|
|
| Author |
Message |
ravenzoom
Green Belt
Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 384
Location: Quebec, Canada
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| I agree with those who say they liked more style vs. style of the early UFCs. I loved those matches, seeing two adversaries fighting completely different styles, that was cool to watch. Today's fighters look too much the same, there's no intrigue to it anymore for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nick_UKWC
Blue Belt
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 305
Location: UK
Styles: Wing Chun
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
In my opinion UFC fighters these days fight the 'UFC Style' which makes it a lot less interesting than it used to be! obviously to compete in this arena you have to cover all your bases, that makes sense.
I see it a bit like Formula 1 racing, everyone started out totally different, doing there own thing and over the years they have become more and more alike, until now all the cars are pretty much the same.
_________________
"...or maybe you are carrying a large vicious dog in your pocket." -Scottnshelly |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gary
White Belt
Joined: 02 Nov 2004
Posts: 11
Location: Oregon, U.S.A.-Earth
Styles: Chinese Kung Fu,Tai Chi,and Others
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You had to learn grappling in the UFC because the grapplers wrote the rules. They made illegal many strikes that would make it way easier to knock out the grapplers.No elbow strikes down,no striking the back of the head, etc. It would have been nice to see style vs. style while letting the strikers use most of their weapons, but then the grapplers would not have had such an advantage.
_________________
"Don't look back. Something might be gaining on you." - Satchel Paige. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tufrthanu
Brown Belt
Joined: 29 Aug 2003
Posts: 686
Location: Minnetonka, MN
Styles: American Tae Kwon Do, Sin Moo HKD, WHF HKD, Song Moo Kwan TKD
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's an interesting point. Does anyone know what the official rule set was that the Gracies first used for UFC?
_________________
Long Live the Fighters! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MASIsshinryu
Orange Belt
Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Posts: 133
Location: GA
Styles: Isshin ryu Karate, Kempo, Aikijujutsu, Shaolin Kung Fu
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
The original rules were: No eye gouging, no biting and no fish-hooking the mouth. I can understand these from fighter safety (and sanitary) reasons, however even these simple rules made the UFC already separated from realistic street fighting. I know of a couple of people who have broken attempts on the street to choke them by shifting position and "taking a bite out of crime."
Currently, the UFC has posted on the web the following set of "fouls:"
1) Butting with the head.
2) Eye gouging of any kind.
3) Biting.
4) Hair pulling.
5) Fish hooking.
6) Groin attacks of any kind.
7) Putting a finger into any orifice or into any cut or laceration on an opponent.
8 ) Small joint manipulation.
9) Striking to the spine or the back of the head.
10) Striking downward using the point of the elbow.
11) Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea.
12) Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh.
13) Grabbing the clavicle.
14) Kicking the head of a grounded opponent.
15) Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent.
16) Stomping a grounded opponent.
17) Kicking to the kidney with the heel.
18 ) Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck.
19) Throwing an opponent out of the ring or fenced area.
20) Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent.
21) Spitting at an opponent.
22) Engaging in an unsportsmanlike conduct that causes an injury to an opponent.
23) Holding the ropes or the fence.
24) Using abusive language in the ring or fenced area.
25) Attacking an opponent on or during the break.
26) Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee.
27) Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the period of unarmed combat.
28 ) Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee.
29) Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury.
30) Interference by the corner.
31) Throwing in the towel during competition.
Although the more technical fouls obviously have a place in competition, there are quite a few that clearly are designed to impede certain styles of fighting from being effective.
_________________
"Tomorrow's battle is won during today's practice."
M.A.S.
Last edited by MASIsshinryu on Sat Apr 16, 2005 8:24 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tufrthanu
Brown Belt
Joined: 29 Aug 2003
Posts: 686
Location: Minnetonka, MN
Styles: American Tae Kwon Do, Sin Moo HKD, WHF HKD, Song Moo Kwan TKD
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well I agree that "full contact anything (sorta) goes" type competitions do favor a grappler over a striker for some of the reasons above...safer to choke than punch to the throat for instance. I also think that alot of those rules involve a safety component...alot of them drastically increase the chances of lasting damage. But its a point nonetheless that alot of a strikers most effective blows are eliminated. And I think whether with the rules or without this applies. If you notice in no form of full contact striking are many of those techniques allowed...while their grappling equivalents are used frequently. But whether from design or not alot of them do lead to a safer fighting environment.
