Is UFC not brutal enough...do wrestlers have an unfair advantage?

[hopkinsfan07]

Bring in head kicks to a downed fighter!!! Wrestlers like Tito or Hughes have no risk when shooting for a takedown against a mostly stand up guy. In pride if you missed a takedown someone like Rua or Silva would smash yo in the head with a kick.

Im not saying bring back stomps (although i wouldnt mind) As some find them to violent.

I think the rules should be a tad more balenced.

Woaa and that thread about not letting people punch from the mount :patsch
I thought that was a joke post mocking the first lad :lol:. When did people become such wimps. I say bring back the violence of Pride.

[Popkins]

Weird that a B-Hop is so passionate about real MMA. Are you aware that Hop thinks MMA is "gay porn"?

[hopkinsfan07]

Weird that a B-Hop is so passionate about real MMA. Are you aware that Hop thinks MMA is "gay porn"?


:lol: I cant agree with everything he says of course.

[Grievesy]

I can't say I care either way. As far as I'm aware, no one in Pride was ever seriously hurt from them. The ref is there for a reason. So I don't see why they can't be brought back in, other than for the fact that the mainstream public may not like it and it may alienate the sport, which is the last thing it needs.

[Polymath]

Bring in headbutts and knees on the ground, and vertical elbows, and don't stand fights up or break up clinches...if anything the curent rules are slanted against the dominant wrestler. Just imagine Brock Lesnar with headbutts allowed.

[AmericanSugar]

i agree bring back head kicks.

[PH|LLA]

I'm not really a connaisseur in MMA and I was wondering why GSP was not unloading his knee to the head against Dan Hardy when he had a clear opening. Of course I figured its cause there's a rule against it but I was kind of disappointed cause the opening was definately there.

[hopkinsfan07]

I'm not really a connaisseur in MMA and I was wondering why GSP was not unloading his knee to the head against Dan Hardy when he had a clear opening. Of course I figured its cause there's a rule against it but I was kind of disappointed cause the opening was definately there.


And how are they anyharder than a standing knee that you push tere head onto if in a muay thai clinch.

Unified rules are stupid, like the no verticle elbow rule...there no more damaging than any other elbow, there just better at getting through the guard.

[achillesthegreat]

Shoot for the takedown and you can get punched or kneed in the face.

Kicks on the ground are too dangerous. I think upkicks to a posture opponent (Vera vs Jones) should be allowed.

[Wilhelm]

Yeah, the rules against no upkicks when your opponent is in your guard and no downward elbows are clearly dumb as they aren't any harder than other techniques that are perfectly legal. Knees to the ground I think are the same except for the fact that from side control the part of the head that your knee has the most access to is the temple rather than the front which could be much more dangerous.

I also think headbuts should be allowed. It would make top control a lot more interesting, not to mention the clinch. I doubt that will ever happen though. When boxing guys think headbuts they think "the fight ends on a lame cut" and since state athletic commissions are so heavily influenced by boxing guys I don't think that's going to change. Not for a while at least.

[BewareofDawg]

Anderson, GSP, Aldo, Machida and Fedor say.....NO! BJ has wrestling experience so I didn't include him.

UNFAIR advantage? :lol: Come on man, it's not like a "secret" art

[Stoo]

Yeah, the rules against no upkicks when your opponent is in your guard and no downward elbows are clearly dumb as they aren't any harder than other techniques that are perfectly legal. Knees to the ground I think are the same except for the fact that from side control the part of the head that your knee has the most access to is the temple rather than the front which could be much more dangerous.

I also think headbuts should be allowed. It would make top control a lot more interesting, not to mention the clinch. I doubt that will ever happen though. When boxing guys think headbuts they think "the fight ends on a lame cut" and since state athletic commissions are so heavily influenced by boxing guys I don't think that's going to change. Not for a while at least.

I agree, I think knees on the ground would give wrestlers even more of an advantage. Igor v Coleman in the OW Grand Prix comes to mind. But would like to see a senseable amendment to a few of the rules regarding knees and elbows on the ground

[dahoe]

knees on the ground rule. just check out wandys or shoguns old fights in Pride.

[tri-pod]

i agree bring back head kicks.


:rofl You want the mount to be severely cut out of the game but you want head kicks to a downed fighter back?

