AuzzieOsbourne - and you did btw.
lols jk calm down
LOL. I like the cut of your jib lad!
LOL. I like the cut of your jib lad!
Next time you go training ask them what a underhook on the ground is.
Brock and GSP have used it.
Or if you think I'm wrong, just make a thread asking what a underhook on the ground is and what it is used for.
Simple.
Why does Overeem need an underhook to HOLD DOWN Rogers when so many other fighters just hold people down normally?
And what part of an underhook is useful for "holding someone down"?
EDIT: Just to clarify if you had an 'underhook' type position in top position on the ground you would be pulling the opponent into yourself (ie. chest to chest) thus your weight would be the thing "holding them down" NOT the underhook (since chest on chest your weight would still be holding them down even without an 'underhook'.
Underhooks are used for controlling an opponent and pulling them into yourself.
You mustn't understand the idea of 'underhooking' if you think it can be used to "hold someone down".
And why are you giving Overeem more credit for "not even needing an underhook" to "hold down Rogers"?
Were you just trying to sound clever?
WALES1 - Or if you think I'm wrong, just make a thread asking what a underhook on the ground is and what it is used for.
Simple.
If Overeem had used an 'underhook' on Rogers he would have pulled himself closer to Rogers thus preventing himself from raining blows onto Rogers. What would be the point in that?
You mustn't understand the purpose of 'underhooking' and why they would be used.
Why would Overeem want to tie up his arms which he was using to pound Rogers?
Sidecontrol.
When Overeem has Rogers in sidecontrol he does'nt even need to control Roger's body with an underhook. How do you control a person in sidecontrol?
He controls him by reacting faster than Rogers movements to unbalance him and keeping his weight down on Rogers. Combine that with use of his base to retain his stability.
He doesn't use an 'underhook' because he doesn't need to. It would be counter productive to his goal of hitting Rogers.
[sarcasm]Clearly Overeem and me (who both thought 'underhooking' was not a good option there) are wrong and you a right with your 'training'. [/sarcasm]
Maybe you aren't very good if you think you have to use an 'underhook' in that situation.
I'd wager Overeem has a better idea than you.
It's not a fault of Overeem.
It's a fault of Rogers.
Rogers is so poor on the ground that Reem doesn't need the underhook.
WALES1 - LOL!
I guess you missed Overeem not even needing a underhook to hold Rogers down.....
Brock takes down both Duffee and Rogers and smashes them, they are not going to be able to spring back to their feet like a fucking cat, like Cain was able to do.
I guess you missed Overeem NOT even needing a underhook to hold Rogers down.
You really are a sad little cunt.
I said Reem did not need to use a underhook in the context that Roger's ground game was so poor.
Fucking retard.
At no point in that fight would an 'underhook' be of advantage to the guy on top (Overeem).
So why give him credit for doing it "without an underhook".
Doing it "without an underhook" was the proper way (since an underhook would've impeded Overeem). It took no additional skill to do it "without an underhook". If he had been able to achieve his objective more effectively with an underhook he would've done it.
WALES1 -WALES1 - LOL!
I guess you missed Overeem not even needing a underhook to hold Rogers down.....
Brock takes down both Duffee and Rogers and smashes them, they are not going to be able to spring back to their feet like a fucking cat, like Cain was able to do.
I guess you missed Overeem NOT even needing a underhook to hold Rogers down.
I guess with all your super 'training' you missed the bit where it would be of NO ADVANTAGE to Overeem to get an underhook from the top position even if he wanted to.
That's not in debate fucktard.
First off, you didn't even know what a underhook on the ground is.
Then you didn't understand that is was due to Roger's ground game being poor that Reem didn't need a underhook.
WALES1 - You really are a sad little cunt.
I said Reem did not need to use a underhook in the context that Roger's ground game was so poor.
Fucking retard.
And here we go with the insults.
I'm a "sad little cunt" but you think a man called "Eric" follows you around various forums correcting your dipshit statements.
No mate. Just because 2 different people think you are a full of shit bellend doesn't mean that they must be the same bloke. It's probably more that you are a shit talking bellend.
Do you still think Brock has "the best streak in MMA of all time"?
Do you still think after he beats Cain and JDS he will be the GOAT? oh wait.....
Hahahaha
Yeah nice one crackhead.
WALES1 - That's not in debate fucktard.
First off, you didn't even know what a underhook on the ground is.
Then you didn't understand that is was due to Roger's ground game being poor that Reem didn't need a underhook.
So who was he meant to use the underhook on in that postion to prove he "didn't even need" it as I could swear he was fighting Rogers at the time of the Rogers fight.
"Underhook" is a wrestling term used in the clinch. If people in MMA have used that term to refer to a similar position on the floor then fine.
It STILL wouldn't have been any advantage to Overeem to use it.
LOL. How many snide little remarks did you make before I called you a fucktard?
You didn't know what a underhook was! FACT!
You didn't understand that Reem didn't need it to use it due to Rogers poor ground game. FACT!
Jog on retard.
Ok it's wiki but I can't be arsed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underhook
Notice that bit where it's a "CLINCH HOLD"
WALES1 - You really are a sad little cunt.
I said Reem did not need to use a underhook in the context that Roger's ground game was so poor.
Fucking retard.
Didn't Rogers get up from under Fedor, but not from under Overeem?
It's been a while since I've seen the fight so that isn't me being a smartass by posing it as a question.
WALES1 - LOL. How many snide little remarks did you make before I called you a fucktard?
You didn't know what a underhook was! FACT!
You didn't understand that Reem didn't need it to use it due to Rogers poor ground game. FACT!
Jog on retard.
About as many as you?
You STILL don't know what an underhook is!
Why would Overeem use it? It was no advantage.
You obviously couldn't see this with your terrible analytical powers.
Same as you couldn't tell Brock wasn't the GOAT (EVERYBODY LOL'd @ you for that one)
Or that he wasn't on the "Best EVER streak in MMA history".
Yeah I'M a retard! LMFAO
rockwell -WALES1 - That's not in debate fucktard.
First off, you didn't even know what a underhook on the ground is.
Then you didn't understand that is was due to Roger's ground game being poor that Reem didn't need a underhook.
So who was he meant to use the underhook on in that postion to prove he "didn't even need" it as I could swear he was fighting Rogers at the time of the Rogers fight.
"Underhook" is a wrestling term used in the clinch. If people in MMA have used that term to refer to a similar position on the floor then fine.
It STILL wouldn't have been any advantage to Overeem to use it.
How fucking dense are you?
Reem did need to use the underhook against Rogers, cos Rogers has a poor ground game.
There would of been no advantage.
Against Fedor, Werdum or Josh - Reem would need a underhook or they would escape.