# mma for self defense



## drummingman (Feb 28, 2007)

what do you all think of taking mma for self defense? it seems to cover just about all major things:striking,throwing,ground fighting.
the negatives that i see are that its rules based.are the any schools that teach from a more street self defense view?


----------



## MJS (Feb 28, 2007)

drummingman said:


> what do you all think of taking mma for self defense? it seems to cover just about all major things:striking,throwing,ground fighting.
> the negatives that i see are that its rules based.are the any schools that teach from a more street self defense view?


 
You realize though, and this is not anything against you or the post in general, but the usual response to that last paragraph is that MMA people can eye gouge and groin kick just as easy as the next person.

Then again, we can look at it from another viewpoint.  The majority of MMA based schools in my area are competition oriented.  That being said, their main focus is geared towards the ring and doing things within the ruleset.  While it does not take much as I said to do a 'dirty' technique, is that something thats going to be thought of at all?  What I mean is, if someone is programmed to just do certain things, are they subconsciously just going to stick to those things, whereas someone who trains in a TMA, a groin shot or something of that nature may be more second nature.

Overall, I won't discredit the fact that their standup, clinch and ground work is very good.

Mike


----------



## Infinite (Feb 28, 2007)

My school is a full contact mma school that focuses on SD.

We just do full contact competitions to make us think while we fight. You have to remember rules while getting pounded on makes it easier to look for other things when a fight not rule required breaks out.

--Infy


----------



## Andrew Green (Feb 28, 2007)

Strategy changes, but the basic skills remain more or less the same .  But to be perfectly honest, self-defence is generally a non-issue in MMA clubs.  You'll probably cover fouls and how to watch for them, but "self-defence"?  Not usually, that's not really a martial arts topic IMO, most of it is not physical at all.


----------



## matt.m (Feb 28, 2007)

Infy and Andy are spot on.  It is all on the strategy.  If you use techniques just to block then that is SD.  The whole point is to just train in something.  If you like it then cool beans, that is the good stuff.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Feb 28, 2007)

mma has many sd strengths:  more contact practice, wide range of techniques for example.

like all combat sports, it also builds habits that are dangerous in an sd situation.  the most common is the reflex to go to the ground.  this works pretty well one-on-one with a mat under you.  on concrete with broken beer bottles and two attackers, it will get you hurt bad and quick.

one other strength of mma is your level of conditioning.  mma produces folks who are stronger, faster and better of wind than many other martial arts.  that's not nothing.


----------



## drummingman (Mar 1, 2007)

so why do a lot of mma people bash tma styles? form what i have read the mma folks think that they are way better equipped for real self defense then tma people.why is this?


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 1, 2007)

In general, from my many experiences, real fights, or self defense situations are covered with MMA training. The majority of the fights are fistfights, clinching, and takedowns, maybe a sloppy kick as well. Once down, common headlocks, chokes, and grabbing. Very rarely have I seen bites, or open hand strikes. Usually, it's just a blitz, grab and punches to submission. or muscling, with all of that and a slam to the ground, followed by more pounding, from a mount position, with the weaker hand/arm pinning you down. There's also sloppy boxing matches, with clinch fighting (bars/clubs) by the "tough guys". Considering all of this MMA: Boxing, counters the sloppy fist fighting very well, Muay Thai, covers the sloppy kick boxing and clinch fighting, and BJJ/wrestling, covers the sloppy wresting/grappling that goes on just fine. Plus MMA are better conditioned cardio wise, and mentally for the task,  than the average "tough guys"


----------



## Hand Sword (Mar 1, 2007)

drummingman said:


> so why do a lot of mma people bash tma styles? form what i have read the mma folks think that they are way better equipped for real self defense then tma people.why is this?


 
 Because the TMA have become so watered down now, (as a whole)  and unrealistic that upon comparison to what they practice, it's not even close. Plus the personality types that gravitate to MMA are "real" and much tougher than the "geeks" that do TMA. All of the fighters I've known were always arrogant. What are you going to do? Get into a fight? Try to Punch them out? With their training and profession, They got that covered!


----------



## sankaku-jime (Mar 1, 2007)

I train MMA but orientated towards self defense, its great, hard work but great.

The only thing it lacks is weapons defense, and there is only occasional multiple opponents work,.


----------



## zDom (Mar 1, 2007)

drummingman said:


> so why do a lot of mma people bash tma styles? form what i have read the mma folks think that they are way better equipped for real self defense then tma people.why is this?



I have a theory on this.

I think it is because with the current popularity, MMA is attracting most of the "tigers" out there &#8212; people who are willing (and able) to give and receive harder contact, who are willing to sweat hard to develop their fighting ability.

But tigers are a minority in the population. In order to really sustain a school/gym, you need more people than there are tigers in the population.

I believe that as MMA grows more popular, they will eventually want to bring the meeker folk into the fold. It helps pay the bills.

I think BJJ has a better chance at this because, as pointed out recently in another thread (sorry I can't remember offhand who it was), you can go "full out" in grappling much easier than in striking without causing injuries.

With the boxing/Muay Thai components, MMA will either have to compromise and back off the contact to attract non-tigers or will have to learn to deal with smaller classes.

So to address the quote above, with the high percentage of tigers in MMA, it is pretty easy for them to think they are better when they see nothing but meek people taking TMAs, for the most part.

As for bashing? I have a theory on THIS too.

The reason is immaturity; lack of character development.

MMA isn't teaching humility and character development &#8212; just fighting techniques.

Before I grew up and became a better person, I used to laugh up my sleeve at people who weren't as "talented" as me, who didn't have my ability.

Then I realized that they, too, deserve respect &#8212; even MORE respect than the talented martial artists.

