and point out that its the TMA's that are the best in MMA, as TMA's are the ones who stick to something long enough to achieve some level of mastery. Just because TMA's like Crocop and Nogueira participate in those kinds of events doesn't make the mixed martial artists.Comment
-
Tom Yum
I'm sorry, but to say that Vitor Belfort and Don Frye have excellent boxing skills is a disservice to boxing. Put either of them in with a Top 20 or 30 pro boxer and they'd get knocked out. No question about it. These comments remind me of the guys who said that Arturo Gatti had a good chance against Floyd Mayweather. But when you put a C level fighter against an A level fighter ... well let's just say the match was embarrassing. Now even with that said, Gatti would beat Belfort worse than Mayweather did him in a boxing match. It would be a total mismatch. If Belfort truly stood a chance, he would be in boxing trying to make million dollar paydays instead of tens of thousands at a time. This goes more so for Frye. I can't believe that you were seious when you said that Don Frye had excellent boxing skills. Belfort's level of boxing skills are a bit superior to Frye's, and Belfort fight like an amateur boxer.Originally posted by Tom Yum
I don't think that some of you realize the difference between amateur skills and pro skills. And to classify Frye and Belfort's skills as "great" is ridiculous. You put either of them in a boxing match with a ranked pro and you'll see those two get beat up really bad. I will agree with Tom that Frye and Belfort had great skills for MMA fighters though. But let's not kid ourselves and discuss them and their skills in the appropriate arenas.
I can't stress enough that if these guys thought for a second that they could make it as pro boxers who make over 10 times what they make now, they would have been gone a long time ago chasing the money. They know, like I know, that they would not make it far at all.
As a matter of fact, if it were Marquee of Queensbury boxing rules only, I'd bet that ButterBean would knock Frye and Belfort out. As toughman fighters go, ButterBean had quick hands and KO power. Now some of you might laugh, but Bean was knocking out guys that were built just like Frye. And Bean's handgame was better than Frye's. What made him odd was that he was very fat and round, but he was knocking dudes out cold. And he was only at a toughman fighter's skill.Comment
-
Not excellent, but great. From my humble point of view, Golden Gloves fighters are great. If they were the best of the best, I'd agree that they'd be in the big times fighting for bigger checks.Originally posted by Uke
I'm familiar with the difference between amateur and professional boxers, more personally from sparring. You can mix it up with an amateur as long as you've got some time under your belt, but you can't touch a professional.Originally posted by Uke
Bean has an impressive amateur record for sure, but he's not the cream of the crop either.
He got schoold by a retired and out of shape Larry Holmes in 2002. He also tied against Peter "Hurricane" McNeily. The same McNeily who lost to Tyson, fresh out of prison.
Allthough unrelated, Bean got tapped out by a 154-lb Japanese MMA fighter named Sudo. Sudo's a clever fighter though.
Bean can hit hard, but so can Frye. Frye knocked out the 400 lb Puerto Rican street brawler with a jab.
Jabs aren't KO punches, so either Frye has a tatoo gun jab or this 400-lb dude ate a ton of twinkees and has no chin.Comment
-
Sure boxers are better at boxing, but MMA are better at NHB competition. That's because they're two different sports that require different skills even though some of the skills overlap. This is just like putting down a football player's skills because they can't hang with professional ruggers in a rugby match. Sure both sports involve running and tackling but they are still too different to compare. A MMA may not be able to box with a boxer, but no matter how good a boxer you are you will never get far in MMA if you only have boxing skills. Now if you want to argue that professional boxers have more natural talent than professional MMA because of the amount of money to be made in boxing and because of the popularity of the sport you MAY have a point, although IMHO that's up for debate too. I'd tend to agree with that though, because MMA is still in it's infancy as a sport.Originally posted by Uke
That said I tend to agree with you that MMA abilities are sometimes hampered because they try to learn too many things at once instead of being patient and mastering one idea before moving on. Many of the best MMA don't fall into this category- many were exceptional wrestlers first ( ie. Mark Coleman) or are like Crocop and Nog.
Great discussion, even if it doesn't really belong in this forum
Comment
-
Very interesting.Originally posted by treelizardComment
-
Nice post.Originally posted by BoarSpearI figured this subject would eventually come up in this forum
........................................................
Fighting Multiple Opponents
Often I have heard many people state that fighting multiple opponents cannot be done. Although fighting more than one opponent is less desirable than fighting one, it is a fact that if you don’t believe you can win against multiple opponents, you can’t.
Understanding that the mind guides the body, when dealing with multiple assailants we must selectively change our mindset. When fighting multiples, people will normally adopt one of the following attitudes:
1. I can’t win against these odds (loosing mindset)
2. I may lose, but I’ll take as many as I can with me (this is still a loosing mindset)
3. I am going to win this thing ( this is your goal)
Again, the first rule in fighting multiple opponents is; “IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE YOU CAN WIN AGAINST MULTIPLE OPPONENTS, YOU CAN’T”
Phil Messina, founder of Modern Warrior and who I have trained with, has shared the following story to illustrate the topic of multiple opponents:
“ A great warrior was once asked, what would you do id one day you ran across three warriors equal to you in all respects except one. The first was faster than you, The second was stronger than you. And the third was more durable than you. If you had to fight each of them, which would you choose first? Without hesitation the great warrior responded: I would simply fight all three at once. When asked why, he responded; I have practiced fighting against the WOLF PACK, but I doubt they have practiced fighting as the wolf Pack”
The point of the above noted illustration is, multiples rarely train to work together and most often work against each other:
* They get in each others way
* Have a tendency to neutralize each others attacks
In a multiple opponent situation do you have to physically defeat each and every attacker? NO you do not! You must PSYCHOLOGICALLY destroy the wolf pack. You must physically defeat the threat as it becomes available, some will retreat, some will scatter. Some don’t really want to be there and will look for an excuse to get out.
