# MMA is like Facebook?



## FrontKick-Jab-Punch

What I mean by that is, on FB we may have 100s of superficial friends, but that doesn't necessarily mean we've developed true, deep friendships there.  I heard someone argue that MMA is like that: by combining so many techniques and styles, a practitioner may be a skilled fighter overall, but doesn't have any depth in a particular style or art.  Thoughts?

How many MMAers started by getting a black belt in a particular style and then moved on to MMA vs. how many MMAers actually began training from scratch in MMA?  Is MMA a "style" of its own?  Is MMA what Bruce Lee's JKD started out to be (only using the most practical and effective pieces of an art, and realizing that it must be tailored to the individual rather than taught inflexibly to everyone)?  More thoughts?

I don't know a lot about MMA so I don't have any particular biases one way or another about it.  I'm looking forward to hearing your opinions!

FKJP


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Ninja focus on breaking your spirit rather than the body...if you break one the other follows...I would be very excited to see an experienced Ninjutsu practioner get in a MMA ring. Remember MMA is a sport...Ninpo Taijutsu is for life or death situations


----------



## Tony Dismukes

MMA as it stands today is really its own art, although it has foundations in a number of older systems.  In the past, most fighters came with strong backgrounds in other arts but these days more and more fighters are starting out training pure MMA from the beginning of their careers.  

As far as "depth" in a given art goes - there are plenty of MMA fighters who have way more depth in their chosen art(s) than anyone on this discussion board.  Renzo Gracie probably has 30,000+ hours of BJJ practice under his belt.  Randy Couture probably has an equivalent amount of experience in wrestling.  That's just in their primary arts.  In their "secondary" arts, they typically have more than enough training to qualify for black belt status.  (Note that I am talking about high-level fighters here.  If you look at an amateur fighter making his debut at a local venue, the expereince level will typically be much lower.)

Modern MMA is a competitive fighting sport which uses whatever techniques, tactics, principles, and strategies the competitors find will work in the environment they have to work in.  There is room for some debate about whether those techniques, tactics, principles, and strategies are truly the "most practical and effective" pieces of the arts they are derived from in general or just the most practical and effective peices in that particular environment.


----------



## Cyriacus

It depends. Its easy to wipe a brush over MMA as being a jumble of different things, but its only a jumble as far as the sheer number of things you need to know to not get caught out with "i have no idea what that is what do i do!". You focus on what you focus on, and it becomes less of a jumble. If youre into boxing, then you can learn MMA and emphasize your training in boxing. And so on.

But in MMA, if you dont learn the other sides of it youre at a disadvantage over someone who specializes in something different whos learnt your stuff especially so that they can circumvent it.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

I mean typically today every MMA fighter needs to have basic skill in:
.Judo/Wrestling 
.Karate/striking/boxing 

Kicking really is nothing special in the MMA world...all I ever see is that stupid Mui Tai side kick which is very easy to counter. 

What would really separate you as an expert fighter is if you have skill in:
.Counter Punching (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
.Grappling/Joint manipulation (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
.Warrior Spirit and endurance (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)

If you want to add some wing chun or kung fu to the mix that would only help


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

MMA is its own art with a million variations...one for every (legitimate) practitioner.


----------



## Cyriacus

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I mean typically today every MMA fighter needs to have basic skill in:
> .Judo/Wrestling
> .Karate/striking/boxing
> 
> Kicking really is nothing special in the MMA world...all I ever see is that stupid Mui Tai side kick which is very easy to counter.
> 
> What would really separate you as an expert fighter is if you have skill in:
> .Counter Punching (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> .Grappling/Joint manipulation (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> .Warrior Spirit and endurance (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> 
> If you want to add some wing chun or kung fu to the mix that would only help



So, youre suggesting making an even bigger jumble?

And the reason you dont see many of those systems in MMA often is because they have their own formats to work in. If you learn MMA, you dont make a habit of expressing your MMA training by going to kickboxing circuits. Or, maybe some people do, but normally if you wanna kickbox you go learn kickboxing.

Also, Counter Punching = Boxing, Grappling/Joint Manipulation = BJJ, and Warrior Spirit and Endurance = MMA Training and possibly some guy telling you youre a warrior.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Ninja focus on breaking your spirit rather than the body...if you break one the other follows...I would be very excited to see an experienced Ninjutsu practioner get in a MMA ring. Remember MMA is a sport...Ninpo Taijutsu is for life or death situations





Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I mean typically today every MMA fighter needs to have basic skill in:
> .Judo/Wrestling
> .Karate/striking/boxing
> 
> Kicking really is nothing special in the MMA world...all I ever see is that stupid Mui Tai side kick which is very easy to counter.
> 
> What would really separate you as an expert fighter is if you have skill in:
> .Counter Punching (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> .Grappling/Joint manipulation (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> .Warrior Spirit and endurance (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> 
> If you want to add some wing chun or kung fu to the mix that would only help



Wow. You really need to step away from the TV once in a while. 
I really hope that you're a troll.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Fight me if you don't like me. MMA is not a art it is a sport. Mixed Martial arts meaning its using previously existing martial arts. Anyone who thinks MMA is an actual style is an idiot.


----------



## Cyriacus

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Fight me if you don't like me. MMA is not a art it is a sport. Mixed Martial arts meaning its using previously existing martial arts. Anyone who thinks MMA is an actual style is an idiot.



Im sorry, i missed the part where anyone said anything to the contrary.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Fight me if you don't like me.


Is that how things are run these days? Whoever is the better fighter is right? Good to know.


> MMA is not a art it is a sport. Mixed Martial arts meaning its using previously existing martial arts. Anyone who thinks MMA is an actual style is an idiot.


So all other martial arts dont use previously existing martial arts? And if it does, that means its a sport? And if I don't understand that, I'm an idiot? Well, I guess I'm an idiot, so can you explain you're reasoning here?

Also, if ninjutsu is the backbone of all martial arts, wouldn't that mean all arts use ninjutsu, a previously existing martial art? If that's the case (which I doubt), wouldn't that make all styles just a sport? Or am I just being an idiot again, and missing something in the logic flow here?


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

I was talking to the guy who called me a troll. He didn't contribute anything to the conversation and insulted me.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Cyriacus said:


> Im sorry, i missed the part where anyone said anything to the contrary.


May be wrong, but I believe he's referring to me stating it's an art with a million different variations, and dirty dog saying he hopes that kalamazoo's a troll.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Let me clarify. When you play for sport (Judo/Karate/MMA) typically the losers are not dead.

And all martial arts came from China


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Let me clarify. When you play for sport (Judo/Karate/MMA) typically the losers are not dead.


Someone needs to die for it to be considered a martial art? Sorry if it seems like I'm just being obnoxious, but what you are saying honestly does not make logical sense to me at all.



> And all martial arts came from China


This is simply not true. Martial arts that originated in Africa or South America and originated centuries ago would have had almost no way to have originated in China. A good many of them do, but not all.


----------



## Cyriacus

kempodisciple said:


> May be wrong, but I believe he's referring to me stating it's an art with a million different variations, and dirty dog saying he hopes that kalamazoo's a troll.



Well, anyone who changes a system to suit themself is making a variation of it. Otherwise there wouldnt be multiple different systems in the first place.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I was talking to the guy who called me a troll. He didn't contribute anything to the conversation and insulted me.



Fair enough.



kempodisciple said:


> Is that how things are run these days? Whoever is the better fighter is right? Good to know.
> 
> So all other martial arts dont use previously existing martial arts? And if it does, that means its a sport? And if I don't understand that, I'm an idiot? Well, I guess I'm an idiot, so can you explain you're reasoning here?
> 
> Also, if ninjutsu is the backbone of all martial arts, wouldn't that mean all arts use ninjutsu, a previously existing martial art? If that's the case (which I doubt), wouldn't that make all styles just a sport? Or am I just being an idiot again, and missing something in the logic flow here?



Did Ninjutsu come from China, or was it made out of Chinese systems?



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Let me clarify. When you play for sport (Judo/Karate/MMA) typically the losers are not dead.
> 
> And all martial arts came from China



When you learn any given 'deadly' art these days you typically refrain from killing your training partners. Plenty of the stuff in 'sport' systems could be used to kill someone either by sustained use, sheer volume, or not being on a mat.



kempodisciple said:


> Someone needs to die for it to be considered a martial art? Sorry if it seems like I'm just being obnoxious, but what you are saying honestly does not make logical sense to me at all.
> 
> 
> This is simply not true. Martial arts that originated in Africa or South America and originated centuries ago would have had almost no way to have originated in China. A good many of them do, but not all.



Also, what country something comes from doesnt mean much when Chinese systems are radically different from one another.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

kempodisciple said:


> Someone needs to die for it to be considered a martial art? Sorry if it seems like I'm just being obnoxious, but what you are saying honestly does not make logical sense to me at all.
> 
> 
> This is simply not true. Martial arts that originated in Africa or South America and originated centuries ago would have had almost no way to have originated in China. A good many of them do, but not all.



True the martial way is to preserve life but when you are talking about arts that originated on the battlefield such as Ninjutsu. It would be foolish to think the techniques couldn't kill you. Budo Ninpo Taijutsu is an art of survival...thinking it as a sport would be a grave mistake should you ever fight a Ninja master!

And sure I guess savages hitting each other with sticks could be considered 'martial art' but when you talk sophisticated martial arts your talking China...thousands of years not centuries


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Cyriacus said:


> Did Ninjutsu come from China, or was it made out of Chinese systems?


Don't see a point to responding to everything else, as you are making fair points, that I tend to agree with. But, you did ask this question after my post, so I'll respond to it. I hope it's a rhetorical question, that you or someone else will provide me an answer for, but I honestly don't know the answer to this question. However, based on his signature suggesting it's the base for all MA's, it would seem that, in his mind at least (not saying that meaning his mind is correct or incorrect, I simply don't know enough to support or argue his claim), ninjutsu was not made out of chinese systems, but rather all chinese systems were made out of ninjutsu. 
That wasn't really the point I was getting at with my questions, just that many martial arts, at one point or another, had developed from another martial art, and are still considered martial arts. I see no reason why MMA should be any different.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

The history of the origins of Ninjutsu have always been shrouded in mystery


----------



## Cyriacus

kempodisciple said:


> Don't see a point to responding to everything else, as you are making fair points, that I tend to agree with. But, you did ask this question after my post, so I'll respond to it. I hope it's a rhetorical question, that you or someone else will provide me an answer for, but I honestly don't know the answer to this question. However, based on his signature suggesting it's the base for all MA's, it would seem that, in his mind at least (not saying that meaning his mind is correct or incorrect, I simply don't know enough to support or argue his claim), ninjutsu was not made out of chinese systems, but rather all chinese systems were made out of ninjutsu.
> That wasn't really the point I was getting at with my questions, just that many martial arts, at one point or another, had developed from another martial art, and are still considered martial arts. I see no reason why MMA should be any different.



I dont know the answer either. Thats why i asked


----------



## Cyriacus

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> The history of the origins of Ninjutsu have always been shrouded in mystery



Is the idea that its the backbone of all martial arts shrowded in mystery as well, or only the justification?


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Just because you can't trace its origins over thousands of years doesn't mean it has no historical importance.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> The history of the origins of Ninjutsu have always been shrouded in mystery



You make an awful lot of self-contradictory statements. You claim all (serious) martial arts come from China. And you claim that "Ninjutsu is the backbone of all martial arts". 
How is it possible that the Japanese art of Ninjutsu could both originate in China AND be the backbone of Chinese martial arts?
And your dismissal of any art originating in Africa or South America as "savages hitting each other with sticks" is frankly racist as well as ignorant. 
And then there's this claim. More rampant ignorance. The history of Nunjutsu is no more "shrouded" than that of most other arts.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Dirty Dog said:


> You make an awful lot of self-contradictory statements. You claim all (serious) martial arts come from China. And you claim that "Ninjutsu is the backbone of all martial arts".
> How is it possible that the Japanese art of Ninjutsu could both originate in China AND be the backbone of Chinese martial arts?
> And your dismissal of any art originating in Africa or South America as "savages hitting each other with sticks" is frankly racist as well as ignorant.
> And then there's this claim. More rampant ignorance. The history of Nunjutsu is no more "shrouded" than that of most other arts.



I don't claim Ninjutsu as the backbone our Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei does and I agree. I'm not racist. I hate you dog. Ninjutsu came from China (supposedly) and was perfected in Japan


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

My signature wins   MMA is just a sport meant for entertainment.


----------



## Drasken

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> And sure I guess savages hitting each other with sticks could be considered 'martial art' but when you talk sophisticated martial arts your talking China...thousands of years not centuries



That's a bold statement. So are you implying that only the Chinese were capable of a sophisticated way of defending themselves? Because I have to say that your views, if that is indeed what you are claiming, is wrong.

The Chinese did influence martial styles as much as any country at war with another influences their opponent. However there are many forms that are RADICALLY different from the Chinese styles of the period in which they both were developed. To say China influenced many styles would be correct, but to say China was the origin of all martial arts is not.

