# Modified MMA



## DRANKIN (Nov 12, 2010)

I'm new to the forums, so hello! I've practiced American Kenpo on and off for 25yrs but I love watching MMA. I love to see real fighting with a lot of heart. The sport of MMA captures that the best IMO.

One thing that tends to bum me out about MMA is the lack of standup fighting. I think MMA as an entertainment industry would draw more of a crowd if there were a "division" of MMA, for lack of a better word at the moment, that limited the ground action to say 10-20 seconds. After a takedown either you pulled off a sub/ko/gnp or whatever the fighters intent was and the ref put them back on their feet. We all want to see good standup technique with some of the traditional "Mixed Marial Art" the name implies that is more consistent with fighting on your feet.

My only concern would be that it would simply become a modified form of kick-boxing. But more standup fighting with take-downs and grappling would put more "mixed" in the mixed martial arts. IMO


----------



## James Kovacich (Nov 12, 2010)

Mixed martial art implies any or all arts (within the rules excluding certain types of techniques), not any single style or method whether it be standup or ground. With that said, no fighter can even guarantee landing a strike in 10-20 seconds (which is much easier than a sub). How could we expect a fighter to pull off a sub in that time? 

What your suggesting has been done before (with a longer mat-time but I can't remember off hand how long) but it isn't "truely" MMA because it favors the standup fighter.


----------



## DRANKIN (Nov 12, 2010)

James Kovacich said:


> ...but it isn't "truely" MMA because it favors the standup fighter.


 
Was MMA intended to favor a ground fighter? Or has it simply evolved to favor ground fighting?

I don't know the history of MMA specifically but I remember the original octogon fights in the 90s. I thought that is where the sport was born.

MMA is a specific sport dictated by the rules. The rules can be modified and still be MMA (I wasn't suggesting changing MMA as it is but a modified division of the sport). It could favor fighters locking arms with their backs together if the rules were changed to such and it would still be MMA, Mixed Martial Arts. I wasn't suggesting any "styles" just different rules. It would have to be promoted by UFC or another popular organization with means to be pulled off, of course. IMO it would be add to the fan base.


----------



## James Kovacich (Nov 12, 2010)

DRANKIN said:


> Was MMA intended to favor a ground fighter? Or has it simply evolved to favor ground fighting?
> 
> I don't know the history of MMA specifically but I remember the original octogon fights in the 90s. I thought that is where the sport was born.
> 
> MMA is a specific sport dictated by the rules. The rules can be modified and still be MMA (I wasn't suggesting changing MMA as it is but a modified division of the sport). It could favor fighters locking arms with their backs together if the rules were changed to such and it would still be MMA, Mixed Martial Arts. I wasn't suggesting any "styles" just different rules. It would have to be promoted by UFC or another popular organization with means to be pulled off, of course. IMO it would be add to the fan base.


 
MMA dosn't favor any fighters. Skilled fighters are well rounded "enough" in all ranges. If they favor standup, they still need to be skilled enough at the ground game to be able to stand "if they choose to" and vice versa for the groundfighters. MMA fighters today really are not solely one or the other, although they may be better at one than the other. 

What rules do you feel make MMA favorable to standup fighters?


----------



## DRANKIN (Nov 12, 2010)

James Kovacich said:


> MMA dosn't favor any fighters. Skilled fighters are well rounded "enough" in all ranges. If they favor standup, they still need to be skilled enough at the ground game to be able to stand "if they choose to" and vice versa for the groundfighters. MMA fighters today really are not solely one or the other, although they may be better at one than the other.
> 
> What rules do you feel make MMA favorable to standup fighters?


 
I don't think the rules favor standup fighters. Because you eventually end up on the ground, typically. So the focus is on ground work (which is awesome). I was simply suggesting a modified version of MMA as it is now to allow more focus on the standup game while still allowing limited ground time. In this way you HAVE to be good at standup fighting AND groundwork. As it is now, you don't have to be so good at standup, you ABSOLUTELY have to be good at takedowns and grappling. I'd be interested in seeing more standup and I believe there would be an even larger market. Because most people cannot relate to the ground fighting aspect. As important as it is to finishing fights, a lot of people can't appreciate the grappling as much as the standup action.


----------



## KenpoVzla (Nov 13, 2010)

DRANKIN said:


> As important as it is to finishing fights, a lot of people can't appreciate the grappling as much as the standup action.



While true.....I think MMA draws it's huge crowds from the "All out" image that they give. That's how UFC got started, right? And still to this day, with more and more rules being added, the 2 fighters "All out" in a closed cage is what fans are there after.

It's a trade-off I think....easier to follow fights, but more restricted. I think it could work as long as it's not TOO restricted, I mean, take a look at one of UFC's biggest....Chuck Liddell....primarily a striker.


