Stephen Thompson Challenge

[Phillyboi207]

Quote: Originally Posted by Thetruth11

Only stupid people don't realize if your opponent rushes you and gets close it doesn't mean your out fighting isn't working . Watch Angulo vs Lara Gus was trynna keep Cormier off him and it didn't work. Look up dos anjos vs Cain and also look up dos anjos vs overseem Sent from my SM-G920T using Operation Sports mobile app

Dos Anjos couldnt touch Reem lol

Anyway, please provide videos since you’re clearly very skilled

Im not as good as you so I’d like to learn some tech

[RomeroXVII]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phillyboi207

Dos Anjos couldnt touch Reem lol Anyway, please provide videos since you’re clearly very skilled Im not as good as you so I’d like to learn some tech

He definitely meant to say Dos Santos vs Overeem lol.

[ZHunter1990]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phillyboi207

I think the confusion is people think we mean always fighting off of your back foot. That’s not what we’re referring to. In the game fighting off your backfoot is really strong. It’s the ability to maintain space that we’re missing. Connor is another great example. He’s an aggressive outside fighter. He stays just on the end of range and punishes people for over extending. Wonderboy stays just outside kicking range and punishes when you overextend.

I think we are getting somewhere now. This is the worry, if you leave fighting/countering on the backfoot/stationary as advantageous as it is now and allow more options to escape without striking. You develop a meta that so easily favors not being the aggressor.

Step 1) Land a leg kick or a few punches
Step 2) Move backwards since youre up on points and make them come to you
Step 3) Randomly plant and win big exchanges versus forward moving combos
Step 4) Coast the round out

Everyone trying to be a Stephen Thompson knock off at a high level will not be fun after a while, I promise. At least with an action centric meta, it allows enough exchanges that you cannot consistently depend on point fighting.

Ive also been seeing people say "I want to fight smart, let spammers gas themselves out" It is COMPLETELY possible to be smart while applying pressure, but somehow "fighting smart" to some people here means I have to fight like Stephen Thompson. Simply not true.

Smart - having or showing quick witted intelligence.

Id say constant correct reads and correct reactions in a fast paced environment is fighting smarter/outwitting your opponent.

[Counter Punch]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZHunter1990

I think we are getting somewhere now. This is the worry, if you leave fighting/countering on the backfoot/stationary as advantageous as it is now and allow more options to escape without striking. You develop a meta that so easily favors not being the aggressor. Step 1) Land a leg kick or a few punches Step 2) Move backwards since youre up on points and make them come to you Step 3) Randomly plant and win big exchanges versus forward moving combos Step 4) Coast the round out Everyone trying to be a Stephen Thompson knock off at a high level will not be fun after a while, I promise. At least with an action centric meta, it allows enough exchanges that you cannot consistently depend on point fighting.

Why doesn’t every real UFC fight turn out this way? Why doesn't every fighter IRL fight like Thompson?

Where does grappling fit into your scenario?

[Phillyboi207]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZHunter1990

I think we are getting somewhere now. This is the worry, if you leave fighting/countering on the backfoot/stationary as advantageous as it is now and allow more options to escape without striking. You develop a meta that so easily favors not being the aggressor. Step 1) Land a leg kick or a few punches Step 2) Move backwards since youre up on points and make them come to you Step 3) Randomly plant and win big exchanges versus forward moving combos Step 4) Coast the round out Everyone trying to be a Stephen Thompson knock off at a high level will not be fun after a while, I promise. At least with an action centric meta, it allows enough exchanges that you cannot consistently depend on point fighting. Ive also been seeing people say "I want to fight smart, let spammers gas themselves out" It is COMPLETELY possible to be smart while applying pressure, but somehow "fighting smart" to some people here means I have to fight like Stephen Thompson. Simply not true. Smart - having or showing quick witted intelligence. Id say constant correct reads and correct reactions in a fast paced environment is fighting smarter/outwitting your opponent.

I’d be all for closing the gap in speed between stationary and moving strikes in exchange for more movement

Honestly I think the difference between stationary and moving strikes should be power. Higher footwork guys retaining the most power while moving.

