FAC 16, MMA, Friday, October 7, USA

[Kamais_Ookin]

bigger bet on irfan loses, last bet now coming up with nixon

 

[Kamais_Ookin]

my 2 bigger bets lose and $5 on haga wins fml

 

[Stat_Collector]

nice effort guys but its like being in a junk yard looking for scrap gold.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

My bad on pimping Nixon. Didn't know the dude had such shit TDD.

 

[Stat_Collector]

My bad on pimping Nixon. Didn't know the dude had such shit TDD.

i think this is why i use to use spreadsheets it forces me to play smarter and look at all stats and rate skills. i know what it's like when you try to get the early lines on something, so you do maybe 5-10 mins of research and then end up missing all kinds of holes like stamina or td defense. I think we need a system on the forum for capping fights where we accurately apply a value to a fighter's technique like tdd , getups, jabs, leg kicks. Using a 1-5 rating system.

A perfect way to measure skill is who its landing on? Who is getting off the floor from a good wrestler? These things allow you to set value on things, we need more users on here doing cleric work marking down spreadsheets instead of debating in vague terms. Im guilty of it like the rest of us, we need to all hold ourselves accountable.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

i think this is why i use to use spreadsheets it forces me to play smarter and look at all stats and rate skills. i know what it's like when you try to get the early lines on something, so you do maybe 5-10 mins of research and then end up missing all kinds of holes like stamina or td defense. I think we need a system on the forum for capping fights where we accurately apply a value to a fighter's technique like tdd , getups, jabs, leg kicks. Using a 1-5 rating system.

A perfect way to measure skill is who its landing on? Who is getting off the floor from a good wrestler? These things allow you to set value on things, we need more users on here doing cleric work marking down spreadsheets instead of debating in vague terms. Im guilty of it like the rest of us, we need to all hold ourselves accountable.

I keep notes on tapology which anyone is welcome to look at, i was thinking of maybe starting scoring in certain areas.

I think my problem with this one was just failing to research TDD or risking it without seeing Nixon against a decent wrestler.

 

[EndlessCritic]

my 2 bigger bets lose and $5 on haga wins fml

Second commandment of being an MMA gambling degenerate: Thou shalt have conviction when playing dogs.

 

[mkess101]

i think this is why i use to use spreadsheets it forces me to play smarter and look at all stats and rate skills. i know what it's like when you try to get the early lines on something, so you do maybe 5-10 mins of research and then end up missing all kinds of holes like stamina or td defense. I think we need a system on the forum for capping fights where we accurately apply a value to a fighter's technique like tdd , getups, jabs, leg kicks. Using a 1-5 rating system.

A perfect way to measure skill is who its landing on? Who is getting off the floor from a good wrestler? These things allow you to set value on things, we need more users on here doing cleric work marking down spreadsheets instead of debating in vague terms. Im guilty of it like the rest of us, we need to all hold ourselves accountable.

You'll likely end up with a different set of debates though.

"How do you rate his TDD a 2? He stuffed 4 of 5 TD's from Joe Blow who's a good wrestler!"

"Joe Blow hasn't been a good wrestler for 3 years now, look at easily Sweet Pete stuffed him in his last fight and Sweet Pete is taken down by everybody!"

"But lately Sweet Pete has shown way better scrambling and a really good whizzer that keeps him upright, he's way better than he used to be!"

It's not a WORSE way to assess fighters and their abilities so don't take this as me trashing the idea. It's just that you're gonna end up with the same arguments and discussions we already have but just framed in the context of what score to assign fighters in certain areas.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

You'll likely end up with a different set of debates though.

"How do you rate his TDD a 2? He stuffed 4 of 5 TD's from Joe Blow who's a good wrestler!"

"Joe Blow hasn't been a good wrestler for 3 years now, look at easily Sweet Pete stuffed him in his last fight and Sweet Pete is taken down by everybody!"

"But lately Sweet Pete has shown way better scrambling and a really good whizzer that keeps him upright, he's way better than he used to be!"

