You clearly have very little knowledge of actual spear combat to claim this. Firstly, the Uber Immortal was already halfway turned and looking at Leonidas when his head even came into shot. So you have no basis to claim that he could have executed a thrust at the Immortal while his back was turned. Rising, he would not have been in a good position to execute a proper thrust, and would have had to over extend to reach the Uber Immortal. When this happens, you compromise balance and stability, and lose striking power. Over extending also leaves you completely defenseless. Straight thrusts are also much more easily avoided than slashes, especially if the person is halfway turned to the side and presenting a much smaller target. It's one of the reasons many weapons combat styles have a base combat stance where your hips are at an angle. So no, it was strategically sound to make sure he was in the proper position to execute a spear thrust. Making a wild jab would, in fact, have been stupid and needlessly risky.
You are completely missing the point I am making. You are also ignoring that they had well over 300 other Greek soldiers launch a surprise flank attack during the route. Also, I am not denying that the Immortals got routed. We ARE NOT DEBATING Spartans as a group VS Immortals as a group. And you also ignore that there are multiple instances where Spartans would have been brought down, only to have their comrades save them. Dilios and the Captain are 2 examples, off the top of my head. Themistocles went in there completely on his own and took out more Immortals than any individual Spartan was actually shown doing in the same timeframe. But of course you are just going to continue ignoring this, and go on with your "they routed the Immortals" rant, like it detracts anything from the actual point I am making.
The Immortals, as an entire fighting force, are labeled as Xerxes' personal guard. Not just the ones on the front lines. Also, was Xerxes on the front lines? No, he wasn't. So the very best would have been with him, protecting him in his camp. There were no high priority targets on the front lines, actually fighting the Spartans. Artemisia is frequently within striking distance of the enemy, and is a high value asset. So therefore, logic dictates that she would have had better soldiers guarding her than the troops NOT at Xerxes' side, fighting the Spartans. The only time the Spartans engage Xerxes' actual personal troops is right at the end of the film, when they get surrounded and killed, and the only one who shows anything impressive there is the Captain. In fact, based on screen feats, the Captain is the most skilled Spartan shown in 300.
Also, we have an onscreen comparison that shows that, based on actual shown screen ability, Artemisia's Immortals were, in fact, superior. We have non-Spartans also engage and fight Immortals, during the route you keep mentioning. Even after the element of surprise was gone, they engaged them on equal footing. So we have Immortals slaughtering non-Spartans one-on-one, and Immortals fighting evenly with non-Spartans one-on-one. You have to be blind to not see which would be superior. But I expect you will ignore this as well, and throw out another random line that doesn't actually address this point.
No, it is not clearly represented in the film that a guy who had trouble with one person who is faster and more skilled than he is, can defeat a group of people, all at the same time, who are all faster and more skilled than he is. It's a baseless claim because, based on their actual shown speed and skill compared to his, he would have been brought down. Strength can only counter one person at a time, and taking several wounds would have overcome his durability eventually.
And of course, now you are going to throw your "But they weren't Spartans" line. That doesn't matter. And I will tell you why. The calibre of your opponent affects the outcome of a match, but it does NOT affect the speed and skill you yourself possess. Take Randy Couture in his prime, as an example. If he fights some random guy on the street, is he magically going to visibly move slower and develop sloppier technique because of an inferior opponent than what he normally faces? Of course not. We VISIBLY see that when the Immortal Guards move, they move faster than the Uber Immortal. We VISIBLY see that when they attack, they display smoother, more polished and better executed weapon technique than the Uber Immortal. Whether they are fighting Spartans or not, and whether they are winning or losing in the process, does not change this one bit. But you are either willfully ignoring this fact, or too dense to comprehend it.
Depending on whether or not the blow struck a major artery, it could have been fatal or not. Do we see blood fountaining out of the Uber Immortal's arm, especially in a film with over the top blood effects? No, we don't. So we can realise, based on common sense, that that specific blow did not strike anything critical and would not have been immediately fatal.