----------



## MJS (Nov 13, 2010)

DRANKIN said:


> I'm new to the forums, so hello! I've practiced American Kenpo on and off for 25yrs but I love watching MMA. I love to see real fighting with a lot of heart. The sport of MMA captures that the best IMO.
> 
> One thing that tends to bum me out about MMA is the lack of standup fighting. I think MMA as an entertainment industry would draw more of a crowd if there were a "division" of MMA, for lack of a better word at the moment, that limited the ground action to say 10-20 seconds. After a takedown either you pulled off a sub/ko/gnp or whatever the fighters intent was and the ref put them back on their feet. We all want to see good standup technique with some of the traditional "Mixed Marial Art" the name implies that is more consistent with fighting on your feet.
> 
> My only concern would be that it would simply become a modified form of kick-boxing. But more standup fighting with take-downs and grappling would put more "mixed" in the mixed martial arts. IMO


 
The rules of MMA, as we see them today, are, IMO, much different than what we saw in the early 90's.  Back then, you could roll around for an unlimited amount of time, whereas today, there is a longer list of rules, we see rounds, such as in boxing, fighter safety is much more of a conern, which is a good thing, and also it seems that if you're inactive for an extended period of time on the ground, you will be stood back up.  

IMO, any more changes than we already have, would take away from what the UFC is all about.


----------



## DRANKIN (Nov 13, 2010)

MJS said:


> The rules of MMA, as we see them today, are, IMO, much different than what we saw in the early 90's. Back then, you could roll around for an unlimited amount of time, whereas today, there is a longer list of rules, we see rounds, such as in boxing, fighter safety is much more of a conern, which is a good thing, and also it seems that if you're inactive for an extended period of time on the ground, you will be stood back up.
> 
> IMO, any more changes than we already have, would take away from what the UFC is all about.


 

Mind you, I wasn't suggesting any more changes. Just a different division with modified rules. It would be cool to see both IMO. The world of UFC is big enough nowadays it could support a modified division for competition.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 14, 2010)

DRANKIN said:


> Mind you, I wasn't suggesting any more changes. Just a different division with modified rules. It would be cool to see both IMO. The world of UFC is big enough nowadays it could support a modified division for competition.


 
When you say the world of UFC do you mean just that promotion or the world of MMA? Not all promotions follow the rules the UFC uses, there's a fair bit of difference between the different sets of rules. Only America has a body that can license MMA and set rules, the rest of the world sets it's own rules. There's a fair bit of stand up fighting going on, in fact some say the opposite to you that there's too much and not enough groundwork so perhaps the rules are set right!
 MMAers appreciate the ground fighters as do the knowledgable fans, to pander to those who don't see the point of ground fighting and change the rules is to ruin MMA. If people want to watch standup they can go to MT, boxing etc. The whole point of MMA is that it *is* mixed. The fighters have the chioce of what they want to do, the idea that it alwasy goes to ground isn't true, I've seen fights that stay up for the whole time, the fans weren't too happy about it. I've seen fights where it was on the ground all the time, the fans were'nt happy with that either, a good mixture of all the skills a fighter has is the ideal thing..that and good referees who understand the rules, thats the key to good fights. Oh and fans who understand the rules properly.


----------



## James Kovacich (Nov 14, 2010)

DRANKIN said:


> I don't think the rules favor standup fighters. Because you eventually end up on the ground, typically. So the focus is on ground work (which is awesome). I was simply suggesting a modified version of MMA as it is now to allow more focus on the standup game while still allowing limited ground time. In this way you HAVE to be good at standup fighting AND groundwork. As it is now, you don't have to be so good at standup, you ABSOLUTELY have to be good at takedowns and grappling. I'd be interested in seeing more standup and I believe there would be an even larger market. Because most people cannot relate to the ground fighting aspect. As important as it is to finishing fights, a lot of people can't appreciate the grappling as much as the standup action.


But what your asking to see would favor standup fighters. MMA, atleast the UFC already stands the fighters up if their is not enough action on the ground. So fighting on the ground has a requirement of "action" or risk being stood back up.

That is not the requirement for standup fighters. I have yet to see the fighters reposititioned to the ground (from their feet) for lack of action.


----------



## MJS (Nov 14, 2010)

DRANKIN said:


> Mind you, I wasn't suggesting any more changes. Just a different division with modified rules. It would be cool to see both IMO. The world of UFC is big enough nowadays it could support a modified division for competition.


 
While I see your point, IMO, I think that the current set up is working fine.  I also think that attempting a sub in 10-20sec is wishful thinking.  If I'm reading you right here, you're saying that once the fighters land on the ground, they have 10-20 sec to pull something off?  IMO, unless they land just right, they're going to have to work for position first, before they even think about sub. and that in itself could take 10-20. 

Like I said, compared to the early days, where you saw people laying on the ground, looking for something, while the clock ticks 30+mins, whereas today, if the fighters are just laying there, 'holding' each other, they're stood back up.


----------

