# MMA vs. SD



## ATC (Jan 23, 2009)

We have a couple of MMA students in our TKD classes and I found it funny that when we did SD (Self Defense) the other day one of them tried to get me in one of his MMA holds. I just grabbed and pressed on a nerve point and he let his hold go faster than you can say "hana" and found himself in a joint lock.

I told him sucks when you don't have rules.

That is the one thing I hate about MMA practitioners, they all seem to try to compare the sport of TKD to their sport. They do not seem to understand that no sport translates into real Self Defense.

I love watching MMA but why can't some of these people understand that MMA is not MA in the true sense. MMA is like any other sport and just a sport.

Just my .02 :asian:


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 23, 2009)

cuz everyone wants to be the tough guy


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 23, 2009)

Some people "get it" some people don't. You just went up against a guy who didn't "get it" or at least chose a poor technique to pull on you. Your Vulcan nerve pinch must have been.... unnerving ;P

But blanket statements about people in other arts isn't very cool.

Keeping a closed mind can get you in a squirrly situation. There's a lot to learn from someone from another style. There's always something to learn.

So maybe instead of bragging about it, learn from it; do you know what kind of "MMA hold" he put on you? If you didn't then you're at a loss. He certainly learned something from that situation.

But then again, the Style vs Style thing is soooo overplayed. It's almost a form of penis envy; kind of like a guy with a sporty import tuner, talking smack to a American Muscle driver. You can talk circles, you can stroke your own ego, but you won't get anywhere.

By doing that is a disservice to you, your art, and your training partners.

My .02


----------



## Steve (Jan 23, 2009)

I hate when that happens!

Edit:   the mma guys, what other styles of martial art do they study and do you have any idea how long they've been training?


----------



## terryl965 (Jan 23, 2009)

Remember some people get it and alot do not. I hope that you understand this and do not judge everybody because one or two people. Remember they are doing TKD because of the kicks.


----------



## Marginal (Jan 23, 2009)

ATC said:


> We have a couple of MMA students in our TKD classes and I found it funny that when we did SD (Self Defense) the other day one of them tried to get me in one of his MMA holds. I just grabbed and pressed on a nerve point and he let his hold go faster than you can say "hana" and found himself in a joint lock.
> 
> I told him sucks when you don't have rules.


Vital point strikes/holds don't necessarily work on everyone. (At least, a lot of them don't do much to me other than producing mild discomfort, which I can easily ignore.) It's understandable that the people that aren't prone to them would tend to dismiss them. Word spreads from there, makes them seem unreliable or low percentage etc. 

They just miss out on the fact that when they *do* work, you get big results.


----------



## ATC (Jan 23, 2009)

No, I do get it, and I was not bragging I was just making a point. I also understand than not everyone in MMA thinks this way but many do. Just look around at many of the tkd youtube videos and read the many comments on how TKD sucks and MMA or Maui Tai is better.

The thing that I always try to point out is that sport is sport and each sport style does not compare or translate to another sport style. Also many think that MMA is real and cannot be touched. They do not see it for what it is, a sport with rules. You cannot bite, eye gouge, groin hit, small joint lock, or nerve pinch. There is a lot that you cannot do that is taught in any good self defense class.

Also it was a good learning lesson for the guy in class. He actually understood afterwards and after we talked about the differences in SD and sport. Also a lot of what is taught in MMA can also be used in SD but just remember to take the rules out and do not assume that your opponent will just tap because they cannot get out rules legal. In SD anything goes.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 23, 2009)

the thing is that there are plenty of mma practicioners who post on this board & are very respectful towards more traditional arts, or even have a base in them themselves.  whereas you are not being very respectful to mma.  so maybe you should discuss this on youtube since that is where there are so many people who think tkd sucks.    

jf


----------



## Marginal (Jan 23, 2009)

ATC said:


> The thing that I always try to point out is that sport is sport and each sport style does not compare or translate to another sport style. Also many think that MMA is real and cannot be touched. They do not see it for what it is, a sport with rules. You cannot bite, eye gouge, groin hit, small joint lock, or nerve pinch. There is a lot that you cannot do that is taught in any good self defense class.


It goes both ways though. Those techniques aren't always difference makers. There's one Kung fu vs wrestling video on YT where the grappler takes the KF guy down and applies an armlock. You hear one of the onlookers says, "Look out. He's going for your eye." The KF guy's arm gets snapped in short order. The fight ended right there.


----------



## Steve (Jan 24, 2009)

ATC said:


> No, I do get it, and I was not bragging I was just making a point. I also understand than not everyone in MMA thinks this way but many do. Just look around at many of the tkd youtube videos and read the many comments on how TKD sucks and MMA or Maui Tai is better.
> 
> The thing that I always try to point out is that sport is sport and each sport style does not compare or translate to another sport style. Also many think that MMA is real and cannot be touched. They do not see it for what it is, a sport with rules. You cannot bite, eye gouge, groin hit, small joint lock, or nerve pinch. There is a lot that you cannot do that is taught in any good self defense class.
> 
> Also it was a good learning lesson for the guy in class. He actually understood afterwards and after we talked about the differences in SD and sport. Also a lot of what is taught in MMA can also be used in SD but just remember to take the rules out and do not assume that your opponent will just tap because they cannot get out rules legal. In SD anything goes.


Good lessons to learn.   I think that it's a good time to let go of some easy stereotypes and move on.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 24, 2009)

Marginal said:


> It goes both ways though. Those techniques aren't always difference makers. There's one Kung fu vs wrestling video on YT where the grappler takes the KF guy down and applies an armlock. You hear one of the onlookers says, "Look out. He's going for your eye." The KF guy's arm gets snapped in short order. The fight ended right there.


 
*blink* but, but...he was going for his _eye_.  tahts teh deadly!!!!!!

jf


----------



## ATC (Jan 24, 2009)

Maybe I am not coming across correctly. I am not dissing any art but rather just trying to explain a lesson for all artists and pointing out that sport is sport and SD is SD. No matter the discipline.

I stated that I like MMA and I like sport TKD and sport Karate and so on. Just tried to give a lesson on sport vs. self defense. Maybe I did not do a good job of stating what I was trying to say.

If anyone is offended by my statements I apologize but I was not trying to disrespect any art or discipline but rather point out a few things and that is that sport in any discipline is not self defense alone.

Again I apologize is I have offended anyone.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 24, 2009)

just for future reference, i think you ruffled feathers when you said "one thing i hate about mma practioners" & also "MMA is not MA in the true sense".  but i appreciate what you're saying.

jf


----------



## ATC (Jan 24, 2009)

jarrod said:


> just for future reference, i think you ruffled feathers when you said "one thing i hate about mma practioners" & also "MMA is not MA in the true sense". but i appreciate what you're saying.
> 
> jf


Yes, I should have phrased that better. MMA as a sport and it may be more of MMA fans that do not practice anything that make most of the statements that I hate, once I take the time to think about it.

However MMA as it is stated is a mixture of other martial arts so I am not sure that MMA is a true martial art but rather a term to describe multiple arts used by one. If I am wrong then I am educated.

Thanks you.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 24, 2009)

i know what you mean about mma not being a martial art in & of itself.  that's the opinion i originally held, but if you think about it, many MA developed as a mixture of existing styles.  with that in mind i think mma is headed down the course of being it's own style, if it already isn't.

jf


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2009)

jarrod said:


> the thing is that there are plenty of mma practicioners who post on this board & are very respectful towards more traditional arts, or even have a base in them themselves. whereas you are not being very respectful to mma. so maybe you should discuss this on youtube since that is where there are so many people who think tkd sucks.
> 
> jf


 

Jarrod nicely put!
The title of the thread is provocative, it would be whatever MA V MA you put. 
ATC, you managed to get most of the fallacies about MMA into one post, congratulations. After the others had posted though you managed to back pedal quite well. ( Bet you were all just waiting till I got up and read this weren't ya lol) 
How rude was it of you, an instructor, to demonstrate a move on a student and when he's obviously seen the point of it, you say 'it sucks when you don't have rules'. Your mindset from the off was that these people also do MMA so gosh I'm going to show them a thing or two now. then you go on to generalise about all MMA practioners, well thanks for that. Yes, we all go around comparing TKD to MMA, we do it all the time....not!
Firstly, there are idiots in all sports and all walks of life, none of us is responsible for them but to generalise the way you did is extremely unfair.

