TJS

Or maybe because you would be to busty getting punched in the head repeatedly or getting your arm/elbow/sholder broken. Lots of things work in theory.

KSN-thats true some would use a chest to chest type. even then you arent going to have the right leverage to put their head into the ground with any type of force.

Warp- There is a diffrence between a Grappler raining down punches on your head and a striker knowing how to arm bar someone or reverse them...one takes skill and technigue...punching someones head from a top positon does not require much technique to be effective. Unless you are fighitng a midget or a 6 year old you will not have the same reach they do. Your showing your lack of experience again. If i have the mount on someone and i sit up not only can i punch them in the head but they cant even reach my chin in most cases and they certainly dont have the leverage to reach behind my head and pull it down. Nope legs/feet arent going to do you any good from a mount position. If they were a complete moron who attempted to cover your mouth and slowly guide your head down instead of just spiking it into the ground like any intelligent person would do. See the burden of proof is on you, you are the one saying they favor grapplers yet have not produced a single Solid reason why.

Yes that was supposed to be "Cant". What im getting at is If they are on top of him he is going to be in no position to do that unless that are laying on top of him like alimp noodle not doing anything. his theory is unrealstic at best and lacks any reality.

I asked specifically how he would perform the technique he described if he was on the bottom of a mounted position...If he thinks he can bash someones head into the ground by "putting his hands on their head and moving it to the ground" he either has no fight experience whatsoever or is just trolling. A) when you are mounted you cant reach the back of their head if they are sitting up B) they are in a much better position to repeatedly bash You head into the ground along with alot of other things. He has yet to answer any questions seriously or back up any of his claims.

Exactly, that the whole point of this discussion that warp spider dosent understand. Please describe the technique you would use to bash someones head into the ground if you were mounted or under the knee on belly position(The two common positions one would want to achive in a real fight) 1) Put hand on opponent's head. 2) Move hand to ground. Ok I think this Topic is thru since you dont even know basic Grappling terms/positions either that or you think you can bash someones head in when you cant even reach it.

Thats not always true, not unless your fighting at a professional level.

A kickboxer should keep his hands open aswell up until impact. You proabably just cant tell because of the gloves. you move faster when your hands are open and it helps you stay relaxed.

Exactly, that the whole point of this discussion that warp spider dosent understand. Please describe the technique you would use to bash someones head into the ground if you were mounted or under the knee on belly position(The two common positions one would want to achive in a real fight)

It's not if both parties are trying to hit each other it's a disadvantage because it's alot easier to get someone down from a clinch unlees of course the "striker" has better takedowns/defenses than the grappler...at that point he must have grappling experience. As far as you Knocking people out on ther ground the problem with your theory( I call it that because you have obviosuly never fought a competent grappler) is you assume you will be on top. What makes you think you can out grapple a grappler and achive whatever position you want? why is a striker better atcontrol and positioning than a grappler? Good luck smashing people heads while you are mounted and getting your own slammed repeatedly. You seem to be under the impression that Grapplers fall to their backs and pull gaurd in every situation, once again This shows your lack of experience Basically you have some serious flaws in your thinking.

Proabably not, Mark Coleman would still slam them with a double leg most likely, the only diffrence is that would proabably be the end of the fight and he wouldent havr to GNP them. Anyone with real fighting experience knows it's alot easier to achive a clinch than to stay out of one. The problem is once you are in a clinch it's alot easier for a grappler to get a takedown then it is for a striker to get a KO. I would lovey too see you actually go out into the real world and get some fighitng experience beyond you backyard home training and imagination. Olympic wrestlers now suck compared to "warp Spider" the man who can defy all odds and knock out anyone before they get within 2 feet of him. he is impossible to takedown!

In a Fight if one person only attacks and the other only defends it's obvious who the winner will be. Cool Tell him to go win ADCC ulimited divison and prove it. I have never seen an example of an Aikido practicioner showing it;s effectiveness against a trained fighter. im not saying it's impossible but i will remain a bit skeptical especially considering the countless storys i have heard about aikido guys getting pounded on by various People. there are alsotwo former aikido practicioners at my school and both of them agree it's really not practical in a real fight.

Radok-grappling does not mean you have to roll around on the ground, If i threw you on you head that would be grappling, if Choked you out form a standing postition that would also be grappling, that stamtent is absurd. Warp- Yous still have not provided a single valid reason why MMA favors grapplers. other than your WWF "spear" tactic. WE are talking about the floor being an advantage for grapplers, If anyone is going to get takendown it would be the "striker" since "strikers" prefer to stand up and strike. thus there is no way in any takedown the floor would give the grappler an advantage.

