Printable View
So I'm listening to JRE fight companion show with joe,eddie, Ian McCall & Brendan Schaub, and eddie and Brendan get into a small debate about full mount vs top half. They really didn't go into full detail as to why one over the other so uhh any info please....por favor?
I think Brendan is just very confident in HIS top-half game. He was saying personally he is happy to just stay there, work ground-n-pound, elbows, and eventually a submission.
Eddie was basically saying if you put equal time into mount and top half position, you would have more advantages in mount. More control and more submission options. (Mount IS the superior position if you invest the time)
However Brenden has not been spending equal time learning both. He puts all his chips in top half, so from his point of view, why mount if he rarely trains it. Brenden wants to win in any way he can, while Eddie wants to showcase the very best and most exciting jiu-jitsu techniques.
My take on it at least.
Both are good for mma imo. Mount seems like it's better for ground and pound, whereas top half usually has more submission opportunities in my brief experience (D'arce, jnt, leg locks, gulliotines, etc). If I'm on top in a fight, I'm feeling pretty good, just so long as I can get out of full guard ;)
solid ass posting right cheaQuote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
I think I would prefer mount for GnP. Harder for them to sweep. Harder for them to escape back to the feet. To recover guard, they're most likely going to have to get back to half guard first. So I have less risk of being swept, and even if they improve their position, I'm still in top half and I have all those options you mentioned. But mount does have a lot of good subs. Especially in MMA. Monoplata series which can put your right in the mono mount which has all of the rubber guard options. Katagatame, S mount, armbar, mounted triangle, barataplata. I would favor the mount in MMA. But everyone's styles and preferences are different.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
I'm still in top half and I have all those options you mentioned. But mount does have a lot of good subs. Especially in MMA. Monoplata series which can put your right in the mono mount which has all of the rubber guard options. Katagatame, S mount, armbar, mounted triangle, barataplata.....!!!!!
----------------------------------
Tazy
Oh for sure, definitely don't wanna disrespect the position of mount at all. I go their a lot to sky dive and force the soul out of their body through diaphragm suffocation. Also get arm bars from their from s mount from time to time and from opportune swim moves when they get on their side. But the latter situation is kind of the underlying reason why I prefer to get subs from side control and top half. Top half limits their movements, and the general defense to sweeps is either strong sprawls with your free leg, or submission attempts. And side control allows for hip control, mobility, and a constant pressure control, using your upper body as a pivot point. However, I will admit that that's just my take for grappling matches. Never having been in an mma match I cannot say which I'll prefer for submissions, as punches will make subs much easier from mount. But if I am going to play as I practice, then I'll most likely get subs from side and top half much more often.
I think it's personal preference. Top half is probably easier for control, and you can;t throw as much power into punches, but you have a lot of solid submission options. You can work a front headlock series (guillotines, darces, anacondas, JNTs), as well as kimuras and figure four armlocks, or keylocks. You can work arm triangles. Most of these don't involve you risking the top position. You can also go for leg locks like kneebars and heel hooks.
The mount gives you a great opportunity to rain down powerful shots, which will likely finish the fight or expose the back. There are less finishing options that don't involve risking the loss of position. It's generally easier to lose the position, but if you have someone mounted you can make a great argument that they're completely fucked. Whereas in top half that's not such a guarantee.
I'd say that mount = higher risk but higher reward and top half = lower risk and mid-level reward.
???? I don't know man. I come from a school that is full of guys with great half guards. Just for myself I can think of a ton of things I'm doing from half guard to protect me from damage and sweep while negating subs. As soon as I whip up to perfect double unders, you lost mostly everything. Reach up to your shoulder and that JNT/Darce series disappears. Sprawling is a typical defense and yet, the 10th Planet system has options for that too so you're still not safe. The 10th planet half guard has so many threats. Bottom mount doesn't have as many options.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
If I'm in bottom mount, what do I have? Wrap around your waist? Great, now I'm open to monoplatas. Shrimp? Great, now I'm back in half guard. But I have to fight to get the half guard. It's harder to shrimp to half guard than it is to whip up to perfect double unders. Also, shrimping opens your head up to get punched.
I think MMA guys may prefer staying in top half because hardly anyone really has a killer half guard in MMA. I can think of three guys. Werdum, Big Nog, Marcin Held. But most guys use half to survive, not to sweep or sub. So when you're not worried about sweeps, then yeah it's easier to just stay there and throw arm punches.
Bottom mount is just a worse position with less options. So I would rather be in mount. I get to punch with much less risk of chained together sweeps or sub attempts while I get to punch and set up my own subs. So I would prefer to be in mount because I am making the opponent work much harder to survive and I have much less to worry about and I can simply focus on producing damage and danger.