I would also like to point out that BJJ teaches you how to break limbs and kill someone if necessary. All arts used in MMA do have lethal techniques. However considering we aren't running a gladiator arena with fights to the death, you don't see lethal techniques used, or at least applied in a lethal manner. It doesn't mean the fighters are incapable of such.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I don't claim Ninjutsu as the backbone our Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei does



Can you show me a quote where Hatsumi Sensei makes this claim?



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> and I agree.



Oh, so you DO make the claim, then. Self contradictory much?



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I'm not racist.



Then it's probably best if you don't make such racist statements.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I hate you dog.



Why, because I point out how silly and self-contradictory your claims are? Wouldn't it be better if you actually SUPPORTED your claims instead?



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Ninjutsu came from China (supposedly) and was perfected in Japan



How can you possibly know this, when "The history of the origins of Ninjutsu have always been shrouded in mystery"?

You need to make up your mind and decide which claims you're going to support....


----------



## Cyriacus

Gents, dont feed the troll. Unless the food is delicious.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

African kung fu is weak


----------



## Drasken

Cyriacus said:


> Gents, dont feed the troll. Unless the food is delicious.



Hahaha usually I don't, and I don't plan on doing it anymore either. His claims are obviously not backed up by historical evidence and his last post made his intentions more than obvious.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Cyriacus said:


> Gents, dont feed the troll. Unless the food is delicious.



Sometimes feeding the troll is the best and fastest way to prove conclusively that they ARE a troll. Then the solution is simple.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Dirty Dog I actually have these things called books. Weird huh? Try reading Hatsumi's 'way of the ninja' or 'unarmed fighting techniques of the samurai' my sources are all there. Also I have this thing called A REAL TEACHER who I study martial arts under. My Sensei is 5th Dan in the bujinkan and would gladly support my statements besides that racist one


----------



## Cyriacus

Dirty Dog said:


> Sometimes feeding the troll is the best and fastest way to prove conclusively that they ARE a troll. Then the solution is simple.



Thats fair


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

If I'm a troll then you are all troll meat Nam Nam Nam Nam Nam IMA eat u

Way to get way off subject you guys and gang up on the Ninja...typical (spits in disgust)


----------



## Chris Parker

Miles (Kalamazoo).

You might want to step back a bit, as almost everything you've said here, with regards to martial arts, history, ninjutsu, MMA, and everything else, is wrong. In fact, the only thing I can't say is wrong is when you said your teacher is a fifth dan in the Bujinkan... but, bluntly, that doesn't really mean much either.

I sincerely hope that you reconsider making such statements, as you're not only making yourself look bad (and heading for a quick ban from the site, with the rules and policies here), but you are making the art you study look bad as well (by misrepresenting it and being a rather poor ambassador).


----------



## jks9199

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I was talking to the guy who called me a troll. He didn't contribute anything to the conversation and insulted me.



*If you feel that any member here has violated the site's Rules, please use the RTM button to notify the Staff.  (The RTM button is a black triangle with an exclamation point that you'll find at the bottom left side of each post.)  We'll look into it and take any appropriate action.  To respond in kind opens you up to various sanctions and punishments.  For example, a challenge post is an immediate and permanent ban...

jks9199
MT Asst. Administrator*


----------



## FrontKick-Jab-Punch

I'm amused-slash-horrified that my question brought about all this.  Then again, it wasn't my question that did it.  I've only been on Martial Talk for four days, and already I've learned that 50% of the stuff I post will degenerate into an imagined badassery showdown.  I mean, that's really what ALL message boards are like, but I somehow thought one with martial artists on it would be better, not worse.  

I'll go ahead and be the one to instigate this time, so that at least when people get pissy at my post, it can be about something I actually wrote. =)  I don't like MMA.  There is no art to it at all, so it breeds thugs.  It's like prison brawling.  Sometimes it's quite skilled, yes, but often it really isn't at all.  And watching people lie on the ground atop one another, barely moving, occasionally twitching out a punch, is about as entertaining as watching the "what's on TV" channel scroll by.  The video some poor kid posted about a supposed Shaolin monk vs. a TKD fighter was more entertaining than any MMA match I've seen lately (I mention him as he made the comment that the video showed a better fight than most MMA matches, and then 6000 people tried to message board-assassinate him)(I agree with him, although what he posted wasn't really a fight)(it doesn't matter).  I think people that learn a martial art truly and deeply first, and then want to go test it in MMA are okay, like our most recent winner who's name I forget at the moment but who actually has the right attitude (humble, polite, respectful), but people who try to "learn" MMA aren't getting any more out of it than if they took a cooking class and learned nothing but how to make microwave meals.  Even if they were really tasty, they aren't really the same as being a chef.

In sum: MMA is okay as a sport if you like being bored 80% of the time, and has no value as a true martial art.  There, is that offensive and instigatory enough?  Now you can all tell me how easily MMAers can kick my TSD *** and maybe some of my Kung Fu friends will come defend me and we can get a big canvas ring to fight in and the audience can shout "kumite!" as we fight and we can recreate "Bloodsport." =)

FKJP; sarcasm estimate: 75 - 85%


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Kalamazoo Ninja said:
			
		

> Dirty Dog I actually have these things called books. Weird huh? Try reading Hatsumi's 'way of the ninja' or 'unarmed fighting techniques of the samurai' my sources are all there. Also I have this thing called A REAL TEACHER who I study martial arts under. My Sensei is 5th Dan in the bujinkan and would gladly support my statements besides that racist one


Hey Miles, you seem to be pretty excited about studying ninjutsu.  I'm going to offer some advice which will probably be really helpful if you plan to continue that study.  If you're wondering about my credentials to offer said advice, I spent about 8 years in the Bujinkan and had acheived dan ranking before moving on to other arts.  You might also want to pay attention to Chris Parker, who has over two decades of ninjutsu experience.



			
				Kalamazoo Ninja said:
			
		

> Fight me if you don't like me.


Offering to fight someone because they are dismissive of your opinions is pretty much directly opposed to the principles of ninjutsu and the spirit of the Bujinkan.  It makes you and your teacher look bad.  It can also get you banned from this forum.



			
				Kalamazoo Ninja said:
			
		

> Anyone who thinks MMA is an actual style is an idiot.


An important aspect of historical ninjutsu was information gathering.  That means that if you have no direct experience of a subject, it would be wise to learn as much as possible from people who do have that experience before spouting out absolute pronouncements. 
I was the person who stated earlier that modern MMA has pretty much developed into its own style.  I don't compete in MMA, but I have taken quite a few MMA classes as a supplement to my BJJ practice.  I regularly train with people who compete in MMA at both amateur and professional levels.  My statement was based on that experience.  An actual ninja who was under the original impression that MMA was not a style would be asking me questions about the basis of my statement rather than dismissing it as an indicator of idiocy.


			
				Kalamazoo Ninja said:
			
		

> When you play for sport (Judo/Karate/MMA) typically the losers are not dead.


If you ever have to use your Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu techiques in real life, I certainly hope the losers will not end up dead.  I also certainly hope that you hope the same thing.


----------



## Cyriacus

FrontKick-Jab-Punch said:


> I'm amused-slash-horrified that my question brought about all this.  Then again, it wasn't my question that did it.  I've only been on Martial Talk for four days, and already I've learned that 50% of the stuff I post will degenerate into an imagined badassery showdown.  I mean, that's really what ALL message boards are like, but I somehow thought one with martial artists on it would be better, not worse.
> 
> I'll go ahead and be the one to instigate this time, so that at least when people get pissy at my post, it can be about something I actually wrote. =)  I don't like MMA.  *There is no art to it at all, so it breeds thugs.  It's like prison brawling.  Sometimes it's quite skilled, yes, but often it really isn't at all.* *And watching people lie on the ground atop one another, barely moving, occasionally twitching out a punch, is about as entertaining as watching the "what's on TV" channel scroll by.*  The video some poor kid posted about a supposed Shaolin monk vs. a TKD fighter was more entertaining than any MMA match I've seen lately (I mention him as he made the comment that the video showed a better fight than most MMA matches, and then 6000 people tried to message board-assassinate him)(I agree with him, although what he posted wasn't really a fight)(it doesn't matter).*  I think people that learn a martial art truly and deeply first, and then want to go test it in MMA are okay, like our most recent winner who's name I forget at the moment but who actually has the right attitude (humble, polite, respectful), but people who try to "learn" MMA aren't getting any more out of it than if they took a cooking class and learned nothing but how to make microwave meals.  Even if they were really tasty, they aren't really the same as being a chef.*
> 
> *In sum: MMA is okay as a sport if you like being bored 80% of the time, and has no value as a true martial art.*  There, is that offensive and instigatory enough?  *Now you can all tell me how easily MMAers can kick my TSD *** and maybe some of my Kung Fu friends will come defend me and we can get a big canvas ring to fight in and the audience can shout "kumite!" as we fight and we can recreate "Bloodsport." =)*
> 
> FKJP; sarcasm estimate: 75 - 85%



None of that was offensive, or instigatory. And frankly, noone is going to sing the praises of MMA over TSD. You cant honestly think any of us would.
See now, i for one wouldnt be upset with you because of your opinion. You dont have to like MMA. 

Id just like to point out that MMA isnt what you described at all, and that id like an example of a match where people were laying on the ground doing nothing. Id also like one where that wasnt the result of someone forcibly restraining the other person in order to have that effect. Yes, MMA is rough, so are alot of systems. They arent aesthetically pleasing. They arent as technically precise (may i remind you im not just referring to MMA). They dont have to appeal to you. But might i ask that you be repelled by them for reasons that can be justified, even if its just a simple 'i dont like it', rather than calling it an untechnical laying on top of each other prison brawl thug fest with no 'art' to it at all? Does it occur to you that the 'art' side of things is only a good thing if its something you want?

You couldnt pay me to learn an 'art'. But if thats what you like, i have nothing against what youre doing, and i dont look at you as being a dancer whos scared of doing any real violence. Now, however you just reacted to reading that, is how someone feels when you call them a thug or a prison brawler because they arent into the 'art'. Or when you boil a whole system down to laying on top of each other twisting, much like how i could say that you hop around each other jabbing pathetically at the air.
I wouldnt say any of those things because A: Theyre false, and B: Youre doing what you like. Youre learning an art, great. That doesnt change the fact that you couldnt pay me to learn an art, and that the absense of an art doesnt render something thuggish.

You dont like MMA as it is. Fine. But much like the imaginary criticisms of TSD i brought up, theyre reasons you pick up along the way that can be torn down very, very easily.

In closing, if MMA is your definition of thuggish and prisoner brawling, you may need to read up on how thugs do violence and what a prison brawl looks like 
See? Where not bad people. And may i please remind you that youre the one who came in here, and presented the idea that MMA is, as you put it, "What I mean by that is, on FB we may have 100s of superficial friends, but that doesn't necessarily mean we've developed true, deep friendships there. I heard someone argue that MMA is like that: by combining so many techniques and styles, a practitioner may be a skilled fighter overall, but doesn't have any depth in a particular style or art. Thoughts?"

Your viewpoint was obvious. None of us were offended. Did you expect us to be offended when you elaborated? We answered your question.


----------



## Steve

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Let me clarify. When you play for sport (Judo/Karate/MMA) typically the losers are not dead.
> 
> And all martial arts came from China


How many people have you killed?  I ask because I would like to gauge your credibility.


----------



## FrontKick-Jab-Punch

I owe you an apology, Cyriacus!  I haven't been on a message board for many years, and I keep forgetting how difficult it is to either come across as you mean to or understand how anyone else is meaning to come across. =)

I don't dislike MMA.  I don't really think it's like prison fighting. I was just being a pain.  You were, however, incredibly respectful even though you interpreted my comments as being genuine (which would make me kind of a d-bag).  So I think you're a pretty okay fellow.

My true belief is more like this: I personally enjoy studying a traditional martial art, by which I mean, one that includes cultural and philosophical aspects and historical background.  I wouldn't enjoy studying something that was so unidirectionally aimed at fighting.  But that's just my personal opinion and I accept that others may feel the reverse (as you might).  

As to what I've been watching, I'm afraid I was ruined by the Gracie Bros. destruction of the UFC many years ago when I was in my 20s - by which I mean, they were so effective that they turned a cool battle between a variety of fighting styles into everyone trying to take it to the ground and ending up writhing around boringly.  I'm not arguing effectiveness here, but entertainment.  20 year olds are shallow. =)

I do think that MMA is a bit superficial - that was honest.  I suppose to me, it's the difference between being an X-Ray Technician vs. a Radiologist or maybe an electrician vs. an electrical engineer? (which sounds nasty and is coming off wrong, too).  What I mean is that there's a technical aspect to things and a side that reflects depth and breadth of knowledge (sometimes tangential minutiae, I admit!) and I suppose I prefer the latter to the former.  But there's nothing wrong with preferring the former to the latter.

But I like starting crap sometimes, so forgive me. =)  Again, thank you for your intelligent and respectful response. 