Have you ever actually wrestled in your life? It's easy to reverse a double leg? well assume your right but for whatever reason wrestler like Dan Severn, Mark kerr, Mark coleman were able to double leg every single one of their opponets without exception. Maybe your right but for some stange reason Royce Gracie was able to get ever single one of his opponets to the ground...and so was every other competent grappler that faced a "striker". Once again anyone who knows BJJ/judo/wrestling WILL put you on the ground alomst every time from a clinch unless you have signifigant grappling experience. If they are a grappler they should know how to fall without seriosuly injuring themselves regsrdless of the surface. Ok your still not looking at the Facts THE STRIKER IS THE ONE THAT GETS TAKEN DOWN. your argument dosent hold any weight and you have no eveidence to backup your claims.

Today you migh have a better chance with pure grappling but even today a pure grappler would get hurt in most cases atleast at the higher levels of competition.

I wouldent say it's "better" But is definetly an overlooked aspect of alot of people...I think most people have an unrealistic picture of what they would do against a good grappler because they have never really tried it agaist one.

would cosider early up to about UFC 10 Not really, not looking at the Big picture..there were alot of succesful(in their own field) boxers/kickboxers/karateka/TKD'ers etc Some of them won a few fight but most of the time the lost to "grapplers" and You see grapplers/wrestlers from all diffrent backgrounds walk in and almost always win atleast a few fight and ususally do very well Royce Gracie-BJJ Dan Severn-Greco roman wrestling Oleg Taktarov-Sambo Ken shamrock-shootinfighting Remco Pardoe-Judo All these guys had alot of succes with little or no cross training in "striking"

Your right when I pick you up and slam you with a double leg I will also end up on top of you in a side mount. When I Hipp toss you to the ground I will proabably follow. If I sweep you from the clinch I will land in the mount. When I slam you on you head with double underhooks I will end up on top. Do you have a valid point to this? you saying the grappler is going to hurt his knee when he slams someon on their head or back? Any properly performed throw/takdown will hurt the person being taken down alot more than the one doing it. So people who spend alot of time taking people down and getting taken down themselves are less condiditoned to do so than someone who spends little or no time or practice doing it? I guess I could use your thinking and claim a grappler is better conditioned to handle getting punched and kicked than a kickboxer. Like i said it's going to hurt whoever is getting taken down, most of the time that will be the "striker" . Maybe these guys are so conditioned they can get slammed on concrete floors and not get hurt..who knows...

I would say it's alot more common amount certain stlyes or types but there are bad apples in every group and you have to realize the world revolves around money and people are always going to seek it. some are just willing to go alot further to get it. Plenty of people offer good quality instruction and good schools and they are out to make money and there are also the mcdojos whitch sell you your belts.

Wrong again, Soft floors favor a striker since the better grappler will dictate positioning in most cases, are you one of those people who think that a striker has a better chance of out grappling a grappler and ending up on top? I dont give me the "oh if you get knocked down it helps you" because if they are a halfway decent grappler they know how to break fall and it's not a sever issue. There are a few techniques that favor grapplers such as the removal of the "downward" elbow in the UFC. but thats still 3 vs 1 in favor of the "striker" Besides in the early days when there were hardly any rules it became obvious that Grapplers have the advantage. It almost comical that people still try and deny it to this day instead adressing the weakness like most.

No, Standups for inactivity and short rounds definetly do not favor a grappler.

Grapplers have the advantage because it's alot easier to close the distance and achieve a clinch/takedown than it is to keep distanstance and KO someone beofre they get to you. Plenty of "strikers" win nowdays because they learn to grapple, or atleast leanr to avoid takedowns/submissions and get up. Pedro Rizzo, Mirko Cro Cop, Liddell, Silva, are a few examples.

No, Aikido is the type of stlye that works against drunks or untrained people. Not a trained fighter trying to knock your head off your sholders or ground and pound you to a bloody mess.

So basically you dont have any real answer but insted your like to point out typos?

That is what you said. You said the grappler had the best chance of ending up on top. That makes it your argument. Thus, you are arguing that the better grappler has the best chance of ending up on top. Arguing something means expressing your argument, arguing WITH is diputing that same argument. The difference is very important. sure thing, keep playing word games.