MMA is a sport, how many times have I posted that up now? Yes of course it is and with rules. Most of us do understand that and we train for our sport but we also train for SD and believe me we can do the 'real' SD just as well as everyone else and no the rules of MMA don't get in the way of SD because, guess what, we can switch from one to another quite easily. To give a lesson on sport v SD is pointless and patronising. Do you think the sports TKD people who spar with hands down don't know the difference between that and SD? Do you think wrestlers and grapplers don't know they have to be able to punch it out sometimes or use other methods on the street? That rugby and football players don't know they can't just do rugby and footie tackle on people when they start punching? But you choose to give such a lesson to the MMA guys because you assume well they are MMA, thickies, they only know how to do a sport so I'll show them how to do the real thing. Arrogant?

It's naive to post up up saying on 'I just wanted people to see the difference between SD and sport', of all the places in the world this is the one place I'd put my money on people knowing that! A trip through the past threads and posts would have saved you the effort of this post and my having to splutter through my breakfast answering it.

I'm trying to decide whether to continue about MMA being a style but I think I will not.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Oh and if they are in your class they are TKD students not MMA students.


----------



## Steve (Jan 24, 2009)

jarrod said:


> i know what you mean about mma not being a martial art in & of itself.  that's the opinion i originally held, but if you think about it, many MA developed as a mixture of existing styles.  with that in mind i think mma is headed down the course of being it's own style, if it already isn't.
> 
> jf


I've said this repeatedly myself on these boards, so it goes without saying that I agree completely.  As more schools teach a synthesis of various arts in MMA schools, the style will become better defined.  I don't know if it's good or bad, but I think it's inevitable.  

As for the rest, I think Tez managed to drop the hammer pretty hard.  No harm done, and I hope you stick around.  This is a great place.  You just had the misfortune of touching a raw nerve very early.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> I've said this repeatedly myself on these boards, so it goes without saying that I agree completely. As more schools teach a synthesis of various arts in MMA schools, the style will become better defined. I don't know if it's good or bad, but I think it's inevitable.
> 
> As for the rest, I think Tez managed to drop the hammer pretty hard. No harm done, and *I hope you stick around. This is a great place.* You just had the misfortune of touching a raw nerve very early.


 

True, please do stick around, I only get grumpy when MMA is treated unfairly lol. :ultracool


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 24, 2009)

ATC said:


> We have a couple of MMA students in our TKD classes and I found it funny that when we did SD (Self Defense) the other day one of them tried to get me in one of his MMA holds. I just grabbed and pressed on a nerve point and he let his hold go faster than you can say "hana" and found himself in a joint lock.
> 
> I told him sucks when you don't have rules.



No sport, be it MMA, TKD, kickboxing, boxing, or wrestling, equates directly to self defense.  The primary difference is that in a competition, one seeks to dominate and win over an opponent, while in self defense, on seeks to end the conflict quickly and escape.  




ATC said:


> That is the one thing I hate about MMA practitioners, they all seem to try to compare the sport of TKD to their sport. They do not seem to understand that no sport translates into real Self Defense.





ATC said:


> I love watching MMA but why can't some of these people understand that MMA is not MA in the true sense. MMA is like any other sport and just a sport.
> 
> Just my .02 :asian:


I think that there is an extent to which a lot of people compare their art or style to others.  But each art has its strengths and weaknesses, and some are more easily adapted to competition than others.  

There's always an element of 'fanboy' in anything.  An art or style should not be judged by the fanboys (you know, the guys who get into lengthy arguements about whether or not Wolverine could beat Spiderman).

Daniel


----------



## jarrod (Jan 24, 2009)

to be fair to the guy, i know exactly what he's talking about...though i use the term "meatheads" to specify them as seperate from the rest of the mma community.  one of my proudest achievements as an  instructor is taking in one of these meatheads & turning him into a respectful, open minded martial artist...while training him for mma.  

jf


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2009)

I think the fact the MMA students came to learn in a TKD class shows they are open minded and open to being taught, to then be mocked by a TKD instructor doesn't show TKD in a good light.

There is no such thing as an 'MMA hold' the hold will be either BJJ, Judo, Aikido, Karate etc. MMA stands for Mixed Martial Art*s*. 

It is very much martial arts, it has a history far older than many. It was originally Pankration, a striking and grappling art first seen in ancient Greece then Rome. A sport and like any other, hardly. It is full contact and has many of the best sportmanlike attitudes going. Many MMA fighters are traditionally trained, many have BBs in TKD, Karate or Judo. Other have belts in BJJ. yes there's some fans who annoyingly think they know all about fighting but to judge us all by them is ridiculous.

Someone I know, Neil Grove, a BB karateka has just been signed up for the UFC, his karate club still has the 30 man kumite for Nidan grading. You may find this interview with him enlightening.
 http://www.alanorr.com/htdocs/articles/Neil groves.html


----------



## ATC (Jan 24, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Jarrod nicely put!
> The title of the thread is provocative, it would be whatever MA V MA you put.
> ATC, you managed to get most of the fallacies about MMA into one post, congratulations. After the others had posted though you managed to back pedal quite well. ( Bet you were all just waiting till I got up and read this weren't ya lol)
> How rude was it of you, an instructor, to demonstrate a move on a student and when he's obviously seen the point of it, you say 'it sucks when you don't have rules'. Your mindset from the off was that these people also do MMA so gosh I'm going to show them a thing or two now. then you go on to generalise about all MMA practioners, well thanks for that. Yes, we all go around comparing TKD to MMA, we do it all the time....not!
> ...


Hi Tez, Thanks for your comments. I think I tried to state most of your point in each of my subsequent posts in this thread above.

I guess I should also point out that we get a few MMA fighters that come in and want to learn to kick or strike better. It just so happened that we were doing SD and some Hapkido this one day and this guy popped off and said something to the effect of "Oh this is my world, I got this". He then was showing off and making color belt students tap defeating the lesson purpose for that day.

I then tried to explain that what he does is sport and that in reality they did not have to tap but change their mindset to survival. We debated for a while and then I told him to get me in any of his tap out holds. He said that the rear naked choke was one hold that no one could get out of. I asked (stated) are the hands free? He said yes, I then let him place the hold on me. As he began his choke I reached up behind me and grabbed his ears and jaw bone looking to press on the nerves in those areas. I grabbed and pressed both under the jaw and behind the ears, He let go of the choke giving me an opportunity to lock his knee.

I will not lie to you; there was a sense of panic once the choke was put on me. But with a class of on lookers I followed through with my technique to demonstrate my point.

The comment about the no rules sucking was just the start of our conversation and then we debated some more about real and in the ring.

Many people only know what they see. So we do get a lot of people that come in off the street only know TKD for what they see in the Olympics and YouTube. Just as they only know MMA for what they see on TV as well. Well I don't have to tell you how many of those conversations go.

There is even a thread on this board about Sport TKD hands down fighting and many think that this is not good and have their comments. However there are good reasons for doing this in this sport. You cannot explain it and have it make sense to anyone that has not done it. Many times the only way to have something make sense is to demonstrate and have them experience it.

MMA does resemble what many consider real fighting so I get a fair share of TKD won't work if...type statements form people that only see the sport aspect of TKD. Most if not all of these people do not practice either MMA or TKD but only know what they see so it is hard to debate them. By this student being in the class and experiencing both, it was an opportunity to demonstrate non sport TKD in a perceived real life situation.

Again, I may have come across badly, but meant no disrespect to anyone. This is a discussion forum and my intentions were to one, start a discussion and, two, show the difference between sport and SD.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 24, 2009)

jarrod said:


> to be fair to the guy, i know exactly what he's talking about...though i use the term "meatheads" to specify them as seperate from the rest of the mma community. one of my proudest achievements as an instructor is taking in one of these meatheads & turning him into a respectful, open minded martial artist...while training him for mma.
> 
> jf


Meatheads tend to go to whatever is the most popular and perceived as the most macho.  So it is that MMA suffers from a seeming overabundance of them.  The truth is that there are far fewer meatheads than serious MMA practitioners in MMA; the meatheads just go out of their way to get noticed.

