More Dominant Way To Win (POLL)

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » General MMA Talk » More Dominant Way To Win (POLL)
POLL: What is a more dominant win?
50-45 or better 80% (39)
10 second knockout or submission 20% (10)
Kpro
10/3/11 5:54:37PM
Just was curious on the Playground's opinion on this after I posted my opinion on it in another thread.

I think a 50-45 is by leaps and bounds as it shows prolonged dominance and an early knockout can happen before either fighter gets to show any of their skillset or gameplan. But it's still a 10 second finish, so I imagine there will be some on both sides of this.

GSP/Koscheck or Marquardt/Maia is the first example of the two that come to mind.

Feel free to state your reasoning after voting
Poor_Franklin
10/3/11 6:16:20PM
ive never thought about this before.

if a challenger loses to the champ in 10 seconds, it's dominance. if a challenger loses a 50-45 decision to the champ, it is dominant, but there is a moral victory bc at least he went 5 rounds w/ the champ & didnt get finished.

if a champ loses a 50-45 decision, there is no moral victory whatsoever, but if a champ loses in a 10 second sub or ko, then he & his camp will be upset, but will go back w/ confidence in that he "got caught" & he knows he can do better the next time

i honestly dont know which answer i believe, so i will not vote
Hendo67
10/3/11 6:35:10PM
Personally, i'd feel much better about myself going to a decision than laying horizontal looking at the jumbotron, and having people tell me what the hell just happened.

jjeans
10/3/11 6:35:26PM
There is no doubt in my mind 50-45 is more impressive but the most dominant way to me is a fight like Antonio Silva vs Cormier, Jones Rampage. Whereby the fighters proved that he is winning in all aspects and his opponent truly has no real way of winning as he's dictating where the fight takes place. Domination with a finish is what I'm trying to get at. If a fighter can not only prove he's more dominating then go on to finish the fight is by far the most impressive and dominant way to win.

However that's not the question. If a fighter wins in 10 seconds with a knockout hell yeah it's impressive but it's not dominating. If a fighter pulls guard slaps on a triangle and its all over in 10 seconds that's a very different story IMO. As it proved the fighter might not have been able to hang with him on the ground anyway, so the fact the fighter brought it to the ground proved a weakness.

I'm a Kickboxer and I'm saying that just because you can KO the opponent on the feet before he's had a chance to try anything isn't that impressive. Finishing the opponent after 1 takedown defence leaves a much more dominating performance too me.

So maybe what I'm trying to get at is, if a fighter is able to prove he would have kept or been able to keep the fight in that position to me that's more dominating than a 50-45.

But if we're talking Nate/Maia or Hague/Duffee, Goulet/Ludwig etc. Whereby the opponent was finished before anything happens... Then to me it's not that impressive, just exciting to watch.
kopower
10/3/11 6:41:12PM
50-45 is more dominant in my mind. The only way I wouldn't see it dominating an opponent is if a fighter just layed on top of the other, showing no offense.
Chael_Sonnen
10/3/11 7:01:39PM
50-45

Ask Jon Fitch after his match with GSP.
grappler0000
10/3/11 7:10:06PM
50-45 is much more dominant in my opinion when comparing single performances. With a quick finish, there are so many questions that are left unanswered. On the contrary, many of those questions get answered when those same actions are repeated. If we're examining multiple performances where a fighter has 2 back-to-back 50-45 victories versus a fighter with 2 back-to-back 10-second finishes (assuming all other factors are the same, such as level of competition), it begins to become debatable. And for each fight thereafter, I'd say the tides turn in favor of the quick finishes at an exponential rate. As the question stands though, the decision is more dominant.
jiujitsufreak74
10/3/11 7:43:21PM
of the two choices definitely 50-45 if we are talking about a case-by-case basis. grappler brought up a good point with consecutive 10 second finishes and that is a whole other variable that really complicates opinions. but, on a case-by-case basis, i would say a round (or more) of dominance followed by a finish is the most dominant way to win.
KungFuMaster
10/3/11 8:04:46PM
I like all the responses so far and instead of agreeing or disagreeing I would like to take the discussion to another level.

