lomachenkos style in mma

[Based and White Pilled]

I know, mate. Just noting it happens in one style. They still start standing in every sport that has wrestling. Most such sports such as judo, wrestling, sambo still have shorter rounds than 5 mins. Sorry for the bad trolling attempt you did not deserve it, I had a bad day, so the frustration went online.

My point is 5 min rounds are only in MMA and are made to support wrestler so they can have time to grind if they take someone down. I thought that was a pretty obvious rule, knowing the rules of the other sports.

I agree. My point is just that, that rule was to avoid fucking grapplers over. It's a rule to avoid favoring strikers too heavily, not to favor grapplers.

That is all.

 

[Ilk]

I agree. My point is just that, that rule was to avoid fucking grapplers over. It's a rule to avoid favoring grapplers too heavily, not to favor grapplers.

That is all.

I guess it is a point of view then. You see it as fighting should be without rounds. I see it as fighting should be 3 min rounds maximum. And you stand from that if fighting is without rounds it is fair for the wrestlers. While I stand from the side that standard rounds in almost all fight sports is 3 min rounds. And from there the argument which favours whom.

Well the way I see it MMA organizations are going to attract better professional fighters, not amateur wrestlers, if they decrease the ring size and lower the round time and think about the fence. Then you may see kick boxers, MT fighters and boxers transfer to the sport. Right now these guys can not use their ring intelligence and strengths with the current rule set and it is normal for them to stay in their sport and not try a sport which disfavours them greatly.

Back to the topic. If I am Lomachenko I would not accept an MMA fight even if they pay me due to the rule set. Some "MMA star" may actually beat me, because no matter how much better fighter I am and can toy with the guy, he has a chance in these long rounds to take me down and win rounds if not submit me.

 

[Based and White Pilled]

I guess it is a point of view then. You see it as fighting should be without rounds. I see it as fighting should be 3 min rounds maximum. And you stand from that if fighting is without rounds it is fair for the wrestlers. While I stand from the side that standard rounds in almost all fight sports is 3 min rounds. And from there the argument which favours whom.

Well the way I see it MMA organizations are going to attract better professional fighters, not amateur wrestlers, if they decrease the ring size and lower the round time and think about the fence. Then you may see kick boxers, MT fighters and boxers transfer to the sport. Right now these guys can not use their ring intelligence and strengths with the current rule set and it is normal for them to stay in their sport and not try a sport which disfavours them greatly.

Back to the topic. If I am Lomachenko I would not accept an MMA fight even if they pay me due to the rule set. Some "MMA star" may actually beat me, because no matter how much better fighter I am and can toy with the guy, he has a chance in these long rounds to take me down and win rounds if not submit me.

You think the fact that he can take you down and beat you up does not make him the better fighter? You're separating grappling as if they aren't combat sports. If the best wrestler in the world can take down and beat up the best boxer in the world, I fail to see how he is not the better overall fighter.

Also, I find it puzzling that you think a smaller ring would be better for strikers. I understand that they could use their skills to cut off the ring and beat someone up on the ropes, but I don't think that outweighs the conventional wisdom that strikers want to use their footwork to stay away from grapplers.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

If Lomachenko (who has some wrestling experience, though not high level) were to take up MMA, the difficulties he would have from his style would be:
- The long range, MMA typically favours a more in and out style of striking. While we do get people who work the body religiously, side step and pivot around their targets - it is more difficult to do at a high level because of that range. I'm confident Lomacheno would be able to work around this though.
- Leg kicks. Leg kicks slow down the momentum of any fighter, it becomes harder to use your foot work effectively when you're being repeatedly hammered in the legs.

That being said Lomachenko has fantastic punch variety, outstanding feints and while his footwork would need adjusting, it's not like he wouldn't be able to make those adjustments well. Lomachenko's style also makes good use of clinching and sneaking out the back, which would help in MMA for obvious reasons.

He wouldn't be able to move as freely as he does in boxing, but it's like going from driving a car, to driving a bus. The principle is the same, it's in the details. It's not like he'd be starting over from scratch.

 

[Ilk]

You think the fact that he can take you down and beat you up does not make him the better fighter? You're separating grappling as if they aren't combat sports. If the best wrestler in the world can take down and beat up the best boxer in the world, I fail to see how he is not the better overall fighter.