And where did he laugh off the spear tip through the eye? It was that blow that gave Leonidas the opening to decap him? And again, he only landed the spear tip strike because the Uber Immortal stopped fighting him for multiple seconds, after being in a far better position than Leonidas. Also, those 2 sword strikes earlier only came after Leonidas had some breathing room, thanks to another Spartan distracting the Uber Immortal, which allowed Leonidas to draw his sword. Until that moment, he had been completely on the back foot, doing his best to not get cut in half. Another thing you conveniently ignore.
Also, where did I say he didn't have good damage soak? Please quote me. I said that his damage soak does not prevent him from losing limbs. But then, you do only seem to read half of my posts before replying to them.
And you are still ignoring the manner in which both won their most impressive fights. Leonidas struggled and barely won, even with another Spartan distracting the Uber Immortal, and the Uber Immortal stopping his assault for several seconds, leaving himself open. Themistocles EASILY bested Immortals who, by actual screen feats and not simple reputation, are better than the ones the Spartans fought.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
And you are STILL also ignoring that he beat Artemisia afterwards, who also VISIBLY displays better combat speed and weapon skill than the Uber Immortal, and is mentioned in the film as possibly the best sword fighter in the entire Persian Empire. And he did it while seemingly holding back. Early on in their fight, he lands a haymaker that spins her around and could have easily impaled her right there (he was actually within range and VISIBLY combat ready to do so). He lets her recover. They seemingly fight evenly, and ends in what appears to be a draw. But he then shows himself to be able to disarm her with relative ease, and begs her to surrender and to not force his hand. Then, when she attacks again and he realises she won't surrender, he guts her within seconds. But you keep ignoring his fight with Artemisia, despite me bringing it up over and over and over again.
So basically, you misinterpret or misread half my posts. You keep bringing up facts that have nothing to do with the points I am raising, or ignore them completely. You conveniently omit or distort things we see onscreen (like your claim that Leonidas was "just standing around" while the Uber Immortal was fighting Dilios). You call PIS on strategically sound decisions, while ignoring a glaring example actual PIS. You make baseless claims, then try being sarcastic when I ask you to prove them. And you bring totally irrelevant RL facts into the debate. And that is why I am ignoring you from this point forward. I have better things to do than argue with someone who does all that, and then has the nerve to imply that I am not being objective, or that I am not the one understanding things.
Themistocles wins, based on better screen feats. But continue to ignore it, along with half the points I raise in this thread. I can't be bothered to waste more time on you.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Last edited by TheVaultDweller on Sep 9th, 2014 at 09:40 AM
I agree. 300 is a way better movie. Leonidas is a way better character. But then, Sullivan Stapleton, the guy who plays Themistocles, has one of those faces you just want to punch. However, in a one-on-one match, based on their individual feats, Themistocles holds the upper hand.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
What on God's green earth are you talking about... He was TOO Far away for a spear thrust.. That's a total and complete lie... I'm curious though.. How far exactly was he? I'm going to enjoy this response. Anyways, he wasn't too far away for a spear thrust and rose slowly for dramatic effect. He could've rose quicker and launched an attack right away while the immortal would've had his back to him still. There is no disputing he could've done this but decided not to. I'm the last person to claim PIS.. I'm was simply pointing out the error in yoru ways by claiming PIS. Simple.
I'm missing the point... That's truly laughable. You tried to make a point that the spartan's were inferior because they were shown being taken out on occasion by the immortals when outnumbered. It's a ridiculous point because MORE TIMES THAN NOT.. they were BEATING AND KILLING MULTIPLE IMMORTALS at the same time. In EACH scene shown in that battle.. they weren't in their formation they attacked individually and were fighting multiple foes at once. This is CLEARLY shown. Mind you against a SUPERIOR force (which I'll get to later) . So how does it matter one bit that a few spartans died, when the majority lived and killed a SIGNIFICANT No. of immortals and many times while fighting multiple immortals at the same time? Do you how silly of a point you were trying to make? You can claim we didn't see it on screen but that is irrelevant.. we don't see multiple things on screen that we take a fact via dialogue about it afterwards. When we know the immortals numbered in the Thousands.. and the Greeks had a much smaller force.. we also see them fighting multiple immortals at the same time... We also get dialogue that they were routed... YES WE KNOW THEY KILLED A GREAT MANY IMMORTALS INDIVIDUALLY.
