Machida's stand up accepted, but GNP/LNP not? WHY?
MMAPlayground.com »
MMA General »
General MMA Talk »
Machida's stand up accepted, but GNP/LNP not? WHY?
NatedawgThaM
5/27/08 5:29:02PM
This has been bugging ever since Sunday. Some of the same people who praise Machida's stand up for his "technical ability" are some of the same people who hate on GNP/LNP. Why is this so? Their basically doing the exact same thing.
To dodge punches Machida circles like crazy so much to the fact it could by some be considered actually running away. Not exciting at all. Wrestlers take down you and hold you down. Trust me, unless you've tried it you should keep your mouth shut about how "easy" or how much "technique is not being used." I've wrestle so I know how hard it is just to take someone down, nevertheless hold them there. And wrestling in MMA your not just laying cross body using your weight to hold them down for the pin. 80% of the time your in guard after a takedown since your opponent pulls guard so your not using your weight to an advantage to hold your opponent down. Your using straight arm and upperbody strength which is 10X more difficult.. This would be the case if a Heavyweight LNP'd a Light Heavyweight or Middleweight but it's not. That takes as much technique as Machida's circle, duck, dodge, and once in and while one-two combo. That's why I respect but hate on a little Tito Ortiz so much. He makes it look so easy since he's throws bombs when he GNP's. It gains my respect so much but then jealousy brings the hate sometimes. Wrestlers get crap for not punching enough or going for enough submissions. Well it's pretty hard as I said just to control them nevertheless punch or elbow them. Then some guys face some great grapplers or extremely long limbed guys when they GNP/"LNP" so that makes it extremely hard to punch or try and advance position too.
Some of you say it's smart what Machida does which I agree with. His technique is fabulous but it's also smart if your the bigger/stronger guy to just take your opponent down. Not to mention some of you exaggerate when you say somebody's "LNPing". The term Lay-N-Prey is getting thrown around too loosely, most people who say someone LNPs, they don't. But that's a whole other long rant for another topic. I mean I rather get crap for taking somebody down and keeping them their rather then non-stop circling away because it'd give props to my strength.
Machida's stand up fighting is so Mayweather like it's not even funny. It's so quick and fast, elusive that he's also hard to hit since he circles like crazy too. And like Machida he only throws one-two's once every minute of a round. I only bring this up because some of you who loved what machida did to Tito absolutely despise Floyd Mayweather. Which I don't actually.
So will somebody please answer my question. WHY?
To dodge punches Machida circles like crazy so much to the fact it could by some be considered actually running away. Not exciting at all. Wrestlers take down you and hold you down. Trust me, unless you've tried it you should keep your mouth shut about how "easy" or how much "technique is not being used." I've wrestle so I know how hard it is just to take someone down, nevertheless hold them there. And wrestling in MMA your not just laying cross body using your weight to hold them down for the pin. 80% of the time your in guard after a takedown since your opponent pulls guard so your not using your weight to an advantage to hold your opponent down. Your using straight arm and upperbody strength which is 10X more difficult.. This would be the case if a Heavyweight LNP'd a Light Heavyweight or Middleweight but it's not. That takes as much technique as Machida's circle, duck, dodge, and once in and while one-two combo. That's why I respect but hate on a little Tito Ortiz so much. He makes it look so easy since he's throws bombs when he GNP's. It gains my respect so much but then jealousy brings the hate sometimes. Wrestlers get crap for not punching enough or going for enough submissions. Well it's pretty hard as I said just to control them nevertheless punch or elbow them. Then some guys face some great grapplers or extremely long limbed guys when they GNP/"LNP" so that makes it extremely hard to punch or try and advance position too.
Some of you say it's smart what Machida does which I agree with. His technique is fabulous but it's also smart if your the bigger/stronger guy to just take your opponent down. Not to mention some of you exaggerate when you say somebody's "LNPing". The term Lay-N-Prey is getting thrown around too loosely, most people who say someone LNPs, they don't. But that's a whole other long rant for another topic. I mean I rather get crap for taking somebody down and keeping them their rather then non-stop circling away because it'd give props to my strength.
