Daniel Cormier Has Message for Wrestling's Critics: 'Learn Takedown Defense'

MMAPlayground.com » Community » MMA News Share Forum » Daniel Cormier Has Message for Wrestling's Critics: 'Learn Takedown Defense'
emfleek
8/31/11 8:55:42AM
Daniel Cormier has a message for critics of wrestlers, and it doesn't sound like he's going to budge on it anytime soon.

Cormier, one of the most decorated college and amateur wrestlers ever to break into mixed martial arts, has found himself smack-dab in the middle of the Strikeforce Heavyweight Grand Prix against Antonio Silva in the semifinals. And while he believes the fight is his most important test to date, he isn't going to apologize for being a wrestler.

Simply put, the unbeaten heavyweight believes if his opponent can't stop his takedowns, well ... too bad.

"It's not my job, it's not Jon Fitch's job, it's not Josh Barnett's job to actually teach someone takedown defense," Cormier said Tuesday during a media call. "It's their job to learn takedown defense. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK
kingsmasher
8/31/11 10:01:38AM
I agree and we as fans should embrace that rather than support guys who cry about being taken down...because the fighters that cry about it shoudl train and not be taken down then the fight is kept standing which most of us want...
mattjonesy
8/31/11 10:37:51AM
People who want to stand and trade are already at a disavantage when all the wrestler wants to do is clinch and drag you down. I do agree to an extent but all a wrestler has to do is eat a shot or two rush in and get the clinch and they can hold that all day , Alves vs Fitch is a prime example.
I think its more about the striker shooting in on the wrestler and giving him something else to think about, make him think twice before rushing you again.
emfleek
8/31/11 10:40:10AM

Posted by mattjonesy

People who want to stand and trade are already at a disavantage when all the wrestler wants to do is clinch and drag you down.



The fight starts with both men standing up. That doesn't give the wrestler the advantage.
NE-1
8/31/11 10:46:56AM

Posted by emfleek

. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK



And that's where the problem lies. I don't mind a great wrestler getting takedowns and working to improve position while inflicting moderate damage or really punishing the opponent.

The problem lies in the lack of interest in finishing a fight once the takedown is completed. I think it's interesting that standups were a little quicker on the Rio card.

The most frusturating thing to me is the wall clinch. If a takedown takes longer than 1 minute to complete, separate the fighters off the cage. That's not wrestling, in wrestling you don't get a wall to hug someone against.
FastKnockout
8/31/11 12:34:38PM

Posted by NE-1


Posted by emfleek

. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK



And that's where the problem lies. I don't mind a great wrestler getting takedowns and working to improve position while inflicting moderate damage or really punishing the opponent.

The problem lies in the lack of interest in finishing a fight once the takedown is completed. I think it's interesting that standups were a little quicker on the Rio card.

The most frusturating thing to me is the wall clinch. If a takedown takes longer than 1 minute to complete, separate the fighters off the cage. That's not wrestling, in wrestling you don't get a wall to hug someone against.



Fighters should never be separated while against the cage. There are some fighters who use it as a tactic, such as Randy Couture. He holds his opponents against the cage and slowly drains their energy, while also landing moderate damage with his dirty boxing.
emfleek
8/31/11 12:38:28PM

Posted by FastKnockout

Fighters should never be separated while against the cage unless they're stalling.



Fixed.

Chael_Sonnen
8/31/11 12:46:01PM

Posted by emfleek

Daniel Cormier has a message for critics of wrestlers, and it doesn't sound like he's going to budge on it anytime soon.

Cormier, one of the most decorated college and amateur wrestlers ever to break into mixed martial arts, has found himself smack-dab in the middle of the Strikeforce Heavyweight Grand Prix against Antonio Silva in the semifinals. And while he believes the fight is his most important test to date, he isn't going to apologize for being a wrestler.

Simply put, the unbeaten heavyweight believes if his opponent can't stop his takedowns, well ... too bad.

"It's not my job, it's not Jon Fitch's job, it's not Josh Barnett's job to actually teach someone takedown defense," Cormier said Tuesday during a media call. "It's their job to learn takedown defense. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK



Preach it Daniel.....words of wisdom
tn_rebel
8/31/11 2:10:16PM
Don't understand what the debate is here. Wrestling is part of it. You don't see wrestlers complaining about getting punched in the face. What's the difference?
prophecy033
8/31/11 2:47:18PM
If you don't like getting taken down, work on your tdd or learn to work off your back. If neither of those suit you, move to kickboxing
NE-1
8/31/11 7:09:17PM

Posted by FastKnockout


Posted by NE-1


Posted by emfleek

. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK




The most frusturating thing to me is the wall clinch. If a takedown takes longer than 1 minute to complete, separate the fighters off the cage. That's not wrestling, in wrestling you don't get a wall to hug someone against.