WTF are you talking about... The God King was at the battle.. he even came to see Leo... he wasn't in some distant land way away from the battlefield.. he was in very close proximity to the battle. Further, the line reads the PERSONAL GUARD of KING XERXES HIMSELF. You not thinking it was his personal guard is just that you NOT THINKING. We go by what is said and shown. We see Xerxes personal guard attack the spartans and get routed. Yes, he would've had the best of the best immortals with him and to engage the spartans in battle. Afterall, this is where the land war was taking place... Why would he leave his best immortals some place totally different than where the ground invasion was taking place and not with him? That's beyond idiotic to even think he would do that. So what we are left with is individual spartans routing a superior group of immortals than what Them faced and they did so one vs. multiple foes just like Them did. In fact, they killed many many more than Them even came close to killing.
You're not understand something... If 4 of the immortals that attacked Them attacked the Uber.. he would take out one right away... like he was shown doing to A SUPERIOR FOE. The spartans are CLEARLY superior to the immortals. He was shown dealing with Dillos.. another Spartan tries to attack him FROM THE SIDE and he's dealt with. He tanked blows left and right... So if that same group attacked him... One would be dealt with right away and KO'd... probably another right after... The other two might land some blows that he would just tank and then finish off the other two. To even think this wouldn't be possible for the uber immortal to do is laughable and bordering on Idiotic. It's more likely that he would've routed that same group that attacked Them not the opposite.
The point is.. you said it wasn't a killing blow.. in ancient warfare that was MORE LIKELY a killing blow than it not being one. There is simple no disputing this point.
Why would I be impressed him him killing her... What combat feats did she have again.. Please show me these feats that make her the best swordsman in persia. She wasn't impressive to me , and not to be chauvinistic, but he's still a woman. Nothing really impressive there in the lease.
Think about your logic
You think Them is better becaus he beat an INFERIOR group of immortals who in turn beat an inferior group of greeks. That is LITERALLY what you're saying. It's proven that those immortals were inferior to the ones killed by the spartans. We also know that the greeks those immortals killed were inferior to the spartans. NOTHING, literally NOTHING about that makes logical sense to deduce Them is thus better.
Lastly, you literally don't watch ANY MMA, Boxing or been in real life fights to claim what you just did. Of course couture would look BETTER fighting a random dude than a trained MMA artist. He would appear faster.. stronger.. better technique against somebody with none. The fact that you don't even know this tells me you haven't the slightest clue about combat sports. Even a trained MMA artist can be routed and look terrible against Aldo.. yet a superior MMA fighter can still lose but Aldo not look as fast.. as strong and good. That is EXACTLY what happens and how it appears in real life. I'm literally baffled that you didn't know this.
