lmao
yes.
People should be doing both, actually. What takedown efficiency did Ortega have going into the Holloway fight? 14%? 18%? Even if you're only fighting fighters with solid TDD, that's a ridiculously low value for a grappling oriented fighter.
But how many of them are actually using their wrestling offensively?
I'm not denying that at all. I just find it funny how we've kinda come full circle on this. For millennia, striking arts were the predominant martial systems, then UFC, and more specifically, BJJ, turned that on its head. But now that everybody has high level takedown defense, they're all going back to striking. It's too risky and expends too much energy to force a guy to the ground who has a working knowledge of how to prevent it.
He was a Judoka as a child.
You don't know what you're talking about wrestling has been just as prevalent across cultures and history.
No, at least nothing remotely similar to what we consider wrestling today. Wrestling being "the oldest martial art" is one of the greatest myths in the world. Ancient Pankration was a NHB fight to the death, allowing biting, scratching, headbutts, and all manner of strikes, as well as grappling. Grappling systems were often taught in the military throughout history due to the inclusion of armor, but only to unbalance or knock down your foe before finishing them with your weapon. Various tribes and cultures have some sort of grappling-esque sport, but generally these were heavily regulated to remove nearly all elements of actual combat (i.e. sumo).
If I am mistaken, forgive my American ignorance, but I am assuming you are referring to collegiate or freestyle wrestling, as both are extremely prevalent in the UFC. I can tell you first hand that "not engaging" in wrestling will get you stalling call. In my experience, stalling calls come fast too. Our refs were brutal about that.