FKJP


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Sorry. All this started over my signature. I'm not wrong tho. I apologize sincerely if I offended anyone not my intention. Forgive me (bows face down)


----------



## Tony Dismukes

FrontKick-Jab-Punch said:


> I owe you an apology, Cyriacus!  I haven't been on a message board for many years, and I keep forgetting how difficult it is to either come across as you mean to or understand how anyone else is meaning to come across. =)
> 
> I don't dislike MMA.  I don't really think it's like prison fighting. I was just being a pain.  You were, however, incredibly respectful even though you interpreted my comments as being genuine (which would make me kind of a d-bag).  So I think you're a pretty okay fellow.
> 
> My true belief is more like this: I personally enjoy studying a traditional martial art, by which I mean, one that includes cultural and philosophical aspects and historical background.  I wouldn't enjoy studying something that was so unidirectionally aimed at fighting.  But that's just my personal opinion and I accept that others may feel the reverse (as you might).
> 
> As to what I've been watching, I'm afraid I was ruined by the Gracie Bros. destruction of the UFC many years ago when I was in my 20s - by which I mean, they were so effective that they turned a cool battle between a variety of fighting styles into everyone trying to take it to the ground and ending up writhing around boringly.  I'm not arguing effectiveness here, but entertainment.  20 year olds are shallow. =)
> 
> I do think that MMA is a bit superficial - that was honest.  I suppose to me, it's the difference between being an X-Ray Technician vs. a Radiologist or maybe an electrician vs. an electrical engineer? (which sounds nasty and is coming off wrong, too).  What I mean is that there's a technical aspect to things and a side that reflects depth and breadth of knowledge (sometimes tangential minutiae, I admit!) and I suppose I prefer the latter to the former.  But there's nothing wrong with preferring the former to the latter.
> 
> But I like starting crap sometimes, so forgive me. =)  Again, thank you for your intelligent and respectful response.
> 
> FKJP



I'm afraid your original comment contained too many caveats and too much humility to be properly trollish.  To be really effective at starting a fight, you need to not only make a bunch of absolute pronouncements that display your ignorance of everything you are talking about, but you also need to state or imply that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot.

I will make a couple of responses to your stated actual beliefs ...




			
				FrontKick-Jab-Punch said:
			
		

> My true belief is more like this: I personally enjoy studying a traditional martial art, by which I mean, one that includes cultural and philosophical aspects and historical background.  I wouldn't enjoy studying something that was so unidirectionally aimed at fighting.



Totally reasonable.  Nothing wrong with that.



			
				FrontKick-Jab-Punch said:
			
		

> As to what I've been watching, I'm afraid I was ruined by the Gracie Bros. destruction of the UFC many years ago when I was in my 20s - by which I mean, they were so effective that they turned a cool battle between a variety of fighting styles into everyone trying to take it to the ground and ending up writhing around boringly.  I'm not arguing effectiveness here, but entertainment.



Understandable, but I will point out that the grappling becomes much more interesting for a spectator who understands what is going on and what the fighters are attempting to do in each position.  Also, since all the fighters know how to grapple these days, there are plenty of fights settled by stand-up striking.  The motivation for the Gracies to always take the fight to the mat was that most of their opponents had no idea of how to fight effectively in that situation.  Nowadays everybody knows how to grapple and how to strike, so you never know how a fight will end up.



			
				FrontKick-Jab-Punch said:
			
		

> I do think that MMA is a bit superficial - that was honest.  I suppose to me, it's the difference between being an X-Ray Technician vs. a Radiologist or maybe an electrician vs. an electrical engineer? (which sounds nasty and is coming off wrong, too).  What I mean is that there's a technical aspect to things and a side that reflects depth and breadth of knowledge (sometimes tangential minutiae, I admit!) and I suppose I prefer the latter to the former.



I'll have to disagree on the idea that MMA practitoners necessarily lack depth of knowledge.  Take a good look at Anderson Silva or Lyoto Machida.  I'd say that if you were to gather a random assortment of traditional martial arts instructors you would be lucky to find one in a thousand who would match their depth of technical knowledge.  (Then again, both of those gentlemen hold black belts in arts which are older than TSD, so perhaps you would consider that they are traditional martial artists in their own right.)


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Sorry. All this started over my signature. I'm not wrong tho. I apologize sincerely if I offended anyone not my intention. Forgive me (bows face down)



No, it really didn't have much to do with your signature.  I would suggest you take a look back at the post I directed at you a little earlier.


----------



## Cyriacus

FrontKick-Jab-Punch said:


> I owe you an apology, Cyriacus!  I haven't been on a message board for many years, and I keep forgetting how difficult it is to either come across as you mean to or understand how anyone else is meaning to come across. =)



I honestly had no idea. Yes, thats one of the downsides of text. Unlike vocal communication where you have tone of voice, and gestures, and active conversation, it isnt difficult to misinterpret someone 



> I don't dislike MMA.  I don't really think it's like prison fighting. I was just being a pain.  You were, however, incredibly respectful even though you interpreted my comments as being genuine (which would make me kind of a d-bag).  So I think you're a pretty okay fellow.



Hooray!



> My true belief is more like this: I personally enjoy studying a traditional martial art, by which I mean, one that includes cultural and philosophical aspects and historical background.  I wouldn't enjoy studying something that was so unidirectionally aimed at fighting.  But that's just my personal opinion and I accept that others may feel the reverse (as you might).



Id like to think ive gotten over the idea of fighting in the first place. At least, in the head to head man to man skill to skill sense. 



> As to what I've been watching, I'm afraid I was ruined by the Gracie Bros. destruction of the UFC many years ago when I was in my 20s - by which I mean, they were so effective that they turned a cool battle between a variety of fighting styles into everyone trying to take it to the ground and ending up writhing around boringly.  I'm not arguing effectiveness here, but entertainment.  20 year olds are shallow. =)



Play along for a sec - Watch the video, then after having watched it, read the text in white (so you cant incidentally read it before watching the video. Just highlight it. Its there, under the video).






Notice the part where they were both laying on the ground doing nothing? Thats because the dude on the bottom was being all kinds of choked, into unconsciousness by the end. However, i have to admit that since i like chokes, i may incidentally place a higher value on chokes. : )



> I do think that MMA is a bit superficial - that was honest.  I suppose to me, it's the difference between being an X-Ray Technician vs. a Radiologist or maybe an electrician vs. an electrical engineer? (which sounds nasty and is coming off wrong, too).  What I mean is that there's a technical aspect to things and a side that reflects depth and breadth of knowledge (sometimes tangential minutiae, I admit!) and I suppose I prefer the latter to the former.  But there's nothing wrong with preferring the former to the latter.
> 
> But I like starting crap sometimes, so forgive me. =)  Again, thank you for your intelligent and respectful response.
> 
> FKJP



Thats ok.


----------



## Steve

Cyriacus said:


> Notice the part where they were both laying on the ground doing nothing? Thats because the dude on the bottom was being all kinds of choked, into unconsciousness by the end. However, i have to admit that since i like chokes, i may incidentally place a higher value on chokes. : )
> 
> Thats ok.


Just so that everyone can see what happens, the choke starts at about 1:51 when the guy on the bottom shifts the guy on top's right arm across his body.  The guy on top gets rolls because he has no base now on that side, and ends up losing consciousness completely at about 2:02 where you can see his arm drop off the rope.

Prior to that, the guy on top was just basically stalling.

On topic, though, I would say my opinion is that MMA is largely its own style now, although there are what I'd consider "source" styles that are still very important.  More and more kids are getting into MMA having had no martial arts training outside of the MMA gym.

That said, any MMAist who is interested in competing at a high level will have to work very hard to refine techniques in all ranges of combat.  Many compete actively in grappling tournaments, including Judo, IBJJF tournaments and submission grappling leagues such as ADCC.  Many also have Muay Thai records, boxing records and will cross train with all kinds of martial artists to garner an edge in their sport.  The luckiest get to train with Steven Seagal.  (that's a joke)

Point is, like all other martial arts styles, there are going to be generalists and specialists.  There are people interested in making a career out of their style and others who do not.  Those who do will dig ever deeper into the well.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Think about it...when you say "I'm fighting in the style of Mixed Martial Arts" doesn't make sense to me. You should have a primary art as your style in my opinion.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Think about it...when you say "I'm fighting in the style of Mixed Martial Arts" doesn't make sense to me. You should have a primary art as your style in my opinion.



Hey Miles, did you see what I wrote earlier about ninjutsu and information gathering?  Here you have a situation where something (by your own admission) doesn't make sense to you.  That's understandable, since you don't have a background in MMA.  Now try to think like a ninja - gather information.  Can you come up with some questions which would clarify why people who do have MMA training would make statements that don't make sense to you?


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

There's a reason why it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense because Mixed Martial Arts is more of a genre than a style. I am simply saying in order to be effective blending MA you need a primary art to add other arts on top of that


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> There's a reason why it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense because Mixed Martial Arts is more of a genre than a style. I am simply saying in order to be effective blending MA you need a primary art to add other arts on top of that


Why? If someone's already done the blending for you, and made what they think is an effective MA all on its own, why would you need an art separate to be your primary, then blend arts, basically redoing all the work your instructors already done?


----------



## rframe

What did Georges St Pierre say after his fight with Diaz, "I knew he was good in boxing range and I wanted to stay out of his boxing range," St-Pierre said. *"I used my karate."*

Traditional martial arts are alive and well in MMA.  Most of the top contenders resumes are filled with multiple dan ranks in karate, taekwondo, etc.... along with expertise in jiu-jitsu, wrestling, boxing, muay thai, etc.


----------



## Flying Crane

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> African kung fu is weak



This is a really really funny statement.  For a few reasons.


----------



## Steve

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Think about it...when you say "I'm fighting in the style of Mixed Martial Arts" doesn't make sense to me. You should have a primary art as your style in my opinion.



Consider that "doesn't make sense to me" is not the same as "doesn't make sense."  Maybe you just don't get it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

kempodisciple said:


> Why? If someone's already done the blending for you, and made what they think is an effective MA all on its own, why would you need an art separate to be your primary, then blend arts, basically redoing all the work your instructors already done?


 because you are basically just street fighting without any formal training. Sure an MMA instructor can teach you moves that work in the octagon but then you are just learning the art for sport and not for survival outside the octagon. This is just my opinion. My opinion is NOT fact.


----------



## rframe

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Sure an MMA instructor can teach you moves that work in the octagon but then you are just learning the art for sport and not for survival outside the octagon.



This applies to every martial art.  Many arts focus on sports.  There are also many schools/dojos/instructors that "claim" to teach street self defense but teach completely idiotic ideas that will likely get their students maimed or killed in a street fight.  

If I were to blindly bet money on a fight between your your average jiu-jitsu focused MMA guy with some "sport" fight experience versus your average strip mall "I'm so street lethal I should be banned" ninjutsu guy, I'd take the MMA guy every time... and I'm quite sure I'd make money.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> because you are basically just street fighting without any formal training. Sure an MMA instructor can teach you moves that work in the octagon but then you are just learning the art for sport and not for survival outside the octagon. This is just my opinion. My opinion is NOT fact.



The thing is, people will tend to respect your opinion a lot more if it's based on knowledge and facts rather than assumptions about something you have never experienced or researched.  Come on ... be a ninja ... gather information ... you can do it!


----------



## Flying Crane

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> My opinion is NOT fact.



I don't think anyone will argue with you over this statement.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

I guarantee you if were talking hypothetical...Any MMA fighter would get destroyed if they went into the ring with Ninjutsu Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei!


----------



## rframe

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I guarantee you if were talking hypothetical...Any MMA fighter would get destroyed if they went into the ring with Ninjutsu Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei!


----------



## EddieCyrax

FrontKick-Jab-Punch said:


> I do think that MMA is a bit superficial - that was honest. I suppose to me, it's the difference between being an X-Ray Technician vs. a Radiologist or maybe an electrician vs. an electrical engineer? (which sounds nasty and is coming off wrong, too). What I mean is that there's a technical aspect to things and a side that reflects depth and breadth of knowledge (sometimes tangential minutiae, I admit!) and I suppose I prefer the latter to the former. But there's nothing wrong with preferring the former to the latter.
> 
> FKJP



I too am not a large fan of MMA, but I respect the talents of the fighers. BJJ is not my primary MA, but as many individuals have studied this art in preparing for their MMA goals, I felt I needed to at least understand the basic principles if I was ever confronted for my personal self-defense. I have begun supplementary training in BJJ to complement my Kempo. 

All this is to say I have learned that BJJ is equally as technical as my Kempo. My whole opinion on BJJ changed once I began training in it. I understand from an entertainment value there does not appear to be a lot of activity in the ground game, but ask one the fighters how much effort they are exerting and the various manuvers and counters that are being performed that might not be recognized by an untrained individual I think you might have a different opinion at least to the skill involved.

Again, I am not a big fan of MMA for my own reasons, and even though the ground arts are not my primary focus, I will never suggest these fighters do not have technical skills or the depth of knowledge in their craft.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Sorry. All this started over my signature. I'm not wrong tho. I apologize sincerely if I offended anyone not my intention. Forgive me (bows face down)




It actually has little or nothing to do with your signature. It has pretty much everything to do with you posting nonsense. Your signature is nonsense, but it pales in the face of some of the other statements you've made.

That being said, if you can avoid the tendancy to post fantasy ninjer nonsense, you will find that the members of this forum can provide a wealth of information on a huge range of topics.