Daniel


----------



## redantstyle (Jan 24, 2009)

ya, those triplewarmers hurt, but more so in someone who is not adrenalized.  PP's can fall by the wayside.  as i understand adrenalin overrides some pain receptors.  so it's apples and oranges, really.

mma is martial arts just as surely as any other method.  what it may not be is self defense orientated.  that is the delineator. 

the skill sets, mentalities and training are different. 

still they are two peas in a pod, and there is quite often a fine line between the two.

regards.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2009)

ATC, nice reply  and thanks. if you'd made your OP this one instead it would have been a good post.

I've found when men start playing at showing each other techniques often a little bit of rivalry sets in, even in the best of guys lol! Especially when they come from a different style or they are showing me! We had a new guy in the other night, a soldier had done his 'control and restraint' training and wanted to show off a bit, I let him show a move on me as his mate wasn't too willingly, even after he promised it wouldn't hurt. Well it did actually and I could see a faint smirk appearing on his face, there it said, that showed you. So I used an Aikido move to drop him, yep that hurt too. He did not like being dropped by this middle aged lady rofl! See ego, gets in the way.

It's a shame that lad tapped out your lads but then they will have learned a lesson too, don't show off!
He was right, however, about the RNC, when put on fast and properly you won't get out of it. When demo-ing it (as you said...he started to put it on, he didn't crank it on immediately) or even doing it in an MMA comp it's put on slowly, slower in a demo of course. Watch in a fight how slowly it's put on, then imagine it done at speed in a street attack type of situation. A friend of mine who refs pro MMA uses it to get someone off if they won't obey first time he tells them, damn they go out quick.  In the street you'd have to be so fast to get it off, better still not to let it get on. In MMA there are ways to get out of it, depending on whether you are prone or standing, yours is a valid way if you can reach up, I rarely can as everyone is bigger than me. . . . . pause for sympathy there people! 

I know that panic you get when it's on but the thing about MMA is that while it may not be 'real' fighting, it's the closest you're going to get without going downtown on a Saturday night and calling people out. I don't panic now with the choke and I don't freeze if I'm punched in the face (and yes for those who remember my front tooth is still stuck there very elegantly with superglue) MMA is fight orientated, you train to fight the same as in boxing but it doesn't mean that the techniques can't be utilised for SD. Our instructor will often demo a technique for MMA and then say that if you use this slight variation its good for SD. He was in the army for many years, has done, still does actually close protection work and he also works the doors. He's trained with Geoff Thompson many times, they have similiar backgrounds. We do train SD separately from MMA but many techniques are common to both, the mindset is different but thats not a problem.


Idiots you get everywhere, it was kickboxing before, kung fu before that, I expect even boxing got it. You just have to shrug and remember what the people who really do MMA are like. . . . .very cool of course!


----------



## matt.m (Jan 24, 2009)

I tell you what, I have a friend that has a 2 and 1 MMA record. He has a base of boxing, Tae Kwon Do, Wrestling, and BJJ. The guy has the work ethic of a worker bee.

Everytime I talk to him he is always training and well look at the guys in the UFC, WEC, and Showtimes promotion. These guys train as hard as Pro Boxers and that is no easy feat. These folks are tough and in great shape physically and cardio wise. I will not knock their training at all.

I for one have the background of Judo, Hapkido, Tae Kwon Do, and Wrestling. I respect anyone who competes. Is it self defense? Not by a long shot, however competition is nothing but a fight with rules. I have seen point sparring matches where both competitors were drenched in sweat, the same with other competitions. 

I pose this observation: The better the competitors the better the fighters. Afterall, would you say harsh things about Mike Swan (Judo), Randy Couture (MMA), Jason Han (Tae Kwon Do), Jean Claude Van Damme (Karate), Matt Hughes (Wrestling), afterall they are all world champs in their discipline. Probably not.

Good creedo to follow is "Worry about yourself, put on a belt and train."


----------



## Steve (Jan 24, 2009)

matt.m said:


> I pose this observation: The better the competitors the better the fighters. Afterall, would you say harsh things about Mike Swan (Judo), Randy Couture (MMA), Jason Han (Tae Kwon Do), Jean Claude Van Damme (Karate), Matt Hughes (Wrestling), afterall they are all world champs in their discipline. Probably not.
> 
> Good creedo to follow is "Worry about yourself, put on a belt and train."


Randy Couture is a wimp.  I could take him.  And Mike Swain?  Phsshhht.  Total loser.


----------



## matt.m (Jan 25, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> Randy Couture is a wimp. I could take him. And Mike Swain? Phsshhht. Total loser.


 
You bet.  That Matt Hughes guy wow, I expected more of him.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 25, 2009)

On the subject of MMA being a martial art I think it is, the definition of such, proposed by the International Hoplology Society, "A body of organised,codified, repeatable actions, techniques, behaviour, and attitudes the primary intended function and planful design of which is to be used in/for combatative situations" ( Armstrong Weapons and Systems) makes MMA a combat art. It is certainly a combat art.


----------



## searcher (Jan 25, 2009)

Just a thought on why many think MMA is not a MA, could be from each individual having a little different twist along with it having no name, outside of being called MMA.   I like MMA and wish it would be more widely accepted as a MA.


I kinda wish it still had less rules, but what you going to do?   The rules have helped it spread.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 25, 2009)

searcher said:


> Just a thought on why many think MMA is not a MA, could be from each individual having a little different twist along with it having no name, outside of being called MMA. I like MMA and wish it would be more widely accepted as a MA.
> 
> 
> I kinda wish it still had less rules, but what you going to do? The rules have helped it spread.


 
i know EXACTLY what you mean about the rules.  i'm still pissed off we can't headbutt anymore.  

i think that there are many accepted martial arts which have different twists, & mma happens to synthesize most of them, so i think you're right about many people perceiving it as almost discipline-less.  personally i tend to be drawn to the styles that encourage free expression & interpretation.

jf


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

MMA=sport, IMO, not MA

just my opinion, you dont have to agree, and really, I dont care if anyone agrees with me


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 26, 2009)

The thread is a trick question. All the arts are SD. After all, whether it's "competition" or "for real" isn't it interchangeable? I mean "competiton" has some one attacking you, hitting you, choking you out, etc.. isn't that the same as someone on the street, bar, club etc..? Aren't you in a competion when fighting them too? I would think so, since "winning" is still the objective. I would say that it's all SD and competition, just different forums, with a certain amount of rules to follow or not.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> MMA=sport, IMO, not MA
> 
> just my opinion, you dont have to agree, and really, I dont care if anyone agrees with me


 
yeah but the problem is how do you test your SD skills without going to prison?

as i've brought up before, almost every warrior class throughout history has participated in some sort of sport or formalized fighting.  it obviously has value for SD.  

jf


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

the problem is, when you make it into a sport, you have to, for safety's sake water it down to the point where it isnt deady

that defeats the purpose of training in martial arts

"as you practice, so shall you perform"

I dont train for sport.

but really, that isnt why I dont consider MMA a MA


----------



## jarrod (Jan 26, 2009)

i'd disagree with you on a couple points (not that you care, as you pointed out  )  

not all non-sport martial arts are deadly: aikido comes to mind.

sport based competitions remove deadly techniques, yet plenty of boxers die in the ring, a couple mma'ers have, & all martial sports carry a risk of serious injury.  

"as you practice, so shall you perform"

very true.  however, katas, focus mitts, heavy bag training, makiwara training, uchikomi, & all the other staples of training within various styles do not simulate real combat.  nothing does.  sport fighting is another training tool, some use it some don't.  doesn't matter to me.

i am curious though as to why you don't consider MMA an MA if you'd care to elaborate.

jf


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 26, 2009)

Watering down as a basis--I guess. However, the same is done in "reality" also. You don't treat a drunk, who could barely stand up, the same as some boxer who's mad at you and attacks you, or that young street thug who comes at you do you? Again, it's all interchangeable, and ultimately the same. Therefore it's all SD and MA's.


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2009)

If the definition of a martial art is that it is not a sport, than by that definition TKD, Judo, Muay Thai, Kung Fu (or at least Sanda/San Shou), Savatte, Boxing, Wrestling, Fencing , Kyokushin Karate (most karate, really) and bowling are all sports and not martial arts.   I'm sure that there are more.  What does that leave us?  