It's not a WORSE way to assess fighters and their abilities so don't take this as me trashing the idea. It's just that you're gonna end up with the same arguments and discussions we already have but just framed in the context of what score to assign fighters in certain areas.

That's it, I'm putting 10 units on Sweet Pete.

 

[Stat_Collector]

You'll likely end up with a different set of debates though.

"How do you rate his TDD a 2? He stuffed 4 of 5 TD's from Joe Blow who's a good wrestler!"

"Joe Blow hasn't been a good wrestler for 3 years now, look at easily Sweet Pete stuffed him in his last fight and Sweet Pete is taken down by everybody!"

"But lately Sweet Pete has shown way better scrambling and a really good whizzer that keeps him upright, he's way better than he used to be!"

It's not a WORSE way to assess fighters and their abilities so don't take this as me trashing the idea. It's just that you're gonna end up with the same arguments and discussions we already have but just framed in the context of what score to assign fighters in certain areas.

you’re talking about a scenario where a fighter who normally gets taken down had one fight and looked competent there but has a history of poor tdd and everyone debating rather the wrestler in question is diminished in skill maybe because of erosion perhaps because of age etc. So mislabeling the first guy as having solid(3) tdd as suppose to basic tdd(2)

The first thing that needs to be addressed is that the term tdd is very vague. Certain fighters are better stuffing double legs than they are singles or Judo throws.

The second is that one fight is not enough to verify if Sweet Pea is solid at tdd, one fight puts him around 2.5 or suspect of level 3. If sweet pea stuffed 4 of 5 tds from two Dagastani wrestlers in his last two fights that is enough for me.

Lastly this is where we need to start looking into the cappers in this forum as individual players with a set of skill and track record when it comes to breaking down grappling technique. it would be nice if we had a panel of judges here who excelled in one aspect of mma give an insight to their background and be referred to when we have these debates so they give us a much better analysis on the fighter in question. if you’re right about sweet pea and he gets taken down and thrashed. and you guessed correctly 9 times out of 10. Then i’m going refer to you every time we have debates about tdd. As if now its just a free for all and ppl are losing money cause we aren’t getting to the final conclusion of the fight.

 

[Stat_Collector]

But i admit numbers and ratings can be off putting and set ppl off. its kind of geeky and can also have its problems. i think just having a debate on all the elements of mma and writing a summary next to why you think their tdd defense will hold up is a decent start. i just think we need to have the debate more often instead of looking at the odds. more or less a paragraph explaining why you like a fighters hands, kicks, bjj, or wrestling , addressing all aspects should be mandatory. i think the rating system is probably not gonna convince ppl because ppl need something that explains things, rather than simply attaching a number onto it.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

i think this is why i use to use spreadsheets it forces me to play smarter and look at all stats and rate skills. i know what it's like when you try to get the early lines on something, so you do maybe 5-10 mins of research and then end up missing all kinds of holes like stamina or td defense. I think we need a system on the forum for capping fights where we accurately apply a value to a fighter's technique like tdd , getups, jabs, leg kicks. Using a 1-5 rating system.

A perfect way to measure skill is who its landing on? Who is getting off the floor from a good wrestler? These things allow you to set value on things, we need more users on here doing cleric work marking down spreadsheets instead of debating in vague terms. Im guilty of it like the rest of us, we need to all hold ourselves accountable.

Okay so I've drafted a spreadsheet. Here's the criteria I've come up with for scoring/info

Name
Weightclass
Stance
Style
Strength
Speed
Power
Cardio
Pace
Pressure
Heart
Chin
Durability
Movement
Composure
Offensive striking arms
Offensive striking legs
Combination striking
Strike volume
Striking defence hands
Striking defence legs
Counter striking
Aggressiveness
Killer instinct
Range management offense (Do they fall into clinch etc)
Range management defence (Do they move away from the cage, keep wrestlers at a distance?)
Open mat entries
Open mat takedown finishes
Open mat wrestling defence
Cage wrestling takedowns
Cage wrestling takedown defence
Cage takedown control grappling
Cage wrestling pommeling and escaping
Grip control/Stickyness
Grip breaking
Get ups
Top control
Top GNP volume
Top GNP power
Top GNP damage (cuts etc)
Passing
Top submission threat
Guard activity
Guard retention
Bottom submission threat
Sweep threat
Back takes
Back escapes
Submission defence
Notes (Fast starter, particularly dangerous move to look out for etc)

