TUF Season 13: Lesnar vs Dos Santos Discussion Thread *Spoilers*

[wandshogun09]

Clay fought a great wrestling match against Pettis. Oh wait, it was supposed to be a MMA match. Where was the advancing position? The ground and pound? The submission attempts... well Pettis never stopped attacking with submissions the whole fight, and almost had it locked at the end of the second. Guida couldn't handle Pettis standing, so he took him down, held him there and Fitched the shit out of him. The only reason it didn't get stood up was due to some half hearted shoulder bumps from Clay that somehow count as tangible offense. Just because a guy is on top, doesn't automatically mean he is winning, he needs to be offensive from the top position. No different from the terrible Torres/Johnson decision from last weekend. Nothing resembling the mixture of martial arts from Guida, nothing resembling a fight in a match held by the Ultimate Fighting Championship.

 

You don't need to tell us that a guy being on top doesn't mean he's winning. We all know you can win a fight from the bottom (fuck Werdum ended Fedor's reign from there). And I agree I had Torres winning vs Mighty Mouse. Don't think that was a terrible decision either though if I'm honest.

 

The thing is just because it's MMA doesn't mean you have to use every discipline. If you're plan A is wrestling and the other guy can't handle it then why use a plan B. It's no different than a striker stuffing a BJJ guys takedowns and jabbing him for 3 rounds. You fight to your strengths and your opponents weaknesses.

 

As for the stand ups, like I said, clearly the ref felt enough was being done. Pettis was very active off his back and Clay was as active as he could be given the circumstances. What do you want Guida to do? Swing like a nutter from the guard and leave himself open for a triangle or armbar? Ask Chael Sonnen how that gameplan works out, he's done it his whole career. If he'd have fought Anderson like Clay fought Pettis he'd be the champ now. Might not have been as exciting but he'd have that belt on his mantlepiece while he's getting ready to go to court

 

And to be fair Pettis had his chance to finish Guida when he got his back at the end didn't he? And he couldn't get it done. I don't see Pettis whinging, he's got a positive attitude on it and realizes certain aspects of his game need working on.

[David]

Clay fought a great wrestling match against Pettis. Oh wait, it was supposed to be a MMA match.

Are you being serious?

 

Where was the advancing position? The ground and pound? The submission attempts... well Pettis never stopped attacking with submissions the whole fight, and almost had it locked at the end of the second.

First of all, you've just answered your own question there! Do you want the referee to stop the fight & stand them up when Pettis is well-known as a submission expert off his back? He's scored three wins from his last five via a submission from his back.

 

As for Guida, I'm not sure what fight you were watching. You've basically described Shamar Bailey's fight for me. He held down his opponent and did nothing. Guida was constantly trying to improve position, gaining half-guard & side-control positions only for Pettis to come back and manage to force him into full guard. It was riveting stuff to watch, a top class MMA wrestler playing a game of positional ground chess with a guy who's known for throwing up submission attmepts at the drop of a hat.

 

Guida couldn't handle Pettis standing, so he took him down, held him there and Fitched the shit out of him.

You say that like it's a bad thing! What's he supposed to do? Stand and trade with a guy who's a superior striker and who hold advantages in height & reach over him? Fucking Hell...

 

The only reason it didn't get stood up was due to some half hearted shoulder bumps from Clay that somehow count as tangible offense.

Do you want the referee to stop the fight & stand them up when Pettis is well-known as a submission expert off his back? He's scored three wins from his last five via a submission from his back.

 

As for Guida, I'm not sure what fight you were watching. You've basically described Shamar Bailey's fight for me. He held down his opponent and did nothing. Guida was constantly trying to improve position, gaining half-guard & side-guard positions only for Pettis to come back and manage to force him into full guard. It was rivetting stuff to watch, a top class MMA wrestler playing a game of positional ground chess with a guy who's known for throwing up submission attmepts at the drop of a hat.

 

Just because a guy is on top, doesn't automatically mean he is winning, he needs to be offensive from the top position.

