|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 3, 2013 21:17:50 GMT -5
I decided to sit down and prepare an actual plan for one of my fights this coming week. I might do both -- but thought it might be helpful for you guys if I walk through the process that I'm doing. The fight I'll work through here is "Sardonic Restart Region drone 1" vs "Lee Baskins" from the Southside City Pro Box & ABC.
Naturally, I'm going to be honest with you guys in everything from my build to my fight plan -- I'm sure it goes without saying, but the reason this board is password protected is for privacy. Please keep it that way!
Here is the build that I used for Sardonic Restart Region drone 1:
STR 15 KP 0
SPD 11 AGL 15
CHN 8 CON 13
HGT 7 BLD vhvy
An agile slugger, speed is a little higher than I normally do. Ideally, I'll pack on STR, AGL, and SPD -- and have CHN of no more than 10 by 28(28). CON will likely go to 16-17 range. The rest will go as high as it will allow, keeping in a similar spacing, though I will probably let SPD fall down a little, first.
Anyways, on to business:
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 3, 2013 21:24:44 GMT -5
Gotta scout my opponent.
But wait! He's 0(0) -- never had a fight?!
Here's what I do know. He is a Super-Welter, and he is 5'7" (the same height as me).
My first step? Into the Super-Welter retired fighters of Southside City pro Box & ABC, looking for anything even similar to my height. And what do I find?
Craig Bam. 6 wins, 2 by KO, 2 losses. 5'8" tall. Let's peruse Mr Bam.
The two KO's are interesting. With my fighter having 8 chin, I want to know if there is possible KP here.
The first KO fight, vs Steve Bridle, was... odd. It appears that Bridle's manager is drastically inexperienced, and his build lacked the conditioning to keep up with the ludicrous AGG/POW/DEF he was working with. Bridle tired himself out to a point of getting KO'd while Bam wasn't even trying to KO him.
The second KO fight, vs Mark of Io, was standard. Mark is a flasher. Bam did as any smart fighter would, and covered up at the start -- let Mark wear himself out -- and then won handily.
This leads me to believe there is no KP in Bam.
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 3, 2013 21:34:30 GMT -5
I did persue the rest of Bam's fights. I didn't take much from it other than Bam should have had a better record, and better fight plans. The first fight was a win by DQ. There were the two wins where the opponents wore themselves out. He took on Bridle's manager again, and he did the exact same thing to wear himself out again to get to four wins.
I can't fathom a build at 5'8" in Super Welter that is ideal for slapping.
So now, I have to go further (and more recent) into the manager's retireds. Does he have a history of KP anywhere at all? If he's never used it, I'm probably safe. Do most of his fight plans follow this same, strange, slappy pattern? Then I know I can open up and beat the everloving poop out of his fighter to win.
Long story short -- checking his title fights (people like to go back to what is successful for them), as well as fights in and around the Super-Welter range would lead me to believe that this gym has zero KP experience. This is good for me. I also noted that he excessively uses (ring) and (outside), even when they are not his best. I didn't see much of any (clinch) though there was some no-style. The gym seems to generally try to win on points, and doesn't seem to have much to his endurance game. I may be looking at really old fights, but, I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Now, I need to figure out what this build might be.
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 3, 2013 21:49:53 GMT -5
Just now I had the "God, this will be an embarrassing fight to lose" thought. All for the sake of learning -- bear in mind I haven't played in years too  Off to the fighter creation tool. I just noticed this nifty push-button device on the right, where you can select different fighter types. Perhaps our opponent is attempting to learn a new build through these suggestions? There does happen to be a 5'7" option... slugger. 15 0 11 12 10 14 This would be a great matchup for me. He would likely clinch, because that's what sluggers do. But clinch will give him an AGG penalty, and no benefit whatsoever. Our SPD is exactly the same... except I have 3 more AGL than he does (due to him having +2 CHN and +1 CON). This is the efficiency stuff I always talk about! Due to not overspending on the stuff that I don't NEED, I took what should be a very similar matchup, and made an advantage for myself. That is, if this is the build. What if he went very light? I'll still assume 9 chin and 14 con. It seems to be a common spot for managers to feel comfortable with those two stats at the start. This gives me a balanced fighter. Either 13 0 13 13 9 14 or more like my build 14 0 11 14 9 14 The first build is possible, as I find that a lot of managers like to go with a fully balanced fighter at some points. I did it for a while to try to improve my scouting and finding where my advantage was. The problem is, since everyone else except CPers and dancers likely run lower SPD -- that was generally the only consistent advantage. Would he run an agile slugger? Probably not one like mine, but possibly one like the above. |
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 3, 2013 22:04:15 GMT -5
So, time to start planning my fight. What do I know, to put into my plan?
-- I'm throwing caution to the wind on KP. He shows no use of it (save for an Amateur Rules and a Bare Knuckles fight), so I don't see it being likely.
-- For the most part, he wins on score unless the opponent screws up. I should be able to out-endurance him.
-- He is not likely to be a SPD or AGL based fighter, as noted from the builds above. It is possible that I have a bit of an agility advantage, but I think it best to go no style on this one. For one, it disguises my fighter for the next guy to fight him. Secondly, there doesn't appear to be _that_ huge of a difference between his fighter and my fighter... and at no point am I deficient. With my lower CON, I don't need the fatigue of (ring). At best, using ropes would give him -2 and me -1... and that is at best. Just not worth it. Everything else is likely similar... so no style just makes the most sense.
I'll continue this later, feel free to pipe in with questions and such if you like. It may be Sunday before I'm fully back here, but I'll be checking in from my phone in the meantime.
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 7, 2013 21:07:59 GMT -5
Ok back at it...