Fighters should never be separated while against the cage. There are some fighters who use it as a tactic, such as Randy Couture. He holds his opponents against the cage and slowly drains their energy, while also landing moderate damage with his dirty boxing.



Sorry but Randy Couture is the only fighter to ever effectively utilize that as a game plan. Am I crazy or is hugging someone for 10 minutes to "slowly drain energy" not fighting?

You have 15 minutes to fight, I don't pay to watch you hug and footstomp for 10 of the 15 minutes. I'll watch a first grade fight if I want to see this type of action.

Effective work off the cage see Mir vs Carwin
Ineffective & what I have a problem with Alves vs Story
Manak
8/31/11 7:50:44PM

Posted by NE-1


Posted by emfleek

. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK



And that's where the problem lies. I don't mind a great wrestler getting takedowns and working to improve position while inflicting moderate damage or really punishing the opponent.

The problem lies in the lack of interest in finishing a fight once the takedown is completed. I think it's interesting that standups were a little quicker on the Rio card.

The most frusturating thing to me is the wall clinch. If a takedown takes longer than 1 minute to complete, separate the fighters off the cage. That's not wrestling, in wrestling you don't get a wall to hug someone against.



Lay on ur back for 15 min?? does he intend to finish at any point.. tthat is the problem just laying there
Manak
8/31/11 7:54:58PM

Posted by emfleek


"It's not my job, it's not Jon Fitch's job, it's not Josh Barnett's job to actually teach someone takedown defense," Cormier said Tuesday during a media call. "It's their job to learn takedown defense. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK



Y did he bring up barnett, he has a good finishing record, if he takes u down, ur prb getting subed. as far as fitch, he wants a title fight which he deff earned but dec dont pay the bills as much as KOs n SUBs, but i agree u need to learn TDD but lay n pray blows to watch
prophecy033
8/31/11 8:19:44PM

Posted by Manak


Posted by emfleek


"It's not my job, it's not Jon Fitch's job, it's not Josh Barnett's job to actually teach someone takedown defense," Cormier said Tuesday during a media call. "It's their job to learn takedown defense. If they can't defend the takedown, then they deserve to lay on their back for 15 minutes."

LINK



Y did he bring up barnett, he has a good finishing record, if he takes u down, ur prb getting subed. as far as fitch, he wants a title fight which he deff earned but dec dont pay the bills as much as KOs n SUBs, but i agree u need to learn TDD but lay n pray blows to watch

I think he was just naming guys that shoot for the takedown more often then not. Barnett does have a pretty good finishing record.
FlashyG
8/31/11 9:04:52PM
I've always wondered whether the same people who call for stand-ups on wrestlers would be as eager to see the fight brought to the ground if the striker is trying to hard to keep the fight at a distance and not engaging enough on the feet. (Kalib Starnes comes to mind)

Something tells me that rule change wouldn't get anywhere near the amount of support that standing up the wrestlers do.
sbulldavid
8/31/11 10:18:58PM
My only problem is that they don't take into account damage or submission attempts.
mrsmiley
9/1/11 1:34:53PM
I agree with Cormier,but of course you have to account for:

1. The man on top must move to advance posistion,or inflict damage,or attempt a submission.

2. Just because you're on top doesn't mean the judges should award you the round. If the man/or woman, on bottom is attempting submissions or attempting to gain posistion this must be accouted for as well.
machodog76
9/1/11 1:44:12PM
I disagree with all stand ups, it dilutes the purity of the sport. Especially when you get refs that don't understand the ground game. I forget the fight (I think it was Matt Brown vs John Howard) but the ref stood a fighters up while one was working for a Kimura! Depending on the position the unified rules almost always favor one art more than the rest, but it's just the nature of the beast. I'm sure BJJ guys would love to start on the ground and wrestlers would love to have knees to the head be legal from the ground. Bottom line is you don't like to be on your back, get up!
KungFuMaster
9/1/11 4:42:57PM
I do not frown when most wrestlers do their thing to win. I only frown when I see GSP do it. Would you like to know why?

Simple: GSP has so much to offer. The guy is so dynamic, so fast, so tactical and full of bags of tricks but as soon as the going gets a little tough, he opts to shoot for takedowns.

Yes, yes - it is all about winning and doing what will win a fight for you but GSP has talked so much smack about his legacy and so forth...

Taking the challenge face on, coming back to win from behind, taking the more dangerous routes over the easier ones etc...>>>These are what legends are made of...

My opinions come from an era filled with characters like He-man and Don Quiote etc....so I do not expect everyone to understand what I am saying.
tn_rebel
9/1/11 7:43:29PM

Posted by KungFuMaster

I do not frown when most wrestlers do their thing to win. I only frown when I see GSP do it. Would you like to know why?

Simple: GSP has so much to offer. The guy is so dynamic, so fast, so tactical and full of bags of tricks but as soon as the going gets a little tough, he opts to shoot for takedowns.