On the topic at hand, as others have pointed out, if you can't understand why MMA might well be considered a style of it's own, then perhaps you should look within.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Think about it...when you say "I'm fighting in the style of Mixed Martial Arts" doesn't make sense to me. You should have a primary art as your style in my opinion.



Ninjutsu is seperated into various sections. Each section focuses on a different segment of skills. Some focus on weapons. Some on striking. Some on grappling. Some on joint locks.

Hey! Ninjutsu is an MMA!


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I guarantee you if were talking hypothetical...Any MMA fighter would get destroyed if they went into the ring with Ninjutsu Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei!


----------



## Dirty Dog

Steve said:


> Just so that everyone can see what happens, the choke starts at about 1:51 when the guy on the bottom shifts the guy on top's right arm across his body.  The guy on top gets rolls because he has no base now on that side, and ends up losing consciousness completely at about 2:02 where you can see his arm drop off the rope.
> 
> Prior to that, the guy on top was just basically stalling.
> 
> On topic, though, I would say my opinion is that MMA is largely its own style now, although there are what I'd consider "source" styles that are still very important.  More and more kids are getting into MMA having had no martial arts training outside of the MMA gym.
> 
> That said, any MMAist who is interested in competing at a high level will have to work very hard to refine techniques in all ranges of combat.  Many compete actively in grappling tournaments, including Judo, IBJJF tournaments and submission grappling leagues such as ADCC.  Many also have Muay Thai records, boxing records and will cross train with all kinds of martial artists to garner an edge in their sport.  The luckiest get to train with Steven Seagal.  (that's a joke)
> 
> Point is, like all other martial arts styles, there are going to be generalists and specialists.  There are people interested in making a career out of their style and others who do not.  Those who do will dig ever deeper into the well.



This. QFT.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Dirty Dog said:


> Ninjutsu is seperated into various sections. Each section focuses on a different segment of skills. Some focus on weapons. Some on striking. Some on grappling. Some on joint locks.
> 
> Hey! Ninjutsu is an MMA!



Check and mate Dog. You got me...almost forgot Ninjutsu's foundation is based on the 9 different schools of Budo Grandmaster Hatsumi inherited. Ahhh a fun little debate none the less.


----------



## Cyriacus

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I guarantee you if were talking hypothetical...Any MMA fighter would get destroyed if they went into the ring with Ninjutsu Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei!



Since were all hypothetical and stuff...
$20 says i could hypothetically take Hatsumi Sensei in his sleep using a weapon. :lurk:


----------



## Steve

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I guarantee you if were talking hypothetical...Any MMA fighter would get destroyed if they went into the ring with Ninjutsu Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei!



There's a difference between hypothesis and pretend.  If we are playing make believe, I'm the long lost Hatsumi heir... The product of a forbidden love between him and an American tourist.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Cyriacus said:


> Since were all hypothetical and stuff...
> $20 says i could hypothetically take Hatsumi Sensei in his sleep using a weapon. :lurk:


Doubt it.


----------



## Cyriacus

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Doubt it.



Youre welcome to have whatever doubts you like.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Hatsumi has mystic powers I would not mess with him or even joke


----------



## Steve

I stole his amulet.  Hatsumi never saw it coming, and now I have his mystical powers. Muwahahahaha.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Chris Parker

Miles. Stop. You are still wrong in, well, pretty much everything. Take that from someone who's been studying your art for twenty years, son. You're less than a year in, and a 9th Kyu, and frankly have a head full of fantasy, especially where the art and Hatsumi are concerned. Seriously, stop now. You really don't have a clue yet... at this point, you should be asking questions, not saying what you think is true (because, well, it ain't).


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

Ok thanks. I'm just a big dum dum with a small brain.


----------



## Chris Parker

No, you're just overly convinced with propaganda, and inexperienced. There's an old saying that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and this is a very good example of it... with a small amount of experience, and no real knowledge to speak of, you are believing you know what the reality is... and you don't. But that belief has lead you to post things that are grossly inaccurate, and refused to take any correction on them.


----------



## Chris Parker

You know, rather than just tell you "you're wrong", I think I might take each of your posts here and demonstrate how wrong they are, as well as why. I hope that you take that in the spirit of helping you (through correction), rather than being "picked on".



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Ninja focus on breaking your spirit rather than the body...if you break one the other follows...I would be very excited to see an experienced Ninjutsu practioner get in a MMA ring. Remember MMA is a sport...Ninpo Taijutsu is for life or death situations



Right, first one. No, "ninja" do not focus on "breaking the spirit rather than the body". Nor do the martial traditions presently associated with "ninjutsu". Nor is the focus on "breaking the body". The focus, in fact, varies depending on which system you're talking about. And, as far as being excited to see an "experienced Ninjutsu practitioner get in a MMA ring", don't be too hopeful about that. Due to very, very different training ideologies, methodologies, and more, frankly, the ninjutsu practitioner would be in a lot of trouble. When it comes to the idea of "MMA is a sport (well, yes, it's an approach geared around a competitive arena, sure).... Ninpo Taijutsu is for life or death situations", I almost don't know where to start with that... Firstly, get rid of the fantasy, as it's not helping you. Ninpo Taijutsu (Budo Taijutsu) is a modern construct, and is very removed from "life or death situations"... but, then again, so is modern (social) violence, for the most part. Then, you get to the older material that the modern "ninpo taijutsu" is based on... and a fair amount of that is nothing to do with "life or death", other than the weaponry skills. In fact, schools such as Gyokko Ryu teach not to take things to that extreme.

So, in short, your understanding of the focus is wrong, your estimation of the effectiveness in a different arena is off, and your thoughts on the areas of application for both are incorrect.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I mean typically today every MMA fighter needs to have basic skill in:
> .Judo/Wrestling
> .Karate/striking/boxing
> 
> Kicking really is nothing special in the MMA world...all I ever see is that stupid Mui Tai side kick which is very easy to counter.
> 
> What would really separate you as an expert fighter is if you have skill in:
> .Counter Punching (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> .Grappling/Joint manipulation (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> .Warrior Spirit and endurance (Ninjutsu/Jujutsu)
> 
> If you want to add some wing chun or kung fu to the mix that would only help



Right. Miles, you might have missed this when you signed up, but this site is set up as "the Friendly Martial Art Discussion Board".... referring to aspects of other people's arts as "stupid" is a quick way to get people off-side, and have your experience here far less than positive. But to the thrust of this post:

You show that you don't understand what the kick you're criticizing is (it's not a side kick, and really not that easy to stop/counter, especially not as easy as you think). And no-one is saying that there is anything special in MMA.... what it is is a collection of training approaches and methodologies that have been developed and proven to be effective in a particular arena. It doesn't need to be special, just to work. And, so you understand, the approaches of the "ninjutsu" methods just aren't designed for such an arena. And adding Wing Chun or Kung Fu (whatever you mean by that...) is, plainly, a terrible idea. You end up with a range of different approaches to the same idea, many of which directly contradict the others, which just leaves a mess and a lack of skill. As far as the three areas you think are needed to be "separate(d)... as an expert fighter", do you really think that MMA competitors don't have spirit and endurance? Or the ability to counter punch? Or grapple? Honestly, this post just shows how much you don't understand about either subject.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Fight me if you don't like me. MMA is not a art it is a sport. Mixed Martial arts meaning its using previously existing martial arts. Anyone who thinks MMA is an actual style is an idiot.



Again, "friendly martial arts discussion"... comments such as "fight me if you don't like me" can be interpreted as a challenge, and result in immediate banning. Same with calling anyone who disagrees with you an idiot. Cause, frankly, you're wrong. You're taking an absolute beginners understanding of martial arts (that it's to do with "techniques", and that if the same thing is used in different approaches, then it's the same thing), and failing to have any real insight into what a martial art really is.

A martial art is a particular approach, a methodology (that includes technical approaches, training methods, and specific contexts) designed to attain a specific goal. Now, that goal can be "win tournaments", or it can be "preserve old knowledge", or it can be "survive a sudden assault", or it can be "command warriors on a battlefield", or anything, really. The fact that the context is competitive (sport) doesn't make it any less a martial art. Oh, and so you know, the term "Mixed Martial Art" doesn't necessarily mean that it uses previously existing martial arts... it really is a distinct system/approach all of it's own these days. That name came from the early UFC days, where it was specific arts against each other (making the tournaments "mixed martial arts tournaments", not meaning that each competitor was using techniques from a range of arts, more that it wasn't just karate versus karate, or judo versus judo), and was later applied to a training and competing approach that took from a range of systems, in order to create a new whole from the disparate parts. So, uh, anyone who thinks it isn't an actual style hasn't got any clue about what makes something an actual style.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I was talking to the guy who called me a troll. He didn't contribute anything to the conversation and insulted me.



Your responce was far from the best, though, wouldn't you say? And, really, based on your posts, where you were dissing MMA, promoting "ninjutsu", and not listening to anyone, thinking you were a troll (here to stir up trouble, rather than discuss things) was pretty well a fair call. It was then up to you to demonstrate that he was wrong, not to prove him right with a post that goes against the ToS (Terms of Service) you agreed to when signing up here.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Let me clarify. When you play for sport (Judo/Karate/MMA) typically the losers are not dead.
> 
> And all martial arts came from China



Again, that's not the aim of the techniques in ninjutsu either. And no, all martial arts did not come from China. There is no one place all martial arts came from.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> True the martial way is to preserve life but when you are talking about arts that originated on the battlefield such as Ninjutsu. It would be foolish to think the techniques couldn't kill you. Budo Ninpo Taijutsu is an art of survival...thinking it as a sport would be a grave mistake should you ever fight a Ninja master!
> 
> And sure I guess savages hitting each other with sticks could be considered 'martial art' but when you talk sophisticated martial arts your talking China...thousands of years not centuries



Ninjutsu did not originate on the battlefield. And, when it comes to arts that are "battlefield arts", that doesn't mean what you think it does... it has little to nothing to do with fighting on the field itself. Your history is also a fair bit off, by the way. You can pre-date things in China with systematic approaches to combative engagements (yep, even sports!) in ancient Greece, Egypt, Turkey.... 

Oh, and stop with the "deadly ninja master" thing. You need to understand context before you can make any assessment like that... and your assessment is off in a number of ways.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> The history of the origins of Ninjutsu have always been shrouded in mystery



Depends who you talk to. But really, that doesn't help your arguments at all.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Just because you can't trace its origins over thousands of years doesn't mean it has no historical importance.



Yeah... not sure of the context you're meaning here... I didn't see anyone say anything about historical importance at all, nor about anything being traced (or not) over thousands of years....



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I don't claim Ninjutsu as the backbone our Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei does and I agree. I'm not racist. I hate you dog. Ninjutsu came from China (supposedly) and was perfected in Japan



Actually, Hatsumi has quoted Takamatsu as saying that ninjutsu is the essence of martial arts (not the backbone), and that is mainly down to a particular emphasis based on his training and teachings. I don't think you understand it enough to say if you agree with it or not. Ninjutsu did not come from China, though, but (according to the teachings of a few systems) the original methods that would mature into a couple of the Ryu can trace themselves back to China. That's a far cry from saying that "ninjutsu originated in China", though. Even if you are taking the idea of Sun Tzu's Art of War as being the foundation, that's not really the same thing either.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> My signature wins   MMA is just a sport meant for entertainment.



Your signature is a flawed misunderstanding of a wider quote and a deeper context. And no, MMA is not meant "just for entertainment".



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> African kung fu is weak



Do you really need me to point out what is wrong with this?



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Dirty Dog I actually have these things called books. Weird huh? Try reading Hatsumi's 'way of the ninja' or 'unarmed fighting techniques of the samurai' my sources are all there. Also I have this thing called A REAL TEACHER who I study martial arts under. My Sensei is 5th Dan in the bujinkan and would gladly support my statements besides that racist one



Look, I'm going to be blunt. Hatsumi is the head of the Bujinkan, but that doesn't mean that what he puts out there is accurate, or correct. I know the books very well (hell, they're sitting next to me as I type this), but they don't actually support your comments. And, I'd suggest, neither would your instructor (if he does, get a different one). That's not uncommon, though, so don't feel too put out by it. I have a student who has posted here, giving his take on things that I've taught.... and misunderstanding them fairly completely. As a response, I would jump on his comments, and correct them (again).... but it shows that you might be fairly mistaken about what you think your instructor is telling you. At your level of experience, you just don't have the depth of resource (experience) to understand what you're being told yet.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> If I'm a troll then you are all troll meat Nam Nam Nam Nam Nam IMA eat u
> 
> Way to get way off subject you guys and gang up on the Ninja...typical (spits in disgust)



Miles, they don't care that you study ninjutsu (you're not a ninja, by the way). They care about how you've conducted yourself. This post didn't help.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Sorry. All this started over my signature. I'm not wrong tho. I apologize sincerely if I offended anyone not my intention. Forgive me (bows face down)



No it didn't. Yes, you are wrong. If you can take that on board, then there's no problem.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Think about it...when you say "I'm fighting in the style of Mixed Martial Arts" doesn't make sense to me. You should have a primary art as your style in my opinion.



