Back Alley brawl: Zion vs McGregor who wins?

[SearsTower]

Similar to this...

https://www.businessinsider.com/game-of-thrones-the-mountain-could-crush-conor-mcgregor-in-10-seconds-2018-5

Read the quotes and check out the clip and then imagine Zion who is similar in height to The Mountain and much, much quicker with more endurance. A supreme athlete in comparison.

[Mind_Odyssey]

McGregor has trained his entire life on being able to basically kill somebody

[HeartBreakKid]

Ground game has become overrated with the rise of MMA though. Very very bad idea in anything resembling a street brawl, any schmuck can kick you in the head when you're on the ground.

How is that any different then fighting on your feet? Any schmuck can punch you from behind.

One vs one, ground fighting is very effective - and most street fights result in grappling, so it's not like this is some martial arts only thing. This is how real fighting works, and has always worked.

[NW BBALL]

Freak athlete Zion may be but McGregor slips his first punch and takes out the giant’s knees and then chokes him out. It wouldn’t even require a trained fighter of McGregor‘s caliber, combat sports are in a different world.

[Duke4life831]

The better question would be who would win in a fight between Zion and Hafthor.

No fighting training between the 2 of them. Zion is the better athlete while Hafthor is about 4 inches taller and 170lbs heavier and the far stronger man.

[eminence]

Ground game has become overrated with the rise of MMA though. Very very bad idea in anything resembling a street brawl, any schmuck can kick you in the head when you're on the ground.

It' a one on one fight...

Fights are almost never 1 on 1 unless this is just some peacocking to preen for the ladies.

[DaPessimist]

With 1 week of training Zion would murk McGregor.

If we assume Zion has no clue what he's doing, there's a chance that the much smaller McGregor prevails. I don't care how big you are, a leg kick can bring you to your knees.

[eminence]

Ground game has become overrated with the rise of MMA though. Very very bad idea in anything resembling a street brawl, any schmuck can kick you in the head when you're on the ground.

How is that any different then fighting on your feet? Any schmuck can punch you from behind.

One vs one, ground fighting is very effective - and most street fights result in grappling, so it's not like this is some martial arts only thing. This is how real fighting works, and has always worked.

It's much much easier to keep someone (or multiple someones) in front of you when you're on your feet than on the ground. Mobility is just exponentially better on your feet.

[vado]

I would put money on McGregor. Like Zion could win but he'd have to either get lucky or he has a bit of a fighting background we don't know about

[SearsTower]

Watch on YouTube

Man vs boy

Zion would eat him alive.

[HeartBreakKid]

Ground game has become overrated with the rise of MMA though. Very very bad idea in anything resembling a street brawl, any schmuck can kick you in the head when you're on the ground.

How is that any different then fighting on your feet? Any schmuck can punch you from behind.

One vs one, ground fighting is very effective - and most street fights result in grappling, so it's not like this is some martial arts only thing. This is how real fighting works, and has always worked.

It's much much easier to keep someone (or multiple someones) in front of you when you're on your feet than on the ground. Mobility is just exponentially better on your feet.

Your argument really sums up to very little value in the grand scheme of things. You are arguing that fighting on your feet is better than fighting on the ground, because when you are fighting multiple opponents, with the caveat that they are in front of you - you have a marginally better chance of winning?

If you are out numbered then you are likely going to lose regardless. If you're fighting people with no promise that you will get hit from behind, then it is irrelevant whether you are on the ground or feet, because getting struck or taken down when you don't see it will lead to significant damage anyway.

You don't even have to grapple someone to cripple them, just slamming them on concrete is enough to incapacitate them (or kill them, even). There is nothing overrated about ground fighting. Judo, Sambo, Catch and Jiu Jitsu are all developed in places that have tons of street fighting and they all work.

[limbo]

Ground game has become overrated with the rise of MMA though. Very very bad idea in anything resembling a street brawl, any schmuck can kick you in the head when you're on the ground.

How is that any different then fighting on your feet? Any schmuck can punch you from behind.

One vs one, ground fighting is very effective - and most street fights result in grappling, so it's not like this is some martial arts only thing. This is how real fighting works, and has always worked.

Because the goal of street fights is not to be in one in the first place and/or get out of it unscathed if the fight was deemed unavoidable. As such, you need movement above everything else, and going to the ground completely takes away your ability to move freely/quickly to the point where you become a sitting duck.

Besides, you are usually mostly oblivious to your surroundings in street fights. You don't know if the guy you've decided to take to the ground has a weapon or five colleagues willing to dog pile onto you and many more variables that a lot of time result in your own death...

It's just way better and safer to be on your feet, and completely necessary to escape (which should be the primary goal anyway). If fighting is unavoidable while you're escaping, then just throw punches, maybe an occasional kick... If you have some training and can throw a good punch that's really all you need to defuse the situation over 90% of the time.

[HeartBreakKid]

Ground game has become overrated with the rise of MMA though. Very very bad idea in anything resembling a street brawl, any schmuck can kick you in the head when you're on the ground.

How is that any different then fighting on your feet? Any schmuck can punch you from behind.

One vs one, ground fighting is very effective - and most street fights result in grappling, so it's not like this is some martial arts only thing. This is how real fighting works, and has always worked.