_________________
Long Live the Fighters! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gumbi
Blue Belt
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 346
Styles: Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gary wrote: |
| You had to learn grappling in the UFC because the grapplers wrote the rules. They made illegal many strikes that would make it way easier to knock out the grapplers.No elbow strikes down,no striking the back of the head, etc. It would have been nice to see style vs. style while letting the strikers use most of their weapons, but then the grapplers would not have had such an advantage. |
Gary, I've asked others on this board, and now I'll ask you:
Please do not give advice or misinformation on something you obviously know nothing about.
UFC rules were instilled by the Nevada State Athletic Commision, which is basically all boxing for those of you who were unaware.
As it stands, Mixed martial arts events heavily favor the striker. Once you start taking the rules away, the grapplers would start to gain much more of an advantage.
Elbow strikes are much more a grapplers weapon, NOT a strikers weapon. Fights would be much more brutal if a grappler could land elbows once he takes his opponent down, or better yet, when his opponent turns to his stomach from a mounted position to avoid strikes, elbows to the spine will be even more effective.
What you and many other "anti UFC" people need to realize is that elbows to the spine and the back of the head DO NOT STOP takedowns. The most effective defense to takedowns is a sprawl, like it or not.
You want proof? Watch Pride 2 where Mark Kerr (would class freestyle wrestler) fights Branco Cikitic. Branco used to beat ALL the fighters who are now the top of the food chain in current K-1 kickboxing, (Mirko Cro Cop to name one of them). Basically this guy was one of the top strikers in the world, and he attempted EXACTLY what you're thinking. Kerr would shoot in and grab his legs, and Branco would grab the ropes with one hand and throw elbows with his other. The effectiveness of these elbows? Practically nothing at all. Grabbing the ropes was illegal, so the first time the refs stopped and seperated the fighters to warn Branco, but he did the same exact thing when Kerr shot in again. Kerr got furious, picked him up and slammed him to the ground and started stomping the hell out of him while it took 3 refs to pry him off. If the best striker in the world cant make it work, think about that for a moment.
Besides elbows, headbutts are now also illegal, which is a nice way to bloody up someones face- once again a grapplers weapons.
Gloves allow strikers to punch as hard as they want without fear of breaking their hands, a common occurence in early days of MMA, and also takes away the sensitivity of grapplers hands when fighting.
Rounds and time limits allow strikers to start from the standing position much more often- A luxury that would not exist if you had no time limits or rounds.
Stalling on the ground leads to referee stoppage, so a fighter doesnt need to escape the ground phase of fighting in order to get back to his feet- he merely needs to hold on until the bored crowed starts to boo, and the ref restarts them on their feet.
Knees to the head were a very effective means to end a fight from the north south position (Dan Severn and Mark Coleman have used this often).
MASIsshinryu, you stated that:
" I know of a couple of people who have broken attempts on the street to choke them by shifting position and "taking a bite out of crime."
It is impossible to bite someone or be bitten when a choke hold is applied. You are also overestimating the importance of biting and eye gouging in a fight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MASIsshinryu
Orange Belt
Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Posts: 133
Location: GA
Styles: Isshin ryu Karate, Kempo, Aikijujutsu, Shaolin Kung Fu
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gumbi wrote: |
MASIsshinryu, you stated that:
" I know of a couple of people who have broken attempts on the street to choke them by shifting position and "taking a bite out of crime."
It is impossible to bite someone or be bitten when a choke hold is applied. You are also overestimating the importance of biting and eye gouging in a fight. |
In both cases, the bite was used as the arm came across the front of the intended victim. In both cases, flesh was torn (in one case away) by the bites. In one of the two, the attacker did attemt to persist at first, but ceased when the victim drove her keys into the open wound, and began to peel back the open wound.
Stating that elbows are "NOT a strikers weapon" suggest that you have not spent time in a good striking program. We have elbow strikes in almost EVERY kata in Isshinryu (just one example style), when bunkai is examined properly, and have spent a good deal of time working them in the dojo.
Obviously, placing such rules is essential for the safety of the competitors, and they limit pretty much any effective style of fighting, in some way. I enjoy watching UFC-type events for the pure sport of it, and take it for simply for that.
_________________
"Tomorrow's battle is won during today's practice."
M.A.S. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muaythaiboxer
Brown Belt
Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 683
Location: kansas
Styles: teakwondo judo muaythai boxing wresling kung-fu
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
im a bit confused why no head butts? why no heal to the kidneys? i can understand most of the rules but not all.
_________________
Fist visible Strike invisible |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mai tai
Orange Belt
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 135
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
head butts made it too much of a grapplers game.
wrestlers would take someone down, lay on top, grap arms with his arms and headbutt away |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
on the post.
