Manup Standup fights

[HumbleWCGuy]

Yes, there is a "world of difference" -- however, that wasn't the issue. Go read the thread to get the CONTEXT of my POV. I said that the rules of this event made grappling inconsequential. Humble replied about how getting thrown and someone landing on you was somehow "consequential." I asked for him to supply evidence (how many MMA, K1, etc. fights do we have to choose from?) of where being thrown and landed upon made much of a difference in a fight. He couldn't come up with any. Moreover, I told him that I get taken down, thrown, etc. all the time in training and it really isn't consequential -- to which he replied how training isn't fighting in the ring. What a brilliant retort. But how is getting thrown and landed on in training significantly different than getting thrown and landed on in the ring?

Exactly, and my point was that I am tired of debating nonsense with you and that you would know if you just and fought in a competition. As it stands, you sit down when you get tired or hurt. My two 13 year old girls fight harder and are tougher than you. In an effort to prepare them for competitions they have already taken standing 8s in sparring and asked to go out and try to recover after getting destroyed in a round. What have you done? You just go and sit down, and that's the root of this BULL SPIT that you are spewing now and continue to spew.

[t_niehoff]

A few things:
10 seconds isn't enough time, 30 seconds is a tad better and not too long to make it "boring".
Getting landed on after being thrown is very consequencial, even more so when the guy throwing you KNOWS how to do it AND has 100lbs on you, LOL !!
I got a dislocated collar bone from one of those.

The whole "boring" issue is rather silly. What is more boring than watching a bunch of scrubs in the first place?

Anything can be "consequential" -- a slip can be consequential. The point is that this is rarely the case (can you think of any? and if it was that consequential, wouldn't we expect to readily know of some famous examples?). Look at all the MMA, K1, san da, etc. fights out there -- where has this (falling on the guy) had any significance? I bet you can find loads of slams that have been consequential (Arona being slammed by Rampage, Hughes slamming Newton come quickly to mind).

[t_niehoff]

Exactly, and my point was that I am tired of debating nonsense with you and that you would know if you just and fought in a competition. As it stand, you sit down when you get tired or hurt my two 13 year old girls fight harder and are tougher than you. In an effort to prepare them for competitions they have already taken standing 8s in sparring and asked to go out and try to recover after getting destroyed in a round. What have you done? You just go and sit down, and that's the root of this BULL SPIT that you are spewing now and continue to spew.

Then don't debate with me.

You and I both know you don't really train and never have. You certainly don't train MMA or you wouldn't say most of the nonsense that you do. This was pointed out again and again by Dale (why is it the people who really do train MMA never agree with you?). And I don't believe you ever competed. Or really know WCK. You are just an anonymous poster who won't say who he is, where he trains, who taught him WCK, etc.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Then don't debate with me.

You and I both know you don't really train and never have. You certainly don't train MMA or you wouldn't say most of the nonsense that you do. This was pointed out again and again by Dale (why is it the people who really do train MMA never agree with you?). And I don't believe you ever competed. Or really know WCK. You are just an anonymous poster who won't say who he is, where he trains, who taught him WCK, etc.

Dale is a 50 year old baby who trolls internet boards looking for admiration. Pretty much anyone else that I have serious disagreements with is because they are flat out novices like yourself.

[t_niehoff]

Dale is a 50 year old baby who trolls internet boards looking for admiration. Pretty much anyone else that I have serious disagreements with is because they are flat out novices like yourself.

You are the troll.

You weren't involved in the discussion I was having with Phil, when I commented that the rules made grappling inconsequential.

Now, everyone who actually trains grappling -- which excludes you as you don't -- agrees with that. You, of course, know better. Even though you don't train grappling (would that make you a "flat out novice"?), you know better. And your "revelation"? Getting thrown and having someone land on you. You interjected yourself into the conversation (what a troll does) to make a inane comment just to stir the pot. Troll.

You claim everyone who disagrees with you is a "novice" but the truth is that you are an anonymous troll, afraid to use her real name, who makes false claims of having been a kickboxer but won't provide any bona fide supporting those claims, who claims to have learned WCK but again won't provide any details as to where, when, from whom you learned it.

[HumbleWCGuy]

You are the troll.

You weren't involved in the discussion I was having with Phil, when I commented that the rules made grappling inconsequential.

Now, everyone who actually trains grappling -- which excludes you as you don't -- agrees with that. You, of course, know better. Even though you don't train grappling (would that make you a "flat out novice"?), you know better. And your "revelation"? Getting thrown and having someone land on you. You interjected yourself into the conversation (what a troll does) to make a inane comment just to stir the pot. Troll.

People agree with you that the ground grappling part is inconsequential but recognize the benefit of hitting throws to injure your opponent isn't.

[HumbleWCGuy]

You are the troll.