Agreed on fighting smart being possible both ways. The issue is that currently it’s waay too difficult to fight a Stephen Thompson style. Everyone is Max Holloway instead (just an example a high aggressive yet smart fighter)

If the speed difference between stationary and moving strikes was reduced would you then be open to buff movement?

[ZHunter1990]

Quote: Originally Posted by Counter Punch

Why doesn’t every real UFC fight turn out this way? Why doesn't every fighter IRL fight like Thompson? Where does grappling fit into your scenario?

Because people are pressed to put on a good performance ti further their careers. Thompson and Machida are exceptions to the rule because of the styles they have developed training in traditional martial arts for years and years.

A huge part of TMA's are centered around distance management because of the point style tournaments.They have perfected a craft in countering, feinting, and distance management to land those flashy kicks and counters.

Take a look at other people who aren't known for this style try to attempt it, they look terrible and are often criticised for their performance.

In the end, people could give a **** less about putting on a bad performance for the virtual win. It doesnt effect their marketing, promotion, money made, or risk of being cut. They still get the virtual W. So I think its important that engaging is favored over not engaging.

As for grappling. Grappling should be a huge deterrent to plodding with long combinations. I recently cornered Rey Trujillo in a fight vs. Levi Mowls for LFA. The gameplan for Rey(Who is a solid striker) vs Levi (Who is a BJJ blackbelt) was to stay moving. No planting or long combos. He did great the first round in and out with short combos or single strikes. 2nd round comes out, he nails Levi with a good punch, smells blood, throws a 4 punch combo and gets double legged. It was GG from there.

Point is, The threat if a takedown should have a huge impact on volume thrown.

[ZHunter1990]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phillyboi207

I’d be all for closing the gap in speed between stationary and moving strikes in exchange for more movement Honestly I think the difference between stationary and moving strikes should be power. Higher footwork guys retaining the most power while moving. Agreed on fighting smart being possible both ways. The issue is that currently it’s waay too difficult to fight a Stephen Thompson style. Everyone is Max Holloway instead (just an example a high aggressive yet smart fighter) If the speed difference between stationary and moving strikes was reduced would you then be open to buff movement?

I'd say, SOME complaining about aggression being OP are more like Carla Esparza when she fought JJ.

If the strike speed difference and blocking difference were closer between stationary and forward moving? Absolutely, lets get some movement buffs in here!

But like I mentioned before, Id be lying if I wasnt worried about tipping the meta on its head, assuming we are close to the end of patch support.(If you go by UFC1 and 2 cycles)

[tomitomitomi]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZHunter1990

I think we are getting somewhere now. This is the worry, if you leave fighting/countering on the backfoot/stationary as advantageous as it is now and allow more options to escape without striking. You develop a meta that so easily favors not being the aggressor.

I don't think adding even more options is gonna help the 99% from beating aggression when they don't even use the current ones. I don't know how others feel about it but for me personally the issue isn't that pressure fighting is this oppressive unbeatable foolproof strategy.

For me, playing against high volume pressure fighters is simply unfun even if I smash them in the first two rounds. I peaked at low division 5 in Season 1 (think peak ranking was around 300?) and I've played less than 50 games in the following seasons because I don't have any fun grinding the first 30-40 matches where everyone plays aggressively because that's how they are successful against other players that level. The average player at that rank doesn't know how to counter it so that is all they do.

I don't see why the requested stamina nerf for excessive volume is so controversial (Admittedly, they just did an update which reduced stamina recovery in-between rounds but I haven't gotten around to it). Based on the high level players' comments, high volume pressure striking isn't viable there so how does it hurt them if it's also unviable at lower levels due to stamina penalty? Obviously it would have to be finetuned so that the more moderate paced fights stay similar.

Once high volume pressure is tuned down at lower levels, you can then look at adjusting the options that high level players use that make outside fighting OP at the higher levels which don't really impact lower level gameplay since they don't use them anyway.

I don't want to eliminate aggressive playstyles altogether for the reasons you listed but currently at lower levels it is everyone's last resort and first resort. Most players there would still probably play aggressively even if it got nerfed but hopefully not to the extent and frequency it happens now.