I have never said that. So weird you keep saying it. What are you trying to do, miss quote me to get people to like you? I do grappling. I love grappling. And why are you obsessed with ring sports? I've said sports that compete better equipt you then ones that dont. My comment about why it was called a ring obviously went over your head. I've mentioned stepping in the ring in as a turn of phrase. I'm sorry your little autistic brain reads everything so litually.
I have also said I've competed in both, and for me, it felt different, I felt more pressure fighting in a ring. You then said I am wrong. You shouldn't comment on that though, because you've not qualified. But you seem to think doing a judo comp gives you in sight to me comparing the 2 from lived experience.
You can keep making shit up about me all you want, but I know grapples can fight. I have never said they couldn't. You keep hitting the same drum about me with nothing to back it up
I should of never of fed the troll in the first place...it is fun though. But you are a very strange man and always have to resort to lies to try and be little someone. Very childish
But when people have to plain lie to make themselves shine, it says it all really
You have repeatedly said that "if you haven't fought in a ring i.e. full contact kickboxing,boxing or mma, then you can't fight and have no experience".
This is a extremely dumb statement to be saying on an mma forum when the original UFC champion was a straight grappler and most of the early UFC champions were straight grapplers who crossed over with minimal full contact experience from Severn to Coleman to Couture and they all smashed experienced boxers and kickboxers.
So obviously people who do competitive grappling can fight. They may not be as used to taking strikes but it's something they can train to get used to.
So your brain seems to struggle with making these contradictory statements.
It seems I have to explain your own thought process back to you to help you understand, it's like having to take a kid to the slow class arguing with you,and explaining to him what he actually means when he says something since you get confused.
If you want to actually get back to the discussion, the problem I have with this statement is you claiming its correct when it's your opinion. Yes lead hand forward has its positives, and there are better examples than Usman. Being Anderson, wonderboy and bisping (although wonderboy stands southpaw to be strong leg forward).
But there are pletty of fighters who like power hand at the back who dominate, examples being Gsp, khabib, cain, stipe, nunes.
What works for some, doesn't work for all. So to state that one way is better when there are so many variables, I think is wrong
But I would genuinely like to know why you think "right lead stance aligns punching, kicking and grappling the BEST in mma" how do you come too that conclusion when you have no reference to what the stance is up against (ie how the oponient opposite is stood, oponient strengths weaknesses etc)
Like I said switch stance is the most versatile to be able to adapt to fight in both.
But if you are going to train a right handed fighter from the ground up in mma then right hand lead should be the normal orthodoxy.
Since in mma striking to clinch can happen in an instant it makes sense to be in a stance where you are already set to grapple.
Since the gloves are smaller, there is already more power in the right lead and left rear straight to stun so again the strong hand lead makes sense.
Kickers it may vary but many would prefer to have strong leg forward to quickly deliver the kick with favoured leg,and again it leaves the option to shoot in as you would with a wrestling takedown or step the strong hip in with a Judo throw with the same strong leg in front.
It's harder to justify why you would want to train to fight weak hand forward as the base. It makes sense in boxing maybe that's all.
