# Has MMA popularity helped or hurt the MA Community?



## kidswarrior (Apr 2, 2007)

One of the central debates I see recurring among the MA community today is whether the MMA has moved the MA forward, backward, or is irrelevant.

I wanted to see what you thought, and hopefully why some of you believe as you do.


----------



## Andrew Green (Apr 2, 2007)

Forward, it has brought some much needed realism back into the martial arts.  And while all systems do not fit the MMA mold, a lot of what is learnt from the ideas can still be useful knowledge. A lot of BS gets eliminated, and a emphasis on testing things in a non-static situation is a good thing.


----------



## Grenadier (Apr 2, 2007)

As a TMA practitioner for a couple of decades+, I am going to say that it has both helped and hurt things, but that the same thing could be said about any martial arts system.  

First the negative:

Some people get enamored with the pure fighting aspect of the martial arts, and ignore many wonderful things about the non-sparring parts of the systems.  Also, some people look at full contact matches, and grow impatient when I tell them that we don't do full contact here at the dojo.  

I'm more than happy to answer a student's question, as to why they need to learn the basics, learn the kata, etc.  It's only natural for the students to ask questions, and this is almost always encouraged.  

It's when I have to answer questions coming from a student who says "Why do I have to do these stupid kata?  This is ********, that it's taking away from my fighting time."  

I'm not going to pin the blame on the MMA, though, since this kind of individual would probably try to find a way to quit sooner, rather than later.  In this case, it's not really a matter of the MMA being bad, but rather, someone interpreting it badly.    

After all, it comes down to a personal decision of someone to do what they do.  The bottle of Jack Daniels, for example, did not cause Chappaqudick!  



Now on to the positive:

The popularity of MMA has brought in people to come visit the dojo to see what we're about, and from those people, I can actually enroll a fair number of them.  Thus, the popularity of MMA has helpd us overcome one of the more difficult tasks, and that's to get the people in the dojo in the first place.  


All in all?  The positives far, far, outweigh the negatives.  Thus, I would say that overall, it does help.


----------



## Shaderon (Apr 3, 2007)

I would say it's mostly helped.   I hang round my gym in uniform before and after classes, a few people have approached me asking about what we do, they generally say they were interested in MMA but aren't sure if that's what they want to do so are looking at everything available.  These are mostly young men (20's and 30's) but also women all ages between 20 and 60.  

The concept that the arts is mostly fighting does seem to be forward in the minds of the ones that mention MMA but the ones who just want fighting aren't going to stick around no matter how they found us. 

What it seems to have brought, is an increased awareness of the arts as a whole. Not that they now see if for the first time or anything, it's more like there's an increased mind to think "oh there's a person in a white uniform let's go have a chat".  If people suit TKD, Karate, Kung Foo, Aikido, Hapkido or anything else more, they are more likely to settle with that then MMA.    

Any positive publicity is good in my eyes.  If it brings one more student over, then it's positive publicity, if 1 student leaves... then I reckon they'll have dropped out anyway.


----------



## zDom (Apr 3, 2007)

It may have made self defense a bit harder overall as a greater number of people (in particuular, those who like fighting but prefer not to spend time in a dojo/dojang building character) are familiarized with some easy-to-use effective fighting techniques and may even get some practice in with informal backyard emulation.


----------



## Andrew Green (Apr 3, 2007)

Raising the bar is always a good thing


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Apr 3, 2007)

i think it's hurt the martial arts community some by stunting our growth as human beings.  the general attitude of most mma'ers (there are exceptions) is to develop the body almost exclusively.  there's no emphasis on mental and spiritual growth, contribution to society and community, martial arts as a tool for evolution.  that's a step back by 15-20 years for martial arts in america and i find it unfortunate and limiting.

at the same time, it has raised awareness in general.  and since there's no such thing as bad publicity, anything that gets folks to want to train is a good thing.

finally, it has made the tma schools nicer places to train.  that 23 year old hothead who kept hurting all his training partners and insulting the women. he's over at an mma school these days.  the rest of us get to train with grownups now.

so i think it's a wash overall.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Apr 3, 2007)

i should also add that the hothead i just mentioned is getting the training he wants in the first place.  everybody wins.


----------



## MJS (Apr 3, 2007)

IMHO, I think it has done both, but I lean towards saying its done more good.  As Andrew pointed out, it brought the aliveness and resistance aspect more into the spotlight.  It also brought the importance of grappling into the mix as well.

As far as the negatives go, I think that some people feel that it is the end all, be all of training and everything else is garbage.  

IMHO, keeping an open mind is the way to go.


----------



## terryl965 (Apr 3, 2007)

I believe both but with the majority of hurting, to many rules just like sport Karate or Olympic TKD. True it goes alot further but with that being said it has taken the Art out of Martial ARt and added the sport aspect just like there counter parts.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Apr 3, 2007)

Hard to say because there is no real "Martial Arts Community" as a single entity.  There are lots of smaller communities that loosely interact and inter-relate and the rise of MMA popularity has impacted differnt aspects of the martial arts world in different ways


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Apr 4, 2007)

FearlessFreep said:


> Hard to say because there is no real "Martial Arts Community" as a single entity.  There are lots of smaller communities that loosely interact and inter-relate and the rise of MMA popularity has impacted differnt aspects of the martial arts world in different ways



i'd disagree pretty strongly with that notion.  there are different cliques and cabals and allegiances, but martial artists as a whole are impacted by MMA.  just like they were when _The Karate Kid_ came out.  just like we were when ninjutsu became the next big fad in the 80s.

i think this forum is an example of how strong the community as a whole really is.  i mean, seriously.  if you're at a party where you don't know anybody who do you sit down and jaw with, the guy who's into macrame or the guy who's into martial arts -- regardless of which art he studies?


----------



## Bigshadow (Apr 4, 2007)

To be honest, regardless of what art the MMA players have trained in, I don't think it really reflects anything about the arts.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Apr 4, 2007)

No relevance to me


----------



## TraditionalTKD (Apr 4, 2007)

bushidomartialarts said:


> i'd disagree pretty strongly with that notion. there are different cliques and cabals and allegiances, but martial artists as a whole are impacted by MMA. just like they were when _The Karate Kid_ came out. just like we were when ninjutsu became the next big fad in the 80s.
> 
> i think this forum is an example of how strong the community as a whole really is. i mean, seriously. if you're at a party where you don't know anybody who do you sit down and jaw with, the guy who's into macrame or the guy who's into martial arts -- regardless of which art he studies?


 
Actually, I'd rather talk to the guy who does something I have not tried yet. You may learn something new. 99% of the time, the guy practicing martial arts is going to be a BS artist who I'd have no interest in. The exception would be a person I know with whom I can have a converstion and find out how everthing is going in life. Otherwise, I'd pass. Now, if he's a hockey fan we can have a long conversation.


----------



## IWishToLearn (Apr 5, 2007)

Well. There is no such thing as bad publicity. On the other hand - I hate MMA for giving far too many people the opinion that MMA is the solution to reality based fighting.


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Apr 5, 2007)

FearlessFreep said:


> Hard to say because there is no real "Martial Arts Community" as a single entity. There are lots of smaller communities that loosely interact and inter-relate and the rise of MMA popularity has impacted differnt aspects of the martial arts world in different ways


 
I'd have to agree with you. The martial arts scene here in Ireland is completely different from the one in America, therefore the way they've been affected is completely different. Here in Ireland, MMA has been an almost purely positive effect, the only negative being the ever present internet rivalries


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 5, 2007)

Shotgun Buddha said:


> I'd have to agree with you. The martial arts scene here in Ireland is completely different from the one in America, therefore the way they've been affected is completely different. Here in Ireland, MMA has been an almost purely positive effect, the only negative being the ever present internet rivalries


 
I have to agree with you! I think MMA in the States is also a different animal from what it is here. 
Shotgun I take it you've been on the Cagewarriors forum then lol?


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Apr 5, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> I have to agree with you! I think MMA in the States is also a different animal from what it is here.
> Shotgun I take it you've been on the Cagewarriors forum then lol?


 
Heh no not yet, but Ive seen enough on the Irish boards forum. It gets very very silly  
English scene seems pretty similar to the Irish one, but one of my "home-boys" had the dubious pleasure of informing me he found the American MMA scene to be most "wack".


----------



## Andrew Green (Apr 5, 2007)

Shotgun Buddha said:


> he found the American MMA scene to be
> most "wack".



It's not the American MMA scene, its the American scene in general :lol:


----------



## exile (Apr 5, 2007)

Shotgun Buddha said:


> Heh no not yet, but Ive seen enough on the Irish boards forum. It gets very very silly
> English scene seems pretty similar to the Irish one, but one of my "home-boys" had the dubious pleasure of informing me he found the American MMA scene to be most "wack".



I get the feelingand this has been remarked on in other threadsthat there's a kind of intense factional hostility in the US MA scene that isn't present in a lot of other Western countries (remember the infamous dojo/dojo punchups in the 1960s, which someone raised in one of the KMA threads a few weeks backthe whole narrative premise of _The Karate Kid_ and any number of _Walker, Texas Ranger_ episodes?). It occurred to me that maybe one reason for all that is that when Asian countries began exporting their MAs, via expatriate instructors trying to make a living and US servicemen returning home from posts in the Far East who had trained in local MAs, the rivalries between MA schools that were a feature of dojo/dojang culture were brought back, and reenacted in a sense on US soil. That may have injected into MA culture a kind of aggressive preoccupation with system purity, lineage, who betrayed who, and so on that isn't nearly as evident, from what Tez and others have suggested elsewhere, in the UK scene. The evolving MMA world would pick up on that... not that it doesn't happen elsewhere, but it seems to have the greatest intensity and toxicity hereabouts...


----------



## xTNVx NirVana (Apr 5, 2007)

Bigshadow said:


> To be honest, regardless of what art the MMA players have trained in, I don't think it really reflects anything about the arts.


Exactly. You don't focus on one style, like USSD (Kenpo) or most other schools. I know many people just do MA today to be physically fit these days too though, which is seen in every school, but much more in MMA schools. I go to USSD, and the low ranked belts only care about being fit, but when you get to a high rank starting usually at green belt, they are serious about MA, and they don't do it to be fit- there's too much to learn and it's too serious. In MMA, they don't focus on challenging techniques (From what I've heard), so you could be a 4th degree black belt and not give a crap about MA, you just want to be fit.


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Apr 5, 2007)

xTNVx NirVana said:


> In MMA, they don't focus on challenging techniques (From what I've heard), so you could be a 4th degree black belt and not give a crap about MA, you just want to be fit.


 
I'd love to know where you heard that. MMA tends to be gross-motor skill based than most MA, and the techniques are commonly drilled with resistant opponents and through free-sparring.
So while the techniques are themselves straightforward, the manner in which they are drilled is intensely challenging.
So no, its not just about the fitness


----------



## PictonMA (Apr 5, 2007)

Anything that gets people out of their normally sedentary ways and into a gym / dojo / dojang and actually training, becoming physically active (and hopefully learning something valuable) is a good thing.

Anything that elevates the standard or increases the expectation of what is being offered is a good thing.

TMA isn't for everyone, MMA isn't for everyone, the creation of options and an awareness that there are options is a good thing.

And for those of us that love TMA and MMA - it's a GREAT thing.

***

The only negative I see is the over-representation of the 'bad-boy' attitude in MMA, it gets old.


----------



## TraditionalTKD (Apr 5, 2007)

MMA has been very bad for martial arts in two aspects:

1. Your average MMA learns enough kicking, boxing, and grappling to get into a ring and fight. I've seen MMA fighters on TV, and for the most part, all they want to is box and grapple. The fighting is really not very good. In fact, I can only watch a typical Pride/K-1/UFC match for a few minutes before I get really bored. Aside from bad boxing and kicking, the ground fighting is essentially two guys waiting for each other to make a bad move.

2. Traditional MA is based on respect, manners, and listening to your Instructor. So what happens is people want to learn martial arts because they see MMA guys on TV or read about them. Then when they find out they actually to be patient, have respect for their teacher, and listen, they don't want to do it because the MMA guys don't do it. Why should you follow traditional MA etiquette and manners when these UFC guys get away with not doing it? Then, when you emphasize these points, they look at you like their offended they should even have to.


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Apr 5, 2007)

TraditionalTKD said:


> MMA has been very bad for martial arts in two aspects:
> 
> 2. Traditional MA is based on respect, manners, and listening to your Instructor. So what happens is people want to learn martial arts because they see MMA guys on TV or read about them. Then when they find out they actually to be patient, have respect for their teacher, and listen, they don't want to do it because the MMA guys don't do it. Why should you follow traditional MA etiquette and manners when these UFC guys get away with not doing it? Then, when you emphasize these points, they look at you like their offended they should even have to.


 
What on earth makes you think there's no etiquette in MMA? Numerous individuals still bow upon entering the ring, or bow to the opponent. Fighters with a Muay Thai background commonly perform the rituals of their art prior to fight.
Fighters from more Western styles still shake hands or touch gloves prior to a fight, and after the fight will often show a great deal of respect to each other.
So, there is still a strong element of etiquette, manners, and respect in MMA. It just may take a different form than the one you espouse yourself. Perhaps if you were to explain it in that manner, students would be more receptive to it?


----------



## Adept (Apr 5, 2007)

TraditionalTKD said:


> 1. Your average MMA learns enough kicking, boxing, and grappling to get into a ring and fight.



If you want to play *that* card, then it is equally fair to say that most traditional martial artists simply learn a few kata, and learn the basic techniques required to point-spar.

Obviously, both statements are generalisations. Many MMA fighters are very competent martial artists, as are many TMA fighters.



> 2. Traditional MA is based on respect, manners, and listening to your Instructor.



I disagree. Traditional martial arts are based on the study of violence on a personal level. Respect, manners and listening to your superiors are the hallmarks of a well raised person, and are completely seperate things to martial arts. A person can be an excellent martial artist and still be rude, arrogant and over-bearing, while at the same time being well mannered, polite and respectful does not make one a good martial artist.



> So what happens is people want to learn martial arts because they see MMA guys on TV or read about them. Then when they find out they actually to be patient, have respect for their teacher, and listen, they don't want to do it because the MMA guys don't do it. Why should you follow traditional MA etiquette and manners when these UFC guys get away with not doing it? Then, when you emphasize these points, they look at you like their offended they should even have to.



The problem here is they have enrolled in the wrong style of class. These people obviously would have been more at home in an actual MMA gym, or a boxing or wrestling gym than a TMA school.

The problem is not that these people are inferior, or that their views and opinions are wrong. Simply that they have gone looking in the wrong places to find what they want.

I think the MMA have been very good for the martial arts in general. Anything that causes people to question what they are doing is a good thing.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Apr 5, 2007)

Adept said:


> . Many MMA fighters are very competent martial artists, as are many TMA fighters.


 
That about covers it.


----------



## TraditionalTKD (Apr 5, 2007)

Some others raised a valid point why they dislike MMA as well:
As far as MMA fighters are concerned, their way is the ONLY way. To them, non MMA styles are absolutely useless and getting into the ring or cage is the only way to prove that your art is superior. This is fascism pure and simple, because to defend your art is to invite their wrath and contempt. I don't practice judo or karate, but I also respect your right to practice them and see their benefits. As far as MMA fighters are concerned, if you are not a MMA fighter, you're wasting your time.

And viewing fighting as what it's all about is very one dimensional. Real martial arts are much more than simply being able to fight. Because if fighting were all it's about, you wouldn't need the -Do arts just get into the ring or cage and go at it.


----------



## Adept (Apr 5, 2007)

TraditionalTKD said:


> Some others raised a valid point why they dislike MMA as well:
> As far as MMA fighters are concerned, their way is the ONLY way. To them, non MMA styles are absolutely useless and getting into the ring or cage is the only way to prove that your art is superior. This is fascism pure and simple, because to defend your art is to invite their wrath and contempt. I don't practice judo or karate, but I also respect your right to practice them and see their benefits. As far as MMA fighters are concerned, if you are not a MMA fighter, you're wasting your time.



Thats one of the reasons I like it.

I hasten to point out that over-bearing holier-than-thou MMA types are certainly no fun, and the resulting internet flame wars are largerly a waste of time.

However, the MMA stance of 'If you think it works, prove it' encourages everyone to ask themselves 'well, _will_ what I do actually work when I need it?'. Obviously this doesn't mean you have to get in the octagon or the ring and try it out, but it *does* mean you should always question the efficacy of your techniques and training methods, which is something I think a lot of TMA people had stopped doing, and many still aren't doing.



> And viewing fighting as what it's all about is very one dimensional. Real martial arts are much more than simply being able to fight. Because if fighting were all it's about, you wouldn't need the -Do arts just get into the ring or cage and go at it.



It's not just fighting. It's the study of violence. Manners and respect are nice, but they are something you should learn from your parents, not your MA instructor.


----------



## Andrew Green (Apr 5, 2007)

TraditionalTKD said:


> Some others raised a valid point why they dislike MMA as well:
> As far as MMA fighters are concerned, their way is the ONLY way. To them, non MMA styles are absolutely useless and getting into the ring or cage is the only way to prove that your art is superior. This is fascism pure and simple, because to defend your art is to invite their wrath and contempt. I don't practice judo or karate, but I also respect your right to practice them and see their benefits. As far as MMA fighters are concerned, if you are not a MMA fighter, you're wasting your time.
> 
> And viewing fighting as what it's all about is very one dimensional. Real martial arts are much more than simply being able to fight. Because if fighting were all it's about, you wouldn't need the -Do arts just get into the ring or cage and go at it.



And viewing MMA fighters as if that is what we are all about is equally one dimensional is it not?

You seem to be making some pretty sweeping generalizations about MMA, and while it may apply to some it certainely does not apply to all.  Either that or you should also accept that TKD is a shallow copy of karate, its practitioners do watered down versions of the Okinawan forms and there fighting is limited to bouncing around throwing kicks without any use of there arms or knowledge of grappling whatsoever. 

See, we MMA folks can apply stereotypes too


----------



## TraditionalTKD (Apr 5, 2007)

Actually, there is nothing in the WTF rules that states fighters cannot punch. However, the way the fights go makes it very difficult to do so most of them don't. There is a difference between not being allowed to punch (we are), and it being very difficult to based on how they fight. All things considered, there aren't that many rules. Certainly not that different from what others do. You can't kick to the groin, poke the eyes, bite, or sweep the legs in the name of safety. We're not trying to hurt each other.
And I've seen plenty of fighters get knocked out because they had their hands down.


----------



## Andrew Green (Apr 5, 2007)

I think you have completely missed the point of my post.  It had nothing to do with rules, but if you want to go that way MMA has far fewer, it had to do with making sweeping generalizations about an entire style and its practitioners.


----------



## kidswarrior (Apr 5, 2007)

Adept said:


> the MMA stance of 'If you think it works, prove it' encourages everyone to ask themselves 'well, _will_ what I do actually work when I need it?'. Obviously this doesn't mean you have to get in the octagon or the ring and try it out, but it *does* mean you should always question the efficacy of your techniques and training methods, which is something I think a lot of TMA people had stopped doing, and many still aren't doing.



To me, this is the value of MMA for the MA community in general. We TMA's must ask, *If *that guy in the ring did that on the street, how would/could I counter or avoid? And if there's nothing legitimate in my toolbox now (doesn't mean it's not in the art, but maybe I just don't have the tool), how can I remedy that?


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Apr 6, 2007)

TraditionalTKD said:


> Some others raised a valid point why they dislike MMA as well:
> As far as MMA fighters are concerned, their way is the ONLY way. To them, non MMA styles are absolutely useless and getting into the ring or cage is the only way to prove that your art is superior. This is fascism pure and simple, because to defend your art is to invite their wrath and contempt. I don't practice judo or karate, but I also respect your right to practice them and see their benefits. As far as MMA fighters are concerned, if you are not a MMA fighter, you're wasting your time.
> 
> And viewing fighting as what it's all about is very one dimensional. Real martial arts are much more than simply being able to fight. Because if fighting were all it's about, you wouldn't need the -Do arts just get into the ring or cage and go at it.


 
Wow. Godwins Law in action- _As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis__ or Hitler__ approaches one._

Ok first off, how is facism? If you are still in a position where you can voice a complaint about it safely, then its clearly not facism. Were it facism the MMA police would even now be bursting down the door, dragging you from your bed and silencing you forever for your heinous internet crimes.
Now I would like you to note, the clear lack of balaclava clad men raiding your home. This in itself should tell, no its not really facism, pure and simple.

Second, how many MMA practioners have you actually talked to? You're attemtping to paint a picture of a grim conspiracy of MMA fighters, who all train the exact same way, and dismiss anything different.
Thats not just innacurate, its actually completely misunderstanding MMA.
There is no one MMA style. It is a composite, made up other styles. That particular make up varies wildy depending on the club. In some clubs its a mixture of Muay Thai, Wrestling and Brazilian Jujitsu. In mine, its a mix of Kyokushin Karate, Boxing, Judo and Submission Grappling.
So to say MMA dismisses other styles is ludricous, when the very nature of MMA is to mix styles, and pressure test your styles against others.

Third, real martial arts? You just prior gave out about how MMA doesn't consider other stuff real, yet here you are doing the exact same thing, dismissing it as not a "real" martial art, because it doesn't follow your way of doing things. Tad hypocritical don't you think?
You learn discipline in MMA. You learn strength and control in MMA. You learn respect in MMA. You learn dedication in MMA.
But these are things you learn from training, not from talking about them.
And thats the key thing here, these are all qualities present in MMA, but we don't feel any need to make a big deal out of them the way others might, since they're so obvious a part of what we do.


----------



## Kyoshi71 (Apr 6, 2007)

I believe it has certainly hurt the Martial Arts Community.  Now, all martial arts used in self defence are being measured by how their practitioners perform in the octagon.  

