# Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness



## suicide (Jul 25, 2009)

whats your opinion on this ...


----------



## DergaSmash (Jul 26, 2009)

I don't think so. I'm not knocking MMA in anyway. I've trained in Krav Maga and Army Combatives which is similar to BJJ, but I have also trained in both traditional and contemporary Chinese arts. I'm not saying MMA isn't effective in terms of self defense. But I think that any fight that has rules and gear no matter how little, isn't an accurate display of its ability in self defense. There is no small joint manipulation, nor groin strikes in MMA fights. 

I also feel that traditional arts bring something MMA and a lot of contemporary arts don't. There is something to be said for being part of a tradition, for learning something that has been passed down for a long time. I personally have a sense of pride in learning traditional CMA from my Sifu. I like that I can trace the lineage of my Hung Gar back to the founder of the system Hung Hei Goon.  In addition, MA are constantly evolving. People cross train, add and subtract techniques that work and don't work. I'm no expert by any means, this is simply my opinion on what I am sure is going to be a pretty hot debate.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2009)

mma=sport

sport does NOT equal self defense


end of topic


----------



## SenseiBear (Jul 26, 2009)

Nope


----------



## seasoned (Jul 26, 2009)

MMA is trying to become what TMA already is. TMA "has" a well rounded repertoire of techniques used for self defense and MMA has a sprinkling of many techniques for sport. Same dog, different fleas.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> mma=sport
> 
> sport does NOT equal self defense
> 
> ...


 

QFT!

Effectiveness at what by the way?

MMA is the best at.....wait for it.....MMA!


----------



## myusername (Jul 26, 2009)

If you mean effectiveness in self defence then I personally don't think so. I would say that a good traditional school with hard, full resistance and reality based training can better prepare a student to defend themselves in a real self defence scenario. I say this purely because there is more scope to drill and prepare for a greater variety of scenarios such as ambushes, multiple attackers, weapon defence etc. 

However, as we all know there are plenty of traditional schools that don't train hard enough or with enough variety of combat ranges to prepare their students effectively for self -defence. We also know that a student of MMA will learn to fight from all combat ranges and will compete at full contact with full resistance. Therefore, it would be fair to suggest that a fit MMA competitior is better prepared to handle themselves in a self defence situation that an overweight traditional martial artist who has never tested his skill under stress and has no idea of how defend themselves against a competant grappler.

So in my humble opinion it is not so much that MMA surpasses TMA in its effectiveness for self defence it actually all boils down to how realistically it is trained and whether the TMA is utilising all of the scope in diverse scenarios and combat ranges available to it. For self defence, I would personally choose a *good* traditional school every time over MMA. However, if there was not a good traditional school available but only "fluffy" ones then I would probably choose an MMA gym.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 26, 2009)

Good hard MMA training is great!

Good hard TMA training is great!

Good hard Combatives training is great!

*However, in the moment whether in the ring or in a self defense situation it comes down to the individual! *






In other words you can train in the absolutely most fantastic system but if you do not bring it when needed then you are out of luck!


----------



## MJS (Jul 26, 2009)

suicide said:


> whats your opinion on this ...


 
This is a broad question.  I could ask...effectiveness in what?  I've said it before, and I'll say it again....I think that both TMAs and MMAs should look at each other, and incorporate things that the other has to offer.  Now, if you look at the hard training, fitness wise, the conditioning, yes, in many cases, MMA will surpass TMA.  Why?  Well, I need not say anything more than this....look at some martial artists and in many cases, you'll see people out of shape.  Then look at the MMA guys.  What do you see? 

If we look at it from a SD point of view....well, depending on the MMA gym, I'd say that in many cases, the TMAist will surpass the MMA guy.  Many MMA gyms are focused just on the sport side, and thats fine, but there are many who fail to see that its lacking in that area.  Again, dont take this as a slam, because I could turn around and say that many TMA schools are lacking in the ground game.

The my art vs your art debates will rage on for years and years to come.  Whats important is that each student decides for themselves what they want out of their training.  However, I feel that each should be open minded to other things that're out there.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Jul 26, 2009)

Bas Rutten could kick my *** and break my spine so MMA can be good for self defense.
Tanemura sensei could do all sorts of highly interesting things to me and break my spine so TMA can be good for self defense.
It all depends on the person and how he trains, not what he trains. As someone mentioned earlier: an experienced carpenter is probably a very deadly person if he can defend himself with his hammer.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 26, 2009)

suicide said:


> whats your opinion on this ...



You're, of course, wanting to know if MMA has surpassed TMA's in effectiveness for self-defense.......WHICH TMA's?

Taekwondo?  Judo?  Karate?  

The question requires quite a few definitions in order to even begin to be answerable.  Some folks will jump in and say 'Well, MMA is a sport....'  But, then, so is Taekwondo and Judo..........furthermore the UFC may be new, but the style of fighting is actually very old and predates most modern 'TMA's'.......at it's core it's the fundamentals of unarmed fighting.......Boxing/Kicking/Grappling/Wrestling........an old theme with a new name, devoid of and stripped of formal trappings.

I'll defer, again, to Bruce Lee



> &#8220;_Before I learned martial arts, a punch was just a punch and a kick was just a kick. When I studied martial arts, a punch was no longer just a punch and a kick was no longer just a kick. Now I understand martial arts, and a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick._&#8221; -Bruce Lee



A punch is a punch and a kick is a kick..........the formal trappings of many TMA's is the only thing that separate them from what many practicing MMA or even RBSD are doing..........the later have merely stripped away the formal trappings of asian culture, and westernized the practices in to pure study of mechanics........which, I suspect, is what REALLY offends some people about MMA/RBSD and the like......the stripping away of those formal trappings and rituals.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 26, 2009)

Suicide, are you going to post an opinion yourself or just throw out random questions?
Your question is an open one, effectiveness for what? Some posters are assuming you mean self defence, is that what _you_ mean or is it something else? the effectiveness of getting students in the door, making money,fighting fitness or what?


----------



## jarrod (Jul 26, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Suicide, are you going to post an opinion yourself or just throw out random questions?



we already know the answer to this tez.

i do think though that generally speaking most sport styles have more effective training methods, meaning their methods are the fastest way to develop the target skills, often while developing athletic ability as well.  

jf


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 26, 2009)

jarrod said:


> *we already know the answer to this tez.*
> 
> i do think though that generally speaking most sport styles have more effective training methods, meaning their methods are the fastest way to develop the target skills, often while developing athletic ability as well.
> 
> jf


 
I know lol but thought I'd try to get an answer. :ultracool


----------



## Joab (Jul 26, 2009)

myusername said:


> So in my humble opinion it is not so much that MMA surpasses TMA in its effectiveness for self defence it actually all boils down to how realistically it is trained and whether the TMA is utilising all of the scope in diverse scenarios and combat ranges available to it. For self defence, I would personally choose a *good* traditional school every time over MMA. However, if there was not a good traditional school available but only "fluffy" ones then I would probably choose an MMA gym.


 
What is a "fluffy" school?


----------



## Andrew Green (Jul 26, 2009)

suicide said:


> whats your opinion on this ...



In order to judge effectiveness you need an objective by which you can measure that effectiveness.

Is a hammer effective?  No, it's quite useless if you are tying to play a MP3.

The different martial arts do different things, if they didn't we wouldn't have different martial arts.  There is overlap, as most of them do a few things and some of those get shared between multiple ones.

Some are like hammers, fairly specialized and the best thing available for a select set of common objectives.  Others are more like a swiss army knife, doing a lot of things, but none of them as well as others do, yet still extremely useful and convenient.


----------



## myusername (Jul 26, 2009)

Joab said:


> What is a "fluffy" school?



Ah sorry I couldn't think of a better word for it. By fluffy I mean a school that is afraid of a little contact. When I first starting looking for a martial arts class I came across a couple where it was nothing but air punches between students with techniques stopping shot of touching each other. Nothing against this sort of past time as everyone there was lovely but it was just a little light and fluffy for my tastes.


----------



## Kwan Jang (Jul 26, 2009)

I think that the "live" pressure testing and ruleset in MMA is the most realistic way a young, healthy advanced martial artist can spar in a safe manner. I think this is a great training tool for those who are ready for it, but in of itself it's not the peak for self defense. Using it with other aspects of training found in TMA's and RBSD would be of great value. Also many in the MMA game neglect many intermediate steps taught in the TMA's that would be of great value to their overall effectiveness IMO. My guess is that in time, many drills from the TMA's will be adapted into MMA training to plug these holes. Both sides can learn from each other and as things evolve, I'm sure this will be the case.


----------



## searcher (Jul 26, 2009)

I have been having this debate of recent with some locals in my area who are hugely into MMA and the styles that frequently win at it.    It all comes down to who you ask and what the individual likes.    I also just had a rant in another thread about this subject.   There are people on another forum that will put down anything that is not in their way of doing things or those that out-rank them.    I know they justrecently attacked a member of this board without justification and are doing everything they can to destroy him.    At what point did we all turn on each other?    

Not trying to jack the thread, but come on.    All this does is create more problems then it solves.   Effective depends on the situation and who is involved.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 26, 2009)

Joab said:


> What is a "fluffy" school?



Uncle Mikes' Taekwondo Emporium specializing in turning 8 year old's in to Black Belts in less than a year for under $2,000.00.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 26, 2009)

suicide said:


> whats your opinion on this ...


 
"Effectiveness" as related to what? 

Generally speaking, most martial arts (even those that prefer to be labeled as "mixed") can teach you something of use. Whether it's for self-defense or sport. 

The world, including martial arts, ain't black and white and there is no such thing as the super-duper-unconquerable-style-martial-art.

Bury the horse already...it's drawing flies.


----------



## Milt G. (Jul 26, 2009)

Hello,

MMA and TMA cannot "surpass" each other any more then an apple can surpass an orange.   They are different things, which only share some commonalities.

I believe it is the individual practitioner, and not the art or discipline, that is the deciding factor.

An interesting thought, though...
Thanks,
Milt G.


----------



## searcher (Jul 26, 2009)

If effectiveness is what you are looking for, then go buy a gun and start training with it.

Gun trumps hands, feet, etc.    And I am not really looking for a fair fight.   I want to survive at the end of the day.   I have been training for 30 years and I carry a HG almost every day.

Besides, MMA matches are not street fights.  If you think I won't bite, eye gouge, punch in the sack, or resort to any "dirty" tactics on the street, you had better wake up.     IMO, on the street it is a matter of life or death, or I would not be fighting.    I am more than willing to use anything at my disposal to come out on top.   Please take note that I did not say win.   If I have to fight, nobody is going to win.


----------



## thesandman (Jul 26, 2009)

It saddens me the way the UFC has stolen the term "Mixed Martial Arts".  I've trained in a mixed martial arts system for almost 20 years, but it's a true mixing of martial arts, that is a combination of several styles.  My training has been a solid blending of Tang-soo-do, Jujitsu, Aikido and Modern Arnis.  Several traditional styles mixed into a system.

But if I tell people I train in a "MMA" they think I'm working with guys that have no neck in a petulant attempt to hurt each other in an octagon.  

I will come out on a limb and denounce the UFC.  The UFC is about blood lust.  It caters to a crowd of fans that just want to see people hurt.  They want "realism" by which they mean brutality.  It's a mind-set contradictory to the precepts of every phylisophically sound martial arts style I've ever been in contact with.

The martial arts is about more than simply self-defense.  It's also about honor, integrity and the harmony of mind, body and spirit.  It's about putting ourselves on a healthy path.  The UFC has made it harder by it's nature to pass on these traditions to another generation as more and more parents and even adult students associate the martial arts in general with what they see in the UFC.  It's a disgrace and a tragedy to what every instructor should be trying to accomplish in their communities.

So from a perspective on the effectiveness of a traditional art vs UFC training on actually making someone a better person:  Not even a little.

From a perspective of teaching someone an effective way to defend themselves it would I'm sure depend on the direct comparison but unless you're attacked on the street by a someone with a portable octagon cage I would say not.


----------



## jarrod (Jul 26, 2009)

thesandman said:


> The martial arts is about more than simply self-defense.  It's also about honor, integrity and the harmony of mind, body and spirit.



that only applies to budo & taoist based arts, for the most part.  there are plenty of styles which are in fact only about self-defense or combat.  

jf


----------



## thesandman (Jul 26, 2009)

jarrod said:


> that only applies to budo & taoist based arts, for the most part.  there are plenty of styles which are in fact only about self-defense or combat.
> 
> jf



I concede that point, though I'll amend to say that to "Responsible Martial Arts..."

To teach violence with no balance, no addressing of character is grossly irresponsible.


----------



## bowser666 (Jul 26, 2009)

Define effectiveness?  Effective at what ? getting in shape, S/D , etc......


Again i must agree with a previous post, MMA = Sport 


next topic


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jul 26, 2009)

There can be no MMA > TMA or vice versa. It's the person that matters and what they have developed from their chosen art. Just as the old TKD .vs. Jujitsu .vs. Shotokan .vs. Okinawan karate .vs. Kung Fu .vs... is all academic, so is MMA .vs. TMA. It's the individual that counts.

Over the years I've seen excellent practitioners in several arts. As a result, I look at the individual and what they can do over what particular style they belong to. Those that are smart use one art as a base and then explore others to grow and broaden themselves.

And thus you will see Shototkan stylist do kicking routines that look just like TKD and TKDist that have hands like those in Kenpo. And Jujitsu practitioners who can punch like a good boxer.

That's what makes the martial arts so interesting to me. There is no limit to your growth and variety.

Deaf


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 26, 2009)

thesandman said:


> It saddens me the way the UFC has stolen the term "Mixed Martial Arts". I've trained in a mixed martial arts system for almost 20 years, but it's a true mixing of martial arts, that is a combination of several styles. My training has been a solid blending of Tang-soo-do, Jujitsu, Aikido and Modern Arnis. Several traditional styles mixed into a system.
> 
> But if I tell people I train in a "MMA" they think I'm working with guys that have no neck in a petulant attempt to hurt each other in an octagon.
> 
> ...


 

I've asked this many times and will again, please don't judge MMA solely on the UFC. I know it's the biggest and the best hyped show but it's not the sum total of MMA.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jul 27, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> I've asked this many times and will again, please don't judge MMA solely on the UFC. I know it's the biggest and the best hyped show but it's not the sum total of MMA.




I think the fair thing to do is judge traditional styles based solely on their most in your face and flashy component in the same way.  Olympic TKD? XMA? Open Tournaments?  After school programs?

The UFC is a show, its whole purpose is to sell PPV tickets.  Having good fighters and good fights is a part of that, but all the silly antics and trash talking help sell more tickets, which makes more money, which is their goal.  So we get that to.

No different then what happens when traditional arts are turned into a mass spectator friendly format.  You might still have some really skilled and talented people, but they are adapting what they do to put on a show.