I don't mean to come across as a prick here, but you do know that being offensive from the top position means more than throwing punches, don't you? As I mentioned, Guida was constantly looking to improve his position, gaining half guard & side control numerous times only for Pettis to be able to adjust and put him back into full guard, where he had more chance of getting a submission.

 

Both fighters were constantly looking to improve position, and Guida was mixing his offence with a submission defence that I never thought he had. It was an excellent bout.

 

Nothing resembling the mixture of martial arts from Guida, nothing resembling a fight in a match held by the Ultimate Fighting Championship.

Nothing resembling mixed martial arts? What are you on about man?

 

We had two top level athletes who are top 5 in the world at what they do! The last time I checked both wrestling & submission grappling were classified as mixed martial arts.

 

Seriously, if you don't like watching the high-end stuff where guys are so closely matched that the smallest mistake can cost them the fight you're probably better off sticking to watching the UK stuff that concentrates more on two guys slugging it out until one either gets knocked out or runs out of gas.

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

It really comes down to you seeing something different than me, I didn't recall Guida attempting to improve position at all, the only times he made any movement out of guard were when Pettis was trying to sub him. Credit to Guida for his submission defence, that little escape from back mount was probably the best thing he did all fight, but offensively it looked to me like all Guida wanted to do was hold him down and wait for the clock to run out. If he had established a more dominant position like side control or mount at some point, or gone for a submission himself, I wouldn't be so harsh on him. Maybe I need to rewatch the fight, but if Guida did have an improved ground position at some point, it was only for a split second.

 

People are harsh on Fitch and GSP etc for holding guys down, I don't see why Guida should be exempt from that criticism. Any attempts at finishing the fight and mixing up attacks were solely due to Pettis, what was Guida expecting to accomplish with shoulder strikes?

 

Pettis was very active off his back and Clay was as active as he could be given the circumstances.

 

So Pettis was the more active fighter basically. He was aggressive, attacking and prevented Clay from attacking successfully. Why is so much credit given to a fighter simply being on top without accomplishing anything with it?

[David]

People are harsh on Fitch and GSP etc for holding guys down, I don't see why Guida should be exempt from that criticism.

Some people are harsh on them. Usually casual fans who don't understand what they're actually doing when they have their opponents on the ground. If it was as easy as just "holding them down" then everyone would do it.

 

You mentioned Mixed Martial Arts in your last post. The sport includes all of these factors. If a fighter is not as skilled on the feet then he has every right to take a fight to the ground and outwrestle his opponent. It's up to his opponent to counter that strategy. If he can't, then he doesn't deserve to win. It's as simple as that.

 

I keep hearing these complaints that it's not a "wrestling match", but when we have two fighters who spend the entire fight trading blows on the feet I don't hear anyone saying that it's not a "kickboxing match".

[Dead Mike]

People are harsh on Fitch and GSP etc for holding guys down, I don't see why Guida should be exempt from that criticism. Any attempts at finishing the fight and mixing up attacks were solely due to Pettis, what was Guida expecting to accomplish with shoulder strikes?

 

Shoulder strikes are the same as punches to the ribs or kidneys whilst in a similar position. They're not going to finish a fight but they hurt enough (you could break a nose with a shoulder strike) to force your opponent to move an arm or change his position enough in order for you to possibly improve yours. It also stops your opponent from taking a 'breather' as well as maintaining your 'activity' in said position.

[wandshogun09]

I keep hearing these complaints that it's not a "wrestling match", but when we have two fighters who spend the entire fight trading blows on the feet I don't hear anyone saying that it's not a "kickboxing match".

 

This is a good point. Can't remember where but I read after the Cro Cop/Barry fight someone was basically saying Cro Cop bitched out by taking Barry down, as if there was some unwritten rule that whoever grappled first was a pussy. It's ridiculous. Everyone knows Barry's ground game is cack, he gives up his back more than a rent boy. Cro Cop would've been a fool not to exploit that.

