^^ I would argue if you had 50% wrestling and 50% BJJ then 0% striking, most fights would look like masvidal vs askren.
If you mean the person would have enough striking to ‘get by’ then u need to add a weight for striking ability.
I would say a striking ability to get by would be at least 25% of your game. Because if a dude who is like GSP who is maybe half striker half wrestler, he’s gonna jab your head in all day long, as we have seen on many occasions.
Wrestlers are going to claim wrestlers, Jiu Jitsu guys are going to claim Jiu Jitsu, and strikers will claim strikers. It's kind of pathetic really, it's all just ego stroking.
The fact of the matter is, all of it matters. There's no one clearly defined superior art. Historically we've seen a lot of wrestlers enter into MMA because this was the next logical step for their careers. Now we're seeing more strikers enter in like Adesanya who are beating the brakes off of everyone.
Contrary to popular belief, it's not the resume or accumen that matters so much as the athleticism inherent required for the sport they come from.
So in sum, I'd say combat sports athleticism is the most important aspect. You could by an Olympic wrestler like Askren, but that doesn't count for shit at the highest levels of MMA. Your success is directly correlated with your coordination and athletic aptitude.
Look at Whittaker for example, and the gains he's made technically over the course of his career. He qualified for the commonwealth games, he never had a wrestling background. It's due to his athleticism and aptitude to learn new techniques. If you lack either, you won't succeed (ie Ben Askren)
ChiefMac -^^ I would argue if you had 50% wrestling and 50% BJJ then 0% striking, most fights would look like masvidal vs askren.
If you mean the person would have enough striking to ‘get by’ then u need to add a weight for striking ability.
I would say a striking ability to get by would be at least 25% of your game. Because if a dude who is like GSP who is maybe half striker half wrestler, he’s gonna jab your head in all day long, as we have seen on many occasions.
I mean you could arvue that but you would be entirely wrong.
I think wrestling is the most important skill set and endurance is the most important physical attribute.
Calhoon -Fights are all about control. Fights are even fought for control meaning either you and another man are at odds and each of you are going to beat the other man into a compromise and one of you will have control or you are both fighting to control a property such as a UFC title.
It's all about control. So if it's all about control why not pick the art that gives you the most control? A boxer has little control during a fight over his opponent. He is hoping that the opponent is willing to be in range for him to be attacked. If the opponent either backs up or steps forward then he is out of range and there is little the boxer can do to control his opponent and put him in range. A kickboxer is not much better. At first glance the correct answer would seem to be that a wrestler has the most control because he has skills that allow him to takedown opponents and be on top which is the most controlling position in a fight but the key word there is position. The truth is a wrestler who has no bjj experience might be able to control the position but the buy guy will end up controlling the fight with a fight ending submission and the wrestler will be willing to compromise so the buy guy will let him go.
The answer lies in a mix of wrestling and bjj while striking on the feet is at best minimally needed unless you are fighting in mma with time limits and judges that need to be impressed in case the fight goes to a decision.
100% wrestling
100% bjj
If you want to be a great fighter develop both of those to the best of your ability. And throw in enough striking skills to hold your own and impress the judges, or set up easier takedowns. But the real control and the skill that counts in becoming the best is the grappling.
You should try sparring a decent striker, not even someone on the amateur circuit. Your opinion will change overnight. I guarantee you.
Uhtred Ragnarson -Wrestlers are going to claim wrestlers, Jiu Jitsu guys are going to claim Jiu Jitsu, and strikers will claim strikers. It's kind of pathetic really, it's all just ego stroking.
The fact of the matter is, all of it matters. There's no one clearly defined superior art. Historically we've seen a lot of wrestlers enter into MMA because this was the next logical step for their careers. Now we're seeing more strikers enter in like Adesanya who are beating the brakes off of everyone.
Contrary to popular belief, it's not the resume or accumen that matters so much as the athleticism inherent required for the sport they come from.