Fortunately, in MMA, this doesn't effect what they actually do for the most part, mainly just a bunch of pro-wrestling style nonsense leading up to it.  In TMA you have to wear clown suits, scream lots, use shiny weapons that aren't really weapons and do acrobatics.


----------



## tallgeese (Jul 27, 2009)

We've been round this so many times, none of us are going to convince the others we're right or wrong.  

As for my thoughts, yes, the individual practitioner makes a huge difference in one's capabilities.  But there are arts out there more geared to towards actual self defense than others.  What is studied will make a difference.  More importantly, the schools training methodology will make a big difference as well.

On that front, often MMA gyms have a leg up.  Most of their training comes out of drills that incorporate movement and multiple componants from other concerns.  So, you'll be doing a mitt combo, and moving, and throwing a defensive pattern, and at the end you'll sprawl from a takedown.   It's more integrated than many TMA's and "live".  

Not to say that one has to be training in an MMA gym, and other arts that truely base training around a model like that can really put together some great things.

As for the limited weapons, yup, it's a bit concern for MMAers when you talk about sd.  However, if you look at many of the things people tout: eye gouges, low punches and kicks, biting; most of these are easy and instincitve to pick up.  If you get someone who is MMA trained, then chances are they can do some of those with minimal effort.  

As for not culturally passing anything down, that's a different story and wasn't the original question.  Even if you don't train MMA, there are plenty of training aspects that can be used by TMA practitoiners that would improve their game.


----------



## just2kicku (Jul 27, 2009)

I will say no, excuse me while I go get another stick, this one seems to have broke from beating a dead horse.


----------



## ronagle (Jul 27, 2009)

It's part of the ongoing evolution, but due to a lack of modern weapon training, I think it's too specialized to be able to claim that. Like so many other martial arts, it really boils down to your motivation in training in the first place.


----------



## mwd0818 (Jul 27, 2009)

:deadhorse

I used to be into sadism, bestiality and necrophilia . . . then I woke up one day and realized I was just beating a dead horse.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 27, 2009)

suicide said:


> whats your opinion on this ...


Okay, normally, when a topic is posted that has been posted a bunch of times, I refrain from ripping the poster because I believe that people do post with the intention of getting honest answers. 

But have you *yourself* not started this conversation more than once before this??  

Daniel


----------



## searcher (Jul 27, 2009)

Here is how we settle this for the final time.    Get the best MMA guy(don't care who), the best TMA guy(again I don't care who), and you put them up against any "qualified" shooter armed with their firearm of choice.

The one who is NOT dead will be declared as the most effective.


Does everyone see how silly the argument is?     Next problem please.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 27, 2009)

wow.  another pointless, repetitive thread.  who wudda guessed?


----------



## suicide (Jul 27, 2009)

effectiveness overall ! i didnt mean for some of you to have a pissy fit ¨excuse me grandmasters of the martial arts world if i offended you ? just asking a question this is a fourm to spark up conv. about things that are on our minds at any given time if this topic is below your pay grade dont answer to it ? its for some of us that are new here and for the ones with open minds , some of us dont really got time or in the mood to go back and check up on previous post - for what to read what you posted 6 months or a year ago like if it was some sord of chapter in the bible ? come on now whats the dilly ... 

Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness : survival mode ?


----------



## still learning (Jul 27, 2009)

Hello, The most effective martial arts or fighting systems is the NOT the art...each systems has it weakness and strenghts-

It is the people within each style that make it better or worst..."how".." you train one self..."

If you learn and train hard? ...in what ever martial art you train? ....it will work for you on the streets...

So far? ...Proper Verbal speaking...is the most effective style..less damage to the body...and less cost to in the end..

Interaction of words is better... than the interaction of the hands and feet....( a smaller and weaker person in strength can defeat..the biggest guys in the world here)

Smart means- avoidance ............Aloha, " too much talking" ...can work against you too?

PS: learn to talk smart....bigger muscle maybe needed here?


----------



## suicide (Jul 27, 2009)

by reading some of your post i see that some of you guys feel that the mma sport would not work in sd situation ? look i hear and feel what some of you are saying you all have valid points , i guess the only way to know would be to confront a mma on the street and see whats he all about , but sense that doesnt make no sense going out and doing something like that i guess some of us will probably never know...


----------



## still learning (Jul 27, 2009)

Hello, America has the greatest Arm forces in the world......just because it is the best or greatness in weapons and arm forces...

Means Nothing to those who resists...Vietnam, Korean war...and now the talibans....

MMA is very impressive on TV...With rules.....they win most fights in the ring?  ...take away the rules....it will NOT be the martial art style that wins....It will be the Individual with the best skills or has the first effective strike!

What should be consider here?  ..is what is the most effective strikes or tarkets to hit and destroy...?

and the answer will be...the one that becomes open......".UM" eyes are almost always open....!

raking or poking eyes..can be done standing up,sitting down, or on the ground........How many years of training to learn this technique?

.....two eyes...may need to use one or two hands...(kick with a foot works here too).....will it take longer to train when eyes  close? ...first yours then theirs....?  .....the hundred of variations...could take years?

NOT............Aloha,

PS: All grapplers know...when you take someone down...biting,eye gouging...will be use....BY None MA and MA's....


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 28, 2009)

suicide said:


> effectiveness overall ! i didnt mean for some of you *to have a pissy fit* ¨excuse me grandmasters of the martial arts world if i offended you ? just asking a question this is a fourm to spark up conv. about things that are on our minds at any given time if this topic is below your pay grade dont answer to it ? its for some of us that are new here and for the ones with open minds , some of us dont really got time or in the mood to go back and check up on previous post - for what to read what you posted 6 months or a year ago like if it was some sord of chapter in the bible ? come on now whats the dilly ...
> 
> Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness : survival mode ?


 
Where I come from thats just crude.

Okay, lets do this again >sigh< MMA is a competitive sport.

 Some people just do MMA, some people do MMA and TMA, some people do MMA, TMA and SD and some people like to post silly threads that don't mean anything or actually make sense.

:deadhorse


----------



## Cirdan (Jul 28, 2009)

sometimes I wish the word "effective" was never invented....


----------



## Omar B (Jul 28, 2009)

Because it's never effectively used?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 28, 2009)

Cirdan said:


> sometimes I wish the word "effective" was never invented....


It should be a gramatical crime to use it without qualification.

Daniel


----------



## MJS (Jul 28, 2009)

suicide said:


> by reading some of your post i see that some of you guys feel that the mma sport would not work in sd situation ? look i hear and feel what some of you are saying you all have valid points , i guess the only way to know would be to confront a mma on the street and see whats he all about , but sense that doesnt make no sense going out and doing something like that i guess some of us will probably never know...


 
I guess you missed my first post back in this thread.  I didn't say MMA was not effective, I said that in many cases, it'll depend on the gym.  If a MMA gym focuses on just ring fighting, no weapons, nothing other than UFC type fighting, then IMO, you will fight like you train.  No, its not rocket science to kick someone in the groin, but if you're not thinking of it, due to the rule set, you may not do it in the real fight outside of the ring.  I also gave a few pros and cons of each.

If we stop and think about it, much comes down to how each person trains.  You could take art X and say it sucks because it lacks A, B and C, but perhaps if one of the students of art X takes it upon himself to round out his ground game, then he will be in a seperate group from the others.  

In closing, I must ask...what is the point you're trying to make with the youtube clip?


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 28, 2009)

suicide said:


>




*Like MJS I want a little insight into your video clip?*

On the clip:

I see a lot of sucker punching, group stomping a few agreed upon fights and really little to no mma. (though there was a nice mount at the beginning)  

Oh and I see a lot of immature people! 

Now to avoid what is on the video I usually do not hang around a lot of immature people particularly where the alcohol or other vices are being consumed!


----------



## suicide (Jul 28, 2009)

yeah and whos to say whos qualified effectively :barf:


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 28, 2009)

suicide said:


> yeah and whos to say whos qualified effectively :barf:


 
_effectively_ at what?


----------



## MJS (Jul 28, 2009)

suicide said:


> yeah and whos to say whos qualified effectively :barf:


 
Ummm...what the hell are you talking about????  Are you talking about the clip you just posted?  If so, let me say this....after training in the arts for 20+ yrs, I think I'm qualified to look at a clip and determine if they have any skill or if they suck.  Nobody in that clip impressed me at all.


----------



## MJS (Jul 28, 2009)

suicide said:


> effectiveness overall ! i didnt mean for some of you to have a pissy fit ¨excuse me grandmasters of the martial arts world if i offended you ? just asking a question this is a fourm to spark up conv. about things that are on our minds at any given time if this topic is below your pay grade dont answer to it ? its for some of us that are new here and for the ones with open minds , some of us dont really got time or in the mood to go back and check up on previous post - for what to read what you posted 6 months or a year ago like if it was some sord of chapter in the bible ? come on now whats the dilly ...
> 
> Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness : survival mode ?


 
First off, chill out man!  Second, if you're reading before you post, you should see many posts, mine included, that give credit to both, but seeing that both, MMA and TMA are 2 different games, it only makes sense to understand that depending on the circumstance, one will be better than the other.  As I said before, there are strong and weak points in both, and both can benefit from each other.


----------



## mwd0818 (Jul 28, 2009)

Effectiveness how?

Let's just say self-defense in general.  (Getting jumped while filming a ghetto fights video let's say?)

Is practicing kata, one-step sparring and breaking boards going to get you through it?  Probably not.

How about rolling around on the ground going for a submission with rules that don't allow for multiple attackers, bites, eye gouges, finger rakes, etc.  Probably not.

What MMA did for self-defense was bring about an awareness of the need for real and hard training against resistance.  Any school, regardless of style (MMA, TMA, etc.) that trains hard, with resistance and realistic attacking, is contributing to one's ability to be effective in a traditional street situation.

Now, if you want to define "effective" differently, I guess it depends on what the definition of "is" is . . .


----------



## searcher (Jul 28, 2009)

Not to beat the horse anymore, but what are you talking about suicide?    Having taught tactical handgun classes for a few years now and varying MAs for more years then I want to count, I don't see how the "fights" in the video are relating to what this discussion is supposed to be about.   In a situation like the video, I would guarentee I would have drawn my carry gun and defended myself.      And I am not sure why you would think that what was in the video has anything to do with MMA or TMA.    It is a gang style brawl.    Last time I looked, I did not see that in any |MMA or TMA.    

Please elaborate for us, as I am getting confused about the topic at hand.


----------



## BLACK LION (Jul 28, 2009)

jarrod said:


> that only applies to budo & taoist based arts, for the most part. there are plenty of styles which are in fact only about self-defense or combat.
> 
> jf


 
I woefully disagree. 
Character, Honor and integrity are essential to any good human being. You cannot do whats right and you cannot do whats just if you lack the essentials... These dont come standard only to certian arts... they are a standard every man woman and child should adhere to.   

In combat... without integrity you will not survive...if you do it was probably becuase someone with integrity saved your life... 
Honor is what deems character and what are you without character...  what are you without respect...what are you without dignity??? These are nutrients to the being and without them we are no different than a sociopath.       



As far as the original post...  there is no such thing as surpass...  What can be conceived now as a progression will end up as a degradation.  I see much delusion and dilliution

I can see both sides clearly and those firmly planted in the principles that actually matter on an ultimate scale will survive the test of time.  

The majority seems to get fixated on things that lack content...they seem to enjoy being peed on and led to believe its yellow rain. It seems to be more about everything its not supposed to be...rather than everything that is essential and wholesome...  
There are those out there that live by the code and will die by it.... becuase they exist, whats true will remain until we are all gone...whats false will fade away into history.  

many excellent points made here... take care out there ladies and gentlemen.


----------



## BLACK LION (Jul 28, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> It should be a gramatical crime to use it without qualification.
> 
> Daniel


 
Aka= "grammacide"


----------



## BLACK LION (Jul 28, 2009)

I dont know about most people but I have a hard time making social comparisons these days.   The evil in "man" is so much more profound and abroad than people think and behave.  There is great ignorance here.  
Comparing social and antisocial behavior is like comparing oranges to tangerines or lemons...   it is senseless and seemingly pointless as the outcome is the same...there is a winner and a loser.  

Now my friend...compare social behavior against asocial behavior and you are comparing oranges to steak knives... a clear, present and dangerous difference... 

If you seek to compare things on a bigger, stronger, faster, technical and esoteric scale...well then there is always better... there are always improvements...there is always the "latest and the greatest" trumping its predecessor... we see this in everything from computers to cars to ammunition calibers...  there is always the next best thing.  But this is all on a scale that is based on rules...      take those rules away and you have those who will do whatever it takes to come out on top...not to win...but to completelty obliterate thier opposition...   
Take the war in Iraq and afghanistan for example... here you have guys that look like normal people and dont use the latest and the greatest technology but yet they are giving the most powerful country in the world a run for their money...    they only have to use a dead dog and a receiver strapped to some home made pow pow and booooom....there goes 8 highly trained warriors with state of the art equipment... 

make sense?? 

excuse my rant yet again...


----------



## just2kicku (Jul 28, 2009)

suicide said:


> by reading some of your post i see that some of you guys feel that the mma sport would not work in sd situation ? look i hear and feel what some of you are saying you all have valid points , i guess the only way to know would be to confront a mma on the street and see whats he all about , but sense that doesnt make no sense going out and doing something like that i guess some of us will probably never know...



What the hell is that video. I have to agree with Jon on this one, shoot first ask later. The best defense against that, not hang out with the thugs. A situation like that is pretty easy to see and avoid. The only way I see that happening to someone is taking a wrong turn down a wrong street and getting jumped. Other than that.......I don't even know what to say about that garbage, and who in their right mind would buy **** like this. Hell, I don't even know what the point of the video was.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 28, 2009)

jarrod said:


> that only applies to budo & taoist based arts, for the most part. there are plenty of styles which are in fact only about self-defense or combat.
> 
> jf


 


BLACK LION said:


> I woefully disagree.
> Character, Honor and integrity are essential to any good human being. You cannot do whats right and you cannot do whats just if you lack the essentials... These dont come standard only to certian arts... they are a standard every man woman and child should adhere to.
> 
> In combat... without integrity you will not survive...if you do it was probably becuase someone with integrity saved your life...
> Honor is what deems character and what are you without character... what are you without respect...what are you without dignity??? These are nutrients to the being and without them we are no different than a sociopath.


 
I disagree with both.

Character, honor, and integrity are only connected to the MAs on a personal level, insomuch as the individual chooses to make it so.  There is nothing inherent about any art, including budo and arts from a taoist background, that makes these characteristics mandatory.  No amount of preaching or teaching or brow-beating by the instructor can make this a reality in the student.  Only the individual can choose to live a life with good character, honor, and integrity, in whatever way that may be defined.  The art itself most definitely does NOT make it so.

And having these traits is no guarantee that one will get thru combat.  In fact, I'd suggest that one who is willing to sacrifice these traits if necessary in order to do whatever is required to get thru a life-threatening situation, may have the advantage.


----------



## Omar B (Jul 28, 2009)

this thread has effectively said nothing with a whole bunch of words!  