[wandshogun09]

Pettis was very active off his back and Clay was as active as he could be given the circumstances.

 

So Pettis was the more active fighter basically. He was aggressive, attacking and prevented Clay from attacking successfully. Why is so much credit given to a fighter simply being on top without accomplishing anything with it?

 

I know what you mean but Clay was able to defend and stifle all of Pettis' submission attempts, plus Clay was landing some nice shots on the ground in the first round when he was standing over him. Even when Pettis got his back Guida escaped and regained top position.

 

That's all part of the 'effective grappling and octagon control' in the UFC's judging criteria so the judges would have to take that into account also.

 

I'm not saying Clay totally dominated the fight. Pettis did a great job and came close on a couple of submissions but Pettis 'trying' to get submissions and failing shouldn't score more than Guida actually scoring takedowns and passing guard and stuff imo.

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

People are harsh on Fitch and GSP etc for holding guys down, I don't see why Guida should be exempt from that criticism.

Some people are harsh on them. Usually casual fans who don't understand what they're actually doing when they have their opponents on the ground. If it was as easy as just "holding them down" then everyone would do it.

 

You mentioned Mixed Martial Arts in your last post. The sport includes all of these factors. If a fighter is not as skilled on the feet then he has every right to take a fight to the ground and outwrestle his opponent. It's up to his opponent to counter that strategy. If he can't, then he doesn't deserve to win. It's as simple as that.

 

I keep hearing these complaints that it's not a "wrestling match", but when we have two fighters who spend the entire fight trading blows on the feet I don't hear anyone saying that it's not a "kickboxing match".

The distinction for me is that when two guys are trading blows, there's more chance of a fight finishing. We could debate about the art behind various disciplines all we like, but the excitement in watching MMA is seeing a fight end definitively, whether it be by KO or submission. Very little chance of a fight ending when one guy blankets the other.

 

That said, I do enjoy the ground game a lot, I just didn't enjoy it in this fight due to the lack in variation, and I did expect a lot more excitement in this fight going in, hence my frustration in my initial post. One of my favourite recent fights was George Sotiropoulos vs Joe Stevenson at UFC 110. Now that was a true game of positional chess, constant changing of positions and various submisson attempts, never a dull moment there. I think you're inferring that I only want to see brutality and knockouts, not the case at all. I just want excitement, and Guida vs Pettis didn't live up to expectations. I'll concede that Guida had a good gameplan, and maybe he did deserve to win considering his ability to dictate the fight, but it wasn't very fun to watch for me. I still say Pettis was more active, but now that the debate has made me consider things more, Octagon control does count for a lot (perhaps too much) and Guida certainly had that. Can't say I want to see him fight Edgar or Maynard with that kind of gameplan though.

[Cousin Jim Bob]

Come on, I don't think anyone is demonizing all fights that end on the ground here. Or that out wrestling someone without over committing and getting yourself in trouble is not an effective tactic.

 

The critics myself included just find it rather painful to watch a guy just going for takedowns, then doing no significant strikes and making no attempt to finish after the fight hits the ground. Thats what Guida did with added jumping around like an idiot, burping and angry faces.

[wandshogun09]

I'll concede that Guida had a good gameplan, and maybe he did deserve to win considering his ability to dictate the fight, but it wasn't very fun to watch for me. I still say Pettis was more active, but now that the debate has made me consider things more, Octagon control does count for a lot (perhaps too much) and Guida certainly had that. Can't say I want to see him fight Edgar or Maynard with that kind of gameplan though.

 

But when you think about it these are exactly the kind of guys who Clay would have trouble outwrestling. I think Guida vs Edgar, Maynard, Miller and Henderson would all be really tough fights. All them guys have good wrestling and these are just the kind of fights that could turn into wars because Clay wouldn't be able to take them down at will and would be at risk of being taken down himself.

 

Edgar vs Guida is one I've been waiting on since 2007 when both guys had FOTY candidates with Tyson Griffin. Ever since then I've wanted to see them fight each other.

