AAS and MMA
- 07-25-2006, 07:18 PM
- 07-25-2006, 07:42 PM
Originally Posted by MarcusG
No. The issue here is not wether steroids are gonna help someone phisically or not. That fact is pretty friggin obvious. The point that was made was that strength or size is not the determining factor in a fight. I ask you. If strength is ALWAYS an advantage in a fight, than how do u justify it being an advantage when the stronger guy is layin on the mat, knocked the fu*k out?
- 07-25-2006, 07:47 PM
Originally Posted by Rogue Drone
Damn. You seem to be doin pretty good on the rep points bro.
By the way, what camp did you say you come out of?
07-25-2006, 07:53 PM
Marcus is clearly saying that with all else being equal, the stronger man has an advantage. He never implied that strength was everything.Originally Posted by NO HYPE
07-25-2006, 08:07 PM
All else ain't equal. If all fighters were equal in skill, than there would be no winners. No reason for fighting. The stronger man must first FIND an oppertunity for it to be an advantage.Originally Posted by Alexander
And no he didn't imply that strength was everything, he just implied that strength is ALWAYS an advantage and that is bullsh*t.
07-25-2006, 08:11 PM
Then how do you explain when the more skilled opponent is laying on the mat knocked the **** out?
07-25-2006, 08:19 PM
Well if steroids are rampant in professional sports including prizefighting, then my general statement is correct unless you disagree.Originally Posted by NO HYPE
Your example is flawed since you can't always assume that the guy who knocked him out wasn't on steroids in the first place.
Bullsh!t? A crappy fighter like Kimo would benefit from anabolic steroids, someone as skilled as Fedor would also benefit from steroids since strength is a primary attribute. Strength, stamina, speed and having a good chin are all primary attributes. To say strength is not a factor doesn't make sense.
And you haven't responded why training harder, longer, having less fat and having an easier time cutting while on steroids isn't an advantage.
07-25-2006, 08:23 PM
Originally Posted by B4n3 0n3
Just how did ya come to the conclusion that the guy who gets knocked uncoscious, is the more skilled opponent?
07-25-2006, 08:30 PM
Well lets say that everybody said so and so was a great skilled fighter with much greater skills than his opponent. And then he loses when he was supposedly the more skilled man. It's just as hypothetical as your scenario really.Originally Posted by NO HYPE
07-25-2006, 09:08 PM
Originally Posted by Rogue Drone
Team Dagger? the one with kendal from Hawaii? If so Howzit brah. I had my first pro fight out of hawaii in Warriors Quest. I'm coming out of FSA now in SSF we are under Cesar.
Back to AAS i think it's going to be alot let prevalent now due to the fact kimo got popped and he wasnt' even in a championship fight. NSAC was only testing those involved in Title fights but looks like CSAC is testing whoever it feels like
07-25-2006, 09:10 PM
Your statement was "why do competitors use steroids if it doesn't give them an advatage?" It does give them a physical advantage and I've already posted that. Go ahead see for yourself. What good is a physical advantage if ya can't find a opening to use it? What good is it if the opponent has a skill advantage? You never answered that question.Originally Posted by MarcusG
This statement was proceeded by your suggestion that the only way you can have a level playing field is if both of the fighters are using steroids. That's complete bullsh*t.
As far as my example being flawed, I really have no idea what you were trying to say so I can't respond.
"To say strength is not a factor doesn't make sense." Why are u stating things that are untrue. I didn't say it wasn't a factor, I said it wasn't "the determining factor in a fight."
07-25-2006, 09:14 PM
I'm sorry, but could you clarify that statement. I don't understand.Originally Posted by B4n3 0n3
07-25-2006, 09:28 PM
I'm quite interested in the seen out West. You and MIXEDUP are from the West coast correct? I don't know much about it cuz I'm on the other side of the country and the MMA seen out here is kinda lame at the moment. I have to hurry up and get an official record goin so I can fight at some bigger events as I can't use elbows or knees out here. Some bullsh*t state law. So anyways I'll be sure to look you guys up if I'm ever in the area.Originally Posted by Rogue Drone
07-25-2006, 09:36 PM
Yeah the scene out here is blowing up strikeforce which is held in San Jose is the event that broke the north american record for attendance surpassing even the UFC. The only thing is that we have so many good camps your really have to be well rounded to fight at almost any event WE have so many famous camps within a 100 mile radius from ours which is under cesar gracie, to fairtex, to frank shamrocks school AKA where baroni was training his stand up at. It's unbelievable.Originally Posted by NO HYPE
07-25-2006, 09:56 PM
So it sounds like winning enough of those events would greatly improve one's chances of making it to UFC. Well I guess it really doesn't matter where you fight if you have the skills and determination to go all the way. Hell, Jorge Rivera faught out here with no elbows or knees before making UFC. How about you? Are you making your way to the top? Or are you just enjoying yourself?Originally Posted by mixedup
07-25-2006, 10:06 PM
Well we do have some of the biggest events out here KOTC Gladiator challenge IFC etc Sylvia, shogun Babalu, Lidell, Sanchez have all fought in one of those orgs. As for me making it to the top No I am too old and have too many injuries I'm just making a last run at competing right now before I get way too old lol. But I am realistic about my abilities I've rolled or trained with some of the best in the world and I know that I am not world class and probablly never would be. I fight basically for myself so that when I am old i can say I was a professional fighter at one time in my life and also so I can tell my kids about it one day. For me it's about personal accomplishmentsOriginally Posted by NO HYPE
07-25-2006, 10:07 PM
A strength advantage can and will overcome a skill advantage. Just take a look at Matt Hughes-Gracie. Having more strength also means having the ability to wear down an opponent and getting ahead by attrition.Originally Posted by NO HYPE
I was referring to your scenario you gave in your previous post
".....If strength is ALWAYS an advantage in a fight, than how do u justify it being an advantage when the stronger guy is layin on the mat, knocked the fu*k out?"
