data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2aea3/2aea37680be1f62f10585333f254314c8f9475cc" alt="Image"
Not sure if you watched Metamoris 3 live, but if you did, maybe you’re like me and found it bitter sweet. Sweet because the Royler Gracie vs Eddie Bravo match was fantastic. Even though it came to a draw, both men went for it and fought the whole time. There was action! The bitter, well, the rest of the event was. . . meh. Besides Gui Mendes and Samir Chantre, the other matches lacked that aggressive energy that can make BJJ so exciting and fun to watch. I know that points and shorter time limits can be annoying but having the threat of losing sparks a sense of urgency. You’ll move and expose yourself in ways that you wouldn’t if points and time weren’t involved. In many of the matches guys gave up takedowns, didn’t fight aggressively to get into dominant position and all in all seemed very relaxed. It was really disappointing to see some of the competitors just come out and “play”. Its like when you watch MMA and it looks like the two fighters are at a sparring session. To me most of the matches looked like casual rolls in the gym. A couple of times you would see the action spike towards the last few minutes but overall I was left with the impression that everyone was reluctant to open up. No one was upset with the draw, they seemed happy that they weren’t submitted.
The sad part was with all the talent and potential on the Metamoris 3 event it took two men in their 40s, one almost 50, to bring some aggressive action to the show. Hopefully they will adjust the rules or something to get these guys to open up, otherwise they’ll never be able to bring this kind of event to a wide audience.
In my personal opinion I think matches should be shortened rather than lengthened. Not many guys can go full speed for 20 minutes, so they wait till the time draws to a more comfortable range to open up. I know I’ve asked myself the question of, “Should I go hard right out of the gate and risk being gassed towards the end, or should I play it safe and get going towards the end of the match?” and that’s for a 10 minute match! I imagine that a 20 minute match against ultra high level competition would be a big mental obstacle.
While I like the theory of no winner unless its a submission and a longer match duration to work, all it seems to do is invite passivity because the winner-loser dynamic has been taken away. Even if you come up short, as long as you’re not submitted you don’t lose. It allows the competitors to relax in bad positions and focus on defense instead of feeling the urgency to escape which opens up opportunities for submissions. Again, this is my opinion.
I’d love to hear what other people thought about it. If you’re reading, tell me what you think of the whole thing.
Oh and I hope they get a different announcer next time.