And why isn't MMA a primary art these days? You have MMA gyms, teaching MMA as a distinct class, which makes it a distinct and separate style. There are things allowed in MMA that just don't work in the contexts of the source systems, so a new art is required to bring it together as a coherent whole.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> There's a reason why it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense because Mixed Martial Arts is more of a genre than a style. I am simply saying in order to be effective blending MA you need a primary art to add other arts on top of that



The reason it doesn't make sense to you is that you don't understand what makes something a distinct style, Miles. Adding arts on top of each other is a recipe for poor skills.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> because you are basically just street fighting without any formal training. Sure an MMA instructor can teach you moves that work in the octagon but then you are just learning the art for sport and not for survival outside the octagon. This is just my opinion. My opinion is NOT fact.



And, again, why does that make it not a martial art itself? Every art is designed with a single context (usage) in mind (although most can be pressed into usage in other contexts/environments), why is a sporting, or octagon one less than another? How do you view wrestling, then? It's designed for sporting contests, and it's not therefore "street fighting", is it? How about Kendo? Very much sporting, but nothing to do with street fighting... 

My point is that your opinion is, as you say, not fact... but it's also not well informed.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> I guarantee you if were talking hypothetical...Any MMA fighter would get destroyed if they went into the ring with Ninjutsu Grandmaster Hatsumi Sensei!



No, they wouldn't. And, before you argue, Hatsumi would probably say the same thing himself. He's under no illusions about being undefeatable.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Check and mate Dog. You got me...almost forgot Ninjutsu's foundation is based on the 9 different schools of Budo Grandmaster Hatsumi inherited. Ahhh a fun little debate none the less.



No, ninjutsu's foundation is not the 9 Ryu that Hatsumi heads... but Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu is (as well as other things, including, and here is the part you might not like, Hatsumi's lack of care or understanding about a large amount of comabative realities, in favour of creative applications... so nothing to do with being effective in "life or death" combat). It is not an MMA in any way whatsoever.



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Doubt it.



Hatsumi has gone on record a number of times saying how easily even he could be beaten... whether a lucky shot, a gun, or just someone getting the jump on him. So, in the hypothetical, Cyriacus would have a fairly good chance....



Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Hatsumi has mystic powers I would not mess with him or even joke



No, he doesn't. You really need to get over the propaganda, it just makes you look naive and gullible.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Hatsumi has mystic powers I would not mess with him or even joke



The sad thing is that I have a feeling you actually believe this.


----------



## Kalamazoo Ninja

I'm 23 and still live w my mom


----------



## Chris Parker

So? It doesn't stop you from listening to what you're being told by people who know a lot more than you do.


----------



## Kframe

Chris parker, I don't want to quoute your entire post, so please forgive me.  You mentioned that a Bujinkan Budo Tai Jitsu pratictioner would be in trouble in the Octagon. May I ask Why? I have been watching some videos of BBT and it seams like a solid martial art, with strikes, and throws and joint locks and chokes.  I was impressed with a  number of things I saw in the videos, breakfalling techniques, and weapon techniques looked good to me. Such as the various knife defenses.   Taking the weapons out of the question, what aspects of the striking and grappling of the martial art leave something to be desired in the octagon?    I know that mma gyms focus a lot on conditioning,( my mma gym's have helped me lose a lot of weight) could conditioning be what your referring to?


----------



## Chris Parker

You're looking at the wrong things... Realistically, a throw is a throw, a strike is a strike etc, but the application of such (the context, including the cultural surroundings) are where the real differences lie. And the tactical approach for the arts found in the Bujinkan are, in some cases, diametrically opposed to those that have a place in the octagon.


----------



## Kframe

So it because of the differences in application, influenced by culture and tactical therorys of the arts that make it unsuitable for the octagon.  Those same principles that make it unsuitable for the octagon, do they make it suitable for the street?


----------



## Chris Parker

Hmm, that's not as easy to answer.... from a technical standpoint, if you keep all the movement "traditional", then yeah, it's really not suited for modern violence. But if you're looking at the principles, tactics, strategies, then they are far more suited to the street than to a competitive arena.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

I havent looked up the videos, so this is based on kframes and chris parkers statements...but if its the case where the techniques are viable and the context i not, wouldn't it be relatively simple to train someone and help them adapt their techniques to the octagan in the three months before a match? Or was your comment referring to if they entered the octagan with no prior warning/adaption training?


----------



## Chris Parker

No. Again, the techniques aren't the point. To do what you're suggesting is to remove what makes it the art it is, and turn it into something else, which defeats the idea of using that art in that arena.


----------



## Drasken

People get too hung up on techniques and tend to forget the philosophy and approach the style was developed under. Technically speaking, I'm sure ninjutsu or Aikido or really ANY style could be trained and adapted for the ring. But doing so takes much more away from a style than just modifying techniques.
MMA was developed for a specific purpose. It fills this niche very effectively and should be respected for what it is. Other styles do the same. Now training a style in a way that it can be effective in modern times is very useful in my opinion, but you also have to keep in mind the philosophy and traditional approach the art has in various situations. It's a delicate balance.

That being said, if I stepped into the octagon with an MMA fighter, I'd probably do alright with my Krav Maga training. But if I tried a point sarring tournament such as the ones from TKD or various forms of Karate, well I would not make it past the first round most likely. It has less to do with the effectiveness of the style and more with the niche it is meant to fill.

It's like I said in a debate the other night with some friends of mine. Effectiveness doesn't mean universal usefulness. A shark is one of the most efficient killing machines on the planet. Take it out of the water and it is still dangerous. Any experienced deep sea fisherman can tell you that. But it isn't even half as effective as it would be in its own element.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

I dont think that I stated correctly what I was asking. It was not if Bujinkan could be used in an MMA setting. It was if a person with a Bujinkan background, could use those techniques to learn MMA as an art well enough to successfully use it in the ring. I wasn't implying Bujinkan would excel in that sporting area, but that a Bujinkan practitioner could, in those three months, could become proficient enough in MMA to do well in it.


----------



## Chris Parker

No, they'd be better off training MMA. A large amount of the repertoire found in the ninjutsu schools is unfeasible in a competitive setting, for a range of reasons, not least of all is the different time-line applied.


----------



## frank raud

kempodisciple said:


> I dont think that I stated correctly what I was asking. It was not if Bujinkan could be used in an MMA setting. It was if a person with a Bujinkan background, could use those techniques to learn MMA as an art well enough to successfully use it in the ring. I wasn't implying Bujinkan would excel in that sporting area, but that a Bujinkan practitioner could, in those three months, could become proficient enough in MMA to do well in it.


The UFC has been around for 20 years, there is no art that will provide you with enough solid basics in MMA that 3 months training will make you proficient. Brock Lesnar was a division 1 wrestler prior to his pro wrestling career, and a beast of a man, who took a year to train in preparation for his first MMA fight, which he promptly lost. When he won, it was usually by overpowering his opponents, most of whom he out weighed by 40-50 pounds of muscle. The days of "6 months of sprawl training" are long gone.


----------



## martial sparrer

I realized that the reason why there are only a couple kicks that are used constantly is because if you miss, have bad technique, you end up giving your back to be taken down.....for the life of me I couldn't understand why fighters in ufc don't do side kicks....but your body is at the side and you are probably leaning away with bad balance, or someone can catch your foot etc.  most fighters tend to use front kicks, roundhouse to leg, or high round to head so that they are still facing their opponent.  gsp doesn't even do anymore spin back kicks


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

frank raud said:


> The UFC has been around for 20 years, there is no art that will provide you with enough solid basics in MMA that 3 months training will make you proficient. Brock Lesnar was a division 1 wrestler prior to his pro wrestling career, and a beast of a man, who took a year to train in preparation for his first MMA fight, which he promptly lost. When he won, it was usually by overpowering his opponents, most of whom he out weighed by 40-50 pounds of muscle. The days of "6 months of sprawl training" are long gone.


Sorry for not replying...i had, but I guess i forget to click post reply...
With my question, it was under the idea that the art bujinkan, according tot he earlier post, teaches all the same techniques as MMA, just with different contextual uses.Wrestling, nor any other art that I know of, does that, which makes me wonder if that statement about bujinkan is true, since if it was it wouldn't make sense (to me) that no one had ever gone from bujinkan to MMA, or learned bujinkan when cross training for MMA (which was the direction i was planning on going with my original question)


----------



## Tony Dismukes

kempodisciple said:


> Sorry for not replying...i had, but I guess i forget to click post reply...
> With my question, it was under the idea that the art bujinkan, according tot he earlier post, teaches all the same techniques as MMA, just with different contextual uses.Wrestling, nor any other art that I know of, does that, which makes me wonder if that statement about bujinkan is true, since if it was it wouldn't make sense (to me) that no one had ever gone from bujinkan to MMA, or learned bujinkan when cross training for MMA (which was the direction i was planning on going with my original question)



I would say that statement is not true. The techniques I learned in the Bujinkan are very different from the techniques I've learned in MMA.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Due to this quote, it sounded like MMA and Bujinkan were a lot more similar then I had recently known, which is what had confused me...





Kframe said:


> Chris parker, I don't want to quoute your entire post, so please forgive me.  You mentioned that a Bujinkan Budo Tai Jitsu pratictioner would be in trouble in the Octagon. May I ask Why? I have been watching some videos of BBT and it seams like a solid martial art, with strikes, and throws and joint locks and chokes.  I was impressed with a  number of things I saw in the videos, breakfalling techniques, and weapon techniques looked good to me. Such as the various knife defenses.   Taking the weapons out of the question, what aspects of the striking and grappling of the martial art leave something to be desired in the octagon?    I know that mma gyms focus a lot on conditioning,( my mma gym's have helped me lose a lot of weight) could conditioning be what your referring to?[/QUOTEYour other quote was what I had assumed, which would explain why people dont ever cross train in Bujinkan.


----------



## Chris Parker

martial sparrer said:


> I realized that the reason why there are only a couple kicks that are used constantly is because if you miss, have bad technique, you end up giving your back to be taken down.....for the life of me I couldn't understand why fighters in ufc don't do side kicks....but your body is at the side and you are probably leaning away with bad balance, or someone can catch your foot etc.  most fighters tend to use front kicks, roundhouse to leg, or high round to head so that they are still facing their opponent.  gsp doesn't even do anymore spin back kicks



Uh... no.



kempodisciple said:


> Sorry for not replying...i had, but I guess i forget to click post reply...
> With my question, it was under the idea that the art bujinkan, according tot he earlier post, teaches all the same techniques as MMA, just with different contextual uses.Wrestling, nor any other art that I know of, does that, which makes me wonder if that statement about bujinkan is true, since if it was it wouldn't make sense (to me) that no one had ever gone from bujinkan to MMA, or learned bujinkan when cross training for MMA (which was the direction i was planning on going with my original question)



No, as Tony said, they are quite different... in most areas. The basic groupings are similar, and the point I was making earlier was that it wasn't that the throws (for instance) wouldn't physically "work", it was that they weren't designed (in the way they are set up, executed, performed, and so on) to be employed in an MMA context.



Tony Dismukes said:


> I would say that statement is not true. The techniques I learned in the Bujinkan are very different from the techniques I've learned in MMA.



Yep!



kempodisciple said:


> Due to this quote, it sounded like MMA and Bujinkan were a lot more similar then I had recently known, which is what had confused me...
> 
> 
> Kframe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chris parker, I don't want to quoute your entire post, so please forgive me.  You mentioned that a Bujinkan Budo Tai Jitsu pratictioner would be in trouble in the Octagon. May I ask Why? I have been watching some videos of BBT and it seams like a solid martial art, with strikes, and throws and joint locks and chokes.  I was impressed with a  number of things I saw in the videos, breakfalling techniques, and weapon techniques looked good to me. Such as the various knife defenses.   Taking the weapons out of the question, what aspects of the striking and grappling of the martial art leave something to be desired in the octagon?    I know that mma gyms focus a lot on conditioning,( my mma gym's have helped me lose a lot of weight) could conditioning be what your referring to?
> 
> 
> 
> Your other quote was what I had assumed, which would explain why people dont ever cross train in Bujinkan.
Click to expand...


Now, here's where it gets a little messier... I know of a number of people "cross-training" in the Bujinkan (as a primary or secondary art), while training in Judo, or BJJ, or FMA, or Kendo, or Iaido, or many other things. I also know of a couple of Bujinkan people who have entered MMA-style competitions as well... but, to be frank, very little "Bujinkan" comes out in the ring. For very good reason.


----------



## SandaBoxing

Kalamazoo Ninja said:


> Ninja focus on breaking your spirit rather than the body...if you break one the other follows...I would be very excited to see an experienced Ninjutsu practioner get in a MMA ring. Remember MMA is a sport...Ninpo Taijutsu is for life or death situations








Keep on living the dream....Most Ninjas were farmers and crap, who had no chance 1 on 1 vs. the well trained and battle hardened Samurais. So the Ninjas mostly resorted to backstabbing (literally), sniping with arrows and poisoning food and water to kill their enemies. They were cowards pretty much.


----------



## Chris Parker

SandaBoxing said:


> Keep on living the dream....Most Ninjas were farmers and crap, who had no chance 1 on 1 vs. the well trained and battle hardened Samurais. So the Ninjas mostly resorted to backstabbing (literally), sniping with arrows and poisoning food and water to kill their enemies. They were cowards pretty much.



