# Dan Henderson is a cheap fighter



## ricefarmer (Oct 16, 2006)

i know that holding the mouth is legal.. but its bullshit.. nobody really does it and he abuses it..he tries to cover the nose and mouth..

he has no honor man... he did it with anderson silva..

its annoying, probably for the victim too


----------



## AmRiT (Apr 23, 2007)

I see where your coming from but i dont agree with it because its in the rules and he uses it to distract his opponent so he can do what he needs to do. I dont agree with the rule but you cant blame him for using it


----------



## pauly_j (Nov 28, 2006)

So is it cheap when you attack an oponents body to take the wind out of them? God this thread is retarded. Most fighters do it, or jam their forarm into their oponents face. The idea is to make them as uncomfortable as possible.


----------



## Biowza (May 22, 2007)

That happens all the time, not sure how close you pay attention when the fight hits the ground but most fighters do it, especially wrestlers.


----------



## elardo (Jul 8, 2007)

Terrible thread...watch any Pride fights? When I see this, I think of it like foot stomps. It's better than just controlling the opponent w/out immediate offence. It frustrates fighters and it's legal, so why would anyone neglect that chance?


----------



## js9234 (Apr 8, 2007)

Personally I think it's Bullshit and think it shouldn't be allowed but it's in the rule books for now. Henderson is the only one I've seen use it to the extent he has.


----------



## valrond (Nov 26, 2007)

Well, the proposed ammendment to the unified MMA rules say that you can't do that. Why? Because it requires no skill. I don't know when the new rules will apply, but it may be the last fight in which Hendo can do that.

http://www.mmaonline.com/headlines/abc-proposed-changes-to-unified-rules-of-mma/

25. Smothering the mouth or nose
A fighter may not place his hand over his opponent’s mouth or nose in an attempt to smother the fighter’s ability to breathe. This does not include choke attempts where a fighter’s mouth is covered by his opponents arm.

They are not in effect yet, they may never come, but it is thought by many that it is cheap and dirty.


----------



## JMONEY (Sep 19, 2006)

I liked how Palhares looked at Herb Dean and pointed at Dan's hand while he was doing it.


----------



## Cartheron (Sep 5, 2007)

ricefarmer said:


> i know that holding the mouth is legal.. but its bullshit.. nobody really does it and he abuses it..he tries to cover the nose and mouth..
> 
> he has no honor man... he did it with anderson silva..
> 
> its annoying, probably for the victim too


Go back to your paddy fields and cry me a river.


----------



## SlammedSL1 (Jul 22, 2006)

I agree, it's ******* stupid. If you are laying in someone's guard and more interested in covering their mouth than passing your opponents guard, something is wrong there...

That's a boring lay and pray shit


----------



## Grotty (Jul 21, 2006)

So what if smothering the mouth happens, perhaps they should ban choke holds as well


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

I agree it's not very nice at all. Since this is a fight- the person in top control should be required, by rules, to offer words of encouragement to the fighter they are holding down and perhaps even give them tips on how best to escape the position so to make it more fair.

After the fight is over then the fighters, ref and the audience can all go have a pizza party at Chuck E. Cheese's!!!


YAY!!!!

:happy03:​


----------



## yorT (Apr 22, 2007)

Walker said:


> I agree it's not very nice at all. Since this is a fight- the person in top control should be required, by rules, to offer words of encouragement to the fighter they are holding down and perhaps even give them tips on how best to escape the position so to make it more fair.
> 
> After the fight is over then the fighters, ref and the audience can all go have a pizza party at Chuck E. Cheese's!!!
> 
> ...


Since some people didn't read the new unified rules that was posted by valrond, here they are: (Read rule 25)
*
The Amended – Unified Rules*
The following actions shall constitute fouls during any professional Mixed Martial Arts competition.
1. Head-butting or striking with the head in any manner.
2. Eye gouging of any kind.
3. Biting.
4. Hair pulling.
5. Fish Hooking.
6. Groin attacks of any kind.
7. Placing a finger into any orifice, or into any cut or laceration of your opponent.
8. Small joint manipulation.
9. Deliberate strikes to the spine or the back of the head.
10. Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea.
11. Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh.
12. Kicking the head of a grounded opponent.
13. Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent
14. Stomping
15. Pile-driving your opponent into the mat.
16. Purposely throwing an opponent out of the ring or caged area.
17. Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent.
18. Engaging in any unsportsmanlike conduct
19. Holding the ropes or the fence.
20. Attacking an opponent on or during the break.
21. Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee.
22. Disregarding the instructions of the referee.
23. Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury.
24. Interference by the corner.
*25. Smothering (hand cupped over opponents’ mouth)*

*
Definitions and Interpretations:*

1. Head-butting or striking with the head in any manner.
Any use of the head as a striking instrument whether head to head, head to body or otherwise is illegal.

2. Eye gouging of any kind.
Eye gouging by means of fingers, chin, or elbow is illegal. Legal strikes or punches that contact the fighter’s eye socket are not eye gouging and shall be considered legal attacks.

3. Biting.
Biting in any form is illegal. A fighter must recognize that a referee may not be able to physically observe some actions, and must make the referee aware if they are being bit during an exhibition of unarmed combat.

4. Hair pulling.
Pulling of the hair in any fashion is an illegal action. A fighter may not grab a hold of his opponent’s hair to control their opponent in any way.

5. Fish Hooking.
Any attempt by a fighter to use their fingers in a manner that attacks their opponent’s mouth, nose or ears, stretching the skin to that area will be considered “Fishhooking”. Fishhooking generally is the placing of fingers into the mouth or your opponent and pulling your hands in opposing directions while holding onto the skin of your opponent.

6. Groin attacks of any kind.
Any attack to the groin area including, striking, grabbing, pinching or twisting is illegal

7. Placing a finger into any orifice, or into any cut or laceration of your opponent.
A fighter may not place their fingers into an open laceration in an attempt to enlarge the cut. A fighter may not place their fingers into an opponent’s, nose, ears, mouth, or any body cavity.

8. Small joint manipulation.
Fingers and Toes are small joints. Wrists, Ankles, Knees, Shoulders and Elbows are all large joints.

9. Deliberate strikes to the spine or the back of the head.
No direct striking attacks are allowed to the spine or the back of the head crown of the head, centerline of the skull, into the spine, down to the tailbone. A direct strike is an aimed and executed attack to the area. The back of the head is considered from the crown of the head down the centerline of the skull into the spine, with a 1 inch variance to each side, similar to a Mohawk haircut. Strikes that are thrown to areas behind the ears but not within the Mohawk limitation are legal strikes

10. Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea.
No directed throat strikes are allowed. Directed throat attacks are not punches that connect during an exchange from the standing position while fighters are engaged in combat. A directed attack would include a fighter pulling his opponents head in a way to open the neck area for a striking attack. A fighter may not gouge their fingers or thumb into their opponent’s neck or trachea in an attempt to submit their opponent. All arm chokes such as the Rear Naked, Guillotine, and Bar Arm are legal.

11. Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh.
Any attack that targets the fighter’s skin by clawing at the skin or attempting to pull or twist the skin to apply pain is illegal.

12. Kicking the head of a grounded opponent.
A grounded opponent is any fighter who has more than just the soles of their feet on the ground. If the referee determines that a fighter would be a grounded fighter but is not solely because the ring ropes or cage fence has held fighter from the ground, the referee can instruct the combatants that he is treating the fighter held up solely by the cage or ropes as a grounded fighter. A fighter can be kicked to the body when they are on the ground with any type of legal kick except to the head or groin.

13. Kneeing the Head of a grounded opponent
A grounded opponent is any fighter who has more than just the soles of their feet on the ground. If the referee determines that a fighter would be a grounded fighter but is not solely because the ring ropes or cage fence has held fighter from the ground, the referee can instruct the combatants that he is treating the fighter held up solely by the cage or ropes as a grounded fighter . A fighter can be kneed to the body when they are on the ground with any type of legal knee except to the head or groin.

14. Stomping
Stomping is considered any type of striking action with the feet where the fighter lifts their leg up bending their leg at the knee and initiating a striking action with the bottom of their foot or heel. This does include stomping the feet while both fighters are standing (Note) Axe kicks are not stomps.

15. Pile-driving your opponent into the mat.
A pile driver is considered to be any throw where you control your opponent’s body placing his feet straight up in the air with his head straight down and then forcibly drive your opponents head into the canvas or flooring material. It should be noted when a fighter is placed into a submission hold by their opponent, if that fighter is capable of elevating their opponent they may bring that opponent down in any fashion they desire because they are not in control of their opponents body. The fighter who is attempting the submission can either adjust their position, or let go of their hold before being slammed to the canvas. *** This is crucial that referees are properly advised and trained and that
the fighters fully understand this at the rules meeting ***

16. Purposely throwing an opponent out of the ring or caged area.
A fighter shall not intentionally or purposely throw their opponent out of the ring or cage.

17. Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent.
A fighter may not control their opponent’s movement by holding onto their opponent’s shorts or gloves. A fighter may hold onto or grab their opponent’s hand as long as they are not controlling the hand only by using the material of the glove, but by actually gripping the hand. It is legal to hold onto your own gloves or shorts

18. Engaging in any unsportsmanlike conduct.
Any type of behavior or conduct observed or heard by the referee, which can be considered detrimental or disrespectful towards their opponent or the sport of MMA. This includes but is not limited to spitting at your opponent, abusive language, abusive gestures, etc.

19. Holding the ropes or the fence.
A fighter may put their hands on the fence and push off of it at anytime. A fighter may place their feet onto the cage and have their toes go through the fencing material at any time. When fighter’s fingers go through the cage and grab hold of the fence and start to control either their body position or their opponent’s body position it now becomes an illegal action. A fighter may not grab the ropes or wrap their arms over the ring ropes at any time.
If a fighter is caught holding the fence, cage or ring rope material the referee shall issue a one-point deduction from the offending fighters scorecard.
If a point deduction for holding the fence occurs, and because of the infraction, the fouling fighter ends up in a superior position due to the foul, fighters will be re-started standing in a neutral position

20. Attacking an opponent on or during the break.
A fighter shall not engage their opponent in any fashion during a time-out or break of action in competition

21. Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee.
A fighter shall not engage their opponent in any fashion while their opponent is under the care or handling of the referee

22. Disregarding the instructions of the referee.
A fighter MUST follow the instructions of the referee at all times. Any deviation or non-compliance may result in the fighter’s disqualification

23. Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury.
Timidity is defined as any fighter who purposely avoids contact with his opponent, or runs away from the action of the fight. Timidity can also be called by the referee for any attempt by a fighter to receive time by falsely claiming a foul, injury, or purposely dropping or spitting out their mouthpiece or other action designed to stall the fight

24. Interference by the corner.
Interference is defined as any action or activity aimed at disrupting the fight or causing an unfair advantage to be given to one combatant. Corners are not allowed to distract the referee or influence the actions of the referee in any fashion.

*25. Smothering the mouth or nose
A fighter may not place his hand over his opponent’s mouth or nose in an attempt to smother the fighter’s ability to breathe. This does not include choke attempts where a fighter’s mouth is covered by his opponents arm.*


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

They are *proposed* rules and not rules that the UFC has accepted so pointing out that rule does nothing especially when applied to this fight.​


----------



## valrond (Nov 26, 2007)

Walker said:


> They are *proposed* rules and not rules that the UFC has accepted so pointing out that rule does nothing especially when applied to this fight.​


We didn't say he cheated, but it is seen as cheap and dirty, that is why it is proposed to be banned.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

valrond said:


> We didn't say he cheated, but it is seen as cheap and dirty, that is why it is proposed to be banned.


Where did you read an explanation for why they proposed banning it?

And yes, this does seem like a silly proposal. Smothering doesn't put a fighter at an increased risk of injury. Seems like they're banning it for appearances, not necessity.


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

It may be cheap and dirty to some people but what about when fighters lay their foreman across the neck pretty much doing the same thing in that same position?

Either way it doesn't matter as the UFC hasn't adopted these rules so saying Hendo was cheap and dirty while doing something within the rules is lost on me. :dunno:​


----------



## stitch1z (Dec 9, 2007)

I really don't find anything "dirty" at all about this tactic. :dunno:


----------



## Zemelya (Sep 23, 2007)

i agree, this 'technique' looks fucked to me personally; although we can't blame Hendo for doing that, in his position loosing wasn't an option and he did what he could. 
but IMO it should definitely be banned


----------



## kamikaze145 (Oct 3, 2006)

I am not a huge fan of this either, mostly because its boring and if you are "smothering" then you probably arent passing guard or doing any real GNP damage, but its legal and its probably an annoying thing to deal with. I know lots of wrestlers that have their own similar techniques that just make you uncomfortable and its just part of their game, they dont want you to be having any fun when wrestling/fighting them. I have honestly never seen it come even close to changing the outcome of a fight though


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

I truly don't understand why people think this technique is cheap and/or dirty.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Firstly, it's Dan Henderson 

Secondly... and no offence is intended homie but holding the mouth is something that MANY people do and is not cheap to anyone who partisipates in the sport. Go to your local Jitz gym and have a gander... it is a super common manuver and those who call fighters cheap because of it simply are uninnitiated in the jitz game outside of MMA. It is not cheap -- it's legit, it's a tool that gains you position, and just because it is simple and 'anyone can do it' doesn't make it any less effective or fair.




jasvll said:


> Where did you read an explanation for why they proposed banning it?
> 
> And yes, this does seem like a silly proposal. Smothering doesn't put a fighter at an increased risk of injury. Seems like they're banning it for appearances, not necessity.


Agreed. It doesn't endanger the fighter whatsoever so it should never be banned. Furthermore... what's next? Banning cross-facing? Posted elbows? No hands on the face at all unless they are fists? pretty rediculous. haha.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

kamikaze145 said:


> I am not a huge fan of this either, mostly because its boring and if you are "smothering" then you probably arent passing guard or doing any real GNP damage,


 Fighters generally use it as a distraction, creating opportunities to do those things.
It's not like they're spending entire rounds doing nothing bu trying to keep their hand over their opponents face.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

just gotta say this thread is refreshing in a way. 

When these threads come up on Sherdog the place goes nutso. Hundreds of people calling fighters cheats, cheap, weak, shady, etc. And the vast, vast, majority of them saying that it is an illegitimate maneuver simply because 'anyone can do it', like 'anyone' can't throw a punch or hip toss. 

While i don't agree with those in the thread that think it is cheap it is nice that they aren't -- for the most part -- flat out hating on fighters who take advantage of a very legal tool. It is even more refreshing that there are so many here who understand it is a normal part of the fight game and always has been.

Kudos to ya'll for not being dicktards to one another. :thumbsup:


----------



## NGen2010 (Jun 3, 2008)

js9234 said:


> Personally I think it's Bullshit and think it shouldn't be allowed but it's in the rule books for now. *Henderson is the only one I've seen use it to the extent he has.*


Well of course he is the only one to use it *"to the extent he has"*. What the hell...:dunno: :confused02: :confused03:


----------



## sk double i (Apr 13, 2007)

I'm just surprised that this was the first time you saw a fighter do this. A lot of people do this, with their hands, body, forearm etc. And please tell me how this is cheap? It's a freakin fight, not a cuddle party. 

Is the knee to the stomach illegal when you have top position illegal? How about a choke? or a punch to the face?


----------



## SlammedSL1 (Jul 22, 2006)

There are tons of fighters who work from the top position and are extremely successful (GSP, Kos, Tito, Fedor) and they don't have to resort to cheap tricks. 

Henderson tried that shit with Silva round one, I doubt Silva was too happy because he layed waste to him afterwards pretty quick. It's a shitty stall tactic, and it won't be around for too long imo.


----------



## StrongStyleThug (Aug 30, 2008)

Well, you said yourself it's legal so it's not like Henderson is doing something that's not within the rules and because of that I don't really see the arguement here.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

SlammedSL1 said:


> There are tons of fighters who work from the top position and are extremely successful (GSP, Kos, Tito, Fedor) and they don't have to resort to cheap tricks.


 Funny you mention Tito, the guy that inspired the 'no fingers in orifices' rule because he used to stick his fingers into cuts once he opened the other guy up. Now that's cheap. 

Covering someone's mouth, on the other hand, is not, anymore than crossfacing or using your forearm against their neck is. 



> Henderson tried that shit with Silva round one, I doubt Silva was too happy because he layed waste to him afterwards pretty quick.


 Are you suggesting that if Henderson hadn't done that, Silva wouldn't have tried to finish the fight the way he has everyone else he's faced recently? :thumb02:



> It's a shitty stall tactic, and it won't be around for too long imo.


 How is it a stall tactic? It's used to set up opportunities to advance position. It's the opposite of a stall tactic.


----------



## Kin (May 22, 2007)

How is it cheap, if it isn't illegal? Secondly, who cares? As others have aptly pointed out, this is a fight -- not a fingerpainting contest. 

Also, I have no faith in the new unified rules. The only new thing that they're bringing to the table, that organizations aren't already using, is the retarded amount of weight classes. So I could care less what those rules say about face smothering.


----------



## stitch1z (Dec 9, 2007)

SlammedSL1 said:


> There are tons of fighters who work from the top position and are extremely successful (GSP, Kos, Tito, Fedor) and they don't have to resort to cheap tricks.
> 
> Henderson tried that shit with Silva round one, I doubt Silva was too happy because he layed waste to him afterwards pretty quick. It's a shitty stall tactic, and it won't be around for too long imo.


I certainly don't see it as a stall tactic. At all.

And it's certainly not unfair. How does obstructing your opponents breathing any worse than dropping elbows and fists on to them?


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

ricefarmer said:


> i know that holding the mouth is legal.. but its bullshit.. nobody really does it and he abuses it..he tries to cover the nose and mouth..
> 
> he has no honor man... he did it with anderson silva..
> 
> its annoying, probably for the victim too


 
I'd lie to see you tell dan he has no Honor....thats a fuckin dumb statement....do you know the rules, if you think its cheap call dana white and complauin to him I'm sure he's waiting for some like you to call him on that......:thumbsdown: Sorry to sound harsh but dan is one of the most classy fighters and when its not illegal deal with it.....plus you say its lay and pray b/s and Danny game plan was to never be in a position to mount palhares, he wanted to stand the whole time which he did effectively.....



SlammedSL1 said:


> I agree, it's ******* stupid. If you are laying in someone's guard and more interested in covering their mouth than passing your opponents guard, something is wrong there...
> 
> That's a boring lay and pray shit


How about having him mounted and knowing he's already breathing hard clearly it bothered Pallhares but he complained twice and he was told a fact by herb Dean......"its legal" comon fellas danny is one of the most classy dudes out there get you facts straight..... OR, is it that he shouldnt do everything he can to win a fight????


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

This thread is bullshit. Nothing wrong with putting your hand over someones mouth+nose. It's a staple of wrestling, has no health risks.. what exactly is there possible to complain about it, other than perhaps it is time wasting.


----------



## Davisty69 (May 24, 2007)

I say, if it's not illegal, it's not cheap. 

I personally hate foot stomps and see them as cheap, but while I dislike fighters using them, I can't get mad at them and call it cheap.

You could say the same thing about putting your knee on your opponents stomach to restrick breathing, or a body triangle. They all are aimed at the same result.


----------



## valrond (Nov 26, 2007)

Originally, everything (almost) was legal in the UFC, shots to the back of the head, kicks to the head of a downed opponent, small joint manipulation, grabbing the cage. All of those things were banned, as will probably the smothering, as people with more knowledge than us, like Big John, has suggested to do.

Now, all of you that say it isn't cheap or dirty because it is allowed, will you change your opinion if this changes ?


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

you know what guys... lets just play it safe. Lets dress all the fighters up in ballet slippers and dresses and act out the fight in interpretive dance instead :thumb02:


----------



## NGen2010 (Jun 3, 2008)

StrongStyleThug said:


> Well, you said yourself it's legal so it's not like Henderson is doing something that's not within the rules and because of that I don't really see the arguement here.


Agree. If a fighter decides not to use a legal move because they think it's uncool, unfair or "cheap" then shame on them. I have no problem when fighters cover the nose/mouth of another fighter - isn't it like a choke? Fighters tap out all the time because they can't breath.


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

shatterproof said:


> you know what guys... lets just play it safe. Lets dress all the fighters up in ballet slippers and dresses and act out the fight in interpretive dance instead :thumb02:


No way man- this is where it's at- Dance-fighing!!! The real magic starts at 3:20:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqNHqfYkxDs​ 
Valrond- if it becomes a rule there of course it will be dirty for a fighter to do something against the rules. But doing the mouth smothering is not like Hackney's nutsack attack on Joe Son which though legal at the time I would consider more "dirty". Legal at the time but still...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19Dz8arDKs4​


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Walker said:


> No way man- this is where it's at- Dance-fighing!!! The real magic starts at 3:20:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqNHqfYkxDs​



Haha, i think the real question is... could MJ take on the Jets AND Sharks? 

Damn -- i might kick my own ass for that, a Westside Story referance.


----------



## drockh (Nov 17, 2006)

I really don't get what all the fuss is about... There are a lot more dangerous things allowed in the UFC than disrupting someones breathing from the top. This is just another underutilized tactic in the UFC like footstomps. If more people did it you wouldnt think its so bad...


----------



## Davisty69 (May 24, 2007)

valrond said:


> Originally, everything (almost) was legal in the UFC, shots to the back of the head, kicks to the head of a downed opponent, small joint manipulation, grabbing the cage. All of those things were banned, as will probably the smothering, as people with more knowledge than us, like Big John, has suggested to do.
> 
> Now, all of you that say it isn't cheap or dirty because it is allowed, will you change your opinion if this changes ?


Well that answer seems quite obvious. If covering the mouth of your opponent is made an illegal move, as it was under the unified rules, then doing so would be cheap and dirty. 

Is hitting your opponent in the boys, eating the penalty, but causing your opponent to be weakened cheap? Of course it is. It is using an attack that is not permitted for your advantage.

However, was it dirty or cheap when Keith Hackney tore up Joe Son's balls? No, because it was a legal move. 

Cheap means tricky to me. Dirty means illegal blows. A fighter that spits out his mouthpiece to get a break is being cheap. A guy that punches with his thumb out, possibly causing an eye poke, is dirty.


----------



## drockh (Nov 17, 2006)

valrond said:


> Originally, everything (almost) was legal in the UFC, shots to the back of the head, kicks to the head of a downed opponent, small joint manipulation, grabbing the cage. All of those things were banned, as will probably the smothering, as people with more knowledge than us, like Big John, has suggested to do.
> 
> Now, all of you that say it isn't cheap or dirty because it is allowed, will you change your opinion if this changes ?


I will think its cheap and dirty if its used in a fight after they make it a rule change.. Honestly though I see nothing wrong with it. Maybe it looks bad on TV? If they want to change it for that reason whatever..


----------



## Fedor>all (Oct 22, 2006)

My theory is that Dan Henderson tries smothering the breathing ducts of his opponent so that they gas before him, which is highly unlikely (at middleweight).


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

shatterproof said:


> Haha, i think the real question is... could MJ take on the Jets AND Sharks?
> 
> Damn -- i might kick my own ass for that, a Westside Story referance.


Tis funny you said that because my first search was for "west side story dance fighting". 

Davisty69- I know where you are coming from with if it's legal it's not "dirty" and though I haven't see all fights in the UFC- the Hackney ball shots were the worst I saw of that variety. No- technically wasn't illegal at the time but he also could have dropped punches to Son's stomach as well as the family jewels.​


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

valrond said:


> Originally, everything (almost) was legal in the UFC, shots to the back of the head, kicks to the head of a downed opponent, small joint manipulation, grabbing the cage. All of those things were banned, as will probably the smothering, as people with more knowledge than us, like Big John, has suggested to do.


 Are you actually suggesting that putting your hand over your opponents mouth is comparable to the banned things you just mentioned?


----------



## drockh (Nov 17, 2006)

jasvll said:


> Are you actually suggesting that putting your hand over your opponents mouth is comparable to the banned things you just mentioned?


Whaaaa!? Id much rather get kicked in the junk than have a hand over my mouth :thumb02:


----------



## BazDaManUk (May 27, 2007)

Why are people comparing smothering someones face/nose to actuall submissions/moves, are you stupid? :confused03:

Smothering someone's face to stop them from breathing requires no skill, it should be banned, getting someone in a choke hole or knocking the wind out of them requires skill, totally different.


----------



## mtxsub7 (Jun 2, 2008)

I think it's fine as long as you don't do it 24/7 and constantly aim to do that, a little here and there is OK.


----------



## drockh (Nov 17, 2006)

BazDaManUk said:


> Why are people comparing smothering someones face/nose to actuall submissions/moves, are you stupid? :confused03:
> 
> Smothering someone's face to stop them from breathing requires no skill, it should be banned, getting someone in a choke hole or knocking the wind out of them requires skill, totally different.



In order to take someone down and get them in the position to utilize covering there mouth does take skill.. Does dropping elbows on someones face take skill?


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

ricefarmer said:


> i know that holding the mouth is legal.. but its bullshit.. nobody really does it and he abuses it..he tries to cover the nose and mouth..
> 
> he has no honor man... he did it with anderson silva..
> 
> its annoying, probably for the victim too


Yeah, and isn't it lame when he uses his hands to punch people too? I bet its so annoying for the victim!


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

BazDaManUk said:


> Why are people comparing smothering someones face/nose to actuall submissions/moves, are you stupid? :confused03:


 Why are people comparing putting your hand over someone's mouth to punching to the back of the head?



> Smothering someone's face to stop them from breathing requires no skill, it should be banned,
> getting someone in a choke hole or knocking the wind out of them requires skill, totally different.


 I may have just missed this in the rule book, but where does it say that anything that isn't hard enough to execute should be banned? Are strikes from the mount next on your list?


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

jasvll said:


> I may have just missed this in the rule book, but where does it say that anything that isn't hard enough to execute should be banned? Are strikes from the mount next on your list?


Yes. And you're no longer allowed to walk into the cage, all fighters are now required to perform a complicated gymnastics routine upon entry that includes at least five full rotation flips and thirty seconds of horsework on the top of the cage wall.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

HexRei said:


> Yes. And you're no longer allowed to walk into the cage, all fighters are now required to perform a complicated gymnastics routine upon entry that includes at least five full rotation flips and thirty seconds of horsework on the top of the cage wall.


 These new unified rules is awesomes!


----------



## jeremy202 (Feb 3, 2008)

ricefarmer said:


> i know that holding the mouth is legal.. but its bullshit.. nobody really does it and he abuses it..he tries to cover the nose and mouth..
> 
> he has no honor man... he did it with anderson silva..
> 
> its annoying, probably for the victim too



listen here you chinamin, thats called disrupting your opponents breathing pattern to make it harder for him to fight.Now get back to your rice patty


----------



## Scarecrow (Mar 20, 2008)

It happens all the time. Get over it and pick another argument.


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

ricefarmer said:


> i know that holding the mouth is legal.. but its bullshit.. nobody really does it and he abuses it..he tries to cover the nose and mouth..
> 
> he has no honor man... he did it with anderson silva..
> 
> its annoying, probably for the victim too


This is a really stupid comment.

The point of this sport is to use all of the tools that you have, and covering the mouth is an effective one. Fighters do it in jiu-jitsu and grappling matches all the time (I, personally, use my hairy ass chest to do it from mount).

It's a good way to disrupt the breathing and give your opponent something to think about that might distract them from what you're really trying to do.

If you've got the back and your opponent is defending the choke, you might cover the nose and mouth so that if they pull hand down to get it off, they set up the choke. There are plenty of other reasons to do it.

The truth is, you're not going to submit someone with it, the same way your not going to submit someone with a forearm to the Adam's Apple, but it gives you a huge chance to open something up and to draw a reaction that you can capitalize on.

If you're going to whine about the fight, find something legitimately illegal or disruptive to worry about.

Nowadays, no one understands the concept of honor. Honor is about showing respect to your opponent outside the cage and it's about putting your balls to the wall inside the cage. If Dan Henderson (or Palhares) had moves in their arsenal and they *didn't* use them, that would be dishonorable, that would be disrespectful to the sport and the opponent.

Throw everything but the kitchen sink at your opponent, and if that doesn't work, tear the kitchen sink out of the wall and throw that too.

I get so sick of people whining about what moves are and aren't honorable. This sport is about competing to the best of your ability, both fighters did that and one of them was judged the winner (whether you agree with the decision or not).

Complain about something that matters.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

BazDaManUk said:


> Why are people comparing smothering someones face/nose to actuall submissions/moves, are you stupid? :confused03:
> 
> Smothering someone's face to stop them from breathing requires no skill, it should be banned, getting someone in a choke hole or knocking the wind out of them requires skill, totally different.


so, your contention is that if something is relatively easy to do it should be banned? that's a pretty goofy threshold. the test is to be unreasonable endangerment to the fighter, which covering the face does not meet. 

doesn't take a hell of a lot of skill to jab or stomp either. Why should guys who pull guard have this specific rule and all-new threshold created for them? haha.

Next up for banning, i guess, will be cross-facing, any form of grappling that covers the face including north-south positions and high mount, posted elbows, and anything that brings the forarm accross the face from rear or top positions. Rediculous, right? i agree :thumb02:


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

HexRei said:


> Yes. And you're no longer allowed to walk into the cage, all fighters are now required to perform a complicated gymnastics routine upon entry that includes at least five full rotation flips and thirty seconds of horsework on the top of the cage wall.


Hillarious......:thumb02:


----------



## yorT (Apr 22, 2007)

IronMan said:


> This is a really stupid comment.
> 
> The point of this sport is to use all of the tools that you have, and covering the mouth is an effective one. Fighters do it in jiu-jitsu and grappling matches all the time (I, personally, use my hairy ass chest to do it from mount).


Question about the hair thing, in high school wrestling matches is it illegal to shave your arms a day or two before the event so that they are prickly?

Also why doesn't everyone just do want matt lindland does and not shower and rub garlic on themselves to disrupt their opponent. It isn't illegal is it?:dunno:


----------



## drockh (Nov 17, 2006)

yorT said:


> Question about the hair thing, in high school wrestling matches is is illegal to shave your arms a day or two before the event so that they are prickly?
> 
> Also why doesn't everyone just do want matt lindland does and not shower and rub garlic on themselves to disrupt their opponent. It isn't illegal is it?:dunno:


LOL! Does Lindland seriously do that? Thats the funniest thing ever...


----------



## mrmyz (Nov 23, 2006)

if its in the rules then so be it.


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

Against a BJJ guy sure as hell I would put my hand over his nose and mouth. Get him to focus on his breathing and less about where my arms and legs are. I agree with this move just because it is an equalizer, everyone can do it and it really doesn't put the fighters in any danger, just messes with their head.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

It's a good offensive move. It's allowed and it is effective. I like the smother, as well as the foot stomps.


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

yorT said:


> Question about the hair thing, in high school wrestling matches is it illegal to shave your arms a day or two before the event so that they are prickly?


Not that I'm aware of, but I wasn't a wrestler in high school.



> Also why doesn't everyone just do want matt lindland does and not shower and rub garlic on themselves to disrupt their opponent. It isn't illegal is it?:dunno:


I'm pretty sure it qualifies as a foreign substance. So that would be out.


----------



## pauly_j (Nov 28, 2006)

I don't think the hair on your arms is thick enough or course enough to be sharp when stubly. Also, I don't think Lindland rubs garlic on himself, he just smells bad.


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

pauly_j said:


> I don't think the hair on your arms is thick enough or course enough to be sharp when stubly. Also, I don't think Lindland rubs garlic on himself, he just smells bad.


Trust me, mine is.

I had a mustache in the fifth grade, and if I go for a north/south choke, I've had guys admit that they tap from the arm hair in the nose/mouth.

If you've got that good eastern european/armenian thing going, you can kill somebody with body hair stubble.


----------



## The Legend (Jun 13, 2006)

J.P. said:


> It's a good offensive move. It's allowed and it is effective. I like the smother, as well as the foot stomps.


Exactly, and I am sure there is more but I think Dan is the only one that uses it consistently and Chris Leben uses the foot stomps consistently in his fights as well.

P.S. I mean consistently by they use it from fight to fight


----------



## G-S-P (Sep 1, 2007)

ricefarmer said:


> i know that holding the mouth is legal.. but its bullshit.. nobody really does it and he abuses it..he tries to cover the nose and mouth..
> 
> he has no honor man... he did it with anderson silva..
> 
> its annoying, probably for the victim too



Goddamn you're an idiot. How does putting his hand over his opposition's mouth constitute that as cheating? It's nothing more than a tactic that has been in the sport for years, done in training as well, however nothing to rant about.


----------



## ricefarmer (Oct 16, 2006)

lookey here morons, just cuz its legal doesn't mean it aint cheap, and dishonorable, i know others have done this. but they usually dont abuse it or move on to something better. fuckin hendo the fraud, lays and prays and just spend the entire round fixated on covering the mouth and nose.. thats nto a fighting move. thats a stupid ass move

to the retard inbreds who can't argue. and say shit like why dont we ban body blows and forearm chokes.. yeah lets just ban fighitng then **** tards. cuz these are real fighting moves. 

just the fact that its considered banning in the unified rules shows u that it is considered cheap. it really doesn't hurt the opponent it just promotes lay and pray. at least foot stops keep the fight movin by forcing them to change the pace.


----------



## Redrum (Jan 30, 2008)

i am not going to quote your post, ricefarmer, because i don't want to see it twice, but i have to tell you that your post is one of the worst i have ever seen on this site. your language is not going to convince anyone to agree with your position.


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

IronMan said:


> Trust me, mine is.
> 
> I had a mustache in the fifth grade, and if I go for a north/south choke, I've had guys admit that they tap from the arm hair in the nose/mouth.
> 
> If you've got that good eastern european/armenian thing going, you can kill somebody with body hair stubble.


yeah but you know what ironman for all the talk of forearm hair in peoples faces if it were me I would get even more pissed...hair from an arm in my face..whoopty doo....no disrespect to you guys but what do you think...are forearm hairs that annoying?


----------



## evilappendix (Jan 4, 2007)

I have no problem with it. It's an effective way to make your opponent loose their wind and composure. The rules allow for it as well, which means use it as often as possible in my book. You guys here that are upset over it tend to forget fighting is about dominating your opponent and suppressing your will on them. I admit, it must be annoying for those on the receiving end of this, but thats half the fun of it.


----------



## yorT (Apr 22, 2007)

IronMan said:


> Not that I'm aware of, but I wasn't a wrestler in high school.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure it qualifies as a foreign substance. So that would be out.


I just asked my friend that used to wrestle in high school and he said you were not allowed to have any stubble on your body.


----------



## IronMan (May 15, 2006)

coldcall420 said:


> yeah but you know what ironman for all the talk of forearm hair in peoples faces if it were me I would get even more pissed...hair from an arm in my face..whoopty doo....no disrespect to you guys but what do you think...are forearm hairs that annoying?


Have you ever choked on hair?

I'd never tap from it, but it's a b*tch.


----------



## screenamesuck (Jun 29, 2006)

lol its cheap for him to do something that isn't against the rules???? Fighters do it all the time, why are you picking on Dan lol.


----------



## ricefarmer (Oct 16, 2006)

screenamesuck said:


> lol its cheap for him to do something that isn't against the rules???? Fighters do it all the time, why are you picking on Dan lol.


because hes the worst offender, he doesn't actually get anything done after doing it.. i wouldn't be so pissed if he would knock someone out after that or cause some damage.. but he just does it to do it. or annoy i dont know.. hes a fraud either way.. how wanderlei lost is beyond me


----------



## panthony (Nov 12, 2006)

I read the entire post and I'm speechless. This happens daily in the gym. If teenagers training can take it without complaining or bitching, I doubt the pros fighters are.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

The only legitimate complaint is that Dan doesn't actually end up doing much, which is sort of true, but irrelevent to the actual mouth covering.
Blame the scoring system.

Hairy men wrestlers - gross - I bet you sweat a lot too, so the ******* hair is full of sweat - gross. You should do like Rampage used to do in pride and put your balls in the other guys face.


----------



## screenamesuck (Jun 29, 2006)

Its all strategy dude. Wouldn't you do whatever you can as long as it doesn't break the rules to win a fight


----------



## valrond (Nov 26, 2007)

screenamesuck said:


> Its all strategy dude. Wouldn't you do whatever you can as long as it doesn't break the rules to win a fight


The fact that the only pro that does it regularly in the UFC is Dan Henderson.

Anyway, I guess all of you think you know more of MMA than John McCarthy, one of he dudes that proposed smothering to be banned.

Can't you think for yourselves? Is being legal the only reason why you like a move/strategy?

Regardless of the current rules, there are some things people don't like to see in a fight. Grabbing the fence wasn't dangerous, but it was banned. Laying on the other fighter without doing any offensive move wasn't dangerous, but it was banned. Also, there is nothing in the rules about talking smacking or not touching gloves at the beginning of the fight, but people can have his opinion if they like it or not.

I don't like smothering. It's legal, but I consider it cheap. An MMA expert than Big John thinks that too, so I must not be that wrong.

So you like he move? It's fine, but don't just say you like it because it is in the rules. Rules change, what today is fine the next day isn't. But it is hard to think that you can like something and dislike it just because another guy says it is not legal.

BTW, the you here is generic, not a direct response.


----------



## kc1983 (May 27, 2007)

Stupid thread. 
The thread starter hates Hendo and was upset that Palhares had nothing on him. 
Get over it and lets move on.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

valrond said:


> The fact that the only pro that does it regularly in the UFC is Dan Henderson.
> 
> Anyway, I guess all of you think you know more of MMA than John McCarthy, one of he dudes that proposed smothering to be banned.
> 
> ...



NO one was saying that they "like" the ******* move because it is legal, they said it wasn't cheap because it is legal, i.e. anyone can do it.

Grabbing the fence has nothing to do with what we are talking about as it involves the exterior environment the ighter is in and a lot of us don't like the fact that fights get stood up due to inactivity, well I sure as hell don't. You don't see the ref break apart two fighters and put them in a clinch or put one fighter in the others guard when there is inactivity standing up.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

valrond said:


> The fact that the only pro that does it regularly in the UFC is Dan Henderson.


 This doesn't make particularly good sense, but I'll respond by pointing out that Henderson is far from the only one that uses this technique. I can't remember how many times I've heard Rogan or Rutten point out that covering the nose and mouth won't lead to a submission, but is designed to disrupt the opponent's breathing, distracting them from the larger offense. 



> Anyway, I guess all of you think you know more of MMA than John McCarthy, one of he dudes that proposed smothering to be banned.


 McCarthy didn't come up with the proposed amendments; he was consulted. You're making up a specific connection between McCarthy and this particular rule as an appeal to perceived authority, in place of a meaningful reasoning. I could just as easily say that McCarthy fought rule 25 tooth and nail because he doesn't want mma to turn into thumbwrestling.



> Can't you think for yourselves?


 As opposed to saying it doesn't matter what anyone other than John McCarthy thinks?



> Is being legal the only reason why you like a move/strategy?


 Several reasons have been offered. Maybe you need to review the thread?



> Regardless of the current rules, there are some things people don't like to see in a fight. Grabbing the fence wasn't dangerous, but it was banned.


 Banning the use of outside objects to defend against the opponent's offense is hardly the same thing as banning a move that is generally used to set up an offensive advance.



> Laying on the other fighter without doing any offensive move wasn't dangerous, but it was banned.


 That's not banned. It just leads to a stand up. If all you do is lay on your opponent with your hand over his mouth, guess what will happen?




> Also, there is nothing in the rules about talking smacking or not touching gloves at the beginning of the fight, but people can have his opinion if they like it or not.


 Fighters aren't allowed to talk to each other. 

If the thread starter had asked for people's opinions on smothering, rather than singling out a particular fighter for public humiliation, he likely would have gotten different results. Instead, the thread is about whether or not Henderson is a cheap fighter with no honor for fighting within the rules, not whether or not you or I personally like smothering.



> I don't like smothering. It's legal, but I consider it cheap. An MMA expert than Big John thinks that too, so I must not be that wrong.


 There you go thinking for yourself again.



> So you like he move? It's fine, but don't just say you like it because it is in the rules. Rules change, what today is fine the next day isn't. But it is hard to think that you can like something and dislike it just because another guy says it is not legal.


I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people bringing up the rules as evidence that Henderson was fighting within them, not that it made smothering awesome.


----------



## Drrone (Sep 7, 2008)

If you are allowed to do it, then you can't blame Dan. It is one of those dumb things though; like foot stomping. Neither of them are necessary.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

John Mcarthy has never said anything about mouth covering. He merely reported the california rules idea thingy. He commented on where the back of the head is (apparently up for contention), but made no comment on the mouth covering.

Though I can tell you inside his head he was thinking - banning mouth covering is ******* stupid.

**** you might as well ban top position because it tires out the guy below.


----------



## AceFranklin88 (Apr 21, 2007)

jasvll said:


> This doesn't make particularly good sense, but I'll respond by pointing out that Henderson is far from the only one that uses this technique. I can't remember how many times I've heard Rogan or Rutten point out that covering the nose and mouth won't lead to a submission, but is designed to disrupt the opponent's breathing, distracting them from the larger offense.
> 
> McCarthy didn't come up with the proposed amendments; he was consulted. You're making up a specific connection between McCarthy and this particular rule as an appeal to perceived authority, in place of a meaningful reasoning. I could just as easily say that McCarthy fought rule 25 tooth and nail because he doesn't want mma to turn into thumbwrestling.
> 
> ...


Wow. Completely owned.


----------



## Davisty69 (May 24, 2007)

valrond said:


> The fact that the only pro that does it regularly in the UFC is Dan Henderson.
> 
> Anyway, I guess all of you think you know more of MMA than John McCarthy, one of he dudes that proposed smothering to be banned.
> 
> ...


Where is the quote of Big John calling cheap? 

Are you sure it wasn't banned because it makes MMA look bad?


----------



## BloodJunkie (Jun 18, 2007)

valrond said:


> Well, the proposed ammendment to the unified MMA rules say that you can't do that. Why? Because it requires no skill. I don't know when the new rules will apply, but it may be the last fight in which Hendo can do that.
> 
> http://www.mmaonline.com/headlines/abc-proposed-changes-to-unified-rules-of-mma/
> 
> ...


I'm not making an argument for or against smothering the mouth but to say it takes no skill is not accurate. Without any skill how do explain an opponent being on thier back with no way to pull the hand from the mouth? It takes skill to get yourself in the position to smother an opponent.


----------



## A1yola06 (Jan 5, 2007)

JMONEY said:


> I liked how Palhares looked at Herb Dean and pointed at Dan's hand while he was doing it.


ya, then the ref said "he's allowed to do that". I don't like the rule... but its allowed so more power to him. I swear it makes me uncomfortable just watching it happen, makes me wanna take deep breaths haha


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

JMONEY said:


> I liked how Palhares looked at Herb Dean and pointed at Dan's hand while he was doing it.


Had Palhares did his homework on Hendo, he'd have known that Dan uses smothers and that they're legal.

That's Rousimars fault.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

J.P. said:


> Had Palhares did his homework on Hendo, he'd have known that Dan uses smothers and that they're legal.
> 
> That's Rousimars fault.


Yep. Nothing dirty about it.

Not exciting, that's true, but not dirty at all.


----------



## wukkadb (Jan 1, 2007)

This is a funny thread b/c today I was watching Pride 17 and in Dan Henderson's pre-fight interview he says his pet peeves are people who disrespect the rules and then he calls out Gilbert Yvel and Wanderlei Silva about it lol. Just thought I would share


----------



## Fieos (Mar 26, 2007)

valrond said:


> Grabbing the fence wasn't dangerous, but it was banned.


Actually this is very dangerous. Great way to lose fingers.


----------



## FedorsFan (Jul 19, 2008)

It's not illegal and I personally don't see anything bad about it. It's not like it's a groin shot or anything. But then again, it's not the most exciting thing to watch.


----------



## jcal (Oct 15, 2006)

I hate it when people do that, it used to happen to me grappling all the time, usually from someone who sucked. I think since they allow that they might as well allow you to bend fingers too, why not its a good counter. Besides that as much as I like Hendo he hasnt looked very good for a long time,he was extremely winded during the fight and still winded during the post fight interview, age is catching up to him


----------



## valrond (Nov 26, 2007)

jcal said:


> I hate it when people do that, it used to happen to me grappling all the time, usually from someone who sucked. I think since they allow that they might as well allow you to bend fingers too, why not its a good counter. Besides that as much as I like Hendo he hasnt looked very good for a long time,he was extremely winded during the fight and still winded during the post fight interview, age is catching up to him


They should allow then to bite the hand, that's what a normal person would do in a real fight, but nooo, I can smother your mouth but you can't defend yourself using your teeth.


----------



## TraMaI (Dec 10, 2007)

SlammedSL1 said:


> I agree, it's ******* stupid. If you are laying in someone's guard and more interested in covering their mouth than passing your opponents guard, something is wrong there...
> 
> That's a boring lay and pray shit


I think its ******* stupid that someone as good at BJJ as pahlares didnt capitalize on it tbh. Theres a few things he couldve done from the position hat may not have won him the fight but wouldve made henderson pretty uncomfortable


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

As Rogan would say, "Tough balls. Figure out a way to get up."


----------



## TheGamefather (Sep 8, 2008)

I think its fine, and I think MMA looses heat everytime a rule is added.



valrond said:


> They should allow then to bite the hand, that's what a normal person would do in a real fight, but nooo, I can smother your mouth but you can't defend yourself using your teeth.


Agree %100

solving the problem by loosening the rules is a win win


----------



## TheGamefather (Sep 8, 2008)

edit: dang, dbl post... habit


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

valrond said:


> They should allow then to bite the hand, that's what a normal person would do in a real fight, but nooo, I can smother your mouth but you can't defend yourself using your teeth.


Thats silly - in a real fight if your in a dominant enough position that you can put your hand on the other guys mouth and smother them, then you could just as easily poke their eyes out or any other similar nasty tactics you like. There are many barred holds along those lines, such as chin to the eye etc.

Yes anyone can gouge at any time in a street fight, but it's a lot easier to do from a position of controlling the other guy, having him pretty much at your mercy.

Hell if your talking about biting, the guy on top can bite a lot easier than the guy on the bottom, the guy on top can control where the other guys head is.


It all reminds me of at school, where we used to say kicking or grabbing ears/hair was cheap.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

What does what a "normal person would do in a real fight" have to do with anything? Hell, I'd say the smartest thing a normal person could do in a fight is kick their opponent in the nuts then poke em in the eyes. But this isn't a real fight, and these aren't normal people. 

But anyone who's grappled can understand why hand over mouth techniques should be legal. If you can't keep someone from putting their hand over your mouth and it is actually harming your perfomance in the fight, then you don't belong in a cage where you can be choked or have your joints ripped apart. Defending some dude putting his hand over your mouth is about as basic as it gets.


----------



## joey__stalin (Dec 31, 2006)

Wow, a stupid thread sure seems to drawn out the idiots... Coincidence?


----------



## swellin (Dec 30, 2007)

If you can smother a guy why stop there, they should just allow you to strangle the ******* guy. Its damn near the same thing. Both are ******* stupid ways to try and win a fight, just because its MMA does not mean that you should do anything you can to win, there is still some honor and respect in fighting and smothering is not honorable in anyway. Its in the same league with kicking a guy in the nuts and poking someone in the eye. It is DIRTY. that's my take on it anyway just because its legal does not mean its ok.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

swellin said:


> If you can smother a guy why stop there, they should just allow you to strangle the ******* guy. Its damn near the same thing. Both are ******* stupid ways to try and win a fight, just because its MMA does not mean that you should do anything you can to win, there is still some honor and respect in fighting and smothering is not honorable in anyway. Its in the same league with kicking a guy in the nuts and poking someone in the eye. It is DIRTY. that's my take on it anyway just because its legal does not mean its ok.


The only reason throat strikes (including strangle crushes like you mean) are illegal is because you can collapse the windpipe and kill your opponent pretty easily that way. It's to prevent serious injury and death, not because it's dirty or dishonorable. If covering was anywhere near that dangerous it would already be illegal in the UFC.


----------



## No_Mercy (Oct 17, 2006)

pauly_j said:


> So is it cheap when you attack an oponents body to take the wind out of them? God this thread is retarded. Most fighters do it, or jam their forarm into their oponents face. The idea is to make them as uncomfortable as possible.


It's agreed. Dan is a solid fighter, but sometimes fighters do what they gotta do to win. Would I do it...no. If you've ever taken BJJ man they do some scandalous shit in there exactly what he said, "The idea is to make them as uncomfortable as possible." On a funny anecdote I met this British fighter who said he used to forego showering and shaving for days before a fight to make it as uncomfortable as possible for his opponent. I'm like...that's a funny idea. 

Supposed cheap moves
- foot stomps
- placing knee to the body to pin the person down
- forearm to the face, head, or neck to pin and cut the circulation (Did you see Koscheck doing this while Chris was bleeding profusely?)
- BTW: Maurice Smith was one of the first fighters to implement that tactic of disrupting the breathing
- You should have watched the Keith Hackney vs Joe Son fight back in the days...lolz!


----------

