# MMA & the Olympics



## Scout200

Should the MMA be part of the Olympics? I personally think so.. What are  your thoughts?

-Scout


----------



## Omar B

It can't realistically.  They would have to do it tournament style with each fighting a couple of times over the course of the Olympics.  I see a lot of people dropping out because of injury, or doctor's advice.  It won't be like Boxing or TKD where it's based upon a points system, it's MMA, you can't soften that up and even winners get injuries.  There's a reason MMA fighters are all ineligible to fight for 3 (or is it 6?) months after each bout, win or not.


----------



## Steve

+1 to what Omar said.  

BJJ has a much better chance of eventually being an Olympic sport, but jury's still out on whether that would be good or bad.  Lots of judoka and tkd stylists are pretty upset with the effects that becoming an Olympic sport has had on their style.


----------



## geezer

stevebjj said:


> +1 to what Omar said.
> 
> BJJ has a much better chance of eventually being an Olympic sport, but jury's still out on whether that would be good or bad. Lots of judoka and tkd stylists are pretty upset with the effects that becoming an Olympic sport has had on their style.


 
I don't think having Olympic MMA would adversely affect _professional_ MMA any more that the restrictions on Olympic boxing limit pro boxing. TKD is a totally different situation, same for judo. Neither existed as a professional sport comparable to MMA today.

Now as to the logistics of having bouts spaced out so that competitors would have sufficient recovery time before going on... I don't know how you would approach that. Maybe you could have sanctioned elimination bouts months in advance so when the Olympic Games were held, you would already be down to the semi-finalists or even finalists? I mean, that's all the public ever sees in most events anyway, right?


----------



## Kajowaraku

It's not goint to happen anytime soon, imho. MMA is what it says, mixed martial arts. Just kicking, beating, tearing and choking each other until one relents. We already have wrestling and Judo as olympic sports on the ground, and boxing and TKD standing up. MMA just combines aspects of those and than some more (like the ever popular G&P principle). I don't think the commitee will really feel it actually adds something new other than just being the latest hype in fighting art mids. That's no critique on MMA, merely my prognosis on it's (imho) rather slim chances of becoming an olympic sport.


----------



## Steve

geezer said:


> I don't think having Olympic MMA would adversely affect _professional_ MMA any more that the restrictions on Olympic boxing limit pro boxing. TKD is a totally different situation, same for judo. Neither existed as a professional sport comparable to MMA today.
> 
> Now as to the logistics of having bouts spaced out so that competitors would have sufficient recovery time before going on... I don't know how you would approach that. Maybe you could have sanctioned elimination bouts months in advance so when the Olympic Games were held, you would already be down to the semi-finalists or even finalists? I mean, that's all the public ever sees in most events anyway, right?


Sorry I wasn't clear.  I meant that I don't think that MMA is suitable for a round robin/tournament format like olympic boxing for many of the same reasons that Omar mentioned.  

Of sports associated with MMA, wrestling is already in the olympics, as is boxing.  BJJ has been considered and will probably be considered again in the future, particularly since Brazil is an upcoming host.  In many ways, it's a good fit.  There is already a well developed tournament ruleset.  It's an international sport and there are high level competitors from just about everywhere.  But, as I said, not everyone is convinced that being an Olympic sport is a good thing.


----------



## Gemini

If you enjoy MMA, DO NOT wish it to be an Olympic sport. By the time they got done butchering to what networks consider suitable for televison, you wouldn't recognize it. Practical application aside, anything even hinting at violence gets thrown into a 2:00 am time slot if it get air time at all. We need the prime time to make room for guys throwing stones on ice and chasing them with brooms. Mesmerizing...:shrug:


----------



## BloodMoney

MMA was, in ancient times, one of the most popular (in fact I believe THE most popular) of all the games in the Olympics. 

Pankration fell out of favor, but in all honesty it should be in the Olympics. Judo and TKD are relatively new (especially compared to Pankration, which became a staple of the Olympics somewhere round 650 BCE) and are Japanese/Korean arts, yet THE Olympic martial art, Pankration, is not in there. Makes no sense to me. Modern day Pankration has got a lot safer and more controlled, and is thriving. It has huge followings and could easily be introduced into the Olympics as if it had never left. A few simple thoughts on it here I was just reading, good article.

Now to be fair modern MMA, as in UFC stuff, is different from Pankration. But yes, I still think it could (and should) be introduced into the Olympics. Yes some changes in the format would be needed, but thats pretty simple. 