First step if fighting multiples, “AWARENESS”
* Positioning relative to each other (movement in conjunction, setting up)
* Attackers glancing at each other (silent communication, waiting for attack cue)
* Word(s) that don’t make sense ( to confuse, may be attack signal)
* Unusual body language (inconsistent with conversation, assailant may do something-remove hat, wipe hair back, drop something-usually attack cue)
* Secondary subject distraction (may attempt to divert attention to other assailant(s) in order to attack)
Second Step in fighting multiples “IDENTIFY GROUP MENTAILITY”
· Who is the strong link, this is your greatest threat. This person may be identifiable by virtue of position or leadership role
· Who is the weak link, this is your weakest/least threat. This person may be identified by distance or in a protected position
· Remember that the above two are dynamic, and we have the ability to effect change on these
GENERAL STRATEGY WHEN FIGHTING MULTIPLES:
* Psychological battle is as important as physical battle
* If possible identify the leader and take him out of the fight quickly and decisively. This will create a new leader, by destroying the old one- see if anyone else wants to assume the role
* If you can’t take out the leader right away, take away his leadership role by showing the rest of the group that he can not protect them. Make the strong link psychologically ineffective- keep him at bay will defeating others
* Create a weak link by injuring an attacker but leaving him standing so that he may be used against the group later on
* Create a psychologically devastating and overwhelming visible injury to those you attack to disempower the group
* The use of real or improvised weapons should be used
* The first few seconds are critical in establishing psychological control
* CONTINUED MOVEMENT is a must. If you remain stationary the pack will triangulate
* Don’t be predictable move and strike erratically and viciously to the vision, wind and limbs of opponents using gross motor skills. Strike the person you are not looking at
Use the principal of S.C.A.R. (Screening, Cracking, And Re-directing) to your advantage:
SCREENING:
Use your attackers against each other. Cause them to get in each other’s way. Cause them to provide protection for you by being obstacles to others effectively attacking you (shield yourself from blows and attacks from others)
CRACKING:
When tactically feasible, move between your attackers, striking as you do so. This tactic will allow you to move into a more desirable position for attack while forcing your opponents to adjust to you. Position is often more important than distance. You want to be as efficient and productive as possible while forcing your attackers into less desirable positions
RE-DIRECTING:
Use your attackers momentum and direction against them. You do not have to make devastating hits with each engagement. Instead, re-direct your attackers into less desirable and or damaging positions such as walls, tables, chairs, each other. Let inanimate objects cause damage to them or let them cause damage to each other
Remember that while using the principals of SCAR, you want to be causing physical and psychological damage at the same time.
Remember that fighting multiple opponents is chaotic, and that you want to cause the chaos without becoming part of it. It is my opinion, that a multiple opponent confrontation is a “DEADLY FORCE” encounter. Why, it has been my experience as an LEO that those that fall victim to these swarmings end up seriously injured, or dead.
I have trained to fight the WOLF PACK, but I doubt the WOLF PACK has trained to fight cohesively against me. This is a tactical advantage that I can use to make a less desirable situation more desirable, thus giving me the “WIN” mindset and attitude.
Strength and Honor
Darren Laur
http://members.shaw.ca/tmanifold/fighting_multiple.htmComment
-
Try harder...
Originally posted by Richard Kerr
EDIT!!!! You waste of space! We DON'T NEED TO READ IT TWICE!!!
Comment
-
Not near great. Maybe decent at best. At their weight, they would be heavyweights in boxing. And even in this awful era in heavyweight boxing they wouldn't even be up there with the bums. Especially not Frye.Originally posted by Tom Yum
Oh I know Bean ain't the cream of the crop, but I'd put my money on him to knock out Frye or Belfort in a boxing match. That was my point. Frye and Belfort aren't even up to Bean's level. And you further illustrate my point: Larry Holmes is an old man, but an excellent boxer. But as old as he is, thorough training from an old able body will still embarrass someone with toughman skills. And Belfort and Frye don't even have Bean's power.Originally posted by Tom Yum
To imply that someone has great skills would be to imply that he is great at what he does. Therefore, to say that Belfort and Frye have great skills is to say that they are great boxers. Tom, I like you and all, but that's just laughable. Great boxers are millionaires. Great boxers are champions within professional boxing. Great boxers fight other great boxers. To say that Frye and Belfort are great when they've only fought toughman competition can only mean they are great in their respective organizations, and not in the whole of boxing. Again, I'm confident that ButterBean could beat them both in boxing, and he's shown himself to be at best just a toughman.
And just to head people off at the pass when they argue this point, they still will have to acknowledge that if either of them could make millions being "great" in boxing, they most definitely would have. So to say that Vitor Belfort has great boxing skills after he lost to Chuck Liddell, who got outboxed by 40 year old wrestler Randy Couture is ridiculous.Comment
Comment