You weren't involved in the discussion I was having with Phil, when I commented that the rules made grappling inconsequential.

Now, everyone who actually trains grappling -- which excludes you as you don't -- agrees with that. You, of course, know better. Even though you don't train grappling (would that make you a "flat out novice"?), you know better. And your "revelation"? Getting thrown and having someone land on you. You interjected yourself into the conversation (what a troll does) to make a inane comment just to stir the pot. Troll.

You claim everyone who disagrees with you is a "novice" but the truth is that you are an anonymous troll, afraid to use her real name, who makes false claims of having been a kickboxer but won't provide any bona fide supporting those claims, who claims to have learned WCK but again won't provide any details as to where, when, from whom you learned it.

PM is for a private conversation. The rest of the forum is public. Any Billy Bob who wishes to register an opinion is welcome.

Honestly, at this point you have made so many ridiculous claims that my anonymous opinion carries more weight than yours.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The whole "boring" issue is rather silly. What is more boring than watching a bunch of scrubs in the first place?

Anything can be "consequential" -- a slip can be consequential. The point is that this is rarely the case (can you think of any? and if it was that consequential, wouldn't we expect to readily know of some famous examples?). Look at all the MMA, K1, san da, etc. fights out there -- where has this (falling on the guy) had any significance? I bet you can find loads of slams that have been consequential (Arona being slammed by Rampage, Hughes slamming Newton come quickly to mind).

Many people find ground work boring, you know that, so did the UFC and made the changes, we all know how AbuDhabi just eats up the ratings, right?


Certainly a slam is more consequential then someone falling on someone, even on purpose, due to a throw.

[Wayfaring]

A few things:
10 seconds isn't enough time, 30 seconds is a tad better and not too long to make it "boring".
Getting landed on after being thrown is very consequencial, even more so when the guy throwing you KNOWS how to do it AND has 100lbs on you, LOL !!
I got a dislocated collar bone from one of those.

I agree that 30 sec would allow something to be worked on the ground - 10 sec isn't long at all and kind of discourages ground work.

Was training ippon seoi nage throws last night with a judo olympic alternate for 2000 team and another greco bronze medalist in 2008 olympics. Several words come to mind. "Inconsequential" is not one of them. "Amplitude" however is.

[t_niehoff]

People agree with you that the ground grappling part is inconsequential but recognize the benefit of hitting throws to injure your opponent isn't.

Do you understand the difference between something that is highly unlikely though possible and something that is likely?

Throwing your opponent is not likely to injure your opponent. In fact, it is extremely unlikely. I'm not saying it doesn't sometimes (very rarely) happen. But people get thrown all the time in judo/grappling tournaments, in MMA, in wrestling, etc. and very rarely do people get significantly injured -- and most of the time they do it is due to accidents. This is why you can't find any videos to support your view. The whole idea of throwing someone to cause injury has more to due with fantasy than reality.

What IS consequential about throwing someone and landing on top (which occurs in MMA frequently) is that you are then in a position - the top - to dominate the ground. In fact, if you throw them and don't land on top, there will be space for him to pull guard.

But with only 10 seconds, none of that really matters.

[t_niehoff]

I agree that 30 sec would allow something to be worked on the ground - 10 sec isn't long at all and kind of discourages ground work.

Was training ippon seoi nage throws last night with a judo olympic alternate for 2000 team and another greco bronze medalist in 2008 olympics. Several words come to mind. "Inconsequential" is not one of them. "Amplitude" however is.

Context.

A throw itself isn't in most cases consequential (doesn't carry much in the way of consequences) if you have no time to take advantage (being on top) the throw provides.

[Phil Redmond]

Based on what I've been reading here I'm starting to think that 30 seconds is a lot better. I'm going to suggest it for the next fights. I hope the promoters agree. It's probably too late for them to change the rules now.

[Phil Redmond]

Phil, I didn't see any kids nor did I see women? I have two 13 year old girls. We can't make it this time anyway, but with more notice this looks to be a nice little debut if they don't kickbox at the Arnold next year.

If you tell me that they have a healthy kids division that fights like the video. I might say to heck with it and run up there.

Good idea. I'll be suggesting that they open a kids division.

[Wayfaring]

A throw itself isn't in most cases consequential (doesn't carry much in the way of consequences) if you have no time to take advantage (being on top) the throw provides.

You're just not seeing things from the same amplitudinal point of view that I was seeing things.

[t_niehoff]

You're just not seeing things from the same amplitudinal point of view that I was seeing things.

Perhaps not. You had a world class judoka throwing a scrub at judo. I've seen white belts tap from shoulder pressure in side control too.

I agree that getting slammed isn't fun and games. But as I pointed out, where is the evidence of this stuff having a significant effect in MMA fights or K1 fights or etc.?