Using a Shell or Crab Type Defense in MMA / KB

snizzar said:
I feel like it's defenses are too subtle to notice and therefore not particularly judge friendly
Click to expand...
You are right :)

Nuclearlandmine said:
I'd like to see you turn your lead foot's toe pointing to the opponent's centreline, instead of what you are doing in the vid, which is a bit too sideway. It will allow you to align yourself with your opponent better, and make yourself less open with opponent's lead leg kick as well.
Click to expand...
I tried that a few times, but whenever Im not concentrated on that, I get back to completely sideways again, Im not sure why...
 
Nuclearlandmine said:
Fuck yes, that moment when my opinions are vindicated
Click to expand...
really? I thought the videos clearly show that stance as a hindrance. What are the advantages? Because i didn't see any. There were disadvantages though.

If anything, i'd like to see you turn your lead foot's toe pointing to the opponent's centreline, instead of what you are doing in the vid, which is a bit too sideway. It will allow you to align yourself with your opponent better, and make yourself less open with opponent's lead leg kick as well.
Click to expand...

Very bad idea. If you happend to get leg kicked flush while your toe is pointing forward and your shoulder is rolled, body twisted to the side, your knee will be screwed
 
Bay Area said:
really? I thought the videos clearly show that stance as a hindrance. What are the advantages? Because i didn't see any. There were disadvantages though.
Click to expand...

Increased linear mobility, a devastating jab, hard to punch, more leverage to grab-and-attack...?
 
Double post
 
Last edited:
Bay Area said:
really? I thought the videos clearly show that stance as a hindrance. What are the advantages? Because i didn't see any. There were disadvantages though.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. The video showed that Ivica's stance and method aren't refined yet for his environment. He got hit a lot where he would have more easily been able to defend with a more nuetral stance. The whole purpose of a stance in fighting is to provide a platform where one can attack and defend at any given moment. And by defend, I mean defend all the possible attacks. Most fighting venues will develop a common stance because over time it will pragmatically develop. There will be variances, but ultimately the stances will be similar. Ivica's style looks cool, and I'm hoping he'll adapt to be able to start leg checking and defending those hooks and kicks better and more consistently. He needs to look at Petrosyan to get some ideas.

Bay Area said:
Very bad idea. If you happend to get leg kicked flush while your toe is pointing forward and your shoulder is rolled, body twisted to the side, your knee will be screwed
Click to expand...

The knee is more commonly damaged if there is weight on it and its kicked. Without load the leg does a pretty good job of staying pliant and the ligaments and tendons in the knee will generally still be safe. Though, it's still a bad idea because he'd be giving a better angle on the actual nerve that's targeted with leg kicks...unless he learns to check/evade those legs kicks, to which we're back to what was being touched on above.
 
Last edited:
SAAMAG said:
The whole purpose of a stance in fighting is to provide a platform where one can attack and defend at any given moment. And by defend, I mean defend all the possible attacks.
Click to expand...

This x 1000. The poster in the video's objectives could have been met more efficiently in the tried and true frontal MMA stance. People like to say MMA is still young and we don't know what works yet. This is false stance wise. The most efficient MMA stance was discovered decades ago.
 
Bay Area said:
This x 1000. The poster in the video's objectives could have been met more efficiently in the tried and true frontal MMA stance. People like to say MMA is still young and we don't know what works yet. This is false stance wise. The most efficient MMA stance was discovered decades ago.
Click to expand...

how many people in mma would u consider to be defensive masters?? I see the same bar room brawls as I did back in the 90s....

Bottom line is any style can be effective in a fighting environment it comes down to the person and his temperment
 
Bay Area said:
really? I thought the videos clearly show that stance as a hindrance. What are the advantages? Because i didn't see any. There were disadvantages though.



Very bad idea. If you happend to get leg kicked flush while your toe is pointing forward and your shoulder is rolled, body twisted to the side, your knee will be screwed
Click to expand...

If you didn't see any advantages then you're either not looking hard enough or trying not to see them. He did work with his jab, was very difficult to hit with punches, had great awareness and the ability to throw a hard right hand from that stance. There were disadvantages of course. He ate a lot of kicks and and got taken down a good amount.

