I see in another thread most guys on here are talking about Greco-Roman wrestling for MMA in particular. Why this type of wrestling over Freestyle wrestling? Is it not double and single legs that still to this day get most fights to the ground?
Both are effective, but I think Greco/Roman has more options, mainly neutralise a striker in the clinch then takedown, or strike Randy/Hendo style, and tire the other guy out 1st Of course a good double/single works fine too, Chael has built a career on it. But G/C is more preferable as you have a base in the stand up and getting the takedowns with a strong clinch.
Not alot if you ask me. Greco's emphasis is upper body. Freestyle is alot more versatile. Guys with the Greco background have a much better clinch game though. Ala Couture and Hendo. That said Hendo and Couture are a thing of the past. Haven't seen anyone since that employs Greco as well as those two.
I don't know that Greco-Roman wrestlers have any more techniques at their disposal than Freestyle wrestlers, in fact they probably have fewer, but Greco wrestlers are forced to concentrate above the waste. The clinch is everything in Greco-Roman, so it is no wonder that the practitioners become masters of it. The clinch is a position that people often wind up in while fighting. That's just my guess.
I think that was me - I was referring more to a comparison with Judo/Sambo as Greco-Roman wrestling perfects upper body throws. It can be a good basis for dirty boxing and clinch grappling up against the cage (a la Couture). In reality most wrestlers coming into the UFC are folkstyle which is a mixture of freestyle/greco-roman so have experienced in both leg takedowns and upper body throws.