Well, okay.  Bowling isn't a sport.  

Seriously.  I don't get the "rules" thing. Every martial art has rules for safety.  I can understand the position that MMA isn't a codified style and therefore not a Martial Art.  That makes sense to me, but the rules thing... I just don't get it.


----------



## redantstyle (Jan 26, 2009)

Most people have various mental blocks that prevent them from causing serious harm to others.  of course, these blocks sometimes crumble under extreme stress.   only a certain percentage of the population is truely sociopathic....i.e. 'natural born killers'.

the conventional wisdom is that too much competition dulls the self defensive capability because it tends to reinforce the mental blocks against extreme violence.  in the ring, there are rules, and the intent is to 'win' or submit the opponent, not kill him.  to be sure, some have died, and others have recieved grevious injuries, but i highly doubt those instances were intentional.  nobody was sitting in the dressing room going, " I'm going to go out and murder this guy tonight!"

the system i train in is 'teh d33dly', and our founder had killed multiple men before coming to america.  my art is SD MA and not for competition. 

beyond the techniques, the real goal of traditional TMA self defense training is to override the inhibitions that are in place against violence.  it seeks to break various conditionings, whether they be genetic or social, that effectively 'stop' someone from issuing full force against another. 

in short, TMA is intended to create the aforementioned sociopath.

MMA is a martial art, it's just not one that is designed to make people into killers, is all.

and as footnote, the old school tourneys often did result in death, maiming and the like.  by those standards, today's MMA and SD arts are highly filtered and/or 'softened'.


regards.

JMBarr
RedAntGungFu
( Liu Seong derivative)


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 26, 2009)

Personally, I don't see MMA as "a martial art", though I do see MMA competitors as martial artists.  I see MMA as martial sport, participated in by individuals who are trained in several individual martial arts.

MMA competition is essentially open competition with no restriction on style, which makes it a rule set, not an MA.

MMA stands for mixed martial arts, which makes it a term for people who practice more than one art and compete in competitions that allow them to utilize the skills that they have from those arts.

Someone posted here a while back that MMA was developing into its own specific style, essentially consisting of those moves that are most effective in competition.  This is essentially training for a focused competition, which is not the same as a martial art.

The difference between MMA, wrestling, sport fencing, and perhaps savatte (not sure on that one) versus the other arts that are mentioned in Stevebjj's post is that competition is only a small portion of those arts.  

Taekwondo in its _*full*_ curriculum has a large quantity of techiques that are not a part of competition, SD, philosophy, and poomsae.  That doesn't make it 'superior' to MMA.  

In the same way, SD is only a portion of taekwondo, not the whole.  The aspect of it as a fighting system _outside of the ring_ is the main focus of taekwondo.

Certainly, there is overlap between SD, MMA, and Taekwondo; all of the arts that contribute to MMA have an SD element, so MMA competitors will have SD training.  MMA is a fighting system, and though it is geared towards use in the ring.    

Lets not forget that while MMA is not taekwondo, taekwondo is a part of MMA, as a good number of MMA competitors either have a TKD background or crosstrain in TKD for improvement in kicks.

Daniel


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 26, 2009)

redantstyle said:


> Most people have various mental blocks that prevent them from causing serious harm to others.  of course, these blocks sometimes crumble under extreme stress.   only a certain percentage of the population is truely sociopathic....i.e. 'natural born killers'.
> 
> the conventional wisdom is that too much competition dulls the self defensive capability because it tends to reinforce the mental blocks against extreme violence.  in the ring, there are rules, and the intent is to 'win' or submit the opponent, not kill him.  to be sure, some have died, and others have recieved grevious injuries, but i highly doubt those instances were intentional.  nobody was sitting in the dressing room going, " I'm going to go out and murder this guy tonight!"
> 
> ...




Not to burst your bubble, but I've run into a TON of TMA-oriented folks who can't seem to handle themselves getting punched in the face (at least the first time). Assuming your blanket statements are correct, all TMA-oriented folks are "above" sport violence, and "accustomed" to extreme violence?

Show me the proof, man. Because I just don't see it on someone who hasn't tested his/her skill in some sort of competition.

The truth of the matter is that instead of promoting your ideas on TMA vs Sport MA, you should be (WE should all be) promoting the concept that there is functional validity in almost all MA. 

But giving your student a false hope that since his art is deadly, so he's above a functional martial artist? That's just the wrong kind of Kool-Aid; the kind that could get someone killed on the street.

Show me functionality. Don't shovel words about T3h Deadly MA and instructors saying they killed people. I thought this was 21st Century. 

With all due respect, I suggest waking up.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 26, 2009)

redantstyle said:


> the system i train in is 'teh d33dly', and our founder had killed multiple men before coming to america. my art is SD MA and not for competition.


You mean that the _actua_l name of the system you train in is 'teh d33dly'?? Never heard of a TMA named in L33T speak.



redantstyle said:


> beyond the techniques, the real goal of traditional TMA self defense training is to override the inhibitions that are in place against violence. it seeks to break various conditionings, whether they be genetic or social, that effectively 'stop' someone from issuing full force against another.
> 
> in short, TMA is intended to create the aforementioned sociopath.


 No, TMA's varry greatly in their intent. Funakoshi and Kano certainly weren't trying to do this. Quite the opposite.

Most TMA's are fighting systems designed to enable you to either defend yourself when unarmed or disarmed, or to be used on the battlefield. Unless a battlefield oriented TMA is coupled with the military indoctrination of the time in which such TMA's were used, you certainly won't get anything close to a sociopath. And even with military indoctrination, you won't get a sociopath; the military wants soldiers, not sociopaths, and sociopaths don't make the best soldiers.

Daniel


----------



## CDKJudoka (Jan 26, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> The military wants soldiers, not sociopaths, and sociopaths don't make the best soldiers.
> 
> Daniel




I resemble that remark. 

The Military should break any sociopathy that may be present in the individual, and if it doesn't the person learns to mask it. Sociopaths are good at that. I should know.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 26, 2009)

DarkPhoenix said:


> I resemble that remark.
> 
> The Military should break any sociopathy that may be present in the individual, and if it doesn't the person learns to mask it. Sociopaths are good at that. I should know.


 

You're right all the way.
 The sociopaths go into the special forces...well, you didn't think those guys were normal did you?


----------



## CDKJudoka (Jan 26, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> You're right all the way.
> The sociopaths go into the special forces...well, you didn't think those guys were normal did you?




That must explain why I went in the the Rangers.  We have to be crazy to willingly jump out of a perfectly good airplane.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

Jarrod, 
since you asked so nice, I will be happy to blather on. it's something ilike to do anyway.

now, before i go into detail, be advised, this is just my opinion, i dont expect anyone to agree, and as i said, I dont really care if anyone agrees with me or not.

ok.

First, some definitions for this discussion:

*fighting system*-a group of techniques taught together as a collection with a unifying theme

*Intent*-the goal of the fighting system, it's purpose

now, here is the meat of it.

when I think about "is this a martial art" for me, it boils down to INTENT

was the fighting system founded to provide self defense, or to compete in a sport with rules?

As i said in a previous thread, judo was created for competition, as was BJJ. They are sports. They may have some SD application, but that isnt thier INTENT. They were designed from the ground up with one thing in mind, sport. Same with Thai Boxing. (side note: the original art that Muai Thai was based on was a combat art, but that is lost to time now. Muai Thai now exists only as a sport)

Most TMA's however were not designed for sport. They were designed for combat, and have to be HIGHLY modified to be used in a sport setting.

Now that being said, there is the matter of the teacher. An instructor can change the intent of the fighting system.

Someone *could* teach BJJ and focus on Self defense-it would be crappy half assed self defense, unless he added material to the fighting system, but he could do it. Same with judo.

some do teach TKD, or Shotokan or whatever as sports, but *they have to leave out large parts of the fighting system to modify it for sport settings*.  

Starting to see the difference?

For example, I dont teach or modify my system for sport in anyway. In fact, I tell all my students that I do not teach so they can go to tounaments. That has cost me some students in fact. But I dont care.