So in sum, I'd say combat sports athleticism is the most important aspect. You could by an Olympic wrestler like Askren, but that doesn't count for shit at the highest levels of MMA. Your success is directly correlated with your coordination and athletic aptitude.
Look at Whittaker for example, and the gains he's made technically over the course of his career. He qualified for the commonwealth games, he never had a wrestling background. It's due to his athleticism and aptitude to learn new techniques. If you lack either, you won't succeed (ie Ben Askren)
Following up on the next page...
my frat version: Athleticism dictates success. Anyone who disagrees is just being foolish.
The most important is "heart" and "toughness".
A trainer in Thailand Said This, and its true!
"Most important is the heart , kick can be good, punch can be good but what about second round , third round. If you dont have heart you Will Never get any where in fighting"
Uhtred Ragnarson -Calhoon -Fights are all about control. Fights are even fought for control meaning either you and another man are at odds and each of you are going to beat the other man into a compromise and one of you will have control or you are both fighting to control a property such as a UFC title.
It's all about control. So if it's all about control why not pick the art that gives you the most control? A boxer has little control during a fight over his opponent. He is hoping that the opponent is willing to be in range for him to be attacked. If the opponent either backs up or steps forward then he is out of range and there is little the boxer can do to control his opponent and put him in range. A kickboxer is not much better. At first glance the correct answer would seem to be that a wrestler has the most control because he has skills that allow him to takedown opponents and be on top which is the most controlling position in a fight but the key word there is position. The truth is a wrestler who has no bjj experience might be able to control the position but the buy guy will end up controlling the fight with a fight ending submission and the wrestler will be willing to compromise so the buy guy will let him go.
The answer lies in a mix of wrestling and bjj while striking on the feet is at best minimally needed unless you are fighting in mma with time limits and judges that need to be impressed in case the fight goes to a decision.
100% wrestling
100% bjj
If you want to be a great fighter develop both of those to the best of your ability. And throw in enough striking skills to hold your own and impress the judges, or set up easier takedowns. But the real control and the skill that counts in becoming the best is the grappling.
You should try sparring a decent striker, not even someone on the amateur circuit. Your opinion will change overnight. I guarantee you.
I have and it wouldn't.
Calhoon -ChiefMac -^^ I would argue if you had 50% wrestling and 50% BJJ then 0% striking, most fights would look like masvidal vs askren.
If you mean the person would have enough striking to ‘get by’ then u need to add a weight for striking ability.
I would say a striking ability to get by would be at least 25% of your game. Because if a dude who is like GSP who is maybe half striker half wrestler, he’s gonna jab your head in all day long, as we have seen on many occasions.
I mean you could arvue that but you would be entirely wrong.
U think if someone had zero striking ability - literally retarded at striking, that they would beat the vast majority of professional fighters using only their wrestling and BJJ credentials?
ChiefMac -Calhoon -ChiefMac -^^ I would argue if you had 50% wrestling and 50% BJJ then 0% striking, most fights would look like masvidal vs askren.
If you mean the person would have enough striking to ‘get by’ then u need to add a weight for striking ability.
I would say a striking ability to get by would be at least 25% of your game. Because if a dude who is like GSP who is maybe half striker half wrestler, he’s gonna jab your head in all day long, as we have seen on many occasions.
I mean you could arvue that but you would be entirely wrong.
U think if someone had zero striking ability - literally retarded at striking, that they would beat the vast majority of professional fighters using only their wrestling and BJJ credentials?
He’s just trolling. Ignore it.
Calhoon -Uhtred Ragnarson -Calhoon -Fights are all about control. Fights are even fought for control meaning either you and another man are at odds and each of you are going to beat the other man into a compromise and one of you will have control or you are both fighting to control a property such as a UFC title.