Southside gym has had one fight run so far, so I'm obligated to check it out and see if he is still using his strange slappy-fighting tactics. He is. Still no KP.
Time to get into the fight plan & simming.
The goal is to be efficient, and win the endurance game. I don't want to just win. I want it to hurt, and i want to win by KO.
#Start efficient
#Gauge by endurance what the opponent is willing to give.
-- If opponent is slapping, go HARD to the body
-- If opponent is playing the endurance game, play it. I should be able to win by likely having better allocated AP's.
#Keep an eye on score from about round 5 on, but endurance is really the focus.
-- If score is getting away and opponent is getting tired, consider a stun.
#Plan to rest if tired in round 8. Don't think this is needed, but can't be too safe.
#From Round 9 on, score is important.
-- If up on score and opponent is exhausted, go HARD to the body until round 12, then KO. Make it hurt.
-- If up on score and opponent is not exhausted, maintain efficiency and score lead.
-- If down on score and opponent is exhausted, go for the KO.
-- If down on score and opponent is not exhausted, aggressive power punch (7/7/6?)
#Do NOT slap. I am an endurance fighter, built to win the endurance game. If I try to slap, I am not playing to my fighter's strengths.
#Global conditionals:
-- Towel is not needed for this fight. I pretty rarely use a towel at all, really.
-- if match is won, continue being efficient to the body until the 12th. This should hurt, and be a KO.
Now to write it:
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 7, 2013 21:45:48 GMT -5
Step one, crack open the practice sim. Input my stats, and input my suspected opponent's stats. I went with the build most similar to mine. Why? In my opinion, it would be the biggest 'threat' to my build. They all have their similarities, but that build minimizes my advantages and would likely be the most efficient opponent (because it has the most points allocated in STR and AGL, the main Damage-formula stats). This means that as long as I allow for a margin of error, this should be the build I can expect the most damage out of. The start is easy: #Start efficient 1) 4B/8/8 Fair enough. Next: #Gauge by endurance what the opponent is willing to give. Here, I use a sneaky little trick to find what the opponent is doing. I know that I'll be doing 4B/8/8. So I create a little percentage table so when I sim, I can see what happens. if endurance_percent > 88 then 8/8/4 if endurance_percent > 90 then 9/1/11 if endurance_percent > 92 then 9/2/9 if endurance_percent > 94 then 9/4/7 if endurance_percent > 96 then 9/6/5 if endurance_percent > 98 then 9/8/3 Note the first two numbers... 8/ 8/4 = 88% 90 is 91 because you can't have 0 aggression, and ten can get confusing. So I sim 4B/8/8 vs 4B/8/8, and low and behold -- line two fires off and tells me what percent of damage would happen if the opponent also did 4B/8/8. I believe it was 92 or so, but I fudged it down a bit to 90 to account for scouting error. So, if the opponent is going harder than 4B/8/8 at me -- I'll back off a touch, but keep pressure on. 2) 4B/7/9 The rest falls in line logically: if endurance_percent >= 90 then 4B/8/8 if endurance_percent >= 94 then 5B/9/6 if endurance_percent >= 98 then 5B/10/5 Similar deal with round 3: 3) 4B/7/9 if endurance_percent >= 88 then 4B/8/8 if endurance_percent >= 92 then 4B/9/7 if endurance_percent >= 96 then 5B/10/5 4)4B/7/9 if endurance_percent >= 80 then 4B/8/8 if endurance_percent >= 85 then 4B/9/7 if endurance_percent >= 90 then 5B/10/5 if endurance_percent >= 93 then 5B/10/5 (allout) Gotta sneak that allout line in just because I love it so much  Now things get more complicated, as score starts to come into play... |
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 9, 2013 17:28:41 GMT -5
And then... I had an out of town meeting, followed by beer, followed by golf (with beer) followed by beer, followed by dinner (with beer), followed by beer, followed by the strip club (with beer) I think you can see where I'm going with this. Luckily, at some point in the day I realized that I didn't know when fights are running and that there was a good chance I wouldn't get to finish the plan. So I threw in a: If opponent = exhausted then 5h/10/5 It triggered, and I won handily Gained a point of AGL, will train STR next. |
|
|
|
Post by Termit on May 10, 2013 8:32:43 GMT -5
It's a really good stuff which shows how to think/prepare/what are the steps when you plan a fight you want to win
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on May 14, 2013 18:50:33 GMT -5
I was able to reach South side through the forums. Perhaps we can have the unique perspective from each side on what happened in this fight, as I just approved his membership on the boards |
|
|
|
Post by unclestars on Nov 25, 2014 21:35:22 GMT -5
Now this is interesting stuff. Jim, i def need to ask you questions on this, because i think i see you logic for round one, but you have lines like 9/1/11 and 9/2/9, but in your #plan, you said that you didn't want to slap, because you are an endurance fighter. I'm confused
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSardonic on Nov 26, 2014 13:34:55 GMT -5
Now this is interesting stuff. Jim, i def need to ask you questions on this, because i think i see you logic for round one, but you have lines like 9/1/11 and 9/2/9, but in your #plan, you said that you didn't want to slap, because you are an endurance fighter. I'm confused That wasn't my plan. That was merely finding how much damage I should expect after each round depending on what the opponent's does. So if I sim a round, then my fighter does 9/2/9 the next round, I'll know I'm now at 92% endurance damage. It just helps me gauge where I would expect my endurance percent to be depending on what the opponent does. |
|
|
|
Post by unclestars on Nov 26, 2014 17:07:25 GMT -5
I wonder how the hell did you come up with the numbers equaling the percentage. THAT IS FUCKING BRILLIANT!! I reread it again, and this would be good for scouting an opponent..
FUCKING BRILLIANT!!!
|
|