Where did combat sports evolved from? From combat of course...

And what is the purpose of combat? To kill or disable your enemies of course...

When we think of it in these terms, then the 10 second KO seems to be the better objective when engaging in combat or combat sports.

Just something for you guys to think about.
KungFuMaster
10/3/11 8:23:54PM
If you are truly dominant, you would be able to disarm and finish your opponent quickly.

Fighters like GSP, Cruz, Fitch etc. are not dominating fighters. They are what you call strategists who have simply found loop holes in the sport of mma and have exploited those loopholes to almost perfection.

To be slightly better in all categories of the fight game is not domination. Domination is controlling the tempo, controlling where the fight takes place, exacting your will, and ending it whenever you see fit.

^^^^This is one of the many times where my outlandish opinions will come to haunt me.

I am prepared. Bring it.
Kpro
10/3/11 8:32:28PM
I think we'd all agree that two dominant rounds followed by a finish in the 3rd trumps both of the poll options but the reason there are only two options are they are the two extremes.

@KFM - I guess it depends on someones definition of dominant. A 10 second win would be the preferred method for the winner being a combat sport but is it more "dominant" than owning your opponent in striking, grappling, aggression, and dictating where the fight takes place for 25 minutes even if you don't get the finish? I could see someone who'd lost by a 10 second KO working their way back to title contention much quicker than someone who lost 50-45 because onlookers and the organization, I would think, would view the person KO'd in 10 as having a better chance in a rematch than the guy who lost all 5 rounds because they didn't get to show their skills or gameplan.


Another example; which is more dominant, and these are real examples, names were removed so the thread doesn't get derailed :)

RND 3 Fighter A outstruck Fighter B 161-2 for a 10-8 from all judges but did not get a TKO or SUB.
RND 1 Fighter A dropped Fighter B with one punch and TKO'd him in 7 seconds. Fighter B didn't get a chance to attempt any offense.


I guess it just depends on someones definition of dominant and is as arbitrary as MMA judging but the very large majority so far leans towards "dominating" as owning someone over 25 minutes rather than a 10 second finish TKO or SUB.
Kpro
10/3/11 8:36:36PM
Does Koscheck have a better shot to beat GSP in a rematch or does Maia have a better shot to beat Marquardt in a rematch based on their previous fights?
DeadHead988
10/3/11 8:45:02PM

Posted by Kpro

Does Koscheck have a better shot to beat GSP in a rematch or does Maia have a better shot to beat Marquardt in a rematch based on their previous fights?



Maia has a much better chance of beating Marquardt. Wow, by answering your question I just realized the answer. YOU ARE A GENIUS!
KungFuMaster
10/3/11 8:47:39PM
I happen to agree with the majority here but I felt the need to stir the pot.

In combat sports, I would agree a 5 round beatdown is more dominating than a 10 second KO. It shows the victor is able to avoid most or all of his opponent's offenses while exacting his will.

However, if you extend combat sports to the realm of actual combat, then it becomes clear - what is more dominating.
pmoney
10/3/11 8:54:11PM
I am also kind of in the third option here. One of my favorite performances ever, and I think a great display of one of the forms of dominance, is Nate Diaz vs. Marcus Davis. I know I have rambled about this fight before, but bare with me.

Diaz got rocked by Marcus Davis early in the first, and was in a bad way. Diaz recovered though, and he found his timing fairly quickly after that. From then on, it was Diaz completely mutilating Davis on the feet, until Diaz mercifully decided to stop the fight by choking Davis until he was unconscious, in the third and final round of the fight.

In that performance, Diaz took Davis' best, and then Diaz said "My turn" and it was game over. Just one form of dominance, and my opinion, one of the most impressive. For voting and Playground purposes though, I'd say the 50-45 is more dominant. It also allows you to see more of a fighter in action. The 10-20 second KO is fun, and always a crowd pleaser though.