But take into consideration that he's just one guy. His stance is more bladed than anyone who's supporting the stance believes it should be in mma. He relies almost exclusively on his lead hand for offense and is usually reluctant to throw the right. There are a lot of improvements that could be made to his stance and strategy that would make him more dangerous. Plus, the same stance being used by someone with a more diverse kicking arsenal (especially kicks with the lead leg) and better grappling could have very different results.

If nothing else, his videos are a proof of concept. The videos demonstrate that the crab/shell can be used to win mma fights, considering he uses it to win mma fights.

Like I said before, I definitely think this stance could be applied by certain types of fighters and against certain types of fighters very well.
 
a guy said:
If you didn't see any advantages then you're either not looking hard enough or trying not to see them. He did work with his jab, was very difficult to hit with punches, had great awareness and the ability to throw a hard right hand from that
Click to expand...

*Yawn* All of the things you posted could be accomplished with a regular linear boxing type stance like Gsp uses. Minus the disadvantages of crabbing up. So again, why do it if there are more efficient ways of doing things?
 
Bottom line, the dude has a winning record and competed in legitimate organizations.

I still have reservations with the overall premise of the thread (the advantages of the stance were more to do with linear mobility and the offense generated by his hands, less with his shoulder roll defense) but the same thing that got me annoyed with Sinister and Thug (complaining that possible negatives aren't worth discussing if they could happen to anyone) are the same complaints I have with the naysayers now (not happy with him because he wasn't doing things that simply aren't commonly done in MMA).

I like it. I really like his ability to catch kicks in that stance. It has made me rethink things.
 
thugpoet said:
Bottom line is any style can be effective in a fighting environment it comes down to the person and his temperment
Click to expand...
I bet I could get Dunken Kung Fu to work in MMA too if I dedicate 30 years of my life to it. Or I could take a more effecient path.
 
Bay Area said:
I bet I could get Dunken Kung Fu to work in MMA too if I dedicate 30 years of my life to it. Or I could take a more effecient path.
Click to expand...

Standard issue canned reply to attempt to set aside that someone is successful with a method one doesn't approve of. You may want to consider that people are drawn to styles that they like and that this may have something to do with why they fight the way they do. If you made Drunken Gung Fu successful by dedicating 30 years of your life to it, you'd be extraordinary. Being extraordinary perhaps should be encouraged more in our Sports if we want them to appeal to people who otherwise wouldn't have much interest in seeing people always fight the same ways. If you don't like a style, that's perfectly fine. But not everyone who actually fights is going to necessarily choose their style merely based on the possible downfalls of it. Some fighters (and these ones tend to end up being the best) are going to attempt to do what majority thinks they shouldn't.

FWIW, there is no "standard efficient MMA stance," almost every athletes stance comes from different disciplines. If you're going to argue something, at least argue it with a notion that actually exists.
 
Every stance style has holes..dep on your opp skillset or his ability to stick to a gameplan..those weaknesses can and will be exploited. But not every fighter has the mentality skills or discipline to do so; you can be open to leg kicks but if your facing a guy who isnt a good setup guy, doesn't kick hard or isnt mentally/physically conditioned to leg kick..well more than likely it wont be as big an issue...

Its not as simple as saying here is the hole attack it...if my hole is leg kicks; but ur not committed to it..the min u get countered or miss a few your gonna bail and go back to what got you to the dance.. if my hole is td and ur not a takedown guy..once u get stuff and countered your gonna bail or worse yet if they don't work and you don't have that conditioning you may bail and go with what brought you. Even though it is painfully clear that I have this specific hole for you to fill.....

You have to have refined that skill or buy in to the approach to stay committed, think about condit...there were moments his app didn't work..did he bail out and try to kill Diaz...no..he kept moving..hitting and moving. He bought in...

Strategy can be easy to see ...recognize, executing is the hard part; that why we scream at guys go inside..but he is an outside guy...put ur punches together..when he is a potshot guy..stick and move when he is a brawler.

All I am saying is not everyone can or will take adv of his holes...because not everyone has the mentality..faith in their coaching under fire..or the tech/physical ability to. The book been written on lyoto why the hell did hendo and bader lose to him..they lack the skills..ability to take adv of holes in his game.
 
Jukai said:
Bottom line, the dude has a winning record and competed in legitimate organizations.