And once again you are making claims without screen evidence. For example, that Leonidas could have launched an attack while the UI had his back turned, when we don't even see his position or his battle readiness at that moment. Also when he rises, his head rises at a slight arch, which implies that he was not even directly looking at the Uber Immortal before he was already turning. And yes, when he actually gets into a position to launch an attack, he lundges forward while doing so (to get closer, because he was initially TOO FAR AWAY), keeping his weight on his front leg, like you are supposed to with a spear thrust. Not something you can do properly in the position he was in when we see him for the first time, when the UI was already halfway turned and looking at him. Also, omitting certain aspects of things (like Dilios lying on the ground when the Immortal attacked him, or that we have a direct example of the two groups of Immortals fighting non-Greeks, and one group doing much better), and reading what you want to read, instead what I am actually saying (like me saying Xerxes was not on the FRONTLINES for the actual battles, or that the specific sword thrust in question wasn't lethal, or that Themistocles, without anyone watching his back, killed more Immortals in the same timeframe. And it is only someone who actually does not know much about actual fighting technique would claim what you did with Couture. I do have martial arts experience, and have watched a lot of fights. And unlike you, I am actually able to discern different levels of skill and speed, without one guy needing to beat another guy. For example, I have friends who dominate the local Muay Thai fighting circuit, and look great doing it. But when I look at them, and look at videos of the guys who fight in Thailand, I can tell with my own eyes that the Thai fighters are better, even the ones on the losing side. I am seriously questioning your ability to comprehend the post of others.
So just as I predicted, you have distorted some facts, made more baseless claims contradicted by the actual films, and misread my posts. And this is why I am replying to you for the last time now.
And it is also telling that the majority of people in this thread agrees with me that Themistocles wins, and has better screen feats. But I guess now you are going to tell me that we're all wrong and you're right. But I really don't care. I know I am right. Most of the people in this thread know I am right. So your opinion is irrelevant to me.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Last edited by TheVaultDweller on Sep 9th, 2014 at 07:48 PM
With the line of logic you use and how you deduce things... It's a wonder I lasted this long in the conversation. I literally broke down your logic to.. An inferior group of immortals beat an inferior group of greeks and was routed by Them.. This somehow is greater than.. A Superior group of immortals being routed by Spartans in one vs. multiple immortal situation. That's literally what you're trying to say and it makes no logical sense.
Now, onto real life fighting for a moment. I have combat experience myself.. boxing experience to be more specific. Your example holds NO water.. Let's use some more concrete examples shall we.. Watch a fight between Sweet Pea vs. McGirt and Sweet Pea against Ramirez. The speed.. timing.. counter punching and movement of Mcgirt make Pea not look as fast..as good defensively or offensively among other things. If you never saw the Mcgirt fight and just saw the Ramirez fight... you might think Pea was one of the fastest boxers that ever lived. Who your foe is makes all the difference in the world in how the fight will go and how good you'll look. Even at an elementary level.. if your'e fighting somebody good.. and get dominated... that looks much worse than fighting somebody shitty and you dominating them. You tried to prove a point and failed miserably at it. Who your opponent will ALWAYS affect how you look and how the fight will go. Not to say you can't still look good.. but you'll always look better against inferior people. That's a fact. How about an example closer to home...
Take a look at Randy Couture vs. Mike Van Arsdale and Couture vs. Kevin Randleman... If you watched the Randleman fight... you might come to the conclusion that Randy Couture isn't that good of a Wrestler, even though we all know that he is. Randleman dominated him in the wrestling aspect of the game and made him look like an amateur. We all know that he's not an amateur, and in fact, quite the opposite. Yet, when he fought Mike.. he looked like a great wrestler who dominated a decorated wrestler. Point is, who your opponent is can make you look much better or much worse. To even say this isn't true is laughable at best.
I can't be bothered to read his posts anymore. He has distorted what we see on screen and speculated about what he thinks is happening off screen, and claims that it is "indisputable facts". Like apparently kicking a guy when he is down and knocking over a yelling (giving him ample warning), bum rushing Spartan, is "tanking blows left and right".
And at the same time, continues to claim that the Immortals Themistocles faced are inferior to the ones the Spartans faced, even though the only direct comparison we have (both groups fighting against non-Spartans) clearly shows the ones Themistocles fought doing better. Also, ignoring Artemisia, simply because she is a woman, despite it being mentioned that she was trained by the best fighters Xerxes had, and that there was eventually no one could match her skill. Hell, as a preteen, she bested a full grown, muscular man. Or never mind the fact that they show her bringing Xerxes' the head of kings she took (which by his own arguments, would have been protected by their best soldiers). But apparently, unless you are a Spartan, it doesn't count.