I think that the octagon fighters are great and it takes a certain type of person to get in there.  However, comparing a ring-style competition to an actual self-defense scenario is apples to oranges.


----------



## Kyoshi71 (Apr 6, 2007)

Shotgun Buddha said:


> Wow. Godwins Law in action- _As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis__ or Hitler__ approaches one._
> 
> Ok first off, how is facism? If you are still in a position where you can voice a complaint about it safely, then its clearly not facism. Were it facism the MMA police would even now be bursting down the door, dragging you from your bed and silencing you forever for your heinous internet crimes.
> Now I would like you to note, the clear lack of balaclava clad men raiding your home. This in itself should tell, no its not really facism, pure and simple.
> ...


 
I agree with you.  Leave the Nazis and Fascism out of a friendly discussion.


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Apr 6, 2007)

Kyoshi71 said:


> I believe it has certainly hurt the Martial Arts Community. Now, all martial arts used in self defence are being measured by how their practitioners perform in the octagon.
> 
> I think that the octagon fighters are great and it takes a certain type of person to get in there. However, comparing a ring-style competition to an actual self-defense scenario is apples to oranges.


 
Heh, actually they're being measured by your ability to perform them regularly against a resisting opponent. That doesn't mean getting in the ring, it means pressure testing. After all, if you can't perform the techniques against a resisting opponent in a controlled environment, what makes you think you could perform them in an uncontrolled one?
Thats an open question, not aimed at you in specific.


----------



## NDNgirl4ever (Apr 7, 2007)

It's not really relevant to me.


----------



## kidswarrior (Apr 7, 2007)

Shotgun Buddha said:


> Heh, actually they're being measured by your ability to perform them regularly against a resisting opponent. That doesn't mean getting in the ring, it means pressure testing. After all, if you can't perform the techniques against a resisting opponent in a controlled environment, what makes you think you could perform them in an uncontrolled one?



As I said earlier, as a TMA guy this is the key thing that MMA provides. I don't feel the need to test my strategy and techniques in any MMA setting, but I do want to know they have a chance of working against a resisting, unpredictable opponent. Doesn't mean anyone has to agree with me :ultracool. Just MHO of what's good for myself and my students.


----------



## Dave Leverich (Apr 7, 2007)

While I've seen some "MMA" guys who were jerks, I've seen many TMA's that were as well. It simply goes with the territory. Most of the people I've met that study what everyone is calling 'Mixed Martial Arts', have been great guys. One locally has asked via a friend about some help in the striking arena (as that's my thing) and I've found him to be extremely respectful, humble and an all around great guy. He came from a wrestling background (shocking I know hehe).

I think everyone has said it a few times now though, broad generalizations are lame. It's a kind of prejudice against people of a certain 'something' be that an art, color, language or what have you. And while I DO put violent criminals into one large group, that's my own perhaps... shortcoming.

I've seen the arts in general increase in visibility and public awareness, as well as public understanding, greatly over the last few decades. I think the UFC/K1/IFL/Pride/WCL etc... those are simply showing another aspect of them in a form that people accept. Boxing has been popular for millennia, this is just a few variations of a very old theme.

So for me? I think it has helped a great deal, granted there are few tools in the shed, but most seem to be good guys/gals from what I've personally met.


----------



## tradrockrat (Apr 7, 2007)

Anyone who refuses to see how MMA has helped TMA's shed their recent complacency (as a whole - I'm sure _*your*_ TMA never got complacent  ) and provide a much needed spark to get other arts to re-evaluate some of their practices, is in denial.

Do I believe that MMA's are the best?  At what?  No I don't.

Do I believe that MMa's have created division and controversy?  Yes.

Do I believe that some people on both sides of the argument are morons and egomaniacs?  Yes.

Do I believe that MMa's have hurt TMA's?  No - not unless there was already something seriously wrong with a particular school.

It's cyclical (we TMa practitioners should be familiar with this concept, shouldn't we?)  TMA's were at first thought esoteric and mystical, then Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris (and Bill Wallace, etc etc etc) showed us how they could really kick butt for real - suddenly it was combat that counted. We were most recently back into the mindset of "Learn the technique = kick ***".  The philosophy had once again usurped the practical.  MMA's showed us just how important live training and physical fitness was to a successful practitioner of sport.  This has caught on in the mainstream and people are once again thinking greatness is determined by win / loss records.  I have always believed that the truth was in the middle.

I think we can all admit that if you are in great shape, you have a better chance of surviving a violent encounter - as a whole.  Yeah sure, the grand master of 65 years old may be able to kick but on a very fit 20 year old with basic skills, but that fit 20 year old will beat the other 20 year old who watches movies when he should be sparing.  And when those two 20 year olds are 65, the one who stayed fit will be a master, the other one won't.

JMHO.


----------



## exile (Apr 8, 2007)

I think Tradrockrat has made some great points. My own take on it is, there are MMAists who pursue an aggressive and negative agenda when they talk about TMAs, but that's not the fault of MMA, or the MMA community per se. There are aggressive and negative individuals all over the map, and advocates of one TMA against another can be just as arrogantly dismissive as any MMA fan's wholesale putdowns of the TMAs as a group. But the existence of the MMA scene has thrown into relief a problem that the TMAs have been saddled with for quite a while, and that can only be a good thing. 

What I'm getting at is that the TMAs were created in one cultural/historical context and have been transplanted to a radically different one, and in effect have had to reinvent themselves on North American and European soil, something which I don't think has been at all easy. 

There have been a lot of comments on other threads about the differences in the levels of, on the one hand, everyday danger and vulnerbility that led to the original creation of these unromaniticized, brutal, all-business fighting systems in Asian societies, and on the other hand, their spread to prosperous, largely middle-class, privileged Western clienteles; the upshot is, these arts just do not have the same essential relevance to _survival_ here, now that they did there, then. Increasingly, the basis for TMAs in the West has become sport competition, part of the larger entertainment economy, which something we do big-time. So you have Olympic TKD and sport karate (the two are almost indistinguishable) as the defaults for how these TMAs are presented to their First World clientele.  And as people have noted, on MT and elsewhere, over and over, these martial sport developments are governed by scoring systems which are highly artificial and specialized, leading to serious changesmy own description would be `distortions'in technical content.

What the MMA competitions have done is shove in the face of these TMA contests the spectacle of relatively open-ended fighting with minimum emphasis on artificial style and acrobatic glitz. From my own experience watching WTF-style TKD on the one hand, and UFC-style fighting on the other, I'd have to say that the latter looks way more unrestricted and hard-edged than the former. My own feeling is that Matsumura's bloody, violent street fights in 19th c. Shuri alleys were _way_ nastier than what we've seen on the UFC circuit, but the two have much more in common than either has with modern sport karate competition. So this leaves karate in its Okinawan, Japanese and Korean variants with a big problem: what are they going to _be_ in the 21st century? Are they going to continue to go more and more in the direction of artificial, stylized competition, whose artificiality becomes more and more highlighted by comparison with MMA competition? That's one possibility. But another is that the TMAs will recover their original purpose as combat arts, designed to use tried-and-true, completely unconstrained techniques to damage a violent, untrained but aggressive attacker to the point where he has to leave the fight no matter how bad his original intentions werereturn, in effect, to the karate that Matsumura developed and taught, and its subsequent offshoots. Some practitioners will go with the first possibility and some with the second, but the existence of MMA-style competitions helps force TMA practitioners to face the problem of deciding whether they want their art to take the form of a clearly unrealistic arena sport, on the one hand, or... something else, on the other. To me this is a good outcome....


----------



## Xue Sheng (Apr 8, 2007)

The only effects I see that MMA has had on TMA are

It gives a whole lot of people reason to discuss, argue fight over what is better Ad nauseam and it always comes down to yes it is no its not (repeat) :deadhorse 

And it does point out that many in TMA no longer train as hard as they use to.  Face it guys the MMA folks train very hard. This does not however prove anything is more effective that another. If this were the case then in the winter snow shoveling would by far be a better year round exercise than swimming because you cant swim in winter. This is of course talking about exercising outside and in places that get snow in the winter.

If a TMA person trains like they should they are very effective. If an MMA person trains as the majority does then they are very effective. And as far as what works on the street, I hope neither ever has to find out.


----------



## Andrew Green (Apr 8, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> It gives a whole lot of people reason to discuss, argue fight over what is better Ad nauseam and it always comes down to yes it is no its not (repeat) :deadhorse




Nah, that was getting done long before MMA came into the spotlight.

"Shotokan is watered down Okinawan Karate"

"Karate lacks the depth of Kung Fu"

"TKD is a butchered up copy of Shotokan"

Remember those?

Or how about the fun that followed Bruce Lee?  Crosstraining vs not?  Or JKD concepts vs Original JKD?

Boxing vs Karate was a fun one as well.

And of course Judo vs Karate.

Kendo vs Olympic Fencing.

Judo vs Jujitsu.

These fights are not a reult of MMA, they're a result of people being people.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Apr 8, 2007)

OK

It gives a whole lot of people a *new* reason to discuss, argue fight over what is better Ad nauseam and it always comes down to yes it is no its not (repeat) :deadhorse


----------



## bigfootsquatch (Jan 17, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> OK
> 
> It gives a whole lot of people a *new* reason to discuss, argue fight over what is better Ad nauseam and it always comes down to yes it is no its not (repeat) :deadhorse


 
And its almost as fun as talking about Ashida Kim!


----------



## SageGhost83 (Jan 17, 2008)

MMA has brought more visibility to martial arts period, and I certainly think that making Martial Arts as a whole more visible is a good thing. The bad thing is the combination of noobs who swear by it without even having taken the time to truly explore the wider world of the martial arts and the Taekwondo Mcdojangs that are starting to advertise themselves as being MMA schools or having MMA programs when they are little more than korean footsy parlors with crappling (crappy grappling, not the good stuff) thrown in for good measure. Of course, mcdojangs do that with reality based self defense too, so this is no surprise. I wouldn't want to learn that roundhouse gun disarm, neither would I want anyone else to learn it and have false confidence/stupidity from it. The martial arts can be so absurd at times .


----------



## rabbit (Jan 17, 2008)

bushidomartialarts said:


> that 23 year old hothead who kept hurting all his training partners and insulting the women. he's over at an mma school these days.


 
Do you guys think there is people like that at the MMA schools? I was thinking of going to one of the MMA schools for some more realistic training, but not if the guys there are aggressive, drug using, and are the type that show zero sportsmanship.

Do you think the people at the MMA schools would train bad people? If I were an instructor I wouldn't ever want to train someone who would use what he learned in my class for something bad.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 17, 2008)

rabbit said:


> Do you guys think there is people like that at the MMA schools? I was thinking of going to one of the MMA schools for some more realistic training, but not if the guys there are aggressive, drug using, and are the type that show zero sportsmanship.
> 
> Do you think the people at the MMA schools would train bad people? If I were an instructor I wouldn't ever want to train someone who would use what he learned in my class for something bad.



No.

Things like this depend on the instructor(s) more then the school.  There are good and bad people in more traditional arts, RBSD systems, Boxing, Muay thai, MMA, you name it.

If you wanted a comparison I'd say MMA is more like a football team or a hockey team, where traditional arts are more like a academic class.  It's not a perfect comparison, but I think as a generalization it will work.

There will be different demographics, but not in the sense of one being bad and the other good.  Both can be either, but they do it in different ways.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 18, 2008)

rabbit said:


> Do you guys think there is people like that at the MMA schools? I was thinking of going to one of the MMA schools for some more realistic training, but not if the guys there are aggressive, drug using, and are the type that show zero sportsmanship.
> 
> Do you think the people at the MMA schools would train bad people? If I were an instructor I wouldn't ever want to train someone who would use what he learned in my class for something bad.


 
The 23 year old who beats up on people and insults women would not be welcome at any MMA club/class I know. He would be shown the door PDQ.
Training in an MMA class is surprisingly not much different from training in a TMA class. It may seem more informal but good manners and care for others is very much the order of the day. Techniques are practised only to the point where you feel the lock/choke whatever coming on never to the point of pain. MMAers don't feel they have to prove in a class how tough they are. It may even surprise you to know that there are women training too lol. 
MMA classes teach MMA here rarely do they teach SD, that's a different class so if you want to learn to defend yourself go somewhere that does specifically SD. MMA classes very rarely aggressive, they are intense and hard working. We don't fight in class, we train and spar. The sportsmanship is of a very high level in the class as it is on the fights themselves. They may be trying to knock each others block off in the ring/cage but afterwards they are showing each other moves they've done! 
Most fighters I know over here come from a TMA background, I knew at least four who are TKD blackbelts (Rosi Sexton who fights in Bodog is one), one I know, Sami Berik comes from a CMA background. 
As with all martial arts, there are good schools and bad, good instructors and bad , good students and bad students. The art they practice doesn't make them that way, they do so don't blame MMA or TMA, it's the way of the world.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 18, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> No.
> 
> Things like this depend on the instructor(s) more then the school. There are good and bad people in more traditional arts, RBSD systems, Boxing, Muay thai, MMA, you name it.
> 
> ...


 
Nicely put Andrew!  I have met some great friends through BJJ and MMA training.  *Great people and true friends*.  I have also met a few jerks but no more than where I have trained in any other system.


----------



## bigfootsquatch (Jan 18, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> The 23 year old who beats up on people and insults women would not be welcome at any MMA club/class I know. He would be shown the door PDQ.
> Training in an MMA class is surprisingly not much different from training in a TMA class. It may seem more informal but good manners and care for others is very much the order of the day. Techniques are practised only to the point where you feel the lock/choke whatever coming on never to the point of pain. MMAers don't feel they have to prove in a class how tough they are. It may even surprise you to know that there are women training too lol.
> MMA classes teach MMA here rarely do they teach SD, that's a different class so if you want to learn to defend yourself go somewhere that does specifically SD. MMA classes very rarely aggressive, they are intense and hard working. We don't fight in class, we train and spar. The sportsmanship is of a very high level in the class as it is on the fights themselves. They may be trying to knock each others block off in the ring/cage but afterwards they are showing each other moves they've done!
> Most fighters I know over here come from a TMA background, I knew at least four who are TKD blackbelts (Rosi Sexton who fights in Bodog is one), one I know, Sami Berik comes from a CMA background.
> As with all martial arts, there are good schools and bad, good instructors and bad , good students and bad students. The art they practice doesn't make them that way, they do so don't blame MMA or TMA, it's the way of the world.


 
Exactly, alot of mma people may be more intimidating due to what people read about mma on the web so on. The guys can sometimes get a little cocky, but its no different than in traditional schools. One benefit of MMA schools IMO is that the training can is serious, and there isn't many there that are halfassing it like you find at those wonderful mcdojos that have so degraded tma.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 18, 2008)

A lot of the internet loudmouths don't actually train in anything, they just are Ultimate Fighter fans, which is a step below WWE fans.  Some might start, but few people with that attitude last long in any class.

Others it is a case of "Internet annonymity + Otherwise normal person = Complete jackass"

But in order to safely train a contact sport you have to check your ego at the door, otherwise people get hurt.  Anyone that can't do that won't last in a class.


----------



## Grenadier (Jan 18, 2008)

Thugs come in all shapes and sizes, and can be found at a TMA or MMA school, depending on what the owner decides to accept.  

I've known certain TMA schools that had a legitimate lineage back to the founder of their art, that didn't encourage sportsmanship or good behavior, and it was no surprise that most of the community thought of them as breeding grounds for thugs.  

And yes, there are going to be some MMA schools out there that do the same thing.  It just comes down to who's running the show, and what they decide to tolerate.  

Most martial arts schools, whether they are TMA or MMA, aren't going to tolerate thuggery.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 18, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> A lot of the internet loudmouths don't actually train in anything, they just are Ultimate Fighter fans, which is a step below WWE fans. Some might start, but few people with that attitude last long in any class.



Yup that is about it.

I have talked to online and in person quite a few MMA guys and I have the greatest respect for there dedication and attitude. It reminds me of TMA of the old in the old days actually



Grenadier said:


> Thugs come in all shapes and sizes, and can be found at a TMA or MMA school, depending on what the owner decides to accept.



Very VERY true


----------



## Sanchin-J (Jan 20, 2008)

When you think about the historical ties of each of the Martial Arts out there, and how the art was born into being, you can kind of see where I'm going with what I'm about to say.  In a not so strange way, many of the martial arts we've come to know have similarities with one another, some in techniques as simple as the common round house kick or a simple leg sweep. When you think about it, a martial art is a living breathing creation that expands and grows over time, even some of the more traditional arts have adapted techniques not necessarily from their own cultural heritage. As controversial as this may sound, I can't help but wonder if every art in existence today isn't more or less an MMA art. Sure some arts cling to traditional training, but I don't think that many of them can deny either being either a branch of, or closely related to another form of martial art. 

I don't know how many of you folks have ever really watched and studied the "Human Weapon" series that's currently being aired, but in just about every episode I see something that closely resembles a technique from another style. Even in studying a few different styles I've seen things that are a little too similar to be mere coincidence. I think the MMA popularity promotes open minds and is actually helping the entire MA and MMA community to grow. I won't deny that while I frown upon the MMA in general due to the brutality it exhibits, I do watch matches occasionally and enjoy seeing some of the techniques being used. To be really honest, its the schools that should probably be asked this question instead of the individuals, many schools teach self defense not how to pummel someone into paste in an octagon arena, so if anyone is offended or finds it to be unacceptable it would be the schools.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 20, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> If you wanted a comparison I'd say MMA is more like a football team or a hockey team, where traditional arts are more like a academic class.  It's not a perfect comparison, but I think as a generalization it will work.
> 
> There will be different demographics, but not in the sense of one being bad and the other good.  Both can be either, but they do it in different ways.



I like this comparison. Of course, some academic classes have labs/fieldwork/clinicals, where you are required to demonstrate your knowledge. There are arts that are like this, too, that up the ante so to speak, with harder contact & pressure testing. 

I'm hard pressed to say anything that hasn't already been said. MMA has done some good things for martial arts in general. It's increased the popularity of martial arts, certainly, or at least a few of them. It's also brought the import of contact and ground fighting back to the game TMA-ers. However, many folks have left perfectly good arts after watching a BJJ fighter submit someone, when a little basic ground training and takedown defenses added to their current art would have served them better. 
Many now think that MMA represents reality when it is in all actuality a very sterile environment. Fight shorts, a clean floor that's softer than hardwood or concrete, and a completely one-on-one fight that you see coming, with no chance of friends or weapons coming into it. 
(With this in mind, Pro Wrestling is more realistic!!!)
MMA is as far from reality as many non- or light contact TMAs, it's just at the other end of the spectrum. A happy medium is necessary.


----------



## Cryozombie (Jan 20, 2008)

I don't think its hurt anything, but I do liken the MMA "phenomenon" to the song "Son of A Plunder" by Disturbed.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 21, 2008)

I voted no relevance to me. The clubs I train at (a traditional Wado school and a more modern Ju Jutsu place) probably wouldn`t be doing anything different if there were no UFC and I don`t really know anyone that is in the arts because of MMA popularity. Never really watched a fight myself for that matter.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 21, 2008)

Cirdan said:


> I voted no relevance to me. The clubs I train at (a traditional Wado school and a more modern Ju Jutsu place) probably wouldn`t be doing anything different if there were no UFC and I don`t really know anyone that is in the arts because of MMA popularity. Never really watched a fight myself for that matter.



YOU'VE NEVER SEEN MMA!?! Where do you live, Norway??? :wink2:


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 21, 2008)

Doc_Jude said:


> YOU'VE NEVER SEEN MMA!?! Where do you live, Norway??? :wink2:


 
Yeah, and beware or I`ll smite you with the might of Thor!
Actually I got much better things to do with my time.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 21, 2008)

Cirdan said:


> Yeah, and beware or I`ll smite you with the might of Thor!
> Actually I got much better things to do with my time.



Awww, come on, I'm worth the time to smite. Really.:tantrum:


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 21, 2008)

Doc_Jude said:


> Awww, come on, I'm worth the time to smite. Really.:tantrum:


 
Smiting is good. I`ll bring my warhammer along next time I am in the neighborhood. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




I was just thinking MMA shows are not worth my time to watch when I can work, train, be with my girl or sleep instead.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 21, 2008)

Cirdan said:


> Smiting is good. I`ll bring my warhammer along next time I am in the neighborhood.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh. Well, in that case, you're pretty right on.


----------



## chinto (Jan 21, 2008)

I think their ego's are usually very large like a professional boxer or any other prize fighters, and things have hurt the perception of the martial arts more then helped... They are prize fighters, and a prize fight is about money and entertainment and not survival.. so I would say hurt it...


----------



## pstarr (Jan 22, 2008)

I don't see it as a martial art any more than professional wrestling can be said to be a martial art...


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 22, 2008)

chinto said:


> I think their ego's are usually very large like a professional boxer or any other prize fighters, and things have hurt the perception of the martial arts more then helped... They are prize fighters, and a prize fight is about money and entertainment and not survival.. so I would say hurt it...


 
How many MMA fighters do you know? I know most of them in the UK and one from the States and I can put my hand on my heart and say very very few have egos let alone very large ones. Many fighters fight semi pro or amateur so don't get paid. There are very healthy club leagues where again no one gets paid. I would suggest you are basing your views on watching the UFC which has very little to do with grassroots MMA.
As for it not being a martial art, come train with us and see for yourself instead of making sweeping statements that sound condescending and snobbish.


----------



## buddah_belly (Jan 22, 2008)

All I know is that every time a new Steven Seagal movie hits DVD, it's bad for Aikido dojos because you get a new influx of ponytails.  