For more on different forms of dominance, please see:

Ben Saunder vs. Matt Lee
Gilbert Melendez vs. Tatsuya Kawajiri II
Nate Diaz vs. Takanori Gomi
Jon Jones vs. Shogun Rua
Shogun Rua vs. Rampage Jackson
Pookie
10/3/11 9:23:27PM
I think it really is dependent on the fight.

A 50-45 round could be a highly competitive fight, where one guy won each round but still had difficulties throughout the fight. & A quick flash KO could have literally been a gurantee in a specific fight due to how the styles match-up. Take Rumble v. Yoshida for instance.

It can be either way. I think a clear "this" or "that" is just a statistics guess.
SmileR
10/4/11 12:01:58PM

Posted by KungFuMaster

I happen to agree with the majority here but I felt the need to stir the pot.

In combat sports, I would agree a 5 round beatdown is more dominating than a 10 second KO. It shows the victor is able to avoid most or all of his opponent's offenses while exacting his will.

However, if you extend combat sports to the realm of actual combat, then it becomes clear - what is more dominating.



I've got to disagree dude. If you beat the crap out of someone for a while without knocking them out I guarantee they wont ever want to see you again. If you're in a fight and one punch someone I bet the next time they see you they'll have more confidence than if you beat the ugly into them.
Same in war or combat sports in my opinion.
Poor_Franklin
10/4/11 2:47:07PM
yeah/ 50-45 is more demoralizing to the psyche
KungFuMaster
10/5/11 8:11:39PM

Posted by SmileR


Posted by KungFuMaster

I happen to agree with the majority here but I felt the need to stir the pot.

In combat sports, I would agree a 5 round beatdown is more dominating than a 10 second KO. It shows the victor is able to avoid most or all of his opponent's offenses while exacting his will.

However, if you extend combat sports to the realm of actual combat, then it becomes clear - what is more dominating.



I've got to disagree dude. If you beat the crap out of someone for a while without knocking them out I guarantee they wont ever want to see you again. If you're in a fight and one punch someone I bet the next time they see you they'll have more confidence than if you beat the ugly into them.
Same in war or combat sports in my opinion.



When the United States was owning Japan in WW II, Japan still had hope and risked their own lives to defend their nation (kamikaze). But when the United States decided to throw a two punch combination (Hiroshima and Nagazaki), Japan surrendered unconditionally.

I used that example but I, under no circumstance, agree with the decision to bomb Japan. Japan was on the brink of defeat prior to the bombing and the nation had discussed surrendering before it happened.

The decision to bomb Japan was fueled by hate and vindication for what happened to Pearl Harbor. The explanations and excuses for bombing Japan would have you believe otherwise, but the real truth is >>>>Japan had depleted all or most of its resources and was on the verge of surrendering - and we knew that but hate and vindication proved to be a stronger motivation when it comes to war.
cowcatcher
10/6/11 2:52:50AM

Posted by KungFuMaster


Posted by SmileR


Posted by KungFuMaster

I happen to agree with the majority here but I felt the need to stir the pot.

In combat sports, I would agree a 5 round beatdown is more dominating than a 10 second KO. It shows the victor is able to avoid most or all of his opponent's offenses while exacting his will.

However, if you extend combat sports to the realm of actual combat, then it becomes clear - what is more dominating.



I've got to disagree dude. If you beat the crap out of someone for a while without knocking them out I guarantee they wont ever want to see you again. If you're in a fight and one punch someone I bet the next time they see you they'll have more confidence than if you beat the ugly into them.
Same in war or combat sports in my opinion.



When the United States was owning Japan in WW II, Japan still had hope and risked their own lives to defend their nation (kamikaze). But when the United States decided to throw a two punch combination (Hiroshima and Nagazaki), Japan surrendered unconditionally.

I used that example but I, under no circumstance, agree with the decision to bomb Japan. Japan was on the brink of defeat prior to the bombing and the nation had discussed surrendering before it happened.

The decision to bomb Japan was fueled by hate and vindication for what happened to Pearl Harbor. The explanations and excuses for bombing Japan would have you believe otherwise, but the real truth is >>>>Japan had depleted all or most of its resources and was on the verge of surrendering - and we knew that but hate and vindication proved to be a stronger motivation when it comes to war.