So he is distorting facts about the Leonidas fight, while lowballing the shit out of Themistocles' opponents, in order to make his pick look better. Which is why I don't give a shit what he says anymore.
As to RL fighting, I have been doing martial arts for half my life. I mentioned Randy Couture because I personally know the guy who was his trainer for several years, and often train under that guy's brother myself. So him claiming that I know nothing about fighting is laughable. And all because he can't pick up on the more subtle things when seeing two people fight, and needs one to "dominate" the other before he gets clued in.
I've been doing martial arts long enough that I have called Muay Thai match results before they even started, because I could already see a difference in skill when the guys were warming up, before they even got to the ring. And they didn't need any kind of opponent to make them look better or worse, unless the air in front of them counts, while they are shadowboxing.
So he can make all the claims or typos he wants. I don't care anymore.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Last edited by TheVaultDweller on Sep 10th, 2014 at 08:38 AM
Pot meet Kettle there buddy.... You've been disingenuous about a great number of things... That the spartans weren't fighting multiple immortals at once... that the immortals them fought who rolled through Greeks wasn't that impressive since they weren't spartans... tried to low ball the uber immortal.... lied about one of xerxes generals having the best immortals with her (not true)... claimed PIS when there was no such thing, and if so, it was from both sides. I could go on and on. Here again you don't seem to realize that the immortals that faced the greek tribes aren't as good as Spartains... Just the facts. Neither was the group of immortals as good as the ones the spartans faced. I supplied the evidence for this very point.
That's nice you been doing whatever you've been doing for a long time.. clearly hasn't helped your logic nor how you view fights. You made the claim that people don't look better or worse depending who they fight. That is so idiotic it's not even funny. I referenced two fights your idol of sorts fought which clearly show the exact point I'm making. Funny you didn't respond to that.. not surprised. I'd be surprised if you've even seen the fights in question
No individual Spartan has a visual screen feats exactly like what Themistocles had. I never said they didn't fight multiple Immortals. I mention multiple times that both the Spartans and Themistocles were outnumbered. But we do not see them blocking, dodging and parrying blows from 3 different angles at the exact same time. The closest example is when the Captain goes on a rampage when his son is killed, and those are against normal Persians. I re-watched the entire Immortals battle we're discussing. Barring intervention by another Spartan, every time a Spartan gets attacked from multiple directions at the exact same time, it results in their death. And you are also ignoring the fact that towards the end of the battle, they did group together and reform their shield wall, and that is when the Immortals actually get routed.
No, I never said she had the best Immortals at her side. I said that logic dictates that she would have better guards than front line warriors, who were not side-by-side with Xerxes, while fighting the Spartans. And you act like the land and sea groups was separated by some massive distance, when we clearly see Artemisia interact with Xerxes face-to-face. And also ignore that the final battle, where she had Immortals with her, occurs after Leonidas is already dead, and Xerxes no longer has any threats remotely in the vicinity he is in.
And you supplied NO evidence to prove your opinion that those Immortals were better. Like I have pointed out, the only comparable on screen example we have is when the non-Spartans in 300 engage the Immortals during the flank attack, and do quite well against them, even after the element of surprise is spent. And in comparison, we see the other Immortals steamroll through non-Spartans. So the on screen evidence supports my viewpoint.
Also, how exactly am I lowballing the Uber Immortal by referencing exactly what happens on screen? He kicks a downed Spartan, knocks over another yelling and charging one, and has Leonidas on the back foot for the majority of the other parts of their fight, until he leans forward to growl at him, allowing Leonidas to stab him in the eye and decapitate him. This is exactly how the fight goes.
And also no, taking a moment to get your bearings in the middle of the battlefield, after being knocked to the ground, instead of trying a risky attack from an unknown position, and not willingly disarming yourself of your primary weapon, on that same battlefield, are both strategically sound decisions. Unless you want to tell me that attacking recklessly or throwing your weapon away on a gamble is a good idea?