Also, I find it puzzling that you think a smaller ring would be better for strikers. I understand that they could use their skills to cut off the ring and beat someone up on the ropes, but I don't think that outweighs the conventional wisdom that strikers want to use their footwork to stay away from grapplers.

Nope for 2 reasons. First Loma is a proven quality in amateur and professional scene. He has what .. 400 wins as an amateur? No MMA fighter has his legacy as a fighter.

Lomachenko aside if you take someone down and beat him up... how many times are you able to do that? Lets say out of 10 times? See in fighting there is something that has to be a constant in order to determine a better fighter. Lomachenkos 400 amateur wins are such for example.

This is why I love a league set up rather than a cup direct elimination set up in soccer for example. In a league set up you find the highest in form and most quality team for a season. While in a cup game, the same team may lose. It does not mean they are a worse team. It means they lost.

Anyway I do not believe UFC has quality to win against someone as Loma. But that depends on him if he prepares.

And no ... boxers would not like to be in range. They would like to be in close mid range to punch the wrestlers. Range gives the wrestlers a chance for leg catching and some long take down attempts.

If I have to theory craft as a boxer. If I am in a MMA match I would go for the kill. Jab my oponent to the fence and finish him there. Pressure jabing like Golovkin for example breathing in the opponents face.

 

[Based and White Pilled]

Nope for 2 reasons. First Loma is a proven quality in amateur and professional scene. He has what .. 400 wins as an amateur? No MMA fighter has his legacy as a fighter.

Lomachenko aside if you take someone down and beat him up... how many times are you able to do that? Lets say out of 10 times? See in fighting there is something that has to be a constant in order to determine a better fighter. Lomachenkos 400 amateur wins are such for example.

This is why I love a league set up rather than a cup direct elimination set up in soccer for example. In a league set up you find the highest in form and most quality team for a season. While in a cup game, the same team may lose. It does not mean they are a worse team. It means they lost.

Anyway I do not believe UFC has quality to win against someone as Loma. But that depends on him if he prepares.

And no ... boxers would not like to be in range. They would like to be in close mid range to punch the wrestlers. Range gives the wrestlers a chance for leg catching and some long take down attempts.

If I have to theory craft as a boxer. If I am in a MMA match I would go for the kill. Jab my oponent to the fence and finish him there. Pressure jabing like Golovkin for example breathing in the opponents face.

Your perception of "better fighter" is weird. The better fighter is the person who wins a fight the majority of the time. It's really that simple.

If you want to compare across sports, obviously Lomachenko is a more accomplished athlete than almost anyone in MMA. However, anyone who beats him in a fight is a better fighter. MMA is as close to a real fight as mainstream sports get. MMArtists obviously get to claim to be the best fighters until proven otherwise.

 

[Ilk]

Your perception of "better fighter" is weird. The better fighter is the person who wins a fight the majority of the time. It's really that simple.

If you want to compare across sports, obviously Lomachenko is a more accomplished athlete than almost anyone in MMA. However, anyone who beats him in a fight is a better fighter. MMA is as close to a real fight as mainstream sports get. MMArtists obviously get to claim to be the best fighters until proven otherwise.

Nope not really. You do realise that most fighters would not switch to MMA due to their limited pay. We have already seen some pretty good kick boxers turn to MMA and do reasonably well. In reality world wide boxing draws the biggest talent pool of fighters due to pay and popularity. We will know only if MMA fighters are best once the organizations are able to pull to boxers, MT and kick boxers in their prime.

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

The main problem strikers have when they enter MMA is dealing with grappling. Sometimes they're still really good at it without much grappling background.
Loma has plenty of wrestling skill, a lot more than your average successful MMA pro. So we can throw that concern out the window.
The rest of what he would have to learn would be minimal in terms of time or preparation. He would be far more ready than most MMA guys when they entered.

One thing his opponents would have to deal with is his FUNDAMENTALS are so good it's impossible to deal with. MMA guys really are in the stone age when it comes to fundamentals. If you can't take a great striker down and keep him down (or just one that's better at striking than you) then you're getting creamed, usually into the highlights for you. That's why Chuck, CroCop, and Connor were nearly unbeatable, fighting them before they got old was terribly lopsided-- a real uphill battle for those who couldn't match them striking (almost no one). These days almost everyone knows takedown defense. It's not a special rare skill it was in 2004, it's been deciphered and freely shared since around when Forrest Griffin became a thing. BUT we don't have to worry about that, because Loma already has extensive experience in NOT BEING TAKEN DOWN.

