There is a systemology that proposes that wrestlers do better in MMA.
Can this be filtered further, and how best to define 'wrestler' for profit?
stefan084
SBR MVP
07-21-09
1490
#2
well currently takedowns are overrated by the current system so this may work until the judging gets tweaked
Comment
Vrakas
SBR Wise Guy
02-27-10
627
#3
It's simple really there are first time slammers and then there are wrestlers.
Comment
Vrakas
SBR Wise Guy
02-27-10
627
#4
How you best define wrestlers for profit is easy. Do you have someone who is good at takedowns? If yes they are likely a wrestler. Usually they tend to have backgrounds in highschool / college wrestling but this is not always the case.
Comment
Pin2Win
SBR High Roller
01-10-11
139
#5
Takedowns, ground control, balance, it all helps
Comment
Kaladarus
SBR MVP
11-11-09
1876
#6
Wrestling+Submission Defense=Win
Comment
Preston09
SBR MVP
05-19-09
1834
#7
Wrestlers easly can control the fight against non wrestlers. Granted the fight will be super boring 90% of the time.
Comment
diondublin
SBR High Roller
04-16-10
160
#8
Originally posted by Preston09
Wrestlers easly can control the fight against non wrestlers. Granted the fight will be super boring 90% of the time.
Two questions though:
(1) How does one determine -systemically - that there is a Wrestler vs Non-Wrestler matchup?
(2) How does one establish whether the market has accounted for this bias; i.e. is there value on the Wrestler?
Comment
Chairib
SBR Wise Guy
03-08-10
917
#9
Originally posted by diondublin
Two questions though:
(1) How does one determine -systemically - that there is a Wrestler vs Non-Wrestler matchup?
(2) How does one establish whether the market has accounted for this bias; i.e. is there value on the Wrestler?
Good questions
Comment
Vrakas
SBR Wise Guy
02-27-10
627
#10
Originally posted by Chairib
Good questions
got em!
Comment
Chairib
SBR Wise Guy
03-08-10
917
#11
Originally posted by Vrakas
got em!
Seriously, those are great questions.
Comment
jin2daj
SBR Wise Guy
11-01-09
816
#12
one of the most important things to know is that correlation doesnt mean causation.
one possible explanation for the success of wrestling is that the sport of wrestling already weeds out the weak. the unathletic and the unfit will never make it in the upper echleon of collegiate wrestling and beyond.
for example, a guy like ben askren who has had success in mma, that success might not be totally attributed to wrestling but to his talent. if he had devoted his time to jits or striking it's possible he would have been equally successful.
its just that striking and jiu jitsu dont havent developed like wrestling where you ahve high school and college programs attracting millions of kids from a young age. those who become successful and end up in the ufc are the most successful of those MILLIONS.
a great jits champ has proven himself among 100 others. a wrestling champ is the best of 10000 wrestlers.
Comment
Chairib
SBR Wise Guy
03-08-10
917
#13
Originally posted by jin2daj
one of the most important things to know is that correlation doesnt mean causation.
one possible explanation for the success of wrestling is that the sport of wrestling already weeds out the weak. the unathletic and the unfit will never make it in the upper echleon of collegiate wrestling and beyond.
for example, a guy like ben askren who has had success in mma, that success might not be totally attributed to wrestling but to his talent. if he had devoted his time to jits or striking it's possible he would have been equally successful.
its just that striking and jiu jitsu dont havent developed like wrestling where you ahve high school and college programs attracting millions of kids from a young age. those who become successful and end up in the ufc are the most successful of those MILLIONS.
a great jits champ has proven himself among 100 others. a wrestling champ is the best of 10000 wrestlers.
Correlation doesnt mean causation? I'm going to start calling you Kaplan or Testmasters from now on, let's see you work in a Strawman argument or even an Appeal To Authority.
You make some good points but I definitely would avoid using Ben Askren here.
Comment
bondguy007
SBR High Roller
04-02-11
109
#14
It's as simple as this: WWE wrestlers are on the road doing athletic manuevers 300 days a year. UFC guys? They're lucky if they're on the road 30 days a year.
Comment
Vaughany
SBR Aristocracy
03-07-10
45563
#15
Originally posted by bondguy007
It's as simple as this: WWE wrestlers are on the road doing athletic manuevers 300 days a year. UFC guys? They're lucky if they're on the road 30 days a year.
Comment
urge2kill
SBR MVP
10-27-09
1722
#16
Originally posted by bondguy007
It's as simple as this: WWE wrestlers are on the road doing athletic manuevers 300 days a year. UFC guys? They're lucky if they're on the road 30 days a year.
Comment
BIGDAY
SBR Aristocracy
02-17-10
48245
#17
I ussualy do well with dogs that have a good wrestling base.
Comment
Vaughany
SBR Aristocracy
03-07-10
45563
#18
Originally posted by BIGDAY
I ussualy do well with dogs that have a good wrestling base.
Chance u might get one in Chandler next wknd against Freire
Comment
RaiderNation MMA
SBR Wise Guy
11-05-10
598
#19
the man who dictates where the fight takes place!
Comment
jin2daj
SBR Wise Guy
11-01-09
816
#20
Originally posted by Chairib
Correlation doesnt mean causation? I'm going to start calling you Kaplan or Testmasters from now on, let's see you work in a Strawman argument or even an Appeal To Authority.
You make some good points but I definitely would avoid using Ben Askren here.
haha you took the LSAT?
I actually learned causation/correlation in a college econ class