So no, I have not lied or low-balled about anything. Every post I made has been in reference to what we actually see occuring on screen. And I noticed that a bunch of things you claim I said, I in fact didn't. Like me never saying Artemisia had the best Immortals with her. I even said that Xerxes probably had the very best with him, in his camp. You, on the other hand, have distorted screen feats, made assumptions about things we do not see and claimed it as fact, and totally ignored the feats of one person, purely because of their gender. Under normal circumstances, a woman would have had a tough time on the battlefield, amongst men. Because they generally have a strength disadvantage. But we clearly see Artemisia blocking and parrying strikes from large, muscular men. So we can see that she is much stronger than she appears, and that her strength is in the same class as the men she fought.
So I have based every single thing I have posted on the actual combat feats (the things that matter in a fight) of the various parties I references.
But anyway, I am tired of going around in circles. I am not going to convince you of my point. You most definitely are not going to convince me of yours. So let's just agree to disagree and move on, or spend another 10 pages going in circles. So you believe Leonidas wins, and have your arguments for it. I believe Themistocles wins, and have my arguments for it. Let's just leave it at that.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
No, Randy Couture is not my idol. I don't even personally like him. And again, you misread my posts. I said that they don't actually become slower or less skilled. I specifically said that the calibre of their opponents will affect the fight as a whole. Them appearing slower or less skilled to some people, because they have a better opponent, was not what I said at all. So again it is you who is getting angry and sarcastic because of something you misread.
Here is an example. Say we have multiple guys working on bags. All their opponents are stationary and non-reponsive. Now if you focus purely on them, you can easily notice differences. One guy might have better footwork. One might have a better guard position. One might have better punching or kicking technique. And what they are fighting does not matter, because you can directly see the differences between them by focusing purely on the individual in question.
Or watch an amateur league MMA bout, and then watch a UFC bout. I have seen guys dominate the amateur leagues and look far more impressive than their opponents. But when I watch a professional match afterwards, the gap in skill level is still glaringly obvious, even if the guy I am focusing on is losing. Like I mentioned above, you can visibly see when someone has better punching technique, or has better footwork, or executed their kicks or take downs better, without focusing on how their opponent responds.
Or let's try it another way. If I run 100m against a bunch of really unfit guys and trounce them, but Usain Bolt wins a close race, do I look faster and more impressive than him? Of course not. Because if you focus purely on both of us, without focusing on the race as a whole, you can see that he is visibly moving faster, and has better and smoother running technique than I do. And the same can be done with fights, if you focus on the actual individuals, instead of their opponent, or the fight as a whole. Well, at least I can. If you cannot, then that's on you. But I think that if you actually stopped to focus specifically on the individual fighters, you will actually see what I am talking about.
So here's a challenge. Take 2 fights of one of your favourite fighters. One where they win and one where they lose. Now watch the fights, and ignore the context of them winning or losing. Focus purely on how they move, how they throw their punches, kicks, take downs etc. If you do it that way, I am willing to be that you will actually notice that they do not appear faster/slower, more/less skilled in their separate fights. You will just notice that their opponent's technique and speed is better or worse than theirs is. That's how I view and analyse fights. I break them down into parts when I watch them, to get a better overall opinion on how good someone actually is. Not just how good they might look, depending on who they are fighting.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
I will admit that KuRuPT was right in one instance, that Xerxes was viewing at least the end of the battle between the Spartans, other Greeks and the Immortals, but well away from where the actual combat was busy taking place. But I think I blocked it out mentally, because that shot is such a massive plot hole with regards to the rest of the film. Because Xerxes seemingly knows exactly how to get into the perfect vantage point to view the entire battle, which is a MASSIVE high ground strategic advantage, but keeps charging troops head on at the Spartans, and only puts archers up there at the end of the film. So I chalk that shot up to a plot oversight, or otherwise Xerxes is EXTREMELY stupid.