Hmm.

First off, welcome to the forum.

Secondly, you're replying to a post from over a year ago, which has been thoroughly and completely countered by the membership here (including myself), from a poster who hasn't been here in nearly as long.

Thirdly, you're completely wrong in your own post, on all counts. Ninja were not farmers, anymore than samurai were farmers (some were, particularly the more rural ones, but that's unnecessarily complicating things&#8230, they were, more commonly than anything, samurai. Ninjutsu was simply the skills of information gathering and espionage, including scouting, spying, recon, spreading mis-information, and so on. They were not, let's be clear, "assassins" in any way, shape, or form. There is no account of any "ninja assassination" in any historical records of Japan, but there are plenty of cases of samurai engaging in such actions. As an example, here is part of a recent Facebook post I put on my schools page:



> What is Ninjutsu?
> 
> For many, their impression of what Ninjutsu is comes primarily from entertainment media&#8230; movies, television, and (these days), the internet, including such memes as the one shown here. But, of course, these aren't quite the same as the reality.
> 
> Ninjutsu can have two different definitions, depending on if you're looking at historical uses of the term, or modern. Historically, the term doesn't even refer to combative martial arts&#8230; it's a skill set centred around information gathering and espionage. It was simply another skill set in the arsenal of the various armies, just as it is today. Over time, certain areas of Japan became quite synonymous with these skills&#8230; to the point that warriors from those areas (Iga and Koga/Kohka) came to be referred to specifically as "ninja" (although, at the time, they were simply called "Iga no Bushi/Koga no Bushi"&#8230; meaning "warriors from Iga/Koga").
> 
> Today, the term refers more to the combative martial arts associated with those warriors from Iga and Koga&#8230; although the only ones believed to have survived are a small number from the Iga region. All modern Ninjutsu organisations that claim to teach authentic Ninjutsu are actually most often teaching those martial systems from these areas of Japan. And, being more traditional Japanese arts, they don't look much like what's seen in the movies.



And, finally, that video? Yeah&#8230; the kid in it doesn't have anything to do with ninjutsu, ninja, or anything of the kind. In fact, I have no idea where they got the idea that he was&#8230; unless he suggested it himself&#8230; all it was was rather low-level MMA from him, and he was (rightly) outclassed by someone better. Doesn't mean anything about ninjutsu, though.


----------



## SandaBoxing

Chris Parker said:


> Hmm.
> 
> Thirdly, you're completely wrong in your own post, on all counts. Ninja were not farmers, anymore than samurai were farmers (some were, particularly the more rural ones, but that's unnecessarily complicating things), they were, more commonly than anything, samurai. Ninjutsu was simply the skills of information gathering and espionage, including scouting, spying, recon, spreading mis-information, and so on. They were not, let's be clear, "assassins" in any way, shape, or form. There is no account of any "ninja assassination" in any historical records of Japan, but there are plenty of cases of samurai engaging in such actions. As an example, here is part of a recent Facebook post I put on my schools page:



Thanks for the info. I shouldn't have made such statements about Ninjas as I'm no expert nor really have that much interest in finding out. While I did enjoy what you posted about them and will accept it as more informed than my unresearched version.



> And, finally, that video? Yeah the kid in it doesn't have anything to do with ninjutsu, ninja, or anything of the kind. In fact, I have no idea where they got the idea that he was unless he suggested it himself all it was was rather low-level MMA from him, and he was (rightly) outclassed by someone better. Doesn't mean anything about ninjutsu, though.



Yea, that was more of a fun video that I posted because  there really aren't enough Ninja vs. MMA videos to prove anything (I think there's 2). In general, fighting is fighting and MMA is going to beat most TMA's because we train and do, knock people out as part of our training and this isn't even stepping into the cage to fight yet. In MMA, you can't help but get better at fighting than those who don't fight nor spar hard. Based on what you wrote about Ninjitsu, it's seems to be just another variation of Japanese Jujutsu and maybe some Karate; with authentic Ninjitsu being more about espionage, so watered down or non-authentic Ninjitsu may even be better for fighting than the real thing. I was training with a Traditional Japanese Jujutsu group that partnered with a Ninjitsu one, and they train a lot of what we trained in Jujutsu.


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> Hmm.
> 
> First off, welcome to the forum.
> 
> Secondly, you're replying to a post from over a year ago, which has been thoroughly and completely countered by the membership here (including myself), from a poster who hasn't been here in nearly as long.
> 
> Thirdly, you're completely wrong in your own post, on all counts. Ninja were not farmers, anymore than samurai were farmers (some were, particularly the more rural ones, but that's unnecessarily complicating things&#8230, they were, more commonly than anything, samurai. Ninjutsu was simply the skills of information gathering and espionage, including scouting, spying, recon, spreading mis-information, and so on. They were not, let's be clear, "assassins" in any way, shape, or form. There is no account of any "ninja assassination" in any historical records of Japan, but there are plenty of cases of samurai engaging in such actions. As an example, here is part of a recent Facebook post I put on my schools page:
> 
> 
> 
> And, finally, that video? Yeah&#8230; the kid in it doesn't have anything to do with ninjutsu, ninja, or anything of the kind. In fact, I have no idea where they got the idea that he was&#8230; unless he suggested it himself&#8230; all it was was rather low-level MMA from him, and he was (rightly) outclassed by someone better. Doesn't mean anything about ninjutsu, though.




What does ninjitsu sparring look like by the way?


----------



## Chris Parker

SandaBoxing said:


> Thanks for the info. I shouldn't have made such statements about Ninjas as I'm no expert nor really have that much interest in finding out. While I did enjoy what you posted about them and will accept it as more informed than my unresearched version.



Okay.



SandaBoxing said:


> Yea, that was more of a fun video that I posted because  there really aren't enough Ninja vs. MMA videos to prove anything (I think there's 2).



Scott Morris and Steve Jennum are probably the two best known MMA competitors with a "ninjutsu" background&#8230; the other clips I've seen (including the one you posted) are kids who don't have any connection to ninjutsu at all, outside of some deluded fantasy.

Okay, the next part is going to be broken up a bit&#8230; hopefully the context of your comments will stay intact.



SandaBoxing said:


> In general, fighting is fighting



Actually, no, it's not. It's highly context-dependant. The forms of fighting encountered and needed by a sports competitor are fairly different to the requirements of a self-defence practitioner, which is different again to a military form of fighting, different again to what's encountered and needed by LEO's and security personnel, which is very different to that encountered in various historical systems&#8230; even in modern societies, differences in cultures give you wild differences in what constitutes "fighting".



SandaBoxing said:


> and MMA is going to beat most TMA's because we train and do, knock people out as part of our training



I do hope you're not trying to imply some form of superiority there&#8230; or that such things are unique to MMA training&#8230; 



SandaBoxing said:


> and this isn't even stepping into the cage to fight yet.



Well, I've knocked people out, both in class and outside of it, and all that without sparring at all&#8230; hmm&#8230; 

Of course, it has to be said that if your'e knocking each other out before getting into a cage, then there's some issues to be looked at in your training approach&#8230; 



SandaBoxing said:


> In MMA, you can't help but get better at fighting than those who don't fight nor spar hard.



Actually, no. The thing with sparring is that it is designed to allow you to come up with your own approach, meaning that it is highly personalised in terms of it's ability to engender fighting skills. If you're naturally talented, then it helps greatly, if you're not so naturally skilled, it can be a much harder road than others.

But again, are you really saying that MMA is the only approach that covers such things? Hmm&#8230; 



SandaBoxing said:


> Based on what you wrote about Ninjitsu, it's seems to be just another variation of Japanese Jujutsu



Hmm&#8230; no. Oh, and for the record, it's "ninjutsu", not "ninjitsu". What is currently taught within Ninjutsu schools (the Bujinkan, Genbukan, Jinenkan etc), when it comes to the combative skills, is taken largely from Jujutsu systems (although the actual terminology varies&#8230; the standard common term is "Taijutsu", or "body skills"), yeah&#8230; but that's a bit different.



SandaBoxing said:


> and maybe some Karate;



Nope.



SandaBoxing said:


> with authentic Ninjitsu being more about espionage,



Historic ninjutsu, authentic is another kettle of fish&#8230; 



SandaBoxing said:


> so watered down or non-authentic Ninjitsu may even be better for fighting than the real thing.



When dealing with historical martial systems, that's really besides the point.



SandaBoxing said:


> I was training with a Traditional Japanese Jujutsu group that partnered with a Ninjitsu one, and they train a lot of what we trained in Jujutsu.



Physically, yeah. Of course, each system has it's own idiosyncrasies&#8230;


----------



## Chris Parker

drop bear said:


> What does ninjitsu sparring look like by the way?



We don't spar&#8230; at least, not in the sense that you're familiar with. It's counter-productive, to be frank.


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> We don't spar&#8230; at least, not in the sense that you're familiar with. It's counter-productive, to be frank.



How do you know that guy was not a ninja. Maybe that is what they look like when they spar.

What do you look like when you fight then?


----------



## Chris Parker

Because I've trained in the arts for over 20 years, I know the key aspects of my own art, I know the tell-tale signs, postural concepts, distancing, striking ideas, grappling approach, tactical concepts, and more. The fact that you would ask speaks volumes.

What do I look like when I fight? Very different to the way I'd look when sparring.


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> Because I've trained in the arts for over 20 years, I know the key aspects of my own art, I know the tell-tale signs, postural concepts, distancing, striking ideas, grappling approach, tactical concepts, and more. The fact that you would ask speaks volumes.
> 
> What do I look like when I fight? Very different to the way I'd look when sparring.




Thought you didn't spar.

Can you show an example of ninja fighting then. Maybe I can get a gauge on the differences between pretend ninja and a real one.


----------



## Chris Parker

I don't spar (you might have noticed that I said "than I'd look", not "than I look"&#8230; small things, I know&#8230, although I have in some of my previous training systems (TKD, karate, BJJ, boxing, MMA), and probably will in another art I'm looking to take up. If it's something that works in the context of the systems (as it was in the above listed ones), it's great, if it's not, then it's not needed&#8230; the tricks understanding what the actual needs are, the benefits, the limitations, and so on&#8230; and understanding that not every system has the same requirements or approach.

In terms of showing you something, I could show some examples of kata training, but it's commonly done as embu, not keiko.. and the difference is fairly big. Same with the difference between jiyu waza and oyo waza&#8230; and I'm not sure of any public footage of such. But hey, you're asking, so I'll show what there is:


----------



## ballen0351

SandaBoxing said:


> MMA is going to beat most TMA's because we train and do, knock people out as part of our training and this isn't even stepping into the cage to fight yet. .


----------



## SandaBoxing

Chris Parker said:


> Okay.
> 
> Scott Morris and Steve Jennum are probably the two best known MMA competitors with a "ninjutsu" background the other clips I've seen (including the one you posted) are kids who don't have any connection to ninjutsu at all, outside of some deluded fantasy.



Morris got whooped pretty bad and Jennum just punched like any other puncher. Then Jennum did that sloppy armbar from the full-mount where he yanked the Boxer's arm up w/o maintaining bottom pressure. Luckily the Boxer was clueless.

And it's pretty pompous of you to call the Black kid in that video deluded just because he represented himself as a Ninjitsu stylist. You make it sound like being a Ninjitsu practitioner means a great deal of something. It certainly doesn't mean much in the fighting world today I can tell you that, that's why they were making fun of him in that video. But the kid stepped up and fought, which I give big props to him for. That was also Dominique Cruz that beat him, who later went on to beat Uriah Faber for the UFC Title. He's a Wrestler and in that video vs. the Ninja, still a BJJ WHITE belt.


----------



## SandaBoxing

Chris Parker said:


> Actually, no, it's not. It's highly context-dependant. The forms of fighting encountered and needed by a sports competitor are fairly different to the requirements of a self-defence practitioner, which is different again to a military form of fighting, different again to what's encountered and needed by LEO's and security personnel, which is very different to that encountered in various historical systems even in modern societies, differences in cultures give you wild differences in what constitutes "fighting".



All of that hocus pocus never seems to work when I visit Krav Maga gyms to spar. Jabs and footwork stops the magic show and then, here comes the powerhand combo. Plenty of cops and soldiers train at MMA gyms and if all they had was their department's training + some TMA, then they usually get their butts whooped like any other White belts.  



> I do hope you're not trying to imply some form of superiority there or that such things are unique to MMA training



Very much so when it comes to hand to hand combat. People who trains to fight and actually do fight full contact will always be better than those who trains light contact only. 



> Well, I've knocked people out, both in class and outside of it, and all that without sparring at all hmm



Cool, I hope those women were ok afterward. Just kidding. And you don't spar at all? Now I'd really like to know who you KO'ed.



> Of course, it has to be said that if your'e knocking each other out before getting into a cage, then there's some issues to be looked at in your training approach



Not all the time, but it does happen. But didn't you just brag about doing the same by knocking out people in your gym?



> But again, are you really saying that MMA is the only approach that covers such things? Hmm



I never said that, I just implied that MMA is currently the best today when MMA is defined as employing BJJ & MT to produce fighters and champions. While it's still possible for MMA gyms to go with other routes such as BJJ & Karate to produce champions, it's still not the best and certainly not with Ninjitsu.