But really, comparing or contrasting the 2 is never going to get you anywhere.  Different mediums, different aims.  It's like people who argue classical music versus jazz.  where's the argument, both are great and take piles of talent and compositional skill, accept them for what they are.


----------



## BLACK LION (Jul 28, 2009)

Flying Crane said:


> I disagree with both.
> 
> Character, honor, and integrity are only connected to the MAs on a personal level, insomuch as the individual chooses to make it so. There is nothing inherent about any art, including budo and arts from a taoist background, that makes these characteristics mandatory. No amount of preaching or teaching or brow-beating by the instructor can make this a reality in the student. Only the individual can choose to live a life with good character, honor, and integrity, in whatever way that may be defined. The art itself most definitely does NOT make it so.
> 
> And having these traits is no guarantee that one will get thru combat. In fact, I'd suggest that one who is willing to sacrifice these traits if necessary in order to do whatever is required to get thru a life-threatening situation, may have the advantage.


 
_*"Integrity* is __consistency__ of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations and outcome. _

Everything in life is only as good as its integrity...wether its man, trees, or machines.


----------



## jarrod (Jul 28, 2009)

BLACK LION said:


> I woefully disagree.
> Character, Honor and integrity are essential to any good human being. You cannot do whats right and you cannot do whats just if you lack the essentials... These dont come standard only to certian arts... they are a standard every man woman and child should adhere to.



i don't disagree with your ideals.  however, many arts do not embrace a moral or ethical code; it is often assumed to be built into to culture the art came from, or left to the individual practitioners.  i'm not saying that martial artists should/do operate without an ethical system, only that it isn't built into each & every system.  

you can be a very competent at boxing, wrestling, RBSD, military combatives, etc, without any sort of ethics or sportsmanship.  no one will want to train or compete with you, but moral values are not an inherent part of all styles.  

jf


----------



## BLACK LION (Jul 28, 2009)

jarrod said:


> i don't disagree with your ideals. however, many arts do not embrace a moral or ethical code; it is often assumed to be built into to culture the art came from, or left to the individual practitioners. i'm not saying that martial artists should/do operate without an ethical system, only that it isn't built into each & every system.
> 
> you can be a very competent at boxing, wrestling, RBSD, military combatives, etc, without any sort of ethics or sportsmanship. no one will want to train or compete with you, but moral values are not an inherent part of all styles.
> 
> jf


 
Understood...  thanks for your clarification.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 28, 2009)

jarrod said:


> i don't disagree with your ideals.  however, many arts do not embrace a moral or ethical code; it is often assumed to be built into to culture the art came from, or left to the individual practitioners.  i'm not saying that martial artists should/do operate without an ethical system, only that it isn't built into each & every system.
> 
> you can be a very competent at boxing, wrestling, RBSD, military combatives, etc, without any sort of ethics or sportsmanship.  no one will want to train or compete with you, but moral values are not an inherent part of all styles.
> 
> jf



That's quite true.  Effective action is a separate issue for moral character.  Effective actions are amoral......where the issue of morals comes in, however, is to ensure that as many GOOD people are armed with effective actions as possible.


----------



## Ronin74 (Jul 28, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> It should be a gramatical crime to use it without qualification.
> 
> Daniel


I hope that law goes _effective_ someday... lol


----------



## suicide (Jul 28, 2009)

threads like these bring everything all out dog :angel:


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 29, 2009)

Suicide, that's just pointless and there's very little point in anyone posting anything further if all you are going to do is throw up random comments and videos. there's been thoughtful postings and this is all you contribute?


----------



## MJS (Jul 29, 2009)

This thread is on a 1-way track down the tubes, due to the fact that:

a) the OP isn't posting.

b) what he is posting makes zero sense.

c) when asked direct questions, refuses to answer.

d) posts pointless and offtopic youtube clips in some sort of justification.

e) when asked about the pointless clips, the questions go unanswered.

Man, for someone who started a thread in hopes to discuss, I don't see much productive discussion from the person who started the thread.  I think for now, I'll just watching this thread, instead of posting.


----------



## suicide (Jul 29, 2009)

according to you this thread was pointless ? but i gained much understanding and insight from all of you on the way you and everybody else see things : and the pro and cons about mma & tma when it comes to effectiveness , just that some of you act like you jumped out of the ma hall of fame - what happened to your patience ?


----------



## Dave Leverich (Jul 29, 2009)

mwd0818 said:


> What MMA did for self-defense was bring about an awareness of the need for real and hard training against resistance.  *Any school, regardless of style (MMA, TMA, etc.) that trains hard, with resistance and realistic attacking, is contributing to one's ability to be effective in a traditional street situation.*



Thread answered.


----------



## MJS (Jul 29, 2009)

suicide said:


> according to you this thread was pointless ? but i gained much understanding and insight from all of you on the way you and everybody else see things : and the pro and cons about mma & tma when it comes to effectiveness , just that some of you act like you jumped out of the ma hall of fame - what happened to your patience ?


 
Yes, I as well as a few others are a bit confused, due to the fact that some of our questions are not being answered.  I mean, if a thread is going to be a success, well, questions need to be answered.  

I'm still wondering about that last youtube clip you posted, with all of the children fighting in the street.  How is that related to this thread?  Not quite following that one.  Additionally, if you're going to post youtube clips, I'd think they should at least pertain to the thread at hand.  Again, I, and a few others are wondering what the point you're trying to make is.


----------



## suicide (Jul 29, 2009)

the video clips are in a way : metaphoric 

there used to describe thee unpredictability of things , when i think of the effectiveness in mma tma sd this what it would be up against : thugs , if another black belt attacked me to robb me carjack me etc etc and we squared off that would be something ' but when a thug comes at me with his fist knife or gun in the year 2009 i even ask myself how effective would my training be against a situation like this thats all ... and when you guys ask questions when i get a chance ill get back sometimes i just come through real quick to see whats the happs on the craps so dont expect a thesis on why tai bo is better than gym kata at the moment its requested.

peace love unity & respect


----------



## BLACK LION (Jul 29, 2009)

sgtmac_46 said:


> That's quite true. Effective action is a separate issue for moral character. Effective actions are amoral......where the issue of morals comes in, however, is to ensure that as many GOOD people are armed with effective actions as possible.


 

I never used the word moral character.  As I believe there is two sides to a persons character...moral and amoral....social and asocial.  Often they can be added and subtracted at will.  

I am talking about integrity which can be completely devoid of morals or any code of ethics or encompassed by them... morals can get in the way of decisions causing one to be indecisive.. that all depends on thier integrity... I have morals...I dont rape, commit murder etc but at the same time that wont stop me from crushing a mans throat as a means of self preservation or the preservation of other lives...to me that is not killing in cold blood and therefor has nothing to do with my morals...  I wont pee on the dead body because that would be against my code of ethics...   

Integrity is everything... its not just morals and its not justt ethics...


----------



## MJS (Jul 29, 2009)

suicide said:


> the video clips are in a way : metaphoric
> 
> there used to describe thee unpredictability of things , when i think of the effectiveness in mma tma sd this what it would be up against : thugs , if another black belt attacked me to robb me carjack me etc etc and we squared off that would be something ' but when a thug comes at me with his fist knife or gun in the year 2009 i even ask myself how effective would my training be against a situation like this thats all ... and when you guys ask questions when i get a chance ill get back sometimes i just come through real quick to see whats the happs on the craps so dont expect a thesis on why tai bo is better than gym kata at the moment its requested.
> 
> peace love unity & respect


 
Lets break this clip down. Opening few seconds, you have 2 males, with the caption that he didn't have the other guys money, which led to the guy that was sitting, to get up, and slap the guy that was standing. Would I be faced with that? Nope, due to the fact that its clear this was some drug deal gone bad. I dont do drugs, I dont sell them, I dont buy them and I sure as hell don't hang with those that do. 

Much of the rest of this clip appears to be group and/or gang relating fighting. I dont hang out with gang members, I'm not part of a gang, I dont frequent areas that are known gang areas. I'm probably not going to find myself in a situation like this. 

As I said, much of your success will come down to how you train. If you train at a mcdojo, chances are, you'll probably get your *** kicked. If you bust your *** in training, putting in some hard work, blood, sweat and tears, work various scenario drills, do weapons work, etc., chances of your success just went up greatly.

Like I said, everything I saw in that clip looked to me like a bunch of untrained, brawling punks. If there was skill in any of that, I'm not seeing it.

Good luck to you in your training.


----------



## suicide (Jul 29, 2009)

MJS said:


> Lets break this clip down. Opening few seconds, you have 2 males, with the caption that he didn't have the other guys money, which led to the guy that was sitting, to get up, and slap the guy that was standing. Would I be faced with that? Nope, due to the fact that its clear this was some drug deal gone bad. I dont do drugs, I dont sell them, I dont buy them and I sure as hell don't hang with those that do.
> 
> Much of the rest of this clip appears to be group and/or gang relating fighting. I dont hang out with gang members, I'm not part of a gang, I dont frequent areas that are known gang areas. I'm probably not going to find myself in a situation like this.
> 
> ...


 

what makes you immune to getting slapped ? no one is immune to anything it can happen you as well as me maybe not for oweing money to a drug dealer but theres always people out there that react and do things off of impulse so dont ever count that out ' it could happen at a gas station on vacation or a mere misunderstanding.

getting attacked by multiple assailents ? dont tell me you dont train for these types of situations we all do and when it does happens believe me it will probably be a bunch of gang members or bikers or etc etc doubt that it will be the cobra kai dojo students taking turns kicking and punching you.

unskilled and untrained people are some of the most dangerous people on the earth because there skilled and trained in survival due to there envirment...

and good luck to you in your training 

peace love unity & respect 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NzzXZPuEzs&feature=related


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 29, 2009)

MJS, you have my respect, your patience is greater than mine.


----------



## MJS (Jul 29, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> MJS, you have my respect, your patience is greater than mine.


 
Thank you.


----------



## MJS (Jul 29, 2009)

suicide said:


> what makes you immune to getting slapped ? no one is immune to anything it can happen you as well as me maybe not for oweing money to a drug dealer but theres always people out there that react and do things off of impulse so dont ever count that out ' it could happen at a gas station on vacation or a mere misunderstanding.


 
And if you let someone get within arms reach of you, and you just stand there, hands down, facing the person, yes, you do deserve to get slapped.  Never said I was immune, but I am saying that if you look at that part as well as one towards the end, where a kid was totally unaware of the other guy behind him, that says to me, that you have no awareness.  Its that simple.  If someone was standing in front of me, yelling, upset, angry, etc., yes, my hands will be up in a non-threatening manner, so as to allow me a chance to block or defend against any sudden movement.  Yes, this is stuff that I train for.  If you dont, then I suggest you re-evaluate your training, as something must be lacking.



> getting attacked by multiple assailents ? dont tell me you dont train for these types of situations we all do and when it does happens believe me it will probably be a bunch of gang members or bikers or etc etc doubt that it will be the cobra kai dojo students taking turns kicking and punching you.


 
You obviously took me saying that I dont hang around in gang areas, as me saying I dont train for multiples.  Yes, I train for that too.  Come on now, you're posts are really starting to sound childish.  Part of defending yourself is being aware of whats going on around you.  Is it possible for me to get attacked by more than 1?  Anything is, and if it happens, I'll defend myself to the very best of my abilities.  I'll do whatever I have to, and use whatever tools are available to me.  I worked for the Dept Of Corrections for a period of time, and yes, every day I was outnumbered, but rest assure, I was very aware of what and who was around me.  I'm still here typing this post today.  



> unskilled and untrained people are some of the most dangerous people on the earth because there skilled and trained in survival due to there envirment...


 
And in many cases, what these people thrive on, is getting the jump on you, as well as fear and intimidation.  I've dealt with people in the dojo and outside of that, that were unskilled and untrained...again, I'm still here to talk about it.   Like I said, alot of it all comes down to how you train.  



> and good luck to you in your training


 
Thanks.




> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NzzXZPuEzs&feature=related


 

Ummmmmm......ok.


----------



## suicide (Jul 29, 2009)

its cool your right... glad that your still alive and respect what you been through. stay safe its a jungle in there.





 

what prison have you worked in and what level was the yard ? did you ever have to defend yourself in there against a inmate ?


----------



## MJS (Jul 29, 2009)

suicide said:


> what prison have you worked in and what level was the yard ?


 
New Haven Correctional Center, in New Haven, Ct.  Level 4 facility.




> did you ever have to defend yourself in there against a inmate ?


 
On a few occassions, and fortunately, all turned out well for me.  I was fortunate to be able to verbally talk many situations down.


----------



## suicide (Jul 29, 2009)

you what sifu MJS your alright :uhyeah: i could learn alot from you.


----------



## Trent (Jul 30, 2009)

Back to the original post, "Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness?

In it's all encompassing, unqualified form the answer to the question would be a resounding, "No."  I watched MMA go through it's labor pains and was competing in it at a very amateur level before it even had a name through "studio contests" or "dojo wars" or whatever you wish to call them.  Yeah, ground fighting and grappling did exist, but was not in the public eye except for judo and wrestling.  Also, where do you think MMA receives it's techniques and background?

If we go back to the original question and place it within the context of the sport of MMA, or allow it to be placed only within the rule set provided in competition, I would have to change my answer to "Yes," generally speaking.  Competitors train specifically for technical and tactical advantages inherent to the ring and rules/ prohibitions inherent in the sport, like any sport.  And they have learned to adapt traditional techniques specifically for the situation they will find themselves in-- the ring. Thousands of competitors train and share on what works in competition and what won't every day.  What will and what won't receive a disqualification are also shared.  Today, if someone is solely a traditionalist without training "MMA" specifically but competes in the ring against an MMA practitioner they will lose almost every time when accepting that rule set whether it be through knockout, points or disqualification, a loss is a loss.

MMA has come a very long way in the last decade alone, let alone the last two decades.  I enjoy the fact that it has caused many traditional arts (not all) to remember some cold, hard facts about real training and hand-to-hand situations, but it isn't the be all, end all by any means.


----------



## MJS (Jul 30, 2009)

Trent said:


> Back to the original post, "Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness?
> 
> In it's all encompassing, unqualified form the answer to the question would be a resounding, "No." I watched MMA go through it's labor pains and was competing in it at a very amateur level before it even had a name through "studio contests" or "dojo wars" or whatever you wish to call them. Yeah, ground fighting and grappling did exist, but was not in the public eye except for judo and wrestling. Also, where do you think MMA receives it's techniques and background?
> 
> ...


 
I agree...MMA has come a very long way, since its debut in '93.  We went from 1 style fighters, to multi style fighters.  From epic 30min battles, to rounds with time limits.  We've seen that its important, not only for MMA fighters, but for TMAists as well, to be well rounded.  Long gone are the days when you can just do BJJ and expect to win.  The grapplers understood that you need to learn to strike, and the strikers learned that you need to grapple.  

