Posted On:5/24/2009 2:32pm
Style: Pekiti, ARMA, other stuff
That would be good if we're trying to measure just "how good is this guy at defending". A lot of what Machida and Fedor do is put you in a position where you can't attack them, rather than dodging punches. Machida and Fedor both tend to lower their opponents offensive output.
I am a living legend!
Posted On:5/24/2009 2:53pm
Style: Tatsumaki Senpuu Kyaku
Yep. Still stupid.
Posted On:5/24/2009 3:01pm
Style: BJJ, wrestling
I thought this thread was going to be about the UFC's inability to sign Fedor.
Posted On:5/24/2009 3:57pm
I think Kintanon is right about using a percentage of successful strikes. That would be more useful, especially if we could compare those percentages against common opponents -- which we can't in the case of Fedor and Machida. But as selfcritical wrote, this would not take into account strikes that are not attempted because a fighter has positioned him or herself advantageously.
Who's geeky enough to actually do these counts for some matches? I am, but I don't have easy access to a whole lot of complete match videos.
Posted On:5/24/2009 4:03pm
Style: Chinese Boxing
Originally Posted by Sirc
Yep. Still stupid.
It's okay. Seriously. We don't think you're that stupid.:XXhesitan
Posted On:5/24/2009 9:15pm
It's true. If Machida and Fedor were to ever fight, their corners would be in different states.
Posted On:5/24/2009 9:40pm
Originally Posted by Kintanon
Wouldn't a better ratio be opponentrs strikes thrown vs opponents strikes landed?
As in *FOOMFOOMFOOM*?
Also, it is interesting to see how Silva/Machida/Fedor accomplish a good offense with well-developed defensive skills and have three distinct approaches.
Many things we do naturally become difficult only when we try to make them intellectual subjects. It is possible to know so much about a subject that you become totally ignorant.
-Mentat Text Two (dicto)
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info