----------



## SandaBoxing

Chris Parker said:


> Because I've trained in the arts for over 20 years, I know the key aspects of my own art, I know the tell-tale signs, postural concepts, distancing, striking ideas, grappling approach, tactical concepts, and more. The fact that you would ask speaks volumes.
> 
> What do I look like when I fight? Very different to the way I'd look when sparring.



Well you just heralded Steve Jennum and Scott Morris as LEGIT Ninjas, yet Steve Jennum looked just like some dude throwing wild punches and Scott Morris looked just like some dude eating a ton of wild punches & elbows from Pat Smith.

How is this any different from the Black kid whom you labeled "deluded" just because he claims to be a Ninja just because he got beat up by Dominique Cruz in that video?


----------



## ballen0351

SandaBoxing said:


> All of that hocus pocus never seems to work when I visit Krav Maga gyms to spar. Jabs and footwork stops the magic show and then, here comes the powerhand combo. Plenty of cops and soldiers train at MMA gyms and if all they had was their department's training + some TMA, then they usually get their butts whooped like any other White belts.


Oh boy here we go again.  


> Very much so when it comes to hand to hand combat. People who trains to fight and actually do fight full contact will always be better than those who trains light contact only.


So you train full contact huh?  So how many broken jaws and fractured orbital bones have you had?  Because as a cop ive had to hit people "full Contact" before and that's what happens in "full contact"


> Cool, I hope those women were ok afterward. Just kidding. And you don't spar at all? Now I'd really like to know who you KO'ed.


At lease we know who Chris is and his back ground.  You show up and in your first 10 posts here proceeded to bash TMAs and tell hows how bad as you are yet we no nothing about you or your training.  



> Not all the time, but it does happen. But didn't you just brag about doing the same by knocking out people in your gym?


Then young lady if your going "full contact" and people are only knocked out every once in a while your not really going "full contact" but if it makes you feel more bad *** keep telling us how "full contact" you are




> I never said that, I just implied that MMA is currently the best today when MMA is defined as employing BJJ & MT to produce fighters and champions. While it's still possible for MMA gyms to go with other routes such as BJJ & Karate to produce champions, it's still not the best and certainly not with Ninjitsu.



Says who?


----------



## Chris Parker

SandaBoxing said:


> Morris got whooped pretty bad and Jennum just punched like any other puncher. Then Jennum did that sloppy armbar from the full-mount where he yanked the Boxer's arm up w/o maintaining bottom pressure. Luckily the Boxer was clueless.



Context, son. I didn't put them forwards as great, perfect, or even good examples&#8230; simply as two of the best known examples of people who do have an actual ninjutsu background (although RBWI really is it's own beast, when it comes down to it)&#8230; I know of a couple of Bujinkan members who have a semi-amateur involvement as well, but they're not easy to find any footage of. The point, though, was that most of what's identified as "ninjutsu" isn't.



SandaBoxing said:


> And it's pretty pompous of you to call the Black kid in that video deluded just because he represented himself as a Ninjitsu stylist.



No, it's not pompous, it's accurate. If someone said they were a Judo player, and did nothing but bad attempts at TKD leaping and spinning kicks, would it be pompous to say that he wasn't showing any Judo? 



SandaBoxing said:


> You make it sound like being a Ninjitsu practitioner means a great deal of something.



No, just that it is a specific thing, which was not seen anywhere in the clip provided.



SandaBoxing said:


> It certainly doesn't mean much in the fighting world today I can tell you that, that's why they were making fun of him in that video.



He was being made fun of because he came in with a head full of fantasy, and because the only reference the guys there had was equally based in fantasy&#8230; so that's where they put him (mentally).



SandaBoxing said:


> But the kid stepped up and fought, which I give big props to him for.



Eh, doesn't mean anything to me, frankly. If he wants to engage that way, go for it&#8230; but it's hardly something I'm going to be impressed by.



SandaBoxing said:


> That was also Dominique Cruz that beat him, who later went on to beat Uriah Faber for the UFC Title. He's a Wrestler and in that video vs. the Ninja, still a BJJ WHITE belt.



And? You're now saying that a top name in the sport beat a kid with a head full of delusions, and you're considering this&#8230; what? Impressive that someone who professionally trains for MMA beat a no-name kid? Not surprising because he trains professionally, and the kid was nobody? And I'm not sure what the reference to his (then) BJJ white belt has to do with anything, especially if he was already a fairly seasoned wrestler&#8230; and, if it didn't make any difference, then why was it important that the kid was claiming to be a ninjutsu practitioner? Obviously you're saying that the person matters (which is the case in sports systems, honestly) more than the system&#8230; I mean, MMA loses as much as it wins (each MMA match has an MMA competitor win, and an MMA competitor lose&#8230, so is the system really that good? I mean, you're as likely to lose with it as anything else&#8230; 



SandaBoxing said:


> All of that hocus pocus never seems to work when I visit Krav Maga gyms to spar. Jabs and footwork stops the magic show and then, here comes the powerhand combo. Plenty of cops and soldiers train at MMA gyms and if all they had was their department's training + some TMA, then they usually get their butts whooped like any other White belts.



What hocus pocus? What the hell are you talking about? You said that "fighting is fighting", I pointed out that it's not, as it's highly context-dependant, and gave examples of a range of different influences on exactly what constitutes a "fight" in a range of contexts&#8230; there was no "hocus pocus" at all&#8230; Oh, and you don't really want to play the "plenty of cops train MMA" route&#8230; that argument can be made for almost any system on the planet&#8230; Troy Wideman, the gent in the first clip I showed on the previous page, has been an LEO for decades, for example&#8230; the Bujinkan has many military, security, LEO members, as does almost any other art I could come up with. 

But here's the thing&#8230; if an LEO used an MMA approach, he'd probably get suspended or fired&#8230; and if a soldier used it, he's probably already dead from the armaments of his opponent. Really not a good argument.



SandaBoxing said:


> Very much so when it comes to hand to hand combat. People who trains to fight and actually do fight full contact will always be better than those who trains light contact only.



I'll reiterate&#8230; do you really think such things are unique to MMA? Cause, if you do, you really should do a bit more looking around&#8230; MMA is just a johnny-come-lately in all this, when all's said and done&#8230; many other systems have been doing it longer, harder, and far more seriously than you have a clue about.



SandaBoxing said:


> Cool, I hope those women were ok afterward. Just kidding. And you don't spar at all? Now I'd really like to know who you KO'ed.



Careful, son.

Who have I knocked out? Two students (within a week of each other), and two people in real life. And no, we don't spar&#8230; we do have a form of free-form training, and do a lot of scenario work, but the idea of trading blows/sports-style sparring is ineffective, counter-productive, and detrimental to our approach.



SandaBoxing said:


> Not all the time, but it does happen. But didn't you just brag about doing the same by knocking out people in your gym?



No, I didn't "brag", I mentioned it to demonstrate that MMA is not unique in the way you think it is&#8230; oh, and I don't have a "gym"&#8230; 



SandaBoxing said:


> I never said that, I just implied that MMA is currently the best today when MMA is defined as employing BJJ & MT to produce fighters and champions. While it's still possible for MMA gyms to go with other routes such as BJJ & Karate to produce champions, it's still not the best and certainly not with Ninjitsu.



The question was whether or not you thought that MMA was the only approach that "fought or sparred hard", not what you thought was the best (I think it's pretty obvious what you think is the best&#8230; I'd disagree, but it's just opinions at that point, and I have no need to change your mind&#8230; if you like it, great, if you get value, even better&#8230; but you really should realise that your opinion doesn't necessarily translate to fact). But again, you're still missing context&#8230; "champions" means absolutely nothing to me&#8230; it's artificial garbage, and nothing to do with martial arts (the way I approach them). If you want to win MMA matches, you need to train MMA&#8230; which is a particular training methodology, and is the best suited for that context&#8230; if you have other needs, then other approaches are better. That's what you're simply not getting.



SandaBoxing said:


> Well you just heralded Steve Jennum and Scott Morris as LEGIT Ninjas, yet Steve Jennum looked just like some dude throwing wild punches and Scott Morris looked just like some dude eating a ton of wild punches & elbows from Pat Smith.



"Heralded"? No. I just brought them up as more credible examples (when it comes to their background).



SandaBoxing said:


> How is this any different from the Black kid whom you labeled "deluded" just because he claims to be a Ninja just because he got beat up by Dominique Cruz in that video?



They have legitimate, credible backgrounds in what they claimed to have. You seriously had to ask that question?


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> Context, son. I didn't put them forwards as great, perfect, or even good examples&#8230; simply as two of the best known examples of people who do have an actual ninjutsu background (although RBWI really is it's own beast, when it comes down to it)&#8230; I know of a couple of Bujinkan members who have a semi-amateur involvement as well, but they're not easy to find any footage of. The point, though, was that most of what's identified as "ninjutsu" isn't.
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's not pompous, it's accurate. If someone said they were a Judo player, and did nothing but bad attempts at TKD leaping and spinning kicks, would it be pompous to say that he wasn't showing any Judo?
> 
> 
> 
> No, just that it is a specific thing, which was not seen anywhere in the clip provided.
> 
> 
> 
> He was being made fun of because he came in with a head full of fantasy, and because the only reference the guys there had was equally based in fantasy&#8230; so that's where they put him (mentally).
> 
> 
> 
> Eh, doesn't mean anything to me, frankly. If he wants to engage that way, go for it&#8230; but it's hardly something I'm going to be impressed by.
> 
> 
> 
> And? You're now saying that a top name in the sport beat a kid with a head full of delusions, and you're considering this&#8230; what? Impressive that someone who professionally trains for MMA beat a no-name kid? Not surprising because he trains professionally, and the kid was nobody? And I'm not sure what the reference to his (then) BJJ white belt has to do with anything, especially if he was already a fairly seasoned wrestler&#8230; and, if it didn't make any difference, then why was it important that the kid was claiming to be a ninjutsu practitioner? Obviously you're saying that the person matters (which is the case in sports systems, honestly) more than the system&#8230; I mean, MMA loses as much as it wins (each MMA match has an MMA competitor win, and an MMA competitor lose&#8230, so is the system really that good? I mean, you're as likely to lose with it as anything else&#8230;
> 
> 
> 
> What hocus pocus? What the hell are you talking about? You said that "fighting is fighting", I pointed out that it's not, as it's highly context-dependant, and gave examples of a range of different influences on exactly what constitutes a "fight" in a range of contexts&#8230; there was no "hocus pocus" at all&#8230; Oh, and you don't really want to play the "plenty of cops train MMA" route&#8230; that argument can be made for almost any system on the planet&#8230; Troy Wideman, the gent in the first clip I showed on the previous page, has been an LEO for decades, for example&#8230; the Bujinkan has many military, security, LEO members, as does almost any other art I could come up with.
> 
> But here's the thing&#8230; if an LEO used an MMA approach, he'd probably get suspended or fired&#8230; and if a soldier used it, he's probably already dead from the armaments of his opponent. Really not a good argument.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll reiterate&#8230; do you really think such things are unique to MMA? Cause, if you do, you really should do a bit more looking around&#8230; MMA is just a johnny-come-lately in all this, when all's said and done&#8230; many other systems have been doing it longer, harder, and far more seriously than you have a clue about.
> 
> 
> 
> Careful, son.
> 
> Who have I knocked out? Two students (within a week of each other), and two people in real life. And no, we don't spar&#8230; we do have a form of free-form training, and do a lot of scenario work, but the idea of trading blows/sports-style sparring is ineffective, counter-productive, and detrimental to our approach.
> 
> 
> 
> No, I didn't "brag", I mentioned it to demonstrate that MMA is not unique in the way you think it is&#8230; oh, and I don't have a "gym"&#8230;
> 
> 
> 
> The question was whether or not you thought that MMA was the only approach that "fought or sparred hard", not what you thought was the best (I think it's pretty obvious what you think is the best&#8230; I'd disagree, but it's just opinions at that point, and I have no need to change your mind&#8230; if you like it, great, if you get value, even better&#8230; but you really should realise that your opinion doesn't necessarily translate to fact). But again, you're still missing context&#8230; "champions" means absolutely nothing to me&#8230; it's artificial garbage, and nothing to do with martial arts (the way I approach them). If you want to win MMA matches, you need to train MMA&#8230; which is a particular training methodology, and is the best suited for that context&#8230; if you have other needs, then other approaches are better. That's what you're simply not getting.
> 
> 
> 
> "Heralded"? No. I just brought them up as more credible examples (when it comes to their background).
> 
> 
> 
> They have legitimate, credible backgrounds in what they claimed to have. You seriously had to ask that question?




And at this point back to he said she said.


But it is pretty easy. Mma can be shown in the context of resistance. A lot of martial art can be shown in this context. Not street vs sport because without a street example there is no street vs sport argument. 

Mma can be shown working against resistance against other styles. Whether they be ninjitsu or not.

So quite simply show ninjitsu working against resistance. If you train for the street show resistance in the street. If not show sparring or competition.