Let's take a look at what MMA really has evolved into. It's a striking fight where grappling is used for backup or to help control damage. It's not mysterious how it works anymore, so you're not going to overwhelm a good striker these days with the fact that you are a jack of all trades or some bs that would have worked two whole decades ago. Even strikers who haven't gone into MMA are familiar with the tactics and techniques. Any run of the mill MMA gym could make an elite striker into an MMA monster in a matter of months (not years, not clumps of years). That's why you have guys who were journeymen or worse coming into MMA and making it into the top 5 if not #1.

 

[Based and White Pilled]

Nope not really. You do realise that most fighters would not switch to MMA due to their limited pay. We have already seen some pretty good kick boxers turn to MMA and do reasonably well. In reality world wide boxing draws the biggest talent pool of fighters due to pay and popularity. We will know only if MMA fighters are best once the organizations are able to pull to boxers, MT and kick boxers in their prime.

there is a very good chance that there are boxers who could be better fighters than the guys in MMA if they trained for it for awhile. At this current moment, they are not better fighters. They would all get taken down and dominated.

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

there is a very good chance that there are boxers who could be better fighters than the guys in MMA if they trained for it for awhile. At this current moment, they are not better fighters. They would all get taken down and dominated.

Why do you think boxers, unlike everyone else, wouldn't train specifically for a fight with an MMA camp? Brock did, and all he knew was wrestling.

Only boxers who didn't take MMA training seriously would get dominated. If they actually entered MMA with the idea of being an MMA fighter then you're wrong. We already have low level boxers in there that have done wonderfully. How would they all get taken down and dominated when it wasn't like that for the boxers we already have in there?

I think you're talking about a silly one-off a washed up boxer would do just for money, ala Jimmerson or Toney. Nothing would have made those guys win because it was never their intention.

 

[rmongler]

And to be honest if I am a boxer I would not do MMA fight considering the rule set and the ring favours wrestling over stand up fighting greatly.

Mutual combat between two unarmed opponents favors wrestling.

 

[noc]

I guess it is a point of view then. You see it as fighting should be without rounds. I see it as fighting should be 3 min rounds maximum. And you stand from that if fighting is without rounds it is fair for the wrestlers. While I stand from the side that standard rounds in almost all fight sports is 3 min rounds. And from there the argument which favours whom.

Well the way I see it MMA organizations are going to attract better professional fighters, not amateur wrestlers, if they decrease the ring size and lower the round time and think about the fence. Then you may see kick boxers, MT fighters and boxers transfer to the sport. Right now these guys can not use their ring intelligence and strengths with the current rule set and it is normal for them to stay in their sport and not try a sport which disfavours them greatly.

Back to the topic. If I am Lomachenko I would not accept an MMA fight even if they pay me due to the rule set. Some "MMA star" may actually beat me, because no matter how much better fighter I am and can toy with the guy, he has a chance in these long rounds to take me down and win rounds if not submit me.

You don't understand something. MMA have these rules because of politics. Comes from Valetudo, no time limit almost no rules.. the idea is to have te realest fight possible still. Also strikers have their hands protected and with handwropes and gloves their fists are weapons

 

[noc]

Nope not really. You do realise that most fighters would not switch to MMA due to their limited pay. We have already seen some pretty good kick boxers turn to MMA and do reasonably well. In reality world wide boxing draws the biggest talent pool of fighters due to pay and popularity. We will know only if MMA fighters are best once the organizations are able to pull to boxers, MT and kick boxers in their prime.

Boxing is the sport of the poor, is a dangerous game that attract just some of these people (and sons of boxers) not everybody born liking boxing.. for the rules, doesn't look fun. lol Nobody is gonna win just with Boxing, they would become MMA fighters to, there is no style vs style in mma
What boxing has is excelent striking trainers, probably there is more people in Asian Martial Arts but half of what they do is bullshit

 

[noc]

Why do you think boxers, unlike everyone else, wouldn't train specifically for a fight with an MMA camp? Brock did, and all he knew was wrestling.