Some people just want to fight...even in TMA we discuss the "real world possibilities" of certain techniques.  I can't fault them for that.  It's who they are.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 22, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> How many MMA fighters do you know? I know most of them in the UK and one from the States and I can put my hand on my heart and say very very few have egos let alone very large ones. Many fighters fight semi pro or amateur so don't get paid. There are very healthy club leagues where again no one gets paid. I would suggest you are basing your views on watching the UFC which has very little to do with grassroots MMA.
> As for it not being a martial art, come train with us and see for yourself instead of making sweeping statements that sound condescending and snobbish.


 
I have to say based on the few real MMA people I have had a chance to talk with I agree with you. 

Also I believe that many MMA people train incredibly hard much the way TMA did in the old days.


----------



## Eternal Beginner (Jan 22, 2008)

chinto said:


> I think their ego's are usually very large like a professional boxer or any other prize fighters, and things have hurt the perception of the martial arts more then helped... They are prize fighters, and a prize fight is about money and entertainment and not survival.. so I would say hurt it...


I have to respectfully disagree with you.  I train at a gym that offers Muay Thai, BJJ, MMA as well as traditional MA's.  The whole "prize fighter" mentality of the large ego and the assumption that it is all "about money and entertainment" is rather dismissive of men (and women) who train very diligently, sincerely and are extremely dedicated.  

The fact is, most people who train MMA will never fight in a large event and even if they do it is definitely not about the money because even at the higher levels the payouts are small unless you are one of the few Randy Coutures or Chuck Liddells.

Of course there are fighters with large egos.  I think anytime you have any high level athlete who has dedicated their life to a sport and is confident in their ability they will be accused of having "ego".  The guys that I have trained with that have fought in the UFC, IFL, and KOTC are the most helpful, accomodating guys who are sincerely interested in making the sport grow.  They do that through training others, seminars and making sure even the newest noob that walks through the door is given the opportunity to train without being harmed and encouraged even though they may never want to be a UFC fighter. 

I think people who see MMA as harming the public perception of Martial Arts in general are people who don't really know what MMA is or have no experience with the training and methodology behind it.  They are all too eager to condemn is as thuggery and "street-fighting" without taking into account the countless hours these competitors put into studying all ranges of combat.


----------



## chinto (Jan 23, 2008)

Eternal Beginner said:


> I have to respectfully disagree with you.  I train at a gym that offers Muay Thai, BJJ, MMA as well as traditional MA's.  The whole "prize fighter" mentality of the large ego and the assumption that it is all "about money and entertainment" is rather dismissive of men (and women) who train very diligently, sincerely and are extremely dedicated.
> 
> The fact is, most people who train MMA will never fight in a large event and even if they do it is definitely not about the money because even at the higher levels the payouts are small unless you are one of the few Randy Coutures or Chuck Liddells.
> 
> ...



could be, all I can say is the few I have personally met who do cage fights and train in MMA in my aria have had large egos .. that is not a huge number and so perhaps I have just had the misfortune to meet ones that were taught the wrong attitude or just had that kind of ego before and kept it.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 23, 2008)

chinto said:


> could be, all I can say is the few I have personally met who do cage fights and train in MMA in my aria have had large egos .. that is not a huge number and so perhaps I have just had the misfortune to meet ones that were taught the wrong attitude or just had that kind of ego before and kept it.


 
I think all and any of the martial arts can attract the person who has an inflated ego and wants boasting/bullying rights over others. One thing I've found is that anyone who says they are a 'cagefighter' very likely isn't as the genuine article will say they are a fighter or they fight MMA. Again as with all martial arts there are going to be the McDojos and the people who instil the wrong attitude. I do hope though you get to meet some of the 'good guys'.


----------



## kidswarrior (Jan 23, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> I think all and any of the martial arts can attract the person who has an inflated ego and wants boasting/bullying rights over others. One thing I've found is that anyone who says they are a 'cagefighter' very likely isn't as the genuine article will say they are a fighter or they fight MMA. Again as with all martial arts there are going to be the McDojos and the people who instil the wrong attitude. I do hope though you get to meet some of the 'good guys'.


I have come to believe Tez3, among other posters of similar opinion, is right. I admittedly used to think MMA fighters were all rude and arrogant. But I recently have interacted with two different MMA training studios in the area, which just happen to be back to back on the same lot. One fits the ugly stereotype :whip: but the other, which is also growing like crazy--I've sent some of my students there who realize they don't want to do TMA--is run by some of the most experienced, humble, respectful fight veterans I've met. So of course, all their fighters exhibit the same attitudes. :asian:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 30, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> I think all and any of the martial arts can attract the person who has an inflated ego and wants boasting/bullying rights over others. One thing I've found is that anyone who says they are a 'cagefighter' very likely isn't as the genuine article will say they are a fighter or they fight MMA. Again as with all martial arts there are going to be the McDojos and the people who instil the wrong attitude. I do hope though you get to meet some of the 'good guys'.


 


kidswarrior said:


> I have come to believe Tez3, among other posters of similar opinion, is right. I admittedly used to think MMA fighters were all rude and arrogant. But I recently have interacted with two different MMA training studios in the area, which just happen to be back to back on the same lot. One fits the ugly stereotype :whip: but the other, which is also growing like crazy--I've sent some of my students there who realize they don't want to do TMA--is run by some of the most experienced, humble, respectful fight veterans I've met. So of course, all their fighters exhibit the same attitudes. :asian:


 
Yup

There is a MMA school near me and the guy that runs it and is the head instructor I have a lot of respect for and if I were younger I'd go train with him. He is just plane fascinated with all things Martial Arts he was asking all sorts of questions about CMA and I was asking all sorts of questions about MMA and it was a great meeting, and his students seem much the same.

But in just about anything that can be classified as a martial art it has been my experience that the real deals tend to be to busy training to give anyone a hard time and the want-to be types tend to try and make up for lack of skill with excessive use of mouth.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Sep 1, 2009)

Thread necro!!

Well, I voted that it has mostly helped.  May seem odd, given that I practice what are considered traditional martial arts, but I feel that it has helped.

Firstly, it has opened a lot of people up to martial arts in general.  Boxing and wrestling really did not do that in the same way.  MMA has the benefit of being drawn from divergent styles, thus people will want to know, 'where did he learn that move?' or 'what styles did she train in to get that skilled?'

As others have pointed out, it has brought about some needed self examinaiton to the martial arts.

I have not watched a lot of mma, but I have watched some, and as a TMA guy, I really enjoyed examining what was being done on the mat and trying to ID the styles that contributed to a fighter's skills.

In the end, things come along and shake things up.  Things improve, then plateau, then another shake up happens.  We all look at Judo as a traditional art, but Kano was revolutionary in his day.  Bruce Lee shook things up later.  Now MMA.  Each shake up results in advances and improvements across the arts.  Who knows when or what the next one will be, but I look forward to it.

Daniel


----------



## WhiteLotus (Sep 1, 2009)

I think it has generally hurt the community. The MMA fights or the so called, "Ultimate Fighter Fights" are a sport fighting and not a combative fighting. They are mostly structured by complex rules and guidelines that make many traditional fighting techniques not allowed. So really it tends to drift away from traditional martial arts. Also in many of these fights it seems as if the more complex techniques of some styles are stripped away for the simple and basic moves in the ring. I also see very little blocking and stances are usually weak. this implies that such fighting is the way to go, but in the street and reality it is not.


----------



## Nolerama (Sep 1, 2009)

I came from a TMA background, and went into MMA.

I've been exposed to a lot of ideas from a lot of different arts and use MMA as the vehicle in which to apply functional MA technique in a competitive setting.

In response to White Lotus: While I like the competitive format that MMA offers, it does put into harsh realization that there are SD aspects not readily trained for in MMA competition. However, anyone training in MMA knows for sure that there are tech applicable to SD, in conjunction with MMA-competition. I'm skeptical of anyone saying that hurts the MA community. I think physical ability, knowlege of functional technique, and competitive edge are desired traits in all forms of combat.

Take those three traits back to a TMA school, and you have yourself a very knowlegeable, functional martial artist within that art.

There was a time that I swore off TKD, saying it wouldn't help in any way, shape or form. I abhorred aikido because it just didn't seem real to me. I didn't believe in ninjitsu because I grew up believing that ninjas simply didn't exist.

After a few years in MMA, there's a ton of concepts taken from those arts, and found in the most peculiar places. I have grown (with the help of many folks here at MT) to appreciate an aspect of what makes the MAs great: it's diversity. Think of each MA as a book. There's an entire library out there to figure out the best way to subdue your opponent, win a fight, or get out of a possibly sticky situation.

MMA is a medium in which each fighter formulates their own strategy with their own technique from varied arts. Personally, I think it's a major boost in MA interest.


----------



## blindsage (Sep 1, 2009)

It moves away from Traditional MAs?  Like Muay Thai, Boxing, Jiu Jitsu, Greco-Roman Wrestling, Sambo, Kyokushinkai Karate, Judo?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Sep 2, 2009)

WhiteLotus said:


> I think it has generally hurt the community. The MMA fights or the so called, "Ultimate Fighter Fights" are a sport fighting and not a combative fighting. They are mostly structured by complex rules and guidelines that make many traditional fighting techniques not allowed. So really it tends to drift away from traditional martial arts. Also in many of these fights it seems as if the more complex techniques of some styles are stripped away for the simple and basic moves in the ring. I also see very little blocking and stances are usually weak. this implies that such fighting is the way to go, but in the street and reality it is not.


While I do agree with much of what you say and feel that you said it well, I disagree with your conclusion that it has generally hurt the MA community. To a great extent, it seems to be slowly (or not so slowly) replacing wrestling. I do not hear teens talk about wrestlers anymore; UFC fighters are the talk of teens from what I have seen. And each of those fighters have techniques in their repitiore drawn from the classical martial arts.

Also, I think that in terms of traditional grappling arts, it has been a huge boon. Traditional western grappling has had little exposure, as the WWE/F and the WCW have been action oriented soap operas for longer than some UFC fans have been alive.

Yes, MMA drifts away from traditional martial arts in a variety of ways. But it never claimed to be traditional and it is a sport. But it still has the ability to lead people back to the donor arts, which are mostly traditional. 

Daniel


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 2, 2009)

WhiteLotus said:


> I think it has generally hurt the community. The MMA fights or the so called, "Ultimate Fighter Fights" are a sport fighting and not a combative fighting. They are mostly structured by complex rules and guidelines that make many traditional fighting techniques not allowed. So really it tends to drift away from traditional martial arts. Also in many of these fights it seems as if the more complex techniques of some styles are stripped away for the simple and basic moves in the ring. I also see very little blocking and stances are usually weak. this implies that such fighting is the way to go, but in the street and reality it is not.


 
MMA is a sport, of course it has rules , why are you expecting 'stance's and blocks'. What MMA implies is that it's the way for MMA to go, those of us whodo MMA don't claim it's for the street, its for fighting in MMA comptitions, we train SD for the street. 
I could go on but I'm bored now.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Sep 2, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> To a great extent, it seems to be slowly (or not so slowly) replacing wrestling. I do not hear teens talk about wrestlers anymore; UFC fighters are the talk of teens from what I have seen.


 
Too late to edit, but if it was not clear in my post, I specifically meant Pro wrestling in the WWE idiom, not wrestling in general.

Daniel


----------



## TigerCraneGuy (Sep 2, 2009)

Blasted MMA thugs!!!

TMA definitely beats MMA anyday; look at Lyoto Machida, and George St Pierre, and-

Oh wait, forgot something important here: Machida's a Shotokan guy who's made it work in the ring... and wasn't St Pierre's background was in Kyokushin-Kai.

Whoops.:angel:

Seriously, it has been my experience that those who actually train are less likely to mouth-off than those who don't.

And any fighting system, be it traditional or modern, will always have its share of aggressive nutriders. You know the type: those morons who are always looking for an excuse to insult others. All talk, little to show for it.

Personally, as a Kenpo 5.0 practitioner, I feel that the MMA aspects of the method have actually helped and not hindered me. After a year of getting back in the game, I'm actually getting comfortable with ground-fighting, and can even foil basic submissions quite effectively.

Just my 2 cents.

TCG


----------



## Joab (Sep 2, 2009)

I have to say I'm biased as I out and out hate MMA. I think the behaviour of those in the UFC in the tv commercials alone makes the martial arts look like it is full of a bunch of uncouth fellows, ruffians, naves and the like, perhaps something that might not get through the censors is what I really have in mind...but, hey, if its your thing go for it, I'm not into it.


----------



## Ironcrane (Sep 2, 2009)

Joab said:


> I have to say I'm biased as I out and out hate MMA. I think the behaviour of those in the UFC in the tv commercials alone makes the martial arts look like it is full of a bunch of uncouth fellows, ruffians, naves and the like, perhaps something that might not get through the censors is what I really have in mind...but, hey, if its your thing go for it, I'm not into it.



I believe I understand where you're coming from, as I was put off from watching MMA on T.V. due to all the ego, and from that one UFC reality show, that I suddenly forgot the name of.

I would like to mention though, that from a few of the MMA gyms, I've been in, and with the MMA people that I've talked with, they're pretty friendly people, and aren't full of themselves like you see on tv. In fact, they're just as put off by all the antics on tv, as everyone else.


----------



## Tames D (Sep 2, 2009)

Joab said:


> I have to say I'm biased as I out and out hate MMA. I think the behaviour of those in the UFC in the tv commercials alone makes the martial arts look like it is full of a bunch of uncouth fellows, ruffians, naves and the like, perhaps something that might not get through the censors is what I really have in mind...but, hey, if its your thing go for it, I'm not into it.


 
To me it's entertainment. I've always trained for the street but I enjoy watching Karate tournaments and MMA events. I put them in the catagory I feel they belong: Entertainment. 

As far as the "uncouth" behavior of the 'typical' MMA player, who cares? I don't. Their behavior is refreshing after hearing about the daily antics of the 'typical' NBA thug, uh, criminal, uh, I mean player. Has that hurt basketball? I don't think so and again, I don't care.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Sep 3, 2009)

Joab said:


> I have to say I'm biased as I out and out hate MMA. I think the behaviour of those in the UFC in the tv commercials alone makes the martial arts look like it is full of a bunch of uncouth fellows, ruffians, naves and the like, perhaps something that might not get through the censors is what I really have in mind...but, hey, if its your thing go for it, I'm not into it.


Well, I think that it makes them the martial arts look like it is full of....

the WWE! 

Lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllets get ready to rumble!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Monday Nitro, a supersized smackdown, and a grudge match on the side!!

If you changed out UFC with WWE, strictly in terms of the advertising, nobody would notice. 

Now when they tuned in or went to see the show live, they would definitely notice, as the UFC has a much superior product to the WWE...
...unless of course you want action oriented soap opera.

It is pretty clear that they are going for the same market that the WWE and WCW traditionally appeal to, so they are using a PR strategy that quite honestly, works very well. Not my cup of tea, or in my case, coffee, but there are those who like it.

Thames made referrence to off court thuggery of pro athletes. For the most part, any less than socially acceptable behavior seems to be limited to tasteless ads and the occasional bad egg. The athletes themselves seem pretty calm outside of the advertising.

Daniel


----------



## Joab (Sep 3, 2009)

You guys might be right, but sadly, typical John Q. Public only sees the commericials, and those commericials make martial arts look bad in my humble opinion.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Sep 4, 2009)

Joab said:


> I have to say I'm biased as I out and out hate MMA. I think the behaviour of those in the UFC in the tv commercials alone makes the martial arts look like it is full of a bunch of uncouth fellows, ruffians, naves and the like, perhaps something that might not get through the censors is what I really have in mind...but, hey, if its your thing go for it, I'm not into it.



I tend to agree with you. I think todays youth have enough problems without trying to be like some of the MMa guys.


----------



## Nolerama (Sep 4, 2009)

WhiteLotus said:


> I tend to agree with you. I think todays youth have enough problems without trying to be like some of the MMa guys.



Could you cite examples that say that's the norm in terms of MMA people? The vast majority of MMA folks I've come across and seen on TV tend to be highly intelligent athletes.

Regardless, what makes MMA any different than any other sport in terms of youth idolization? If I had kids, I'd rather have them look up to Kenny Florian or Randy Couture than, say, football's Michael Vick or Plexico Burress.

The "MMA Creates Bad Role Models" argument is a cop-out and you know it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 4, 2009)

I was going to make this another thread but I simply dont care enough about it anymore to put in the effort. But I have to say this whole MMA vs TMA thing in all its variations and incarnations has me completely befuddled.... I just dont get it anymore.

I personally dont see that much of a difference between the two and these types of discussions or arguments are starting to make me wonder if we, as Traditional Martial Artists, are so easily threatened by the existence of Mixed Martial Arts wouldnt it be better to look at our own training to see why we feel so threatened and why we feel the need to argue about it so much. And why are we so concerned about how we are perceived by those that do not do martial arts and base their one and only opinion on something they see on TV.

IMO MMA (you could also substitute Sports Sanda if it were more popular) should not be so much a threat as a wake up call to many of those in TMA that are resting on our laurels instead of training like we use to in the old days.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Sep 4, 2009)

I voted that it hurts and helps the "MA community" equally. On one hand, it's great advertising. No one can deny that. I'd say it's probably sparked as much interest in the martial arts as Bruce Lee did in his day. So on that front, it had helped the community. 

It also gives a dynamic environment in which to stress-test _some_ aspects of the martial arts. Without turning things into a deathmatch, or creating an entirely new format with an advanced type of protective gear that allows for a much greater deal of realism (stay tuned on that one, kiddos: it's coming, and sooner than you think   ), MMA serves as a good vehicle to add at least a little bit more realism than wrestling or point sparring. 

On the other hand, it hurts MA in a variety of ways. First and foremost is the view that this type of fighting is realistic. In the current days of MMA, There are a whole slew rules, which are for the most part necessary for the safety of the fighters. But it makes for decidedly_ unreal_ competition. That's all well an good, but the presupposition being propagated is that this is as _real_ as you can get.

Another way MMA hurts the MA community is that it makes the Martial Arts all about fighting. A lot of my students are fans of MMA. I am too, as I see some truly impressive technique from many of the fighters. But the problem comes when my students try to apply the same mentality, intensity, and techniques with eachother. It creates a dangerous training environment.

Only on rare occasion do I work with trained athletes, and the opportunities where I train athletes conditioned for MMA. More often I work with kids, soccer moms, teenageers, etc.-- the people who need martial arts most. But we take this demographic and incorporate the MMA mentality, and this leads to an even _more dangerous _environment.

I'll also combat the mentality that any publicity is good publicity. There are a lot of people who now _won't_ go into martial arts -- and again, these are the people _most in need _of martial arts-- because they think they have to be in optimal shape and willing to take a massive beating to learn anything in the martial arts (this problem is compounded by the fact that, in the advanced ranks, it is true to a certain degree).

One further reason it hurts MA is something I'm seeing on the streets more and more frequently: kids with no training reenacting what they see on TV. These kids have no training in the spiritual principles of MA or the proper use of force, and they are beating the tar out of eachother. This is making kids tougher, faster, more highly skilled (though unrefined)... and more willing to fight for no reason. It's making the streets more dangerous. 

I teach people to use the gentle answer first and use as little force as possible, none being optimal. But frankly, I'm wondering if I can handle some of these kids _myself_ without causing the kids serious harm. Hopefully I can, but these kids seem a _lot_ tougher and more agressive than kids were when I was a kid. That's scary, because as a kid I got the crap kicked out of me with decent regularity, and had been jumped by groups of other kids more than once. One of my students got jumped recently and he was just barely able to keep training. And he _won. _

Granted, as the streets change, we must continue to refine our training and training methods to maintain relevancy. But I sincerely think I can point to MMA as a major influence in this change.


So all in all, MMA has both helped and hurt the community in roughly equal measures. We can't ignore the detrimental impact, but there are also Shining examples of beneficial things within MMA (BJ Penn's project comes to mind..)

There's my long-winded explanation of my vote.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Sep 12, 2009)

Nolerama said:


> Could you cite examples that say that's the norm in terms of MMA people? The vast majority of MMA folks I've come across and seen on TV tend to be highly intelligent athletes.
> 
> Regardless, what makes MMA any different than any other sport in terms of youth idolization? If I had kids, I'd rather have them look up to Kenny Florian or Randy Couture than, say, football's Michael Vick or Plexico Burress.
> 
> The "MMA Creates Bad Role Models" argument is a cop-out and you know it.



Sorry, you said, "highly intelligent"? lol....could you site even one , "Highly intelligent MMA fighter on TV" and lets see how they talk and the attitude they give and thier intellectual backgrounds and education.

It is not a cop out about the role models. I believe many youth today are being swayed in a wrong direction by these men and the marketing promoters who are after the big bucks.


----------



## Steve (Sep 12, 2009)

WhiteLotus said:


> Sorry, you said, "highly intelligent"? lol....could you site even one , "Highly intelligent MMA fighter on TV" and lets see how they talk and the attitude they give and thier intellectual backgrounds and education.
> 
> It is not a cop out about the role models. I believe many youth today are being swayed in a wrong direction by these men and the marketing promoters who are after the big bucks.


Kenny Florian is a gifted athlete and a very intelligent person. He's articulate and holds a degree from Boston College. Had his pro fighting career not taken off, his intention was to go to law school.

Rich Franklin holds a masters degree and was a math teacher in an urban high school before making a run as a full time fighter.

Joe Lauzon was a network administrator before going full time as a fighter. 

These are three just off the top of my head. If you took some time to hang around BJJ or MMA schools, you'd find out the sport attracts smart people. The strategic aspects make it very appealing to intellectuals. I could spend some time researching other bios, but ultimately, I think that it would do you more good than me. I already know firsthand how smart many of the people I train with really are.

