UnderGround Forums
 

UnderGround Forums >> EVAN DUNHAM on Sherk Decision, Rematch, Future


9/27/10 8:29 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Uncle Justice
73 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/30/03
Posts: 24362
 
http://www.fightersonlymagazine.co.uk/news/viewarticle.php?id=5338


Excerpts:

FO: So you’re not fixated on a rematch, but if the choice was yours, you’d prefer Sherk as an opponent?

Yeah, another fight with Sean.  I can finish him.  I would jump all over the opportunity for a rematch.  I have all the respect in the world for Sean.  He’s a hell of a nice guy , but after this fight I think I can beat him.   

But, with that being said, I don’t expect a rematch with him.  Maybe one day.  He wants to keep moving up and I respect that.  He did everything he needed to do in the fight, but I would definitely like to fight him again.




FO: You really turned things around after the first frame.  Why do you think you were more successful in the later rounds?

He’s a smart fighter.  He played it well.  I noticed in the 1st round he was coming forward, but if you watch, in the 1st round he was playing back and using my forward pressure along with his to come in twice as quick.  I definitely thought by the 3rd round I had that range figured out real well.   

All the damage he did was on the ground, he didn’t land much on the feet.




FULL ARTICLE HERE
9/27/10 8:34 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Uncle Justice
73 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 09/27/10 8:34 PM
Member Since: 1/30/03
Posts: 24363
  
9/27/10 8:36 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Skids182
14 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/17/10
Posts: 79
Good to see he is taking the loss so well. I would like to see a rematch, and I think he takes it. Phone Post
9/27/10 8:45 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Kostakio
610 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/16/05
Posts: 33841
He's my second favorite lightweight right now. Phone Post
9/27/10 8:46 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Uncle Justice
73 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/30/03
Posts: 24364
  Oh yeah, there's one important correction:

FO:  Do you feel you won the fight? 

After the fight I believed that I did enough to win the decision.  I was more the aggressor, especially in the 3rd.  I know I won the 3rd, he won the 1st, but the 2nd is up in the air.  I think I won, but that’s my opinion.  But I watched the fight again and I can see how they gave it Sherk. 

It makes you wonder, though:  When you get a takedown, how is it scored?  What is control?  Is it a takedown or sticking and moving?

FO:  It’s interesting you ask that question, because I have some strong feelings about the weight of a takedown in the unified rules counting for effective grappling (the same as threatening with submissions and using an active guard) and also for control.  It seems that escaping back to your feet or pulling guard should be weighed the same since they are all forcing your opponent to a different location of the fight.

I think that’s right.  If you take somebody down for 10 seconds or 5 seconds and they get back up, I think the person that was taken down was able to implement their game the same way the wrestler was to bring the fight to where they have the advantage.

_____________________________________________________

 

That's how it's supposed to read.  The article has me asking the question about how takedowns are scored, and my following statement as his answer.


  
9/27/10 8:51 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
fabes
193 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 38290
Future Champ IMO. Phone Post
9/27/10 9:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
I'mDownWithBrown
15 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/7/08
Posts: 1200
He came off very well in that interview. Thanks for posting.
9/27/10 9:12 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
cincibill
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/21/06
Posts: 749
Sherk is still a bad ass, and won.
9/27/10 9:43 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
AceAtGSU
15 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/7/09
Posts: 286
cincibill - Sherk is still a bad ass, and won.


Sherk is a badass, respectfully disagree on the won part though.
9/27/10 10:08 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
AceAtGSU
15 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/7/09
Posts: 287
CREamedbyCandy - The way he handles this loss reaks of badassery I can't wait to see him fight again he's a ferocious competitor who is supremely dynamic in a different way reminds me of a Diaz brother


Not as arrogant though, Nick or Nate would have been vocal in how they thought they won and how the whole thing was bullshit.
9/27/10 10:13 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Chris
393 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 14393
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, Partner
I agree, future champ.
9/27/10 10:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Caught_clean
15 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/11/09
Posts: 419
I bet on Dunham, and while I think he won, Sean fought his ass off and it wasn't the worst decision ever. I saw Evan have a really bad round 1, and remember wondering if he would crumble after that... but he came back way stronger in both rounds, pretty crazy.
9/28/10 12:37 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PirateJax
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/20/06
Posts: 1586
This is how you handle a tough loss with dignity and class. Someone please forward this to Jeremy "I won that fight that I lost" Stephens.
9/28/10 1:01 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Wasa-B
333 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 32342
I want to see Dunham fight very soon
9/28/10 9:59 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Uncle Justice
73 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/30/03
Posts: 24366
 Good to see the positive comments.  I can guarantee Evan is a friendly, humble, and down to earth guy in person, and shockingly talented.