Only boxers who didn't take MMA training seriously would get dominated. If they actually entered MMA with the idea of being an MMA fighter then you're wrong. We already have low level boxers in there that have done wonderfully. How would they all get taken down and dominated when it wasn't like that for the boxers we already have in there?

I think you're talking about a silly one-off a washed up boxer would do just for money, ala Jimmerson or Toney. Nothing would have made those guys win because it was never their intention.

What low level boxer?
You talk like they are all the same, i don't think all of them can be good. Where is Floyd? he was training with Woodley

 

[Ilk]

there is a very good chance that there are boxers who could be better fighters than the guys in MMA if they trained for it for awhile. At this current moment, they are not better fighters. They would all get taken down and dominated.

Did not know prawling is a fucking hard skill to master. Man this is not a 40 years old fat Toney we are talking about. We are speaking for a guy that is a boxing prodigy, with world class footwork and wrestling back ground...

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

What low level boxer?
You talk like they are all the same, i don't think all of them can be good. Where is Floyd? he was training with Woodley

All the great boxing stylists in the UFC are lower level in boxing. None of them are even mid-level pro. Not good enough to even be called "Journeyman".

None of them are anywhere near Loma's level. But despite that, the punchers are mopping up the higher tiers of the UFC. That's how effective just a little good boxing is.

 

[noc]

All the great boxing stylists in the UFC are lower level in boxing. None of them are even mid-level pro. Not good enough to even be called "Journeyman".

None of them are anywhere near Loma's level. But despite that, the punchers are mopping up the higher tiers of the UFC. That's how effective just a little good boxing is.

Well fists is what a fighter use the most, and Boxing is the best with punches, but i don't think they are boxers, or Muay Thai guys
I don't accept that they are low level, you are judgind them for watchin them "boxing" with these rules

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

Well fists is what a fighter use the most, and Boxing is the best with punches, but i don't think they are boxers, or Muay Thai guys
I don't accept that they are low level, you are judgind them for watchin them "boxing" with these rules

Yeah they are effective. I'm judging them objectively using the average skill level of semi-successful pro boxers as the baseline

The difference between just throwing punches and boxing is very subtle but makes all the difference. Until someone actually immerses themselves in boxing training they will not be able to spot the difference (and even then, it will take a lot of effort and time)

The guys that are really good are doing more of the boxing inherent subtleties that they don't teach anywhere else (and the bad boxers don't do), that's how its possible to spot them. Besides that, we know that some of them came from boxing because it's in their public record and they don't keep it a secret.

The highest levels in MMA make the most and best use of punches. It's very noticeable.

 

[noc]

Yeah they are effective. I'm judging them objectively using the average skill level of semi-successful pro boxers as the baseline

The difference between just throwing punches and boxing is very subtle but makes all the difference. Until someone actually immerses themselves in boxing training they will not be able to spot the difference (and even then, it will take a lot of effort and time)

The guys that are really good are doing more of the boxing inherent subtleties that they don't teach anywhere else (and the bad boxers don't do), that's how its possible to spot them. Besides that, we know that some of them came from boxing because it's in their public record and they don't keep it a secret.

The highest levels in MMA make the most and best use of punches. It's very noticeable.

I know, Boxers have being fighting for over one hundreed years and they discovered great things fighting full contact with the most used weapons, MMA just has to look in what they found

 

[Based and White Pilled]

Why do you think boxers, unlike everyone else, wouldn't train specifically for a fight with an MMA camp? Brock did, and all he knew was wrestling.

Only boxers who didn't take MMA training seriously would get dominated. If they actually entered MMA with the idea of being an MMA fighter then you're wrong. We already have low level boxers in there that have done wonderfully. How would they all get taken down and dominated when it wasn't like that for the boxers we already have in there?

I think you're talking about a silly one-off a washed up boxer would do just for money, ala Jimmerson or Toney. Nothing would have made those guys win because it was never their intention.

I said there are boxers who could do it if they trained for it. With the possible exception of guys like Lomachenko who already have a grappling background, it would take a few years not a single camp.

I'm not referencing any specific guy who has tried in the past. I'm saying that the best fighter alive right now is the guy who would most likely win a nhb fight right now. That person is the top MMA fighter, not the top boxer.