Mizugaki vs Cariaso

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » Mizugaki vs Cariaso
POLL: Was it a good decision?
Yes 13% (4)
No, Mizugaki should have won 87% (26)
bjj1605
2/26/12 5:42:11PM
So for all of you who are familiar with me on this thread, you know that I'm a big critic of the current UFC judging system.

This fight was exactly how I would like fights to be scored from now on.

Mizugaki got takedowns and top position put he was actually LOSING the grappling exchanges. He also got worked on the feet. Take downs are usually WAYYYYYYYYYYY over scored, so this was really exciting for me.

I'm not sure if it was just because it was in Japan or if the judges are actually getting better.

What do you guys think? I'm adding a poll but I'd appreciate some comments too.

I'm sure that plenty of people who are used to shitty UFC judging thought Mizugaki won....but can you defend that position?

Edit: Just so we're clear, I picked Mizugaki to win and was rooting for him as well. In no way was I "hoping" that Cariaso would win the fight. He just did. When it was over I was thinking "Cariaso is about to get robbed because these types of decisions always go to the guy on top. At least I picked Mizugaki."

I was pleasantly surprised when they got it right.
Twenty20Dollars
2/26/12 5:45:09PM
People were saying Frankie got takedowns and should have won.
bjj1605
2/26/12 5:49:37PM

Posted by Twenty20Dollars

People were saying Frankie got takedowns and should have won.



I disagree with that as well.

I think people need to change their thinking about takedowns.

A takedown is worth very little on its own (unless its a slam and it causes damage.) It should be viewed as a path to do something else.

The GOAL behind a takedown should be:

1) Passing to a dominant position.
2) Landing meaningful strikes.
3) Attempting a submission.

If none of those three things happens after a takedown, the takedown its self is worth almost nothing.
Aether
2/26/12 5:55:36PM
I would have to watch this again. At the time I definitely thought Mizugaki won the fight, but I also thought the rounds were very close. I think my impression was that Cariaso won the striking, but by a narrow enough margin that Mizugaki's top control was enough to sway the fight in his favour.

I'm pretty sure I don't agree that Cariaso was winning the grappling. If I recall correctly he didn't come very close to any sub attempts, and got one sweep in the second round from which Mizugaki immediately stood up. To me the question is whether the top control was enough to overcome the difference in striking, and I would have to re-watch to really say with confidence.
bjj1605
2/26/12 5:59:16PM

Posted by Aether

Mizugaki's top control was enough to sway the fight in his favour.




I take issue with the term "top control."

Its true that you can control a guy from the top. But that phrase makes it sound like the words are synonymous.

Just because a guy on top doesn't mean he's in control.

You can control a guy from guard or even half guard.
Aether
2/26/12 6:14:38PM
It's incredibly rare that the guy on the bottom is in control. Unless he's constantly attacking with subs, he's on his back because the other fighter put him there, not because he wants to be, and even if you're able to neutralize the other guy, you're still in a defensive position, not an offensive one. It's like defending a sub or checking a kick. You might make his offense worth less, but it doesn't mean you're in control of what's happening, you're still the one defending.

Again, for this fight specifically I would have to re-watch to argue one scoring or the other, but as far as controlling someone from the bottom goes in a general sense, unless you're mounting some offense, you're not in control IMO. Just holding onto someone who took you down or staying in guard doesn't equate to control as far as I'm concerned. Even if you neutralize the guy on top of you, you're still in the worse position, you're carrying his weight, gravity is on his side, and you're there because of his offense.
tepid55
2/26/12 6:27:43PM
I thought Mizugaki clearly won 2 of the 3 rounds.
bjj1605
2/26/12 6:39:42PM

Posted by Aether

It's incredibly rare that the guy on the bottom is in control. Unless he's constantly attacking with subs, he's on his back because the other fighter put him there, not because he wants to be, and even if you're able to neutralize the other guy, you're still in a defensive position, not an offensive one. It's like defending a sub or checking a kick. You might make his offense worth less, but it doesn't mean you're in control of what's happening, you're still the one defending.

