Constructive Criticism for EBI 3 - 20/20 Hindsight (Minor Spoilers)

[Solicit]

Overall great show:

1- Announcer stood out to me as well
2- Live stream was great quality but pausing didn't work for me. When I paused it and then resumed play it went live.
3- I felt like I couldn't walk away from the TV without missing something (even to pee or get a drink). The three hours flew by extremely fast and I'm not sure how you could have shortened the show at all to allow intermission without dumping the kids fights but I really wanted to see them too Show was so good I didn't want to miss a thing, I guess that is nothing to complain about and being able to pause the stream and resume where you left off would fix this.
4- This may get me booed but.. I feel like if Hinger won it would have been really bad for the show. His game seemed very conservative and he was not taking any risks. Also, am I the only one who thought he seemed much larger than Tonon and Orchard (were there same day weigh-ins or maybe he just has that Cheick Kongo build)? Hinger is obviously a BAMF but he was not exciting to me or the 8 people at my house watching. In all fairness he did say this was his 1st sub only tournament which shocked me considering he is a black belt, maybe now that he has a sub only under his belt he will start opening up his game.

Never blame the athletes, always blame the rules. He was conservative, for sure. That's because winning EBI3 was more important than $10,000.

This problem has been discussed and most people seem to think it will go away completely when the pot gets big enough. Just need $100,000 pot and people will be leaving that shit on the mat in regulation.

Plus we'll have a 16 man bracket full of world champions.... just need a bigger pot. THat has to be as high a priority as production quality, if not more.

Josh Hinger hit a first round triangle, almost Twistered Darragh O'Conaill, and tried to roll to the truck on Nathan Orchard twice. If that is considered conservative, I don't know what to say.

[Brandon Mccaghren]

Josh Hinger hit a first round triangle, almost Twistered Darragh O'Conaill, and tried to roll to the truck on Nathan Orchard twice. If that is considered conservative, I don't know what to say.

Yup

[Brent Alvarez]

+1

[bobby rivers]

Sometimes I wonder if people know what dynamic high level jits is supposed to look like against others at the highest level. There's a reason good purple belt matches are so entertaining. Constant crazy transitions that are fuckin awesome, but only happen because someone was loose. When nobodies loose, highest level comp, the transitions may be more subtle, but they're just as dynamic, more set up, and twice as technical.

[bobby rivers]

Also don't underestimate what it takes to immobilize a bamf. Controlling an escape artist for 2-3 min of top ride time is damn near essential to wear out and eventually isolate a vulnerable point in a solid defense.

[Martin Harris]

Josh Hinger hit a first round triangle, almost Twistered Darragh O'Conaill, and tried to roll to the truck on Nathan Orchard twice. If that is considered conservative, I don't know what to say.

Once again, I am not saying Hinger isn't a beast but to make my point; you just used four examples from three of Hinger's matches to prove he wasn't conservative. If you were trying to prove to me that Tonon was not conservative how many examples would you have? I agree that Hinger is awesome at jiu jitsu, my point was that I don't think he is a good fit for trying to take sub only to the mainstream.

A good comparison would be GSP; after losing to Serra he adopted a conservative style. He was still an awesome fighter and He was still nearly unbeatable but his style was far less entertaining.

[Mike Nall]

Sometimes I wonder if people know what dynamic high level jits is supposed to look like against others at the highest level. There's a reason good purple belt matches are so entertaining. Constant crazy transitions that are fuckin awesome, but only happen because someone was loose. When nobodies loose, highest level comp, the transitions may be more subtle, but they're just as dynamic, more set up, and twice as technical.

This is so true. When people get to be better, they just don't leave the same level of openings. people like Garry Tonon or Bill Cooper aren't the norm, because they don't care about giving up position, baiting, or leaving openings if they think it will get them a submission.

Once again, I am not saying Hinger isn't a beast but to make my point; you just used four examples from three of Hinger's matches to prove he wasn't conservative. If you were trying to prove to me that Tonon was not conservative how many examples would you have? I agree that Hinger is awesome at jiu jitsu, my point was that I don't think he is a good fit for trying to take sub only to the mainstream.

A good comparison would be GSP; after losing to Serra he adopted a conservative style. He was still an awesome fighter and He was still nearly unbeatable but his style was far less entertaining.

I get your point on examples but Tonon is one of maybe 5 guys in the sport right now that have examples like that. What he does isn't normal. It's awesome, but 1/100 people grapple like that regardless of points/no points, and that's a generous estimate. What Tonon does works for him, but won't work for most grapplers.

I think we have to decide. Do you want to make sub only mainstream, or do we want to make sure that we have the best people winning the matches. Obviously a balance of both would be perfect. If you really wanted to make it mainstream, you'd get all purple belts to do it, and get a big budget behind them to sell their personalities, and do a reality TV show type of deal. That would be way more fun to watch. If you really wanted to make it prestigious, you'd invite all of the very best. The reality is that the Jedi level grapplers are never going to be super exciting to watch against other elite elite level grapplers, 90% of the time. Points, no points, doesn't matter. They're too good and they don't make enough mistakes. in ADCC you see the coolest subs and transitions on day 1. On day 2 during the semis and the finals you see way more matches go the distance because everyone is too good to get finished.

I think we also have to think about what we mean by mainstream. Jiu-Jitsu is never going to be popular on TV. It just won't. That sucks, and I wish it wasn't true, but it's too complicated to follow. Someone flipping through channels won't get it. No points helps, and people can follow a tap out like Eddie says. But show that Cummings/Tonon match to someone and they won't be able to follow unless they're at least a really big MMA fan.

Jiu-Jitsu is a sport about control. You need control before you submit, unless every sub you do is a flying triangle attack. That doesn't mean it has to be some super slow setup. But even a 60 second process of working the vice grip for the Japanese necktie is not going to be exciting for most people, because they don't know what they're looking at. Boxing is easy to follow because punches are so self explanatory. Same with darts, frisbee, and a number of other goofy games on TV.

I agree on GSP by the way. He was one of the most exciting guys ever and then became a super defensive fighter.

[Ross Davidson]

Alright, who let the white belts out of their cages?

[Enrique "Kiko"]

Alright, who let the white belts out of their cages?

[Ross Davidson]

Lol