Eddie Bravo: "The Game Has Changed"

"A lot of fighters wanted to sit in half guard and pound them and rain elbows, but never try and pass the guard.
When you have that kind of attitude, you're only going to get so far. Your game is going to be so limited and
you're going to win some and lose some; you're going to bat .500 and not get very far."

Eddie Bravo

I'm not really knowledgable in Bravo style JJ, but doesn't mission control have the same "problems" as what he just stated?

eddie isn't a fighter, he just pioneered the rubber guard. He teaches jiu jitsu but that's his specialty. I dont see his commenting on one dimensional fighters having anything at all to do with "mission control" ?
I think he's be the first to tell you it's only a piece of the puzzle.

---

Posted by saemskin

eddie isn't a fighter, he just pioneered the rubber guard. He teaches jiu jitsu but that's his specialty. I dont see his commenting on one dimensional fighters having anything at all to do with "mission control" ?
I think he's be the first to tell you it's only a piece of the puzzle.

---

Well if he isn't a fighter then his comments don't have that much stock to MMA now do they.

What I meant by my mission control statement was that the mission control position (to me) seems to be a position where one fighter is content to be in without working for a significant positional change. That is exactly what Bravo is criticizing of these other fighters with respect to staying in half or full guard. Maybe he should criticize the fighters that try to go for rubber guard and do dick all in it or don't even do it properly.

I mean, I think there are a lot of fighters that don't pass the guard when they could or have really inactive guards themselves, but at the same time, I don't think it's due to the fact that the "game has changed." I think it has more to do with fighters' inexperience. I think it's more about fighters not having the skills to pass guard or have an effective guard, not a "new" mass approach to MMA.

I thought he was making separate points - one about the value/popularity of rubber guard, and another about how you'll only be partly successful if you remain in the half-guard and try to to GnP - like Tito and Hughes of years past. There's not a lot of fighters pounding people out for a victory from the half-guard anymore - it's changed.

---

Posted by scoozna

I thought he was making separate points - one about the value/popularity of rubber guard, and another about how you'll only be partly successful if you remain in the half-guard and try to to GnP - like Tito and Hughes of years past. There's not a lot of fighters pounding people out for a victory from the half-guard anymore - it's changed.

---

To me, rubber guard is like the Thai clinch. Fighters see it work elsewhere and they try to do it and mess it up. Honestly, I haven't seen much success with the rubber guard in MMA as a whole and even less so than Ground and Pound from the full/half guard. A lot of fights are stopped due to strikes, even if they are not that effective, from full/half guard, but none are stopped holding a guy in rubber guard. That's the part of the interview I don't agree with. I can actually see a reason for throwing strikes from full/half guard. It works more than he is admitting and has been proven to be more effective than holding a guy in rubber guard. I also see more successful guard passes than successful rubber guards.

I'm not saying I disagree with the statement that fighters need to work on their positioning. I totally agree with that. Hell, that's obvious to anyone that understands martial arts. I just don't agree the mentality that the MMA game has changed in the last 8-10 years in that respect. There is a distribution of different fighters' skills in MMA and more often than not, I am convinced that the overall game hasn't changed in the last 8-10 years. ..... though I think it should.

I love Eddie Bravo. Usually he has good things to say. But it seems like he just doesn't pay much attention to MMA anymore.

GSP got amazing WRESTLING skills. That's what has propelled him.

He was right about the evolution and champs falling cuz they stop evolving but a lot of things he said were wrong.

---

Posted by scoozna

I thought he was making separate points - one about the value/popularity of rubber guard, and another about how you'll only be partly successful if you remain in the half-guard and try to to GnP - like Tito and Hughes of years past. There's not a lot of fighters pounding people out for a victory from the half-guard anymore - it's changed.

---

I usually don't disagree with Rush very often but here I must disagree... To say that you see more successful guard passes than rubber guards is a flawed statement to me (i hope i paraphrased that right). Bravo is saying himself that the rubber guard isn't going to work every time and i have yet to see a fighter in a large scale organization utilize it properly. That being said some people will pound you out from half guard or full guard and some refs will stop a fight when someone is taking unanswered shots from those positions but i really don't see how that has anything to do with Eddie's comments on Rubber Guard. It is a valuable tool that really does work better than basic guard. It is easier to find yourself in a position to apply a submission when working RG (rubber guard) properly (properly being the operative word) In regard to your comment about Mission Control, i must say that usually unless the opponent knows what you are up to MC is just an ends to a mean. It is a way of securing on of your opponents arm while freeing up one of your own to set up either a triangle or a gogoplata... I think Eddie is correct, in a few years i think we'll see Rubber Guard becoming the standard, at least with fighters who are in a higher echelon of fighters.

Edit: Also in recent mma Gina Carano went to the rubber guard when it hit the mat briefly and even though it was a sloppy RG, she still almost caught a gogo almost immediately though she didn't have the rest of her opponent's body secure.

It's interesting to note that Frank Mir is training with Bravo prior to this fight with NOG, learning the rubber guard technique. There was a video posted here and the possibilites that are present when a proper rubber guard is executed are pretty amazing, at least that's the impression I got.

