Diaz fallacy of logic re: Pride rules

Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

Exactly, plus soccer stomps,and 10 minute first rounds I think GSP is way more effective under Pride rules in general.

Creating knees to a downed opponent would have created more space leading to a scramble.

GSP rode out another decision victory. If knees were allowed he MAY have finished Diaz or LOST top position in a scramble.

Diaz is DEADLY in a scramble and would have made the fight more interesting Phone Post

This fight had a lots of scrambles which is why I enjoyed it, also GSP got off a good knee body shot, I would assume he could have easily done it to Nicks head.

shmuckothemighty - Exactly, plus soccer stomps,and 10 minute first rounds I think GSP is way more effective under Pride rules in general.

GSP would have been yellow carded more due to stalling.

Under pride rules BJ would have won the first fight. Phone Post

2buff - 
shmuckothemighty - Exactly, plus soccer stomps,and 10 minute first rounds I think GSP is way more effective under Pride rules in general.

GSP would have been yellow carded more due to stalling.

Under pride rules BJ would have won the first fight. Phone Post


There was no stalling in either fight under Pride Rules.

We all know the issue with take down scoring. This has been discussed endlessly.

He has a point.

IMHO, it hasnt been changed because TPTB feel that fighters have the ability to stop the take down.

So which is it. Is it easier to take someone down or easier to sprawl?

GSP woulda turned Nicks face into mashed potatoes in the first two rounds with the total control on the ground if Pride rules.

shmuckothemighty -
2buff - 
shmuckothemighty - Exactly, plus soccer stomps,and 10 minute first rounds I think GSP is way more effective under Pride rules in general.

GSP would have been yellow carded more due to stalling.

Under pride rules BJ would have won the first fight. Phone Post


There was no stalling in either fight under Pride Rules.

You didn't watch the bj fight Phone Post

FreightTrain - We all know the issue with take down scoring. This has been discussed endlessly.

He has a point.

IMHO, it hasnt been changed because TPTB feel that fighters have the ability to stop the take down.

So which is it. Is it easier to take someone down or easier to sprawl?

Gravity always wins Phone Post

Yes I did - both, that's not stalling not even close to stalling.

I see it differently.....

BJJ guys love to say wrestlers "smother" them or "hold them down".... But in truth the guy on bottom is holding MORE then the guy on top. The guy on bottom is usually the one slowing down the pace on the ground, not the guy on top.

Last night was a great example. Nick wasn't going for subs, he was "attacking" from bottom. He was trying to survive, not "fighting" on the ground.

What's the top guy suppose to do? Let him get up? Let him sweep him? It's laughable.

The truth is, BJJ guys are the one who don't create space when on top. Not wrestlers. (generally speaking)

The "wrestlers hold me down" thing is a myth in MMA, IMO

shmuckothemighty - Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

His point was that pride rules created more exciting fights. Can't really argue that. pride fights as a whole were muchore action packed than UFC. IMO. Phone Post

Samoa - 
shmuckothemighty - Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

His point was that pride rules created more exciting fights. Can't really argue that. pride fights as a whole were muchore action packed than UFC. IMO. Phone Post


.....yeahhhh sort of I got that his main points was no elbows would nullify wrestlers advantage.

My point is 10 minute rounds with head stomps and knees to the head actually favors wrestlers.

I.E Mark Coleman

Samoa - 
shmuckothemighty - Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

His point was that pride rules created more exciting fights. Can't really argue that. pride fights as a whole were muchore action packed than UFC. IMO. Phone Post


Disagree tbh

I think GSP may have got away with fighting pretty much the same way in Pride

2buff - 

Creating knees to a downed opponent would have created more space leading to a scramble.

GSP rode out another decision victory. If knees were allowed he MAY have finished Diaz or LOST top position in a scramble.

Diaz is DEADLY in a scramble and would have made the fight more interesting Phone Post



Knees on the ground are so brutal. Fast forward to the 6:00 mark

Samoa - 
shmuckothemighty - Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

His point was that pride rules created more exciting fights. Can't really argue that. pride fights as a whole were muchore action packed than UFC. IMO. Phone Post


I think you are cherry picking. There were a quite a few boring PRIDE fights. And a lot of PRIDE fights were exciting due to matchmaking, short notice fights (hard to gameplan) etc, so it's pretty hard to just make blanket statements like that.

Doctor Snuggles -
Samoa - 
shmuckothemighty - Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

His point was that pride rules created more exciting fights. Can't really argue that. pride fights as a whole were muchore action packed than UFC. IMO. Phone Post


I think you are cherry picking. There were a quite a few boring PRIDE fights. And a lot of PRIDE fights were exciting due to matchmaking, short notice fights (hard to gameplan) etc, so it's pretty hard to just make blanket statements like that.

Think what you want. I believe that was the spirit of nick's point about the rules and as a whole I believe Pride had more exciting fights. Those are my opinions. If you disagree, I'm ok with that. Phone Post

Mufasatheking -
Samoa - 
shmuckothemighty - Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

His point was that pride rules created more exciting fights. Can't really argue that. pride fights as a whole were muchore action packed than UFC. IMO. Phone Post


Disagree tbh

I think GSP may have got away with fighting pretty much the same way in Pride

GSP would have had tons of standups and probably yellow cards if he fought in Pride the way he fights now. Phone Post

shmuckothemighty - 
Samoa - 
shmuckothemighty - Yes no elbows means people have to create more space, but Pride also had knees to the head of downed opponents which would greatly favor GSP and other dominant wrestlers.

His point was that pride rules created more exciting fights. Can't really argue that. pride fights as a whole were muchore action packed than UFC. IMO. Phone Post


.....yeahhhh sort of I got that his main points was no elbows would nullify wrestlers advantage.

My point is 10 minute rounds with head stomps and knees to the head actually favors wrestlers.

I.E Mark Coleman


Mark had a good run in the tournament, but for the most part did not do anything other than that.  There are a few examples (Mark v Goes and Vov, to your point, are great examples) of knees to the head ending fights, but I can't think of any off the top of my coconut where a wrestler used head stomps as a style of attack consistently.



Again, reading through the "bitches", "motherfuckers", "ya knows", and "uhhhhhhs" I believe that Nick's point is made that Pride's environment and rules made it impossible for a fighter to adopt GSP's style and be successful, especially to the degree that he has been (most dominant champion ever?).



Let me be clear, Nick wasn't a top fighter in Pride for the most part.  I think he is trying to stay relevant and get another pay day.  Of course he is going to rail against rules that don't favor him.  Thats the way he is.  I don't disagree with him that Pride rules made for more exciting fights though.