I think BJJ would be easier and somewhat more fitting in many ways, and personally think its long overdue for inclusion in the Olympics. Theres a huge talent pool for it, lots of good refs, well defined and easily judged rules etc...why its not in there comes down to politics I would assume, not incapability. 

I think MMA or BJJ would be more exciting to watch than Olympic TKD or Judo in my opinion, as fun as watching two people hop about faking each other out or grabbing each others lapels is 

I still want to see a military olympics, where all the armies of the world put their best in and face off on drills and obstacle courses and stuff...a la Hoplitodromos (which was a mid distance race between soldiers in full armor). *That would be the ****!
*


----------



## Tez3

Kajowaraku said:


> It's not goint to happen anytime soon, imho. MMA is what it says, mixed martial arts. *Just kicking, beating, tearing and* *choking each other until one relents*. We already have wrestling and Judo as olympic sports on the ground, and boxing and TKD standing up. MMA just combines aspects of those and than some more (like the ever popular G&P principle). I don't think the commitee will really feel it actually adds something new other than just being the latest hype in fighting art mids. That's no critique on MMA, merely my prognosis on it's (imho) rather slim chances of becoming an olympic sport.


 

Interesting that you state it's martial arts but then denigrate it. It isn't just kicking, beating, tearing (? what on earth do you mean by that?) and choking each other, it's martial arts, the kick each other in TKD, choke each other in Judo, punch each other in boxing but thats okay by you but MMa is just a fad, yeah, okay, you may think that but if I agreed with you we'd both be wrong. Oh and there's no ground and pound in amateur and semi pro rules MMA.

And it's no, no, no to MMA in the Olympics, they have spoilt too many sports by changing the rules to suit 'audiences' and the television people so absolutly not.


----------



## Andrew Green

Omar B said:


> It can't realistically.  They would have to do it tournament style with each fighting a couple of times over the course of the Olympics.  I see a lot of people dropping out because of injury, or doctor's advice.  It won't be like Boxing or TKD where it's based upon a points system, it's MMA, you can't soften that up and even winners get injuries.  There's a reason MMA fighters are all ineligible to fight for 3 (or is it 6?) months after each bout, win or not.



3 month suspensions are rare, a lot of guys fight more often then that when working the smaller shows.  

Look at guys like Jeremy Horn or Dan Severn, they have period where they are fighting every month, sometimes twice a month.

Chris Leben just made some headlines for taking the Akiyama fight 2-weeks after fighting Arron Simpson.

None of that is really the point of all this though, but you are right.  Pro-MMA would definitely not work as a Olympic event.  Something like the Pankration rules, or the Combat Grappling rules that FILA has put out 'could' work, but it becomes a matter of whether or not it should.  There are definite ups and downs to being a Olympic sport, I'm not entirely sure it would help.  

I think maintaining amateur MMA as it exists is also important, I wouldn't want to see things turn into just Pankration rules, then pro.  I also would worry about schools spreading themselves too thin... You'd probably end up with separate gyms for whatever the Olympics decided to do and the current style as they would no doubt fork.

Personally I'd rather see Kickboxing, Grappling or both get in at this point.


----------



## Josh Oakley

My question is: why?


----------



## Tez3

Josh Oakley said:


> My question is: why?


 

Because people who don't like MMA want to drag it down to the level where it's toothless and sanitised and therefore acceptable to them. Too many people don't understand what it actually is as opposed to what they perceive it to be so they want to bind it up with so many rules and regulations, put it in the Olympics and make it a pale shadow of what it was.


----------



## terryl965

Realistically no but at the same time no to TKD, Judo or Boxing and wrestling.


----------



## MJS

Personally, I dont think it would go over that well, due to the fact that people already have a distorted image of it, so no doubt it'd go over like a lead balloon. LOL.  But, if it were to be done, I'd say it'd make more sense to use the original method that they used in the early UFCs, which was more tournament style.


----------



## MJS

Kajowaraku said:


> It's not goint to happen anytime soon, imho. MMA is what it says, mixed martial arts. Just kicking, beating, tearing and choking each other until one relents. We already have wrestling and Judo as olympic sports on the ground, and boxing and TKD standing up. MMA just combines aspects of those and than some more (like the ever popular G&P principle). I don't think the commitee will really feel it actually adds something new other than just being the latest hype in fighting art mids. That's no critique on MMA, merely my prognosis on it's (imho) rather slim chances of becoming an olympic sport.