I really think you (rush) ought to watch it before you discount the technique or Eddie's comments for that matter. He does have a gym and trains fighters for a living, so I do think his opinons, while some dont agree with them, are valid opinoins none the less. Also, you'll notice that Joe Rogan and Goldie consult with him for his scoring during fights, or at least used to.

Lastly, if you want to see and effective rubber guard, watch some Shinya Aoki fights. Amazing.
That is, if ground fighting amazes you as it does me. he choked a dude out with the rubber guard. He pulled his foot over his head and reached around behind the guys head and grabbed his foot pinching his noodle off. amazing

couture and forrest love 2 be in half gard they say it letsw them stay heavy on there opponet and keep them in place

Eddie is so slick on the ground I'd take anything he has to say to heart

There's a reason there are very few top contenders in MMA who utilize rubber guard. Rubber guard is great, but it's hard to utilize in MMA. Guys anymore are so damn strong and to hold someone in rubber guard that is that strong requires immense flexibility. It's so hard on the knees to train rubber guard that it's ridiculous.

The ruleset isn't exactly rubber guard friendly, either. Fighters have to worry about downward elbows and hitting the back of the head.

I'm not saying it can't be utilized effectively, but to do that on a consistent basis someone has to literally be a dedicated rubber guard practicioner IMO. Some day I believe it will be a staple, but not yet.

---

Posted by Rush

---

Posted by saemskin

eddie isn't a fighter, he just pioneered the rubber guard. He teaches jiu jitsu but that's his specialty. I dont see his commenting on one dimensional fighters having anything at all to do with "mission control" ?
I think he's be the first to tell you it's only a piece of the puzzle.

---

Well if he isn't a fighter then his comments don't have that much stock to MMA now do they.

---

I'm not going to get into the rest of the discussion, but this isn't true at all. A person doesn't need to actually practice something themselves in order to be an expert in it. Also, practicing something doesn't make you an expert on the subject. There are a lot of fighters with little to no regard for strategy, and there are a lot of analysts who don't fight but are incredibly knowledgeable about the technical and strategic aspects of the sport.

Studying something doesn't require participation in that thing. You can become an expert by observing closely an understanding why certain tactics are and are not effective. You don't necessarily need to put it into practice yourself in order to understand it.

Personally I started training long after I started watching, and I think that I learned the vast majority of what I know long before I started training. Understanding and doing are different things.

---

Posted by Aether

I'm not going to get into the rest of the discussion, but this isn't true at all. A person doesn't need to actually practice something themselves in order to be an expert in it. Also, practicing something doesn't make you an expert on the subject. There are a lot of fighters with little to no regard for strategy, and there are a lot of analysts who don't fight but are incredibly knowledgeable about the technical and strategic aspects of the sport.

Studying something doesn't require participation in that thing. You can become an expert by observing closely an understanding why certain tactics are and are not effective. You don't necessarily need to put it into practice yourself in order to understand it.

Personally I started training long after I started watching, and I think that I learned the vast majority of what I know long before I started training. Understanding and doing are different things.

---

First of all, I still stand by my comments.

As for the quotations above, no I disagree. To truly understand what works and what doesn't you have to practice it. If you seriously learned more prior to training then you might want to consider changing schools/teachers because in my 14 years of martial arts experience, I have never witnessed someone that knew more prior to their actual training. Saying something works because one reads it in a BJ Penn book (or something) is not the same as understanding why it works because you've tried it while the other guy was trying to hit you in the face and it either worked or didn't work. But that is beside the point I made.

The point I made was that Eddie was flat out wrong about the sport changing with respect to what "works". I never disagreed with what he said about the effectiveness of passing guard. That's how I would choose to fight. However, it doesn't mean that guys are not winning fights by not passing guard, nor does it mean that the game has changed in that respect.

I thought it was funny that he also mentioned rubber guard because the vast majority of guys that (try to) utilize rubber guard in MMA (the fights that I have seen) usually only accomplish one thing, and that is holding the guy in your guard.

I wish I had the time to watch the last 20 UFCs and count how many times rubber guard was used, how many times it was used properly/successfully vs. how many times a guy either won or advanced his position from striking within the guard. I am confident that the numbers are not even close to what Bravo was saying/thinking.

What bothered me about it was that he was insinuating that his style has significantly evolved MMA (or something to that angle). MMA has certainly evolved to incorporate different guards, rather than the classic closed guard, if Bravo said that, then I would agree with him, striking from the guard has been, is and will be a big part of the game. Unless there is a rule change, I am confident it will stay the same.

All this article was was a huge advert for his style of JJ. What the heck is he saying that JJ is the only aspect of MMA where you get exposed? Give me a break. The comments he made about Hughes just about had me dry heaving.

---

Posted by bullettdodger

I usually don't disagree with Rush very often but here I must disagree... To say that you see more successful guard passes than rubber guards is a flawed statement to me (i hope i paraphrased that right). Bravo is saying himself that the rubber guard isn't going to work every time and i have yet to see a fighter in a large scale organization utilize it properly. That being said some people will pound you out from half guard or full guard and some refs will stop a fight when someone is taking unanswered shots from those positions but i really don't see how that has anything to do with Eddie's comments on Rubber Guard.