Steroids are an advantage for a competitor who is using them hence my comment about a level playing field.
07-25-2006, 10:16 PM
Originally Posted by mixedup
07-25-2006, 10:21 PM
I disagree about the strength thing. When I was training and competing, I was 170 at 6 foot 2, hardly strong, but I would submit lots of stronger guys or wear them down because I had better cardio and patience.
07-25-2006, 10:21 PM
Plus look at the athletes who dont even weight train, let alone use. Fedor anyone?
07-25-2006, 10:33 PM
"A strength advantage can and will overcome a skill advantage." That's very amusing. That kind of mentallity is elementary at best.Originally Posted by MarcusG
I give up man. I can say the same thing over and over till my fingers won't type anymore or my computer catches on fire and you still won't see the truth. I've gathered from your statements, that you are not a fighter, but just a confused spectator.
07-25-2006, 10:37 PM
Right on man. Some people will never understand unless they are put in the situation themselves. It's pretty easy to tout useless opinions from the outside of the ring.Originally Posted by ktw
07-25-2006, 10:59 PM
[QUOTE=MarcusG]A strength advantage can and will overcome a skill advantage. Just take a look at Matt Hughes-Gracie. Having more strength also means having the ability to wear down an opponent and getting ahead by attrition.
Well you got to remember that although Royce may have had a skill advantage in BJJ Matt had a skill advantage in other aspect wresting etc. Also I would have say Matt was much more experienced and skilled without the gi as Royce spent most of his career fighting with the gi on. So that isn't a great example of strength over skill. I mean we could say the same thing of the BJ Penn/Hughes fight no one is going to doubt Matt was stronger but BJ used his better submission skills to choke him out. I will however concede that all things being = the stronger fighter will have an advantage however all things are never = in MMA
07-25-2006, 11:26 PM
I think roids can also give you a huge mental/attitude/confidence advantage which benefits certain types of people more than others. The Kerr that smashed people in Vale Tudo was not the same as the Kerr that layed and prayed in some of his Pride matches. He never seemed to have the right personality for MMA, but given enough chemicals he could connect to his inner rage. Vitor is another example.
Baroni in his 2nd fight with Tanner also looked like he was off the juice and didn't come to fight that night....
07-25-2006, 11:29 PM
I agree that a fighter with more strength has a PHYSICAL advantage, however he still needs an oppertunity to utilize that advantage. Hence the comparison of strength vs. skill.Originally Posted by mixedup
Now I'll revert to your conclusion.... All things are never equal in MMA.
07-25-2006, 11:38 PM
No I think what you were arguing against was:Originally Posted by NO HYPE
which is not BS. Size, strength, stamina and skill are ALWAYS factors in a fight. The first two are the reasons for weight classes. If you don't believe that then that's your prerogative. Nobody is saying that just because fighter A is stronger than fighter B that A will win, just that it is ONE advantage that fighter A has OVER B, not the deciding factor. Capiche?Originally Posted by NO HYPE
Originally Posted by NO HYPEThis is a theoretical discussion in which 'skill' is subjective. By the sounds of it, your definition of the more skilled fighter is the one who wins the fight, which is one way to look at it. However, take three fighters A, B, and C. A beats B, B beats C, but A loses to C. Or A beats B in one fight but loses to B in another. Who is the most skilled?Originally Posted by NO HYPE
Also as MarcusG said, anabolics allow fighters to train longer and harder (some help with connective tissue as well); something that contributes to skill.
07-26-2006, 01:00 AM
I didn't state anything about size, strength, stamina and skill not being factors in a fight. I am an MMA fighter and I am quite aware of what factors are in a fight. This entire discussion was about strength vs. skill and how they both play a role but that strength in and of itself is not the determining factor in a fight.Originally Posted by Nitrox
Weight classes have nothing to do with size or strength and everything to do with weight. Otherwise they would be refered to as size classes or strength classes.
"this is a theoretical discussion in wich 'skill' is subjective", Yeah, just as subjective as strength. How can a person look at two fighters and say that just because one fighter is bigger and stronger than the other, that he has THE advantage. He has AN advantage physically but that will not be an advantage against a more skilled opponent.
And yes somebody was saying that just because fighter A is stronger than fighter B, that A will win. Read what he stated about Matt Hughes and Gracie.