As an aside, the funniest example is Niels Hoven from that reality show, Beauty and the Geek. He had a perfect score on his SATs and was going to MIT when he was on the show, and he also trains BJJ. It's funny how many computer geeks really like BJJ in particular.  My school is a great mix of geeks, cops and firefighters.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 12, 2009)

Dr. Rosi Sexton has a 1st Class Mathematics degree from Cambridge  and a PhD in Theoretical Computer Science from Manchester University, she is currently doing a degree in Osteopathy.She's a TKD blackbelt too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/northwest/series5/martial_arts.shtm
She's fought in America as well, Leigh Remedious who fought Genki Sudo in the first UFC from London has a first class honours degree in engineering.


On a UK MMA site SFUK there was for a longtime a running thread about what careers fighters/people who trained MMA did in 'the daytime'. the surprising thing to many who don't know much about us is that it's not the thugs who do it but teachers, police officers, social workers, IT specialists, students, a couple of university tutors, service people, even doctors. The majority of MMA followers are literate, intelligent and very pleasant people, yes they get drowned out at times by the less intelligent but on the whole MMA is not a sport for idiots, for one thing it's quite a celebral game,lke physical chess, if you can't think you'll get beaten!


----------



## Milt G. (Sep 12, 2009)

Hello,

A little bit of both I think.
Depends on your point of view and training "rationale".

Thank you,
Milt G.


----------



## Xinglu (Sep 12, 2009)

I voted both.  I believe that MMA has improved martial arts, and the only thing it has hurt is public image.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 12, 2009)

"mma is just a game based on a duel where we play with our arguments of physical expressions to the point where we stop when its time to..... We dont play for keeps. The mountain of a molehill of it is purely for marketing purposes,lol"

Sami Berik, Sanshou and Pro MMA fighter.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Sep 12, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> I was going to make this another thread but I simply dont care enough about it anymore to put in the effort. But I have to say this whole MMA vs TMA thing in all its variations and incarnations has me completely befuddled.... I just dont get it anymore.
> 
> I personally dont see that much of a difference between the two and these types of discussions or arguments are starting to make me wonder if we, as Traditional Martial Artists, are so easily threatened by the existence of Mixed Martial Arts wouldnt it be better to look at our own training to see why we feel so threatened and why we feel the need to argue about it so much. And why are we so concerned about how we are perceived by those that do not do martial arts and base their one and only opinion on something they see on TV.
> 
> IMO MMA (you could also substitute Sports Sanda if it were more popular) should not be so much a threat as a wake up call to many of those in TMA that are resting on our laurels instead of training like we use to in the old days.




I think it started with me when one of my students said about Kung Fu, something like, "why don't we see that in the ring and on MMA fights?"

My answer caused me to really look at the differences and there are many.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Sep 12, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> Kenny Florian is a gifted athlete and a very intelligent person. He's articulate and holds a degree from Boston College. Had his pro fighting career not taken off, his intention was to go to law school.
> 
> Rich Franklin holds a masters degree and was a math teacher in an urban high school before making a run as a full time fighter.
> 
> ...



I think what I am refering to in particular is what i have seen on the shows like "the Ultmate fighter and others", with all the bold talk and boasting and even some drinking eachothers urine, and madness in the house etc. Then they talk big and curse all over the place and act like.....well.................meatheads, really. This is more the public image. I also know that because a person has a degree does not make them excused from such behaviour.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 13, 2009)

WhiteLotus said:


> I think what I am refering to in particular is what i have seen on the shows like "the Ultmate fighter and others", with all the bold talk and boasting and even some drinking eachothers urine, and madness in the house etc. Then they talk big and curse all over the place and act like.....well.................meatheads, really. This is more the public image. I also know that because a person has a degree does not make them excused from such behaviour.


 

Oh dear, you have to remember that this is a reality television programme and that the fact they are fighters is actually just the excuse for them being there, it could for any other reason, the programme makers don't actually care. Do you have 'Big Brother' over there?
If you want to know over in Europe this is the image of *Americans* in MMA, so should we paint all Americans like this because we have seen them on the television doing the things you pointed out? For many yes this is what Americans do, the MMA bit is less of an issue to many here as this is an American programme, made by Americans and with American in it.We could also judge Americans by the other stuff thats on television, the gangs the mafia etc etc. Do you see my point here? Don't judge the whole by a little thats on offer by a television company.


----------



## gardawamtu1 (Sep 13, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Oh dear, you have to remember that this is a reality television programme and that the fact they are fighters is actually just the excuse for them being there, it could for any other reason, the programme makers don't actually care. Do you have 'Big Brother' over there?
> If you want to know over in Europe this is the image of *Americans* in MMA, so should we paint all Americans like this because we have seen them on the television doing the things you pointed out? For many yes this is what Americans do, the MMA bit is less of an issue to many here as this is an American programme, made by Americans and with American in it.We could also judge Americans by the other stuff thats on television, the gangs the mafia etc etc. Do you see my point here? Don't judge the whole by a little thats on offer by a television company.



A lot of that could be seen in the UK v. US version last season.  I'm from the US and wish we could have had much more mature and serious representation.  The UK fighters, for the most part, outclassed ours.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 13, 2009)

gardawamtu1 said:


> A lot of that could be seen in the UK v. US version last season. I'm from the US and wish we could have had much more mature and serious representation. The UK fighters, for the most part, outclassed ours.


 
I know most of the fightrs that were in TUF, and they are good guys. We'd all said to them before they went they they weren't to show us up and they were to behave themselves! All of them have responsible jobs and fighting isn't their main 'profession', they knew they'd all go back to their day jobs too. One, Martin Stapleton is a Royal Marine Commando PTI and wouldn't let down the Corps in public. It's a matter of pride and perception, however the programme makers should take responsibliity fro the way they encourage people to behave badly, a show full of people behaving well isn't going to sell.


----------



## Milt G. (Sep 13, 2009)

Hello,

I think the big "put off" for MMA practitioners are the attitudes that many of them have.  Kind of like professional wrestlers.  While, perhaps, helpful to their sport, it can be a put off to the rank and file "others".  I think much of the overall negativity towards the discipline is embodied here.

I know that many of these folks just "play the part" for the promoters and fans.  Perhaps beneficial in that realm.  But when those same attitudes "bleed off" into their personal lives and other relationships is when the negativity towards the whole "shooting match" is most prevalent.  Much of that behavior becomes attributed to MMA in general.  Sometimes wrongfully so.

I know that many of the practioners of MMA systems are not as the sport is perceived as a whole.  It is just the general "perception", fueled by the ones that throw off the negativity and aggression so openly and often.  And what I mean by that is the overly aggressive "posturing" and the apparent lack of self esteem "style".  The "demanding" respect thing.  Respect is earned, and can never really be demanded or forced, IMO.

I have found that the real "capable" practitioners are the ones that are quiet.  Sadly, the "loud" ones set the stage for many and give the sport much of its negative press.  I had a student in the late 1980's.  Went to BJJ in the early 1990's as a start to his current MMA "style".  Was a very polite and respectable young man when a student.  Made it to 1st black, even.  I continue to hear of his "change" to this day.  He is "still in the game" and runs a training gym for MMA "potentials".  Most of what I hear about him is in direct contrast to his behavior when training with us.  Not positive, sadly.

Part of the "persona"?  Maybe.  Necessary?  Probably not.  I think the MMA is, by and large, really better then it is perceived, and more positive then many of its participants lead us to believe.  I will have to say that I do enjoy watching it from time to time.  Sadly. I feel I have to mute the sound when the "talking" starts.

Just a half of cent, here. 
Thank you,
Milt G.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 13, 2009)

Pro fighters are part fighter, part actor.

Their job is not just to fight well and win, but to get people to want to see them fight.  The reason people want to see them fight, whether it is they want to see them win, or they want to see them lose doesn't matter.  As long as people want to see them fight they get paid, even if they aren't top of the game.  

As soon as you put a mic in front of them, many of them are acting.  They have a "stage persona", just as comedians, musicians and other performers do.

Personally I don't like the acting, and attempts at adding a 'story', but they are no worse then the acting and attempts to add a 'story' in most kung fu movies, and I enjoy those as well, just not for the acting


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Sep 13, 2009)

I also think its a bit of both. The mma has made some tma have alook at how they train and look at ways to become more "well rounded" in their training techniques etc. On the down side I think it has taken the 'patience' out of training for some of the younger guys. For a lot of the kids now looking to start im martial arts the first thing they always want to know is how quickly they can get really good. Traditional martial arts can take years and years to get good at and a lot of the kids just want results quickly because they may be 17 years of age and know they cant fight too much beyond 30 so they just dont have the patience to stick with an art for years and years and the idea that it may take 5 or 6 years (or sometimes longer) to get to black belt just really doesnt appeal to them.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 13, 2009)

ralphmcpherson said:


> and the idea that it may take 5 or 6 years (or sometimes longer) to get to black belt just really doesnt appeal to them.



And yet, BJJ has one of the longest "time to black belt" when compared to other styles and it is arguably the art that gained the most out of MMA popularity.  So I think you're argument is a little flawed in that respect.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Sep 13, 2009)

Andrew Green said:


> And yet, BJJ has one of the longest "time to black belt" when compared to other styles and it is arguably the art that gained the most out of MMA popularity.  So I think you're argument is a little flawed in that respect.


I know nothing about mma , but would most of the bjj black belts in the mma have trained for those black belts prior to the ufc/mma beginning? I was talking about a young 17 year old now looking to one day join the ufc , by the time he becomes a black belt it would be time to retire.


----------



## Xinglu (Sep 13, 2009)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I know nothing about mma , but would most of the bjj black belts in the mma have trained for those black belts prior to the ufc/mma beginning? I was talking about a young 17 year old now looking to one day join the ufc , by the time he becomes a black belt it would be time to retire.



Not at all, Randy Couture is a purple belt in BJJ.I would encourage him to wait until he at least has his Blue belt before entering the ring, this should also give him a year to hone his striking skills too!


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Sep 14, 2009)

Xinglu said:


> Not at all, Randy Couture is a purple belt in BJJ.I would encourage him to wait until he at least has his Blue belt before entering the ring, this should also give him a year to hone his striking skills too!


Please forgive my ignorance as I know absolutely nothing about bjj or mma , but how long/what belt would someone have to have in bjj before it could be effective in the mma against the good fighters? Like hypothetically , if someone in their early 20's decided to take up bjj with the purpose of eventually fighting proffessionally how long would it take for them to be at a level where it would work against other experienced grapplers? Oh,  and sorry for veering off topic.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 14, 2009)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Please forgive my ignorance as I know absolutely nothing about bjj or mma , but how long/what belt would someone have to have in bjj before it could be effective in the mma against the good fighters? Like hypothetically , if someone in their early 20's decided to take up bjj with the purpose of eventually fighting proffessionally how long would it take for them to be at a level where it would work against other experienced grapplers? Oh, and sorry for veering off topic.


 
Doing BJJ as an art and grading is probably a bit different from doing BJJ and grappling with the intention of fighting. 
If you already have a striking art as your core art you should be competent to grapple in about a year if you train regularly, this doesn't mean you will be competent to grade necessarily but will be able to start fighting. If starting fighting it should be at least in semi pro rules against similiar novice fighters, you can't jump straight into pro fighting. Training and learning is ongoing in MMA, you are always looking to learn. 
It also depends like all martial arts on how much time you have to train and what other arts you have under your belt. We've had lads have their first fight in six months but this was in the amateur division against beginners like themselves, they were usually kickboxers, boxers or karateka as well. I can be a good learning experience in its self. Depends what you are looking to do really. Sorry thats a bit vague.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Sep 14, 2009)

thanks for the info. So if , for instance, a really good muay thai fighter who knew no bjj at all wanted to fight mma do you think a year of solid training in bjj would be enough to get him started at a decent level , even against a good grappler or would the grappler just destroy him? Again , sorrry for my ignorance , I just have no idea how quickly someone can get competent at bjj.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 14, 2009)

ralphmcpherson said:


> thanks for the info. So if , for instance, a really good muay thai fighter who knew no bjj at all wanted to fight mma do you think a year of solid training in bjj would be enough to get him started at a decent level , even against a good grappler or would the grappler just destroy him? Again , sorrry for my ignorance , I just have no idea how quickly someone can get competent at bjj.


 
Tbh it doesn't have to be BJJ, it can also be Judo or wrestling, perhaps a mixture of all three which is what we do. The best thing is to get an MMA coach who is experienced in teaching what you need and who will also and _this is important_ get you the fights you need to make a career if thats what you want.Even if you don't want a career and want just to have a few fights it's still important to get a good coach. It's vitally important that you fight the right people and have the right tactics for those people. You can be  BJJ blackbelt with black belts in karate but if you don't have the right coach it means nothing.


----------



## Xinglu (Sep 14, 2009)

Tez gave you good info, what matters is that you have a good trainer.  I have seen solid standup fighters demolish grapplers, I have seen solid grapplers destroy stand up fighters.  It comes down to the fighters and their trainers and how well they've prepared.

I want to repeat that it should take about a year to get an understanding of the ground game for the ring.  That means that you probably won't want to go rolling with the experience grapplers in the ring, rather that you know the escapes and can make them play your game.

Being competent in any MA is variable, are we talking competent against other trained people (which I have assumed in my answer) or competent on the street against mostly untrained people.  As you can imagine, even someone with three months of training has an advantage against the untrained, especially on the ground.


----------



## Steve (Sep 16, 2009)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Please forgive my ignorance as I know absolutely nothing about bjj or mma , but how long/what belt would someone have to have in bjj before it could be effective in the mma against the good fighters? Like hypothetically , if someone in their early 20's decided to take up bjj with the purpose of eventually fighting proffessionally how long would it take for them to be at a level where it would work against other experienced grapplers? Oh, and sorry for veering off topic.


It would depend upon previous experience and individual drive and talent.  I can tell you that a young guy trains at my school, came off the street with no previous training and is extremely talented and motivated.  He wasn't allowed to take an amateur MMA fight until he had his blue belt in BJJ and his striking/MMA coach said he was ready.  That was just over a year after training.  It was three years and a purple belt in BJJ before he took his first professional MMA fight and he's still learning a ton all the time.


----------



## MJS (Sep 16, 2009)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I also think its a bit of both. The mma has made some tma have alook at how they train and look at ways to become more "well rounded" in their training techniques etc. On the down side I think it has taken the 'patience' out of training for some of the younger guys. For a lot of the kids now looking to start im martial arts the first thing they always want to know is how quickly they can get really good. Traditional martial arts can take years and years to get good at and a lot of the kids just want results quickly because they may be 17 years of age and know they cant fight too much beyond 30 so they just dont have the patience to stick with an art for years and years and the idea that it may take 5 or 6 years (or sometimes longer) to get to black belt just really doesnt appeal to them.


 
I still don't see how someone could think that al they need is a short amount of time to be good.  I mean, even arts like Krav Maga, which IMO, utlilizes the KISS principle, still doesnt mean that if someone spend 3 mos. that they're going to be at BB level.  

This is one of the downsides of the arts in todays world...nobody wants to put in the blood, sweat and tears that it really takes to get good in an art.  I have to agree with Andrew....BJJ is one of the longest time frames, yet look at its popularity.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Sep 16, 2009)

MJS said:


> BJJ is one of the longest time frames, yet look at its popularity.


Most commercial "karate" schools would do well to take notice of this. This is how I remember karate being many years ago. If you had a blue belt or a purple belt, man, you were really something. A brown belt was hotter than a third dan in most modern commercial Karate/TKD schools and a black belt was the definition of shock and awe.  A second or third dan was shock and awe accompanied by fear and trembling, and a fourth dan or higher was like Daehan Park in Best of the Best.

BJJ still has that mentality and is doing quite well. 

Daniel


----------



## Xinglu (Sep 16, 2009)

MJS said:


> I still don't see how someone could think that al they need is a short amount of time to be good.  I mean, even arts like Krav Maga, which IMO, utlilizes the KISS principle, still doesnt mean that if someone spend 3 mos. that they're going to be at BB level.



Not BB level. Competent against an untrained attacker? Sure!  Some one who seriously studies anything for three months has an advantage over your average joe.



MJS said:


> This is one of the downsides of the arts in todays world...nobody wants to put in the blood, sweat and tears that it really takes to get good in an art.  I have to agree with Andrew....BJJ is one of the longest time frames, yet look at its popularity.



It used to be that a BB meant you were "one tough mutha."  Now days, not always so.  It's sad.  My Xingyi teacher told me that you can get rich teaching MA, but to do so you must sacrifice things.  In most cases (not all) it is the quality of student produced.


----------



## Xinglu (Sep 16, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Most commercial "karate" schools would do well to take notice of this. This is how I remember karate being many years ago. If you had a blue belt or a purple belt, man, you were really something. A brown belt was hotter than a third dan in most modern commercial Karate/TKD schools and a black belt was the definition of shock and awe.  A second or third dan was shock and awe accompanied by fear and trembling, and a fourth dan or higher was like Daehan Park in Best of the Best.
> 
> BJJ still has that mentality and is doing quite well.
> 
> Daniel



Exactly!  But - they didn't have 30 plus students in a class either, they might have had 30 students total in their school! Now it seems like a lot of people are more about $$$ instead of producing highly skilled students.  My hat's off to BJJ who are somehow managing to make decent money and still produce skilled students.


----------



## Steve (Sep 19, 2009)

Xinglu said:


> Exactly!  But - they didn't have 30 plus students in a class either, they might have had 30 students total in their school! Now it seems like a lot of people are more about $$$ instead of producing highly skilled students.  My hat's off to BJJ who are somehow managing to make decent money and still produce skilled students.


No mystery to me.  It's fun, effective, and practical.  And there's this thing that not all martial artists like, but keeps standards consistent.  It rhymes with shmompetition.


----------



## Kwan Jang (May 9, 2010)

As a school owner, I believe that the quality of my advanced students, especially my black belts, is the quality of my product. As it is in most industries, you can have short term success by putting out a poor quality product, but in the long run it will come back to bite you. Of course, it should be noted that many of the schools that are successful on the money side, but weak on the combative or technical side provide a strong service for teaching the lifeskills that many parents are looking for for their children.

There are schools that teach a large volume of students that keep a very high quality of their students with very high standards. Using BJJ as an example, Renzo Gracie's school often will have more students in a single class than many schols will have in their entire student body. When I fought at this year's NAGA world grappling championships, Renzo's team brought did very well in the medal count. Our schools (my instructor also helped Renzo, as well as Ralf and Cesar develop their teaching format) and Steve LaVallee's schools are known for producing high numbers of high quaility students as well.

It should be noted that when you compare BJJ's ranking system to others that their purple belt is placed roughly where most other quality programs have their 1st dan, their brown is where most have 2nd and their black is where most have 3rd. Not only in time and training, but purple is a teaching rank, too. So, let's compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges here. I agree fully with their idea of making their ranks something you truly have to strive for and grow into.

Even our schools have struggled the last few years with the quality issue as we've grown, but IMO we are correcting those mistakes.


----------



## Maiden_Ante (May 9, 2010)

IMO: hurt, hurt, hurt. Now even the media tries to exploit the popularity with tv-shows like UFC. It really gets on my nerves when they try to prove who is the greatest fighter (thereby; what is the greatest fighting system) in this way. And the so-called "culture" of MMA with silly looking shorts in flashy colours and _cool_ motives that'll make the fighters into walking commercial notice boards - this also applies to thai boxing.
Together with magazines like _Fighter_ with pictures of some worked-out guy who looks a like steroid-pumped mental institution fugitive (of course, all in the spirit of appearance archetypes that plague the society in general).

I confess; I don't train MMA. I am certain that it's a good, solid self-defense system (otherwise it probably wouldn't get popular to begin with, would it?) so this is simply observations from my part. Then again, this was also the case in some countries with Asian martial arts some time ago when Karate kid (was it only me that just now heard the sounds of a thousand tormented souls crying out in agony?) came out.
So it'll pass, like all things that are popular in the media.

Uh, good night everyone.

/Andreas


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 10, 2010)

Maiden_Ante said:


> And the so-called "culture" of MMA with silly looking shorts in flashy colours and _cool_ motives that'll make the fighters into walking commercial notice boards - this also applies to thai boxing.


To be fair, I have seen some gi's and doboks that look like NASCAR driver's gear because they have so many patches, stars and stripes on them.

The silliness of the shorts, sponsor logos not withstanding, is more indicative of western athletics.

Daniel


----------



## Maiden_Ante (May 10, 2010)

I can only imagine. I don't have any patches on my gi. I can understand having one or two, but then it just looks flashy and stupid.

And that doesn't budge my opinion on MMA "culture"...


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 10, 2010)

Fair enough.  My opinion of the general culture of western athletics is not all that high.  Unfortunately, the most visible MMA organizations seem to have co-opted the general tone that the WCW had back before WWF became WWE, along with a good amount of WWE fanbase shifting to the UFC.

When I see "Affliction" gear, I just shake my head.  I sure wouldn't want my MA to be called an affliction.

Daniel


----------



## pmosiun1 (May 10, 2010)

I think MMA helps the Martial art community because what they do actually works.

It is unlikely other martial art where there are so many story of how certain master can do this and that but then if you look at the first UFC, these master and their martial art got exposed. 

Sigh, just the other day, i was watching Ip man 2 and the bs that got filmed, in the movie, the wing chun guy win against the boxer, but we all know in real life the boxer would win against the wing chun guy.

Even more bs is how this martial art in this movie is portrayed as "humble" when in real life a beaten boxer is much more humble than an untested wing chun guy.

The patch in the fighters shorts are in many ways the sponsor of the fighter, it is after all a sport. Other sport also have sponsor, formula 1, football etc.


----------



## mook jong man (May 10, 2010)

pmosiun1 said:


> I think MMA helps the Martial art community because what they do actually works.
> 
> It is unlikely other martial art where there are so many story of how certain master can do this and that but then if you look at the first UFC, these master and their martial art got exposed.
> 
> ...