Self defense is what i focus on, to the exclusion of sport. So, i determine by my teaching method, that TKD, MY tkd is a MA.

Someone else's TKD may be taught as a sport

Now that being said, ALL TKD was designed and founded for combat, not sport, so TKD is a MA. Same with most styles of karate, Kung Fu, etc

MMA exist for only one reason, sport. Thats it, thats all.

ergo, not a MA.

A fighting system sure, but not a MA

Now you mentioned Aikido. Trust me, done right, as O-Sensei originally taught it? deadly as hell. Same with original japanese juijitsu for that matter. And notice, there are no aikido tournaments.

so, in short, here is a good litmus test:

*do you have to heavily modify the fighting system to use it in a competition? thats prob a martial art

do you have to modify the fighting system to use it for self defense? thats prob a sport
*
_also, you mentioned different taining aids, well, the makiwara hardens the hand, making it into a very hard, very destructive weapon. Thats clearly for self defense, and you notice, in this sport crazy age, not many people do makiwara anymore._

Thank you for your attention.


----------



## dancingalone (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> Now you mentioned Aikido. Trust me, done right, as O-Sensei originally taught it? deadly as hell. Same with original japanese juijitsu for that matter. And notice, there are no aikido tournaments.



Tomiki aikido does compete in randori-style tournaments, but I generally agree with your post.  I only differ in that I think sport styles like judo or BJJ can be modified more easily than you do for practical self-defense.  Thanks for sharing your thoughts.


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> Jarrod,
> since you asked so nice, I will be happy to blather on. it's something ilike to do anyway.
> 
> now, before i go into detail, be advised, this is just my opinion, i dont expect anyone to agree, and as i said, I dont really care if anyone agrees with me or not.
> ...



"My art is better than your art" is what I'm getting out of that... Lol.

TKD is also a sport. It's in the Olympics. I respect that... Heck, there's a sport application to almost anything. Chess. Ironing Clothes. Eating.

We get it.

Take two people. One is an athlete, the other is scrawny. Both untrained in MAs. In a street fight, the athlete has the edge. In fact, there's no question about it.

Take those same two people, give them some sort of MA. The athlete trains in a combat sport. The unathletic person trains in whatever you assume is a True Martial Art. They've trained for the same amount of time. 

The athlete still has the drop on the guy because there's that sheer physicality from training for sport, as well as the confidence in his own technique because he's tested it before.

Take the two of them, and pit them each against the stereotype of an attacker. Perfect technique can only go so far. Who cares if you can throw a kick properly when it has no strength or power behind it? I'll still bet on the athlete.

So please, quit knocking or dismissing what you consider "sport" because MAs are all sports with rules and regulations; some more apparent than others. It's ultimately up to the practitioner to decide his/her level of athleticism, dedication to technique, and the ability to figure out what works for them in a real situation.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

Nolerama said:


> "My art is better than your art" is what I'm getting out of that... Lol.


 
Then you need to read it again.

Nowhere does it say any thing is better than any other thing

i was asked why I think things are different from other things

i explained my thought process

you cant tell me I am wrong, because I am not. It is opinion, and I am not stating it as fact. So there is no right or wrong.

but, this:

*"Perfect technique can only go so far. Who cares if you can throw a kick properly when it has no strength or power behind it? I'll still bet on the athlete."
*
if you are throwing the kick properly, it will be a strong kick. Classic training methods work just fine. you wanna make your legs strong? try a couple thousand hours in a horse stance.

*"So please, quit knocking or dismissing what you consider "sport" because MAs are all sports with rules and regulations"*

For one thing, I am not knocking anything. Nowhere have I said that anything was good or bad

And another thing Not all Martial arts are sports, tho most can be used and or taught that way WITH MODIFICATIONS. 

*"It's ultimately up to the practitioner to decide his/her level of athleticism, dedication to technique, and the ability to figure out what works for them in a real situation."*

Sports are by defintion, not "real situations" rules take you right out of the realm of "real"


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 26, 2009)

Nolerama said:


> "My art is better than your art" is what I'm getting out of that... Lol.


That isn't what I got, but I will use that as a springboard to make an observation.

Some arts *are* better than others for *some* things.  BJJ is a better art than taekwondo for groundfighting.  Why?  TKD has little to none unless it is grafted on from another art.  TKD is a better art to Shotokan for high, flashy kicks.  Why?  TKD focuses on high flashy kicks in a way that Shotokan does not.

But no art is inherently superior to another art.

Every art has its pros and cons, so it really comes down to what you want ouf of it.

Daniel


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 26, 2009)

I'm not telling you you're wrong. I'm just saying that it would be respectful to give credit where credit is due: functionality and athleticism are huge factors (quite possibly deciding factors) in winning/surviving a fight, SD or Sport.

And I don't think that thousands of hours in horse stance make you a better kicker. Strong legs and technique make you a better kicker and you can get that being a good athlete as well.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 26, 2009)

I'd say that thousands of hours in a horse stance may not directly relate to kicking technique, but it will strengthen the legs, particularly the quads and glutes, which should certainly help in any endeavor using those muscle groups, including kicks.

Daniel


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

Nole,
I gave credit where it is due.

I said that BJJ/MMA might have some self defense use.

In fact, I gave it more credit than it is due since I dont really think much of bjj/mma as self defense systems at all, and whats worse? I see MMA as pandering to the lowest common denominator. 

and you can think that spending hours i the gym makes you more likely to survive a fight, but you mma types always forget one basic thing

technique trumps strength every time. Proper technique IS strong technique


----------



## searcher (Jan 26, 2009)

jarrod said:


> yeah but the problem is how do you test your SD skills without going to prison?
> 
> as i've brought up before, almost every warrior class throughout history has participated in some sort of sport or formalized fighting. it obviously has value for SD.
> 
> jf


 

You knwo, your post makes me think of the gladiators of Rome.  I am sure that they did not consider what they were doing as SD. but the heck if they were not practicingit day in/ day out.    That is, IMO, very much like MMA today.


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> Nole,
> I gave credit where it is due.
> 
> I said that BJJ/MMA might have some self defense use.
> ...



I think it's understood that we can agree to disagree.

However, I think saying "you MMA types" is kind of funny. Because you don't know my "type" and, no, we don't ALWAYS do anything. Jeez, man. You love lumping people into groups, don't you? 

I agree that technique is important, but doesn't trump ANYTHING because the real world is a lot less forgiving when it comes to technique; especially in a SD situation. Sometimes you won't have time to pull off your technique. So I think you're wrong on that point.

Oh yeah, I think talking up your art/way of thinking like it's the best thing in the world, and call another style of LEARNING (we all have base arts) "pandering to the lowest common denominator" is hypocritical and ultimately short-sighted.

Sorry, I'm not going to bow to you on this one simply because you stated what you think is fact.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

and yet, you are STILL trying to tell me I am wrong......

MMA fanboys, a pain in the *** since 1992 and counting.....

Of course I lump people into groups, thats the way the world works. Everyone belongs to some kind of group. Human society functions that way. 

and BTW- sure I know your type. Your profile says it all. Arts: mma/bjj

tells me everything I need to know.

but, lets assume I am wrong. 

Got a black belt in anything?

anything at all?

And when i say "lowest common denominator" I dont mean the worst people, I mean what I see as the worst part of the human mind set. 

the easy way.

MMA is the easy way

want great kicks but cant be bothered to learn TKD? want great hands but dont have time to study boxing? want to roll around on the ground but dont wanna bother learning judo?

then come on down to the buffet, get everything in one place

except buffet food? it usually isnt that great. Jack of all trades, master of none. 

that is contrary to my mind set. I would rather be great at one thing that works than have half assed ability to do 20 things. Most mma types have 2 kicks, 2 punches, a couple of locks, not much of any one thing, and they tend to not be great at any one thing, but rather mediocre at many things.

thats great for some people, some people love buffets.

not for me.

and this is off topic. Someone asked me for my thought process on what is or os not a martial art, I explained it, and as I said, I really, REALLY dont give a crap if you agree.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> Got a black belt in anything?
> 
> anything at all?.


 
Not really wanting to climb back &#8220;down&#8221; into this pit of MMA vs TMA or in this case MMA vs TKD&#8230; which could be interpreted as one sport MA vs another sport MA.

I could be wrong here but if part of your argument is that if you don't have a Black belt you are not skilled then you have just effectively told 98% of all CMA practitioners world wide they have no skill as well as a whole lot of other East Asian MA styles.


Also BJJ has a belt system and it is a rather hard road to go to get one, harder than many MAs out there today actually.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

not my contention at all Xue

sorry if it looked that way.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> not my contention at all Xue
> 
> sorry if it looked that way.


 
No problem

Just making sure and doing my best to keep THOUSANDS of CMA people form getting offended and telling you that you have offended their family and you have offended the Shaolin Temple


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

oh hell no. Last thing I want to do. I can think of easier ways to get dead.....LOL


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> Also BJJ has a belt system and it is a rather hard road to go to get one, harder than many MAs out there today actually.



absolutely true.

i was talking about that with Steve last week. Very hard to make bb in bjj. 

NOW

it was hard to make BB in anything 40 years ago when karate schools were as hard to find as REAL bjj is today..

just wait a few years, BJJ will prob go the way of TKD. Strip malls, 10 year old BB's, etc

it is the nature of the business.


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 26, 2009)

So on this forum, it's okay to call MMA practitioners lazy? That we're taking the "easy way"?

You have no idea what you're talking about.

And you get to bash MMA people like it's an annoyance to you? TF, you sound like the dude from The Foot Fist Way in the way that your TKD is deadly, has SD application, and is far superior to anything a lowly, non belted person like me can say... But whatever.

You win because you type louder.

I also think MMA "Fanboys" suck. But they suck in the same way people walking around with a "bought" black belts do. And there are a ton of them running around. But they're definitely not in any BJJ, Muay Thai, Judo or Western boxing organization and if they do exist, it's few and far between.

I wish I had the gall or insecurity to tell people these forums that I despise any one art, learning method or style, but I can't because I actually care about others from different styles.  I respect MAists for what they do, generally speaking. I don't need to stereotype.

Easy way out? Ha!


----------



## redantstyle (Jan 26, 2009)

> Not to burst your bubble, but I've run into a TON of TMA-oriented folks who can't seem to handle themselves getting punched in the face (at least the first time). Assuming your blanket statements are correct, all TMA-oriented folks are "above" sport violence, and "accustomed" to extreme violence?


 
burst my bubble? yeah okay buddy. 

who ever said 'all' of anybody? ime, most tma'ers suck. indeed very few are actually 'combat' trained. 

and what do any of the people you encountered have to do with me?

(answer: nothing)



> Show me the proof, man. Because I just don't see it on someone who hasn't tested his/her skill in some sort of competition.


 
I could care less what you have seen. the world is alot bigger that what you have seen.



> The truth of the matter is that instead of promoting your ideas on TMA vs Sport MA, you should be (WE should all be) promoting the concept that there is functional validity in almost all MA.


 
my ideas? lol, again, sir...lol.

and btw, i never said anything decrying the 'functional validity' of any art. stop trying to put words in my mouth. 



> But giving your student a false hope that since his art is deadly, so he's above a functional martial artist? That's just the wrong kind of Kool-Aid; the kind that could get someone killed on the street.


 
what makes you think i have any students? again, you are assuming that you know anything about my training, which you dont.



> Show me functionality. Don't shovel words about T3h Deadly MA and instructors saying they killed people. I thought this was 21st Century.


 
eh, i am talking about someone born in 1917, who was a veteran of WW2 and the Indonesian independance war. try looking in Stars and Stripes magazine around 1941 or 42 for the 'Red Ant'.

and if you would pay attention, you would see that i am discussing methodologies and intent. 





> With all due respect, I suggest waking up.


 
with all due respect, i suggest you stop assuming.

regards,

JMBarr
RedAntGungFu
akaktk


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

TKD IS deadly, or can be if taught and used right
it DOES have self defense applications, or can, if taught and used right

that doesnt make it superior.

I have never said anything was better than anything else

I have only said they are different

Daniel pointed out that some things ARE better than others, depending on what the goal is

thats true, but I didnt even go that far.

seriously, is reading comprehension a problem for you? maybe you are dyslexic? cuz i didnt say anything was better than anything else. Never did I use the word "lazy" 

do you normally make stuff up and accuse someone of saying it?

And i respect Martial artists too

I am one

Anyway, I am tired of you now. you are boring me.

I was asked a specific question, I answered it, i will let you know when I care if you agree or not.


----------



## redantstyle (Jan 26, 2009)

> No, TMA's varry greatly in their intent. Funakoshi and Kano certainly weren't trying to do this. Quite the opposite.


 
those are post-restoration arts. 



> Most TMA's are fighting systems designed to enable you to either defend yourself when unarmed or disarmed, or to be used on the battlefield. Unless a battlefield oriented TMA is coupled with the military indoctrination of the time in which such TMA's were used, you certainly won't get anything close to a sociopath. And even with military indoctrination, you won't get a sociopath; the military wants soldiers, not sociopaths, and sociopaths don't make the best soldiers.


 
right, but some arts are STILL Traditional in the definition you have here.  and some are not.  they do exist. 

as far as the military indoctrination goes, my experience in the marine corps says different. 

there is some literature out there about studies conducted in ww2 concerning the 'killer instinct'.  they found many soldiers fired over the heads of the enemy.  military indoc was changed accordingly.  at least in the Corpse.

regards,

JMBarr
RedAntGungFu


----------



## redantstyle (Jan 26, 2009)

what with all the personal enmity on this subject?


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 26, 2009)

You still don't get it. I'm saying you're operating under a very myopic point of view when it comes to the MAs.

Are you going to "lol" the entire time? Grow up, expand your mind. I'm apologize if your ego was bruised, but learn to think for yourself. I want to help you helping you think about MA in a light that's not a male ego competition.... Because buddy, when it comes to ego, you've already won.

Have fun being T3h D33dliest ;P Good luck on your journey.

If you will, could you elaborate on this Red Ant??

Is it like this?


----------



## Nolerama (Jan 26, 2009)

redantstyle said:


> what with all the personal enmity on this subject?



TF is like Luigi to my Mario... except we really didn't get along in the first place and possibly speak/type different dialects. And we're definitely not brothers (and I'd like to think I get the Princess every time ;P)

I respect the guy, but like to argue with him as well.


----------



## redantstyle (Jan 26, 2009)

im not sure who is talking to who anymore...

am i the myoptic one?

and yes, he was nicknamed the 'Red Ant' after fire ants.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

i think heis saying you are myopic, I am just an ***.....


----------



## jarrod (Jan 26, 2009)

twin fist i disagree with you but thanks for taking the time to explain your thoughts.

jf


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

Jarrod, 
the least i could do since you asked so nice and all.

Feel free if you like to tell me where you think i got it wrong


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> absolutely true.
> 
> i was talking about that with Steve last week. Very hard to make bb in bjj.
> 
> ...


 
I wish I could tell you it won't happen but... sadly, you are likely correct


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2009)

I think this thread has lost its way.

Regarding 10 year old BJJ black belts, I said before that I hope this never happens. Honestly, I think that, if anything, BJJ will follow Judo.  Judo has pretty good quality control and the requirements for each rank are fairly consistent.  I think we may see BJJ mcdojos and disreputable schools, but by and large, I don't see it completely abandoning all reason as we've seen the Lee's Strip Mall TKD phenomenon do.  

I just wanted to get this out there before the thread gets sent to Gitmo.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 26, 2009)

oh lord i hope you are right Steve. If there is one thing I respect the hell out of BJJ for, it's the grading.


----------



## matt.m (Jan 26, 2009)

Steve,

I like where you were going with the whole codification thing.  However, I haven't seen 2 tkd schools have the same cirriculum from one org. to another.  Plus look at Judo, there are a laundry list of techniques.  However, not every org teaches Judo the same.

So, MMA has set a few base things to be good at to succeed.  What that means is it is up to the participant to decide how to best to that for themselves.



stevebjj said:


> If the definition of a martial art is that it is not a sport, than by that definition TKD, Judo, Muay Thai, Kung Fu (or at least Sanda/San Shou), Savatte, Boxing, Wrestling, Fencing , Kyokushin Karate (most karate, really) and bowling are all sports and not martial arts. I'm sure that there are more. What does that leave us?
> 
> Well, okay. Bowling isn't a sport.
> 
> Seriously. I don't get the "rules" thing. Every martial art has rules for safety. I can understand the position that MMA isn't a codified style and therefore not a Martial Art. That makes sense to me, but the rules thing... I just don't get it.


