MMAMadness.com has the FightMetric breakdown from the Chuck Liddell vs Wanderlei Silva fight at UFC 79.
If you’ve never heard of or seen FightMetric before, they provide an in-depth quantitative analysis of fights much the same way that boxing’s compuscore and other systems work. The analysis they provide really is very interesting stuff, and you should check out some of their past fight analysis as well.
Overall, the FightMetric breakdown shows Liddell easily winning the fight 340-265 with Chuck winning the first and third rounds and Wanderlei controlling the second round.
An interesting point they have brought up is the fact that Wandi is strictly a power puncher:
[Wanderlei] Silva doesn’t jab.
That’s a bit of an overstatement, though not by much. Silva attempted 45 head jabs in a match that was spent almost entirely on the feet. By comparison, Liddell threw 82.
Historically, 45 jab attempts is not a small number, in fact, it’s a bit above avergae. But it’s Silva’s jab-to-power strike ratio that is absurd. Based on FightMetric’s database of statistics, the average fighter throws about 1.5 jabs for every power strike at distance, a ratio of three-to-two. So a normal fight would see a fighter throw about 40 head jabs compared to about 25 power strikes at a distance.
Silva threw more than 2.5 power strikes for every jab thrown, a five-to-two ratio. Those 45 head jabs are contrasted by 113 power strike attempts.
Baseball stats people talk about a “three true outcomes” hitter, that is, a batter who either walks, strikes out, or hits a homerun (the three outcomes that are independent of defense) most times at bat. Though he went to a decision this time, Silva could be the model for a “two true outcomes” striker. Winging all those power shots could knock someone out, but it could just as soon open you up for counter-striking.
Loading ...
tom b
Ben Cartlidge
Shawn Smith
JStein
StuDog
LaM
Angelina
interesting
kansas
ur boy needs to go back to chutebox.. and the the **** doesnt he throw jabs…. what the fukks up with that bro… is he more of a homerun swinger and not trying to pick people apart like that **** chuck does?
doc props again on the site … it looks so much better… when my associate and i lauch ours welld definetly have a link for yours as the premier mma website…
uhh.. ya, i thought the breakdown was basically a bunch of BS. Ive checked out a few breakdowns from fightmetric in the past and personally im not a fan of their system of logic. They gather a bunch of facts and use deductive reasoning to come to highly questionable conclusions.
This isnt boxing guys.. in mma a high Jab count could work against you just as easily as it works for you. Its about doing what works best and capitalizing on opportunities. The best tactic is to take what your opponent gives you, be patient and dont try to force anything.
Dumb stats like that dont prove anything man, jab % in mma, blah.. doesnt mean anything man. Why dont they count the ratio of headfakes to strikes? or the ratio of quick kicks to hard haymaker kicks? because its ridiculous to even bother counting and no conclusions can be made of the outcome.
Styles make fights, but fights also make styles, depending who your fighting. Look at GSP Hughes 3, perfect example, GSP is known to throw alot of jabs, but in this last fight his *** % was way down, because he was concentrating of his wrestling. He wasnt worried about Hughes striking and throwing 100 jabs would really just be a waste of time and energy. He benefited by NOT throwing alot of jabs and changing his game up more towards the wrestling aspect.
SPEAK TO THESE MUTHAFUCKAS YODA! there not a whole lot about judging in MMA that i really like, i dont give a gawd damn what anyone says its hard to say who wins in a fight that did really end. what if the fight went 7 more rounds would Chuck have still won? he was looking pretty tired. what if the fight had no rounds would Wand have made it past the 10 min. mark? Chuck was finding his range and tagging Wandi good and often. as far as im concerned between Chuck and Wanderlei there was no BETTER man that night. Chuck Liddell was the smarter athlete and won the match based on the rules set out for him and thats what really counts i guess but does that really make him the better fighter?
doc
i was reading on mania.com that ricco is selling his belt… how does that work.. i thought everytime u lose the belt u give it back hows that work…
No, each time a belt is given its actually a new belt. Matt Hughes probably has 7 belts. If you remember BJ Penn kept his belt even though he was out of the UFC and when he returned to the UFC he wore it into the arena in his fight with Hughes.
lol so he wasnt even champ and wore it out anyways
excuses excuses chuck won that fare and sqaure if they fought again it would be the same thing chuck is a better stand up fighter.
I heard that silva had to go to the hospital something about his eye his face was a wreck thats what you get when you stand with chuck.
dude what are you talking about? nobody is making excuses for anything. Chuck won the fight and as far i know no one is disputing that fact. the thing that people are arguing over is whether Wandi won round two or not, and if you are the MMA fan you claim to be and you actually watched the fight you would be able to admit that round two was at very least a very close round.