It's all about control. So if it's all about control why not pick the art that gives you the most control? A boxer has little control during a fight over his opponent. He is hoping that the opponent is willing to be in range for him to be attacked. If the opponent either backs up or steps forward then he is out of range and there is little the boxer can do to control his opponent and put him in range. A kickboxer is not much better. At first glance the correct answer would seem to be that a wrestler has the most control because he has skills that allow him to takedown opponents and be on top which is the most controlling position in a fight but the key word there is position. The truth is a wrestler who has no bjj experience might be able to control the position but the buy guy will end up controlling the fight with a fight ending submission and the wrestler will be willing to compromise so the buy guy will let him go.
The answer lies in a mix of wrestling and bjj while striking on the feet is at best minimally needed unless you are fighting in mma with time limits and judges that need to be impressed in case the fight goes to a decision.
100% wrestling
100% bjj
If you want to be a great fighter develop both of those to the best of your ability. And throw in enough striking skills to hold your own and impress the judges, or set up easier takedowns. But the real control and the skill that counts in becoming the best is the grappling.
You should try sparring a decent striker, not even someone on the amateur circuit. Your opinion will change overnight. I guarantee you.
I have and it wouldn't.
Sure you have...
Theres no point in continuing this conversation. You're arguing against fact and basic MMA meta game development, take care.
ChiefMac -Calhoon -ChiefMac -^^ I would argue if you had 50% wrestling and 50% BJJ then 0% striking, most fights would look like masvidal vs askren.
If you mean the person would have enough striking to ‘get by’ then u need to add a weight for striking ability.
I would say a striking ability to get by would be at least 25% of your game. Because if a dude who is like GSP who is maybe half striker half wrestler, he’s gonna jab your head in all day long, as we have seen on many occasions.
I mean you could arvue that but you would be entirely wrong.
U think if someone had zero striking ability - literally retarded at striking, that they would beat the vast majority of professional fighters using only their wrestling and BJJ credentials?
Absolutely. So long as they are the better wrestler and grappler the striking defense is easy to figure out.
Uhtred Ragnarson -ChiefMac -Calhoon -ChiefMac -^^ I would argue if you had 50% wrestling and 50% BJJ then 0% striking, most fights would look like masvidal vs askren.
If you mean the person would have enough striking to ‘get by’ then u need to add a weight for striking ability.
I would say a striking ability to get by would be at least 25% of your game. Because if a dude who is like GSP who is maybe half striker half wrestler, he’s gonna jab your head in all day long, as we have seen on many occasions.
I mean you could arvue that but you would be entirely wrong.
U think if someone had zero striking ability - literally retarded at striking, that they would beat the vast majority of professional fighters using only their wrestling and BJJ credentials?
He’s just trolling. Ignore it.
While there is some truth to the fact that I am trolling a bit, at the same time what I say is true. Hand to hand combat is made up of positional control and attacks. Strikers have very little positional control, they have to gain positional advantage through footwork and faints. Someone who doesn’t want to play that game though can easily just use distance management to never allow a striker to attack. This leaves the striker with a puncher chance to land a fight ending shot on a grappled way in. A knee like Jorge landed is long odds at best. Truth is clinching is easy. Even hurt strikers can clinch to regain their composure. Bottom line is positional control sucks for strikers and that is a fact. And attacks are hard to come by if you are never in position.
Grappled on the other hand dominate positions with physical control and the inferior grappled have to have real skills to escape. While they are being controlled and trying to escape they are also very vulnerable to attacks via ground and pound or of the submission variety.
While I am somewhat trolling this thread what I say is true and nothing I have said is anywhere near as trolling as what you said earlier when you used Ben Askren as an example of an unsuccessful mms fighter.
^ I don't disagree with your sentiment that wrestling may be the most important controlling aspect of fighting, I just have argument with your opinion that u don't need any striking ability at all to be a world champion. When you said that the striking defence would be easy enough to figure out - that in itself is a display of striking knowledge.
ChiefMac -^ I don't disagree with your sentiment that wrestling may be the most important controlling aspect of fighting, I just have argument with your opinion that u don't need any striking ability at all to be a world champion. When you said that the striking defence would be easy enough to figure out - that in itself is a display of striking knowledge.
There is a difference in knowledge and skill though.