Machida's stand up fighting is so Mayweather like it's not even funny. It's so quick and fast, elusive that he's also hard to hit since he circles like crazy too. And like Machida he only throws one-two's once every minute of a round. I only bring this up because some of you who loved what machida did to Tito absolutely despise Floyd Mayweather. Which I don't actually.
So will somebody please answer my question. WHY?
Aaronno9
5/27/08 5:40:59PM
The thing is, yeah machida was circling away alot, but he was cracking tito constantly, just not letting tito hit him. Plus i think when its standing up and both guys are trying to strike you know its only one punch away from ending, but when somebodies just laying in guard chances are all your gona get are little rabbit punches so the ref can see some action, so its always a little more exciting on the feet.
Ive got no problem with the way machida fights, or the way certain wrestlers fight. But the best example i can think of in regards to lay and pray was when carmelo marrero (sp) beat kongo. I mean, that was just straight up boring.
Anyways, ground and pound is accepted, its rare you see somebody like tito get called boring becouse when he takes the fight down hes constantly throwing shots. Theres a differance between groud and pound (see tito vs shamrock) and lay and pray (see carmelo vs kongo).
Ive got no problem with the way machida fights, or the way certain wrestlers fight. But the best example i can think of in regards to lay and pray was when carmelo marrero (sp) beat kongo. I mean, that was just straight up boring.
Anyways, ground and pound is accepted, its rare you see somebody like tito get called boring becouse when he takes the fight down hes constantly throwing shots. Theres a differance between groud and pound (see tito vs shamrock) and lay and pray (see carmelo vs kongo).
DiabloFreak56
5/27/08 5:41:32PM
dude im sorry lay-n-prey is 20x worse. lay and pray is laying on someone the whole fight doing absoloutely nothing. what machida did was he was being strategic in when he threw his strikes and when tito engaged he used his ELUSIVNESS to dodge them. i dont see how it doesnt make sense to you how its totally different then lay-n-prey.
oh and by the way lay-n-prey is the late Tim Sylvia
Machida was actually throwing strikes.
oh and tim sylvia=fedor's Mr.Hand
oh and by the way lay-n-prey is the late Tim Sylvia
Machida was actually throwing strikes.
oh and tim sylvia=fedor's Mr.Hand
bls1919
5/27/08 5:51:24PM
First off he was taggin tito when ever he wanted. Much ,more than a one two combo once a minute. Second why not elude Titos strength, shoot in and GnP. Which he does great. also he stuffed a lot of Tito shots not just avoided. I would have to say that Lay and Pray is much worse. But i do agree that the novice fan mislabels a guy working and not really "killing" the other fighter, as a Lnp
Boo_Radley21
5/27/08 6:27:27PM
Posted by DiabloFreak56
dude im sorry lay-n-prey is 20x worse. lay and pray is laying on someone the whole fight doing absoloutely nothing. what machida did was he was being strategic in when he threw his strikes and when tito engaged he used his ELUSIVNESS to dodge them.
At least when a wrestler takes someone down and keeps them there they are making a lot more contact than someone dodging constantly
teddythetuna
5/27/08 6:27:32PM
GNP=Machida. Its smart if your good at it and it is effective
LNP=Starnes. Not effective at all and is boring
Also i dont like Mayweather because he is very arrogant and talks alot of crap. but he is probably the best p4p fighter ever. i just hate the guy
LNP=Starnes. Not effective at all and is boring
Also i dont like Mayweather because he is very arrogant and talks alot of crap. but he is probably the best p4p fighter ever. i just hate the guy
Pookie
5/27/08 6:42:58PM
Machida isnt boring, thats why its accepted.
Boo_Radley21
5/27/08 6:43:55PM
I think he is.
Pookie
5/27/08 6:46:54PM
Posted by Boo_Radley25
I think he is.