Yes, yes - it is all about winning and doing what will win a fight for you but GSP has talked so much smack about his legacy and so forth...

Taking the challenge face on, coming back to win from behind, taking the more dangerous routes over the easier ones etc...>>>These are what legends are made of...

My opinions come from an era filled with characters like He-man and Don Quiote etc....so I do not expect everyone to understand what I am saying.



Your right, GSP is way too talented to be so boring to watch. But I can't blame him because I don't think he would be on the streak he is if he took more chances. Don't think he would still be in the p4p talk.
bjj1605
9/2/11 12:42:36AM

Posted by sbulldavid

My only problem is that they don't take into account damage or submission attempts.



True.

I completely agree with Cormier that people need to learn take-down defense if they don't want to get taken down. Strikers who complain about getting taken down or act like ground fighting is some how less tough or less manly are just bitter that they can't win fights.

I am completely against stand-ups and resetting guys who are on the fence. Let them fight. The less ref intervention the better. They should only be there to prevent illegal blows and stop a fight.

BUT....

The rules totally favor wrestlers. The way the rule is written to prevent knees to grounded opponents is ridiculous. Personally I'm in favor of knees on the ground. Still, I get why the rule is there. But the real problem is when a fighter is ON HIS BACK. Instead of "three points of contact" it should state "a fighter on his back" (or if you don't want knees when someone has your back) "a fighter on the bottom".

If you bring back the knee as a way to stop takedowns, suddenly wrestling looks a lot less appealing. Shooting for a guys legs is really dangerous when he can time a knee and end the fight. Ask Pele. Fighters would have to use more upper body take-downs. These can be more challenging to get and also a lot more entertaining to watch (ex. Jon Jones/ Karo Parysian).

Also, the judging is ludicrous. I have seen so many fights where a guy takes his opponent down and spends the entire fight defending submissions....and gets the decision. The GUARD is a NEUTRAL POSITION. Which ever fighter is more aggressive while in the guard (top or bottom) is winning the fight.

Look at the way grappling tournaments are scored. You get points for a takedown. That is an offensive action. But you get no points for staying in the guard. It should be the same way in MMA.

There are three basic scenarios:

1) Fighter A takes down fighter B. Fighter A advances position or lands meaningful ground and pound. Fighter A wins.

2) Fighter A takes down fighter B. Fighter A and fighter B either both do nothing or do exactly the same amount of damage/activity. Fighter A wins because he got the takedown.

3) Fighter A takes down fighter B. Fighter B does more damage or attempts more submissions/sweeps. Fighter B SHOULD win the fight.

So I'm pro grappling. Pro purity of the sport. Anti-unfair advantages for wrestlers.
Kpro
9/2/11 12:52:17AM
I thought the rule read that the guy laying closest to the word Sony at the bottom of my TV gets a 9 and whoever is closer to the top of my TV gets a 10 regardless of what happens.

I'm pretty sure most judges go by this method so it must be widely understood, I would think.
bjj1605
9/2/11 1:44:02AM

Posted by Kpro

I thought the rule read that the guy laying closest to the word Sony at the bottom of my TV gets a 9 and whoever is closer to the top of my TV gets a 10 regardless of what happens.

I'm pretty sure most judges go by this method so it must be widely understood, I would think.




ncordless
9/2/11 1:55:54AM

Posted by Kpro

I thought the rule read that the guy laying closest to the word Sony at the bottom of my TV gets a 9 and whoever is closer to the top of my TV gets a 10 regardless of what happens.

I'm pretty sure most judges go by this method so it must be widely understood, I would think.



That's the old method. Because of all the complaints, they changed their method. Now, the judges watch to see which fighter raises their hands first in victory first, and award the fight to him. The logic being that whichever fighter has the ability to raise their arms first must have gotten the better of the fight.
Pookie
9/2/11 3:29:04AM

Posted by emfleek


Posted by mattjonesy

People who want to stand and trade are already at a disavantage when all the wrestler wants to do is clinch and drag you down.



The fight starts with both men standing up. That doesn't give the wrestler the advantage.



The Judges give the Wrestler the advantage. I think that's where people should focus their effort if they want the sport to change. Educate the judges so that a guy isn't rewarded for failed takedown attempts under the guise of "control".

Fighters have no excuse, they need to learn to defend the takedown if they don't want to be taken down.

But i do think the judges/criteria(however you wanna look at it) is in need of an overhaul in most cases.

emfleek
9/2/11 9:00:11AM

Posted by Pookie

The Judges give the Wrestler the advantage.



Agreed.
Kpro
9/2/11 8:29:07PM
What if they came up with a fighting surface that allowed fighters working to defend a takedown better leverage and the surface also allowed for working your back higher up without needing to be against the cage......




Related Topics