Again, for this fight specifically I would have to re-watch to argue one scoring or the other, but as far as controlling someone from the bottom goes in a general sense, unless you're mounting some offense, you're not in control IMO. Just holding onto someone who took you down or staying in guard doesn't equate to control as far as I'm concerned. Even if you neutralize the guy on top of you, you're still in the worse position, you're carrying his weight, gravity is on his side, and you're there because of his offense.



Go to your nearest BJJ gym and ask to roll with the guy with the best guard. Spend the whole rolling session in his guard and then tell me if you feel like you're in control.

I'm not trying to be a dick. I respect your opinion, but I vehemently disagree with it.

First of all, takedown aren't the only way to end up in guard. "Pulling guard" is very common in grappling competitions. In that case, the guy most certainly DOES want to be on his back. The only reason we don't see more guard pulling in MMA is because judges give decisions to the fighter on top. If you fix the judging I guarantee you guard pulling would make a resurgence.

Second, why does the guy on bottom have to be attacking to be in control? You don't apply the same standard to the guy on top. "Gravity is on his side", "You're carrying his weight." That's really just not true. I'm not sure if you do jiu jitsu or another grappling art, but being in guard is not at all an uncomfortable position. Side control, mount, back mount, north south, spraw postion....they all suck when you're on the bottom.

Guard is nothing like that. In guard you have your legs wrapped around the guy and he's sitting on his heels. He's actually carrying his own weight and none of it is really pressing down on you. More important, the guy on the bottom actual had more literal control (in the sense that he can dictate the way the other guy moves his body.) On top you have two options: punch or try to escape. The top guy can't really do anything to stop the bottom guy's movements. The guy on bottom can use his legs, wrist control, rubber guard, over under control, ect. to prevent the guy on top from doing what he wants. This is literally CONTROL.

In BJJ we usually say guard is a "NEUTRAL" position. In reality the guy on bottom often has the advantage. The only reason it's "NEUTRAL" rather than "DOMINANT" is because the guy on top can more easily move to a better position while the guy on bottom has to sweep in order to achieve a dominant position.

I just can't really understand your classification. The guy on top is "In Control" whether or not he does anything. The guy on bottom isn't "in control" unless he's attacking. You're using two different standards. Control is a separate scoring criteria from "Aggression" or "Effective Grappling" which is what I think you're talking about.
Aether
2/26/12 7:05:03PM
It's not BJJ though, it's MMA. You can throw punches, which COMPLETELY changes the context of everything you just said. IMO In BJJ it's a neutral position, in MMA it isn't, because the guy on top can punch you MUCH harder, which is exactly what Mizugaki was doing.

Yes you can pull guard, and if you pull guard it's most likely because you're going to start attacking from the bottom, which is exactly the way I said you can exhibit control from the bottom. As far as not carrying the guy's weight, I'm not sure how you can argue this. If the guy is laying on top of you with his head in your chest, any time you want to move, you have to deal with the weight of his body pressing down on you, having your legs wrapped around him might make it a little less difficult than it is in side control, but it doesn't completely negate it, if he postures up onto his legs you may not be carrying his weight, but then he has plenty of space to punch you. For all of these reasons, in the context of MMA, guard is not a neutral position IMO.

I think you're looking at these positions from a straight BJJ perspective, and not considering how dramatically adding striking in changes the dynamic of these positions.
bjj1605
2/26/12 7:14:55PM

Posted by Aether

It's not BJJ though, it's MMA. You can throw punches, which COMPLETELY changes the context of everything you just said. IMO In BJJ it's a neutral position, in MMA it isn't, because the guy on top can punch you MUCH harder, which is exactly what Mizugaki was doing.