Why? Because they have more to overcome. Learning and training the techniques is more difficult for them (as they have less talent, athletic ability, are in worse physical condition). 

And they are more courageous. It is easy to appear "brave" when you can impose your will on your training partners or opponents with impunity. But the TRULY brave students are those who, every day, face people who are throwing flurries of techniques at them &#8212; who may be terrified of my head high kicks, for example, and my relentless combinations &#8212; and yet KEEP SHOWING UP, pushing past their fear, to train amongst the "tigers."

I guess that is the source of my aggravation with the MMA "tigers" out there and the programs that train them without building character along with fighting ability.

It seems they assume, because they have never SEEN a tiger training TMA (we are few, but we DO exist!) that TMAs are all weak.

And they haven't learned respect for the lambs as the TMA-tigers have.


----------



## Odin (Mar 1, 2007)

drummingman said:


> so why do a lot of mma people bash tma styles? form what i have read the mma folks think that they are way better equipped for real self defense then tma people.why is this?


 

Do TMA'ers not do exactly the same thing???

I've lost count of how many times MMA'ers are passed off as not being serious martial artists and that MMA in itself is ''just a sport''....just look all around martialtalk!


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 1, 2007)

Style bashing has been around since before MMA got started in North America.  Everyone thinks there's is the best and since its the best, everyone should do it.


----------



## zDom (Mar 1, 2007)

Andrew Green said:


> Style bashing has been around since before MMA got started in North America.



True. But MMA and BJJ seem to be the most vocal style bashers out there, presently.

IMO, there is a big difference between thinking and saying your style is the best and bashing other styles.

You can do the first without the second (which is what I try to do). Or, to put it another way, you can say "I'm great" without saying "You suck!" or "I'm the ONLY one who's great!"

To wit, I bet nobody on MT knows what my least favorite martial art is  (Don't bother guessing; it is a personal preference and I won't offend by telling ya'll what it is and why).

Despite me arguing with MMA and BJJ, they aren't my least favorite. I have a lot of respect for both &#8212; I probably argue so often with them here on MT, however, because that seems to be the only groups bashing, directly or indirectly, what _I_ am doing. And most often bashing my arts based on misconceptions, IMO, so my aim is to try to clear those up, or at least voice the other side so newbies can make their own decision after having heard both sides.



Andrew Green said:


> ... Everyone thinks there's is the best and since its the best, everyone should do it.



I don't think everybody should do hapkido, however. Some people just aren't cut out to be the elite


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Mar 1, 2007)

haven't we had this conversation?

i mean, often?


----------



## FearlessFreep (Mar 1, 2007)

bushidomartialarts said:


> haven't we had this conversation?
> 
> i mean, often?



Oh, not this week at least...


----------



## sankaku-jime (Mar 2, 2007)

zDom said:


> MMA isn't teaching humility and character development  just fighting techniques.



MMA is like any other discipline, you get out of it what you put in. As for teaching humility what can be more humbling than getting your butt kicked, 
IMO TMA's can produce over inflated ego's and pretty boy martial artists who look in good in the Dojo strutting around in their fancy pyjama's but in reality they can only apply their art on compliant training partners, of course not all TMA are like that.

As for teaching character development, I think its a myth that Eastern Martial Arts will instill better character than say Western Boxing or MMA.


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 2, 2007)

sankaku-jime said:


> As for teaching character development, I think its a myth that Eastern Martial Arts will instill better character than say Western Boxing or MMA.



Team sports have long been promoted on the basis of building character, since before eastern arts really made it to North America.

MMA definately has the potential, just like anything else.  But different people get different things out of different activities.  I get more out of beating each other up in good fun then I do from little zen stories thrown in about why I should do some kata 10,000 times without question.

Lots of respect is earned and given on the mat.  It takes trust to do this day in and day out with people, esspecially when you are first starting.  You also learn some very important truths, that anyone can be beat, everyone looses sometimes, and if you fight you will get hurt.  You also learn a lot about how far you can push yourself, how much you can take and keep coming.

Combat sports character development is what made Rocky such a great movie


----------



## zDom (Mar 2, 2007)

sankaku-jime said:


> IMO TMA's can produce over inflated ego's and pretty boy martial artists who look in good in the Dojo strutting around in their fancy pyjama's but in reality they can only apply their art on compliant training partners ...



Very true. I've seen this type come out of the very same dojang that has produced humble/effective martial artists.



sankaku-jime said:


> As for teaching character development, I think its a myth that Eastern Martial Arts will instill better character than say Western Boxing or MMA.



Again, you are right. It probably depends more on the instructor/coach than the system.


----------



## zDom (Mar 2, 2007)

Andrew Green said:


> Team sports have long been promoted on the basis of building character, since before eastern arts really made it to North America.
> 
> MMA definately has the potential, just like anything else.  But different people get different things out of different activities.  I get more out of beating each other up in good fun then I do from little zen stories thrown in about why I should do some kata 10,000 times without question.
> 
> ...



Good points.

I'm guess I'm just trying to figure out why seem to be getting more Tito Ortizes and Ken Shamrocks than Matt Hugheses and Georges St. Pierreses.

I really think a BIG part of it is the UFC's producers: I think they film footage and ask leading questions until they can edit together something that sounds like smack talking, going for a WWF vibe instead of a good-sportsmanship mutual respect thing.

The smack talking is fine with me in the WWF because it is all make-believe. But when you have athletes really putting it on the line, I think EVERYBODY deserves respect.


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 2, 2007)

Trash talking sells tickets. Pro sports have never been promoted to build character, that was a amateur sports card.  Not too long ago pro-sports in general where looked down on.  Athletes played for the money, not the love of the sport.  They where not loyal to there city or country.  And if they would take money to win, how could anyone know they also wouldn't take money too lose?


----------

