222358 Bullies, 4883 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 11 to 20 of 35
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 12 34 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Tacitus is offline
    Tacitus's Avatar

    Lightweight

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    165

    Posted On:
    12/02/2005 11:01pm

    supporting member
     Style: Crazy Monkey, BJJ, MT

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I think it's also the fact that learning the skill set involved in GnP takes a lot less time to learn than learning advanced submission tactics. Therefore, one can become a 'master' of the GnP in a lot less time than you can in BJJ. I think for this reason, a lot of the newer guys are more confidant with ground and pounding someone, rather than going for the sub. As well, someone well learned in subs, may be beaten by the GnPer, because it's just an easier thing to master.
  2. Darkpaladin is offline
    Darkpaladin's Avatar

    The r34l Drunken Jiu Jitsu

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    1,193

    Posted On:
    12/02/2005 11:12pm

    supporting member
     Style: _razilian _iu _itsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    That's the reason it's mixed martial arts. Grappling isnt' just grappling, standup isn't just standup. That's what makes it good.
  3. bwerb is offline

    Canuckistanian Refugee

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Soviet Canuckistan
    Posts
    353

    Posted On:
    12/02/2005 11:37pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, JKD Concepts, Kali

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    But...what I'm saying is...the rule change to "stand-up" fighters is in effect, negating the game plan and technique of a dedicated BJJ player. The rules are now taking what was effective in winning and putting a handicap on it, not because it wasn't an effective and winning tactic but simply because the great unwashed didn't understand what was going on.

    Yes GNP is effective, yes it is great self defense but...is it really the "ultimate" or does it appear to be the most effective "style" of MMA because of the rule changes?
    The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.
    ~F. Scott Fitzgerald

    Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, smashing things up is sometimes very pleasant.
    ~Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  4. Phoenix is offline
    Phoenix's Avatar

    Stand and Deliver!

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,677

    Posted On:
    12/02/2005 11:51pm

    supporting member
     Style: JKD Concepts, Kyokushin

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I think the only real problem people have with GnP is that it doesn't look pretty. But looking pretty ain't what a real fight's all about.
    "Onward we stagger, and if the tanks come, may God help the tanks." - Col. William O. Darby
  5. bwerb is offline

    Canuckistanian Refugee

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Soviet Canuckistan
    Posts
    353

    Posted On:
    12/02/2005 11:59pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, JKD Concepts, Kali

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Phoenix, it is "entertaining" but since they stand the fighters back up aren't they in effect negating and changing what is more "realistic" once they are on the ground? I don't see bystanders standing guys back-up if they aren't being "active" enough.

    Since the rules now state that you have to be "active" on the ground, the GNP seems to be the most effective technique. But if you were allowed to tie-up and do the old "position before submission" as long as it can take and as "unexciting" as it can be for onlookers, aren't you in effect making the "fight" quite unrealistic?
    The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.
    ~F. Scott Fitzgerald

    Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, smashing things up is sometimes very pleasant.
    ~Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  6. bwerb is offline

    Canuckistanian Refugee

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Soviet Canuckistan
    Posts
    353

    Posted On:
    12/03/2005 12:25am

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, JKD Concepts, Kali

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I totally agree that it's common sense but...let the fighters fight. If they hit the ground and it isn't "thrilling"...let it play out. It's a great deal more realistic than allowing a ref to step in and let everyone regroup. That's all I'm saying.

    Obviously in the ring/octagon/cage, there are rules, it's a sport after all, I'm just questioning making rules for fighting based upon what is more interesting to watch vs. rules which protect the participants. I see the MMA progressing towards the former instead of simply enforcing the latter.
    The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.
    ~F. Scott Fitzgerald

    Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, smashing things up is sometimes very pleasant.
    ~Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  7. Tacitus is offline
    Tacitus's Avatar

    Lightweight

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    165

    Posted On:
    12/03/2005 12:36am

    supporting member
     Style: Crazy Monkey, BJJ, MT

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I agree the 'standup' rule really takes away alot from BJJ's strategy and effectiveness in the UFC. But I don't really see how that rule in particular brings about the dominance of ground n' pound? You seem to be linking the two together, but I don't see it. I think even if the standup rule wasn't there, ground and pound would be used just as much.
  8. bwerb is offline

    Canuckistanian Refugee

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Soviet Canuckistan
    Posts
    353

    Posted On:
    12/03/2005 12:55am

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, JKD Concepts, Kali

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Yeah, I agree that I'm linking a couple of slightly different thing together...they are more or less two topics...but hey it's a discussion board. Anyhow, what I'm asking is more or less...are the current rules of the UFC making fights less "real". Is GNP the most realistic and best possible "technique" to win in the UFC/MMA...if it is...then should we toss everything else aside if we are trying to be realistic or...alternately, do the various "arts/styles" still have some credibility above and beyond what seems to be the current tactic of choice to win?
    The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.
    ~F. Scott Fitzgerald

    Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, smashing things up is sometimes very pleasant.
    ~Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  9. Tacitus is offline
    Tacitus's Avatar

    Lightweight

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    165

    Posted On:
    12/03/2005 1:13am

    supporting member
     Style: Crazy Monkey, BJJ, MT

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Even though I think the early UFC's showed flaws in most ma's, I still think that it's sport fighting. Not that this takes away from MMA's effectivness. But, from the begining someone's grappling strategy is going to be diffirent in the ring than on the pavement. Just like a grapplers strategy is diffirent in a grappling event than a MMA event. I think we can judge a method of combat by it's abilty to adapt and be effective in multiple scenerios of differing rules, i.e tkd functions fine in a standup environment, but once it's allowed to go to the ground, it is ineffective. I think if a BJJ player is involved in the UFC and he has the ability to win the fight via GnP and dosn't because it dosn't confirm to what BJJ 'is', then that person is suffering from the exact same problem that TMA's suffer from. In a UFC environment, if that person wants to win, they have to adapt.
  10. lifetime is offline

    Perpetually Punchdrunk

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,118

    Posted On:
    12/03/2005 8:53am


     Style: TKD, MT

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I do like Pride rules where they restart fighters in the same position they were in. Personally I think it's great that referees can come in and restart the fight if nothing's happening. I saw a few early Prides with the Gracies, and those matches were just.. 40 minutes long with two men laying on top of each other doing NOTHING for the entire fight. They weren't working, weren't fighting for grips or position. Just laying there. It's terrible.
    Rad ki was made up by adolescents. I do not know who created trad ki but it was not made by adolescents. your an ass dude, Im not being a little bitch you are, your past the level of a bitch. Your beyond Bitch! If im easting my time with ki and psi, then your wasting time to prove frauds, and all **** like that! -theoutsider

    Kick boxing is ok, but don't expect do beat a man like Rickson Gracie with that. You need a real martial art. You need Xing Yi Quan. -Emptyflower

    The splits, how ever, have a few martial uses. Doing the splits for me, can put my fists in testical strike range.

    dont ignore the Art for the Martial or else your just kick boxing

    Yes i am serious, there are kicks that can block punches. we have them in Moo duk kwan.
    I want to learn how to use them in case my arm gets broken in a fight.
    what would you have me do? if my arm gets broke, not block punches? -sempi-stone
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 12 34 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.