 
Umm...alrighty then. LOL.  Of course, while you appear to be making it sound like such a horrible thing, I'll say that there are also numerous football, baseball, basketball injuries as well.  

The MMA that we see today, at least here in the states, is very different from what we saw in the early days.  Today, we see fights that are stopped, often much to the dismay of the crowd, because while they feel it was a premature stoppage, the ref, looking at the nature of the injury, has the fighters safety in mind.  

I'll also state that the arts do involve contact and fighting.  As Tez mentioned, TKD students kick each other during sparring, boxers punch each other, Judo and Wrestlers choke and slam each other around.  Bottom line is, the arts involve contact.  If someone is against that, then IMO, they should be enrolling in a non-contact class, such as knitting or TaiChi, rather than the Martial Arts.


----------



## Gemini

terryl965 said:


> Realistically no but at the same time no to TKD, Judo or Boxing and wrestling.


Terry, I pretty much agree with this except for wrestling. I've always enjoyed it and it hasn't changed much at all since I was in high school. Also, because it's not considered an impact/contact sport and therefore deemed "violent" like the others, it actually gets air time.


----------



## KenpoVzla

Will see if GSP competes for the Canadian Wrestling team and how he does. Point being, until a reputable figure steps up to make this happen, the Olympic committe is not one to go after MMA, specially when there are other disciplines already in line to be an olympic sport.

The Olympics already has wrestling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrestling_at_the_Summer_Olympics and TKD, so I would think they're not desperate to go after something like MMA.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> Because people who don't like MMA want to drag it down to the level where it's toothless and sanitised and therefore acceptable to them. Too many people don't understand what it actually is as opposed to what they perceive it to be so they want to bind it up with so many rules and regulations, put it in the Olympics and make it a pale shadow of what it was.


 
So let me make sure I understand what you're saying. You're saying people want to put MMA in the Olympics to purposely make it weaker? Very conspiritorial. 

And while that may or not be the _impact _on MMA were it to be included in the olympics, I strongly doubt that is the _intent._ And your argument sounds like this is their _intent.... _whoever _they_ are. You never really specified _which people._ It obviously can't be everyone, since you apparently don't _want_ MMA to be an Olympic sport, and I don't _care_. There's two people ruled out right off the bat.


----------



## Tez3

Josh Oakley said:


> So let me make sure I understand what you're saying. You're saying people want to put MMA in the Olympics to purposely make it weaker? Very conspiritorial.
> 
> And while that may or not be the _impact _on MMA were it to be included in the olympics, I strongly doubt that is the _intent._ And your argument sounds like this is their _intent.... _whoever _they_ are. You never really specified _which people._ It obviously can't be everyone, since you apparently don't _want_ MMA to be an Olympic sport, and I don't _care_. There's two people ruled out right off the bat.


 


Well putting TKD in the Olympics hasn't exactly enhanced it has it? The Judo rules are constantly being tweaked to make it a 'better spectator experience' rather than enhancing the sport itself. There's other non martial arts sports its' happened to as well. Read some of the comments I get on MMA from the anti MMA people and you wouldn't doubt their intent to change it or even just wipe it out 

Wasn't arguing btw, just making a comment, whether it's the intent or not, putting MMA into the Olympics will ruin it. We discussed this in the UK MMA scene and none of us want MMA in the Olympics. We have no ruling body so even if it were in the Olympics there would be no British team.


----------



## ATC

Tez3 said:


> ...We have no ruling body so even if it were in the Olympics there would be no British team.


You'd be surprised at how fast a national org would spout up if it were to be added to the Olympics. GB would have a team in there. I would bet dimes to dollars. Someone would do it.


----------



## Tez3

ATC said:


> You'd be surprised at how fast a national org would spout up if it were to be added to the Olympics. GB would have a team in there. I would bet dimes to dollars. Someone would do it.


 

Perhaps but it wouldn't be done by the current people in British MMA. I think a TMA group would grab it and run with it, good luck to them lol!


----------



## zDom

Tez3 said:


> Perhaps but it wouldn't be done by the current people in British MMA. I think a TMA group would grab it and run with it, good luck to them lol!