 
Its only a movie , build a bridge and get over it.


----------



## TigerLove (May 10, 2010)

From man to man - there is no general yes or no.

From me, mma helped me a lot about understad martial arts better. Why? Well whatever you do in life, having look at it from one more corner, is new experience, and always will help, no matter how experience looked like, it will make horizonts wider.

Martial artists must know something about other arts to truly understand his, and if for me mma counts in "other arts".


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 10, 2010)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Thread necro!!
> 
> Well, I voted that it has mostly helped.  May seem odd, given that I practice what are considered traditional martial arts, but I feel that it has helped.
> 
> ...



With almost a year on, my opinion remains the same.  I can do without some of the visual trappings and marketing, but those are just that: visual trappings and marketing.

While MMA does not really approximate a fight and more than a karate tournament or a boxing match does in my opinion, it does allow for a broad range of techniques to be used against a resisting opponent.

It also shows that people are willing to train and stay with a martial art in the United States without the carrot of constant belt promotions (as seen in many McDojos) or special clubs.

Daniel


----------



## pmosiun1 (May 10, 2010)

You guys should get over this. MMA actually helped the martial art community by showing what actually works, Muay thai, boxing, bjj, wrestling and expose those that do not work.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (May 10, 2010)

I chose helped and hurt in roughly equal measures.

I think MMA has brought unprecidented exposure to martial arts in general, and those schools that understand this and are smart enough to take advantage of it have done extremely well because of the increasing popularity of MMA.

I think that the economy has had much more of an effect on martial arts in general, but I think when you combine the two what you are currently seeing is the death of the middle group of martial arts schools... the ones that are okay... maybe have a good business model, but just an okay curriculum, or a good curriculum but just an okay business model.

I think what we are seeing is a thinning of the herd, with the really great schools, that have great curriculum and great business models excelling, and on the opposite end the McDojos also excelling.

I see nothing that will change with this either until the economy becomes a Bull again and alows mediocre people to do good basically by falling out of bed.

I would however like to see some champions of traditional martial arts start to reemerge.. you know the really badass tough guys who could make any system work, and  would be champions for their respective styles in a sports setting. I think a vast majority of those types have migrated to mma settings, and I would absolutely love to see some traditional marts arts schools re attract them.. 
will it happen?
Dunno... I do not consider myself a traditional martial artist anymore either..
I consider myself a Kenpo guy first and foremost... but I have spent extensive time training in Muay Thai, Boxing, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu in addition to my Kenpo.... So even if I were to go wipe the mats with MMA guys, I can not say with a straight face that I am purely a traditional martial artist....
I do believe that it can come around again... depends on some great individuals in the traditional systems to make it happen though.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (May 10, 2010)

pmosiun1 said:


> You guys should get over this. MMA actually helped the martial art community by showing what actually works, Muay thai, boxing, bjj, wrestling and expose those that do not work.


 

umm no not even close... what MMA did was show what works under strict rules, that are designed to reward athletic ability.
I find myself many times working under a specific set of rules and having trouble against another martial artist who specifically trains only under those rules, but when the rules open up I have found I have little trouble with the same person.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 10, 2010)

pmosiun1 said:


> You guys should get over this. MMA actually helped the martial art community by showing what actually works, Muay thai, boxing, bjj, wrestling and expose those that do not work.


I think it may have showed (to some degree) which martial arts work in a sport setting, as that is what 'events' such as these show, but not everybody wants to learn a 'martial sport'. I dont really think it showed much at all as far as what supposedly "doesnt work" because people of varying skill levels entered these events , particularly in the early days. For instance, royce gracie was a very elite bjj fighter , he was one of the best there was going around but I am not aware of too many other traditional martial arts that were represented by the best that art had to offer. Some of the footage Ive seen of apparant kung fu, tkd, karate etc practioners shows nothing more than some very average practitioners of these arts , surely no one I would consider "elite" in their field.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (May 10, 2010)

pmosiun1 said:


> I think MMA helps the Martial art community because what they do actually works.
> 
> It is unlikely other martial art where there are so many story of how certain master can do this and that but then if you look at the first UFC, these master and their martial art got exposed.
> 
> ...


 

you are pretty naive on the whole thing I see... the fighters in the first several UFCs were hand picked to fit into Royces style, they were hand picked because they were ignorant of Jiu Jitsu, and were really not a threat and were going along with the show... There were many much better fighters available that were turned down. I train in BJJ, am closing in on my Brown Belt, but have no misconceptions that the first few UFCs were just huge commercials designed to introduce America to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu in the most dramatic way possible... it worked, and its effects are still working today... probably the most successful strategic move I have ever seen.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 10, 2010)

pmosiun1 said:


> I think MMA helps the Martial art community because what they do actually works.
> 
> It is unlikely other martial art where there are so many story of how certain master can do this and that but then if you look at the first UFC, these master and their martial art got exposed.
> 
> ...


Please refrain from using broad generalisations such as "we all know in real life the boxer would win against a wing chun guy". What are you even basing this on? Do you really believe that ANY boxer will beat ANY wing chun guy 100% of the time? If so you are very , very naieve. That really is a simplistic way of looking at things , I dare say there are many wing chun guys who would murder a boxer , and vice versa , and this can be said for all arts.


----------



## tellner (May 10, 2010)

It's certainly bounced a lot of folks' reality checks


----------



## HapJim (May 12, 2010)

MMA does not help MA. The silly attitudes and egos are like watching a bunch of 1st graders. Also, MMA does NOT show what "actually" works.

In MMA there are no.....
Eye gouges, no knife hands to the throat, no downward elbows the head, no strikes and/or elbows to the back of the head and spine, no small joint manipulation, no kicking/or kneeing a downed opponent in the face, no pressure point attacks.

These techniques work in the Real Life. These techniques worked, the few times I had to use them in Iraq while house clearing.

Traditional Martial Arts teach respect and dignity, along with their techniques.

MMA is a crude sport. Nothing more. It is IMO- a sport we can do without.


----------



## MarCn (May 13, 2010)

I think Mostly hurt the MA Community


----------



## Bumblebee (May 13, 2010)

I voted no relevance to me, because I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing regardless.  I don't think it really matters what other people are doing.  Or at least I'd like to think I think this way.  Yes, some people are more focused on the physical aspects of martial arts, but is it really our place to judge?  Does it hurt our martial arts training/enthusiasm?  I don't think so.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 13, 2010)

HapJim said:


> MMA does not help MA. The silly attitudes and egos are like watching a bunch of 1st graders. Also, MMA does NOT show what "actually" works.


It shows what actually works within the rule set.  The rest is not something that I have observed as being pervasive.  When I have watched matches, I have seen the same level of professionalism that one sees in boxing.  I don't pay any attention to the advertisements.  

To be fair, I have never trained in an MMA gym.  I have however, seen plenty of lousy attitudes in more than one of what would be considered 'TMA' schools.



HapJim said:


> In MMA there are no.....
> Eye gouges, no knife hands to the throat, no downward elbows the head, no strikes and/or elbows to the back of the head and spine,


None of which is done in TMA sparring either.




HapJim said:


> no small joint manipulation, no kicking/or kneeing a downed opponent in the face, no pressure point attacks.


I am not familiar enough with MMA rules to say if this is accurate, but I can say that while you may train in the technique in a dojo, you will not be using them in free sparring.  Unless of course you stop short, in which case you are not really using them.

Regarding pressure points, those are hardly a guarantee.  They don't work on everyone to the same degree or in some cases, at all.



HapJim said:


> These techniques work in the Real Life. These techniques worked, the few times I had to use them in Iraq while house clearing.


And you were in a military setting without an elaborate rule set insuring safety of the participants to hold you back. 

You would not be handling your training partners the same way.



HapJim said:


> Traditional Martial Arts teach respect and dignity, along with their techniques.


Traditional martial arts don't technically teach anything.  Instructors do.  And not all instructors teach the non-martial aspects of the arts they instruct.



HapJim said:


> MMA is a crude sport. Nothing more. It is IMO- a sport we can do without.


Crude?  On a technical level, it really is not, though I have no doubt that some competitors are crude.  At the highest levels, it is very technical.  

As for whether or not it is a sport we can do without, you'll get different answers depending upon who you ask.

I have no dog in this fight and got along just fine before MMA was televised, or even called MMA.  But I have no issues with its existence.  It simply is not my cup of tea.

Daniel


----------



## Andrew Green (May 13, 2010)

HapJim said:


> MMA is a crude sport. Nothing more. It is IMO- a sport we can do without.



It is a highly technical and strategic sport.

And don't give me that crap about participants being disrespectful, it's simply not true.  At the top level it becomes entertainment as well, and that's all you are seeing.  No MMA gym would tolerate that sort of attitude in training as it would lead to constant injuries.

Put TMA in the entertainment realm and the same thing happens.  In movies 99% of people that do martial arts are bad guys, of course the good guy always whoops all of them, but I'm not sure the higher percentage of 'bad guys' shows that traditional styles are 'better' in entertainment.

I can also say that I have seen a lot more disrespectful behaviour in 'traditional' events then grappling / mma events.  But that is just personal experience.


----------



## Shifu Steve (May 13, 2010)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> To be fair, I have seen some gi's and doboks that look like NASCAR driver's gear because they have so many patches, stars and stripes on them.





Daniel Sullivan said:


> The silliness of the shorts, sponsor logos not withstanding, is more indicative of western athletics.


 
Hysterical. It's very true. To be fair to the MMA contingent, there are some very tricked out TMA dojos that shamelessly promote with dragons, weapons, yin yangs and any other symbol they can get their hands on. I'm not talking about an occasional symbol, I have seen these guys with tailor made jackets that stop nothing short at what Daniel described. 

I think that in some ways the UFC gets a bad wrap because of issues like this and maybe it's deserved to a degree. However, the idea behind Mixed Martial Arts is a sound idea. There's nothing wrong with being a well rounded fighter and training in different systems. The UFC is a vehicle for promoting so called MMA (which in my opinion means next to nothing since it's not even a real style, just a combination of multiple styles at the discretion of the practitioner) but it's just one organization. The popularity of MMA in general is not a bad thing if it gives us a reason to consider other approaches to Martial Arts. In regards to the flash and the meathead attitude, my opinion is so what...it gives them something more productive to do then bench-press and may give me an occasional sparring partner that will help me prepare for the "roided out maniac in the bar scenario." You gotta watch out for them


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 13, 2010)

Here is a question: why does there have to be a question of TMA vs. MMA anyway?

Kind of silly.  MMA is very specific.  TMA can be anything from straight up striking, straight up grappling, a mix, straight up weapons, straight up just one weapon, mostly sport, mostly practical, or a combination.

MMA as an athletic event is essentially an open tournament with a rule set that allows for techniques culled from what are mostly traditional arts.  That rule set tends to favor a certain mix of techniques.

As far as the MMA gym versus the dojo, people train in what they train in for a reason.  The gal at the local taekwondo school who trains with her kids is looking for a different product than what an MMA gym offers and wouldn't be there anyway.  The guy at the aikido school who loves the way his art flows and the tranquility it brings to his life probably won't be there either.  Both she and he are getting trained in skills that they can use to defend themselves and in an environment that meets their needs.

The guys and gals who trains at the MMA gym, however, have a different set of needs and priorities.  Not better or worse; just different.  

MMA and TMA have a degree of overlap with regards to student demographic, but for the most part, that overlap is with athletically minded students who are comfortable in either environment, want a strong sportive aspect and will end up in either an MMA gym or a dojo that does a lot of tournament fighting.  Some may like both and train at more than one place.

Outside of that overlap, the student demographic is different and those happy in one environment probably weren't considering the other anyway.

Be it MMA or TMA, if it isn't what you want to do, then train in your chosen system and be happy.

Daniel


----------



## Balrog (May 14, 2010)

I voted hurt.

It has now become the "public face" of martial arts.  I get people in my school all the time that watched some cage fight and they want to learn how to rip someone's heart out and eat it while it's still beating, that sort of stuff.

We actually were an MMA school long before "modern" MMA.  Our students learn Taekwondo as their primary martial art (think college major), but they also get a little cross-training with joint manipulation from aikido, grappling from jiu-jitsu, etc.  We're not trying to make them expert in those areas, just exposing them to the areas to make them more well-rounded martial artists (think elective courses in college).


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 14, 2010)

Balrog said:


> I voted hurt.
> 
> It has now become the "public face" of martial arts.  I get people in my school all the time that watched some cage fight and *they want to learn how to rip someone's heart out and eat it while it's still beating*, that sort of stuff.


That is taught in Temple of Doom Federation Dojangs.  They call their forms and style of TKD Kali-maa-hon. 

The kwan was established before the outbreak of WWII and it is questionable as to whether or not it can legitimately be called taekwondo.  Schools that teach it are hard to find, however, as the founder, along with many of his senior students, was killed by some guy in a hat before he could designate succession.  The style has suffered from squabbles between his four remaining senior students.  

This has resulted in four different TOD federations each claiming direct lineage and teaching authority, though only three are international.  The fourth came into existence when one of the four remaining senior students fled to North Korea, and is only active within that country.  

Because of the internal strife and factional disputes, the style has gone into severe decline, with its only publicity being the result of a revisionist history motion picture by a man named Spielberg.  This virtually wiped out any ability to teach the style in the west, as its mere mention drew undeserved criticism.

Daniel


----------



## Andrew Green (May 14, 2010)

Balrog said:


> they want to learn how to rip someone's heart out and eat it while it's still beating, that sort of stuff.



That sounds like they where watching Sonny Chiba (Karate) or maybe something out of Hong Kong (Kung-fu)?  I also understand ninjas are capable of such things from what I've seen on tv and in film. Definitely not MMA, it's against the rules, only schools that teach stuff that is too deadly for sport competition know how to do that stuff.


----------



## chaos1551 (May 14, 2010)

I voted helped and hurt because, though it exposes martial arts to the community at large, it also exposes martial arts to the community at large.


----------



## repz (May 14, 2010)

I voted hurt.

Reason I say hurt, is because of all the style bashing. For some reason, some MMAs like to relive past times and live on peoples achievements in fights as if they were their own, but these fighters they will never become, nor have the ability of.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 14, 2010)

repz said:


> I voted hurt.
> 
> Reason I say hurt, is because of all the style bashing. For some reason, some MMAs like to relive past times and live on peoples achievements in fights as if they were their own, but these fighters they will never become, nor have the ability of.


I have certainly noticed more 'style bashing' since mma has become the latest fad. There always was an element of style bashing but in the last couple of years the whole "my art is better than your art" and "these arts arent effective" stuff just seems to be everywhere and it usually seems to be coming from ufc wannabees who sit on their couch watching mma and becoming 'experts' on which art works and which one doesnt. I had a guy the other day give me an hour long lecture on martial arts and what works, what doesnt, which arts are the best etc etc , when I asked him what he trains in he told me he doesnt do martial arts but loves watching ufc and has gained all his information from what he has seen on the television.


----------



## repz (May 14, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I have certainly noticed more 'style bashing' since mma has become the latest fad. There always was an element of style bashing but in the last couple of years the whole "my art is better than your art" and "these arts arent effective" stuff just seems to be everywhere and it usually seems to be coming from ufc wannabees who sit on their couch watching mma and becoming 'experts' on which art works and which one doesnt. I had a guy the other day give me an hour long lecture on martial arts and what works, what doesnt, which arts are the best etc etc , when I asked him what he trains in he told me he doesnt do martial arts but loves watching ufc and has gained all his information from what he has seen on the television.


 
Yes sir, it happens in boxing where people think they are coaches, as a kid I took their advice when I boxed, until my actual trainer told me not to listen to those drunks. It happens in baseball, football, soccer, you get the drift... everyone is an expert in a sport, yet they never played it, or dont continue to.


----------



## repz (May 14, 2010)

Another thing that is friggin hilarious is now that Machida lost, everyone is bashing karate even more now, saying how inferior it is to Muay Thia since Ruas beat him, yet somehow they switched on their selective memory that they can forgot all the Muay thia fighters Machida already ate and spat out. Its like they were sitting on the edge of their seats praying for his lost, like he left a mark on the pure mma combat, or their arguments against karatekas was getting harder, and Machidas comments on tma having a chance in mma was too much to bare for them.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 14, 2010)

repz said:


> Yes sir, it happens in boxing where people think they are coaches, as a kid I took their advice when I boxed, until my actual trainer told me not to listen to those drunks. It happens in baseball, football, soccer, you get the drift... everyone is an expert in a sport, yet they never played it, or dont continue to.


 yes, and it leads to very broad sweeping theories such as 'tkd guys lack hand skills' or 'most fights go to the ground' etc


----------



## tellner (May 14, 2010)

repz said:


> I voted hurt.
> 
> Reason I say hurt, is because of all the style bashing. For some reason, some MMAs like to relive past times and live on peoples achievements in fights as if they were their own, but these fighters they will never become, nor have the ability of.



Pot. Kettle. Black?
Splinter in your brother's eye? Beam in yours?

Before MMA pretty much all TMA styles did was bash each other and bask in the reflected glory of a fictional Yesterday. How many "O-Senesei did this" or "The Ninjas _(sic)_ could do that" or "This was the Ancient Pitiless Battlefield Art of the Lower Slobovians" have we heard over the last century? At least when boxers or MMA fighters brag it's about someone they actually knocked out or submitted.


----------



## repz (May 15, 2010)

tellner said:


> Pot. Kettle. Black?
> Splinter in your brother's eye? Beam in yours?
> 
> Before MMA pretty much all TMA styles did was bash each other and bask in the reflected glory of a fictional Yesterday. How many "O-Senesei did this" or "The Ninjas _(sic)_ could do that" or "This was the Ancient Pitiless Battlefield Art of the Lower Slobovians" have we heard over the last century? At least when boxers or MMA fighters brag it's about someone they actually knocked out or submitted.


 
I never said there wasnt. Do you have a semi-truck backed up in your eye? Because its for the people that have never fought these styles in a no holds bar match but think they can live in the eyes of others who have. 

And last I checked, for a non sport style to "not work", it has to lose its purpose, which for a lot of them is self defense. I have yet to see that happen in mma.


----------



## Gaius Julius Caesar (May 16, 2010)

pmosiun1 said:


> I think MMA helps the Martial art community because what they do actually works.
> 
> It is unlikely other martial art where there are so many story of how certain master can do this and that but then if you look at the first UFC, these master and their martial art got exposed.
> 
> ...


 
 Funny, I have a student who Boxed for years out of Gleason's Gym in NYC so he got great instruction and was around some great fighters.

 The other day we were sparring, keeping it hands and feet with out grappling. I have no formal Wing Chun training, I have crosstrained with some people who do it from novice to instructors of the art. 

 Guess what was giving him the hardest time and alowed me nail him in the nose and temple several times while his defending limb was trapped against him? Some of the Wing Chun I picked up.

 Now we were wearing gloves, imagine if we put eyes and throats on the table of acceptable targets, then the Boxer has next to nothing (if he is keeping within styles that is) and the Wng Chun guy has a whole host of technques he has practiced thousands of times.

 Saying someone from this art will alays beat up someone from some other art is stupid.

 It only counts the surface of the art.
 What about they train harder at their art than you do?

 Maybe they have a gift for the movements of the art and they can embody their art in combat better than you?

Maybe your art has a good rep but your instructor does not teach it well?

Maybe it's a great style, but your school has a relaxed, hobbiest atmosphere.

Maybe the Boxer has a great combative attitude in the Gym or in the Ring, applying his skills with another Boxer, who is trying to KO him but not kill him but if he hits the streets the fact that someone is out to kill him, ther is no Ref, Corner or Judges to stop the fight and no rules maybe his fear effects his performance?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 16, 2010)

tellner said:


> Before MMA pretty much all TMA styles did was bash each other and bask in the reflected glory of a fictional Yesterday. How many "O-Senesei did this" or "The Ninjas _(sic)_ could do that" or "This was the Ancient Pitiless Battlefield Art of the Lower Slobovians" have we heard over the last century? At least when boxers or MMA fighters brag it's about someone they actually knocked out or submitted.


Amazing how a common competitor has suddenly made most of TMA forget about that.

Of course then you have to really ask: what truly constitutes a traditional martial art?  I have seen styles that are younger than the UFC called Traditional.  Even Taekwondo is less than sixty years old, and the sparing style that has developed out of the olympic movement is less than thirty, and definitely distinct from the rest of taekwondo.

Daniel


----------



## tellner (May 16, 2010)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Amazing how a common competitor has suddenly made most of TMA forget about that.


There's an old Arab saying that goes "My brother and I will fight my cousin. My cousin and I will fight the foreigner." MMA has the potential to eat all the commercial schools' lunch. So the WingVingTsunChun ITF/WTF and all the other fights fade away.



> Of course then you have to really ask: what truly constitutes a traditional martial art?  I have seen styles that are younger than the UFC called Traditional.  Even Taekwondo is less than sixty years old, and the sparing style that has developed out of the olympic movement is less than thirty, and definitely distinct from the rest of taekwondo.



I guess they become traditional when people forget their MA used to be M.


----------



## Radharc (May 17, 2010)

Hey,

I think the MMA debate is anything but linear, IMO when we talk about martial arts we are talking about a lot of "different animals", we have internal martial arts, we have people who do martial arts just to stay fit, we have people who like to compete, we have the self-defense aspect, different martial arts cater to this aspects in different extents.

Now regarding MMA, from a competition mindset perspective i think it was largely positive, in a way it helped answer the age old question "can my martial art beat your martial art", it set a focus on efectivness inside the ring, one on one. The negative side is that some ppl tend to think of MMA as the ultimate form of fighting regarding efectiveness, and transport that notion to real life self-defense settings, where there are no rules. A simple street multiple opponents scenario brings MMA "advantages", like grappling, seriously into question, I know for sure that in a such a situation the last thing i wanna do is grapple or go to the ground, in this setting something considered "innefective" in the octagon, like Aikido, can probably be more effective. Not to mention a more obvious system like Krav Maga

That said, I think there are some other positive effects, it encouraged cross training, people are more aware now that lots of different systems have very good techniques and that its a good thing to be well rounded and have different tools for different situations. Anything that can help to counter system-isolationism and helps fighting systems evolve is good in my opinion. And it brought lots of people into martials arts as well.