It is a valuable tool that really does work better than basic guard. It is easier to find yourself in a position to apply a submission when working RG (rubber guard) properly (properly being the operative word) In regard to your comment about Mission Control, i must say that usually unless the opponent knows what you are up to MC is just an ends to a mean. It is a way of securing on of your opponents arm while freeing up one of your own to set up either a triangle or a gogoplata...


I think Eddie is correct, in a few years i think we'll see Rubber Guard becoming the standard, at least with fighters who are in a higher echelon of fighters.

---

The comments on passing the guard and rubber guard are connected by the fact that Eddie was claiming his "style" was the wave of the future and that the days of striking from within the guard are long gone. Considering the fact that most of the guys can't check a kick properly, can't escape from poorly based mounts, don't know how to do a proper one leg takedown, etc. I really don't see how rubber guard is going to revolutionize MMA. Sure there are a few fighters out there that can use it well, but I don't think it will ever become mainstream and I don't think we will see a significant decline in striking from full/half guard.

IMO, Eddie was throwing a bunch of obvious statements, mixed with some BS to promote his style.

In a way I think the game has changed, in the sense that more fighters are well rounded and more fighters are aware of the big 3 sub attempts from the guard (the Kimura, the triangle, and the armbar) that are typically attempted.

Eventually something has to evolve or fighters are going to look for new submissions that people arn't used to defending.

The rubber guard can be used effectively as we've seen. I don't think the rubber guard offers that many more options than the traditional guard but it is a more effective way to control and deliver strikes, such as Jason Day vs Alan Belcher. I think Eddie actually sent him instructional tapes afterwards (though they mustn't have been very good because he received a thrashing from Bisping shortly thereafter).

I don't think it will become the more common variation, but it wil become more common.

Doing something and understanding how it works are two different things. You don't need to do something to understand how it works. It's a fact whether you choose to believe it or not, it isn't an opinion.

I can study the workings of an automobile and if I study long enough I'll be able to show you every individual part, tell you what it does, and how it interacts with the other parts. That doesn't mean that I can put one together. Understanding something and putting it into practice are entirely different things. In order to IMPLEMENT an armbar or a triangle effectively, yes you need to actually practice it. In order to understand what situations they should be applied and how they work, no you don't need to actually do them. These are things you can learn through observation.

There are tons of people all across the world who know the ins and outs of different sports, what strategies do and don't work in different situations and why who have never actually participated in the sport on a professional level. There are tons of movie critics who understand how different styles of directing, symbolism, lighting and dialogue effects a movie who have never made a movie themselves, there are tons of literary critics who understand how different grammar, phrasing, and linguistic styles effect books but have never written a novel. I can go on forever.

It's simply not true that you need to participate in something to understand it. Maybe you personally need to learn through a hands on approach but that isn't true of everyone. Many people are able to learn far more easily through observation than through hands-on learning.

You are merging the definitions of knowing and understanding. They are not the same thing.

One can say that a fighter can apply a triangle in a certain situation because they have seen it done before. However, if they have never been in that situation, they don't understand why that it is the case. They don't understand all the aspects that go into that scenario.

Using your automobile example, you can memorize the schematics of a car engine and memorize what other people say each part does, but you don't understand how it works if you have never seen a real car engine before.

If you don't understand something, you really can't teach it.

Well reading the post you have above the one in regards to me i can see that we were discussing slightly different things. In response to your post above mine, i can only say that we can agree to disagree. I don't think HIS style is going to revolutionize MMA or that Jiu Jitsu is the only discipline where you can be exposed but i do think that a lot more people are going to start using rubber guard due to the advantages in both defense and offense it presents. As with anything new, people need to practice it in combat situations so they can become more comfertable with it. I think in a few years we'll see a pretty solid stable of rubber guard players.

---

Posted by Rush

You are merging the definitions of knowing and understanding. They are not the same thing.

One can say that a fighter can apply a triangle in a certain situation because they have seen it done before. However, if they have never been in that situation, they don't understand why that it is the case. They don't understand all the aspects that go into that scenario.

Using your automobile example, you can memorize the schematics of a car engine and memorize what other people say each part does, but you don't understand how it works if you have never seen a real car engine before.

If you don't understand something, you really can't teach it.

---

Yes... you can understand how it works by studying it without practicing it. There's no logical reason you can't gain understanding of something by studying it without physically putting it into practice, especially something pertaining directly to strategy. What you're saying just isn't true. No point in continuing this any father though.

my personaly view while I think the rubber gaurd has some uses.. I do not think it is the end all be all.. And it seems liek even Eddie says that as well.. I think it opens up new options in certian situations.. as for going for the mount as opposed to stayin g in gaurd.. I think it depends upon the fighter different people have different styles what works for one may not work for another.. I like to get the mount if I can I hate being in anothers gaurd... but I am good at keeping myself in a mouont once I get there.. some people aren't.. I am fairly effective from the gaurd as well.. but given the choice I'll take the mount position any day of the week.