UFC 191 (9/5): Johnson vs. Dodson II

[High 5]

Of course the fans are going to boo flyweights after being spoiled by that clash of titans.

Spoiler:

[lilfishi22]

I had a good laugh when Mir walked out with that gut and Goldie later commenting about how Mir was no longer training for the "body builders" image any more and he's taking a "fuel for the body" approach to training. Pretty clear Mir is taking that approach way overboard

[Jasen777]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/roynelsonmma/status/640373701704224768[/tweet]

Seriously though instead of standups, I'd rather them just ban closed guard - or at least the kind where you hug the guy's back also (I'm fairly sure that's the technical name?) Guys on the bottom are getting too dependent on the ref saving them. Of course, I'd rather have no ref intervention on the issue, but that doesn't seem to be an option.

[REDDzone]

The idiotic part is that would never happen if dummies like fat John didn't rush to bail them out when they do it. The current system literally directly incentivizes stalling when thats the opposite of what their goal is.

[Bernman]

It disincentivizes it for the top fighter, who theoretically has more control over whether they stay in that position or not.

And it's natural to hold from the bottom so you can to protect yourself. Less excuse for the top guy who has leverage to break free if they have the desire to and aren't in such peril. But they just don't want space often times because top time is incentivized in the judging. At least until that changes, stand-ups for inaction should be enacted by the referees.

Even if top time wasn't technically rewarded, I'd still fear system gamers doing it because tie goes to the runner, or they'd punch lightly every 30 seconds and then go back to stalling out the round. So stand-ups may always be a necessary evil of an entertainment and timed fightsport. Just have to improve judging, refereeing, and legislating as much as you can to use discretion better.

[REDDzone]

It disincentivizes it for the top fighter, who theoretically has more control over whether they stay in that position or not.

And it's natural to hold from the bottom so you can to protect yourself. Less excuse for the top guy who has leverage to break free if they have the desire to and aren't in such peril. But they just don't want space often times because top time is incentivized in the judging. At least until that changes, stand-ups for inaction should be enacted by the referees.

Even if top time wasn't technically rewarded, I'd still fear system gamers doing it because tie goes to the runner, or they'd punch lightly every 30 seconds and then go back to stalling out the round. So stand-ups may always be a necessary evil of an entertainment and timed fightsport. Just have to improve judging, refereeing, and legislating as much as you can to use discretion better.

Being on top generally IS winning. Now, being on top of Tony Ferguson or Carlos Condit or Anthony Pettis isn't always winning. But, 90% of the time, the guy on top is controlling the fight and doing more damage because he has more leverage and because gravity. If you take away the ability of guys like Fat John to assert themselves at every opportunity, then the onus is on the bottom fighter to do something besides grab and hold. Sure, they may grab and hold while they gather their bearings if they are eating shots, or grab and hold AND THEN CREATE ANGLES (breaking posture is the #1 priority from the guard, creating angles is #2) and go for a submission or try to back take or create space and stand.

If the system (and refs who love to assert themselves into fights) didn't reward Arlovski for stalling, he may have had to actually throw a strike from the bottom, or create an angle and snap a triangle or armbar, or get butterfly hooks to shoot Mir out and stand up.