You are an advocate of fantasy based fighting. If you actually watch fights. If you actually train to fight, you will realize quickly that hitting someone with a shirt doesn't work. I was in jiujitsu class one day, and a guy was sitting on a guys back, with his belt wrapped around his neck, pulling with both hands trying to choke him out with his belt. It didn't work. What worked was a rear naked choke.
People get kicked all the time. Grapplers eat shots all the time. Most of the time though, they will get the clinch, secure a takedown, and dominate. I am primarily a striker. When I throw kicks, sometimes they get caught, and I get swept. If you think it's possible to totally stay on the outside indefinitely against a good grappler, then you're delusional, or simply ignorant of what fighting is actually like.
I agree that it's better to be a well rounded fighter. But grapplers with little to no striking consistently win fights against strikers with little to no grappling.
You might have a tough time winning arguments if you consistently refuse to provide a constructive. It could be seen as a forfeited round if it isn't in the rules to waive your opening statement.
Don't worry about it, it's all good
lol, these things happen. Guess we'll tie on conduct now
alrighty
would you be willing to delete this debate?
im sorry for the ff, we've been busy at work. Ill use r2 for my opening
Vote bump
vote bump
no problem
Yeah, would you like to run it back, and repost pur arguments as our round 1 arguments and go from there?
This is a debate I would be interested in
You are an advocate of fantasy based fighting. If you actually watch fights. If you actually train to fight, you will realize quickly that hitting someone with a shirt doesn't work. I was in jiujitsu class one day, and a guy was sitting on a guys back, with his belt wrapped around his neck, pulling with both hands trying to choke him out with his belt. It didn't work. What worked was a rear naked choke.
People get kicked all the time. Grapplers eat shots all the time. Most of the time though, they will get the clinch, secure a takedown, and dominate. I am primarily a striker. When I throw kicks, sometimes they get caught, and I get swept. If you think it's possible to totally stay on the outside indefinitely against a good grappler, then you're delusional, or simply ignorant of what fighting is actually like.
I agree that it's better to be a well rounded fighter. But grapplers with little to no striking consistently win fights against strikers with little to no grappling.
Agreed. No question grappling is the most important thing to be good at for fighting.
That's just a verbose rendition of the resolution.
It's more difficult to argue that it "is" true, because that would shoulder an impossible burden of proof
The best our knowledge of god's existence can say is that it's likely or unlikely, because certainty on this topic is impossible.
Baby don't hurt me
Yes, but where's the fun in that? I'm surprised this isn't going to get voted on.
Vote bump
Alright guys, let's get at least one vote
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Please consider voting
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Vote bump
Yeah, it's a debate I was excited to do. So thank you for the challenge
Vote bump
Vote bump
Riveting discussion
He's come a long way
I think this was one of my favorite debates
Yeah, you too
Could you define god in the description?
Interested ?
I'd like to do this debate with you sometime
This is a tough resolution for CON
You might have a tough time winning arguments if you consistently refuse to provide a constructive. It could be seen as a forfeited round if it isn't in the rules to waive your opening statement.