Skilled striking takes years to become good at. Lots of repetitions of seeing jabs, crosses, hooks, and uppercut coming and acting appropriately, being able to create angles and throw strikes in broken rythem, It is a hard art to become skilled at. But having said all that the skill is almost useless when fighting an opponent who is not willing to trade strikes with you and even an unskilled striker can easily be too far away to hit or cover up, close the distance, and clinch. If that unskilled guy is a better wrestler and grappler then the striker is screwed once he has been clinched.
On the other hand though defending against a good grapplee takes skill. Years and years of skill because the inferior grappler is totally caught in an inferior position that he can not just walk out of.
Nearly zero striking skill is NEEDED to be a great mms fighter imo as long as you are a dominant wrestler and grappler. I fully believe that being a horrible striker that fights smart is better than being an average striker that is willing to trade. The horrible striker who is unwilling to trade will beat great strikers if his wrestling and grappling is on point.
Best tools for current ufc champs in my humble opinion.
Current ufc hw champ - best tool striking
current - lhw champ - best tool striking
current - 185 champ adesanya - striking , whittaker is good at striking to
170 champ - striking
155 champ wrestling khabib and 155 interim is striking(Tony)
145 champ striking
135 wrestling same as 125
125 wrestling same as 125
if you ask me striking is what makes most of em current Champions. Sure they are very good wrestlers too but compared to others in their division i would say that most current ufc Champions stand out in striking
Uhtred Ragnarson -Uhtred Ragnarson -Wrestlers are going to claim wrestlers, Jiu Jitsu guys are going to claim Jiu Jitsu, and strikers will claim strikers. It's kind of pathetic really, it's all just ego stroking.
The fact of the matter is, all of it matters. There's no one clearly defined superior art. Historically we've seen a lot of wrestlers enter into MMA because this was the next logical step for their careers. Now we're seeing more strikers enter in like Adesanya who are beating the brakes off of everyone.
Contrary to popular belief, it's not the resume or accumen that matters so much as the athleticism inherent required for the sport they come from.
So in sum, I'd say combat sports athleticism is the most important aspect. You could by an Olympic wrestler like Askren, but that doesn't count for shit at the highest levels of MMA. Your success is directly correlated with your coordination and athletic aptitude.
Look at Whittaker for example, and the gains he's made technically over the course of his career. He qualified for the commonwealth games, he never had a wrestling background. It's due to his athleticism and aptitude to learn new techniques. If you lack either, you won't succeed (ie Ben Askren)
Following up on the next page...
my frat version: Athleticism dictates success. Anyone who disagrees is just being foolish.
Both versions of your post are fantastic. People love arguing the "technique over athleticism" point because it's an ego thing as well. Technique can be learned by pretty much anyone, the athletic component is where people have limited control, and people hate reminders that they may just be fundamentally genetically inferior to another. GSP's wrestling is an example
Sabaki -Best tools for current ufc champs in my humble opinion.
Current ufc hw champ - best tool striking
current - lhw champ - best tool striking
current - 185 champ adesanya - striking , whittaker is good at striking to
170 champ - striking
155 champ wrestling khabib and 155 interim is striking(Tony)
145 champ striking
135 wrestling same as 125
125 wrestling same as 125
if you ask me striking is what makes most of em current Champions. Sure they are very good wrestlers too but compared to others in their division i would say that most current ufc Champions stand out in striking
A strong case could be made that for Cejudo, his best tool in his rise since the 1st DJ loss has been his striking too though. Going back to Uthred's point, the dude is just an athlete. He could've started in Ameridote and he'd probably still be close to where he is now.
Also, with regard to wrestling, being a good MMA wrestler is definitely a different skillset than just a guy with a good sport wrestling pedigree. Between being barefoot, the striking, the range at which engagement usually occurs due to striking, the gloves, and the cage, it's becoming a thing of its own. It's no different than how No-gi and Gi jiu-jitsu are starting to evolve so much that you really have to specialize to be able to stay at the top of the game.
On a final note, you really just need to learn the side-step.