While I have to disagree about the PH reference because I love where I live & think you go too far when you explain things a lot of times when you could just come out and say what you're thinking in plain english(little jimmy), your theory here is something I buy into. I don't think we are that different in the way we think, I just tend to take a much more direct approach. You aren't on any cowcatcher hit list buddy, I just talk shit to you when we disagree, and I expect the same from you. Don't be upset that we disagree(d) let's just continue to have the banter that makes this site great. If I hurt your feelings, or made you think you couldn't react because I'm a mod, I'm sorry. You can call me out or disparage anything I say, because in the end this is the internet, and you are a human, and we aren't always going to be roses. I hope this ended any bad feelings you had about this site or me, we are friends, let's stay friends.
KungFuMaster
10/6/11 11:30:17AM

Posted by cowcatcher


Posted by KungFuMaster


Posted by SmileR


Posted by KungFuMaster

I happen to agree with the majority here but I felt the need to stir the pot.

In combat sports, I would agree a 5 round beatdown is more dominating than a 10 second KO. It shows the victor is able to avoid most or all of his opponent's offenses while exacting his will.

However, if you extend combat sports to the realm of actual combat, then it becomes clear - what is more dominating.



I've got to disagree dude. If you beat the crap out of someone for a while without knocking them out I guarantee they wont ever want to see you again. If you're in a fight and one punch someone I bet the next time they see you they'll have more confidence than if you beat the ugly into them.
Same in war or combat sports in my opinion.



When the United States was owning Japan in WW II, Japan still had hope and risked their own lives to defend their nation (kamikaze). But when the United States decided to throw a two punch combination (Hiroshima and Nagazaki), Japan surrendered unconditionally.

I used that example but I, under no circumstance, agree with the decision to bomb Japan. Japan was on the brink of defeat prior to the bombing and the nation had discussed surrendering before it happened.

The decision to bomb Japan was fueled by hate and vindication for what happened to Pearl Harbor. The explanations and excuses for bombing Japan would have you believe otherwise, but the real truth is >>>>Japan had depleted all or most of its resources and was on the verge of surrendering - and we knew that but hate and vindication proved to be a stronger motivation when it comes to war.



While I have to disagree about the PH reference because I love where I live & think you go too far when you explain things a lot of times when you could just come out and say what you're thinking in plain english(little jimmy), your theory here is something I buy into. I don't think we are that different in the way we think, I just tend to take a much more direct approach. You aren't on any cowcatcher hit list buddy, I just talk shit to you when we disagree, and I expect the same from you. Don't be upset that we disagree(d) let's just continue to have the banter that makes this site great. If I hurt your feelings, or made you think you couldn't react because I'm a mod, I'm sorry. You can call me out or disparage anything I say, because in the end this is the internet, and you are a human, and we aren't always going to be roses. I hope this ended any bad feelings you had about this site or me, we are friends, let's stay friends.



I will take the direct approach and give a thumbs up.
armbar66j7
10/6/11 8:06:21PM
yeah i mean look at robert emerson vs manny gamburyan, yea mannys got a glass jaw, but who would of geussed emerson would be a 12 second knockout guy, if that punch didnt land, it woulkdnt have knocked him out, so i agree, 50-45 is a much more thourough way of detroying and breaking down a fighter
Geoffo
10/24/11 9:27:30PM
Compare the poll results to the amount of GSP & Dominick Cruz haters.
Hmm.......?
BustedKnuckle
10/27/11 7:00:39PM
Ok here is my dilema. I voted without looking at any of the posts......as to not be swayed by outside comments. I came to the conclusin of 50-45 decision victory is better! I like seeing a fighter get beat down and broken. Thats the long and short of it. But then I read the first post by Poor_Franklin. And perspective of the out come is completly relevant to my decision. I always assumed the champ won. If not it throws the entire vortex of the the argument off! Man am I stoned right now and dont know how to counter the Conteneder winning
Related Topics