Strikers vs. Submission Specialist

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » General MMA Talk » Strikers vs. Submission Specialist
ac_gi
2/17/07 1:13:00AM
I know this topic is played out, but I wanted to post it anyway.

The Pride/UFC champions and their most dominant skill is Gnp or some type of striking.

Strikers or GnP...
Takanori Gomi
Sean Sherk
Georges St. Pierre
Anderson Silva
Dan Henderson
Chuck Liddell
Wanderlei Silva
Tim Sylvia

Submissions...
Fedor Emelianenko (sambo, 48% of his wins by submission)

It seems to me that being great at striking, then learning submission defense is the way to go. Any thoughts?
jmoooooo
2/17/07 2:59:48AM
if fedor wins 48% of his matches by submission...then wouldnt 52% be by striking?....wouldnt that make him a striker more than a submission specialist? (by 4%)


just curious.........


i dont think anyone who is really heavily trained in only one area is going to dominate..........the people on your first list arent 1 dimensional..

anderson silva, with a black belt in bjj is hardly just a striker/gnp guy. he is a submission specialist, who chooses to strike because hes equally good there.

george st. pierre is a purple belt in bjj with a very heavy wrestling background (trains with the canadian olympic team, was second in the country at the collegiate level 2 years in a row in his weight class), so between his ground control and bjj training with carlson gracie, if the UFC was just a grappling promotion with the same fighters, he would still be top 2 or 3 in his weight class, with an equal or better shot at being the champion than anyone..he just chooses to strike...but he has submitted people before...

tim sylvia might be the most 1 dimensional fighter on the list, but is fighting (or has been lately) in a watered down division..and he also has the advantage of his freakish size/reach/weight/etc.

chuck liddel might be the other exception, but he does have a wrestling background (college) and trains bjj (purple belt, i think)


point being you have to do it all, and you have to be good at it all in order to be the champ. Fedor and GSP are the two best examples....can finish it standing, can finish it on the ground, and are equally comfortable with both.


the one trick ponies as champions are slowly being replaced. matt hughes was just a wrestler, who was training in striking a little, but no heavy background in it. and he was exposed by both gsp and penn. sylvia will be exposed when he fights a truely well rounded fighter who can handle his reach, sylvia at 240lbs and 6'4 with the same skills wouldnt be the champion.

so now that ive rambled forever....the best answer is to be both a striker and a submission specialist.

JunCTion
2/17/07 3:07:42AM

Posted by jmoooooo

if fedor wins 48% of his matches by submission...then wouldnt 52% be by striking?....wouldnt that make him a striker more than a submission specialist? (by 4%)




no.
48% by submission (12)
24% by tko/ko (6)
28% by decision (7)
Svartorm
2/17/07 3:21:00AM
I just posted about this in another thread. Right now, strikes own because their takedown defenses are quicker than takedowns. The next step will probably be people that are great clinch fighters and who work takedowns from the clinch. Quinton Jackson could be the vanguard of a new era if he can keep his head in the game.
JunCTion
2/17/07 3:38:35AM

Posted by Svartorm

I just posted about this in another thread. Right now, strikes own because their takedown defenses are quicker than takedowns. The next step will probably be people that are great clinch fighters and who work takedowns from the clinch. Quinton Jackson could be the vanguard of a new era if he can keep his head in the game.



i know chucks td defense is great but does anybody try to clinch with him
could a. silva clinch beat chucks strikes
didnt sylvia knock aa down in the clinch
Svartorm
2/17/07 3:53:02AM
If A. Silva was the same weight, he'd stand a good chance against Chuck I think. Thats not the kind of clinch fighting I'm talking about though. Thats striking from the clinch, as opposed to grappling and takedowns from the clinch. Someone I haven't seen in awhile that had a good clinch game was Trevor Prangley. Not to say he could beat Chuck, but his style of fighting could well be chucks anti-thesis.
OB_Juan
2/17/07 4:06:03AM

Posted by Svartorm

If A. Silva was the same weight, he'd stand a good chance against Chuck I think. Thats not the kind of clinch fighting I'm talking about though. Thats striking from the clinch, as opposed to grappling and takedowns from the clinch. Someone I haven't seen in awhile that had a good clinch game was Trevor Prangley. Not to say he could beat Chuck, but his style of fighting could well be chucks anti-thesis.



But Randy is a greco roman specialist. if anybody were to get Chuck down it would have been him. The thing w/ Chuck is that he doesn't even let you get close enough to clinch. While I don't think your logic is far off overall, using Chuck is a bad example.


Following your logic, I think judo will prove it's worth in the near future. Plus, judokas just seem to be natural badasses (Yoshida, Karo, Nastula, etc are all tough mofos to beat).
Svartorm
2/17/07 4:29:09AM
You're right, Chuck probably is a bad example, as his arms are way long and he keeps a ton of distance between himself and his opponent.

