[QUOTE=Cyberhwk]
Chuck’s skills are on on his feet and STAYING THERE. He has very good take down defense, though from what I’ve seen his ground game is underwhelming.
His lack of a ground game is what got him in trouble against Jackson last time. We’ll see how he holds up this Saturday. The Pride fight was in a ring. This time it’s in Chuck’s territory.
/Wish I could watch. Gotta work.
[/QUOTE]
I’m pay-per-viewing that mutha. Actually, I think Chuck may have a bad night. He doesn’t do the type of close infighting that Jackson does very well. Not to mention that Jackson has an iron head. Not as tough as somebody like, say, Don Frye, but definitely not easy to take out with one massive strategic bomb.
[QUOTE=Cyberhwk]
To which rules would you be referring? Knees to the head? Soccer kicks?
[/QUOTE]
Not so much that as the format. The “no gi” rule, for one. A gi gives a BJJ guy traction, handles, and chokes, and taking away the gi deprives him of that part of his arsenal. Timed rounds is another. If time isn’t a factor, a grappler in good position can tire his opponent by making him waste his energy and struggle unecessarily, which gives the grappler the opportunity to slowly work for better and better position like a python, or to completely gas his opponent to the point where he can’t resist a submission at all.
Worse than that, though, is standing up grounded fighters for “inactivity.” If you’re in good ground position and your opponent is wasting all his energy struggling against you, inactivity isn’t a bad thing; it means your opponent is getting gassed and you’re not. You can’t play that war of attrition under modern rules, because you’ll get stood back up. Even actively seeking the submission can get you stood back up if you take too long. I understand it’s to keep audiences from being bored to tears, but it takes away from the ground game and gives a big advantage to strikers.