The downside is now that he have a hybrid system that lots of annoying people think that can turn you into a super-man, and is superior to all others.


I have to admit I haven't read the entire thread, only the first few pages and a lot of people made very good points there and  I´m sure others did the same afterwards, so I apologize if I'm repeating someone.


----------



## MJS (May 17, 2010)

HapJim said:


> MMA does not help MA. The silly attitudes and egos are like watching a bunch of 1st graders. Also, MMA does NOT show what "actually" works.


 
I wouldn't limit that 'attitude' to just MMA though.  I've seen quite a bit of what you describe, in other arts as well.  



> In MMA there are no.....
> Eye gouges, no knife hands to the throat, no downward elbows the head, no strikes and/or elbows to the back of the head and spine, no small joint manipulation, no kicking/or kneeing a downed opponent in the face, no pressure point attacks.
> 
> These techniques work in the Real Life. These techniques worked, the few times I had to use them in Iraq while house clearing.


 
Agreed.  And this is where alot of the debate takes place.  You get the TMA guys who say this stuff, the MMA guys who say it wont work in the ring, the MMA guys who think that what they see (insert any MMA fighter here) do in the ring, is a sure shot that it will also work for them.  Just goes around and around.  To that, I like to say this:  everyone has their fav. things that they like to do.  The TMA guy will fall back on what you said, the MMA guy will talk about the clinch and taking the guy to the ground.  All are fine and dandy, however, IMHO, I think that they should also have a plan b, c, and d, in the event those things do not work. 



> Traditional Martial Arts teach respect and dignity, along with their techniques.


 
See my comment above.  Again, I've seen a lack of that as well.



> MMA is a crude sport. Nothing more. It is IMO- a sport we can do without.


 
I agree, it is a sport.  However, IMO, I think that both the TMAs and MMA, can benefit from each other.


----------



## tellner (May 17, 2010)

HapJim said:


> MMA does not help MA. The silly attitudes and egos are like watching a bunch of 1st graders. Also, MMA does NOT show what "actually" works.


As others have pointed out, these are hardly confined to MMA. I've seen relatively little of it in professional MMA. And TMA can hardly point fingers. See Boztepe vs. Cheung, ITF vs. WTF, TSD vs. Karate, CHKD vs THKD, pretty much any two Silat lineages _ad nauseam, ad infinitum_. At least in the competitive sport the ego and talking yourself up can be a legitimate part of the mental game - psyching yourself up and the other guy out. It can serve a purpose. In the TMA it's generally a lot less connected to any real-world goal.



> In MMA there are no.....
> Eye gouges, no knife hands to the throat, no downward elbows the head, no strikes and/or elbows to the back of the head and spine, no small joint manipulation, no kicking/or kneeing a downed opponent in the face, no pressure point attacks.
> 
> These techniques work in the Real Life. These techniques worked, the few times I had to use them in Iraq while house clearing.


Frankly, most TMA are lousy at that sort of thing. The ones that spar don't use these techniques in their bouts. And what they teach is often pretty lame, stuffed into a dance-form kata or taught as unconnected technique. Is it really what their practitioners revert to under pressure? Are these things so off an MMA player's radar that he or she couldn't bite, elbow or stomp a downed enemy? 

I'm honestly guessing no on both counts. 

Let's take a look at what they have in common - boxing and wrestling loosely defined. Maybe MMA fighters are specialists in this. Are their boxing and wrestling skills as good as or better than most TMA types'? Definitely no worse. Are they in better condition? Almost certainly. Wrestling and Thai boxing require a hellish degree of fitness.



> Traditional Martial Arts teach respect and dignity, along with their techniques.


Says so right there on the label. In about thirty years of this game I can't say I've seen them do a very good job of it. "Respect" tends to mean a lot of bobbing up and down combined with worshipful butt-kissing to anyone with a fancier colored strip of cloth and a highly developed, rigidly enforced status system. 

My working definition of "respect" and "dignity" are a little more nuanced than that. 

If we're talking about fighters or even people terrified to the point where they turn into vicious scared monkeys you respect the fact that one lucky or desperate attack could ruin your day. So a prudent person has manners which keep him from putting himself in danger. Someone who has put in a lot of time and effort deserves recognition for it. And good manners are just plain good manners anywhere. Besides, if you don't have them people tend to stay away from you.

Dignity? If you mean physical and emotional confidence I suppose MA can be good for that. So can MMA. So can anything which gives you a sense of real accomplishment. 



> MMA is a crude sport. Nothing more. It is IMO- a sport we can do without.


A sport? Certainly. People who compete make no bones about that.

Crude? Hardly. It has developed very quickly and to a very high level so that the early winners like Royce Gracie aren't even contenders anymore. It's highly optimized for what it does. That isn't everything, but it covers a whole lot of territory. More than most TMA, to be quite honest. 

Something we can do without? Yeah, I guess so. We can do without all sorts of things. But it does provide a valuable service. All sorts of people were fooling themselves and had no way of seeing if what they were saying was true. 
"My striking can stop any wrestler". No. Not really. 
"My martial art is unstoppable". Didn't turn out that way.
"Our anti-fill-in-the-blank techniques are invincible". Proved false.
"I don't have to learn anything about what anyone else does. All I have to do is practice what they teach us." Not if you want to put up a good fight.
And so on.


----------



## HapJim (May 18, 2010)

A quick reply, for time is limited. Your opinions are well presented.

But my opinion has never changed.

I have never been able to like, or respect MMA. I think it damages the image of Martial Arts. Damages and does nothing to help.


----------



## repz (May 18, 2010)

For the TMA or Self Defense types.

Take out the eye gouges, groin shots, accept the fact that maybe one shot wont take out a superbly conditioned athlete when protection is wrapped around your hand, stop small joint manipulation and finger tears, dont use the enviornment (cage in this instance) and weapons, accept sport strategies (point count, aggresiveness for points), dont think about him pulling out a weapon, no neck strikes, no stomps to the knee, no nose or ear pulls. Modify all of this, which for some styles is all that they are or a big majority of their syllabus, conform to the popular and effective standard to make up what you dont have for this situation, and you maybe you can succeed in mma. Simple as that, and has been done before.

But dont forgot what you lost to get there, and its up to you to decide if it was all worth it or not.


----------



## Andrew Green (May 18, 2010)

repz said:


> For the TMA or Self Defense types.
> 
> Take out the eye gouges, groin shots, accept the fact that maybe one shot wont take out a superbly conditioned athlete when protection is wrapped around your hand, stop small joint manipulation and finger tears, dont use the enviornment (cage in this instance) and weapons, accept sport strategies (point count, aggresiveness for points), dont think about him pulling out a weapon, no neck strikes, no stomps to the knee, no nose or ear pulls. Modify all of this, which for some styles is all that they are or a big majority of their syllabus, conform to the popular and effective standard to make up what you dont have for this situation, and you maybe you can succeed in mma. Simple as that, and has been done before.
> 
> But dont forgot what you lost to get there, and its up to you to decide if it was all worth it or not.



Now keep in mind that any "traditional" style that does all those likely either doesn't spar at all, or spars and competes under rules that are far more limiting then those used in MMA.

But if you are from a school where nose and ear pulls are a major part of sparring, please post some videos set to benny hill music.


----------



## repz (May 18, 2010)

Andrew Green said:


> Now keep in mind that any "traditional" style that does all those likely either doesn't spar at all, or spars and competes under rules that are far more limiting then those used in MMA.
> 
> But if you are from a school where nose and ear pulls are a major part of sparring, please post some videos set to benny hill music.


 
Lol, i love when someone posts something and automatically becomes the representative of whatever point they want to make. No one in there should be something that can be taken as someone saying A is better than B. Even if you dont agree with that, or believe even if it was legal it wouldnt have an affect, its still fact that many arts have to give that up, and conform to a different standard. 

And sparring using protected areas that allow groin shots and eye gouges is possible with certain gear. Sparring live with someone who is armed with a device that needs to be disarmed is possible. Not all tma and sd arts train the same, there is no standard in every art. MMA has a rule set that has to be followed, so its easy to guess their training patterns, non-mma doesnt has a standard ruleset to follow, so bunching them up into one broad catergory isnt so easy.


----------



## Shifu Steve (May 18, 2010)

I think its difficult to say MMA this or TMA that at any length, I mean thats such a generality that it really needs to be qualified by a specific example.  I know were speaking in terms of opinion, everyone is entitled to their own, but personally I could not say what most TMA or MMA schools do.  Again, I have to state that MMA is such a loose term (not to say TMA isnt).  I suppose you could call yourself a Mixed Martial Artist the second you train in another martial art.  So by this definition I will call myself such and volunteer that Ive trained in 2 or more traditional styles.  Now that Ive established my credibility (that was easy) as a Mixed Martial Artist I immediately find my new found (self imposed) title under scrutiny.  If I really am a Mixed Martial Artist, why dont I fight in a ring, cage or the UFC?  For starters, I do actively spar.  However, I spar for different reasons.  Sometimes I spar to work a technique which isnt really very close to an organized MMA bout.  However, sometimes I spar, all out, for the very purpose of fighting.  

Ive never fought in an official capacity so I dont know if that automatically disqualifies me from being a Mixed Martial Artist.  If it does, then my question is what is a Mixed Martial Artist?  If its a fighter that participates in a full contact combat sport that allows a wide variety of fighting techniques and skills, from a mixture of martial arts traditions and non-traditions, to be used in competitions then I renounce my title and happily return to the vague TMA camp.  

My point is this: Mixed Martial Arts as a concept are a great idea.  Ive always adopted the philosophy that whatever works is worth using.  Since most styles generally emphasize some things over others, theres no shame in looking at a complementary style for some answers or just for a different perspective.  However, MMA as a sport/culture/media outlet/entertainment venue is fundamentally different than the original idea behind Mixed Martial Arts (as a concept).  I like that sport/entertainment MMA raises awareness about multiple approaches to fightingI also think it raises awareness about extreme conditioning which cant be a bad thinghowever outside of that what is it really?  Its just s sport, like anything else.  The techniques dont necessarily work any better than the ones taught in the traditional dojo. How could they?  They are based on those techniques (minus the ones that are not allowed).  They may be organized and boiled down in a way thats more conducive to a ring or cage fight, but any martial artist worth listening to can modify their own technique to fit a given situation.  Theres also the experience of fighting in real time, with rules, for the purpose of winning.  Something that any TMA dojo could do if they chose to.  However I cant speak to the caliber of the opponent but if youre fighting to get the experience of real time/full contact you dont need to fight Rampage Jackson.  I think one of the issues is that traditional or self defense schools may have a different focus and see sport MMA as a watered down version of Martial Arts.  To me, its just a sport.  It has some ideas behind it that are good reminders for my own training but other than that its focus and goal diverge from my own.  I dont train for money, entertainment or sport so I dont see how sport MMA affects anything I do no more than professional boxing does (another sport from which I look for ideas to apply to my own approach).  

Concerning the culture aspect I cant really see a synergy there either.  Are we comparing dojo culture to what we see on TV?  Thats pointless.  These guys are coached to get ratings for TV and PPV.  Of course they are going to act crazy.  People want to watch that.  That doesnt even relate to the dojo because the circumstances are totally different.  I have no idea how a given UFC fighter acts in his gym, dojo etc but I would guess its much more serious and subdued.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 18, 2010)

Shifu Steve said:


> I think it&#8217;s difficult to say MMA this or TMA that at any length, I mean that&#8217;s such a generality that it really needs to be qualified by a specific example.  I know we&#8217;re speaking in terms of opinion, everyone is entitled to their own, but personally I could not say what &#8220;most&#8221; TMA or MMA schools do. * Again, I have to state that MMA is such a loose term* (not to say TMA isn&#8217;t).


 
I'm going to quibble a little. 

MMA as a term is like kendo.  Realistically, any sword art practiced in Japan  could be called kendo, as it means way of the sword (literally sword  way).  But when you say 'kendo,' everyone knows that you're talking  about guys in navy blue keikogis and hakamas wearing bogu and wielding  shinais who fence under the rules set down by the ZNKR.  

Likewise, when you say MMA, people know that you are talking about the  sport, not the generic of simply mixing martial arts.


Shifu Steve said:


> I suppose you could call yourself a &#8220;Mixed Martial Artist&#8221; the second you train in another martial art.


Not unless you are mixing the arts.  I train in three different arts currently and have trained in three others previously.  

Unless I blend them together in some kind of meaningful way in my practice, I am a diversified martial artist, but not necessarily a mixed martial artist.

And if I were to blend my hapkido, taekwondo, and kendo/kumdo into a cohesive style that involves kicks/knee strikes, hand/elbow stikes, and whacking with a stick and/or cutting with a sword (in our kumdo federation, we do both), then I may have a very cool art that is well suited to the late seventeenth/early ninteenth century, or to walking with a stick at night, but it *still* wouldn't be MMA (they'd never let me bring my sticks or sword into the cage.  Drat).

Generally, outside of sport, I see such blending dubbed as hybrid rather than mixed.  HKD and JKD are both hybrid arts, but nobody actually calls them MMA, though some do consider JKD to be the progenitor of modern MMA (I don't know that that is really accurate, however; I'll leave that to someone more versed in JKD and MMA than I to decide).

Minor quibble aside, I like your post and agree with you!

Daniel


----------



## Shifu Steve (May 18, 2010)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Likewise, when you say MMA, people know that you are talking about the sport, not the generic of simply mixing martial arts.


I don't disagree with this. My point was to highlight MMA as an idea (generic) vs. the popular, specific notion that you refer to. I think The MMA raises consciousness about the generic concept which I ascribe to. 




Daniel Sullivan said:


> Unless I blend them together in some kind of meaningful way in my practice, I am a diversified martial artist, but not necessarily a mixed martial artist.


Logically I agree but in practice I blend the multiple styles I study. I have trained in multiple arts distinctly for the arts that they are (for the purpose of preservation and lineage) but I train techniques that are influenced by two or three styles and when I spar all those styles are present and I draw from them the aspects that I find most effective for me. So in my case I do blend them together in a meaningful way.


----------



## MJS (May 18, 2010)

HapJim said:


> A quick reply, for time is limited. Your opinions are well presented.
> 
> But my opinion has never changed.
> 
> I have never been able to like, or respect MMA. I think it damages the image of Martial Arts. Damages and does nothing to help.


 
So, you're fine with the way the people act in the traditional arts?  As I've said, its pretty safe to say that there are just as many issues there, as you claim there is with MMA.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 18, 2010)

Andrew Green said:


> Now keep in mind that any "traditional" style that does all those likely either doesn't spar at all, or spars and competes under rules that are far more limiting then those used in MMA.
> 
> But if you are from a school where nose and ear pulls are a major part of sparring, please post some videos set to benny hill music.


This comes back to whether or not you have to spar with certian moves to ready you for using them in real life. I train with guys who practice all the dirty stuff like throat strikes, groin strikes, eye gouges etc and all the things that are 'against the rules' in MMA. Now these guys obviously dont spar using these techniques but the fact they have practiced them literally thousands and thousands of times over 20 years or more leads me to believe that if they were being attacked those moves would come out and would be performed brutally. Just because they dont use them in sparring doesnt mean they cant do them effectively in my opinion. For a lot of these guys those moves would be the first thing they would rely on if defending themselves, whereas as a 'sports fighter' does not train these moves as they are not part of the ruleset so it is less likely they would be proficient in using them to defend themselves. Basically my point is, just because you dont do something in sparring doesnt mean you cant do it, providing it is practced regularly. For instance, I spar by WTF ruleset (no kicking below the belt), but I can assure you if push come to shove the first thing I will do is kick their knee out using one of the kicks Ive practiced a million times , just because I dont do it in sparring doesnt mean I cant do it.


----------



## Tez3 (May 19, 2010)

HapJim said:


> A quick reply, for time is limited. Your opinions are well presented.
> 
> But my opinion has never changed.
> 
> I have never been able to like, or respect MMA. I think it damages the image of Martial Arts. Damages and does nothing to help.


 
So basically you are saying that you find MMA people unlikable and cannot respect them ( I paraphrase for brevity), that's a pretty big judgement to make about several thousands of people *worldwide* you know nothing about. You base this judgement on what? A television show perhaps? an _American_ television show? Have you seen MMA live, have you been in a proper MMA gym with serious fighters at all? Have you met fighters from other countries? Have you researched their backgrounds? Have you met any fighters from the Indian continent, from Australasia, from Europe, the UK?  Have you met the guys from MMA gyms in Scotland who, when another, rival, Scottish gym was flooded out and the training equipment destoyed all gave something so the gym could restart in another location. Or how about all the promotions here that raise so much money for local charities or the fighters who fight for free on shows that help Service charities, or about the servicemen and women who fight MMA ( 2 British soldiers who fought MMA have been killed in Afghan so far), they disgust you too with their 'lack of morals' etc?
The US military has taken a great interest in MMA as the British forces are beginning to, believing there is much good to be found in it's training.
Most MMA fighters I know in the UK and Europe are experienced TMA people too, many have Dan grades in traditional styles from TKD, karate and WC. 
The vast majority of MMA people are normal, hard working ( many have to combine training with their day jobs) martial artists who enjoy the challenges of MMA which when you actually get to know it is physical chess. It's not everyone's cup of tea but we like it, and what you see on your hyped up, money and fame driven American shows is not where MMA is at grassroots level where the real people are.

You don't have to like MMA but really it hardly shows a superior intellect and higher moral standing when you slag off thousands of people you know nothing about.


----------



## Andrew Green (May 19, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> but I can assure you if push come to shove the first thing I will do is kick their knee out using one of the kicks Ive practiced a million times , just because I dont do it in sparring doesnt mean I cant do it.



Now let me ask you this, in MMA kicking the knee is legal, so are you confident that it will have the effect you think it will when it very rarely does a great deal when used in full contact sparring?

Also, I can assure you that any sport fighter knows all the dirty tricks, despite being illegal in competition they still are used.  In recent fights Kimbo can be seen digging a thumb into the eye in a attempt to get out of a triangle that the ref didn't catch, paul Daley was using a similar technique from the bottom of mount against Koschek.  Groin kicks are a frequent occurrence, despite being illegal.

Also look at the history of MMA, it came out of vale tudo, in which none of the current rules really existed and schools did, and often still do include those in there training to some extent, although certainly not to the same extent as legal techniques.  However you do have to remain aware of what the fouls are in any combat sport.

But to the real question, if you are confident that you can use techniques that exist outside of your sparring and competition rules if forced to do so, why would you assume that others, competing under a different ruleset are not capable of doing the same?


----------



## Tez3 (May 19, 2010)

Andrew Green said:


> Now let me ask you this, in MMA kicking the knee is legal, so are you confident that it will have the effect you think it will when it very rarely does a great deal when used in full contact sparring?
> 
> Also, I can assure you that any sport fighter knows all the dirty tricks, despite being illegal in competition they still are used. In recent fights Kimbo can be seen digging a thumb into the eye in a attempt to get out of a triangle that the ref didn't catch, paul Daley was using a similar technique from the bottom of mount against Koschek. Groin kicks are a frequent occurrence, despite being illegal.
> 
> ...


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Andrew Green said:
> 
> 
> > Now let me ask you this, in MMA kicking the knee is legal, so are you confident that it will have the effect you think it will when it very rarely does a great deal when used in full contact sparring?
> ...


----------



## MJS (May 19, 2010)

Both sides make a good point, but I'm going to side with Ralph a bit more on this one.  I'll also refer back to the Fight Quest series, specifically the Krav Maga and Kajukenbo episodes.  In both of those, we saw 2 MMA guys, who more times than not, fell back on their MMA training.  Doug even said it himself in the KM show.




> but when people base "what works and what doesnt work" on what they've seen in MMA I have a problem with it.


 
Another good point, and personally, I feel the same way.  As another example: we talk about the elbow to the back against a double leg.  The TMA guys feel its a valid tech, the MMA guys disagree.  Yet in that Kaju show, we saw a very effective elbow to the back of Jimmy.


----------



## Tez3 (May 19, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Tez3 said:
> 
> 
> > The difference as I see it is that, yes, they know the dirty tricks (I dont doubt that for a second), but they dont train them or practice them over and over because they are not part of the ruleset. I 'know' how to play golf, but I do not train it everyday so I doubt I could go out and become a pro golfer, just as these guys 'know' the dirty tricks but they dont train them over and over where some arts do. I dont doubt their skill for a minute and Im sure they could easily handle themselves on the street, but they are training in a 'sport' with rules and if viewed this way I have no problems with it whatsoever, but when people base "what works and what doesnt work" on what they've seen in MMA I have a problem with it. So, in answer to your question, I am as sure as I can be that techniques that exist outside my sparring ruleset may well work because I have practiced them time and time again, I may not use them in sparring but they are something I do 4 to 5 days a week, every week. Sportsman train for what may happen in a game, a cricketer does not practice batting against under arm bowling because they cannot come accross this in a game, so they simply dont train it, just as a sports fighter is not going to spend hours and hours practicing throat strikes because it is not something they are allowed to do or have to learn to defend against.
> ...


----------



## Andrew Green (May 19, 2010)

MJS said:


> Another good point, and personally, I feel the same way.  As another example: we talk about the elbow to the back against a double leg.  The TMA guys feel its a valid tech, the MMA guys disagree.  Yet in that Kaju show, we saw a very effective elbow to the back of Jimmy.