07-26-2006, 01:06 AM
"A strength advantage can and will overcome a skill advantage."Originally Posted by NO HYPE
07-26-2006, 09:47 AM
No, it will not. Fedor does not lift weights and look how he has dismantled every good HW in the world, you think it's because he's strong? I doubt he's as strong as Randleman or Coleman is and he subbed them pretty well. Chuck Liddell is not strong in the weight room (I know a guy who trained with him that's how I know this) and he's doin pretty well right now. The list can go on and on. In grappling if you don't have everything down right it will not matter how strong you are, technique triumphs skill. Still don't believe me? How about Phil Baroni being horrible despite his good physique, same with Vitor Belfort, who despite being ripped proved that he is not at the same level as anyone else in his class
07-26-2006, 09:50 AM
I will add that my coach wrestled on the olympic level for 12 years and only had us doing basics for strength training: Pullups, Hang cleans+power cleans, Squats, and deadlifts. which were the only things he ever did during his career and you can't say that he wasn't successful.
07-26-2006, 12:07 PM
07-26-2006, 12:21 PM
Fedor may not lift weights in a gym, but I've seen clips of him doing strength building exercises like tire throws and sledgehammer work. He has a lot of explosive strength, watch him throw around Nog like a ragdoll. It's not on the level of Randleman or Coleman, though, like you said. Vitor is highly skilled. He lacks in the mental aspect of the game and gases too.Originally Posted by ktw
I think strength can definitely offset a skill discrepancy in some scenarios, ie good skill + extreme strength can beat great skill a reasonable amount of the time. Rampage is a great example. Watch him slam his way out of sub attempts. He also isn't the technical wrestler Linland is but slammed him hard twice.
07-26-2006, 01:30 PM
My point with Fedor is that he does not do the typical weight training routine and doesnt have the muscularity of a lot of other athletes.
Lets all watch Nog V. Sapp, Sapp is 375 lbs of raw muscle and got owned by Nog., who is a lot smaller and weaker.
07-26-2006, 01:36 PM
Originally Posted by Nitrox
Hmmmmm let's see.... Ah.... no actually, the reason we have different weight classes is to ensure that the two opponents fighting are within a 15lb variable. This means that the different weight classes are.... divided by WEIGHT. Not size or strength.
07-26-2006, 03:57 PM
Why is it so hard for people to understand this? Anyone who has ever competed or followed MMA knows that this argument is stupid, strength rarely matters, same with size. Hell, Nick Diaz knocked out Robbie Lawler who was a lot stronger and bigger, you think it mattered then?
07-26-2006, 04:18 PM
Funny you brought up Nog/Sapp. You say Sapp got owned by Nog. That is hilarious, it was more the other way around. Yes Nog won but he got pounded by someone with very little skill, all due to the strength discrepancy. Strength definitely matters. I have no grappling training at all, but I wrestle buddy's that wrestled in HS and wrestle in college now, and I can manhandle them because I'm so much stronger then them. I'm not saying skill isn't extremely important, but so is strength.Originally Posted by ktw
07-26-2006, 04:51 PM
Yeah Nog's ability to take brutal beatings is the only reason he won that fight as well as the CC fight.
07-26-2006, 05:22 PM
Originally Posted by Alexander
Your buddy's aren't very good then, plain and simple. A guy we have wrestles on an international level at 185, he definately kills me when I'm at 205 even though I lift more than him. Why you ask? Because he has lightning fast speed, experience, and near perfect technique.
I used the Nog example because the same thing has happened with me and stronger guys, they get this ego like they're invincible, come out swinging, get gassed, and then subbed by someone much smaller.
Another example of strength not being an advantage is Ken Shamrock. He always comes out hard, but gasses super fast like most guys who weight train too much, and his skill level has detiorated so much that he can't win against anyone decent.
I think it's safe to say that since you have no experience in MMA that you can not actually make a good case for your point, just like a lot of people in this thread. I get great pleasure from subbing new trainees who think like you. Very humbling when they get choked out because they have no idea where to leave their arms while in the guard or stick their head out too much on a shot. Even as they improve, having years of experience over them will always give me an advantage because I have been in every possible situation and learned something from it. Most crappy people who fight in Rage in the Cage are roided out dorks like Edwin Dewees who have no skill but can bench 315 so they automatically let their ego get ahead of them.
07-26-2006, 05:32 PM
It sounds like you are talking about a trained fighter against just any dude off the street with no skill at all, thats a retarded comparison. And yes I have alot of expirience on the mat.Originally Posted by ktw
07-26-2006, 05:45 PM
Originally Posted by ktw
What makes you think lawler is stronger than Nick?
Similar Forum Threads
- By Alpine in forum AnabolicsReplies: 8Last Post: 06-28-2004, 11:25 PM
- By TheTom in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 03-15-2004, 01:00 AM
- By Musclemar in forum AnabolicsReplies: 0Last Post: 07-18-2003, 01:28 PM
- By lwb357 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 1Last Post: 02-26-2003, 05:27 AM
- By ironviking in forum Cycle InfoReplies: 13Last Post: 02-03-2003, 04:55 PM