Guest Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=584127 he tried 41 takedowns, yes 40 fucking 1, didn't get a single one, and didn't get gassed at ALL. And he can't even cut as much weight as me so it shows his cardio sucks and that was when he had full energy. 41 takedowns, didn't land any, landy 3 whole strikes through the whole fight in statistics i land about 10, he wins UD 30-27.. Lol seriously, why the fuck didn't he gas and also, if somebody tries 3+ takedowns in a single round and doesn't get one, you should score the takedown defence. He won by spamming takedowns and got 0 out of 41. WTF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 look, 2 minutes in and it says hes winded, didn't land a single strike in the first round either, and it said he dominated the round, erm, anybody can keep diving into the floor with their (takedown attempt) for 5 minutes. It's crazy. I won that fight I'm confident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 I'm going to show you the actual effective sprawling, I should have been awarded for. If I'm sprawling 4 in a round, that should just exhaust him, nevermind him failing with fucking 41 attempts. Rd 1: Jim Miller has stuffed three takedown attempts in the round now. That's going to take a lot out of Jonny Zurp. Miller leaves Zurp with his face pressed against the mat as he sprawls beautifully, defending against a solid takedown attempt. Miller sprawls well and throws a nice strike on the way out which just misses Miller slaps away a takedown attempt from Zurp, before circling back to the center of the mat. Aswel as the other thousand he "missed", I say that's enough to win me the round as I sprawled some ^. So yeah, after the sprawls and the other dozen of takedown attempts, he should be exhausted right? WRONG. (NOW TIME FOR THE SHIT JUDGING, I'M SHOWING EVERYTHING EFFECTIVE THAT HAPPENED OTHER THAN ALL HIS MISSED ATTEMPTS, SHOWING ACTUAL SPRAWLS OR STRIKES.) Rd2: Zurp shoots in for a takedown. "I don't think so" says Miller as he avoids it easily. Miller keeps the fight standing with a nice sprawl. Zurp dives in and grabs Miller's left leg, looking for a takedown. Miller pushes down on Zurp's head and hops out. Jim Miller has stuffed three takedown attempts in the round now. That's going to take a lot out of Jonny Zurp. (STUFFED THREE WITHIN THE FIRST MINUTE) Miller stuffs the takedown. and Miller counters with a crisp hook to the side of the head. Zurp throws a jab, cross combination which is slipped and Miller counters with a head kick. Jim Miller is looking to throw some combinations by the looks of things. "Jonny Zurp seems to be getting the better of the standup" ARE YOU SERIOUS? HE'S LANDED NOTHING IN THE ROUND, GOT HEADKICKED, GOT A JAB AND STRAIGHT? "Jonny Zurp showed his class in that round. I'd imagine he'll take it on all the scorecards." RD 3: Zurp throws a looping left and ducks down for a takedown. He's got his arms around Miller's waist but Miller gets an underhook and avoids the takedown by throwing Zurp off to one side. Zurp scores with a sloppy right hand. Miller should have avoided that one. and Miller finishes the little exchange by landing a big kick to the body. Zurp is trying hard to land a takedown here. Miller sprawls well and keeps this one on the feet. Zurp looks for a takedown but Miller sprawls well. Jim Miller has stuffed three takedown attempts in the round now. That's going to take a lot out of Jonny Zurp Miller slaps away a takedown attempt from Zurp, before circling back to the center of the mat. Zurp throws a jab, cross combination which is slipped and Miller counters with a left and a right that stings Zurp. Zurp throws a sloppy head kick and Miller counters with a head kick. That will keep Zurp thinking before he tries any more sloppy attacks! Miller leaves Zurp with his face pressed against the mat as he sprawls beautifully, defending against a solid takedown attempt. Zurp has a takedown stuffed. Zurp closes the distance looking to clinch letting Miller counter with a right hand. Zurp shoots in and drives through. Miller sprawls well. Zurp shoots in looking for a double leg takedown. Miller defends it nicely. Zurp is trying hard to land a takedown here. Miller sprawls well and keeps this one on the feet. Zurp shoots in looking for a takedown but Miller manages to keep the fight standing, pushing Zurp's face into the canvas for good measure before circling away. I would just about give that final round to Jonny Zurp. I've got Zurp winning every round here. Surely the decision will go his way and he'll pick up a well deserved decision victory. I was just showing everything that could have gotten either of us points, and it's obvious it was me who came out on top, wtf is this what was my fighter supposed to do he avoided 41 takedowns, sprawling plenty of them and by the looks of things, the other fighter was getting ready to run a triathlon. at least score sprawled takedowns please. I landed effective punches in rounds too, look at the statistics he did nothing at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 In a crap fight he was more aggressive, thats about it. You should be pleased your guy has granite chin and leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 granite chin? he hit me 3 times the whole fight i hit him 10 times! I'm saying he should have been gassed cos after 2 minutes it said he was winded from the takedowns and on his profile he has absolutely 0 energy and still, he didn't even gas in the fight and he did absolutely nothing except fail and fail and fail. He's the one with the granite chin getting headkicked and countered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 i just think its bs. I'm fighting another 25 year old and it's going to be another loss to my record, this prick has threw all his on wrestling and jits, sensational wrestling and like a purple belt. There is no way you can build an 18yo to beat that. No way at all, and my fighter has wonderful punch technique, striking defense, and takedown defense, and i bet i still dont ko him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 18 yr olds are not really meant to fight right off the bat unless your in a tourney