Well i guess it breaks down to how the majority of people feel. I believe on the poll in the news section it was about 2-1 for not boring.
So to answer the original question, machida's stnad up game is accepted because the majority or people enjoy his fights, whereas the majority of fans dont appreciate LnP.
grappler0000
5/27/08 7:20:45PM
Posted by teddythetuna
GNP=Machida. Its smart if your good at it and it is effective
LNP=Starnes. Not effective at all and is boring
It was a long day at work today, so I'll just ask...am I missing something here?
Boo_Radley21
5/27/08 7:32:54PM
Posted by grappler0000
Posted by teddythetuna
GNP=Machida. Its smart if your good at it and it is effective
LNP=Starnes. Not effective at all and is boring
It was a long day at work today, so I'll just ask...am I missing something here?
I was thinking the same thing but didn't say anything.
Aaronno9
5/27/08 7:55:04PM
Posted by grappler0000
Posted by teddythetuna
GNP=Machida. Its smart if your good at it and it is effective
LNP=Starnes. Not effective at all and is boring
It was a long day at work today, so I'll just ask...am I missing something here?
I think hes just comparing the types of stand up to the types of ground fighting in relation to what the TS said. Like, in comparison, machidas stand up is the equivalent of gnp, so while you might not like the fight being on the ground, or machidas stand up being so elusive, its still not boring becouse theres something happening. Then youve got starnes whos stand up is the equivalent of lnp, becouse he was actually running away and being boring, just like real lay and pray would be to just lay on top of the guy with no action.
I think it more more directed at the fact the TS had gnp and lnp as the same thing when there not.
Thats how i read it anyways, even though i think i understood i still had a hella hard time trying to word it lol.
teddythetuna
5/27/08 7:56:43PM
The argument was machida strikes like a wrestler who LNP. what im saying is if a wrestler can take you down and GNP then it is smart and effective like Machida's striking. but if a wrestler just lays on top of you doing sweet F all then its like Starnes striking vs Quarry. Not effective and makes for a boring fight. GNP is not boring in my opinion and neither is Machida. But LNP, like the starnes fight, i found boring as F*ck.
wolfman
5/27/08 8:58:10PM
Posted by teddythetuna
The argument was machida strikes like a wrestler who LNP. what im saying is if a wrestler can take you down and GNP then it is smart and effective like Machida's striking. but if a wrestler just lays on top of you doing sweet F all then its like Starnes striking vs Quarry. Not effective and makes for a boring fight. GNP is not boring in my opinion and neither is Machida. But LNP, like the starnes fight, i found boring as F*ck.
EDIT: Aaron beat me to it...
mkiv9secsupra
5/27/08 9:24:27PM
Chuck liddell was smart to take Silva down and score points but do nothing with it but Machida is great because he lands 2 shots and steps out of range and doesnt try to finish? that 110% BS and also called the Tim Sylvia effect. Dont be a hypocrite, if Machida is great and exciting then so is Sylvia.
gartface
5/27/08 9:50:29PM
I think it's a broad generalization to say that everyone who likes Machida hates GNP. I enjoy a good ground war. And there is a huge difference between GNP and LNP.
wolfman
5/27/08 9:53:28PM
Posted by mkiv9secsupra
Chuck liddell was smart to take Silva down and score points but do nothing with it but Machida is great because he lands 2 shots and steps out of range and doesnt try to finish? that 110% BS and also called the Tim Sylvia effect. Dont be a hypocrite, if Machida is great and exciting then so is Sylvia.
When I saw the fight I saw Machida almost finish Tito at the end of the first, he had Tito in the crucifix and was raining down the leather. Tito was saved by the bell, had Machida had another ten seconds he probably would have finished him. Then, with a minute left in the 3rd, Machida dropped Tito with a nice knee to the liver and nearly finished the fight there. I see what you're trying to say, but Machida tried to finish Tito and he nearly did. Remember, Tito is a hard fighter to finish.