Given the popularity of MMA, yes, its very possible to encounter someone in the real world, with a grappling background, and as crazy as it may be to roll on the pavement, if you do end up there, you'd better know how to roll and counter and be able to get back to your feet.  

I have said, and will continue to say, that I feel strongly, that everyone can benefit from each other.  People shouldn't be so blind to the many things that're out there.  Look at what you can add to your art from someone else, to make yourself better.


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

I am curious.  There are many techniques found in many different TMA's that would be considered ineffective for combat.

How many techniques/tactics/strategies are found in MMA matches that are considered 'suspect' for "real" street fighting?


----------



## mwd0818 (Jul 30, 2009)

fangjian said:


> I am curious.  There are many techniques found in many different TMA's that would be considered ineffective for combat.
> 
> How many techniques/tactics/strategies are found in MMA matches that are considered 'suspect' for "real" street fighting?



Anything that puts you on the ground and "engaged" with your opponent.


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

mwd0818 said:


> Anything that puts you on the ground and "engaged" with your opponent.


 
So the  'ground and pound' and 'submission grappling' aspects are not advised for real combat, but the 'sprawl and brawl' and 'clinch fighting' aspects are ok?


----------



## mwd0818 (Jul 30, 2009)

I purposely over-simplified my response, but in a real street situation, everything has its place really, but anything that results in a loss of a situational awareness and/or an inability to disengage quickly is a dangerous move.  There might not be any friends, there might not be any weapons, and a friendly cop might be there to bail you out, but those are a lot of "mights".

Survival should be paramount in a street situation, and then closely followed by terminating the threat.  Termination of a threat is often most easily accomplished by distance, and distance is tough to establish while you are engaged in a grappling contest.


----------



## tallgeese (Jul 30, 2009)

However, grappling can occur.  

You can trip, get overpowered, or any endless list of things.  Heck, a competent high school wrestler can take about any competent karate guy down IF said karate guy hasn't trained to deal with it.  Even then, a slightly better high school wrestler might get one down.

I do get tired of hearing the mantra about staying off the ground and then have those same people either not train on the ground or short change their training there under the premise that it's a bad idea to go there.

Situations are often too fluid to rule out anything as a no-no.  More tools equal more options that cover more situations.


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

What I am wondering is if any TMA'er ( whatever style, Tkd, Karate, etc) while watching an MMA fight says to themself     " pfft.  If someone ever did 'that' to me in a 'real' fight, they're gonna get hurt"


----------



## tallgeese (Jul 30, 2009)

As to the clinch, it's highly advisable to train here for street level encounters.  It's a distance gap that often gets ignored in trad training and is often seen in sd confrontations.


----------



## MJS (Jul 30, 2009)

fangjian said:


> I am curious. There are many techniques found in many different TMA's that would be considered ineffective for combat.
> 
> How many techniques/tactics/strategies are found in MMA matches that are considered 'suspect' for "real" street fighting?


 
I think my reply will address both of these questions.   IMO, I'd say that simple things are the key.  When you start getting into long, in-depth techniques, the chances of success start to get shorter.  I say this due to the ever changing scenario.  For example...lets say I pick a Kenpo tech against a right punch.  Odds are, I'm not going to complete the full tech. before I have to adjust and move on to something else.  Keep in mind, my opponent isn't going to stand there.

If we look at MMA matches, we see 2 fighters fighting for 3, 5 min rounds.  Are they doing things, during that time, to really take out their opponent?  Does it really make sense to hold someone in your guard for 20min, while you tire that person out, so you can move in for the kill?  I'd so no.

Now, I'm a big advocate of ground work, and I feel that it should be something that everyone has some background in.  Some will say that they'll never end up there, but I don't know how they can predict what will/will not happen.  If you trip, stumble, whatever, and end up on the ground, it'd be very wise to know how to survive the initial fall, how to escape whatever position you're in, and safely get back to your feet.


----------



## mwd0818 (Jul 30, 2009)

tallgeese said:


> However, grappling can occur. . . . More tools equal more options that cover more situations.



I agree, and it's why I have ranks in Judo, Jiu-Jitsu and BJJ too.  But it's important to remember that an MMA sport bout is not real life.  It is definitely moreso than point sparring, but it is not a real self-defense situation.  I will stick to the idea that your primary goal is in a street situation is to _*survive*_, and then, to terminate the threat.  The more exposed you are to different threats, punching, kicking, grappling, multiple attackers, etc., the better you will be prepared to _*survive*_.  Ignore the ground, and you trip and are in a world of hurt.  Think the ground is the ultimate, you engage the wrestling, get a guy's back and choke him out while his friend is kicking you in the head.

It's all about awareness and being as prepared as possible.  Sport techniques are for sports, self-defense is for real life, and is a lot more than punching, kicking, or grappling.


----------



## tallgeese (Jul 30, 2009)

Sure, I agree.  But the reference was to MMA and it's components, not plethora of other things that go into the whole package.


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

MJS said:


> If we look at MMA matches, we see 2 fighters fighting for 3, 5 min rounds. Are they doing things, during that time, to really take out their opponent? Does it really make sense to hold someone in your guard for 20min, while you tire that person out, so you can move in for the kill? I'd so no.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## suicide (Jul 30, 2009)

Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness ? 

i know us tma´s train for sd , for situations in the streets that can very explosive and dangerous but what about a mma you think what they do in the octagon wont work in the real world ? i believe they can be very effective - i dont know if more than or less than a tma i guess it all depends on the person but thats what i was asking.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 30, 2009)

suicide said:


> Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness ?
> 
> i know us tma´s train for sd , for situations in the streets that can very explosive and dangerous but what about a mma you think what they do in the octagon wont work in the real world ? i believe they can be very effective - i dont know if more than or less than a tma i guess it all depends on the person but thats what i was asking.


Well, for starters, the techniques of MMA all come out of one TMA or another.  Many TMA's have techniques developed around sport/competition.

So some were developed for a sport/competition scenario.  Some were developed for combat.  Use of sport techniques for practical SD is a bad idea, whether or not the user learned them in a TMA or MMA.

Daniel


----------



## suicide (Jul 30, 2009)

what mma sport tech. do you think would be a bad idea to use on the street ?


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well, for starters, the techniques of MMA all come out of one TMA or another. Many TMA's have techniques developed around sport/competition.
> 
> So some were developed for a sport/competition scenario. Some were developed for combat. Use of sport techniques for practical SD is a bad idea, whether or not the user learned them in a TMA or MMA.
> 
> Daniel


What sport techniques in MMA would be a bad idea?


----------



## MJS (Jul 30, 2009)

fangjian said:


> MJS said:
> 
> 
> > If we look at MMA matches, we see 2 fighters fighting for 3, 5 min rounds. Are they doing things, during that time, to really take out their opponent? Does it really make sense to hold someone in your guard for 20min, while you tire that person out, so you can move in for the kill? I'd so no.
> ...


----------



## suicide (Jul 30, 2009)

?


----------



## MJS (Jul 30, 2009)

suicide said:


> Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness ?
> 
> i know us tma´s train for sd , for situations in the streets that can very explosive and dangerous but what about a mma you think what they do in the octagon wont work in the real world ? i believe they can be very effective - i dont know if more than or less than a tma i guess it all depends on the person but thats what i was asking.


 


Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well, for starters, the techniques of MMA all come out of one TMA or another. Many TMA's have techniques developed around sport/competition.
> 
> So some were developed for a sport/competition scenario. Some were developed for combat. Use of sport techniques for practical SD is a bad idea, whether or not the user learned them in a TMA or MMA.
> 
> Daniel


 


suicide said:


> what mma sport tech. do you think would be a bad idea to use on the street ?


 


fangjian said:


> What sport techniques in MMA would be a bad idea?


 
I'm leaning in agreement with Daniel here.  As I've said in earlier posts, much is going to come down to how you train.  I'm not sure if the questions being asked here are legit or baiting but nonetheless, I don't think that its that difficult to see a difference, especially if you're the slightest bit familiar with MMA.  Actually, I gave a few examples just a moment ago, when I spoke of the guard.  

Lets use this as an example...I know we've all talked about the saying, "You fight like you train." So going on that, lets use Rocye as an example.  Anyone familiar with his fights, should see that his striking skills are not up to par.  His specialty is fighting on the ground, not striking.  That being said, is it going to make sense, to pull guard, for the sake of pulling it, as I mentioned in my last post, to tire someone out, just so you can go for a sub., when there are many other things, that are available to you, that probably won't put you in a bad position?


----------



## MJS (Jul 30, 2009)

suicide said:


> ?


 
Confused on something??


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

MJS said:


> I'm leaning in agreement with Daniel here. As I've said in earlier posts, much is going to come down to how you train. I'm not sure if the questions being asked here are legit or baiting but nonetheless, I don't think that its that difficult to see a difference, especially if you're the slightest bit familiar with MMA. Actually, I gave a few examples just a moment ago, when I spoke of the guard.
> 
> Lets use this as an example...I know we've all talked about the saying, "You fight like you train." So going on that, lets use Rocye as an example. Anyone familiar with his fights, should see that his striking skills are not up to par. His specialty is fighting on the ground, not striking. That being said, is it going to make sense, to pull guard, for the sake of pulling it, as I mentioned in my last post, to tire someone out, just so you can go for a sub., when there are many other things, that are available to you, that probably won't put you in a bad position?


 
People who hate on MMA always say things like "What are you gonna do on the street, pull guard?"  "There's no eye poking and fish hooking. It's just a sport"  with a sarcastic voice and all.  I'm trying to ask what are then the real disadvantages of MMA?  
I agree that simple SD is different.  We train that at my place seperately too. 

I was trying to think of BJJ fights of the past and I always recall those guys-- keeping distance for a moment and looking for the clinch/takedown.  Getting the takedown and proceeding to a better position t finish the fight.  I don't remember any of them pulling guard


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 30, 2009)

fangjian said:


> What sport techniques in MMA would be a bad idea?


Well, for starters, "in MMA" implies that the techniques are peculiar to MMA, and the are not. They did not come from MMA. The techniques and/or strategies come from their donor arts.

Kicks to the head of a standing opponent are generally a bad idea outside of a sport setting (while not common in MMA, they do occur). Lenthy submissions, rolling on the ground for extended lengths of time. Any techique that takes advantage of a rule setting, be it in MMA or anything else. 

I am sure that anyone who competes in MMA tournaments could give you a laundry list of things that they do in the ring that they would not do in an SD context.

Just to clarify, I am referring to competative MMA, not hybrid martial arts developed specifically for real world use.

You ask, "what are then the real disadvantages of MMA?"  There are not any specifically.  MMA competitors all train in several somethings.  Just as they know what techniques to _not _use in the ring/cage/octagon, I assume that they *also* know what techniques to _not_ use in SD.

Daniel


----------



## MJS (Jul 30, 2009)

fangjian said:


> People who hate on MMA always say things like "What are you gonna do on the street, pull guard?" "There's no eye poking and fish hooking. It's just a sport" with a sarcastic voice and all. I'm trying to ask what are then the real disadvantages of MMA?
> I agree that simple SD is different. We train that at my place seperately too.
> 
> I was trying to think of BJJ fights of the past and I always recall those guys-- keeping distance for a moment and looking for the clinch/takedown. Getting the takedown and proceeding to a better position t finish the fight. I don't remember any of them pulling guard


 
Are you saying that I am hating on MMA?  If thats the case, I think that you need to re-read many of my posts, because I have said many times, that I enjoy watching it, hang out with people who enjoy it, train in it, teach it, you name it.  I have also said many times, that those TMAists, who claim that the eye gouge is "the deadly" end all be all fight finisher, make me cringe.  

You dont recall people pulling guard?  Keep in mind, as I've said, which apparently went missed, I've said that MMA has evolved from the early years.  But, for the sake of your question, let me point you to the following:





 
Royce pulls guard against Shamrock 35 secs in.  Again around 1:15.  The fight at 1:29.  While he did not pull guard, he was still looking to take Remco down.  Towards the end of this clip, which is Royce vs. Dan Severn, he spent the entire fight in his guard.  Now, I will say that there were times when he got mount or side mount.  The only striking that you saw from him, was once he was in an advantageous position.  

This goes back to what I was saying before....its one thing to end up on the ground at no fault of your own, but to intentionally take the person there, with the sole purpose of finishing on the ground, in a street, RL situation, IMO, isn't the wisest thing to do. 

Again, I enjoy MMA, and I've added a few things to the way I train.  I feel that having a ground game is very important for every art, due to the fact that MMA is so popular, its very possible in a RL situation, we could face someone with grappling skill.  Better to have it and not need it, than to not have it and wish you had.   I'll also say that depending on the school, that will determine what type of grapplers they put out.  If its a pure BJJ school, with the focus on competition, chances are, they may not focus on SD situations, that a Kenpo, TKD, Hapkido, etc. school may.  

I've always felt that if you want to be as well rounded as possible, you need:

Striking, kicking, clinch, weapons and ground.


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

When I think of MMA, I think of someone who trains all 4 ranges of unarmed combat ( let's say; sprawl and brawl, clinch and pound, ground and pound, and submission grappling) and spars those 4 ranges.  It could be my ignorance but I just don't see a lot of disadvantages in the training method or techniques.  When it comes to the actual competitive sport, I can't find many holes in the testing of this knowledge either.  

At my place, we do that, plus we do weapon stuff with Filipino martial arts and my students have to know basic escapes from common self defense situations. That's all I could think of that the above paragraph kind of lacks.


----------



## fangjian (Jul 30, 2009)

MJS said:


> Are you saying that I am hating on MMA? If thats the case, I think that you need to re-read many of my posts, because I have said many times, that I enjoy watching it, hang out with people who enjoy it, train in it, teach it, you name it. I have also said many times, that those TMAists, who claim that the eye gouge is "the deadly" end all be all fight finisher, make me cringe.


Sorry.  The first paragraph was intended to be an 'in general' statement.  The second paragraph was for you.  I'll try to take more care with my posting.  hahaha  Reminds me of when I went to a Tai Chi seminar one time and the teacher was saying how UFC, Pride isn't real fighting because they don't train eye gouging etc.  Made me and my friend laugh for a while.  



> You dont recall people pulling guard? Keep in mind, as I've said, which apparently went missed, I've said that MMA has evolved from the early years. But, for the sake of your question, let me point you to the following:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for getting the clip for me.  When I said early BJJ fights I was thinking more like those closed door fights back before the UFC.  I'm sure 'pulling guard' happened but not at a rate that condones people talkin smack to me all the time.  "What are you gonna do pull guard" haha



> This goes back to what I was saying before....its one thing to end up on the ground at no fault of your own, but to intentionally take the person there, with the sole purpose of finishing on the ground, in a street, RL situation, IMO, isn't the wisest thing to do.