or something where face another 18 yr old -- that is one problem with doing qfc's there is no kind of certain match up like an org could do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 yeah ;p but im just curious as to why he won, doesn't bother just want it fixed for future fights . The wrestler already dominates, now they can dominate by failing miserably, how stupid lol. That's like me spamming takedowns and not getting a single one because I suck and winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duphus Posted July 20, 2013 Report Share Posted July 20, 2013 You lost round 1 cause you fighter did absolutely nothing, he never threw one punch. Opponent won based on aggression as he actually did something offensive plus got the clinch. Round 1 totally went to opponent easily reason it said he dominated it Round 2: I counted a total of 5 shots landed by you, this wasn't enough to overcome the aggression of the opponent so that tells me you most likely set to way accurate and very little damage. Round 3: exact same thing you landed 5 shots It's obvious you were on 100% counter and probably all most all on accurate or your fighter has no/little strength and/or no/little punching power thus causing very little in terms of damage scored. The lack of damage you did on each of those 5 strike rounds was not enough to over comes the aggression and multiple attacks the opponent did so the round was scored for the opponent The 100% counter and real high accuracy maybe combined with low strength was what was wrong, basically you lost this fight because of slider setting. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefty Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 ooooooh there's that word again... Sliders... aka Tactics... aka Strategy... seriously bro stop swatting at your opponent like their flies... THEY ARE MEN AND MUST BE PUNCHED WITH VIGOUR! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 I can't really imagine a fight in real life when someone would be able to attempt 41 takedowns in 15 minutes. But I also can't ever think of a fight where a guy has ever won a decision for throwing 12 punches/kicks in 15 minutes either. Unless you score a KO less than 1 punch per minute isn't ever winning a fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffWanderer Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 I can't really imagine a fight in real life when someone would be able to attempt 41 takedowns in 15 minutes. But I also can't ever think of a fight where a guy has ever won a decision for throwing 12 punches/kicks in 15 minutes either. Unless you score a KO less than 1 punch per minute isn't ever winning a fight. It really depends how takedowns are being recorded. Some will record each time someone gets taken off their feet as a takedown. This means you can technically have a dozen takedowns happen in a few seconds if a scramble is wild enough. I'm not saying that I agree with this type of scoring but you will certainly see upwards of 60 at some small "local" MMA fights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 You lost round 1 cause you fighter did absolutely nothing, he never threw one punch. Opponent won based on aggression as he actually did something offensive plus got the clinch. Round 1 totally went to opponent easily reason it said he dominated it Round 2: I counted a total of 5 shots landed by you, this wasn't enough to overcome the aggression of the opponent so that tells me you most likely set to way accurate and very little damage. Round 3: exact same thing you landed 5 shots It's obvious you were on 100% counter and probably all most all on accurate or your fighter has no/little strength and/or no/little punching power thus causing very little in terms of damage scored. The lack of damage you did on each of those 5 strike rounds was not enough to over comes the aggression and multiple attacks the opponent did so the round was scored for the opponent The 100% counter and real high accuracy maybe combined with low strength was what was wrong, basically you lost this fight because of slider setting. obviously hes going to be aggressive my tactic was counter purposely to defend against his shots, me sprawling them takedowns and landing 5 shots, is definitely enough to win over his "aggression." my main question really is how was he winded off the takedown attempts 2 minutes in the first round and survive the whole fight without any sign of tiring? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 You lost round 1 cause you fighter did absolutely nothing, he never threw one punch. Opponent won based on aggression as he actually did something offensive plus got the clinch. Round 1 totally went to opponent easily reason it said he dominated it Round 2: I counted a total of 5 shots landed by you, this wasn't enough to overcome the aggression of the opponent so that tells me you most likely set to way accurate and very little damage. Round 3: exact same thing you landed 5 shots It's obvious you were on 100% counter and probably all most all on accurate or your fighter has no/little strength and/or no/little punching power thus causing very little in terms of damage scored. The lack of damage you did on each of those 5 strike rounds was not enough to over comes the aggression and multiple attacks the opponent did so the round was scored for the opponent The 100% counter and real high accuracy maybe combined with low strength was what was wrong, basically you lost this fight because of slider setting. It was actually on more damage than accuracy. not only does a wrestler have a point advantage being on top, they also have an advantage just launching their body at people like a wreckless ball and getting nowhere and failing miserably, and they still win the fight. I was always going to counter to prevent the takedowns, didn't even tire him, and he landed 3 shots the entire fight, i landed headkicks and things.