9/28/10 10:10 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
jaydub
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/14/02
Posts: 14938
Nice Interview....Dunham will definitely be a contender for the belt within the next two years...I knew he'd be there once i seen him dismantle Griffin.


I'd love to see a rematch with Sherk.
9/28/10 12:25 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
john joe
401 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/21/06
Posts: 3037
Fighters Only Magazine, Website Editor
really good interview this, Dallas Winston is a future FO Hall of Famer
9/28/10 1:03 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
White347LX
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 46570
Wow, this Dunham guy appears to be one of the smarter fighters out there.
9/28/10 2:02 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
JDjitsu
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/8/09
Posts: 279
Lots of "so called" professionals could learn a lot from this kid. His maturity and humility is on another level. That's if he isn't being coached exactly what to say. He seems genuine to me. I think he's gonna be top 3 around the end of 2011. I'll be rooting for him for sure.

And that was a great interview for sure. FO Mag ftw.
9/28/10 2:08 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ausgepicht
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44920
Evan will be champ someday. Bet the house on it.

I do disagree though about the standing up should carry equal weight as a takedown. Getting up is not offensive. A takedown fulfills the criteria for Octagon Control, Effective Grappling, and Effective Aggressiveness. Getting up only fulfills the Effective grappling, and MAYBE the Octagon Control.

9/28/10 2:19 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Uncle Justice
73 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/30/03
Posts: 24368
ausgepicht - Evan will be champ someday. Bet the house on it.

 

I do disagree though about the standing up should carry equal weight as a takedown. Getting up is not offensive. A takedown fulfills the criteria for Octagon Control, Effective Grappling, and Effective Aggressiveness. Getting up only fulfills the Effective grappling, and MAYBE the Octagon Control.


 How is escaping back to the feet (when a fight is already on the ground) any less offensive than a takedown standing?  A takedown, pulling guard, and escaping back to your feet all do one thing:  force your opponent to a different phase of combat.

Yet, as you mention, a takedown counts MORE THAN an effective strike or threatening with submissions (they are only effective grappling/striking) where a takedown is effective grappling AND control AND aggression.

A takedown isn't offensive either unless it does damage.  WHAT HAPPENS after the takedown is offense; a takedown is nothing but a factor of control.

By the way, "getting up" IS NOT even included in the criteria.  Speculation ensues that it should be counted as "reversals", but the rules don't specify that, and the judges sure as hell don't score it that way.
9/28/10 2:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ausgepicht
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44923
UJ, I see your point, but a takedown DOES cause damage, and in some cases a TKO/KO. Getting back to standing does NOT cause damage, though if you strike or do a takedown of your own AFTERWARD, of course it will. This is why I see it as less offensive. I get what your saying about it being a positional change which is why I mentioned it falls under effective grappling, so in essence it is included in the criteria or it should be. Getting to standing is definitely underrated right now.

The criteria about clean strikes is important, but at best clean strikes can be combined with octagon control. 2 criteria. A takedown can have 3 criteria....clearly this is why judges are scoring the way they are. I agree that more powerful strikes, ones that clearly stun, or hurt should be of more value than a takedown that just brings a person to the mat.

We need a scoring system that is more specific. There should be a variance and credit appropriate for strikes. A jab clearly isn't as good as a left hook that gets someone fish dancing. Same with the takedowns. A guard flop or a single leg running the pipe are gentle compared to a German suplex or a back arch. Wrestling has a scoring system in place that could easily be adapted to MMA.

9/28/10 2:45 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Uncle Justice
73 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/30/03
Posts: 24369
 Ehhh, no.  A takedown does not cause damage.  The amount of takedowns that have caused TKO/KO's are 1%.  It CAN, and those takedowns are the exception to the rule and absolutely should be considered offensive.

The striking criteria already upholds the most effective (damaging) strikes over all others.  But it makes no sense to have a takedown given more strength than almost any other technique, and be the only inherently control-based move that's counted alongside with strict offense.

IMO, of course. 
9/28/10 2:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ausgepicht
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 09/28/10 2:53 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 44924
UJ, takedowns DO cause damage and it doesn't have to be a KO/TKO. They wear you down and hurt, excepting the ones I mentioned. Anyone who has wrestled or been on the receiving end of relentless takedowns knows this (not saying you don't, just saying in general). Any fight where there are a number of takedowns are always followed by commentary about how damaging and wearing it is.

I think we are in a phase where the takedown is overvalued, but not by much. I think with all the recent scrutiny, things will change a bit. Remember this isn't kickboxing, but MMA and striking shouldn't have more value by default.

9/28/10 6:54 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Uncle Justice
73 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 09/28/10 7:01 PM
Member Since: 1/30/03
Posts: 24373
ausgepicht - 1. UJ, takedowns DO cause damage and it doesn't have to be a KO/TKO. They wear you down and hurt, excepting the ones I mentioned. Anyone who has wrestled or been on the receiving end of relentless takedowns knows this (not saying you don't, just saying in general). Any fight where there are a number of takedowns are always followed by commentary about how damaging and wearing it is.

 

I think we are in a phase where the takedown is overvalued, but not by much. I think with all the recent scrutiny, things will change a bit. 2. Remember this isn't kickboxing, but MMA and striking shouldn't have more value by default.


 1. A lot of things in MMA "wear you down and hurt you", but they're not weighed evenly with submission attempts and damaging strikes.  You know?

2. I'm not saying striking should have more value by default, I'm saying takedowns shouldn't have more.  It's been made clear that effective means towards finishing the fight through striking or grappling is the highest rated credential.  A takedown does nothing but open up the door for the chance to start being superior.  It only shows superiority over another by control, not by inflicting offense.

Again, a takedown is forcing your opponent to engage in a different phase of combat than the one present:  a takedown says, "We're having a grappling match now"; meaning the grappling match should be judged (offense) and transitioning to the grappling match should be scored, but only moderately through control and not extremely with effective grappling (offense).

If you still disagree, tell me once the fight is on the ground why getting back to your feet isn't scored the same.  Just as the stand-up fighter is forced to grapple, the stand-up fighter forces the grappler to engage in free-phase combat.  You can say one initiated the action, which is correct; that's why it's also rewarded as effective aggression, and escaping is rewarded as effective defense IN ADDITION to both counting for control.  So there's a tiny little bit of advantage to the more aggressive move.

But I don't think that because humans walk upright that whoever goes down first gets more credit than getting back up.  It's just like pulling guard.  You're forcing your opponent into a different position/location/phase of combat.  You may have the advantage there, you may not... but it doesn't matter.  Whatever takes place following this change of location is what's scored the highest.

I'm seeing this weird graph, with the top offensive moves in bold:

"FREE PHASE / STAND-UP"   < --CONTROL ---> "CLINCH"  < -- CONTROL --->  "GRAPPLING / GROUND"

Any fight can be sliced up by standing, clinching, and grappling.  The fight transitions through these phases, usually by "control":  one fighter forcing another to one of these different locations.  What happens in these three phases with effective striking and grappling should be "Tier 1" scores, and all the elements of control (takedowns, pulling guard, escaping back to your feet; forcing the fight to go to a different area) should be "Tier 2" scores.  Whether the moves were offensive/aggressive in nature (takedowns, pulling guard) or reactive/defensive in nature (escaping back to your feet, sweep after takedown/reversal) would be "Tier 3" scores.

You can kinda assign any certain point-value to each, as long as they were proportioned correctly.

Shit.. I think I just finally found the missing link in the scoring system I've been trying to create.  Does all of that crap make sense though?  I forgot I was even responding to anything or anyone in particular.  ;) 

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.