I doubt you will find many MMA practitioners that will tell you it will never be effective, it can be, there is a reason strikes to the spine are disallowed.  What you will hear is that it is a unreliable technique, and you are far better off using higher percentage defenses as attempting the elbow will more often then not end up with you on your back, and getting there with a pretty hard impact as to do it you put your weight over the guy shootings shoulders, allowing a easy lift and slam.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 20, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> ralphmcpherson said:
> 
> 
> > I think what people are overlooking is that there are very few professional MMA fighters, there are many who fight pro rules but they don't earn their living fighting so don't train MMA day in day out, many, like the fighters at our club also train SD. A lot of fighters I know train SD with people like Geoff Thompson, his seminars and courses are very popular here. Karl Tanswell as well as training MMA fighters is well known for his SD training. One of our fighters recently gained his instructor certificate in Krav Maga. Many fighters work as doormen, police offciers, or are in the military, many do jobs where self defence is important, such as social work, teaching, security etc who fight.
> ...


----------



## Gaius Julius Caesar (May 20, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Tez3 said:
> 
> 
> > The difference as I see it is that, yes, they know the dirty tricks (I dont doubt that for a second), but they dont train them or practice them over and over because they are not part of the ruleset. I 'know' how to play golf, but I do not train it everyday so I doubt I could go out and become a pro golfer, just as these guys 'know' the dirty tricks but they dont train them over and over where some arts do. I dont doubt their skill for a minute and Im sure they could easily handle themselves on the street, but they are training in a 'sport' with rules and if viewed this way I have no problems with it whatsoever, but when people base "what works and what doesnt work" on what they've seen in MMA I have a problem with it. So, in answer to your question, I am as sure as I can be that techniques that exist outside my sparring ruleset may well work because I have practiced them time and time again, I may not use them in sparring but they are something I do 4 to 5 days a week, every week. Sportsman train for what may happen in a game, a cricketer does not practice batting against under arm bowling because they cannot come accross this in a game, so they simply dont train it, just as a sports fighter is not going to spend hours and hours practicing throat strikes because it is not something they are allowed to do or have to learn to defend against.
> ...


----------



## Shifu Steve (May 20, 2010)

Gaius Julius Caesar said:


> ralphmcpherson said:
> 
> 
> > The average MMA fighter stance leaves his testicles open like a speed bag because no one is suppossed to kick him there, so he uses stances that work better for the ruleset. That is smart for his sport, could be the end in the street.
> ...


----------



## Tez3 (May 20, 2010)

Gaius Julius Caesar said:


> ralphmcpherson said:
> 
> 
> > Great points. If a MMA practicianer trained those types of technques and did some training modified for the street i.e. Differnt body positioning and stancing, accounting for the pressence of a blade (No more double leg takedowns!) an enemy who will try to rip or bite off an ear or finger (I saw a guy bite of another mans lip once.) and some other considerations and he will be just fine for the street. I know Gregg Jackson teaches his fighters about these things, it be safe to assume others do as well.
> ...


----------



## tellner (May 20, 2010)

Tez, watch any football (football, not hand egg) game when the teams line up for penalty kicks. Guys instinctively guard the Franks and Beans with an instinct honed through millions of years of evolution. The ones who didn't didn't have descendants


----------



## MJS (May 20, 2010)

Andrew Green said:


> I doubt you will find many MMA practitioners that will tell you it will never be effective, it can be, there is a reason strikes to the spine are disallowed.


 
You're right.  Theres a laundry list of things that're not allowed.  However, that doesn't mean those same things couldn't be trained for a street situation.



> What you will hear is that it is a unreliable technique, and you are far better off using higher percentage defenses as attempting the elbow will more often then not end up with you on your back, and getting there with a pretty hard impact as to do it you put your weight over the guy shootings shoulders, allowing a easy lift and slam.


 
Higher percentage for who?  You? Me? See, this is why I don't like to use that term....because its so open ended.  People talk about these 'high percentage' moves, as if they're the gosple of things to do in the ring.  Fact is, what is 'high percentage' for you, may not be for me, and this is due to many reasons.  Yet how many times do people assume that because they see Rickson or any other fighter do something, they assume it'll work for them?  

In the example that I pointed to though, you had Jimmy, who is a MMA fighter, attempt a double leg, and it was countered with the elbow.


----------



## shaolin_al (Jul 7, 2010)

It has both helped and hurt the MA community. Every guy now thinks he is the next GSP and are packing into MMA gyms. The good traditional martial arts teachers are having to close shop and teach from home if at all. MMA is not totally to blame for this as the economy doesn't help either but it is still a problem. MMA has become its own system of techniques and can be trained for street. Fighters like Lyoto Machida who have a traditional arts background and who finds success in UFC get fans interested again in traditional styles. So it goes back and forth. That's just my two cents.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 7, 2010)

shaolin_al said:


> It has both helped and hurt the MA community. Every guy now thinks he is the next GSP and *are packing into* *MMA gyms*. The good traditional martial arts teachers are having to close shop and teach from home if at all. MMA is not totally to blame for this as the economy doesn't help either but it is still a problem. MMA has become its own system of techniques and can be trained for street. Fighters like Lyoto Machida who have a traditional arts background and who finds success in UFC get fans interested again in traditional styles. So it goes back and forth. That's just my two cents.


 

I wish that were true! The recession has hit everyone and disposable income is less so MMA gyms/clubs are finding it hard as well as promotions trying to sell tickets. The number of tradtional martial arts classes here hasn't changed, they far outnumber MMA ones which I can probably recite off to you now lol, we don't have that many.


----------



## qwksilver61 (Jul 7, 2010)

While I do have certain respect for the art and their Instructors...I do not like the self-centered cocky-a@#*holes and their friends that I occasionally run into that are quick to put it to the test,all for the sake of being a big badass.
Sad but true.....someone gets a morsel..they want the whole cake!
I am sure though that there are legit schools in the area with some code of conduct,of course you will get some bad apples too....so hey that would be 50/50


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 7, 2010)

qwksilver61 said:


> *While I do have certain respect for the art* *and their Instructors...I do not like the self-centered cocky-a@#*holes and their friends that I occasionally run into that are quick to put it to the test,all for the sake of being a big badass.*
> Sad but true.....someone gets a morsel..they want the whole cake!
> I am sure though that there are legit schools in the area with some code of conduct,of course you will get some bad apples too....so hey that would be 50/50


 
That goes for the TMA places as well though, it's human nature not the style.
 Those cocky whatsits would be that whatever style they did or even if they did none, not MMA's fault they are like that. They could pick Muay Thai and be like that, or karate or TKD etc. More to do with the way they've been brought up than what they may train ( I'm betting though they don't train MMA just mess around at home)


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> That goes for the TMA places as well though, it's human nature not the style.
> Those cocky whatsits would be that whatever style they did or even if they did none, not MMA's fault they are like that. They could pick Muay Thai and be like that, or karate or TKD etc. More to do with the way they've been brought up than what they may train ( I'm betting though they don't train MMA just mess around at home)


true to a degree but it depends on the TMA I believe. If an arrogant , cocky bloke started at my club he wouldnt last long, they have usually left by yellow belt as our instructors dont care for it at all. If word got back to our GM or one of the instructors that a member of our club was out on weekends picking fights, showing off, big noting themselves etc , the outcome would not be good. The tenants of our martial art clearly state that this behaviour is unacceptable. I cant speak on behalf of all clubs, but where I train there are over 4000 students and probably 200 of them are blackbelts and I can honestly say that I am yet to meet more than 1 or 2 of those black belts who I would regard as having an attitute problem because those who do get sorted out very quickly. In saying all this Im not saying its any better or worse in MMA, Im just saying that not all TMA clubs have these sorts of problems.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 8, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> true to a degree but it depends on the TMA I believe. If an arrogant , cocky bloke started at my club he wouldnt last long, they have usually left by yellow belt as our instructors dont care for it at all. If word got back to our GM or one of the instructors that a member of our club was out on weekends picking fights, showing off, big noting themselves etc , the outcome would not be good. The tenants of our martial art clearly state that this behaviour is unacceptable. I cant speak on behalf of all clubs, but where I train there are over 4000 students and probably 200 of them are blackbelts and I can honestly say that I am yet to meet more than 1 or 2 of those black belts who I would regard as having an attitute problem because those who do get sorted out very quickly. In saying all this Im not saying its any better or worse in MMA, Im just saying that not all TMA clubs have these sorts of problems.


 
What makes you think anyone would survive being cocky in an MMA place? It's actually the last place you would be able to do this. The problem as I read it was that these people were cocky *outside of training* as the poster didn't train with them. You have no control over the behaviour of your students outside training you know, you may not even know what they are doing or saying, they could be equally cocky.

I never said that all TMA places have these problems but it seems harder for people to accept that all MMA places don't either. the perception people have of MMA is taken from the television and the fans not the actual fighters.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 8, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> What makes you think anyone would survive being cocky in an MMA place? It's actually the last place you would be able to do this. The problem as I read it was that these people were cocky *outside of training* as the poster didn't train with them. You have no control over the behaviour of your students outside training you know, you may not even know what they are doing or saying, they could be equally cocky.
> 
> I never said that all TMA places have these problems but it seems harder for people to accept that all MMA places don't either. the perception people have of MMA is taken from the television and the fans not the actual fighters.


you'll note in my last post that I made a point that I was not saying that it was any better or worse in MMA. I was not insinuating that its any different from mma to tma.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 8, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> you'll note in my last post that I made a point that I was not saying that it was any better or worse in MMA. I was not insinuating that its any different from mma to tma.


 

and I never said all TMA places were like that!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 8, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> That goes for the TMA places as well though, it's human nature not the style.
> Those cocky whatsits would be that whatever style they did or even if they did none, not MMA's fault they are like that. They could pick Muay Thai and be like that, or karate or TKD etc. More to do with the way they've been brought up than what they may train ( I'm betting though they don't train MMA just mess around at home)


 
The only difference is that the cocky MMA guys will actually put it to a test.......often times the cocky TMA guys will simply make statements they have no intention of backing up about what they could do.......if the conditions were just right for it........though never right now.


----------



## Steve (Jul 8, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I think it may have showed (to some degree) which martial arts work in a sport setting, as that is what 'events' such as these show, but not everybody wants to learn a 'martial sport'. I dont really think it showed much at all as far as what supposedly "doesnt work" because people of varying skill levels entered these events , particularly in the early days. For instance, royce gracie was a very elite bjj fighter , he was one of the best there was going around but I am not aware of too many other traditional martial arts that were represented by the best that art had to offer. Some of the footage Ive seen of apparant kung fu, tkd, karate etc practioners shows nothing more than some very average practitioners of these arts , surely no one I would consider "elite" in their field.


Just in the interest of keeping it real, Royce was chosen specifcially because he wasn't the top jitsuka in the Gracie family at the time.  No slouch by any means, but not the Gracie family's best, either.  The strategy was to show a guy who was visibly smaller than his opponents and very mild looking.  Worked, too.  If a guy yoked up like Rickson with his vale tudo experience had gone in, he would have looked very much like Ken Shamrock and the other huge wrestlers, sambo experts and shoot fighters.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 8, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> Just in the interest of keeping it real, Royce was chosen specifcially because he wasn't the top jitsuka in the Gracie family at the time.  No slouch by any means, but not the Gracie family's best, either.  The strategy was to show a guy who was visibly smaller than his opponents and very mild looking.  Worked, too.  If a guy yoked up like Rickson with his vale tudo experience had gone in, he would have looked very much like Ken Shamrock and the other huge wrestlers, sambo experts and shoot fighters.


Quite true, but Royce was still considered "elite" by BJJ standards. I could be wrong but I dont think many other arts were represented by their elite fighters. I know for a fact that no one of any significance in tkd entered, thats not to say they would have won but I surely cant base any opinions on what works and what doesnt unless elite fighters from all arts compete. The TMA guys who entered were laughable, I doubt those guys even had a black belt in their art let alone any sort of track history of being an elite fighter.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 8, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> The only difference is that the cocky MMA guys will actually put it to a test.......often times the cocky TMA guys will simply make statements they have no intention of backing up about what they could do.......if the conditions were just right for it........though never right now.


I dont really see your point. Yes, the cocky MMA guys will actually put it to a test, against other MMA guys in a sports setting within their rule set just as cocky TMA guys put it to a test against other people of their art within their ruleset. If you're suggesting that cocky MMA guys go aout and get in fights to "make a statement" then the same can be said of some cocky TMA guys. Suggesting that MMA guys are more likely to back up their statements just seems absurd.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 9, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I dont really see your point. Yes, the cocky MMA guys will actually put it to a test, against other MMA guys in a sports setting within their rule set just as cocky TMA guys put it to a test against other people of their art within their ruleset. If you're suggesting that cocky MMA guys go aout and get in fights to "make a statement" then the same can be said of some cocky TMA guys. Suggesting that MMA guys are more likely to back up their statements just seems absurd.


 

I'm quite confident that one can find more MMA guys willing to test their skills under the least restrictive rules possible than TMA guys.  That kind of goes without saying.

And the point there is that there's cocky......and then there's being willing to back it up.  I have to respect someone who, when push comes to shove, is willing to put up or shut up........that's really all i'm saying.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 9, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Quite true, but Royce was still considered "elite" by BJJ standards. I could be wrong but I dont think many other arts were represented by their elite fighters. I know for a fact that no one of any significance in tkd entered, thats not to say they would have won but I surely cant base any opinions on what works and what doesnt unless elite fighters from all arts compete. The TMA guys who entered were laughable, I doubt those guys even had a black belt in their art let alone any sort of track history of being an elite fighter.


 
There was nothing stopping them then or now........but when it's all said and done, it's easier to say than do.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 9, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> There was nothing stopping them then or now........but when it's all said and done, it's easier to say than do.


You are assuming that everybody wants to fight competitively. Many of these guys have nothing to prove. They know what they know and dont feel the need to prove it to anybody, I really dont think they care what other people think, and if because of this people choose to label them 'scared' or 'unable to back up their statements' then good for them. I certainly dont go through my life worried about what others think, and I assume many others are the same, so many would not see the point of having to prove anything. Ive seen high ranking martial artists defending themselves and I am well aware of their capabilities. The key difference is that BJJ did have something to prove, and they did. People saw first hand how effective it is and its grown in popularity since and has made a lot of money for those involved.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 9, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> I'm quite confident that one can find more MMA guys willing to test their skills under the least restrictive rules possible than TMA guys.  That kind of goes without saying.
> 
> And the point there is that there's cocky......and then there's being willing to back it up.  I have to respect someone who, when push comes to shove, is willing to put up or shut up........that's really all i'm saying.


Thats your opinion and you are entitled to it, but its just that, your opinion. I believe that it is a broad sweeping generalisation. I know many TMA guys who love to get it on and do so regularly and do quite well. I also know that it comes a lot down to the personality of the practitioner. Some of the toughest guys I know take a hell of a lot to get them to fight, you could spit in their face and they will just turn the other cheek and walk away, but if hit them they will tear you apart. Fighting is, and always should be, your last resort, anyone who has to fight to "prove a point" really needs to see a psycologist in my opinion.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 9, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> You are assuming that everybody wants to fight competitively. Many of these guys have nothing to prove. They know what they know and dont feel the need to prove it to anybody, I really dont think they care what other people think, and if because of this people choose to label them 'scared' or 'unable to back up their statements' then good for them. I certainly dont go through my life worried about what others think, and I assume many others are the same, so many would not see the point of having to prove anything. Ive seen high ranking martial artists defending themselves and I am well aware of their capabilities. The key difference is that BJJ did have something to prove, and they did. People saw first hand how effective it is and its grown in popularity since and has made a lot of money for those involved.


 
Like I said, when it's all said and done, there's usually more said than done.  The Martial Arts are about actions.  If it was pure philosophy then mere words would suffice.  

When, however, one is claiming the superiority of efficiency of a given physical act, asking them to prove it isn't outside the reasonable.

What's more, it's only been in very recent times that asking someone to prove it has been dismissed.  The TMA's of even the recent past is replete with examples of 'challenge matches' to test one's skills.  

The 'I'm really good..........but I have nothing to prove' phenomenon is a very recent invention.  And, it might be quite reasonable..........until the discussion becomes 'what is effective'..............and it seems a bit absurd for some folks to claim their skills are effective, but simultaneously proclaiming they are under no obligation to prove it.

You are right, of course, that this is merely my humble opinion........other's mileage may vary.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 9, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Thats your opinion and you are entitled to it, but its just that, your opinion. I believe that it is a broad sweeping generalisation. I know many TMA guys who love to get it on and do so regularly and do quite well. I also know that it comes a lot down to the personality of the practitioner. Some of the toughest guys I know take a hell of a lot to get them to fight, you could spit in their face and they will just turn the other cheek and walk away, but if hit them they will tear you apart. Fighting is, and always should be, your last resort, anyone who has to fight to "prove a point" really needs to see a psycologist in my opinion.


 
Again, I disagree........human aggression is a natural thing, and male ritual hiearchical combat is perfectly normal.  

Fighting outside of that limited societally acceptable sphere is considered taboo, but not really abnormal.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 9, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Like I said, when it's all said and done, there's usually more said than done.  The Martial Arts are about actions.  If it was pure philosophy then mere words would suffice.
> 
> When, however, one is claiming the superiority of efficiency of a given physical act, asking them to prove it isn't outside the reasonable.
> 
> ...


I think I like to believe that all arts (within reason) are effective if trained correctly. I dont really think there is an art you can train properly in for many years and not end up a decent fighter. When it comes down to fighting competitively there is more to it than "which art is better". For these reasons I find it to be little ridiculous when you hear people say "kararte wont help you in a real life situation because it doesnt work in the UFC". I love the UFC and I love watching any MMA but I dont use it as a gauge to see which arts work and which dont or which art is better than another.


----------



## Gaius Julius Caesar (Jul 9, 2010)

One of the problems of this art vs this art is there is a differnce between fighting another martial artist in a one on one, sanctioned match, at a predetermined time and place and being attacked by the unknown on the street.

 One is compitition the other is personal war.

 A MMA guy beating down a traditional JJ guy only proves that that particular MMA guy can beat that particular TJJ guy in a match.

 It says nothing about which one can better handle someone trying to bash a crowbar over your skull, a knife to the gut or someone sticking a gun in your face.

 I also sparred with an MMA guy once and when I stuck my fingers in his eyes in an Irmei nage and took him down and then simulated  stomping him in the ribs and face, he got all bent out of shape about me using foul tactics and made excusses that even if I stomped him for real it would not have made a differnce.

 I ended it there because I knew that if we went again I was going to have to really hurt him or get hurt myself, it was not worth it to prove a point.

 Another time a MMA guy was talking smack about knife arts, so we went at it with me with a Sharkeez training knife and he unarmed.

 He ignored the cuts to the hands and face, the stab to the back of the head (Occuput) as he enterd for a double leg TD and slamed me to the mats.

 "See that stuff dont work." but was I going to pull a real blade and kill him to prove a point I already know and don't care if he does? No because we live in a Nation of laws that does not allow Duels. (unfortuantly IMO.)

 I dont care about MMA vs TMA, I care about good people vs bad people out to hurt, rob, rape or kill.

 MMA with some focused training for the street or TMA with some live training can both help good people vs the bad.

 I'd rather be allies than enemies anyday, we can all learn from each other and build relationships that last.

 I think as time goes on their will be much more positive back and forth between TMA, MMA, RBSD, Combatives, what have you. I allready see it with people who train at my school and the previous school we were at.
 Judoka's, Military combatives, Kickboxers, Boxers, Ninjakas, Kung Fu, Wrestling, people with that in their background have come through the doors to train Combat and Aiki Jujutsu and all of us are the better for it.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 9, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> I'm quite confident that one can find more MMA guys willing to test their skills under the least restrictive rules possible than TMA guys.  That kind of goes without saying.



I think the dynamic has shifted the way that it does in anything else.  

The new newer system is pushed hard because those who take part in it  want to promote it and grow it.  And nothing promotes or grows anything  more than authenticity/proof in the pudding/being the real deal/etc.  

The older systems are well established and those who take part in them  have nothing to prove, so they rest on their laurels and the quality  generally suffers as financial gains are maximized.

Also, the newer player will often take risks and chances that the established player will not.  The established player is at a point where there is something to lose and chances are risky.  The newer player must take chances because they have less to lose and the chances are rewarding.

It is pretty much the same in every industry.  Sometimes, the  established system's decline is recognized by those who take part and  action is taken to reverse the decline.  Pretty much the only way to do  that is to start raising the bar and streamlining by cutting loose  excess baggage.




sgtmac_46 said:


> And the point there is that there's cocky......and then there's being willing to back it up.  I have to respect someone who, when push comes to shove, is willing to put up or shut up........that's really all i'm saying.


No argument there.  

Though I also think that the average MMA student, competitive or no, is generally someone who is in a position to take greater physical risks.  The average TMA student in the US, regardless of the art, is a person with a day job, a mortgage, and likely a family, and cannot risk regular sports injuries.

That said, if you are in my shoes, a single dad with full custody, working a full time job to pay the bills and is not independently wealthy, be willing to admit that you are and respect the guys and gals who both have and take the opportunity to take the physical risks to prove their skills in the ring.

Daniel


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 9, 2010)

Another point in all this is that TMA's have proven themselves time and time again and should not have to come out and enter tournaments each time a new generation of young martial artists come around just to "prove a point". In the 50's and 60's they had real "anything goes" fights, particularly in korea and japan. These matches were brutal you could strike the groin, eye gouge, bite etc and the winner quite often hobbled out of the ring with their leg broken in 2 places and covered in blood. These guys were karate and tkd practitioners mainly and they really did put their arts to the test. My GM fought in these matches as a young man and says they were brutal. I know what he teaches works and I dont need to see one of his students enter the UFC to prove it.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 9, 2010)

Gaius Julius Caesar said:


> One of the problems of this art vs this art is there is a differnce between fighting another martial artist in a one on one, sanctioned match, at a predetermined time and place and being attacked by the unknown on the street.
> 
> One is compitition the other is personal war.
> 
> ...