As for Judo, I'll be interesting to see how the great judokas in the sport adapt to no-gi fighting. I'm not well versed in Judo, but most of the moves I've seen are very gi intensive, using the grip to perform throws. No-gi fighting seems to severly hamper that, although Karo has done well in working around this.
Snacks
2/17/07 6:20:02AM

Posted by OB_Juan


Posted by Svartorm

If A. Silva was the same weight, he'd stand a good chance against Chuck I think. Thats not the kind of clinch fighting I'm talking about though. Thats striking from the clinch, as opposed to grappling and takedowns from the clinch. Someone I haven't seen in awhile that had a good clinch game was Trevor Prangley. Not to say he could beat Chuck, but his style of fighting could well be chucks anti-thesis.



But Randy is a greco roman specialist. if anybody were to get Chuck down it would have been him. The thing w/ Chuck is that he doesn't even let you get close enough to clinch. While I don't think your logic is far off overall, using Chuck is a bad example.


Following your logic, I think judo will prove it's worth in the near future. Plus, judokas just seem to be natural badasses (Yoshida, Karo, Nastula, etc are all tough mofos to beat).



SK Absolute and Grabaka are where it's at.
crimethinc
2/17/07 7:09:46AM
I think the advantage that strikers have against sub guys is that it's a lot harder to defend against a striker. Submission guys need to take the fight to the ground. There are exceptions but for the most part submissions are a ground game. If you have guys like Chuck with outstanding takedown defense it really neutralizes the sub game and forces the guy to exchange with a guy who is much more in his element. Plus, even on the ground a guy with very little submission knowledge can defend himself or at least restrain his opponent enough to get it back to it's feet. We've all heard the saying that a less skilled fighter has a "puncher's chance." One wild punch can end a fight. I've never seen a guy reviewing his fight and saying "I just reacted on instinct and accidentally got this guy in a triangle choke."
loller90278
2/17/07 1:20:02PM

Posted by Svartorm

If A. Silva was the same weight, he'd stand a good chance against Chuck I think. Thats not the kind of clinch fighting I'm talking about though. Thats striking from the clinch, as opposed to grappling and takedowns from the clinch. Someone I haven't seen in awhile that had a good clinch game was Trevor Prangley. Not to say he could beat Chuck, but his style of fighting could well be chucks anti-thesis.



ahh yes trevor prangley.. wheres he fighting now?
his fights with semenov were niiiiiiiiiice
ac_gi
2/17/07 6:01:43PM

Posted by crimethinc

We've all heard the saying that a less skilled fighter has a "puncher's chance." One wild punch can end a fight. I've never seen a guy reviewing his fight and saying "I just reacted on instinct and accidentally got this guy in a triangle choke."



LOL! That's classic.
JimiMak
2/17/07 9:44:48PM

Posted by crimethinc

I think the advantage that strikers have against sub guys is that it's a lot harder to defend against a striker. Submission guys need to take the fight to the ground. There are exceptions but for the most part submissions are a ground game. If you have guys like Chuck with outstanding takedown defense it really neutralizes the sub game and forces the guy to exchange with a guy who is much more in his element. ."



True, for the most part. But then you have a guy like Fedor or (I hate to say it) Arona, if they want to clinch or go to the ground it will. It just seems lately it's hard to find good grapplers that defend striking well. In the same way as how at one point there were few strikers that could deal with a grappler. I think the comment Svartorm made may be right about fighters who can fight from the clinch having the future advantage. I just think they would have to strike, throw, pull and take down from the clinch. Maybe eventually that'll be the norm and we'll be talking about what striker/wrestler can neutralize someone's clinch. But for now you have to strike to be a champ, esp at a higher weight.
Svartorm
2/18/07 4:10:33AM

Posted by loller90278


Posted by Svartorm

If A. Silva was the same weight, he'd stand a good chance against Chuck I think. Thats not the kind of clinch fighting I'm talking about though. Thats striking from the clinch, as opposed to grappling and takedowns from the clinch. Someone I haven't seen in awhile that had a good clinch game was Trevor Prangley. Not to say he could beat Chuck, but his style of fighting could well be chucks anti-thesis.



ahh yes trevor prangley.. wheres he fighting now?
his fights with semenov were niiiiiiiiiice



I think his last fight was in Bodog.
Snacks
2/18/07 4:57:34AM
lol at including GnP as a form of Striking, yet not taking into consideration the wrestling and submission defense required to effectively utilize such a tactic.
ac_gi
2/18/07 10:54:24PM

Posted by Snacks

lol at including GnP as a form of Striking, yet not taking into consideration the wrestling and submission defense required to effectively utilize such a tactic.



GnP is a form of striking.

I don't know about you, but this looks like it's going to be a strike to me!
Image Attachment(s):
Photo Attachment 1
Related Topics