Yes you can pull guard, and if you pull guard it's most likely because you're going to start attacking from the bottom, which is exactly the way I said you can exhibit control from the bottom. As far as not carrying the guy's weight, I'm not sure how you can argue this. If the guy is laying on top of you with his head in your chest, any time you want to move, you have to deal with the weight of his body pressing down on you, having your legs wrapped around him might make it a little less difficult than it is in side control, but it doesn't completely negate it, if he postures up onto his legs you may not be carrying his weight, but then he has plenty of space to punch you. For all of these reasons, in the context of MMA, guard is not a neutral position IMO.

I think you're looking at these positions from a straight BJJ perspective, and not considering how dramatically adding striking in changes the dynamic of these positions.



I'll admit, I've never had a full contact MMA fight (although I've done MMA sparring with guys like Pat Curran). But I still know it makes a big difference when the guy can punch you.

But that is a red herring in this argument.

I wasn't talking about BJJ vs MMA. I was talking specifically about MMA.

No where in my comments will you find me saying "A guy on his back who is getting punched in the face is winning the fight."


That would be a dumb argument.

I'm talking about a guy on his back who's not taking significant damage and is either throwing his own strikes or dictating the grappling.

Edit: I can agree with you that guard isn't a neutral position in MMA. But it's still NEAR neutral. So either guy can win depending on what he's doing. IMO Cariaso won because he was at least "not losing" on the ground and because he was winning on the feet.
Twenty20Dollars
2/26/12 7:23:23PM
I think it comes down to how the judges interpret the rules.
Aether
2/26/12 7:49:30PM
Ok, I rewatched this fight just now and I will stand by Mizugaki winning, this is what I saw:

Round 1 - on the feet it's nearly dead even, Mizugaki slips punches and counters 3 or 4 times in the first minute, lands a leg kick or two, for the second minute Cariaso lands a few right hands, then Mizugaki gets a TD with about 2:45 left in the round Cariaso goes for an omoplata which Mizugaki escapes fairly easily without getting swept. For the next 2 minutes Mizugaki alternates between pushing his weight into Cariaso's chest, and posturing up for GnP Cariaso throws some short elbows, but because he has no space to create momentum, they are worth very little compared to Mizugaki's punches from the top.

10-9 Mizugaki

Round 2 - Mizugaki pushes forward with a few strikes, lands only one and ties up against the cage while eating a shot in return while closing the distance, Cariaso throws a knee or two and Mizugaki throws a couple of punches, they separate and reset, for the next minute both fighters are missing almost all of their strikes, Cariaso throws a high kick, which lands under Mizugaki's arm while Mizugaki lands a counter hook. Again at about 2:45 they tie up, Cariaso lands 3-4 knees to Mizugaki's 1 and Mizugaki gets the takedown a few seconds later. Mizugaki is throwing some arm punches while putting his weight on Cariaso to try to keep him against the cage, Cariaso is again throwing short elbows, but Mizugaki is giving him no space to develop power, Mizugaki postures up and throws some significant GnP, then plants his head back into Cariaso's chest, at which point Cariaso starts working a sweep. He sweeps Mizugaki but Mizugaki stands back up before Cariaso can get on top, they reset, tie up and the round ends. Again the standup is almost dead even, but Mizugaki's punches from the top are worth more than Cariaso's short elbows from the bottom IMO.

10-9 Mizugaki

Round 3 - Cariaso throws a glancing headkick, Mizugaki pushes forward and ties up against the cage, Cariaso is lands 5-6 knees and Mizugaki lands only 2-3, Cariaso reverses Mizugaki and tries for a TD of his own, when he is unsuccessful, he breaks and lands a nice combination to Mizugaki's head, and the fighters reset. This time Cariaso pushes forward landing a left and tying up against the cage, Mizugaki reverses, Cariaso lands 3-4 good knees and a good elbow to the head. Cariaso reverses Mizugaki against the cage and throws more knees. Again Cariaso breaks with a good combination to Mizugaki's head. Cariaso lands another glancing headkick at 2:15 and falls over, Mizugaki scrambles on top. This time Mizugaki is not posturing up at all, he passes to half guard but Cariaso immediately regains full guard, only 3-4 punches from Mizugaki from the top during this period, and Cariaso scrambles back to his feet both fighters connect and break, Cariaso charges at Mizugaki and the round ends. Cariaso got the better of the standup by a significant margin in this round, and Mizugaki did not GnP like he did in the first 2 rounds when he was on top.