Please explain how in the world you are hitting monoplatas from top half. Are your legs insanely long? Are you made of rubber?Quote:
Originally Posted by tazy
I agree. In the end it is a matter of personal preference. I guess I'm old school because I still believe in the old philosophy of pass, mount, finish. Sure you can finish before you get to mount, but I still see the mount as being the best position for punch damage, control, and finishing opportunities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Nall
So help me understand your philosophy. How is mount riskier than top half? In top half I have to worry about old schools, electric chairs, deep half sweeps, knee bar attempts, toe hold attempts, dog fight and everything that comes with it, back takes, and I'm sure there's more that I'm not mentioning. With mount you have to worry about upa, bucking, shrimping, the occasional flexible guys who can enter heel hooks from there. What else?
I like that summary, Mike. If I'm in bottom half though, my goal is to get out of it. It's not a great position for a fight, however, if you're good at getting out, it can be a great transitional phase for you. My game is centered around lockdown half. Everything I do depends on me having an excellent lockdown sweep/homie control/kimura control game from bottom half. However, if I'm going against someone who is good at jiu jitsu, bottom half can be a nightmare for me if I'm not 100% on my game and transitions. And that's kinda the idea, I guess. Most guys in mma don't spend too much time preparing to win from the bottom, in effective ways. There's such a high priority on wrestling that getting top position out of the gate is the only way a lot of people will grapple in mma. So when they inevitably get stuck on the bottom, there's not much they can do.
Oh yea, my guys I train with have killer half guards too, just based off of butterfly (super stomp). They are Marcelo guys after all ;)
Turns out that the black belt at my gym is actually the guy credited for naming Z guard too. Stephen Kesting actually referred to him as the positions namer. Needless to say he's a z guard master, though he rarely uses it anymore.
That's awesome that you train with quality guys like that. I think that's a really solid post. I sort of side on the idea that getting to the top is the smart choice for MMA. I think there are great options from the bottom, but the sad reality about MMA judging as we all know is that you on bottom = losing to judges no matter what you're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
I did see that switch a bit in the Tony Ferguson/Danny Castillo fight. I hope it's a trend and not a fluke, but I guess the judges saw Tony's marces, leglocks, and striking from the bottom as being better than Castillo's wet blanket strategy. Contrast that with Diego Sanchez/Jon Fitch in 2007. I'd have to watch it again, but Diego threw up a lock of tight subs from the bottom and still lost the fight across the board in the decision.
I just think that if you want to try to sub from the bottom instead of sweep, you'd better actually do it. I don't think this is news to anyone. I'd like to see your strategy done more in MMA and I think it would be refreshing. You probably think the same b/c of the Marcelo guys you train with, but Joe Lauzon IMO has one of the best bottom games in MMA. get to butterfly and sweep to the top. He's so strong with that, and i think it's one of the better bottom strategies in the sport.
Yea that Ferguson fight was refreshing to witness. It still pissed me off hardcore when the fans booed and how Castillo showed such disrespect after the fight because of the decision.
I agree. Very awkward post fight interview.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
I also think Ferguson would've finished most people. Castillo is almost impossible to choke. I remember Jacob Volkmann had him in like 6 or 7 darces and marces in their fight and he could never quite put Castillo away. One of the fighters backstage on that card was telling us that Tony Ferguson was doing some insane moves in the back before the fight. Real entertaining fighter.
Then you aren't rolling with 1/2 guard killers. You shouldn't be content there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
No it doesn't. And Strong sprawls form 1/2 guard end up getting you swept or giving them full guard. Against a good 1/2 guard you well be kept off balanced and constantly strugging to find it, discarding any sub attempts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
I don't feel content just being in top half at all. If there's no submission, I'm gonna pass. Definitely want to advance position as much as possible. And I assure you that I get swept into submissions and passes all the time by guys at my gym. However, keeping their head away from my hips by prying their head with my shoulder whole digging my whizzer in deep and sprawling my leg back has proven to be an effective defense. Actually, that defense helped me win a match a while back. Not saying it's an end all be all, and I'm not saying that top half is better than mount or whatever. They all have their uses, right? I just feel that when punches are introduced, the guy on the bottom is in a far worse position and should be desperate to get something going, whereas the guy on top, if he is successful in his defense, can focus more on breaking down the person in guard, and has opportunities that aren't always available from mount.
But I'm probably wrong. I am a lot. Only a blue belt, I know. But I just wanted to clarify my position.
Like I said, against 1/2 guard killers. Whizzer/sprawl will get you tore up in my gym and the rest of 10p schools with lockdown killers. Pulling it off in competition is irrelevant as we are talking about mma.
There is no comparison on threat level of bot 1/2 vs bot mount. Bot 1/2 is a high level threat,mount low at best. You can actually defend punches and use them to set up sweeps from 1/2 and submissions effectively. Again with the mount, low percentage at best.
Your argument is to have them do more work in half guard so the can do the samethings as if they were in mount. I disagree completely having more lower percentage options in top 1/2 is better than fewer higher percentage options from mount. You can punch hands free from mount. You cannot, without risk, punch freely with both hands from 1/2 guard.
