Takedowns - Ground Strikes = ?
We've now posted the stats for the fight between Rashad Evans and Thiago Silva and there's something peculiar about the numbers. Despite landing eight takedowns throughout the match, Evans managed to land only three strikes on the ground. It is exceedingly rare to see an instance where a fighter lands more takedowns than ground strikes. In fact, Evans now holds the record for least strikes landed by a fighter with five or more takedowns landed. Previously, there had been only one such instance in modern UFC history -- Fabricio Camoes did it at UFC 106, landing five takedowns but only four strikes. We've now seen twice in two months something that had never happened before in the preceding nine years. What an age we live in!
This, of course, begs the question represented by the equation in the title: In the absence of any striking (or submission attempts, for that matter) once on the ground, are takedowns really an effective offensive technique?
posted by FightMetric @ 2:41 AM
6 Comments
6 Comments:
http://begthequestion.info/
Interesting information, but you make me crazy.
My understanding of the universal rules is that positional control is relevant, but secondary to strikes and submissions.
I have always thought that positional control should not be considered effective offense as it is only a means to an end. However takedowns should be considered effective offense ONLY if they include a slam, and in that event that they do, the slam should be evaluated as an equivalent strike.
Takedowns with strikes are obviously more effective but
takedowns without strikes can be effective in testing a persons cardio. GSP vs. Sera, GSP vs Penn, etc. In short, the strategy of keeping an opponent off balance by constantly changing levels, and wearing a fighter down, but forcing them to have to fight to get back to their feet, is extremely effective.
sry to bother you guys, i agree with a draw, because it felt like that, yet i can not figure out, how you came up to that draw 29 to 29.
care to explain? which round how scored?
29 to 29 makes no sense, shouldnt it be 28 to 28???
29 means you get two rounds 10 and 1 round 9.
if both get two rounds 10, means one round both got 10 points, is that even possible?
not wanna flame, just wanna understand!
@anonymous it's a 10 point must system, which means at least one fighter HAS to be given 10 points.
Rashad wins the first round 10-9
The second round, they have it as a draw which would be 10-10. It's now 20-19 Rashad.
The final round, they give to Thiago 10-9. The final score would be 29-29.
I agree with most of what Eric Kamander said except I think position, control and takedowns should be considered as effective offense, just not by much. It should be some of the lowest scoring forms of offense, but it should score nonetheless.
Here's how I think the scoring system should be from highest to lowest scoring:
Knockdowns > HiPer Strikes (Head) > HiPer Strikes (Body) > Takedown (Slam) > HiPer Strikes (Legs) > Submission Attempt (close submission attempts that make you think "Why isn't he tapping?!") > LoPer Strikes (Head) > LoPer Strikes (Body) > LoPer Strikes (Legs) > Submission Attempts (where the opponent gets out before he's in any serious danger) > Takedown (No Slam) > Passes > Control (like Couture on Vera) > Aggression (like Quarry on Starnes)
thx for the answer. i was obviously one of the "noobs" who didnt know 10:10 is possible. i always read that there has to be a winner and a loser. now i searched about the ten point system and its possible to give 10:10. good to know. :D
cheers.
Post a Comment
<< Home