10-9 Cariaso

I watched it 2-3 times, including once at 50% speed, and I think Mizugaki having top control with decent GnP for 3 minutes in both of the first 2 rounds won him the fight. Cariaso managed to keep the fight standing for about 3 minutes in the final round, and outstruck him by more than 2-3 shots, so Mizugaki's ground control with no GnP was not enough to give him this round

29-28 Mizugaki IMO.
Aether
2/26/12 7:51:36PM

Posted by bjj1605


Posted by Aether

It's not BJJ though, it's MMA. You can throw punches, which COMPLETELY changes the context of everything you just said. IMO In BJJ it's a neutral position, in MMA it isn't, because the guy on top can punch you MUCH harder, which is exactly what Mizugaki was doing.

Yes you can pull guard, and if you pull guard it's most likely because you're going to start attacking from the bottom, which is exactly the way I said you can exhibit control from the bottom. As far as not carrying the guy's weight, I'm not sure how you can argue this. If the guy is laying on top of you with his head in your chest, any time you want to move, you have to deal with the weight of his body pressing down on you, having your legs wrapped around him might make it a little less difficult than it is in side control, but it doesn't completely negate it, if he postures up onto his legs you may not be carrying his weight, but then he has plenty of space to punch you. For all of these reasons, in the context of MMA, guard is not a neutral position IMO.

I think you're looking at these positions from a straight BJJ perspective, and not considering how dramatically adding striking in changes the dynamic of these positions.



I'll admit, I've never had a full contact MMA fight (although I've done MMA sparring with guys like Pat Curran). But I still know it makes a big difference when the guy can punch you.

But that is a red herring in this argument.

I wasn't talking about BJJ vs MMA. I was talking specifically about MMA.

No where in my comments will you find me saying "A guy on his back who is getting punched in the face is winning the fight."


That would be a dumb argument.

I'm talking about a guy on his back who's not taking significant damage and is either throwing his own strikes or dictating the grappling.

Edit: I can agree with you that guard isn't a neutral position in MMA. But it's still NEAR neutral. So either guy can win depending on what he's doing. IMO Cariaso won because he was at least "not losing" on the ground and because he was winning on the feet.



I will agree with it being near-neutral with only a slight advantage for the guy on top, I think we agree in terms of the value of the position, and we disagree with how effective Mizugaki actually was on the ground in this fight.
Budgellism
2/26/12 9:06:31PM
14-1 is around what I thought this would be by the end of the day.
Bubbles
2/26/12 10:51:27PM
make it 17-1
bjj1605
2/27/12 1:38:38AM
maybe I need to re-watch the fight...

I'll see what I think after a second look.
KungFuMaster
2/27/12 12:43:26PM
I finally had a chance to watch this fight and I agree with Dana White.

Cariaso did landed more punches but IMO it was not overwhelming or should I say not enough to balance out the takedowns and grappling control of Mizugaki. If Cariaso was DOMINATE on the feet, then I can see him earning the decision but IMO he was not. He only did a tiny bit more than edge Mizugaki while standing.

After the official decision was read, the look of surprise on Cariaso's face said it all.
bjj1605
2/27/12 3:54:00PM
Round 1: The entire first half of the round is spent on the feet. Cariaso doesn't land anything devastating or rock Mizugaki, but he is clearly getting the better of the striking exchanges. At about 2:40 Mizugaki lands his first takedown. Cariaso almost immediately attacks with an omoplata. Mizugaki escapes and falls back into guard. Cariaso is keeping head and wrist control and avoiding the punches. Mizugaki punches but can't land clean. Cariaso attacks again with an arm bar or omoplata that never gets going. In the last 10-15secs Mizugaki gets enough space to open up with strikes.

Fightmetric Stats for Round One: Cariaso lands 25 strikes to Mizugaki's 23. Mizugaki lands 9 significant strikes to Cariaso's 8. Mizugaki was 1 for 2 on takedowns.

