BTW if Chuck and Machida ever fought

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » General MMA Talk » BTW if Chuck and Machida ever fought
« Previous Page
POLL: Chuck or Machida
Chuck 52% (25)
Machida 48% (23)
bigbubbano23
7/11/08 10:22:49PM
i bet chuck is the first one who can actually catch machida. Fact- did you know machida can run faster backwards while throwing leg kicks than anyone alive.
Pookie
7/12/08 1:19:29AM

Posted by bigbubbano23

i bet chuck is the first one who can actually catch machida. Fact- did you know machida can run faster backwards while throwing leg kicks than anyone alive.





ooo you said while throwing kicks, nvm...
jkdskinhead
7/12/08 1:38:29AM

Posted by mkiv9secsupra


Everything you just said is trumped by Forrest Griffin. Hes not going to be knocking anyone out anytime soon and it sure isnt part of his gameplan, yet he is still winning



I was replying to someone that said knockouts dont deserve to be an entire area of fighting thus making a fighter complete.. fighters can still be imcomplete and win.. your Forrest Griffin comment has no bearing at all on what I was explaining.
Pookie
7/12/08 1:51:07AM
I agree with your reasoning, but i think machida has a tool of his own that exists in maybe less than a handful of fighters. and thats his reflexes. Until he fights a fighter that is either incredibly fast(and IMO chuck is not near that fast) or has those same type of twitch reflexes that machida has, his defense and technical offensive attack will be enough.

Theres maybe 3-4 fighters out there who possess the skills necassary to beat machida. Anderson Silva, Shogun, Rampage, and Lil Nog. 2 of those fights will never happen either.
mkiv9secsupra
7/12/08 1:56:42AM

Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by mkiv9secsupra


Everything you just said is trumped by Forrest Griffin. Hes not going to be knocking anyone out anytime soon and it sure isnt part of his gameplan, yet he is still winning



I was replying to someone that said knockouts dont deserve to be an entire area of fighting thus making a fighter complete.. fighters can still be imcomplete and win.. your Forrest Griffin comment has no bearing at all on what I was explaining.



So if a fighter doesnt have knockout power he cant be complete?!

Please watch a few boxing and k1 matches. Power and speed is an aspect of striking but the main objective is accuracy and efficiency. Just because you dont have power to knock people on their backs with one shot that isnt even 100% accurate doesnt mean you lack part of the MMA game. Big Nog is a great boxer who isnt going to knock anyone out either but he is a complete fighter.
MoJoy
7/12/08 2:13:44PM

Posted by Pookie

I agree with your reasoning, but i think machida has a tool of his own that exists in maybe less than a handful of fighters. and thats his reflexes. Until he fights a fighter that is either incredibly fast(and IMO chuck is not near that fast) or has those same type of twitch reflexes that machida has, his defense and technical offensive attack will be enough.

Theres maybe 3-4 fighters out there who possess the skills necassary to beat machida. Anderson Silva, Shogun, Rampage, and Lil Nog. 2 of those fights will never happen either.



Spot on. Bravo my friend. MosDef.
jkdskinhead
7/12/08 3:33:14PM

Posted by mkiv9secsupra


Posted by jkdskinhead


Posted by mkiv9secsupra


Everything you just said is trumped by Forrest Griffin. Hes not going to be knocking anyone out anytime soon and it sure isnt part of his gameplan, yet he is still winning



I was replying to someone that said knockouts dont deserve to be an entire area of fighting thus making a fighter complete.. fighters can still be imcomplete and win.. your Forrest Griffin comment has no bearing at all on what I was explaining.



So if a fighter doesnt have knockout power he cant be complete?!

Please watch a few boxing and k1 matches. Power and speed is an aspect of striking but the main objective is accuracy and efficiency. Just because you dont have power to knock people on their backs with one shot that isnt even 100% accurate doesnt mean you lack part of the MMA game. Big Nog is a great boxer who isnt going to knock anyone out either but he is a complete fighter.



Yeah theres lots of good things you can posses in striking.. knockouts are a very large portion of the game, and can come from punching, kicking, slaming, or other methods. Being a knockout artist is in itself a whole area of fighting.. just because your a good boxer doesnt mean your a complete fighter.. there are tons of great boxers in mma that arent complete fighters..

I wouldnt consider a guy that can wrestle, submit, and knockout people a complete fighter, if he didnt have versitle striking skills and good boxing.

Well rounded yes.. but not complete.

To be complete you need to have it all
Pages: 1 [2]
Related Topics