With real punches being thrown, it wouldn't take long to change your mind.
can't even believe this is even a discussion! My, how times change.
I actually was in a match against a 10p person using the lockdown when I used that defense to set up a Marcelotine, and I've since refined it a bit, but I can't debate ya coach. You're far above my pay grade. But this is just my limited experience.
Still irrelevant, and again I said 1/2 guard killer. If you passed with it, he wasnt a killer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
How many times have you rolled against full punches. Where you partner started in mount and 1/2 guard?
Didn't pass, got the tap. I haven't sparred in mma since I switched gyms to focus on jiu jitsu, and we didn't ever do situational sparring drills. As I said before, I'm not trying to disrespect the position of mount at all; I love it! Just in my experience so far, I get more subs from top half and side control than mount, and I feel that there's more variety from top half **if my top half control is good enough**
I remember Randy saying he preferred top half over side control. I get that. It seems easier to hit the guy without him escaping from top half. I can't imagine someone not preferring mount over anything else in MMA. Mount seems to almost always end the fight in MMA. Mount pretty much always puts the ref in "I'm about to stop the fight" mode.
Again it continues to be "still irrelevant", since we are still talking about mma, not you in a grappling tournament.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Davidson
So your saying you've haven't done full live situational sparring with punches from 1/2 guard and mount. But your "feel" its better than mount for mma because you do it grappling. Do you see the flawed logic in suggesting (even if for yourself) that top 1/2 is better than mount for mma based on your "limited" (ie. No) experience in that situation based on an assumption, rather than based on serious serious reps and mat time? Punches change everything. Fuck theory, you have to KNOW what works, not what you THINK will work.
You're right coach. Like I've said in previous post, this is just my experience. And I've also admitted in a previous post that I dunno how things will change with punches, but this is just my experience this far. I've also never said mount is worse than top half. I'd never disrespect such a dominating position like that.
Brendan Schaub has a total of one wins by submission in his entire MMA career and it was on Matt Mitrione who I saw lose to a blue belt in the first round at EGO last year not long before this fight. I wouldn't say that makes him a submission authority.
Thank You! Top Half is a silly position to be content to stay in, Give good pressure and pass to Side Mount or Mount, There's so much control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Watkins
The reason MMA fighters like top half is because they don't have to pass to continue to "score points". With guy's who are beast 1/2 guard players, you wont see the guy on top of them have much success generating serious damage from there. (Cuts, not withstanding). I think You see a lot of transitions to dogfight and single leg attempt from half, and scrambles which is fine, But the focus needs to be on why not just pass and continue to grind them out with little to no worry of being stretched out or even swept.
The problem is Jiu Jitsu in MMA is very sloppy and a majority of the fighters who get pounded out from 1/2 guard, could have easily tossed in a butterfly hook or even used the under hook/ dogfight to stand up like Chuck Liddell used to do so well.
I respect Schaub as a brown belt, but I think he's not 100% confident in his passing game, and not confident in Mount, so he doesn't do them when he fights, (which is fine) BUT there are so many advantages to being in a position where they don't have control of your lower body when you're on top.
I thought that was some pretty left field shit from Schaub. Especially when Eddie asked him if that meant he preferred to hang out in mount rather than half guard when he's on bottom and he's like "Well no, I'm trying to get to half guard at least" and the conversation kind of faded out lol. But yeah, If your on bottom and and in half guard in MMA, you're way safer and have way more options than if your mounted. I don't think anyone needs to be told that
I have trouble respecting Schaub due to his behavior at Metamoris toward Cyborg who is more than a god to me. I can't say I hate him, but I would listen to a long list of individual's opinions on finishing before I would listen to him. I can say I agree with everything else you said though. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mejia
A good mount is better than a great half guard. Actually a great half guard leads to mount.
Mma, jj, tidilywinks.. Mount is better.
Every opportunity in half you still have. The dismount. But this isnt optimal. Mount then isolate = dominate.
Top half means I hope he's not a badass.
That's what I believe as well. Like I said before, 10th Planet Roc has some killer half guard guys. If/when I get to half, I'm trying to get the hell out of there ASAP. The longer I hang out in someone's half guard, the longer they have to formulate a strong offense, and now I'm on defense even though I'm on top. No bueno. I feel a lot safer in mountQuote:
Originally Posted by bobby rivers
I'm still in top half and I have all those options you mentioned. But mount does have a lot of good subs. Especially in MMA. Monoplata series which can put your right in the mono mount which has all of the rubber guard options. Katagatame, S mount, armbar, mounted triangle, barataplata.....!!!!!
----------------------------------
We are the pioneers in providing Braindumps You can get our 100% Android certification practice test Adams State University Also get free demos of University of California, Berkeley paced test engine to help you pass Northwood University