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

Bring in headbutts and knees on the ground, and vertical elbows, and don't stand fights up or break up clinches...if anything the curent rules are slanted against the dominant wrestler. Just imagine Brock Lesnar with headbutts allowed.
:good Let alone the gloves that make it harder to grapple with... and protect the strikers hands... so they he can punch harder... and more often.

Realistically... Kicks to a downed opponent don't have much effect at all on stopping a takedown attempt. That would have to be a pretty horrible takedown shot to get kicked in the head while you are down... somehow before you have reached your opponent. Kicking at them only helps them take you down easier. Knees on a shooting wrestlers usually don't work either. I have seen it work on occasion (on very sloppy shots)... but not very often. Besides that... it will only be effective as the wrestler is lowering his level to shoot... he wouldn't be on his knees yet anyways... so they can already knee him at that point. Allowing knees to a downed opponent helps the dominant wrestler much more than it helps a standing striker.

[hopkinsfan07]

:good Let alone the gloves that make it harder to grapple with... and protect the strikers hands... so they he can punch harder... and more often.

Realistically... Kicks to a downed opponent don't have much effect at all on stopping a takedown attempt. That would have to be a pretty horrible takedown shot to get kicked in the head while you are down... somehow before you have reached your opponent. Kicking at them only helps them take you down easier. Knees on a shooting wrestlers usually don't work either. I have seen it work on occasion (on very sloppy shots)... but not very often. Besides that... it will only be effective as the wrestler is lowering his level to shoot... he wouldn't be on his knees yet anyways... so they can already knee him at that point. Allowing knees to a downed opponent helps the dominant wrestler much more than it helps a standing striker.


Not a wrestler but can you imagine how different the Anderson Silva-Thales Letis fight would be if kicks to a down fighter were in?

It makes it harder for a wrestler because if say a fighter sprawls and he is now standing with the wrestler still on the floor. It would make it more risky and maybe make for more entertaining fights.

[achillesthegreat]

The only real advantage any art had is BJJ because in the beginning people didn't have a scooby what was going on. It went past a normal headlock or hammerlock.

[Wilhelm]

:good Let alone the gloves that make it harder to grapple with... and protect the strikers hands... so they he can punch harder... and more often.

Realistically... Kicks to a downed opponent don't have much effect at all on stopping a takedown attempt. That would have to be a pretty horrible takedown shot to get kicked in the head while you are down... somehow before you have reached your opponent. Kicking at them only helps them take you down easier. Knees on a shooting wrestlers usually don't work either. I have seen it work on occasion (on very sloppy shots)... but not very often. Besides that... it will only be effective as the wrestler is lowering his level to shoot... he wouldn't be on his knees yet anyways... so they can already knee him at that point. Allowing knees to a downed opponent helps the dominant wrestler much more than it helps a standing striker.


It's not during the shot, it's after an unsuccessful shot. There are frequently instances where the guy taking the shot has one or both knees down and other guy is in a position to knee them in the head or more infrequently kick them. It wouldn't be used as a defense to a shot but would be a big penalty on shots that didn't succeed.

[Freakzilla]

It's not during the shot, it's after an unsuccessful shot. There are frequently instances where the guy taking the shot has one or both knees down and other guy is in a position to knee them in the head or more infrequently kick them. It wouldn't be used as a defense to a shot but would be a big penalty on shots that didn't succeed.

:good:deal

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

Not a wrestler but can you imagine how different the Anderson Silva-Thales Letis fight would be if kicks to a down fighter were in?

It makes it harder for a wrestler because if say a fighter sprawls and he is now standing with the wrestler still on the floor. It would make it more risky and maybe make for more entertaining fights.
Why on earth would a wrestler stay on the floor while his opponent is standing?

[james4210]

Bring in head kicks to a downed fighter!!! Wrestlers like Tito or Hughes have no risk when shooting for a takedown against a mostly stand up guy. In pride if you missed a takedown someone like Rua or Silva would smash yo in the head with a kick.

Im not saying bring back stomps (although i wouldnt mind) As some find them to violent.

I think the rules should be a tad more balenced.

Woaa and that thread about not letting people punch from the mount :patsch
I thought that was a joke post mocking the first lad :lol:. When did people become such wimps. I say bring back the violence of Pride.

You guys got me totally wrong in my thread, asking the question is UFC to brutal.

I wasn't posing the question is some namby-pamby Goodhart ninny.