I guess maybe it's just about comfort levels.  I enjoy grappling and feel comfortable there.  I think if I was to get in a street fight I would definately go for a takedown ( I'm not very comfortable with my boxing) and ground and pound.  That doesn't mean I would go for side control or north south.  More like-get a clinch-ankle pick-kick him while he's down.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 30, 2009)

fangjian said:


> When I think of MMA, I think of someone who trains all 4 ranges of unarmed combat ( let's say; sprawl and brawl, clinch and pound, ground and pound, and submission grappling) and spars those 4 ranges. It could be my ignorance but I just don't see a lot of disadvantages in the training method or techniques. When it comes to the actual competitive sport, I can't find many holes in the testing of this knowledge either.
> 
> At my place, we do that, plus we do weapon stuff with Filipino martial arts and my students have to know basic escapes from common self defense situations. That's all I could think of that the above paragraph kind of lacks.


When someone says, "MMA", particularly on the internet, it is pretty  much universally recognized as referring to the competative sport.  

Certainly, the fact that it stands for mixed martial arts does not help in clarity, as I know guys who mean that they train in either multiple martial arts and blend them in their own practice or who train in places where martial arts are "mixed" in order to prevent holes in training.  Which is of course, not the same thing as competative sport.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 30, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Well, for starters, "in MMA" implies that the techniques are peculiar to MMA, and the are not. They did not come from MMA. The techniques and/or strategies come from their donor arts.
> 
> Kicks to the head of a standing opponent are generally a bad idea outside of a sport setting (while not common in MMA, they do occur). Lenthy submissions, rolling on the ground for extended lengths of time. Any techique that takes advantage of a rule setting, be it in MMA or anything else.
> 
> ...


 
Daniel, thats spot on! In MMa fights also a fighter knows who he's matched with and will have developed tactics to deal with that opponents strengths and weaknesses so watching a fighting doesn't mean you see all the techniques available in MMA. One of our fighters was matched with a UK champion Judoka so the plan was to keep him standing as much as possible to negate his strength, his plan was to get our fighter on the floor as much as possible. None of this happens in a self defence situation. Our fighter won by a flying knee to the chin and KO, our fighter is also a doorman and knows exactly what he should use in MMA and what he can use 'on the street' as it were.
Many techniques used to get submissions etc can be nicely adapted for use in self defence, it requires presence of mind as much as anything else.
Being small and female I often end up on the floor when dealing with and trying to arrest, however since I've being doing MMA I haven't felt so 'lost' as before when I just did karate. It ain't ideal to be on the ground personally I would never go for a takedown and throws usually end up with me being lighter going down too. I think being a mile down the road is the best bet lol but having more confidence if you are stuck on the floor there is great. I do practice getting up a lot from being put down, I think thats important. Pepper spray and a baton is pretty good too lol.

Certainly in the UK when MMA is mentioned it means the competitive art and nothing else. People when doing more than one art or mixing them up it's refer to it then as cross training. Perhaps suicide means cross training really and not MMA?


----------



## Bruno@MT (Jul 30, 2009)

suicide said:


> what mma sport tech. do you think would be a bad idea to use on the street ?



First thing that comes to mind: going to the ground.
Bad idea if you are not in a context where you know for sure that there is only one opponent.


----------



## tallgeese (Jul 30, 2009)

see my post higher up....things happen, best to be prepared.


----------



## suicide (Jul 30, 2009)

Bruno@MT said:


> First thing that comes to mind: going to the ground.
> Bad idea if you are not in a context where you know for sure that there is only one opponent.


 

most street fights end up on the floor wheather you like it or not , ready or not - no matter what the case is : one on one or three on one so i doubt a mma will freeze up and not know what to do once he know hes going to the concrete.


----------



## blindsage (Jul 30, 2009)

suicide said:


> most street fights end up on the floor wheather you like it or not , ready or not - no matter what the case is : one on one or three on one so i doubt a mma will freeze up and not know what to do once he know hes going to the concrete.


Really?  They do?  What other Gracie mythology do you buy into?


----------



## BLACK LION (Jul 30, 2009)

I hear alot that "most streetfights end up on the ground"... its like a jingle or a slogan...   

In a sense it is true and that is that sooner or later somebody is going to be on the ground...  its false in the sense that every physical altercation ends in a wrestling or grappling match.   It brings a misconception that it is somehow important to train to "go to the ground"...  when it is the complete opposite... 

Most street fights end up with someone either being jumped, stabbed or shot...   Its rare that you see a real street fight between 2 people in which they are both at leisure to duke it out between each other...  people these days just dont fight like that... 
I see them end more violently and more frequently than these schoolyard or backyard party brawls tossed around on the net... 
I see bottles flying...knives gleaming and guns blazing.


----------



## jarrod (Jul 30, 2009)

all fights start on the feet.  

grappling should be included in SD training to prepare for a worst case scenario, not as a primary strategy.  

jf


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 30, 2009)

jarrod said:


> all fights start on the feet.
> 
> grappling should be included in SD training to prepare for a worst case scenario, not as a primary strategy.
> 
> jf




Jarrod points out that you need to know how to grapple even if you do not want to be there.  If you are taken down it would really be a shame if you did not know what to do.  Just makes for some common sense!


----------



## suicide (Jul 30, 2009)

blindsage said:


> Really? They do? What other Gracie mythology do you buy into?


 
yeah they do and gracie aint got nothing to do with it so leave em out of it dog ! i ve seen fights were one dude drops the other with a punch to the face and gives him a chance to get up - but you see that aint gonna happen everytime not everyone is that righteous most cats will go in for the kill and comense with the ground and pound.


----------



## pmosiun1 (Jul 30, 2009)

suicide said:


> whats your opinion on this ...



I think it is true. I believe that in order to learn how to fight, you must actually fight. MMA people do not claim to be able to survive gang fights or knife attack but alot of traditional martial art out there claim their martial art teach how to deal with knife attack or multi-opponent. Just look at your typical tae kwon do knife defense.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> yeah they do and gracie aint got nothing to do with it so leave em out of it dog ! i ve seen fights were one dude drops the other with a punch to the face and gives him a chance to get up - but you see that aint gonna happen everytime not everyone is that righteous most cats will go in for the kill and comense with the ground and pound.


 

Anyone want to translate this for me?


----------



## jarrod (Jul 31, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Anyone want to translate this for me?



suicide's personal observations confirm that most fights go to the ground.

jf


----------



## seasoned (Jul 31, 2009)

BLACK LION said:


> I hear alot that "most streetfights end up on the ground"... its like a jingle or a slogan...
> 
> In a sense it is true and that is that sooner or later somebody is going to be on the ground... its false in the sense that every physical altercation ends in a wrestling or grappling match. It brings a misconception that it is somehow important to train to "go to the ground"... when it is the complete opposite...
> 
> ...


You bring up some very good points. This lends itself to the belief that self defense is more a case of survival, then just a walk in the park.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

jarrod said:


> suicide's personal observations confirm that most fights go to the ground.
> 
> jf


 
Thank you! I can't decide whether he's talking 'American' or just can't articulate.
My personal experience is that it tends to be only the person being attacked that ends up on the floor if they aren't careful, with the attacker and his mates booting him. Certainly people slip when fighting on drink sodden floors or are pushed and fall over them but really no one wants to take it to the floor if you can help it. 
This is what we have to deal with


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

fangjian said:


> When I think of MMA, I think of someone who trains all 4 ranges of unarmed combat ( let's say; sprawl and brawl, clinch and pound, ground and pound, and submission grappling) and spars those 4 ranges. It could be my ignorance but I just don't see a lot of disadvantages in the training method or techniques. When it comes to the actual competitive sport, I can't find many holes in the testing of this knowledge either.
> 
> At my place, we do that, plus we do weapon stuff with Filipino martial arts and my students have to know basic escapes from common self defense situations. That's all I could think of that the above paragraph kind of lacks.


 
And there is nothing wrong with any of that.   As I said, it, IMO, comes down to how these things are applied.  Let me give another example.  If someone shoots in on me on the street, would I sprawl to defend myself?  Sure.  However, once thats done, I would get back to my feet and either continue the fight standing or get the hell out of there, if that was possible.  I would not, once I did the sprawl, work my way around the guys back, sink my hooks in, and try for a RNC.  If I don't have to prolong my ground defense, I'm not going to.


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

fangjian said:


> I guess maybe it's just about comfort levels. I enjoy grappling and feel comfortable there. I think if I was to get in a street fight I would definately go for a takedown ( I'm not very comfortable with my boxing) and ground and pound. That doesn't mean I would go for side control or north south. More like-get a clinch-ankle pick-kick him while he's down.


 
If I did a tech. from Kenpo, which resulted in me taking the other guy down, sure, I'd do some G&P as well.  But, I'd make sure that I was in a good position to do it.  Take down, fire off some strikes, and get out.    Personally, I too like the knee and elbow range.  Maybe its the FMA in me.


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> most street fights end up on the floor wheather you like it or not , ready or not - no matter what the case is : one on one or three on one so i doubt a mma will freeze up and not know what to do once he know hes going to the concrete.


 
As blindsage said, this is Gracie mentality.  The 90% comment was, from what I hear, a study done regarding LEOs, taking suspects to the ground to cuff, etc.  Of course this is what they're going to say, why?  Because that is what they specialize in, so yes, chances are, they're intentionally going to take the person there.

And IMO, in a bar, with many people, not much light, do you really want to be rolling around?  So while I'm looking for that RNC, I'm getting smashed over the head with a bottle.


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> yeah they do and gracie aint got nothing to do with it so leave em out of it dog ! i ve seen fights were one dude drops the other with a punch to the face and gives him a chance to get up - but you see that aint gonna happen everytime not everyone is that righteous most cats will go in for the kill and comense with the ground and pound.


 
Here, let me pour you another glass of Gracie Kool-Aid.:drinkbeer


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

On the subject of Gracie Jujitsu I have Renzo Gracie's book (with John Danaher) called Mastering Jujitsu. The self defence section is full of common sense and none of the braggadacio of many Gracie fans. Renzo actually warns that while jujitsu gives you an advantage in weaponless combat with a single untrained attacker you shouldn't get arrogant or haughty! He even says that walking away if you can is a victory. The most important thing to him he says is control, if someone is trying to take you down he suggests guilliotines, RNC etc all from standing. The only time he mentions having to use BJJ on the floor is when you are attacked by someone much larger and stronger who will take you down then you try to get control and hopefully hang on until help comes. 

He points out and I tend to agree with this, that the only attack that will *always* take you down is the one by the rapist. 

I also have Renzo and Royler Gracie's book on BJJ, in there too it says that it should be clear that  BJJ practitioners don't always advocate taking a fight to the floor. A considerable amount of their SD applications are done from standing.


----------



## mwd0818 (Jul 31, 2009)

I'll stick to my original comment.  MMA techniques are ineffective in a real, self-defense situation if they engage the attacker in a manner which either:


Prevents situational awareness
Prevents a quick and hasty disengagement

Most often, going to the ground is not advisable if you are potentially in a multiple attacker situation.  One-on-one, sure, if that's your speciality it can work.  However, I don't like the idea of relying on that.  The goal of real self-defense on the street is to *Survive* and then *Terminate immediate future threats to your safety*.  Often, the easiest way to *Terminate* is to create distance - distance is impossible when grappling.  It's also impossible while boxing, but there is often less of a change from a right cross to a full sprint than there is from being on someone's back with hooks in to a full sprint.

Do you need to train for ground work?  Sure, there's a chance you'll get taken down.  If you like it, and want to work out there, then go for it.  But just like the Gracie's helped prove that the ground was important, they also proved that ignoring any of the fighting ranges was a critical mistake.  In MMA competitions, we are even seeing a return to a more well rounded martial artist, with ground and striking skills.  On the street, in a pure self-defense situation, ground fighting is not advisable as it engages you too much to a single attacker, prevents space and distance from being established, and isolates your situational awareness.  If you keep those things in mind, and can safely go to the ground for a quick arm bar break, then sure . . . but I don't feel you can risk extended grappling.

I also have reviewed some of the Gracie SD rather than the sport jiu-jitsu, and they are with me on this one.  And from what I gather, Rickson had some mean boxing skills, too.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

I suspect that many Gracie fans don't actually do BJJ so don't know what they are talking about! They are possibly the ones watching MMA and when one fighter is on top of the other they are shouting for the bottom one to stand up! Total lack of knowledge (though it's funny to listen to).
When police here take someone down it isn't usually a single officer, or if it is others are there very quickly.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> most street fights end up on the floor wheather you like it or not


Not in my experience, both first hand and observed. I have seen many fights go to the ground, but certainly not the majority.



suicide said:


> ready or not - no matter what the case is : one on one or three on one so i doubt a mma will freeze up and not know what to do once he know hes going to the concrete.


The same could be said of a wrestler, a judoka, an aikidoka, a hapkidoin, or any number of other arts that incorporate grapples and ground fighting.

Once again, the techniques are not from MMA, but from their donor arts. The Gracies ground fighting prowess did not come from MMA, but from Brazillian Jiu Jitsu. 

The biggest advantage that a competative MMA athlete has is hard training and regular fighting. Same with boxers and other martial athletes that train and fight with minimal protective gear, but the MMA athlete regularly fights a greater variety of opponents in multiple combat ranges (the biggest advantage MMA athletes have over stand up only or grappling only sports).

Daniel


----------



## Chris Parker (Jul 31, 2009)

Hi,

I've been watching as this thread went from a non-question to a very succinct answer on the very first page through to the general wackiness we find here... been a fun ride, hasn't it? I've so far resisted posting here because I thought it was already covered, but let's see if we can sum it all up, shall we? Maybe put this one to bed? Okay, here we go....

Has MMA surpassed TMA? Yes. And no. Let's look at both.

MMA has surpassed TMA in the public mentality to a great degree with the advent of UFC-style competitions gaining mainstream popularity, hence the term being far more widespread (ask an average viewer of such events about MMA, and they'll immediately have a reference point. Ask about TMA, and expect a blank stare until you explain that you mean the disparate individual systems classed under this umbrella term). So that's one to MMA.

But if you ask those same viewers about "martial arts" without the "mixed" part, then they will reference many things being refered to here as TMA. MMA almost isn't classed as a "martial art" in many senses, as the familiar uniforms aren't used, flashy (leaping, spinning etc) style techniques aren't commonly seen, and it doesn't look like the type of things people see in movie choreography. And that is where the majority of the public get their knowledge about martial arts. Essentially, they will class MMA in the same category as boxing, wrestling, or kickboxing. Sport, yes. Martial art, no. After all, can you get a Black Belt in MMA? Or boxing? This one is a draw, as MMA is taken out of the same category as TMA systems.

MMA is limited. Very limited. In fact, it is limited to the degree that it can be a liability in self defence terms. And that comes down to it being a sport system. But first we'll cover what MMA actually is, because that has come up once or twice here as well. As we all know, MMA stands for Mixed Martial Arts, and has become a catch-all term for the type of training people go through in order to compete in a particular type of competition. And as such, as pointed out earlier, it is a mis-nomer.