Because the goal of street fights is not to be in one in the first place and/or get out of it unscathed if the fight was deemed unavoidable. As such, you need movement above everything else, and going to the ground completely takes away your ability to move freely/quickly to the point where you become a sitting duck.

Besides, you are usually mostly oblivious to your surroundings in street fights. You don't know if the guy you've decided to take to the ground has a weapon or five colleagues willing to dog pile onto you and many more variables that a lot of time result in your own death...

It's just way better and safer to be on your feet, and completely necessary to escape (which should be the primary goal anyway). If fighting is unavoidable while you're escaping, then just throw punches, maybe an occasional kick... If you have some training and can throw a good punch that's really all you need to defuse the situation over 90% of the time.

We are talking about fighting not running.

The premise of this argument that ground fighting is overrated because another guy can enter the fight and stomp on you just seems very weak. If you are fighting someone and they have five additional friends, then you are not fighting anyone you are getting lynched. Whether you have boxing ability or not would be negligible if your plan was to run.If your plan was to run you would merely....run.

That doesn't make ground fighting overrated. Ground fighting is overrated on the basis that it might not work against multiple opponents infers that stand up would work - which it wouldn't, even if it would be more effective.

[limbo]

We are talking about fighting not running.

The premise of this argument that ground fighting is overrated because another guy can enter the fight and stomp on you just seems very weak. If you are fighting someone and they have five additional friends, then you are not fighting anyone you are getting lynched. That doesn't make ground fighting overrated.

No, eminence's claim was that going to the ground in a street brawl is a BAD idea, which it is, NOT that it's a ineffective fighting strategy to defeat someone in a fight...

Ground game is overrated in a street brawl if you want to maximize your chances of staying alive/being unharmed in a fighting scenario where you have absolutely no idea of what your surroundings are. That's really the crux of the argument.

[slick_watts]

these threads are just excuses for self insertion fantasies.

[Swish1906]

Is this thread a joke? I give Zion maybe 30 seconds in each fight.

Against 53y old Mike Tyson, i give Zion 10 seconds max...

[Swish1906]

I am utterly dumbfounded at how lopsided this is for in favor of McGreror. Do people not realize Zion is twice his size and literately a walking slab of muscle?

Zion also has 34 years and twice the size/weight on this guy, huh...so easy win Zion...not

Read on Twitter

[HeartBreakKid]

I am utterly dumbfounded at how lopsided this is for in favor of McGreror. Do people not realize Zion is twice his size and literately a walking slab of muscle?

Zion also has 34 years and twice the size/weight on this guy, huh...so easy win Zion...not

Read on Twitter

People who think Zion would just run over McGregor because of the size difference are basically saying that Zion would destroy the Light-Heavyweight champion of the world, Canelo Alvarez - lol.

McGregor isn't a particularly small person.

[eminence]

How is that any different then fighting on your feet? Any schmuck can punch you from behind.

One vs one, ground fighting is very effective - and most street fights result in grappling, so it's not like this is some martial arts only thing. This is how real fighting works, and has always worked.

Because the goal of street fights is not to be in one in the first place and/or get out of it unscathed if the fight was deemed unavoidable. As such, you need movement above everything else, and going to the ground completely takes away your ability to move freely/quickly to the point where you become a sitting duck.

Besides, you are usually mostly oblivious to your surroundings in street fights. You don't know if the guy you've decided to take to the ground has a weapon or five colleagues willing to dog pile onto you and many more variables that a lot of time result in your own death...

It's just way better and safer to be on your feet, and completely necessary to escape (which should be the primary goal anyway). If fighting is unavoidable while you're escaping, then just throw punches, maybe an occasional kick... If you have some training and can throw a good punch that's really all you need to defuse the situation over 90% of the time.

We are talking about fighting not running.

The premise of this argument that ground fighting is overrated because another guy can enter the fight and stomp on you just seems very weak. If you are fighting someone and they have five additional friends, then you are not fighting anyone you are getting lynched. Whether you have boxing ability or not would be negligible if your plan was to run.If your plan was to run you would merely....run.

That doesn't make ground fighting overrated. Ground fighting is overrated on the basis that it might not work against multiple opponents infers that stand up would work - which it wouldn't, even if it would be more effective.

A) My statement was simply that going to the ground is overrated in regards to something resembling a street brawl.

B) The goal of any fight is to not be in that fight any longer.

C) Like most areas of life prevention is the best medicine- talking/running/whatever you can do to avoid being in that fight.

D) Yes, a 6v1 is always going to be a big fat L, you're completely at their mercy. If a side is seriously outnumbered going into a fight they should flee. Engaging at all is almost certainly a bad move.

E) Most serious fights are some X v Y (say 3 v 4 or something - if dudes are promising to stay out of it - and it's believable - it's not a very serious fight in my mind). That is when going to the ground is a bad idea.

F) Going to the ground also in most scenarios 'ups' the level of engagement for lack of a better word, many folks are willing to disengage from some boxing stances and half connected jabs. If you're putting someones friend to sleep through a choke... Less likely.

[bamheat]

Whoever picks Zion is as stupid as someone picking McGregor if it was one on one basketball.