I was posing the question so the next headliner does end in 20 seconds because one of the fighters rolls his ankle and is jump on.

When I pay to watch a fight, I want to enjoy watching the fighter skill, not yet another flash in the pan victory and it's all over. Or 15 minutes of ground rolling.

I'm not happy with the way UFC is, if other people are, I am happy that they are happy. I'm saying this from the perspective of someone who really cares about the sport.

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

It's not during the shot, it's after an unsuccessful shot. There are frequently instances where the guy taking the shot has one or both knees down and other guy is in a position to knee them in the head or more infrequently kick them. It wouldn't be used as a defense to a shot but would be a big penalty on shots that didn't succeed.
That would happen A LOT less frequently than a wrestler being on top and kneeing the shit out of his opponent underneath him. Knees to a downed opponent would help the wrestler (GNP) A LOT more than it would help a striker.

[Koa]

That would happen A LOT less frequently than a wrestler being on top and kneeing the shit out of his opponent underneath him. Knees to a downed opponent would help the wrestler (GNP) A LOT more than it would help a striker.

Nope, it comes from a stuffed shot. Guys who go for a single and double leg and get stuffed end up in a north-south position where they can be kneed to the head.

There are, options for a wrestler who gets something like side mount, to transition north-south with the opponent on his back, but this would remove significant body control, leaving fairly good opportunity to escape, also rather awkward positioning, trying to knee the head.

[Polymath]

Nope, it comes from a stuffed shot. Guys who go for a single and double leg and get stuffed end up in a north-south position where they can be kneed to the head.


That does happen (I think crocop KO'd Yoshida like that?), but more often you see someone with good control on the ground who could do some damage with knees. Watch early mark Kerr fights...bloodbaths.

And btw, I don't think allowing knees matters much to someone who wants to sprawl and strike, but it does help the jiu jitsu guys a lot. The unified rules help jj fighters a lot at the expense of wrestlers.

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

Nope, it comes from a stuffed shot. Guys who go for a single and double leg and get stuffed end up in a north-south position where they can be kneed to the head.

There are, options for a wrestler who gets something like side mount, to transition north-south with the opponent on his back, but this would remove significant body control, leaving fairly good opportunity to escape, also rather awkward positioning, trying to knee the head.
I assure you that you are 100% wrong in your second paragraph. It is actually EXTREMELY easy to knee to the head and keep control. It is actually easier to knee while keeping your opponent controlled than it is to elbow while keeping control.

On the first paragraph... I don't know why everyone keeps re-explaining the same thing over and over. I already know what you are saying. What you don't understand is that a wrestler simply wouldn't linger in that position if his opponent had the option of kneeing him in the head. Not only that... but you could time the knee and snatch it up for an easy takedown as well. A regular striker isn't going to have enough control from a front headlock position from a stuffed shot in order to hold a good wrestler down if he doesn't want to be there. There are a ton of wrestling escapes from that position.

Once again... kneed to a downed opponent help a wrestler much more than a standing striker. MUCH more. MMA caters to strikers at the expense of the grapplers. That's reality. From the rules to the gloves.. to standing fighters up when they don't feel there is enough action on the ground, ect... Who is going to stand you up if you are on your back in a real fight? Why don't they put fights to the ground when it is a boring non-action fight on their feet? Get the point?

[Koa]

That does happen (I think crocop KO'd Yoshida like that?), but more often you see someone with good control on the ground who could do some damage with knees. Watch early mark Kerr fights...bloodbaths.

And btw, I don't think allowing knees matters much to someone who wants to sprawl and strike, but it does help the jiu jitsu guys a lot. The unified rules help jj fighters a lot at the expense of wrestlers.

Actually, it did happen some, but I don't think it was refined. Gomi did it to Gracie as well.. I'm only saying that, the single and double legs are pretty much the overt takedown attempts, and the guys tend to not pay a penalty when they are stuffed.. We know fighters are awarded for takedowns themselves, but what about stuffing a takedown?

And also, BJJ players/fighters tend to have the sort of weak single leg attempt, get stuffed plenty of times as well. Obviously not their only attempt, and I'm not sayign every bjj guy has weak takedown attempts, it's just a general observation.

Rethinking what Widdow is saying, are you saying that from the side mount? I want to see this in action and how people cope with it. The angle from side mount is odd, seems like it ban be defended against if you turn into them.