A better term may be "Multi Range Unarmed Combat Themed Sport", but the acronym just ain't as catchy. Hmm, MRUCTS... no, doesn't work. It came out of competition between distinct systems (the original UFC), in which a number of people felt that they were lacking in one area or another (most commonly ground-based grappling, as it was set up to be very grappler friendly, and unsurprisingly, grapplers tended to have a great deal of success. More power to them, I say!), and sought ways to "tack on" these aspects to their existing training... instead of looking to the answers in what they already had. Sparing you my very definate views on this, I don't believe this was the best or healthiest approach...

So Strikers began grappling, and Grapplers developed their striking abilities. In the end, there were no real systems or styles to differentiate the competitors, just different approaches to similar skill-sets, based on the strengths and weaknesses, as well as personal preferences of the trainee and trainer (coach or gym). This non-art became the common term MMA, but as you can see, it is really not an "art" in the same way that, say, Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu is. Oh, and I use the same criteria on Kendo and other sport-based systems as well, by the way, but those that have what we are calling a TMA approach keep the art side at least in part, so I consider them a hybrid. For instance, when doing the kata for Kendo, that is the art side. The tournaments are sport.

But there was a reason each of these different gyms/coaches/competitors all ended up doing basically the same thing. It is what worked/works in the environment it is designed for. And that is a competitive ring-based match fight environment. It is not a self defence environment. It is not a battlefield environment. It is not a security environment. It is not a law-enforcement environment. It is not bar environment. It is not a club environment. It is not, in fact, any type of environment other than a competitive ring-based match fight environment. And that is what it is best suited for, because that has been it's forge. But that does raise the question, what exactly is that environment, and how is it different to all the others? Well, without going into every possible environment around, let's explore this one.

A match fight is very simple to understand. It is clear, defined, monitored, and (to a real degree) predictable. By that I mean that a competitor will have a fair degree of understanding of what they might expect to encounter in the ring, what attacks they might face, what weapons they might need to defend against (swords in Kendo, fists and feet in Tae Kwon Do, throws and chokes in Judo, chokes and armbars in BJJ, fists, feet, throws, arm-bars, chokes in MMA as examples), and the rough expected timelines and conditions (3 x 5 minute rounds, what the ground surface will be, when the ref will stop it etc). The other very important thing to realise is that a competition style system will focus on attacking, as that is how you gain points and win. We'll get back to this.

A self defence environment, on the other hand, has none of the above clarity. It could happen at any time, in any location, you could be facing any number, any weapons, any attacks, and no-one is going to step in and stop it (no ref). There is no preditable condition (are you on grass, or concrete? Is it just shouting, or are there going to be punches? Is it over in a few seconds [the most common are, by the way], or are you going to have to deal with an ongoing encounter?). These are just a few ways in which MMA and self defence are very different.

To highlight that, let's look at a timeline of each next to each other. In an MMA bout, you will have any amount of time to have your general preparation. This is the time you spend working on general skill-development in your gym. Then you learn about your fight. You will then typically have 4-6 or 8 weeks specific preparation. As you will often be made aware of who you're opponent is, and you can prepare for them specifically. You will be able to study their movements, work out counters to their favourite moves, and kick up your training to be at your best for the event. The fight itself is then split into various sections. First is the pre-fight, which could last a few minutes to an hour or so. Depending on your level, it could include an interview, ring entrance, an explanation of the rules (again), your opponents ring entrance, and more. Then you get the fight itself, which may be a number of short rounds during which you get an adrenaline dump during the rounds, and an endorphin rush between. Then repeat. This may be 15 - 20 minutes. The post-fight could be again an hour or more, and is very well managed, including physios to manage injuries, trainers to tend to you, even a massage if you're lucky....

A self defence situation is a bit different. The general preparation has the same timeline (any varied amount of time), however the focus needs to cover a larger skill set than an MMA fighter would require. An MMA fighter, for instance, doesn't need to knwo how to disarm a shotgun wielding opponent, or know non-damaging security holds, but when training for real situations, these and many more skills need to be addressed. There is not really much time for specific preparation, it may be a few seconds, or a minute or so as someone yells and pushes you. Or spits in your face. Or asks you the time... As stated, the fight itself is most commonly between 3 and 10 seconds, it can last longer, but not often. And incredibly rarely the 15-20 minutes of a match fight. The post fight can be very bad. There is often no-one to help you manage injuries or any other factors, and the effects can last for years (particularly emotional and psychological factors).

So now we've gotten a better idea of the two situations, we can look at which is better suited to which. Other than the reasons mentned above, I would like to re-visit the concept of a match fighter working towards an attacking mentality. This can be very dangerous for a self defence situation on a number of levels. You can escalate a situation beyond where you could safely get away, you could stay and aggressively continue without real need, and possibly the most important, you open yourself up to legal repercussions and assault charges. If you doubt what I'm saying, check out Bas Rutens "self defence" DVDs. If you do what he suggests, you go to jail. He is very good at what he does, but he is a complete thug who thrives on the violence.

So by it's training methods, MMA training can get you prepared for a physical encounter by getting you used to physical effects of being hit and hitting, as well as handling the adrenaline dumps and endorphin hits, and can give you skills at going against a resisting opponent (oh, and that is so totally out of whack with the reality of a fight as well, by the way. A competition involves two people with the same goal of out-competing each other, a fight involves one person wanting to hurt another and one doing what they have to to not get hurt. Resistance is very different in each situation). But by it's training methodologies it is very limited, and leaves you with very few real options in a large number of situations. You don't have the option of escape trained and drilled, you don't have the option of "gentle" responce tactics (as in security holds and restraint and removal), you don't have talk-down options, you don't have multiple-person drills and training (as you won't find this in the ring), and you don't have weapon use, weapon defence, or weapon retention options as neither you nor your opponent will be carrying them. So it is good, but limited, and in that it cannot surpass anything but itself as it improves through it's own crucible.

It can certainly help, but be aware of the limitations.

There were many other things in this thread that I would like to address, but this has gotten a little long-winded as it is, and I am hoping that this will put the whole thing to bed. But I will make time for one last thing....

Suicide. Seriously, man, what is the deal? Are you just trying to get people riled up? I don't think I've seen a single thread you've started that was started with a clear premise, nor one that you have constructively contributed to. I really have to question the maturity of someone who choses the name "Suicide" to be known by, and posts in such a manner. I originally belived that you were just a kid, but looking at your profile would seem to defy that idea. Really, man, grow up. You say you learnt a lot from this thread, honestly, you haven't shown it. Let's see if we can improve in future, shall we?

I think that should about do it. I'll end with my thanks and congratulations to those who manage to get all the way through this post. You have the patience of one truly interested in having an open mind, and are exactly who should populate this forum.


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> On the subject of Gracie Jujitsu I have Renzo Gracie's book (with John Danaher) called Mastering Jujitsu. The self defence section is full of common sense and none of the braggadacio of many Gracie fans. Renzo actually warns that while jujitsu gives you an advantage in weaponless combat with a single untrained attacker you shouldn't get arrogant or haughty! He even says that walking away if you can is a victory. The most important thing to him he says is control, if someone is trying to take you down he suggests guilliotines, RNC etc all from standing. The only time he mentions having to use BJJ on the floor is when you are attacked by someone much larger and stronger who will take you down then you try to get control and hopefully hang on until help comes.
> 
> He points out and I tend to agree with this, that the only attack that will *always* take you down is the one by the rapist.
> 
> I also have Renzo and Royler Gracie's book on BJJ, in there too it says that it should be clear that BJJ practitioners don't always advocate taking a fight to the floor. A considerable amount of their SD applications are done from standing.


 
Thank you very much for pointing this out! :ultracool  I too, in the past, have attempted to point out the standing aspects of 'grappling' due to the fact that many people, seem to think that when they hear BJJ, they assume that it means the ground.  While there is ground work, there are many things, even if modifications need to be made, that can be done while standing.  You mentioned a few things in your post.


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

Chris Parker said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've been watching as this thread went from a non-question to a very succinct answer on the very first page through to the general wackiness we find here... been a fun ride, hasn't it? I've so far resisted posting here because I thought it was already covered, but let's see if we can sum it all up, shall we? Maybe put this one to bed? Okay, here we go....
> 
> ...


 
WOW!!!  I don't know where to begin with this, so I'll just some it up in 2 words....AWESOME POST!!!!!:ultracool:ultracool:ultracool:ultracool:ultracool  We dont have stars, so I'll rate this as a 5 ultra cool smilie rating!!  Seriously, I really can't find a thing that I disagree with here.  One thing that did cath my eye, was the part I underlined.  A Kenpo friend of mine who now resides in AZ, would often speak of environment and target availability to dictate what technique he would do.  This IMO, is so true.  This is why for me, I like to try to be as well rounded in all ranges as I can, due to the fact that the situation we're faced with, many not be one that dictates me going to the ground.  

"nuf said from me.  This post says it all!  

Mike


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 31, 2009)

oh for the love of peanut butter, would you people stop feeding the troll?

it is clear that suicide is a mma fanboy, has never been in an actual fight, and bases everything he thinks he knows on you tube clips of ghetto beat downs, most of which are staged.

stop feeding the troll!!


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

MJS said:


> Thank you very much for pointing this out! :ultracool I too, in the past, have attempted to point out the standing aspects of 'grappling' due to the fact that many people, seem to think that when they hear BJJ, they assume that it means the ground. While there is ground work, there are many things, even if modifications need to be made, that can be done while standing. You mentioned a few things in your post.


 
In Cornish wrestling the grappling is done standing up with the intent to get your opponent on the floor not continue on the floor, Cumbrian and Westmorland wrestling as well as Scottish backhold are also 'stand up' wrestling/grappling styles.


Can't give Chris any rep it says until I've spread it around a bit so I'll say thanks for a great post here.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 31, 2009)

MJS said:


> As blindsage said, this is Gracie mentality. The 90% comment was, from what I hear, a study done regarding LEOs, taking suspects to the ground to cuff, etc. Of course this is what they're going to say, why? Because that is what they specialize in, so yes, chances are, they're intentionally going to take the person there.
> 
> And IMO, in a bar, with many people, not much light, do you really want to be rolling around? So while I'm looking for that RNC, I'm getting smashed over the head with a bottle.


 
The actual study is posted around here somewhere and actually the percent is closer to 60%. 

:deadhorse

I suppose; however, depending on one's perception, that all successful fights would end up with at least one person on the ground.


----------



## Steve (Jul 31, 2009)

Just to respond to the original post, my opinion is that MMA can be extremely effective depending upon how it's trained.  I don't train striking at all and have zero interest in doing so.  But even in a strictly BJJ course, the emphasis of the training makes a big difference.

I was working in open mat with one of the deputies who trains at our school.  As we rolled light, he was bringing a definite SD emphasis to the mat.  It was a real eye opener.  

Couple of disclaimers.  I believe that physical and mental toughness are very valuable for self defense and you get both from training MMA, BJJ, Boxing, Muay Thai, Wrestling, Sambo or any other combat sport oriented martial art.  I also don't think it would take long for a well trained MMA fighter to learn VERY effective self defense, as I believe it's mostly a matter of emphasis and mindset.  But at the same time, anyone training strictly in a sport oriented gym is kidding themselves if they think they aren't learning some bad habits.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 31, 2009)

Chris Parker said:


> MMA is limited. Very limited. In fact, it is limited to the degree that it can be a liability in self defence terms. And that comes down to it being a sport system. But first we'll cover what MMA actually is, because that has come up once or twice here as well. As we all know, MMA stands for Mixed Martial Arts, and has become a catch-all term for the type of training people go through in order to compete in a particular type of competition. And as such, as pointed out earlier, it is a mis-nomer.
> ...
> But there was a reason each of these different gyms/coaches/competitors all ended up doing basically the same thing. It is what worked/works in the environment it is designed for. And that is a competitive ring-based match fight environment. It is not a self defence environment. It is not a battlefield environment. It is not a security environment. It is not a law-enforcement environment. It is not bar environment. It is not a club environment. It is not, in fact, any type of environment other than a competitive ring-based match fight environment. And that is what it is best suited for, because that has been it's forge. But that does raise the question, what exactly is that environment, and how is it different to all the others? Well, without going into every possible environment around, let's explore this one.
> 
> ...



Wow!  Fantastic post.  

About the only thing I can add has already been said much better by someone else; see Rory Miller's 4 truths about violent encounters in my signature.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> yeah they do and gracie aint got nothing to do with it so leave em out of it dog ! i ve seen fights were one dude drops the other with a punch to the face and gives him a chance to get up - but you see that aint gonna happen everytime not everyone is that righteous most cats will go in for the kill and comense with the ground and pound.


The research and documentation that most fights end up on the ground is often trotted out, without understanding where it came from.  There are several threads here that discuss it at length... but the bottom line is that most people who quote it don't understand that it was a study of police encounters.  After all, they're the most documented "street fights" around.

Most police fights do end up on the ground -- because a cop's goal is to put handcuffs on someone, and putting a resisting suspect on the ground is the best way to do this and maintain control of them.  I'm not going into this at length; it's ground well covered elsewhere.

Saying "most fights end up on the ground" based on that is kind of like saying "most fights end up on the ground" because that's a pretty good bet in MMA events, too.  It's true... with the caveat of the environment and rule sets involved.


----------



## mwd0818 (Jul 31, 2009)

I agree with Celtic Crippler . . . if I do my job, the fight does end with one guy on the ground.  There is no need to fight once he is unconscious though.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Jul 31, 2009)

Hey Chris, great post.



Chris Parker said:


> Suicide. Seriously, man, what is the deal? Are you just trying to get people riled up? I don't think I've seen a single thread you've started that was started with a clear premise, nor one that you have constructively contributed to. I really have to question the maturity of someone who choses the name "Suicide" to be known by, and posts in such a manner. I originally belived that you were just a kid, but looking at your profile would seem to defy that idea. Really, man, grow up. You say you learnt a lot from this thread, honestly, you haven't shown it. Let's see if we can improve in future, shall we?



+1



Chris Parker said:


> I think that should about do it. I'll end with my thanks and congratulations to those who manage to get all the way through this post. You have the patience of one truly interested in having an open mind, and are exactly who should populate this forum.



Thanks  You're welcome.


----------



## Nolerama (Jul 31, 2009)

Lol. This dead horse is starting to stink.


----------



## blindsage (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> yeah they do and gracie aint got nothing to do with it so leave em out of it dog ! i ve seen fights were one dude drops the other with a punch to the face and gives him a chance to get up - but you see that aint gonna happen everytime not everyone is that righteous most cats will go in for the kill and comense with the ground and pound.


LOL!  You state something that is nearly a copyrighted phrase of the Gracies's and no one talked about before they started saying, but it has nothing to do with them.  Ok.  And check out some of the other posts, dog, there is plenty of material for you to review.


----------



## suicide (Jul 31, 2009)

everybody gots there own views based on there personal exp. sounds like some of you havent had a street fight in decades were you had to put your sd awareness to the test.


