What I have been seeing for a long time

**PointyShinyBurn** · Posted On: 8/30/2011 5:35pm

Originally Posted by Yamabushi7

Is there someone who could be considered a tricky counter puncher in MMA?

Does the name 'Anderson Silva' mean anything to you?

**bobyclumsyninja** · Posted On: 8/30/2011 5:38pm

Originally Posted by Yamabushi7

Is there someone who could be considered a tricky counter puncher in MMA?

Yes.

Many of them, however, have epic skillsets all round, so it's not necessarily highlighted in descriptions of all of them.

**atheistmantis** · Posted On: 8/30/2011 8:30pm

Hence the word many in my original post. Actually, I think I can get away with most as I see it.

**bobyclumsyninja** · Posted On: 8/31/2011 2:11am

Some more thoughts on the OP.

Originally Posted by atheistmantis

Why are many mma fighters still backing straight up instead of circling away from their opponents power hand?

Several reasons. Circling predictably is not a good way to avoid feints into high kicks, or lead leg high kicks. Georges St. Pierre is great with the circling and throwing his own lead leg high roundhouse kick. Anderson Silva, Fedor, Aleksander Emilianenko, circle excellently just to name a tiny few. It's a huge list, as it's a basic strategy for avoiding the power straight punch. That's just not a go-to opening punch for that many fighters, over the course of an entire fight, that circling is the automatic best way to move around.

The other thing that I hardly ever see is an MMA fighter holding his ground when his opponent moves forword and deliver a stiff straight arm one two counter.

This is used, but isn't always advisable, for previously stated reasons (earlier post).

I feel that there is just way too much backing up in MMA even at this day and age. IMO still a lot of room for improvement. Lots of wasted energy. Any thoughts?

This is still a young sport. There are very few unassailable assumptions about mma fighting methodology, at this point. Well rounded in all three general ranges of engagement would be one, but there aren't many other things set in stone yet.

A few of the guys who were around at the start of the UFC, have fought recently, and some (Dan Severn) will likely keep on trucking. Relative to Football, American Football, Rugby, Boxing, Cricket, Baseball, Basketball, etc the established high level competition hasn't been running for very long.

Add to that the multitude of possible combinations of styles, advances in training techniques/regimens, dietary improvements, more money attracting more natural athletes rather than to other sports, more $ at stake for those already involved, and other factors, and it's easy to see how mma can and will refine its self rapidly from here on out.

The Gym network to feed fighters into the sport is growing rapidly, especially as retired fighters can use their acquired skills/experience to open gyms, as can active fighters. Kids are coming out of high school now, who have known mma, most of their lives. That's a relatively new phenomenon for modern mma.

We're still watching early pioneers fight, so it's safe to assume the sport hasn't fully matured. Not even begun to, really. As a combat sport fan, this is a great time to be alive.

**atheistmantis** · Posted On: 3/08/2013 7:57am

Originally Posted by bobyclumsyninja

Some more thoughts on the OP.

Several reasons. Circling predictably is not a good way to avoid feints into high kicks, or lead leg high kicks. Georges St. Pierre is great with the circling and throwing his own lead leg high roundhouse kick. Anderson Silva, Fedor, Aleksander Emilianenko, circle excellently just to name a tiny few. It's a huge list, as it's a basic strategy for avoiding the power straight punch. That's just not a go-to opening punch for that many fighters, over the course of an entire fight, that circling is the automatic best way to move around.

This is used, but isn't always advisable, for previously stated reasons (earlier post).

This is still a young sport. There are very few unassailable assumptions about mma fighting methodology, at this point. Well rounded in all three general ranges of engagement would be one, but there aren't many other things set in stone yet.

A few of the guys who were around at the start of the UFC, have fought recently, and some (Dan Severn) will likely keep on trucking. Relative to Football, American Football, Rugby, Boxing, Cricket, Baseball, Basketball, etc the established high level competition hasn't been running for very long.

Add to that the multitude of possible combinations of styles, advances in training techniques/regimens, dietary improvements, more money attracting more natural athletes rather than to other sports, more $ at stake for those already involved, and other factors, and it's easy to see how mma can and will refine its self rapidly from here on out.

The Gym network to feed fighters into the sport is growing rapidly, especially as retired fighters can use their acquired skills/experience to open gyms, as can active fighters. Kids are coming out of high school now, who have known mma, most of their lives. That's a relatively new phenomenon for modern mma.

We're still watching early pioneers fight, so it's safe to assume the sport hasn't fully matured. Not even begun to, really. As a combat sport fan, this is a great time to be alive.

Thank you so much for your wonderful reply. Extremely well written. A delight to read.