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> oh lord i hope you are right Steve. If there is one thing I respect the hell out of BJJ for, it's the grading.


  one thing we can count on is that we will know what you think.  


matt.m said:


> Steve,
> 
> I like where you were going with the whole codification thing.  However, I haven't seen 2 tkd schools have the same cirriculum from one org. to another.  Plus look at Judo, there are a laundry list of techniques.  However, not every org teaches Judo the same.
> 
> So, MMA has set a few base things to be good at to succeed.  What that means is it is up to the participant to decide how to best to that for themselves.


I don't completely disagree.  When (not if) "mma" formalizes more like, say, the shooto schools...  That's what I'm talking about.  I'm on my phone or I'd explain it better.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 26, 2009)

Twin Fist said:


> Jarrod,
> the least i could do since you asked so nice and all.
> 
> Feel free if you like to tell me where you think i got it wrong


 
well i think you're on to something with your ideas about intent. but i think if you trace any art back far enough the intent was almost always militaristic/SD at it's root. i tend to look at sport as a training as a means (imho, the best means) to improve in a specialized area of self defense. for instance boxing by itself may not be the best self defense art in the world, but i don't think that anyone argues that a closed fist punch has it's place in SD. which is one tool that boxers happen to excel at. 

almost every military has encouraged some form of boxing (or any sport MA for that matter) training among it's troops. now obviously boxing isn't going to win a war, but i think anyone can recognize the value of being able to knock someone senseless with your fists. same with judo & bjj; we can trace their origins back to the jujitsu of the samurai & start to view judo & bjj as arts focusing on a specialized skill set used in the battlefield.  rolling around on the ground might not be your best choice in battle, but you may not have a choice. 

but you have already stated that you think martial sports have SD application, so we may be just arguing semantics here.

personally speaking, i trained for SD exclusively for the first several years of my MA life. i avoided competition because i was afraid of losing, afraid of not being able to do what i thought i could do, etc. sport training gave me a lot of confidence in my training & taught me many, many valuable lessons that apply to SD. i know some guys can hit me full bore & not phase me, i know other guys can, i know the sight of my own blood doesn't freak me out, i learned how to manage my anxiety & so on. sport fighting has just been a hugely beneficial part of my martial arts life & i know it translates to self-defense.

just my thoughts,

jf


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 26, 2009)

I do one night shift and you all post this lot?

Okay on the subject of whats a martial art and whats not, whats combat and whats not, I'd suggest you go to Iain Abernethy's website , there is a very good book there to download free, it's called 'Comprehensive Karate; from beginner to blackbelt.' by Micheal J Rosenbaum I can highly recommend it, has a good account of the history of karate and it may surprise many of you. Anyway, its a very good read.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 27, 2009)

redantstyle said:


> those are post-restoration arts.


I don't know that I'd call them that.  Kano's was actually not restoring so much as modernizing and embracing a more sport/competition rout, complete with the dan system from Go.   

Funokoshi simply 'Japanized' Okinawan karate from what I understand.  



redantstyle said:


> right, but some arts are STILL Traditional in the definition you have here. and some are not. they do exist.


 
Both Judo and Shotokan are considered traditional.  Taekwondo is considered 'traditional' and is probably less 'traditional' than Shotokan.  Even so, I do know what you mean.  Seems that traditional today means anything that is self contained, has a belt system, and isn't MMA.  I see 'traditional' as having become more of a format.



redantstyle said:


> as far as the military indoctrination goes, my experience in the marine corps says different.
> 
> there is some literature out there about studies conducted in ww2 concerning the 'killer instinct'. they found many soldiers fired over the heads of the enemy. military indoc was changed accordingly. at least in the Corpse.


I am aware of the studies you referrence, but I don't consider being willing to kill one's enemies in war to be the same as being a sociopath.  Being a sociopath can have (I would think) negative consequences in a working unit. 

Daniel


----------



## BrandonLucas (Jan 27, 2009)

Yep...soapbox time.  Here goes:

It is entirely pointless to argue the facts for both sides for any part of this subject, for many reasons.  And not only is it pointless, it makes all of the people who argue the facts look uneducated.

Basically, these all sound like fanboy arguments to me.  Fanboys for both TMA's and MMA.  

1.  MMA is not a MA *in and of itself*.  It is a collection of parts of *different* MA's that is used to defend yourself in a competant manner, and to play to your strengths and guard your weaknesses.  Most of the time, 1 MMA'ist will train in different arts than another MMA'ist, all depending on what their strengths and weaknesses are.  MMA, by itself, is not a MA in the sense that a TMA is a MA.  In other words, there is no set cirriculum.

2.  TKD is *not* better than anything else out there.  No one art is better than the next, even if it is considered MMA in the sense of mixing and matching techniques to fit a fighting style.  It all depends on who's using it.  A gun is no better than a knife...it all depends on who's using the weapons.

3.  How exactly would anyone here know what is deadly in a MA?  Really?  Has anyone here ever killed someone else with that technique?  The point is that you have no idea what will work and what won't work until you're faced with making that decision at that moment.  You won't know if your pressure point hold is going to work unless you have a seriously resisting opponent that you're trying to defend yourself against.

4.  When intent comes into play, how do you train for that?  It's the same thing as the "deadly" argument.  Unless you truly "intend" on harming your training partner, or your training partner truly "intends" on harming you, then you don't effectively train for that, either.

5.  For sport and competition purposes, anything and everything gets watered down.  My TKD and this person's MMA is going to get watered down the second we step in the Octagon or whatever ring we are *competing* in.  It all boils down to who's the more athletic and able to work within the realm of rulesets.

6.  An athlete is going to have the edge over someone not trained.  Pure and simple.  That doesn't mean that he'll win everytime, but the odds are more in his (or her) favor.  I agree that proper technique is understood to be a strong technique, but the problem here is timing.  An athlete has the edge in timing as well...and if you think about it, the more someone trains in an art, the more* athletic* they become...so really, the point here is moot.  If you're a martial artist that actively trains and is serious about training, then you're an athlete, which gives you the edge.  So now we're seeing someone who is trained in MMA vs someone who is trained in a TMA...no matter if there are rules or it's NHB, you can't tell who is going to be the one left standing.  Not unless you can predict the future.  In which case you should send me a PM of the winning lotto numbers for GA.

Basically, the whole reason this argument has been done to death is because there is *no clear cut answer* as to which is better.  

So what if MMA is the easy way out?  If I train in MMA, and I glean parts of different TMA's to help make me a better *fighter* all the way around, and I can put you out of comission, then who cares *what* I'm trained in??

Like I said before, all of these arguments as far as whether MMA is legit for SD or if TMA can compare to MMA are all basically fanboy arguments.  Respectable people who train in either TMA's or MMA are able to see the strengths and weaknesses of their art, and usually other arts as well.

Is my TKD better than your TKD?  We may never know, unless we were actually in the position to have to find out.  And personally, I would rather not know.  But, it won't be a question of whether I'm a higher rank than you, or if you're a higher rank than me, or if your TKD is more "modern" than mine is, or whatever.  It will simply be a question of who trains harder, who is more athletic, and who is more opportunistic.

I think that if everyone crosstrained in *something*, even if it's underwater basket weaving, they can benefit from it. 

If I offended anyone, my deepest appologies.  I'm just tired of seeing these same tired arguments that go nowhere.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 27, 2009)

Excellent post, Brandon. I had expressed similar sentiments much earlier in this thread.

Regarding intent, if your intent in SD is one of defense, disarm and escape, then you can train with full intent; I fully intend to put my partner on the ground and make haste to get away, or I fully intend to prevent my partner from striking me, either with a foot, fist, or simulated weapon, or I fully intend to disarm my opponent, take the weapon away.

I think that when we talk about SD, we should keep in mind that unless we are in the military and *in a military engagement*, we are dealing with _*civilian self defense*_, so being lethal is not necesarilly the goal. In fact, being lethal can cause you a substantial amount of legal problems.  Military personel off of the battlefield are constrained by the same SD laws that the rest of us are. 