----------



## blindsage (Jul 31, 2009)

More comedy!  HA!  I'm lovin' it.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> everybody gots there own views based on there personal exp. sounds like some of you havent had a street fight in decades were you had to put your sd awareness to the test.


 


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:


Oh it must be decades at least or maybe just a few days ago lol!


----------



## suicide (Jul 31, 2009)

blindsage said:


> More comedy! HA! I'm lovin' it.


 
yeah thats what im saying , bunch a funny style charecters up in this piece.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> yeah thats what im saying , bunch a funny style charecters up in this piece.


 

is English your second language?


----------



## suicide (Jul 31, 2009)

what does it really matter ? it might be my third or fourth but what does that got to do with ma ? dont get side tracked tez lifes to short - it was a simple question Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness and you guys took it ran with it back flipped with it now live with it ... on the real : is English your second language? sounds racist !


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> what does it really matter ? it might be my third or fourth but what does that got to do with ma ? dont get side tracked tez lifes to short - it was a simple question Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness and you guys took it ran with it back flipped with it now live with it ... on the real : is English your second language? sounds racist !


 
There's a rather good programme called 'Dad's Army' where one of the catch lines is 'Stupid Boy!' oh how apt here.

I ask if English is your second language because what you are posting is gibberish, it doesn't make any sense, it might to you but if you can't express yourself how on earth are we supposed to understand your points of view. I might even agree with you if I knew what the hell you are talking about! Your post that I highlighted makes no sense what so ever. Life certainly is too short to try and decipher your posts chum!


----------



## fangjian (Jul 31, 2009)

Suicide,

I understand most of your posts, and understand much of the tones and slang that goes with it.  It is beneficial however to re-read your own posts once or twice, as I do, and make sure most people will understand it.  Check for errors in punctuation, grammar, spelling etc.  I am guilty of these things too and have come off sounding ignorant on many occasions. 
For example, many people might not understand what ' on the real ' means.  You feel me


----------



## fangjian (Jul 31, 2009)

fangjian said:


> Suicide,
> 
> I understand most of your posts, and understand much of the tones and slang that goes with it. It is beneficial however to re-read your own posts once or twice, as I do, and make sure most people will understand it. Check for errors in punctuation, grammar, spelling etc. I am guilty of these things too and have come off sounding ignorant on many occasions.
> For example, many people might not understand what ' on the real ' means. You feel me


 You see that?  I forgot to check that last sentence and forgot to put a question mark.


----------



## suicide (Jul 31, 2009)

There's a rather good programme called 'Dad's Army' where one of the catch lines is 'Stupid Boy!' oh how apt here.


is that really called for tez ? stupid boy ? 

this is a ma fourm whats wrong with you ?


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 31, 2009)

Nolerama said:


> Lol. This dead horse is starting to stink.


 
Dude, I believe even the flies have gone home at this point...



suicide said:


> everybody gots there own views based on there personal exp. sounds like some of you havent had a street fight in decades were you had to put your sd awareness to the test.


 
2003 I believe....not quite a decade yet, but he did go to the ground in a heap after two hits (kick to the nutz followed by a hook behind the jaw line) LOL 



suicide said:


> yeah thats what im saying , bunch a funny style charecters up in this piece.


 
I to enjoy the vast diversity of personalities up in this piece. 



suicide said:


> what does it really matter ? it might be my third or fourth but what does that got to do with ma ? dont get side tracked tez lifes to short - it was a simple question Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness and you guys took it ran with it back flipped with it now live with it ... on the real : is English your second language? sounds racist !


 
I don't believe Tez is a racist.  You'll have to pardon her as the English are not familiar with Ebonics.


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> what does it really matter ? it might be my third or fourth but what does that got to do with ma ? dont get side tracked tez lifes to short - it was a simple question Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness and you guys took it ran with it back flipped with it now live with it ... on the real : is English your second language? sounds racist !


 

Question asked, question answered MANY times, you still refuse to listen.

If you're not happy, I'm sorry, but I can't control that.  Nobody is forcing you to continue to post.

Good day.


----------



## MJS (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> everybody gots there own views based on there personal exp. sounds like some of you havent had a street fight in decades were you had to put your sd awareness to the test.


 
And if people are running around with nothing better to do than fight, well, that shows how childish some are.  Keep drinkin' the Gracie Aid though.


----------



## suicide (Jul 31, 2009)

R.I.P. Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness ( THREAD )


----------



## searcher (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> everybody gots there own views based on there personal exp. sounds like some of you havent had a street fight in decades were you had to put your sd awareness to the test.


 

Yes, it has been close to a decade for me in a street fight(8yrs). In the time since my last "street fight," I have become a CCH holder and I choose to pick my altercations based on whether or not I have to use my carry gun. For most of us that have been in true life or death situations, we choose to not enter into conflicts like the pathetic example videos you posted.


My assessment of your thread is that you are trying to use it to make yourself appear to be a street fighter of sorts. If this is the case, you should probably wait until you grow up to start fighting. And you will need to get some training, regardless of it being TMA or MMA. I find your attacks on upstanding members of this forum and the MA community to be distasteful and very disrespectful. I am not sure what you are trying to prove, but you may want to rethink your strategy. I don't like having to be overly direct with you, but it is needed.

My apologies to the other members of this forum, if I offend you with my comments to suicide, but it is needed.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 31, 2009)

suicide said:


> There's a rather good programme called 'Dad's Army' where one of the catch lines is 'Stupid Boy!' oh how apt here.
> 
> 
> *is that really called for tez ? stupid boy ?*
> ...


 

Yes!


What's a ma fourm?


----------



## suicide (Jul 31, 2009)

sometimes you dont have to choose conflicts they choose you but anyways like i said R.I.P. to this thread its over and done with it...maybe one day when i turn 50 i´ll have my first fight and ill come here and tell you guys about it PEACE LOVE UNITY RESPECT.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Aug 1, 2009)

suicide said:


> everybody gots there own views based on there personal exp. sounds like some of you havent had a street fight in decades were you had to put your sd awareness to the test.



I have been lucky enough never to have been in a street fight. Luck may have something to do with it, but a bigger part is probably common sense and awareness. There are areas I don't visit at all unless I am with a local. I park my car in well lit areas. I always sit my back against the wall and locate a way out as soon as I get in. And if I have a bad feeling about something or someone, I happily leave or make a detour way before there is a situation in the first place.

Then again I am also the kind of person that has smoke detectors in several places, fire extinguishers on every floor, and multiple evacution routes. 



suicide said:


> what does it really matter ? it might be my third or fourth but what does that got to do with ma ? dont get side tracked tez lifes to short - it was a simple question Has MMA surpassed traditional MA in its effectiveness and you guys took it ran with it back flipped with it now live with it ... on the real : is English your second language? sounds racist !





Tez3 said:


> I ask if English is your second language because what you are posting is gibberish, it doesn't make any sense, it might to you but if you can't express yourself how on earth are we supposed to understand your points of view.



English is my third language. If I can learn English, anyone can. It has nothing to do with that. Trying to use proper punctuation, spelling, grammar etc come from a desire to be clear and unambiguous.

If I were to use slang or street talk, many people would not understand the point I was trying to make. That is also why I rarely write very brief one liner posts.

Unless I make an effort to explain precisely what I mean, chances are that the person reading my post will not understand. Studies have shown that almost 50% of the time, people fail to judge the tone (and as a result also the intent) of a forum message.


----------



## Milt G. (Aug 1, 2009)

Hello,

Yes, and no, and yes, and, well...  No...
No, well maybe, yes, no, yes, perhaps, naaaaa...
Well probably, not. No, it is YES...  I have no idea.   

Thanks, 
Milt G.


----------



## DeLamar.J (Aug 3, 2009)

True traditional martial arts hardly even exists anymore, at least the guys who were the real deal, the people who fought for lives, not titles. People have to remember that everything you see in MMA, has all came from martial arts masters way back in the day. Most all martial arts these days is very very watered down from what it originally was, so it can be a accepted  public spectacle. Traditional martial arts is not surpassed by MMA, it's the people who went over seas, spent maybe a few years with a legitimate master, and then come back to the states to teach as supposed "grand masters" who have been surpassed by MMA.


----------



## Unkogami (Aug 4, 2009)

DergaSmash said:


> There is no small joint manipulation, nor groin strikes in MMA fights.


 

Both of which are pretty much a sucker's bet anyway.


----------



## Gaius Julius Caesar (Aug 5, 2009)

Unkogami said:


> Both of which are pretty much a sucker's bet anyway.


 
Well on groin shots, I agree to a point, I have seen people take shots there with no noticable effect, even once samshed and crushed gripped a guy by the jimmies and he proceeded to introduce my head to every locker in the room.

 I have also seen it stop agression cold.

 As for small joint manipulations, if you train in in a art that knows how to properly perform them and set them up, they are far from a sucker's bet.
 To many schools teach them in a slack manner, so I can see where people would downplay them.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Aug 5, 2009)

Gaius Julius Caesar said:


> Well on groin shots, I agree to a point, I have seen people take shots there with no noticable effect, even once samshed and crushed gripped a guy by the jimmies and he proceeded to introduce my head to every locker in the room.
> 
> I have also seen it stop agression cold.
> 
> ...


 
Shoot...one of the best tap-outs I ever saw back in the day was when this Brazilian guy dug this Japanese guy's cup out with his feet while they were grappling around on the ground...he then got in a position that allowed him to start punching the Japanese guy in the groin... he went all "speed bag" on the poor guy and dude tapped out! Now that's what I call a submission! 

BTW, if small joint manipulation is such a sucker's bet, then why isn't it allowed?


----------



## bowser666 (Aug 5, 2009)

DeLamar.J said:


> True traditional martial arts hardly even exists anymore, at least the guys who were the real deal, the people who fought for lives, not titles. People have to remember that everything you see in MMA, has all came from martial arts masters way back in the day. Most all martial arts these days is very very watered down from what it originally was, so it can be a accepted  public spectacle. Traditional martial arts is not surpassed by MMA, it's the people who went over seas, spent maybe a few years with a legitimate master, and then come back to the states to teach as supposed "grand masters" who have been surpassed by MMA.



Sorry to keep this thread  on Life Support but I feel that traditional martial arts are still alive, just that the conditions for fighting for your life vary aroudn the world depending on where you live. If you live in NYC or in Beverly Hills etc...  Your environment dictates that. To say that TMA is dead is far, far , far from the truth and a uneducated assumption.


----------



## Unkogami (Aug 5, 2009)

Gaius Julius Caesar said:


> Well on groin shots, I agree to a point, I have seen people take shots there with no noticable effect, even once samshed and crushed gripped a guy by the jimmies and he proceeded to introduce my head to every locker in the room.
> 
> I have also seen it stop agression cold.
> 
> ...


 

They are great for "Ooh, ooh that hurts!" in the dojo, but in a real confrontation they are a poor choice relative to other options.


----------



## BLACK LION (Aug 5, 2009)

General statement here.  

Groin "shots" are not a suckers bet...  unless you have no testicles or a scrotum you are fair game and subject to spinal reflex behind your cognitive control. Its not the be all end all but its is great seasoning on the trauma dinner plate...   
I can see if you are just attempting to hit,flick.smack or tap them...this includes punching and kicking...but if I step through you and strike your groin with my forearm then proceed to grab,twist and pull up all while driving you backwards and dumping you on your tailbone then I bet my next paycheck I get positive results....  
Likewise, if you are lying on the ground and I do a full body knee drop on your testicles I guarantee I will get positive results...same as if I jumped or stomped on them.  

However...small joint manipulation has failed me several times on a bigger stronger resisiting opponent...  throw in some sweat and the failure multiplies...


----------



## still learning (Aug 5, 2009)

Hello, the closer the training is to real fighting? ...the more effective it will be...

MMA's..practice alot of real stuffs to....Also remember they practice for competition styles alot also...(with rules)

Traditional Arts...have eye gouges, throat strikes,groin strikes,biting,pinching, spitting,....(so do mmas')  ...depending on your instructor teachings...

Endurance is key....most traditionist...will not last as long as a MMA artist....because there practice is very intense...

My Son's and Daughters when they wrestle...even football players cannot last as long....(many after football season..come out to join the wrestling team!

Any art...that training with a boxer's intensity or MMA...I say will be close to equal with a MMA fighters...

Take away the rules of ring fights?  ...than it will be the best man ...no matter the arts...

Aloha,   Verbal works the best....( one police office can rise his hand.and hold up the traffic....for weight lifters here...


----------



## searcher (Aug 5, 2009)

Just to hit on a fewpoints.

Groin shots= severe pain in 99% of most males and females.

Smal joint manipulation=good for me until I can break the bone or dislocate the joint.

MMA and TMA, they both have to get rid of rules to make the "street effective."     It all comes down to how each person trains and for what reasons.

And gun still trumps TMA and MMA.


----------



## Unkogami (Aug 5, 2009)

still learning said:


> My Son's and Daughters when they wrestle...even football players cannot last as long....(many after football season..come out to join the wrestling team!...


 




True, but to be fair it should be noted that your sons and daughters wouldn't be in shape to perform well in football either. There is a different 'in shape' for different sports.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Aug 6, 2009)

Unkogami said:


> True, but to be fair it should be noted that your sons and daughters wouldn't be in shape to perform well in football either. There is a different 'in shape' for different sports.



Aye. I follow sumo wrestling occasionally. In the past there have been US football players who went to Japan to 'show them how it's done'.
As they discovered to their surprise, they did not stand a chance at all.


----------



## suicide (Aug 6, 2009)

man who gave this thread cpr :angel:


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 6, 2009)

Groin shots happen accidentally in MMA fights and evoke differently repsonses from the spectators, to a man there's a loud groan in sympathy, to a woman there's a giggle.The rules say there's time allowed for recovery and every man in the crowd regardless of who they support is there feeling the pain, the women just use the time to chatter. Must be a man thing.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Aug 6, 2009)

Yes, this is a man thing.
If we see someone falling on a railing or running into a fire hydrant or getting kicked in the nuts, we tense up and virtually feel the pain.


----------



## seasoned (Aug 6, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Groin shots happen accidentally in MMA fights and evoke differently repsonses from the spectators, to a man there's a loud groan in sympathy, to a woman there's a giggle.The rules say there's time allowed for recovery and every man in the crowd regardless of who they support is there feeling the pain, the women just use the time to chatter. Must be a man thing.


Well, there is the pelvic bone, then there are those other things, that really produce the pain, when hit. Men are taught from early childhood, to protect the family Jewels, at all cost. Once a man has been hit there, the pain is not duplicated any where else on the body.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Aug 6, 2009)

This is a clear argument against intelligent design, since any halfway intelligent designer would have put the nads somewhere safe, using an exoskeleton cup if necessarry. Then again it could just have been the designer's warped sense of humor so I guess the answer is still open.

And yes, the pain is quite unlike any other, and unless you are taking pain killers, the usual reaction is to drop into a fetal position, completely uncapable of doing or saying anything until the pain subsides.