Close round but Mizugaki eeks it out 10-9 thanks to his takedown, even though almost half the round was spent standing.

Round 2: Both fighters stay in the pocket and throw early in the round. Mizugaki gets tagged with a solid counter and moves in to clinch. Mizugaki secures double underhooks but is unable to get the takedown. The fighters separate. The fighter strike until the mid-point of the fight with Cariaso landing cleaner shots and backing Mizugaki up. Cariaso presses Mizugaki against the cage and attempts a takedowns of his own. Mizugaki reverses and lands his own takedown. Mizugaki attempts to pass but is unable to. Cariaso lands some ineffectual elbows from the bottom. Mizugaki stands up and throws some power shots that don't land. Cariaso attempts a neck-crank that turns into a successful sweep. Mizugaki escapes back to his feet before Cariaso can secure position. Cariaso presses Mizugaki against the cage and lands a hard elbow to end the round.

Fightmetric for Round 2: Mizugaki lands one more strike (23 to 22) but Cariaso lands almost double the amount of significant strikes (15 to 8.) Mizugaki is 1 for two on takedowns. Fightmetric makes a mistake however (which is quite common) by failing to tally Cariaso's takedown attempt or his submission attempt. Presumably this is because it was a clinch takedown rather than a wrestling shot??? Maybe they didn't recognize the submission??? Anyway....Cariaso also scores with a sweep.

The majority of the round was spent standing with Cariaso winning. Mizugaki was unable to pass or land even a single significant strike from the top. Cariaso landed more significant strikes and was able to reverse Mizugaki and land a good shot to end the round. 10-9 Cariaso.


Round 3: Cariaso lands a decent head kick to start the action. Mizugaki presses Cariaso into the cage but it is Cariaso landing the shots. Cariaso reverses position. Cariaso attempts another takedown (which Fighmetric does tally this time.) Cariaso breaks away with a flurry of 3-4 punches that all land. Cariaso attempts another takedown following a right hand (which Fightmetric misses.) Mizugaki presses Cariaso into the cage. Cariaso reverses and lands a very good elbow. Cariaso breaks away with another flurry. At almost the 2:00 minute mark Cariaso lands a head kick but falls down. Mizugaki jumps on top. Cariaso maintains head and wrist control with his feet on the hips. Cariaso attempts an arm bar that he's unable to lock up. Cariaso attempts a guillotine but Mizugaki uses it to pass to half guard briefly. Cariaso returns to guard. Cariaso manages to get back to his feet and land a hard right hand just before the buzzer.

Fightmetric Round 3: Cariaso landed more stikes, more significant strikes, and had a better strike percentage (28 to 24, 14 to 11, 74% to 64%.)

The majority of the round was spent standing. Cariaso landed better shots and more of them. Mizugaki was unable to do anything from the top. 10-9 Caraiso.


Just want to point out to everyone that according to fight metric Cariaso attempted only 1 takedown (actually 3) and that he attempted no submission attempts (actually 5.)

But even according to the stats that they got right, Cariaso won the fight.


All three judges had the exact same score and they were all right.
Aether
2/27/12 9:10:09PM
I've never seen such a generous definition of "submission attempt".

Obviously we dramatically disagree, and frankly I think you're hugely stretching the definition of a submission attempt to suit your case, as well as over-stating the difference in striking. It's generous to say that Cariaso even attempted 1 submission (the omoplata) because this is almost always used to sweep the opponent, not to finish him, and I'm pretty sure the finish rate on omoplatas in the UFC is sitting at about 0 out of several hundred attempts. I don't see how you can say wrapping your arm around the back of a guy's head as he tries to pass guard constitutes a "guillotine attempt" or wrapping one arm around the guy's posted arm for 1 second and never getting your legs and hips out of guard is an "armbar attempt".

Clearly neither of us will convince the other.
bjj1605
2/28/12 10:01:29PM

Posted by Aether

I've never seen such a generous definition of "submission attempt".

