UFC 62 (Might not be good for slower conections.) I myself think Chuck Liddell is going to dominate. He hardly ever gets taken to the ground and, IMO, if Sobral has any chance in winning its on the ground. Liddell's stand up is just so good.
Chuck Liddell is my last hope of a decent, good looking striker other than Rich Franklin. So I hope Liddell wins and at least makes these fights more exciting. No offense to groundfighters (I am not insulting your effectiveness), but seeing UFC guys rolling around on the ground like they are dry-humping doesn't make the exorbitant PPV prices seem worth it.
Good looking? As in physical appearence or striking ability? As to groundfighting, unfortunately that appears to be a commonly held view of those who do not understand it.
I like Babalu and he's been doing so well lately. I think he can win this one and hope he does. Also, it will be funny to see thousands of posts all over the internet that are all "But Silva vs. Liddell is still on, right? Oh, please somebody say it is!"
LOL! I mean in terms of technique. Between you and me, Chuck Liddell ain't a pretty face lol. As to groundfighting, I did state that I did not dispute the effectiveness of the art. In fact, a skilled groundfighter would probably take me out quite handily. I am aware of the difficulty of it, as a bit of friendly sparring with my BJJ crazy friend has shown. But really, I've gotta tell you, techniques aside, it gets boring when all people do is fight like that.
sobral will probobly not be able to take chuck down, if randy c. had a hard time doing it (being a far superior wrestler that most) sobral won't stand a chance, all chuck trains is take down defense, escapes and reversials, and for course kenpo, not to mention he hits like a freight train
That explains my confusion, Liddels striking is not good technical. He has very unusual striking, which is effective but certainly not pretty. As to it getting boring, you should try to learn the techniques involved because it does get exciting.
That is true, Liddel has great takedown defense. But Babalu has great takedowns, and Couture took Liddel down 4 times in 1 fight(of course Liddel has gotten better) and both Couture and Horn pre-fight said they wanted to stand up with Chuck. Babalu is saying flat out, he is going to take this to the ground. He isn't stupid, as Horn and Couture were when they tried to stand up to him. I still have a hard time going against Chuck, so I will put the odds 60/40 in favor of Chuck, maybe 70/30. You guys seen Babalu? I love his staredown. Edit- Forgot to mention Babalu only has 4 losses(not counting his loss to Chuck), three coming by decision against Dan Henderson, Kevin Randlemen, and FEDOR(albeit in Rings). His only non-decision losses came against Liddel and Overreem. If you can last with those three guys the entire fight.....you can last with Liddel.
Babalu's wrestling is absolutely phenominal. Anyone who hasn't seen it should check out IFC: Global Domination - a tournament where he fights Trevor Prangley (a former South African national squad wrestler whom he takes down at will), Mauricio "Shogun" Rua and Jeremy Horn all in the same night It won't be easy, but it's entirely feasible that Sobral could take Liddell down. He'll have to do it in the middle of the cage, though - Liddell uses the sides of the cage too well to get back up to keep him down
i think you and i are on the same page friend it should be a good fight none the less but i got to take lidell
In all the matches of Liddell I've seen when he gets taken down, which is rare, he gets up very quickly. Once he's up and swinging at you its so hard to win. I think Chuck is going to win this fight. Most of the interviews on the UFC 62 site had people high up in the sport siding with Liddell ( Matt Hughes, for example.)
I gotta pick a bone here. Chuck doesn't jab like a traditionally good boxer because this ain't boxing. Jabbing like Muhammed Ali is goina give your arm up for a grab. His guard is low but active cuz you gotta work on defending the takedowns. He gets in and lands his punches not cuz he's lucky but because he ready to repel shoots and block strikes and then counter. I think every striker should take notes on Chuck's striking and learn how to press forward prepared to defend shoots and strikes like him. IMO it's the best way to land your punches. By the way I am putting the odds on Chuck Liddel winning 4 to 1. He better win cuz I wanna see him fight Wanderlei Silva, just wish they'd allow Silva to stomp.
I didn't say it wasn't effective, simply that it is very unusual. Jabbing will not open you up to an arm grab, are you kidding? Jabs are used all of the tim, and rarely does someone go for an arm grab. Look at Anderson Silva's victory over Leben, he won with jabs. IMO his striking is very unusual, and he is the exception to the rule. If others tried to fight like him, they would be beaten badly.
Couture was able to keep him down, Horn didn't try very hard(someone had drugged him and told him he could beat him striking). While the odds favor Liddel, I think Babalu is primed ofr an upset here.
I didn't say that you were insulting Chuck Liddell but I'm just trying to point out why I think his style works. It seems unorthodox but I think if you understand my reasoning you might think his style of striking should be emulated. I didn't mean that jabbing will allow someone to grab you by the arm and chuck you (no pun intended) I meant that a jab usually doesn't have enough force to stop a shoot for take down and can be easily defended by a wrestler with grabbing/parrying/blocking. IMO grapplers are already well trained in defending jabs because it's only slightly different from defending grabs. Since the jab isn't usually a strong punch and the wrestling involved makes it easy to defend I don't see it as a major asset in MMA. I do notice it still being used but I think most of the time fighters use it when it's both fighters wanna stand and throw. Otherwise I should also point out that I differentiate between lightly flicking a jab and throwing a hard straight. I think most of the time MMA guys are throwing hard straights and aren't jabbing in the traditional boxer sense,when it's used effectively.
Couture only managed to keep him down at the end of their first fight when Liddell was gassed so much he could barely move and that was all the way back in 2003. The same thing happened against Rampage. If Chuck's not been working his cardio hard, Babalu could do the same thing (sprawling's pretty tiring). As for the Horn fight - he had no choice but to stand up with Liddell. It's not that Horn didn't try to take him down it's that he has really crappy wrestling skills (by his own admission) and didn't have a prayer of getting past that sprawl. He was hoping to defend and score points standing, get into a clinch and try to work a takedown from there. Of course, everyone's got a gameplan until they get punched in the head. A lot
If someone grabs yor jab and does something involing an arm lock\throw\joint lock, then your jab, simply put, is crap. The purpose of jab is not as much to be a single punch, but is more of a... cover-up, sort of, for more punches. That defeinetly doesn't disqualify the power of a good jab, though, because if you don't have a good jab than you lack a very fundemental aspect of boxing. If you lack that fundemental aspect, and aren't a <deleted> power beast like Bob Sapp, all the hard straights in the world won't help you against skilled strikers.
Everyone says that. An underdog fighter saying they want to/ think they can beat the other guy at their own game is a common tactic used for hyping the fight and making the other guy think they may have been training the wrong way for them. Horn later said that his plan was to work a clinch for a takedown. Who would honestly believe that Horn thought he could beat Chuck on the feet? He certainly thought he could hang with Chuck standing up since he'd never been stopped by strikes before, but Horn's gameplan was undoubtedly to get it to the floor where he would have the advantage