----------



## mwd0818 (Aug 6, 2009)

Although I do think that part of the reaction is a conditioned response - almost psychosomatic.  Granted, sometimes the pain is intense, but there are other times that the initial response is to curl up and not move, but then, on second survey, it's not that bad.  I've had both . . . 

When I teach women's self-defense courses, I teach the groin as what I consider a secondary target.  It should definitely be a viable target, but it isn't the ultimate strike.  Expect a reaction, but under certain conditions, the outcome of a groin strike will vary widely from completely disabling to just pissing the guy off.  So don't rely on it, but it's great in a series.

As for small joint manipulation . . . worth studying and knowing, especially to escape grabs.  They can be difficult to defend against, but they are less reliable than techniques that rely on leverage and positioning of the entire body.  But, there are plenty of self-defense techniques that I've learned over the years that can easily be modified to include bending a finger back or twisting it around WHILE doing everything else . . . so if I can add it in without compromising my technique, then why not?


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 6, 2009)

mwd0818 said:


> Although I do think that part of the reaction is a conditioned response - almost psychosomatic. Granted, sometimes the pain is intense, but there are other times that the initial response is to curl up and not move, but then, on second survey, it's not that bad. I've had both . . .
> 
> When I teach women's self-defense courses, I teach the groin as what I consider a secondary target. It should definitely be a viable target, but it isn't the ultimate strike. Expect a reaction, but under certain conditions, the outcome of a groin strike will vary widely from completely disabling to just pissing the guy off. So don't rely on it, but it's great in a series.
> 
> As for small joint manipulation . . . worth studying and knowing, especially to escape grabs. They can be difficult to defend against, but they are less reliable than techniques that rely on leverage and positioning of the entire body. But, there are plenty of self-defense techniques that I've learned over the years that can easily be modified to include bending a finger back or twisting it around WHILE doing everything else . . . so if I can add it in without compromising my technique, then why not?


 


I agree with you on the groin strike for self defence being secondary, so many non MA arts people say that 'hitting them where it hurts' will do the trick but I think if a man is attacking a women he will instictively position himself to avoid strikes to his groin, making it a secondary target is much more sensible. Focus on other stikes and if the attacker is in a position for a groin strike then go for it.

My instructor when teaching SD will use small joint maniupulation usually to inflict more pain on holds already gotten or to encourage compliance! It works!


----------



## searcher (Aug 6, 2009)

Unkogami said:


> True, but to be fair it should be noted that your sons and daughters wouldn't be in shape to perform well in football either. There is a different 'in shape' for different sports.


 

True enough.    It is called specificity.

I have had World Class Triathletes come to my kickboxing class and get sick within 20 minutes.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Aug 6, 2009)

When I was younger I worked out in the gym 3-4 times per week, about 2 hours per session. I used weights and treadmills, and was in great shape. And then I decided to re-join my old JJ club... it hurt really bad.

Cardio and endurance in a gym are based on continuous actions, not explosive actions. This is a whole diferent ballgame.


----------



## still learning (Aug 6, 2009)

Hello,  MMA fighters...Wrestlers...uses alot of intensity in there fighing stuffs...

To get two idea's on how long you will last...shadow box like you are in a real fight (full power strikes/kicks)...non-stopping, time yourself when exhausted....( one way to see if you have the endurance to last)

Second one is...short high speed burst-running, until exhaust-time yourself
Varietions: step ladders at full speed,increasing the lenghts-bend down at each turn (touch the ground)....

This is where..you will find the difference between MMA..vs ..a typical karate person...

MMA/Wrestles....will go further time lenghts before exhaustions...
------------------------
Did you know....or want to end a fight quickly.....?   (instead of groin)
Know your laws and pentlies before actually do this?

Breaking the thumb ....Most people will stop fighting back..
and
Breaking the BIG toe....if you get an opportunity (against a shoeless)....

Study bone breaking.....tarkets/strikes that works/

A good book to read on this?   GUGE GONGH- by Master Hei Long (seven primary targets to take anyone out of a fight!) , A Paladin Press book, ISBN 0-87364-635-5

Aloha,   we like to break our chicken bones..to get to the marrow..(perfer deep fried first)


----------



## century bob (Nov 7, 2010)

not even close..

but modern karate, taekwondo etc aren't MARTIAL arts - it's just a sport.

REAL martialartists can easily injure/kill any MMA beef in seconds.

Without doubt.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 7, 2010)

century bob said:


> not even close..
> 
> but modern karate, taekwondo etc aren't MARTIAL arts - it's just a sport.
> 
> ...


 

Not flaming much then.

Beef? Real martial artists? Oh dear oh dear oh dear. 

:BSmeter:


----------



## oaktree (Nov 7, 2010)

> not even close..
> 
> but modern karate, taekwondo etc aren't MARTIAL arts - it's just a sport.
> 
> ...


 
The first statement is a blanket statement. Plenty of Karate styles that
are very martial oriented Kyokushin is full contact no bullshi- style.

Also not every one trains in Karate,Taekwondo as a sport but puts their blood and sweat into it just like every other art.

The second statement seems you have a personal disgust with MMA.
 I am unsure what you mean by real martial arts. I mean are you refering to some 16th century samurai warrior vs a modern MMA athlete as your comparison? If you can clarify what you mean it might make a more productive conversation.


My personal *Opinion *is MMA has created new approaches to TMA it as also provided adapations to different settings and as also allowed additions to training. As far as effectivness goes.....in a street fight a tma parries a punch kicks from a cat stance and throws him to the ground follows a textbook kata.

A MMA fighter duck from the punch go for a double leg take down followed by a mount and armbar. Both are effective in neutralizing the attacker and their methods are similar.


----------



## Master Dan (Nov 7, 2010)

DergaSmash said:


> I don't think so. I'm not knocking MMA in anyway. I've trained in Krav Maga and Army Combatives which is similar to BJJ, but I have also trained in both traditional and contemporary Chinese arts. I'm not saying MMA isn't effective in terms of self defense. But I think that any fight that has rules and gear no matter how little, isn't an accurate display of its ability in self defense. There is no small joint manipulation, nor groin strikes in MMA fights.
> 
> I also feel that traditional arts bring something MMA and a lot of contemporary arts don't. There is something to be said for being part of a tradition, for learning something that has been passed down for a long time. I personally have a sense of pride in learning traditional CMA from my Sifu. I like that I can trace the lineage of my Hung Gar back to the founder of the system Hung Hei Goon. In addition, MA are constantly evolving. People cross train, add and subtract techniques that work and don't work. I'm no expert by any means, this is simply my opinion on what I am sure is going to be a pretty hot debate.


 
*thank you: you bring up really valid points related to anything that is based in rules does not stand as the true determinate related to self defens on the street. I applaud MMA for its conditioning if was not for the Olympics watering down traditional MA from its true fighting form to meet Olympic standards we would not see all this happening right now.*

*MMA does not serve the majority of the population especially kids and families with structure and life skills. *

*What MMA does do is create and event that anyone and more important every single one regardless of what they have and who they are can have a shot at competing at national and world level with out politics. There is far more chance of a person getting a title fight in MMA than the Olympics or even getting on the team. *

*Sad to say that young kids want to emulate this and are injuring each other in garages and unqualified instructors that want to serve thier own egos training them. *

*Even worse grown men over 40 who should know better many in corrections and law enforcement while I aplaud them working on conditioning are participating with younger men who have no certification in teach the class are exposing them selves to serious health risks. *

*I asked the kid teaching or running the class how much experience you got and he said 6 months? then they watch a video and go ooh Ahh and try to use it not realizing for the older guys that manipuation of some areas of the body for over 40 should not be done at all or only 15 minutes in a two week period. Plaque can be released into the blood stream and cause heart or stroke up to 7 years later or sooner. *

*We have a doctor right hear in town wants to full contact fight all the time with a clot so big he almost died and had to be sent home from work for two weeks still wants to teach kids in his garage. *

*I hope all the MMA guys screaming for it to be in the Olympics get it. It will be so restricted and watered down it will be to boring to watch. *


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 7, 2010)

You get idiots in all walks of life and in all sports.

All of MMA isn't made up of idiots.

All of TMA isn't made up of saints.

Teenagers have been injuring themselves in many sorts of daft ways since the year dot, MMA isn't responsible for this.

There's a good many people in MMA with a great deal of martial arts experience, theres a good many TMA teaching who shouldn't be and vice versa.

Making blanket statements about anything is never a good idea.  

Why do people feel they can slag MMA off on here but scream like hell if someone even hints at a criticism of their style?


----------



## oaktree (Nov 7, 2010)

> *MMA does not serve the majority of the population especially kids and families with structure and life skills. *


 Life skills such as. Discipline, friendship, teamwork, problem solving the list goes on. This same arguement was used before that learning TMA would allow people to be violent or had no real life skills. You will find aggressive students in all sports and bad teachers in all sports too welcome to life.





> *Even worse grown men over 40 who should know better many in corrections and law enforcement while I aplaud them working on conditioning are participating with younger men who have no certification in teach the class are exposing them selves to serious health risks. *


 Master Dan please don't blame the entire body of MMA for ignortant men who do not 1.get a physical before engaging in physical activites. 2. For not asking a person's creditionals.




> *I asked the kid teaching or running the class how much experience you got and he said 6 months? then they watch a video and go ooh Ahh and try to use it not realizing for the older guys that manipuation of some areas of the body for over 40 should not be done at all or only 15 minutes in a two week period. Plaque can be released into the blood stream and cause heart or stroke up to 7 years later or sooner. *


 Are you the same guy who said that if you hit certain pressure points it will release the plaque killing you later on an old thread on pressure points and meridians? If someone who is over 40(hell someone of any age) wants to engage in an activity he should consult his doctor get the ok sign the wavier that he knows the risk lets not blame the teacher because some guy *Choses *to be there not asking for creditionals or knowing his medical makeup.



> *We have a doctor right hear in town wants to full contact fight all the time with a clot so big he almost died and had to be sent home from work for two weeks still wants to teach kids in his garage.*


 So you blame MMA for this? How absurd. This should be a reference that not all Doctors are intelligent in certain areas however to be fair, it could have been a freak accident.



> *I hope all the MMA guys screaming for it to be in the Olympics get it. It will be so restricted and watered down it will be to boring to watch. *


 
If the people doing it enjoy it and are in agreement with the rules and still do it then who cares? There will be plenty of others doing it differently.

By the way I guess I would be considered a TMA guy actually CMA but I still respect MMA and try to understand were they are coming from.


----------



## Sukerkin (Nov 7, 2010)

This thread has been far too long for me to read it all to check if this has been said before so I'll steam right in, righteous in my ignorance .

Isn't comparing MMA and TMA falling into the trap of comparing apples and oranges?  

TMA's were devised as fighting arts, with the sole purpose of dismantling opponents with as little fuss as possible and taking as little damage yourself as possible in the process.

MMA is a sport, it was designed that way from the get-go and has never pretended to be anything different (discounting those teachers out to make a buck by marketing it as if it was something different).  

Why is it a sport?  Because, in this day-and-age, you cannot have combative entertainment with rules so lax as to permit the maining and killing of the participants.  This is not a bad thing.  

Also, neither does it mean that those that take part in MMA are not well honed atheletes or do not have a good grounding in martial arts in general.  They simply enjoy getting physically competative with a suitably rules regulated conglomeration of the arts they know.  Hence the name, Mixed Martial Arts.

For myself, I don't hold it any worse regard than I do boxing or wrestling.  They are all sports 'entertainment' to one degree or another, making use of the violent arts to make money from a paying audience.  I confess, I did rather look down on it for a while but discourses with those with more experience with it than I have persuaded me that such a superior 'tude was not warranted and reflected more badly on me than it did on the sport in question.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Nov 11, 2010)

century bob said:


> not even close..
> 
> but modern karate, taekwondo etc aren't MARTIAL arts - it's just a sport.


I will have to ask you to support this assertion with verifiable facts.



century bob said:


> REAL martialartists can easily injure/kill any MMA beef in seconds.
> 
> Without doubt.


Define a martial artist. What makes one 'real' versus not real? 

Can an MMA beef not also be a 'real martial artist' as well? Many have TMA backgrounds (Machita comes to mind, and for those who are laboring under a false premise, BJJ is as traditional an MA as judo).

Your post implies that TMA = real martial artist, so define TMA. 

Most MA practiced these days are postwar arts, so how traditional can they actually be? Judo and Shotokan are both prewar arts, but one was developed with sporting intentions and is by its nature *not* traditional, as its inventor *broke* with tradition in order to invent it (all those belts were inspired by swimming and the kyu/dan system comes from the game of Go). 
The other was streamlined for use in the Japanese school system, with many of its aspects renamed in order to make it more 'Japanese' and adopted the use of a version of the judogi, kyu/dan system, and accompanying belts mentioned above in order to facilitate this.

The gi was not even traditional; it was essentially underwear. Since the tights/trunks worn by MMA are essentially the same thing, does that not make MMA traditional?  

Prior to judo, the tradition was to wear a kimono and a hakama, the traditional everyday garments worn by individuals of certain social classes. Kind of like training in a jacket and tie for men or a blouse and below-knee length skirt for women. Maybe we should do that at traditional schools. Women can wear ties now too, so we could adapt all those self defense techniques that involve using a belt with a neck tie. Not only are they easy to remove for combat use (there is a quickdraw-necktie waza that I'd be happy to teach you), but your pants will stay up during the fight.

Finally, saying that a real martial artist can easily injure or kill any MMA beef in seconds is all fine and dandy, but what about MMA vegetarians? Does your assessment still apply?

Daniel


----------



## Shifu Steve (Nov 11, 2010)

century bob said:


> REAL martialartists can easily injure/kill any MMA beef in seconds.
> 
> Without doubt.


 
I've been away from the forum for a few months and when I saw this quote I knew it had been too long. Good stuff. I miss the blanket generalities.

The MMA/TMA debate lives on and I doubt it's going away. The person that started the post may have been a beer or two short of a six pack but he apparently revitalized the issue. 

I thought I had some pretty developed ideas around this issue but something recently caused me to pause and reconsider. I was taught in the TMA camp. However, my teacher, who still teaches the traditional way, now helps to develop MMA fighters by adapting his style to sport fighting. Part of this was a sound business decision on his part because of the allure of MMA, however, the main reason (at least in my opinion) is because he had a lot of students interested in sport fighting so rather than have them go train somewhere else he chose to adapt the training. 

He recently showed me some of the regimen and I was honestly impressed. The techniques and methods were direct, easy to learn, and appeared effective to me. They were all based on the kata I had learned years ago but were just extrapolated into a different situation (e.g. one with definitive rules). So after I saw the traditional forms I had learned applied in an MMA regimen, it helped me to see that the differences between TMA and MMA could be as minimal or as vast as the chosen training methods. 

So to answer the question: No.


----------



## Carol (Nov 11, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Why do people feel they can slag MMA off on here but scream like hell if someone even hints at a criticism of their style?



1. Ego

2. Envy


----------