NatedawgThaM
5/27/08 10:02:45PM
Posted by Gartface
I think it's a broad generalization to say that everyone who likes Machida hates GNP. I enjoy a good ground war. And there is a huge difference between GNP and LNP.
Well some people don't know that. Jake O'Brien/Heath Herring and Justin McCully/Antoni Hardonk were both GNP fights. Both use great GNP to win their decisions. However, the majority of people thought they were both LNP fights. It seems nowadays if somebody is GNPing and they don't finish the fight. It's LNP. Shoot, GSP LNP'S SOMETIMES! He LNP'd Serra. But since he finished him he's considered a "GNP specialist." Rashad Evans I would consider LNP. Tito Ortiz, Sean Sherk, Jake O'Brien, Kevin Randleman, Mark Coleman, Ricco Rodriquez, and Justin McCully I would not.
Also, I forgot to mention. With LNP, you also see a punch thrown every now and then just like Machida. Like a shot or two every minute. I still don't see the difference except ones on the feet and one's on the ground. But when I saw Machida stand with Tito, it looked like Rashad/Bonnar or Rashad/Hoger all over again. People can say "Oh well Tito couldn't do a thing against him and he was able to impose his will and pick him apart at will." Well WRESTLERS DO THE SAME THING! They control fighters, not letting them pull off subs or elbow from their back. They impose their will. SO IT'S THE SAME THING!
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate Machida. I give him props for the sick technique he displays. It's just I can't stand when Machida gets all this love for the same thing Sean Sherk does but he gets crap for it. Their might be a big difference in the stand up environment and the ground environment but I still feel this is a big double standard.
mkiv9secsupra
5/27/08 10:09:15PM
Posted by wolfman
Posted by mkiv9secsupra
Chuck liddell was smart to take Silva down and score points but do nothing with it but Machida is great because he lands 2 shots and steps out of range and doesnt try to finish? that 110% BS and also called the Tim Sylvia effect. Dont be a hypocrite, if Machida is great and exciting then so is Sylvia.
When I saw the fight I saw Machida almost finish Tito at the end of the first, he had Tito in the crucifix and was raining down the leather. Tito was saved by the bell, had Machida had another ten seconds he probably would have finished him. Then, with a minute left in the 3rd, Machida dropped Tito with a nice knee to the liver and nearly finished the fight there. I see what you're trying to say, but Machida tried to finish Tito and he nearly did. Remember, Tito is a hard fighter to finish.
Neither situation was machida trying to finish the fight on purpose. He reversed Tito and realized he had a great position and attemteped to finish. The knee was just an amazing shot. I know he didnt try to finish with that knee because if he was trying to finish he would have used a combination after the knee to finish Tito. He simply threw the knee and backed off then realized tito was hurt and jumped on him.
wolfman
5/27/08 10:36:26PM
Posted by mkiv9secsupra
Posted by wolfman
Posted by mkiv9secsupra
Chuck liddell was smart to take Silva down and score points but do nothing with it but Machida is great because he lands 2 shots and steps out of range and doesnt try to finish? that 110% BS and also called the Tim Sylvia effect. Dont be a hypocrite, if Machida is great and exciting then so is Sylvia.
When I saw the fight I saw Machida almost finish Tito at the end of the first, he had Tito in the crucifix and was raining down the leather. Tito was saved by the bell, had Machida had another ten seconds he probably would have finished him. Then, with a minute left in the 3rd, Machida dropped Tito with a nice knee to the liver and nearly finished the fight there. I see what you're trying to say, but Machida tried to finish Tito and he nearly did. Remember, Tito is a hard fighter to finish.
Neither situation was machida trying to finish the fight on purpose. He reversed Tito and realized he had a great position and attemteped to finish. The knee was just an amazing shot. I know he didnt try to finish with that knee because if he was trying to finish he would have used a combination after the knee to finish Tito. He simply threw the knee and backed off then realized tito was hurt and jumped on him.