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 It really depends how takedowns are being recorded. Some will record each time someone gets taken off their feet as a takedown. This means you can technically have a dozen takedowns happen in a few seconds if a scramble is wild enough. I'm not saying that I agree with this type of scoring but you will certainly see upwards of 60 at some small "local" MMA fights. I didn't going down once, most of the time it was me standing over him then letting him back up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffWanderer Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 I didn't going down once, most of the time it was me standing over him then letting him back up I wasn't really referring to the fight. More as a comment to the idea of not being able to imagine that number of takedowns. obviously hes going to be aggressive my tactic was counter purposely to defend against his shots, me sprawling them takedowns and landing 5 shots, is definitely enough to win over his "aggression." my main question really is how was he winded off the takedown attempts 2 minutes in the first round and survive the whole fight without any sign of tiring? I would argue that you did see the effects of his tiredness. Namely, every shot you threw landed. Had your fighter been more proactive, it is likely that he would have overwhelmed his opponent and got the knockout. In effect, your fighter was so negative that he was doing a Kalib Starnes impression and running from his opponent and failing to punish him despite the fact he was there for the taking. This is what lost you the fight. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CusDamato Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 What CardiffWanderer said, you lost the fight for yourself by not being aggressive enough. I also don't see how you think he wasn't gassed? It said he was gassed in the PBP to start with and he didn't land any of his TDs. Just because he is gassed doesn't mean he will just stop doing anything, your guy was waiting to counter so someone had to do something and he went for TDs that missed because he was gassed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 Cardiff, I hadn't considered the alternative counting of takedowns you've suggested. Your point us correct. But I still stand by my thoughts that it would be almost impossible to win a fight by decision with only 12 strikes in 15 minutes on the feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffWanderer Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 Cardiff, I hadn't considered the alternative counting of takedowns you've suggested. Your point us correct. But I still stand by my thoughts that it would be almost impossible to win a fight by decision with only 12 strikes in 15 minutes on the feet. I completely agree. In fact, a fighter would struggle to win if you only throw 12 punches a round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 funny thing is, he landed 3 punches, nothing else at all, I landed 9 shots altogether + a combo. 1 being a headkick. His strategy was going to be aggressive and go for takedowns, I nulled that and I weren't going to go aggressive against him whats the point, give the guy all abysmal stats and he would've won that fight against me, just failing and failing ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffWanderer Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 To be honest, there was so little action that the number of strikes landed it became irrelevant. Essentially, what you have is two men circling one another for 15 minutes. One guy is trying to get his hands on the other but failing and the other is running away and clearly does not want to fight. The fact he threw out a few half-hearted strikes that happened to catch his opponent really doesn't take away from the overall impression of the fight. Had the retreating fighter engaged even on a semi-regular basis, then that fighter would have one. As for your last comment, the answer is yes, an abysmal fighter who tries to engage would defeat a wonderful fighter who refused too. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CusDamato Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 funny thing is, he landed 3 punches, nothing else at all, I landed 9 shots altogether + a combo. 1 being a headkick. His strategy was going to be aggressive and go for takedowns, I nulled that and I weren't going to go aggressive against him whats the point, give the guy all abysmal stats and he would've won that fight against me, just failing and failing ... I'm not sure you are getting the point, your sliders lost you the fight. you needed to do more to win the fight then just defend his TD attempts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 Learn from it. Even if you don't agree it's clear the game gives more favourable judging to aggression rather than all out defence. Your strategy was to survive, his was to win a fight. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markyosullivan Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 To be honest, there was so little action that the number of strikes landed it became irrelevant. Essentially, what you have is two men circling one another for 15 minutes. One guy is trying to get his hands on the other but failing and the other is running away and clearly does not want to fight. The fact he threw out a few half-hearted strikes that happened to catch his opponent really doesn't take away from the overall impression of the fight. Had the retreating fighter engaged even on a semi-regular basis, then that fighter would have one. As for your last comment, the answer is yes, an abysmal fighter who tries to engage would defeat a wonderful fighter who refused too. Basically what I thought of the fight. If you're going to counter, you need to throw more punches than 10 and you need to put a bit of power in them. You basically offered no threat at all to the other fighter who was basically controlling the fight the whole fight, going for takedowns and controlling the pace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2013 Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 but i find it funny how it said he dominated round 2. I'm just saying you should score sprawls, i had no choice but to play counter and i nulled his gameplan, he still got the win by getting sprawled all the time 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts