Totally agree. ADCC 2013 and 2011 for that matter were amazing... all the way up to the finals which were anti-climatic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Bravo
Printable View
Totally agree. ADCC 2013 and 2011 for that matter were amazing... all the way up to the finals which were anti-climatic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Bravo
The thing is from a purely game theoretic perspective the addition of any rule allows the rule to be manipulated. The longer those rules exist, the more and more precise that understanding will become. For me penalizing the guard pull is a negative... Even though I like to consider myself a passer. The guard is one of the most fundamental positions of jiu jitsu, and chosing to pull guard against a superior wrestler dosent seem something that should be penalized. While spamming subs might not have been a problem in the beginning, if that's the rules set, and it gains equal prestige to the worlds or the adcc, it will become a skill into itself. There will be schools that speciallize in spamming subs. Guards will be invented for the purpose of spamming subs. That's how game theory works.
I know a lot of people here are big fans of sub only, and that's cool, but that rule set has it's problems to. The biggest one I have seen is the draw. Look at the upcoming match between Galvao and Sonnen. Chael has zero chance to win, but he can claim a draw if he just survives even if Galvao does everything right. I for one hate the "draws" where someone is absolutely dominated about as much as a close point win (like Buchecha vs Rodolfo in the worlds)
I personal think sub only no time limit is THE perfect rule set for jiu jitsu, but there are a ton of logistical and marketing problems with that.
I believe his idea is re-inforcing street applicable jiu jitsu. I'm not pulling guard on concrete. That's probably a flawed basis for him to come from because this is sport jiu jitsu, but I think that's his base thought. I'm with you though, I don't enjoy watching poor wrestling for 20 mins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Bravo
That being said, I think you're going to have to give a whole hell of a lot more than negative 1 to a guard pull to discourage it. Just think of how many more sub opportunities you have from guard. Pretty much the only option you have from top before passing his guard is diving on a leg. Guards are so unpassable at the top level these days. By the time the top guy manages to pass the guard, if he ever does, the bottom guy is going to have had so many options for a sub attempt and likely have racked up a high score. I just see guards getting a huge advantage with this format. Just think of how it works with ibjjf rules right now, the guard player wins by advantages from sub attempts and never letting the opponent pass whereas the man on top wins on points by securing a pass. The whole battle is there in that pass. If the guy on the bottom is scoring points the whole time too, the advantage for top is gone.
For example, I get a guy in my full guard. I could throw up a million sub attempts on him in a short amount of time, but if he gets out of all them, manages to eventually bust out of my guard and then scores a pass, he wins in IBJJF. In jjgf, he has no chance, he'll never catch back up. I haven't watched the Budo videos other than the one in OP, probably should've before forming an opinion, but it seems to me the guard would end up having a huge advantage.
Outside of that, the other huge problem is how do you know when they're close enough on a sub to give points? You're basically going to have a bunch of Brazilian judges with an incredibly subjective scoring system leaving many of the wins fully in the judges hands. Are these judges even going to call out sub attempt points for newer subs? Truck attempts? Twister, Barato, hindulotine.. Sometimes it can be hard to know when the guy is even putting in a sub. And if you haven't seen much of the sub before, it will be very subjective to call when it's close enough to give points. The judging will be incredibly subjective.
But, it is an attempt to make the sport more entertaining and offer something different. And that's great. We'll learn a lot from it's success or it's failure.
Bottom line, if there's a point to be scored then there will be stalling to hold on to the lead.
You fix the draw problem, like what might happen in Chael vs Galvao by throwing money at it. You get show money and sub money, and make the sub money significant enough that no one is fighting for a draw. You can do that in a points match too but then the refs calls become too massive.
Subonly with big money incentives is by far the best way to go, you barely even need a ref. Refs are so out of the picture that I reffed EBI which had a bunch of 10p guys and zero people had a problem with it
I agree... sub only is the way for Rickson to go. He could use the EBI format for an Open IBJJF style tournament easy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Bravo
I certinally think sub only is as good as it gets. I have seen some matches in Metamoris where I just didn't like the draw result. I don't know how to fix that and still keep it marketable and fair... But it frustrates me anyway. Especially when someone is so compleatly dominant, or one combatant just refuses to engage.
Monetary incentives are great, but in some cases I feel there are situations where someone is fighting for only two results, loss or draw. No disrespect to Sonnen, but I don't think if you give him the chance to win Bill Gates bank account he can submit Galvao.
But I think that's just arguing semantics. It's something chess players have delt with for a long time.
No matter what the rules are they dictate the game.
That seems like by far the best for high level exclusive events/tournaments for spectators, but we still need these massive competitions with 1000's of competitors for the guys coming up. Does sub only make sense for mega tournaments like how many competitors ibjjf is dealing with? Gracies is giving it a try, guess we'll see once/if they get close to their numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Bravo
Even if Rickson uses the exact same rule set as the IBJJF, perhaps he can wrestle control of the tournament scene away from them. I'd consider that a huge victory in and of itself. The IBJJF is corrupt and gross.
I'm for anything that pushes Submissions instead of wrestle fucking.
I do agree with Eddie on the guard pulling argument, penalizing the guard pull serves a particular style of Jiu Jitsu while handicapping another.
Also I'm down with the sentiment Mr. Mccaghren, I'm down for anything that fucks the IBJJF.
Although Gracie Nationals and Gracie Worlds don't have the numbers the IBJJF Worlds do they have proved that you can run an open tournament with sub only rules. The more people register the more days you ad just like the IBJJF. I think the IBJJF run 4 days just for regular adults, they have whole separate events for masters and kids too. Gracie Nationals has proved it can be done and have proved to be WAY more exciting and WAY less ref bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Eddy