In regards to civilian SD, groundwork is less important than awareness and escape, though having a good groundgame I'm sure can be helpful in extracating one's self from some situations.

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 27, 2009)

BrandonLucas said:


> So now we're seeing someone who is trained in MMA vs someone who is trained in a TMA...no matter if there are rules or it's NHB, you can't tell who is going to be the one left standing. Not unless you can predict the future. In which case you should send me a PM of the winning lotto numbers for GA.


And I'd like the ones for Maryland.

Daniel


----------



## redantstyle (Jan 27, 2009)

> I don't know that I'd call them that. Kano's was actually not restoring so much as modernizing and embracing a more sport/competition rout, complete with the dan system from Go.
> 
> Funokoshi simply 'Japanized' Okinawan karate from what I understand.


 
my understandings on this are drawn from the standard fare, which tends to assert that the arts became 'watered down' at that point.  and here i am pretty much referring to most all 'modern ma'.  the modifications to sport changes the intent and in many cases makes certain techniques or motions 'illegal'.  these concessions are what differentiates modern arts from traditional, imo.  i can be taken to task on that definition in many ways, but that is how i view it in the overall. 

'teh d33dly' is purest sarcasm from me.  i train in the Ironic Fist.  I can simulate a neck break like nobody's business, and _most likely_ do glorious battle with my machetes, batons, daggers, and other weapons in my magnificent arsenal.

'cept i wont.

cause that's psycho... 


i was advised that my use of the word 'sociopathic' might be considered inappropriate or extreme.  i do believe that was the original intent behind martial arts systems. that term might seem a bit harsh, but killing or injuring other people isnt exactly sociable.  military systems and all ma, to one extent or another, have at their core a desensitization to violence.

and from some prior responses,  i see that i should be careful to flesh out my remarks a bit more. what i had say earlier was not a personal preference, just an observation. 






> Both Judo and Shotokan are considered traditional. Taekwondo is considered 'traditional' and is probably less 'traditional' than Shotokan. Even so, I do know what you mean. Seems that traditional today means anything that is self contained, has a belt system, and isn't MMA. I see 'traditional' as having become more of a format.


 
oh definately.  i should have explained my 'classification' system a little better.  i assumed that you, you know, knew what i meant...







> I am aware of the studies you referrence, but I don't consider being willing to kill one's enemies in war to be the same as being a sociopath. Being a sociopath can have (I would think) negative consequences in a working unit.


 
it's either controlled sociopathology or a necessary psychological profile in society, depending on how you want to look at it.  im sure that the incidence of 'bezerks' is less frequent these days.  in context of the thread, i tend to think they may have fostered them a bit more in 'teh old days'. 

regards,

mike.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 28, 2009)

Belts, gradings, curriculums are all 'modern' additions to martial arts, MMA is far more traditional than you are giving it credit for. If anything MMA is going back to the 'old' ways of teaching martial arts. Still as I said before, have a read of the book I recommmended and also have a good look at what Iain Abernethy does, his stuff on the karate grappling methods is very good.


----------



## Hagakure (Jan 28, 2009)

Is this debate STILL going on here? 

I'd not posted for some years, for a variety of reasons (mainly due to not practising any arts!) but this debate was around 2 or 3 years ago.

Stop it. All of you. You should ALL know that MY MA, is better than YOUR MA, even IF you do the same as me.

Big willy fights, that's all this boils down to. 

I'll start a new one. British sports cars are better than American sports cars. Yours don't corner well, are cheaply made, and lack the prestige of ours, simply because we're British don't you know.... Ok, so your companies own ours, but that's not the point!  I think we get the point. At least, I hope we do, or, I've made myself look very silly on the internet.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 28, 2009)

Hagakure said:


> Is this debate STILL going on here?
> 
> I'd not posted for some years, for a variety of reasons (mainly due to not practising any arts!) but this debate was around 2 or 3 years ago.
> 
> ...


 

:lfao:

Nice post!


----------



## Hagakure (Jan 28, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> :lfao:
> 
> Nice post!


 
Why thank you.


----------



## Steve (Jan 28, 2009)

Hagakure said:


> Is this debate STILL going on here?
> 
> I'd not posted for some years, for a variety of reasons (mainly due to not practising any arts!) but this debate was around 2 or 3 years ago.
> 
> ...


I would say that, overall, you're spot on with regards to self defense and cars.  But, I think you give us too much credit.  The Germans own Mini, the Malaysians own Lotus and MG/Rover is owned by the Chinese.  I think we still have the Rolls, the Mercedes and the Jag... and does Ford still own Aston Martin?  But those aren't really sports car companies. 

This has been a public service announcement.  

Oh, and my gung fu is strong...  strong enough to defend myself from you and your army of ninjas.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 28, 2009)

Rolls was purchassed by BMW and VW simultaneously about seven or eight years ago. I'm not sure how that can happen, but in the ensuing legal finageling, Rolls was divested of Bentlly, which went to Vee-Dub and BMW got Rolls Royce. Incidentally, BMW is the owner of Mini.

Jaguar, Rover, and Aston-Martin all got snatched up by Ford back in the nineties and Ford is desparately trying to sell them, if they haven't already. Tata was at least interested in the purchase of Jag, though I don't know if that went anywhere.

In consolation, Ford, BMW, and Vee-Dub were much more caring with the marques that they acquired than Mercedes was when they ate Chrysler. Jag and Aston have benefited greatly from Ford, though Ford never got anything like the return on their investment that they'd hoped for. In fact the cash tied up in acquiring and modernizing Jaguar in particular prevented Ford from doing much with their domestic line except trucks and the Mustang.

I'll stop here: this is waaaayyyy off topic.

Daniel


----------



## BrandonLucas (Jan 28, 2009)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Nope. Rolls was purchassed by BMW and VW simultaneously about seven or eight years ago. I'm not sure how that can happen, but in the ensuing legal finageling, Rolls was divested of Bentlly, which went to Vee-Dub and BMW got Rolls Royce. Incidentally, BMW is the owner of Mini.
> 
> Jaguar, Rover, and Aston-Martin all got snatched up by Ford back in the nineties and Ford is desparately trying to sell them, if they haven't already. Tata was at least interested in the purchase of Jag, though I don't know if that went anywhere.
> 
> ...


 
I'm pretty sure a BMW can take my TKD and squash it any day...and I'm willing to bet that Ford > MMA as well...


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 28, 2009)

Okay, this last direction of posts has given me an idea for a very silly thread that will likely only be appreciated by car nut martial artists. I'll post it in General Martial Arts.

Edit:  It is posted and here's the link: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1112792#post1112792

Daniel


----------



## Hagakure (Jan 28, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> I would say that, overall, you're spot on with regards to self defense and cars. But, I think you give us too much credit. The Germans own Mini, the Malaysians own Lotus and MG/Rover is owned by the Chinese. I think we still have the Rolls, the Mercedes and the Jag... and does Ford still own Aston Martin? But those aren't really sports car companies.
> 
> This has been a public service announcement.
> 
> Oh, and my gung fu is strong... strong enough to defend myself from you and your army of ninjas.


 

You may be right with the cars, it just seems as though all of our (UK) car manufacturers were at some point owned by either the Germans, or the Americans. Which, let's face it, they couldn't be any worse run than they were by UK management, or therein lack of, so I can't complain. 

Your gung fu will NEVER defeat my army of samurai-monkey-ninjas! My TMA will defeat any of your sport orientated MMA any day of the week, and twice on Sundays! Sorry... Let's not go there again. 

Apologies for creating an off-topic monster by the way.

Back on track. Ahem. MMA is better than TMA.

No it isn't TMA is better than MMA. 

No it isn't MMA is better than TMA.

No it isn't TMA is better than MMA ad finitum.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 28, 2009)

My TKD defeats all comers!  I have my army of tiny tigers, little dragons, and nano-ninjas who swarm my enemies at my command, muahaha!!  And my enemy never expects it, as they use their cuteness-chi power before the attack, muahaha!

And if that doesn't work, I use the black belt _club_: a billy club like weapon with a black belt wrapping the grip.

Daniel


----------