And, in my opinion, it goes against his point that the very best were down fighting the Spartans. Because it does not logically make sense to me that he would be so near the battlefield, but put his very best troops in a position where they would be engaged and utterly unable to help him, should he be faced with personal danger. But eh, guess that's where our opinions differ, like with a lot of other things in the films. Which is why I still just think we should agree to disagree with each others opinions, and carry on with other things that doesn't involve arguing in circles.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Suffice to say buddy, I don't agree with a lot again and I also don't want to continue to go in circles. I thought about going back and quoting where you said the Immortals Them beat were superior to who that spartans beat. This prompted part of the entire debate we've been having the last 4 or 5 posts. Now, you're saying the ones the Spartans faced were likely superior. That is in stark contrast to what you were originally trying to portray. Same thing goes for forgetting that the greeks Them's Immortals "ran through" were inferior to the spartans. Which prompted another faze of... just because your fighting somebody superior doesn't mean they will make you look better or worse (which I'll get to in a moment). Let's not also forget that YOU brought up immortals killing spartans and said when Spartans were outnumbered they were killed. Which was disingenuous as I pointed out because they were fighting out of formation and killing immortals one vs. multiple foes. Just because a few died doesn't mean much when they were crushed and many more Spartans lived as opposed to being killed. I could go on, but as you say what's the point. I just wanted you to know that despite my sarcasm and comment I enjoyed the convo and the debate. I didn't know you before but I actually think you're a cool guy
This whole thing is one big missing the point buddy and I'll explain why. I've NEVER claimed that you can't see skill or certain things regardless of who they are fighting. That is of course, common sense as you can see things no matter what. Never denied that. You initially claimed it didn't make a difference who they were fighting because skill always shows through. That is isn't the case and here's why with examples you can relate to. Maybe like you, I've been watching MMA since the days of Pancrase (Shamrocks, Funaki, Bas etc etc) I liked Pride wat more than UFC FYI. Point is, I was watching MMA well before it was even popular because of my boxing experience and training. Now...
Take a look at Anderson Silva vs. Forest and vs. Chael... and you'll get my point... When you fight somebody more skilled, or somebody that nullifies a portion of your game you won't look as good because you're not able to show as much. Chael neutralized Silva's game and you couldn't see the many great things he's able to do in the ring. If you had never seen another Silva fight you might not have the slightest clue how good he was in striking. That is what a skilled opponent can do. Just like how I mentioned you may not know Couture was a great wrestler if you watched him fight Randleman as he was thoroughly dominated in that area... yet we all know he's a great wrestler. Being that you have MMA experience this should be very easy for you to see and know first hand. Nobody is saying certain traits won't show through no matter who you're fighting, but they show much much better when fighting inferior foes. Which is why your Bolt example is frankly kinda bad friend. That isn't a combat sport.. nobody is preventing him from running fast. This is the polar opposite of a combat situation where you can take away your opponents strengths.
For example, you could be great and Judo throws and ground submission. Would anybody see that if they fought a good wrestler who also good striking and could thus keep it on their feet? No you wouldn't. You would have no clue somebody was good at those thing because their foes skill level was better or their game plan nullified your strengths. You routinely see this yourself, which is why I'm wondering you're being so obtuse about this friend. Take a look a Penn vs Diaz.. would anybody know that Penn was one of the best submission fighters ever and was the first American to win Gold at the Mundials? No because it never went to the ground. Point is, the superior immortals didn't look as good because they were fighting superior greeks in the spartans compared to who Them's immortals fought. Who you fight can make all the difference in the world with how you look. Even in boxing, as I gave you examples.. Look at Whitaker against Ramirez or Haugen or most of his Light Weight fights... than look at him against Mcgirt who was able to take away angles from whitaker... used movement and counter punching to make him look not as dominate. Just how it goes bro.
KMC Community Forums
Sep 8th, 2014 03:32 PM