You talk as if you know what Machida is thinking. He wasn't trying to finish the fight on purpose?!?!
Sorry, but that is just hysterical. I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
mkiv9secsupra
5/27/08 10:45:02PM
Posted by wolfman
Posted by mkiv9secsupra
Posted by wolfman
Posted by mkiv9secsupra
Chuck liddell was smart to take Silva down and score points but do nothing with it but Machida is great because he lands 2 shots and steps out of range and doesnt try to finish? that 110% BS and also called the Tim Sylvia effect. Dont be a hypocrite, if Machida is great and exciting then so is Sylvia.
When I saw the fight I saw Machida almost finish Tito at the end of the first, he had Tito in the crucifix and was raining down the leather. Tito was saved by the bell, had Machida had another ten seconds he probably would have finished him. Then, with a minute left in the 3rd, Machida dropped Tito with a nice knee to the liver and nearly finished the fight there. I see what you're trying to say, but Machida tried to finish Tito and he nearly did. Remember, Tito is a hard fighter to finish.
Neither situation was machida trying to finish the fight on purpose. He reversed Tito and realized he had a great position and attemteped to finish. The knee was just an amazing shot. I know he didnt try to finish with that knee because if he was trying to finish he would have used a combination after the knee to finish Tito. He simply threw the knee and backed off then realized tito was hurt and jumped on him.
You talk as if you know what Machida is thinking. He wasn't trying to finish the fight on purpose?!?!
so tell me....after machida landed the knee he took two steps back.....exaclty how does that mean he was trying to finish the fight. he landed a shot and backed off.
also....TITO initiated a body lock and Machida reversed it and fell on top but i guess he was trying to intice Tito into the clinch and reverse what he was doing.
i guess you knew what Machida was thinking.... pay attention to what is going on. Machida backs off EVERY time after he lands a shot. But a keyboard warrior knows everything so nevermind what i said....
wolfman
5/27/08 10:54:40PM
Chill out, that's why I said I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. As you stated your opinion and I stated mine...I'll have to re-watch the fight, but I don't remember Machida backing up right away when he landed the nice liver shot(which he PURPOSELY initiated) 
. I know it is your opinion and both of us are thinking hypothetically about the fight, so our perception is slightly different on how the fight went down. I apologize for pissing you off and I see what you're trying to say. 
I guess I did turn into a keyboard warrior for a minute(sorry again). I'm just trying to say that it is hard to determine whether or not he was purposely trying to finish the fight, when he got Tito down with the body-lock and when he dropped him with the knee.
mkiv9secsupra
5/27/08 10:57:46PM
Posted by wolfman
ha youll have to excuse me. im drunk and have the superman drunk complex right now lol. i guess the only thing to distinguish Machida as a solid fighter is more top competition. I agree neither of us knows the truth about it so well have to wait and see Machidas next fight
wolfman
5/27/08 11:06:31PM
Posted by mkiv9secsupra
Posted by wolfman
ha youll have to excuse me. im drunk and have the superman drunk complex right now lol. i guess the only thing to distinguish Machida as a solid fighter is more top competition. I agree neither of us knows the truth about it so well have to wait and see Machidas next fight
Yeah, no problem man. I was rude with my comment, so it was understandable how you reacted.
Also, the more I read what you said, the more I understood what you were trying to say. I was just looking at it from a different perception as you were going off of how Machida reacted during the fight. Sorry again. 
Kracker_Jap
5/28/08 11:34:09
Just for the record i have always defended the so called LnP and i will also defend the new ninja Machida style....
In the end its a fight we all watch so we can see a guy empose his will on another
It's cool to have a favorite stlye, but don't get all BUTT HURT when a style you don't like wins because of the fighters greatness at that style or the other fighter inability to figure out an answer......
In the end its a fight we all watch so we can see a guy empose his will on another
It's cool to have a favorite stlye, but don't get all BUTT HURT when a style you don't like wins because of the fighters greatness at that style or the other fighter inability to figure out an answer......