I was going to score on a 20 point system. Where 10 basically means I've seen them do it proficiently and anything above you're moving to a strength and anything below is a weakness. If I've never seen it tested I'll leave it blank. So for example if there's a normal paced fight where the fighter is a bit tired at the end but not overly so then that gets a 10 for what I'd consider normal cardio.

I don't personally think rating on a scale of 5 gives enough variance as if I'm using the Bush fight from this card as an example then I thought his back takes and control were very good, probably a 5 on that scale, but then we're saying he's as good as Jussier Formiga, who would be a 20 on this scale with Bush maybe scoring a 17. I also think that means that you can score UFC fighters and low level regional fighters on the same system as then when a fighter steps up or down from the UFC to regional competition, the scores will still make sense.

 

[mkess101]

you’re talking about a scenario where a fighter who normally gets taken down had one fight and looked competent there but has a history of poor tdd and everyone debating rather the wrestler in question is diminished in skill maybe because of erosion perhaps because of age etc. So mislabeling the first guy as having solid(3) tdd as suppose to basic tdd(2)

The first thing that needs to be addressed is that the term tdd is very vague. Certain fighters are better stuffing double legs than they are singles or Judo throws.

The second is that one fight is not enough to verify if Sweet Pea is solid at tdd, one fight puts him around 2.5 or suspect of level 3. If sweet pea stuffed 4 of 5 tds from two Dagastani wrestlers in his last two fights that is enough for me.

Lastly this is where we need to start looking into the cappers in this forum as individual players with a set of skill and track record when it comes to breaking down grappling technique. it would be nice if we had a panel of judges here who excelled in one aspect of mma give an insight to their background and be referred to when we have these debates so they give us a much better analysis on the fighter in question. if you’re right about sweet pea and he gets taken down and thrashed. and you guessed correctly 9 times out of 10. Then i’m going refer to you every time we have debates about tdd. As if now its just a free for all and ppl are losing money cause we aren’t getting to the final conclusion of the fight.

Fighting can be pretty tough to analyze at such a granular level TBH. Again, I'm definitely not trashing your overall idea. I'm just saying that the amount of nuance you're asking people to detect and then label is not only intense but sometimes really subjective.

Don't get caught up too much in my one example. It was an off the cuff way to try to explain what I meant.

Think about this: How do you "score" a fighter's ability to blend his skills? Is there a category for that? It's a skill in and of itself. How do you quantify it?

IDK, if this is something you think is really beneficial then hell yes go for it and try to organize some system that makes it more "uniform" (I guess that's the right word?). I'm skeptical that your trading one set of flaws for another but I'm also willing to keep an open mind.

 

[Stat_Collector]

Okay so I've drafted a spreadsheet. Here's the criteria I've come up with for scoring/info

Name
Weightclass
Stance
Style
Strength
Speed
Power
Cardio
Pace
Pressure
Heart
Chin
Durability
Movement
Composure
Offensive striking arms
Offensive striking legs
Combination striking
Strike volume
Striking defence hands
Striking defence legs
Counter striking
Aggressiveness
Killer instinct
Range management offense (Do they fall into clinch etc)
Range management defence (Do they move away from the cage, keep wrestlers at a distance?)
Open mat entries
Open mat takedown finishes
Open mat wrestling defence
Cage wrestling takedowns
Cage wrestling takedown defence
Cage takedown control grappling
Cage wrestling pommeling and escaping
Grip control/Stickyness
Grip breaking
Get ups
Top control
Top GNP volume
Top GNP power
Top GNP damage (cuts etc)
Passing
Top submission threat
Guard activity
Guard retention
Bottom submission threat
Sweep threat
Back takes
Back escapes
Submission defence
Notes (Fast starter, particularly dangerous move to look out for etc)

I was going to score on a 20 point system. Where 10 basically means I've seen them do it proficiently and anything above you're moving to a strength and anything below is a weakness. If I've never seen it tested I'll leave it blank. So for example if there's a normal paced fight where the fighter is a bit tired at the end but not overly so then that gets a 10 for what I'd consider normal cardio.