100% agree with all of that. The sooner people realise that events like the UFC are a sporting event and not a "fight" the better. If you are attacked on the street it is a completely different ball game to having an organised bout with rules. This is why I keep saying that I hate it when people base what works and what doesnt on what they saw in the octagon.


----------



## Shifu Steve (Jul 9, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Like I said, when it's all said and done, there's usually more said than done. The Martial Arts are about actions. If it was pure philosophy then mere words would suffice.
> 
> When, however, one is claiming the superiority of efficiency of a given physical act, asking them to prove it isn't outside the reasonable.
> 
> ...


 
Mac I like your point here.  While philosophically I would stand by violence is a measure but one that should be used after other avenues are exhausted I think that the martial arts are like all things in the sense that attitudes and opinions on the subject go in and out of fashion with the times.  In our times the fear of repercussions for violence is substantial.  This may contribute to the claim that "I'll mix it up with the best and prevail but I don't need (want) to because in the end this is not what its about."  

While there's truth in that it's partial truth.  In my opinion the end result of Martial Arts isn't about violence at all.  However, there is an aspect of violence that is integral to its foundation.  Denying that is akin to denying the entire reason you train.  The violence exists.  Whether the skill set that enables it is meant to deter it is not the whole point.  It is there, it is relevant, and it should be embraced.  No matter what your take is.  

I wrote a post on open sparring a few months back.  Most of the responses thought it was a bad idea due to legal issues/ safety, etc.  I don't disagree with the reasons behind those posts but I think Brian was the one that brought up a good point; challenges USED to be more the rule than the exception.  Now they are viewed as anti social and violent.  I'm not arguing there aren't good reasons behind that, I'm just saying things change.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 9, 2010)

Shifu Steve said:


> Mac I like your point here.  While philosophically I would stand by violence is a measure but one that should be used after other avenues are exhausted I think that the martial arts are like all things in the sense that attitudes and opinions on the subject go in and out of fashion with the times.  In our times the fear of repercussions for violence is substantial.  This may contribute to the claim that "I'll mix it up with the best and prevail but I don't need (want) to because in the end this is not what its about."
> 
> While there's truth in that it's partial truth.  In my opinion the end result of Martial Arts isn't about violence at all.  However, there is an aspect of violence that is integral to its foundation.  Denying that is akin to denying the entire reason you train.  The violence exists.  Whether the skill set that enables it is meant to deter it is not the whole point.  It is there, it is relevant, and it should be embraced.  No matter what your take is.
> 
> I wrote a post on open sparring a few months back.  Most of the responses thought it was a bad idea due to legal issues/ safety, etc.  I don't disagree with the reasons behind those posts but I think Brian was the one that brought up a good point; challenges USED to be more the rule than the exception.  Now they are viewed as anti social and violent.  I'm not arguing there aren't good reasons behind that, I'm just saying things change.


The personality of the person comes into it. I truly believe that it is not very difficult at all for a lot of people to go through their whole life without ever getting in a fight. Most of my mates are in their late 30's and are yet to experience getting in a fight. This is largely due to their personality, basically unless someone hurts them or their family they just wont fight, they see it as barbaric and immature. I have some other mates where if you look at their girlfriend or accidentally bump into them in a bar they will start a fight. I am one of the ones who just wont fight unless someone attacks me or my family, so i view self defence very differently to someone who regularly gets in or starts fights. For me, when i think of self defence or fighting I think of life or death situations because that is the ONLY reason I will resort to violence, it also means it is highly unlikely that I will ever have to use what Ive learnt.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 9, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Another point in all this is that TMA's have proven themselves time and time again and should not have to come out and enter tournaments each time a new generation of young martial artists come around just to "prove a point". In the 50's and 60's they had real "anything goes" fights, particularly in korea and japan. These matches were brutal you could strike the groin, eye gouge, bite etc and the winner quite often hobbled out of the ring with their leg broken in 2 places and covered in blood. These guys were karate and tkd practitioners mainly and they really did put their arts to the test. My GM fought in these matches as a young man and says they were brutal. I know what he teaches works and I dont need to see one of his students enter the UFC to prove it.


Unfortunately, the arts as they are taught today are very different from what they were in the fifties and sixties.  Taekwondo in particular has radically shifted.

Much of the change is meant to address needs that simply did not exist at the time those arts were being developed.  TMA schools address fitness needs, character building, child care, and socialization.  All of these needs were met outside of the dojo at that time.  

In the fifties and sixties, people had much more in person socialization than they do now.  The average person did a lot more physical work in the course of a day.  Most moms were at home with school aged kids who played together after school and did physical activities because video games had not been invented.  Also, a degree of rough housing was a part of growing up and the draft was still in effect, so as a general rule, most guys were more capable of handling themselves by the time they got out of high school and definitely by the time they got out of the service.

Because TMA schools were the only game in town, they were the ones who affected by that shift.  Had MMA been around in the early seventies, it would have gone through the same cycles with TMA.  But because it came later, it bypassed those changes.  Because TMA dojos/dojangs meet those needs in a martial setting, MMA gyms are freed of the need to do so and to concentrate on their own core demographic.  

No matter how brutal an art's tournaments were in decades past, schools that teach that art must remain relevant and cannot rest on fifty year old laurels.  

I think that the most positive thing that MMA has done (and I think that it has done many positive things) is that it has proven that hardcore schools can still survive, and even thrive.  That should be great news to TMA schools, because it means that not everyone needs to be a daycare center/dojo or make their program soft just to stay in business.

Daniel


----------



## Shifu Steve (Jul 9, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> The personality of the person comes into it. I truly believe that it is not very difficult at all for a lot of people to go through their whole life without ever getting in a fight. Most of my mates are in their late 30's and are yet to experience getting in a fight. This is largely due to their personality, basically unless someone hurts them or their family they just wont fight, they see it as barbaric and immature. I have some other mates where if you look at their girlfriend or accidentally bump into them in a bar they will start a fight. I am one of the ones who just wont fight unless someone attacks me or my family, so i view self defence very differently to someone who regularly gets in or starts fights. For me, when i think of self defence or fighting I think of life or death situations because that is the ONLY reason I will resort to violence, it also means it is highly unlikely that I will ever have to use what Ive learnt.


 
Ralph I don't disagree with your logic here.  As I said, in my view the end result to why I train is not violence.  However I think that the notion of using violence as a last resort may be a more favorable approach now then say 40 years ago.  I like to say things in posts like "I'm not advocating x over y" because it seems like the responsible way to go but in truth deep down I feel that sometimes aggression on aggression is an answer.  Philosophically I reason that's an incorrect statement but practice has taught me otherwise.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 9, 2010)

sgtmac_46 said:


> There was nothing stopping them then or now........but when it's all said and done, it's easier to say than do.



What stops the elite TMA practitioners is that they already are active in their own tournament circuits and promoting their own arts.  It's the same reason that elite baseball players don't compete in the olympics; they are jammed up enough already and frankly, it isn't worth it for them.  The world series is more important than the olympics.

Also, TMA tournaments each have their own fairly specialized rules.  Part of what makes the elite players elite is that they are the best under that particular rule set.  I am sure that if you just threw any of the top MMA players into a WTF tournament with Stephen Lopez, they'd be out their element.  

Not because Lopez is a super fighter, but because while elite MMA players have been focusing on MMA for the past five years, Lopez has been training in WTF TKD only for the past five years.

Take Lopez and jam him into a UFC match, however, and he'd be equally out of his element.

Each rule set has its own unique flair and is designed to showcase a specific skill set.  Some are broader than others, but each has its focus and unique flavor.  Each, including MMA, should be appreciated in its own right.

Daniel


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 9, 2010)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> What stops the elite TMA practitioners is that they already are active in their own tournament circuits and promoting their own arts.  It's the same reason that elite baseball players don't compete in the olympics; they are jammed up enough already and frankly, it isn't worth it for them.  The world series is more important than the olympics.
> 
> Also, TMA tournaments each have their own fairly specialized rules.  Part of what makes the elite players elite is that they are the best under that particular rule set.  I am sure that if you just threw any of the top MMA players into a WTF tournament with Stephen Lopez, they'd be out their element.
> 
> ...


Well said Daniel. Most of the top martial artists are too busy focussing on tournaments to 'prove a point' by jumping into the octagon. Steven lopez is a good example. Even if he wanted to 'prove a point' (which he wouldnt) it would not be worth his time to withdraw from tkd events, potentially lose sponsors, train for an extended period learning the rules of MMA all to just prove a point. The same can be said for successful competitive karate, kung fu etc fighters. The funny thing is that nobody suggests that george st pierre should start going in tkd competitions to 'prove a point'.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 10, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Well said Daniel. Most of the top martial artists are too busy focussing on tournaments to 'prove a point' by jumping into the octagon. Steven lopez is a good example. Even if he wanted to 'prove a point' (which he wouldnt) it would not be worth his time to withdraw from tkd events, potentially lose sponsors, train for an extended period learning the rules of MMA all to just prove a point. The same can be said for successful competitive karate, kung fu etc fighters. The funny thing is that nobody suggests that george st pierre should start going in tkd competitions to 'prove a point'.


 
I've heard the statement that fighting never solves anything........but one thing fighting does solve are arguments ABOUT fighting. When the argument is fighting, the guy that loses the fight, loses the argument. It's really pretty simple, when it's all said and done.

That's what I liked so much about the old UFC..........the rules were simple........two men enter, the guy who taps out, passes out or gets knocked out loses.......and zero excuses.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 10, 2010)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Well said Daniel. Most of the top martial artists are too busy focussing on tournaments to 'prove a point' by jumping into the octagon.


I'm sure that a lot of them would love to do so, but the time that it would take to train to be competitive is time away from what they're already doing, which an elite practitioner is heavily invested in.



ralphmcpherson said:


> Steven lopez is a good example. Even if he wanted to 'prove a point' (which he wouldnt) it would not be worth his time to withdraw from tkd events, potentially lose sponsors, train for an extended period learning the rules of MMA all to just prove a point. The same can be said for successful competitive karate, kung fu etc fighters. The funny thing is that nobody suggests that george st pierre should start going in tkd competitions to 'prove a point'.


Nor should they.  St. Pierre is heavily invested in MMA.  Training to be competitive in WTF sparring would be time away from MMA, which really would not help him.  The WTF style of fighting is so divorced from what St. Pierre does in the octagon that it would not be beneficial to him from a cross-training stand point either.

Frankly, I don't think that anyone should do it to prove a point.  They should do so because it is something that they would like to do.  This past Thursday, I got my first taste of MMA and really enjoyed it.  However, I am heavily invested in kumdo and hapkido.  While MMA would enhance my hapkido, it simply comes down to a matter of time.  I am going to try to get more personal exposure, but I doubt that I will be able to get enough to where I'd be really competitive.  

Who knows though.  Stranger things have happened.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 10, 2010)

The 'danger' of training MMA comes after a few months and you start thinking 'what if I just had one fight, just to see if I can do it'! 

Nothing wrong with training MMA and not fighting it's a personal choice though in some cases the choice is made for you if like me you are on the wrong side of 40ish and a bit or are carrying an injury. It's not so much a competitive thing at least not against another person more against yourself, you just want to know if you can do it, can you fight, bring up the aggression etc.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 10, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> The 'danger' of training MMA comes after a few months and you start thinking 'what if I just had one fight, just to see if I can do it'!
> 
> Nothing wrong with training MMA and not fighting it's a personal choice though in some cases the choice is made for you if like me you are on the wrong side of 40ish and a bit or are carrying an injury. It's not so much a competitive thing at least not against another person more against yourself, *you just want to know if you can do it, can you fight, bring up the aggression etc.*


Well said.  I love kendo/kumdo because it challenges me in some way every time I spar.  Competing is fun, but I'd do it even if I never competed.

My one taste of MMA (not even real MMA) was enough to tell me that, time permitting, yes, I'd train in MMA.  Compete?  Maybe.  But being over forty, competitive MMA is not really the direction that I would expect to go.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 10, 2010)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well said. I love kendo/kumdo because it challenges me in some way every time I spar. Competing is fun, but I'd do it even if I never competed.
> 
> My one taste of MMA (not even real MMA) was enough to tell me that, time permitting, yes, I'd train in MMA. Compete? Maybe. But being over forty, competitive MMA is not really the direction that I would expect to go.
> 
> Daniel


 
We do amateur rules, no head shots standing or on the floor, great fun! What we have here is interclub comps, just for fun, it means there's a fight for nearly everyone who wants to have a go, on mats, not cage or ring and done by weight and experience.


----------



## Laus (Jul 13, 2010)

_Pre-post caveat...I'm replaying to this thread after some 11 pages worth of other replies, none of which I've read, so the following is in no way a response to anything above other than the original post._

I don't entirely understand MMA, I don't follow it or watch UFC and all that, so most of what I know about it is second hand knowledge. But I value mixed skills. I've crosstrained off and on through the years - on more often than off, basically, whenever I've had the time and money - and because of that I find the idea of being limited to a particular style, well, limiting. 

On the other hand, I started out in, and spent six years in, an extremely traditionalist Goju Ryu dojo, and while life has since led me elsewhere I am "by birth" a traditionalist. But while I was kind of good at that, it turns out that's not really the environment for me, and time led me in a direction I doubt that original Sensei expected (and definately didn't like). There are a whole lot of reasons why it happened that way, not all of which I've worked out yet, but at the most basic level I am far more interested in surviving a fight than I am at being a proper goju-ka - whatever that even means, I'm not sure I even know anymore. 

Frankly, I'm the kind of person for whom practicality is always going to win out over tradition - if I can use it, it's golden, wherever it comes from. I suppose in that respect I don't really get MMA because there are_ rules_, and I'm all about living through being attacked by someone who actually wants to hurt/rape/kill me, in other words, situations where _surviving_ is the only rule. But the "drawing on everything" aspect of MMA makes perfect sense to me.

But then there is the spiritual side of things, which is the one thing that draws me to traditionalism. I am not an overtly spiritual person, and if you don't know me well (or read the crap I post here) you would never even know I even think about such things. But I do. I got a lot out of the traditional training, and I would never say otherwise, but I reached a place where there didn't seem to be anywhere else to go, technically or spiritually. While my primary concern is being able to take care of myself in a life-or-death situation, I also want to test myself and push my limits in the mental, emotional, spiritual sense. I suppose that also has its practicality. Survival isn't just about being alive, afterall.

One of the most limiting things I found about my early training was that it always seemed that spiritual battle with my 'self' was only legitimate if it was occcuring within specified paramaters (I suspect this had more to do with my instructor, well-meaning or not, than with Goju itself, before anyone jumps down my throat!). Essentially, it felt as if my life outside the dojo meant nothing in the grand scheme of spiritual growth, as if it didnt count unless it was supervised, and occured over a specific timeline. And you know, that to me was the most ridiculous damn thing...you can't prescribe spiritual growth. 

So do I think MMA has helped or hurt, or that it's irrelevant? I really couldn't say. I've been doing this for seven years, so while I'm certainly not a beginner, I've only just scratched the surface. I am also wary of lumping all the arts in together. MMA is one thing, and all the other arts are, well, whatever art they are. Parts of each may be used in MMA, but they are not MMA, and MMA is not them, and so far as I can tell they are all alive and well in their own right. Okay, that whole sentence says a whole lot of nothing, I know, which is maybe my point. The popularity of various martial arts comes and goes. Eventually MMA's popularity will decline, and something else will take its place, and while the landscape may be somewhat changed I don't think we can really say it will be better or worse. 

Evolution happens whether we like it or not. If it takes a slice out of the traditional arts, then perhaps that is something to mourn. There is value in preserving tradition, and it is always sad when such things disappear. But perhaps this tradition we ascribe to them is more about glamourizing them than about reality. Martial arts are, or at least _were_, at their inception, about _battle_, about surviving that battle, about getting the job done and getting home at the end of the day. If MMA is about using all the available tools to succeed in battle, real or staged, is that really contrary to the spirit of martial arts?

I don't have the answers to these questions. I have some opinions, but they are in no way set in stone...I've been doing this long enough to know that I don't know a whole lot. I suppose this post is more me thinking out loud than anything else.

Osu.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 13, 2010)

Laus said:


> _Pre-post caveat...I'm replaying to this thread after some 11 pages worth of other replies, none of which I've read, so the following is in no way a response to anything above other than the original post._
> 
> I don't entirely understand MMA, I don't follow it or watch UFC and all that, so most of what I know about it is second hand knowledge. But I value mixed skills. I've crosstrained off and on through the years - on more often than off, basically, whenever I've had the time and money - and because of that I find the idea of being limited to a particular style, well, limiting.
> 
> ...


 
MMA the sport evolved from MMA the concept.  The UFC originally was about bringing different arts that claimed effective fighting techniques, and putting them together with extremely limited rules (No biting/No eye gouging) and seeing which ones walked out........and of course since the Brazilians had been doing this under the term 'Vale Tudo' the Gracies intended it as a showcase of BJJ.

As such, it was really originally about testing what worked for self-defense, and paralleled and was influenced by individuals like Bruce Lee and his development of JKD and the concept of breaking from convention and applying what works.

From that beginning of the concept of MMA, the sport of MMA evolved, naturally.  The reason rules evolved in MMA, for the most part, is that it was necessary to receive state athletic commission sanctioning.

As it is, however, MMA is the LEAST amount of rules for any kind of combat sport, in the sense of allowing the greatest latitude for fighting short of going to a bar and picking a fight.


----------



## adamx (Jul 23, 2010)

I will say one thing mma is spawning the new mcdojo in austin everyone teaches some form of "mma" now. Some of these schools never taught more then one style before and some schools are brand new. But dont teach styles like ex: bjj, muay thai but only "mma".....
Kinda makes me mad as I used to watch alot of mma(pride fc and pre zuffa ufc) a few years ago but now I just cant stand to hardly watch it, now that its the "cool" thing to do. Plus ufc now adays make its so damn dramatic like its wwe, but its just lies to try to sell a ppv..
Sorry for the intro rant.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jul 23, 2010)

adamx said:


> I will say one thing mma is spawning the new mcdojo in austin everyone teaches some form of "mma" now. Some of these schools never taught more then one style before and some schools are brand new. But dont teach styles like ex: bjj, muay thai but only "mma".....
> Kinda makes me mad as I used to watch alot of mma(pride fc and pre zuffa ufc) a few years ago but now I just cant stand to hardly watch it, now that its the "cool" thing to do. Plus ufc now adays make its so damn dramatic like its wwe, but its just lies to try to sell a ppv..
> Sorry for the intro rant.


Dont worry, like all fads it will pass. It will always be there but as more MMA mcdojos open up (and theres plenty opening around me) the novelty will wear off and the next 'new exciting
martial art' will take off.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 23, 2010)

adamx said:


> I will say one thing mma is spawning the new mcdojo in austin everyone teaches some form of "mma" now. Some of these schools never taught more then one style before and some schools are brand new. But dont teach styles like ex: bjj, muay thai but only "mma".....
> Kinda makes me mad as I used to watch alot of mma(pride fc and pre zuffa ufc) a few years ago but now I just cant stand to hardly watch it, now that its the "cool" thing to do. Plus ufc now adays make its so damn dramatic like its wwe, but its just lies to try to sell a ppv..
> Sorry for the intro rant.


That makes sense.  MMA is old enough and popular enough for that to happen. 

MMA is also at the same point in its cycle that many TMA were twenty years ago.  People want to do it and are willing to pay but don't want to get beat up or train as though they were going to compete.  They just want to be able to say, 'I train in MMA' because it is cool.  Exact same thing that happened to karate and taekwondo.

Daniel


----------



## Rion (Jul 26, 2010)

MMA and TMA are two different things. Ones a sport the other is mainly for self protecting in real life dangers. I love MMM but its there to entertain me nothing more nothing less. Pepople who want to take it up thats great do something you enjoy,but dont knock other styles for it and the same goes for TMA. Just do you and want makes you happy


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 26, 2010)

Rion said:


> MMA and TMA are two different things. Ones a sport the other is mainly for self protecting in real life dangers.


I must disagree with you.  TMA is a broad classification that includes everything except MMA, boxing, kickboxing, and wrestling.  Fencers debate about whether or not fencing is a martial art.  MMA is a single art.

Some traditional arts won't teach you to protect yourself in violent altercations.  That would include any dedicated weapon art, martial arts that are entirely sportive.  Entirely sportive includes judo, BJJ, sometimes taekwondo, sumo, ssirum, and others.  Then there are entirely internal arts.  I don't think that dealing with muggers is the primary reason that people take up Qi-jong.  The way that tai chi is taught in the states, chances are it will not prepare you for anything violent either.

MMA falls into the category of being entirely sportive, and frankly, is simply a martial art.  I find the dichotomy between MMA and TMA to be a false one, given that pretty much anything with a belt is categorized as TMA, even if its something that I made up five minutes ago.

MMA has its traditions.  It has its protocols.  Like Koryo arts, it does not use belts.  Also like Koryo arts, one can become certified to teach the various skills that make up MMA, and there is a a general consensus as to what skills go into a training program in an MMA gym.  

Finally, many of what we call 'TMA' are actually mixed arts as well.  Hapkido and (believe it or not) taekwondo are both mixed arts.  I mean actual taekwondo, not the sport seen in the olympics.  



Rion said:


> I love MMM but its there to entertain me nothing more nothing less. People who want to take it up thats great do something you enjoy,but dont knock other styles for it and the same goes for TMA.


I second that!



Rion said:


> Just do you and want makes you happy


Amen to that!

Daniel


----------