----------



## Chris Parker

drop bear said:


> And at this point back to he said she said.



No, we're at explaining to you, and you not listening. Still.



drop bear said:


> But it is pretty easy. Mma can be shown in the context of resistance.



No, it can be seen to be applied against a form of resistance in a particular competitive context. Bit different.



drop bear said:


> A lot of martial art can be shown in this context. Not street vs sport because without a street example there is no street vs sport argument.



Sure, there's an argument&#8230; it's a tactical one.



drop bear said:


> Mma can be shown working against resistance against other styles. Whether they be ninjitsu or not.



One more time&#8230; "Ninjutsu", not (never) "ninjitsu". Okay?

Oh, and MMA is only shown as working against other styles in the context of MMA&#8230; where it's naturally going to have the advantage. So, frankly, your point is moot.



drop bear said:


> So quite simply show ninjitsu working against resistance.



The type seen in MMA competitions? Why? It's not only not what we train for, it's almost completely opposite to what we train for.



drop bear said:


> If you train for the street show resistance in the street. If not show sparring or competition.



We don't' spar, we don't have competitions, and I don't think you understand what "resistance in the street" would be&#8230; for one thing, look up a blog post called "The Myth of the Fully Resisting Opponent"&#8230; and, from there, it might be useful to realise that, when it comes to actual violence, resistance isn't actually part of the equation&#8230; as an attacker doesn't actually "resist"&#8230; some food for thought&#8230;


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> No, we're at explaining to you, and you not listening. Still.
> 
> 
> 
> No, it can be seen to be applied against a form of resistance in a particular competitive context. Bit different.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, there's an argument&#8230; it's a tactical one.
> 
> 
> 
> One more time&#8230; "Ninjutsu", not (never) "ninjitsu". Okay?
> 
> Oh, and MMA is only shown as working against other styles in the context of MMA&#8230; where it's naturally going to have the advantage. So, frankly, your point is moot.
> 
> 
> 
> The type seen in MMA competitions? Why? It's not only not what we train for, it's almost completely opposite to what we train for.
> 
> 
> 
> We don't' spar, we don't have competitions, and I don't think you understand what "resistance in the street" would be&#8230; for one thing, look up a blog post called "The Myth of the Fully Resisting Opponent"&#8230; and, from there, it might be useful to realise that, when it comes to actual violence, resistance isn't actually part of the equation&#8230; as an attacker doesn't actually "resist"&#8230; some food for thought&#8230;



I am fine with ninjutsu being shown fully resisted in the street. If that is your context then present it in context. Otherwise it is back to he said she said.

Otherwise you don't have an argument you have a theory.

http://chirontraining.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/myth-of-fully-resisting-opponent.html

OK sparring is more resisted than drills. A ring fight is more resisted than sparring. A street fight is more resisted than a ring fight.(sort of) Now to present that a street fight is more resisted than a street fight is fine. But if you are trying to present a method works due to that street fight resistance. Then you need to show it working in context.

You can't just show drill. Ignore sparring and say street fight. You would need to show street fight. If you want to present that.

Otherwise I could just say street fight as well. Without showing how it works in a street fight. And we both just walk hand in hand into a fantasy.


----------



## Chris Parker

drop bear said:


> I am fine with ninjutsu being shown fully resisted in the street. If that is your context then present it in context. Otherwise it is back to he said she said.



You're not listening. 



drop bear said:


> Otherwise you don't have an argument you have a theory.
> 
> http://chirontraining.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/myth-of-fully-resisting-opponent.html



Still not listening.



drop bear said:


> OK sparring is more resisted than drills. A ring fight is more resisted than sparring. A street fight is more resisted than a ring fight.(sort of) Now to present that a street fight is more resisted than a street fight is fine. But if you are trying to present a method works due to that street fight resistance. Then you need to show it working in context.



No.



drop bear said:


> You can't just show drill. Ignore sparring and say street fight. You would need to show street fight. If you want to present that.



Missed the point.



drop bear said:


> Otherwise I could just say street fight as well. Without showing how it works in a street fight. And we both just walk hand in hand into a fantasy.



Yeah&#8230; you're really not getting it.

Look, you're too stuck in your own head to actually take anything you've been told on board&#8230; you seem to think that "sports" and "street" are the only contexts&#8230; my arts aren't either (my modern methods are more "street", but not any of the actual martial arts I practice), you've completely missed what I said when I told you that there really isn't' such a thing as "resistance" in the street/real violence, and you've missed that actual resistance is actually easier, more reliably gauged and applied, and more in drills than anything else. 

Might I suggest you go back, re-read, and see where we end up then?


----------



## drop bear

Chris Parker said:


> You're not listening.
> 
> 
> 
> Still not listening.
> 
> 
> 
> No.
> 
> 
> 
> Missed the point.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah you're really not getting it.
> 
> Look, you're too stuck in your own head to actually take anything you've been told on board you seem to think that "sports" and "street" are the only contexts my arts aren't either (my modern methods are more "street", but not any of the actual martial arts I practice), you've completely missed what I said when I told you that there really isn't' such a thing as "resistance" in the street/real violence, and you've missed that actual resistance is actually easier, more reliably gauged and applied, and more in drills than anything else.
> 
> Might I suggest you go back, re-read, and see where we end up then?



I am listening I am just disagreeing which is different.



So what context is your art then?


----------



## Chris Parker

drop bear said:


> I am listening I am just disagreeing which is different.



Hmm&#8230; I say "There really isn't 'resistance' in a street fight", you respond "so there's more resistance in a street fight"&#8230; no, you're not listening. It's not a matter of you disagreeing, you're not listening in the first place.



drop bear said:


> So what context is your art then?



Multiple and varied, depending on which system I train that you're asking about&#8230; there's about a dozen of them. Some are to do with duelling, some battle-field orientated, some are to do with a particular form of unarmed combat/defence (historic), and so on. The thing is, they're all historical systems, so you need to look at the time, culture, social group, and so on. None of them are modern self defence systems, none of them are sports.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Okay, let's talk a bit about "contexts", because I think there's a lot of miscommunication and unstated assumptions going on here.  To begin with, Chris is right in that "street" vs "sport" is not sufficient to cover the topic.  I disagree with Chris on a number of issues, but he has some important points that I think are not coming across to those that don't have the background to get what he's talking about.

Rather than speak in terms of generalities, let's look at some different contexts and see what tools and challenges might be present in each one.

*MMA*: Forget the list of current UFC rules - MMA bouts took place years before those rules were put into place and the rules have only changed some of the details around the edges.  Forget arguments about whether MMA is "sport" or "real."  At its essence, MMA comes down to an agreed-upon duel between two unarmed opponents with symmetrical rules and objectives.

Things you have to worry about: a skilled, determined, well-conditioned opponent.
Things you don't have to worry about: numbers, weapons, surprise, appropriate degrees of force, legal repercussions
Tools you have/need: offensive and defensive footwork, striking, grappling, feints, setups, counters to technical attacks, physical and mental conditioning, etc
Tools you don't have/need: numbers, weapons, surprise, verbal manipulation/de-escalation, escape/evasion, awareness of 3rd parties, articulation to justify your actions from a legal perspective, etc


*Security work/ Club bouncer:* Just as the rules of an MMA match might vary from promotion to promotion or in different time periods, so the rules of engagement can vary in different venues for folks in this line of work.  Still, there are certain commonalities.  At its essence this sort of job involves being able to control (potentially) violent/intoxicated/unstable people with the minimum possible damage and legal liability.

Things you have to worry about: Surprise, numbers, weapons, intoxicated/unstable opponents, degrees of force, legal repercussions
Things you don't have to worry about (probably): A highly skilled, technical, calm, prepared opponent
Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation/de-escalation skills, intimidation, surprise, numbers(maybe), at least basic physical skills, ability to stay calm, ability to assess appropriate level of force, ability to legal justify actions
Tools you don't have/need: fancy footwork, counters to sophisticated martial arts techniques, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, weapons(maybe, depending on the job), escape/evasion

*Rape defense*: This is a clear example of a non-symmetric conflict.  The bottom line for the defender is trying to escape unhurt.

Things you have to worry about: Surprise, weapons (maybe), numbers (maybe), larger opponent (probably), intimidation, psychological/verbal manipulation
Things you don't have to worry about (probably): a highly trained martial artist with sophisticated technique who is ready for a tough fight
Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation skills, surprise, escape/evasion skills, weapons (maybe?), physical fighting skills sufficient for at least discouraging a larger attacker, psychological mindset for resisting intimidation/manipulation
Tools you don't have/need: Numbers, size, counters for technical martial arts attacks, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, etc


There are a lot of different contexts for violence.  There is no one-size-fits-all approach that applies to all of them.  There are certain principles, tactics, training methods, and personal attributes that can overlap between these different contexts, but there are also important differences.  It's important to understand what you are actually preparing for.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> Okay, let's talk a bit about "contexts", because I think there's a lot of miscommunication and unstated assumptions going on here.  To begin with, Chris is right in that "street" vs "sport" is not sufficient to cover the topic.  I disagree with Chris on a number of issues, but he has some important points that I think are not coming across to those that don't have the background to get what he's talking about.
> 
> Rather than speak in terms of generalities, let's look at some different contexts and see what tools and challenges might be present in each one.
> 
> *MMA*: Forget the list of current UFC rules - MMA bouts took place years before those rules were put into place and the rules have only changed some of the details around the edges.  Forget arguments about whether MMA is "sport" or "real."  At its essence, MMA comes down to an agreed-upon duel between two unarmed opponents with symmetrical rules and objectives.
> 
> Things you have to worry about: a skilled, determined, well-conditioned opponent.
> Things you don't have to worry about: numbers, weapons, surprise, appropriate degrees of force, legal repercussions
> Tools you have/need: offensive and defensive footwork, striking, grappling, feints, setups, counters to technical attacks, physical and mental conditioning, etc
> Tools you don't have/need: numbers, weapons, surprise, verbal manipulation/de-escalation, escape/evasion, awareness of 3rd parties, articulation to justify your actions from a legal perspective, etc
> 
> 
> *Security work/ Club bouncer:* Just as the rules of an MMA match might vary from promotion to promotion or in different time periods, so the rules of engagement can vary in different venues for folks in this line of work.  Still, there are certain commonalities.  At its essence this sort of job involves being able to control (potentially) violent/intoxicated/unstable people with the minimum possible damage and legal liability.
> 
> Things you have to worry about: Surprise, numbers, weapons, intoxicated/unstable opponents, degrees of force, legal repercussions
> Things you don't have to worry about (probably): A highly skilled, technical, calm, prepared opponent
> Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation/de-escalation skills, intimidation, surprise, numbers(maybe), at least basic physical skills, ability to stay calm, ability to assess appropriate level of force, ability to legal justify actions
> Tools you don't have/need: fancy footwork, counters to sophisticated martial arts techniques, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, weapons(maybe, depending on the job), escape/evasion
> 
> *Rape defense*: This is a clear example of a non-symmetric conflict.  The bottom line for the defender is trying to escape unhurt.
> 
> Things you have to worry about: Surprise, weapons (maybe), numbers (maybe), larger opponent (probably), intimidation, psychological/verbal manipulation
> Things you don't have to worry about (probably): a highly trained martial artist with sophisticated technique who is ready for a tough fight
> Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation skills, surprise, escape/evasion skills, weapons (maybe?), physical fighting skills sufficient for at least discouraging a larger attacker, psychological mindset for resisting intimidation/manipulation
> Tools you don't have/need: Numbers, size, counters for technical martial arts attacks, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, etc
> 
> 
> There are a lot of different contexts for violence.  There is no one-size-fits-all approach that applies to all of them.  There are certain principles, tactics, training methods, and personal attributes that can overlap between these different contexts, but there are also important differences.  It's important to understand what you are actually preparing for.




But then you have the issue of actually working in context. 

I do have a bit of an issue with these lists being used for more than an ideas platform. We take that context and then think it becomes some sort of law.

So then I turn around a say for example I train in the context of rape defence. And I will be surprised he will be larger, numbers, he will not be a trained fighter and so on and this is why a sport system will not equip you to defend rape because the law of sports context. Is.a well conditioned oponant with no surprise etc.

It becomes training by speculation that becomes dogma. And I can't see how that would help.

Working in context is trying to move away from speculation and dogma. But you can't get away with being an expert in every situation.

All of this is why I don't think the street sport is very useful. As far as context I like the idea of working resisted and unscripted.


----------



## RTKDCMB

SandaBoxing said:


> Morris got whooped pretty bad and Jennum just punched like any other puncher. Then Jennum did that sloppy armbar from the full-mount where he yanked the Boxer's arm up w/o maintaining bottom pressure. *Luckily the Boxer was clueless*.



Much like the one in Royce Gracie's first match.


----------



## RTKDCMB

SandaBoxing said:


> In general, fighting is fighting and *MMA is going to beat most TMA's* because we train and do, knock people out as part of our training and this isn't even stepping into the cage to fight yet. In MMA, you can't help but get better at fighting than those who don't fight nor spar hard.



And what exactly do you base this opinion on?


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Much like the one in Royce Gracie's first match.




This thread needs more sakuraba.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-A2GDDNz_Sw


----------