I don't personally think rating on a scale of 5 gives enough variance as if I'm using the Bush fight from this card as an example then I thought his back takes and control were very good, probably a 5 on that scale, but then we're saying he's as good as Jussier Formiga, who would be a 20 on this scale with Bush maybe scoring a 17. I also think that means that you can score UFC fighters and low level regional fighters on the same system as then when a fighter steps up or down from the UFC to regional competition, the scores will still make sense.

gd start, one thing id add is training partners, coaches, quality gym and activity (years active in the last 4)

Just a summary of your notes on the things that stick out the most.

Fighting can be pretty tough to analyze at such a granular level TBH. Again, I'm definitely not trashing your overall idea. I'm just saying that the amount of nuance you're asking people to detect and then label is not only intense but sometimes really subjective.

Don't get caught up too much in my one example. It was an off the cuff way to try to explain what I meant.

Think about this: How do you "score" a fighter's ability to blend his skills? Is there a category for that? It's a skill in and of itself. How do you quantify it?

IDK, if this is something you think is really beneficial then hell yes go for it and try to organize some system that makes it more "uniform" (I guess that's the right word?). I'm skeptical that your trading one set of flaws for another but I'm also willing to keep an open mind.

I mean you could look at individual technique and compare it, you can always tell bad form. But i think the notes or whatever metric you use should be kept private, and then when your done capping share a short summary about the things that standout the most. at the very least knowing you are looking at this from all angles is enough for me. One thing id like ppl to note is how much watch time did they spend. i think #1 problem is just not watching at least 3 fights and giving a full debriefing without being bias. You can always tell when someone did 5 mins of research,but not always the fault of the capper. there isn't enough footage sometimes in these low tier events or fighters.

 

[mkess101]

gd start, one thing id add is training partners, coaches, quality gym and activity (years active in the last 4)

Just a summary of your notes on the things that stick out the most.

I mean you could look at individual technique and compare it, you can always tell bad form. But i think the notes or whatever metric you use should be kept private, and then when your done capping share a short summary about the things that standout the most. at the very least knowing you are looking at this from all angles is enough for me. One thing id like ppl to note is how much watch time did they spend. i think #1 problem is just not watching at least 3 fights and giving a full debriefing without being bias. You can always tell when someone did 5 mins of research,but not always the fault of the capper. there isn't enough footage sometimes in these low tier events or fighters.

Yeah that's one thing I definitely agree with. I don't find it difficult to tell who's actually done a lot of tape on these low level fights (because I don't have time to watch any of them, I just read what other people here have posted). But having people add which fights they've watched, etc is a good idea.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

gd start, one thing id add is training partners, coaches, quality gym and activity (years active in the last 4)

Just a summary of your notes on the things that stick out the most.

I mean you could look at individual technique and compare it, you can always tell bad form. But i think the notes or whatever metric you use should be kept private, and then when your done capping share a short summary about the things that standout the most. at the very least knowing you are looking at this from all angles is enough for me. One thing id like ppl to note is how much watch time did they spend. i think #1 problem is just not watching at least 3 fights and giving a full debriefing without being bias. You can always tell when someone did 5 mins of research,but not always the fault of the capper. there isn't enough footage sometimes in these low tier events or fighters.

Yeah that's one thing I definitely agree with. I don't find it difficult to tell who's actually done a lot of tape on these low level fights (because I don't have time to watch any of them, I just read what other people here have posted). But having people add which fights they've watched, etc is a good idea.

Anyone is free to use my notes if you want. They're under alphabet and I note which fights I've watched and what I've thought of them. I've only been noting fights this year though so it's a pretty limited amount of info really.

Hellowhosthat's MMA Rankings | Tapology