Chuck doesn't need to take Anderson down and control him for 25 minutes like Chael does. Just incorporate a couple of TDs, and soften him up with some ground and pound whenever possible. That was his strategy against Pele. We've seen that Anderson's defense becomes more porous when Anderson gets threatened with TDs (Chael staggered/dropped him twice, and obviously Chris Weidman just KO'd him), and with Chuck's power, that's not a good thing. And don't use Chael Sonnen as any sort of an example why Chuck wouldn't be able to take him down. Stylistically speaking in the octagon, it doesn't matter if Chuck isn't a better pure wrestler than Chael. Chael walks into that cage and you know exactly what to expect. He's going to be diving for your legs, which allows you to somewhat prepare for it. The best way to get a TD in the octagon is to move in when the guy is expecting strikes, and that was what Chuck was a master of. That's why he has one of the highest TD percentages in the sport's history. He didn't go in there to spam TD attempts. And make no mistake, Chuck is a great wrestler himself. He was Div I. Not to mention, he's naturally bigger and stronger than Anderson. Chuck could most certainly take him down if he so chose, because Anderson probably wouldn't expect it. And... you know... Travis Lutter.
If your definition of "prime" Anderson is him in his mid-30's styling on guys like Forrest Griffin, James Irvin, Stephan Bonnar, etc., then I don't understand why you'd say he's 10x better than he was back then. Certainly I agree that he's a better overall mixed martial artist, but we're talking about a Muay Thai fight. Him fighting, essentially, striking novices is a completely different ball game than legitimate Muay Thai fighters who train nothing but Muay Thai all day. Saying he's 10x better now than back then seems inconclusive and speculative on your part, if based on nothing other than that alone. And you're damn right Pele knocked Chuck down with a head kick. Pele was a violent individual with crazy power. Chuck used to take shots that would put out 95% of the division, and keep coming strong.
And I don't understand why you're so sure that Anderson would somehow submit Chuck on the ground. You're acting like that's an absolute. Chael was able to f*ck around in Anderson's guard for almost an entire 5 round fight before being caught in a triangle. I would say Chuck has better BJJ than Chael, and has more than held his own in scrambles against better BJJ guys than Anderson. Plus, like I stated before, he wouldn't be trying to lay and pray Anderson for five rounds. He would simply use them to mix up his attack, because he's obviously got good kickboxing and dynamite in both fists.
Then just say that Anderson has precise striking. Yeah, Anderson may be a more technical striker, but in MMA, with so many factors in play, that's not always going to win you a stand up battle. Talk to Cro Cop about the first Kevin Randleman fight.
Chuck had a much better chin than either Chael or Forrest. And as far as that Forrest fight goes, he was already mentally defeated before that jab. He was just looking for a way out. He was knocked down multiple times, and was getting embarrassed. He was "broken" at that point. It's not like he was unconscious, either. He was putting up his arms as if to say "no more." I love Forrest, but honestly, that was a dark day to be his fan.
Chuck uses more everything than Dan. Dan is ridiculously predictable. Plot, inside lead leg kick, followed by H bomb. Rinse, and repeat. He's been that way since forever. Chuck used multiple techniques. Spinning backfists, spinning back kicks, elbows, head kicks, leg kicks (he battered Jeff Monson's legs akin to Aldo/Faber), crosses, jabs, etc. He had better control over distance than Dan too. Saying that Chuck only went in there to basically throw bombs and hope for the best is completely dismissive. He's beaten guys in stand up wars like Guy Mezger, Vitor, Overeem, and Amar Suloev. He covered ground very well, and he was known for extending his jab and cross to make use of his reach.
Let's not try to use revisionist history to discredit Chuck's striking, especially given the fact that Anderson just got KO'd by a wrestler. All of a sudden, him toying around with Yushin Okami (LOL), doesn't seem so impressive. See? I can do exactly what you're doing.
I disagree. I think it's the exact opposite, to be honest. Chuck had good wrestling and could threaten with TDs, which keeps Anderson on his toes and frees up Chuck's kickboxing game, which would allow him to land and KO Anderson.
__________________ Poppa's comin home to sling some dick.
Chuck would likely not be willing or able to take Anderson down and hit him with any effective GnP. When was the last time Chuck ever did that to a BJJ black belt who is known for subbing guys off their back? Weidman is a FAR superior grappler to Chuck and has much better GnP to boot and he was having quite a bit of trouble landing effective shots from top position. Chael is a better wrestler on paper than Chuck and has also adapted his wrestling better for MMA.
I said that because he improved exponentially and undeniably. The difference in technical skill between the Silva that fought Forrest Griffin and the Silva that competed in Muay Thai matches 10 years ago is HUGE. Anderson used to be a very scrappy, in-your-face type fighter but over time he vastly improved his footwork, head movement, timing, lateral movement, fluidity, and overall fundamentals. He became far more defensively sound over the years.
I don't see why you think it's an absolute fact that Chuck would have been able to take him down and do anything effective from top position. Anderson is a BJJ black belt who has excellent submissions off of his back. Travis Lutter is a better grappler than Chuck and he got choked out while also doing little of note from top position, he briefly got the mount but was only able to land a few shots that Anderson rolled with before Silva escaped.
Chuck's striking (defense especially) is garbage compared to Silva's technically speaking and he constantly leaves himself open for big counters (which is how Rampage and Rashad got him), against a brilliant counter striker like Anderson, that's pretty much a death sentence.
It's going to give Silva the advantage. Anything can happen but the odds favor Anderson in the stand-up.
Chael and Forrest could both take heavy shots in their day. Forrest fought Rampage (who finished Chuck with strikes twice), took his best punches and kept coming forward. Chael took a flush flying knee from Marquardt and kept coming. Anderson has made a career of rocking extremely durable fighters (Hendo, Chael, Leben, Bonnar, Griffin), so I'm sure Andy could hurt Chuck too, especially considering all the openings Chuck leaves.
Chuck is not that hard to figure out, especially defensively. He drops his hands too often after throwing combos, has very little head movement, and has a tendency to get overly aggressive. Anderson would quickly pick him apart.
Chuck's striking was very flawed defensively. He left openings that a brilliant counter striker like Silva could capitalize on all day. Anderson getting knocked out by a far more defensively sound fighter than Liddell ever was doesn't change that.
Anderson would not feel threatened by Chucks's wrestling, nor do I think Chuck would focus on that aspect of his game considering Anderson's excellent defense from the bottom as well as his submission game.
__________________
Sig and Avatar made by Steverules_2 (Thank you!)
Last edited by Insomniatric on Feb 10th, 2015 at 03:30 PM
Yeah, I totally forgot I was even having that debate, then I was just browsing the forums and stumbled on it. Kind of stupid to reply a year and a half later, but eh, I was bored.
KMC Community Forums
Yeah, Anderson may be a more technical striker, but in MMA, with so many factors in play, that's not always going to win you a stand up battle. Talk to Cro Cop about the first Kevin Randleman fight.
Jul 23rd, 2013 04:41 AM