I still have reservations with the overall premise of the thread (the advantages of the stance were more to do with linear mobility and the offense generated by his hands, less with his shoulder roll defense) but the same thing that got me annoyed with Sinister and Thug (complaining that possible negatives aren't worth discussing if they could happen to anyone) are the same complaints I have with the naysayers now (not happy with him because he wasn't doing things that simply aren't commonly done in MMA).

I like it. I really like his ability to catch kicks in that stance. It has made me rethink things.
Click to expand...

I just personally think things like this point out who is who, personality-wise. I come across issues like this because when you train fighters, you meet guys who are going to do what they do no matter what you tell them. They're going to hold on to ideals. The ones who end up being very good, typically. If the ideal is "I can and WILL fight with my hands low, I will NOT keep them near my face"...then there's going to be very little anyone can tell that guy about that unless something happens to him. On the flipside you have trainers who have an ideal approach themselves. "THIS is what works, and if you don't do it, then go somewhere else and do the goofy shit you think will work." How can Sports progress with people taking these positions in abundance? That fighter may never reach his potential if he's constantly discouraged by "what ifs" that haven't happened yet, and that trainer won't be able to get fighters beyond what he himself knows about particular techniques. All he can then do is have them do that same stuff harder and faster, when it comes time for that fighter to adapt, or change, they usually lose.

The way I see it, it's better served to stay open and attempt to find solutions to the potential problems that don't always necessitate "don't ever try that out." I much prefer to say to my guy "alright, if you're going to have that hand down, then you need to be able to _________." As an instructor, I just don't think it's wise to present oneself as closed-minded due to risks. That could lead to trust issues between fighter and trainer. If I am not confident that I can facilitate something that may be unusual, or cannot find a way to make something work that a guy could be good at because I am afraid or ignorant and choose to remain so, then I'm not much use to that caliber of a fighter.
 
I don't know why someone would even argue for an uniform style. Different stances, styles, specialities etc is what makes mma (and other fighting sports to a lesser extent) interesting. If everyone would just look like a carbon copy of each other it would get pretty uninteresting pretty fast. The fact that mma is still evolving and we continue to see new approaches is great.
 
SAAMAG said:
I agree with this. The video showed that Ivica's stance and method aren't refined yet for his environment. He got hit a lot where he would have more easily been able to defend with a more nuetral stance. The whole purpose of a stance in fighting is to provide a platform where one can attack and defend at any given moment. And by defend, I mean defend all the possible attacks. Most fighting venues will develop a common stance because over time it will pragmatically develop. There will be variances, but ultimately the stances will be similar. Ivica's style looks cool, and I'm hoping he'll adapt to be able to start leg checking and defending those hooks and kicks better and more consistently. He needs to look at Petrosyan to get some ideas.
Click to expand...

I viewed some of the footage and while Ivica has an admirable career thus far, there are refinements missing. However I just wanted to note that this stuff you're saying is what I like even though we don't seem to agree based on my disagreement with BA's basic notions. But this shows you're thinking like an instructor, because that's largely what you do. Save for the last line. It's not Ivica's responsibility himself to look at Petrosyan, or even perhaps find someone who CAN refine that style to be more suitable to MMA, it's the responsibility of the head trainer. Unless he's flying mostly solo where boxing principals are concerned (which happens in MMA at the Professional level more than I'd like), of course. He gets quite a bit of good angles and positions, but doesn't always make optimal use of them. And refinement is needed to address the weaker positions, and what happens in the clinch, or how to not give up the outside angle (and thus, the back) so easily even from the beginning positions he uses. That refinement gets put into place, though, and you still have a guy who may win or lose a fight depending on how good the other guy is. But it'd be significantly more difficult to exploit any weaknesses of his positioning.

flanellograf said:
I don't know why someone would even argue for an uniform style. Different stances, styles, specialities etc is what makes mma (and other fighting sports to a lesser extent) interesting. If everyone would just look like a carbon copy of each other it would get pretty uninteresting pretty fast. The fact that mma is still evolving and we continue to see new approaches is great.
Click to expand...

To make this clear, I don't think BA is arguing for a uniform style necessarily, just as SAAMAG said, more neutral beginning positions that are thought of as less risky. I only pointed out that there's no uniform stance like that because every single time someone has a stance that's slightly more one way or another, it gets argued against. Stance, while being about having good positions, is also just as much about the fighter being comfortable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,632
Messages
55,506,453
Members
174,800
Latest member
kechan123

Share this page

Back
Top