Obviously we dramatically disagree, and frankly I think you're hugely stretching the definition of a submission attempt to suit your case, as well as over-stating the difference in striking. It's generous to say that Cariaso even attempted 1 submission (the omoplata) because this is almost always used to sweep the opponent, not to finish him, and I'm pretty sure the finish rate on omoplatas in the UFC is sitting at about 0 out of several hundred attempts. I don't see how you can say wrapping your arm around the back of a guy's head as he tries to pass guard constitutes a "guillotine attempt" or wrapping one arm around the guy's posted arm for 1 second and never getting your legs and hips out of guard is an "armbar attempt".

Clearly neither of us will convince the other.



Nothing generous about my definition. Just literal.

Its a "submission attempt" when someone attempts a submission.


Then you can break it down and categorize it depending on how successful the attempt was. Grappling competitions do this.

But just because a submission attempt isn't close to finishing doesn't mean that it wasn't attempted.

Sorry to hear that you've given up on the conversation though.
Aether
2/28/12 11:17:06PM
Well we both gave round by round breakdowns of how we scored the fight and why, and we disagree, I just don't see how we can continue the conversation without repeating ourselves. At some point we have to just agree to disagree.
bjj1605
2/29/12 12:43:26AM

Posted by Aether

Well we both gave round by round breakdowns of how we scored the fight and why, and we disagree, I just don't see how we can continue the conversation without repeating ourselves. At some point we have to just agree to disagree.



Ok.

Fair enough.

Just want to point out though that I didn't JUST provide a round by round break down.

I also gave the statistics from Fightmetric.

Looking at those stats alone you ought to come to the conclusion that Cariaso won the fight.
george112
2/29/12 1:00:49AM
Answer this question and you'll find the winner.


Who LOOKED like they won..

It's simple really.


Mizugaki was on top of Cariaso most of the time.

On TOP.


The whole reason for this argument is because Mizugaki LOOKED like he won.

Stats are Bullshit I've come to learn in mma.
Aether
2/29/12 1:03:36AM

Posted by bjj1605


Posted by Aether

Well we both gave round by round breakdowns of how we scored the fight and why, and we disagree, I just don't see how we can continue the conversation without repeating ourselves. At some point we have to just agree to disagree.



Ok.

Fair enough.

Just want to point out though that I didn't JUST provide a round by round break down.

I also gave the statistics from Fightmetric.

Looking at those stats alone you ought to come to the conclusion that Cariaso won the fight.



No, not really, since the gap in striking in each round is literally about 2-3 strikes (exactly what I described in my breakdown) whereas the gap in grappling is decisively in Mizugaki's favour, and at least half of the first two rounds were spent grappling.

25 strikes vs 23 strikes in round 1 for example is virtually no difference, and 22-23 in round 2 (in mizugaki's favour) is even less, you're vastly mis-representing the statistics, and then when they don't agree with your argument, you alter them (5 submission attempts for Cariaso)

So no, the statistics do not clearly indicate Cariaso won, you're bending them badly, you're taking the ones that support your argument and agreeing with them, and taking the ones that don't support your argument and saying that they're incorrect. If you're going to cite statistics to support your argument, you don't get to change the parts that disprove your points and keep the ones that support them.
Aether
2/29/12 1:26:06AM
Either use the statistics or don't use them. You cherry-pick whichever ones you like, then plug your own made-up stats into the portions that you don't like.

Fightmetric is correcte as long as it agrees with you, and it's wrong if it disagrees, at which point you amend their interpretation to suit your argument..
bjj1605
2/29/12 4:46:40PM

Posted by Aether

Either use the statistics or don't use them. You cherry-pick whichever ones you like, then plug your own made-up stats into the portions that you don't like.

Fightmetric is correcte as long as it agrees with you, and it's wrong if it disagrees, at which point you amend their interpretation to suit your argument..



Ok...so I was saying by Fightmetric's statistics. Not my own.

Regardless, you're right about this conversation going no where.
Related Topics