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

I'll concede that Guida had a good gameplan, and maybe he did deserve to win considering his ability to dictate the fight, but it wasn't very fun to watch for me. I still say Pettis was more active, but now that the debate has made me consider things more, Octagon control does count for a lot (perhaps too much) and Guida certainly had that. Can't say I want to see him fight Edgar or Maynard with that kind of gameplan though.

 

But when you think about it these are exactly the kind of guys who Clay would have trouble outwrestling. I think Guida vs Edgar, Maynard, Miller and Henderson would all be really tough fights. All them guys have good wrestling and these are just the kind of fights that could turn into wars because Clay wouldn't be able to take them down at will and would be at risk of being taken down himself.

 

Edgar vs Guida is one I've been waiting on since 2007 when both guys had FOTY candidates with Tyson Griffin. Ever since then I've wanted to see them fight each other.

Wow, that's an excellent point, can't believe I overlooked that. I guess it would be a bit like Edgar vs Maynard II where both guys used their wrestling in spurts, yet couldn't dominate with it, so it became a fucking excellent fight. Good arrows That makes the prospect of that fight happening much more appealing.

[wandshogun09]

Yeah Edgar/Maynard 2, Edgar/Griffin and Guida/Griffin are all examples of excellent wrestler vs wrestler fights. All really exciting close fights. It's when guys are matched evenly in skills like that we usually get something special.

[Egg Shen]

like i said in my initial post, i think Guida's movement on top and the fact that he's in the 'dominant' position means that when he fights that way he's gonna be very hard to beat. He has a great top game, he doesn't do insane amounts of damage but he moves that much that that it's basically impossible for the ref. to stand them up.

 

People also need to remember that Pettis was fighting like a madman off his back, he was throwing up his legs constantly so Guida had to stay defensive minded. Now i know this could lead to saying that Pettis won the fight, but other than the armbar in round 2 he didn't come close to finishing (this being the difference between the Torres/Johnson fight last week, Torres came close with a few submissions) Guida. People also need to start realising that fights are rarely won off their backs, sometimes i think they can be but judges clearly score the guy on top as being in the dominant position. There's uproar after every decision like this like it's the first time it's happened, but it's been happening for years. It's very hard to win a decision off your back.

 

It's one of them fights that'll be debated and people are clearly on the Guida hate-train, but i genuinley thought he put on a great performance.

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

It's funny, I used to like Guida, but I've really soured on his last few fights. He doesn't come to fight now, he comes to win a match. For his career, that's a great move, but it doesn't really help him gain fans. Ever since joining Jackson, he's become a big "gameplan" guy. It was clear in the Gomi match, the goal was to fluster Gomi with his movement, and then capitalise on the confusion. Good plan, but not exactly entertaining to watch him dance around the Octagon like a spaz. People are starting to see through his long haired, tattooed charade. I really hope Jim Miller gets the next LW title shot. He may not have the "personality" of Guida, but he comes to fight. That's what people pay to see, isn't it?

[Egg Shen]

If we're having the option of sticking I'd obviously like to stay as Real Madrid as I'm just starting to get used to them but if we're changing things up then we'll have to come up with a fair system as a first come first served system will just piss people off. Maybe get all the best 3 or 4 star teams on a list and pick them out of a hat or pick numbers on a first come first served basis. If everybody PM'd a number from 1=15 (or however many were in the league) to whoever was organising it and they were assigned the team on the list. If a number is chosen twice then they can pick again. Then once its all done the initial list can be posted up here to prove there was no wrong doing.

 

i have to disagree. If Guida has a clear path to victory why not take it? he'd be stupid not too. The guy's making a legit run at the title, can't expect him to take unnecessary risks. If the guy he's fighting can stop Guida executing the gameplan you can guarantee it'll turn into a war.

 

I can understand the frustration cause people expect to see Guida/Huerta, Guida/Griffin, Guida/Sanchez every time out. But Guida still fights the same way he always has really, he's just better at it now.