Or, like what happened to TKD, a completely new group could come in and dedicate their training to exploiting the Olympic rules, squeezing out the original MMA'ers completely.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> Well putting TKD in the Olympics hasn't exactly enhanced it has it? The Judo rules are constantly being tweaked to make it a 'better spectator experience' rather than enhancing the sport itself. There's other non martial arts sports its' happened to as well. Read some of the comments I get on MMA from the anti MMA people and you wouldn't doubt their intent to change it or even just wipe it out
> 
> Wasn't arguing btw, just making a comment, whether it's the intent or not, putting MMA into the Olympics will ruin it. We discussed this in the UK MMA scene and none of us want MMA in the Olympics. We have no ruling body so even if it were in the Olympics there would be no British team.



1) Your new argument is highly speculative.
2) Your old argument was highly _presumptive_.
3) You are in fact _arguing_ your current position. And at an earlier point you _were_ arguing your previous position.Please take to time and learn what an argument _is_ before stating --incorrectly-- that you are not.


----------



## Josh Oakley

zDom said:


> Or, like what happened to TKD, a completely new group could come in and dedicate their training to exploiting the Olympic rules, squeezing out the original MMA'ers completely.



I doubt that, since MMA was already a SPORT previously, and is a more highly organized sport now, with more rules and regulations.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

The general feeling amongst most martial artists is that tkd has been adversley affected by becoming an olympic sport but from a larger viewpoint Im sure many would disagree with this. Tkd's popularity has grown immensley over the last decade or so and it continues to grow very quickly. More and more people are now making a living out of tkd whether it be competing (even in australia we have full time tkdists) or from running schools. Im amazed at how many kids at my children's school do tkd and in some parts of the world there is talk of it becoming part of the physical education curriculum in schools. Im not saying its a good or bad thing but certainly from many perspectives tkd has really thrived since becoming an olympic sport.


----------



## Tez3

Josh Oakley said:


> 1) Your new argument is highly speculative.
> 2) Your old argument was highly _presumptive_.
> 3) You are in fact _arguing_ your current position. And at an earlier point you _were_ arguing your previous position.Please take to time and learn what an argument _is_ before stating --incorrectly-- that you are not.


 
Who's arguing? I'm not, merely passing a comment on something you know nothing about and I do which is British MMA. It must be the time of year of year when people take the internet too seriously and get their knickers in a twist. Calm down son. It's not serious, just a chat on MMA in the Olympics. It's not the Oxford debating society.

zDom, I think you are likely to be right. The Olympic commitee would step in, make a governing body and all us reprobates would be left out of the scene. MMA in the UK is an extrememly idiosyncratic entity, it's so small for a start that I know practically everyone in it, there's no money and we do it all for the fun. Olympic stuff might be getting too serious for us.


----------



## BloodMoney

I dont see it as a case of putting MMA in the Olympics, as much as its a case of putting MMA _back _in the Olympics after a long hiatus.

If Judo, Wrestling and TKD are in the Olympics then BJJ should be at least, if not Pankration. I dunno about modern cage fighting MMA though, but hell, I would watch more Olympics if it were on.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> Who's arguing? I'm not, merely passing a comment on something you know nothing about and I do which is British MMA. It must be the time of year of year when people take the internet too seriously and get their knickers in a twist. Calm down son. It's not serious, just a chat on MMA in the Olympics. It's not the Oxford debating society.



So... you really don't know what the word argument actually means. And you have no intent on actually learning it. Well, since you take the internet serious enough to post all conspiratorially, But not serious enough to care about logic, or even the meanings of words, I guess we're done here.


----------



## Tez3

Josh Oakley said:


> So... you really don't know what the word argument actually means. And you have no intent on actually learning it. Well, since you take the internet serious enough to post all conspiratorially, But not serious enough to care about logic, or even the meanings of words, I guess we're done here.


 

 I can be as argumentative as you wish dear boy but I choose not to be when you are clearly just trying to wind me up. There's no plot to take over the world or even MMA, I posted tongue in cheek which obviously went straight over the top of your head. Do you seriously think people hate MMA that much they would conspire together to take it over, good grief!  :lol:

MMA is growing but not so much that there would be enough countries putting teams in to make it worth having a competition. The TKD and JUdo people would be anxious to keep MMA out, the UK Judo team did badly at the last Olympics and have been threatened with having their sports grant taken away or at least made smaller, they won't want competition. MMA people here don't want it in the Olympics as they feel it will castrate the sport, turn it into something else they won't like. We have a *small *wrestling team which did well last week in the Commonwealth Games, they won't want competition either for grants or places. The boxing team which again was a disappointment in China though the Home Country boxers did well last week, were like the Judo team, had a huge amount of money given to them but failed to perform. Again more opposition to MMA, boxing here generally does not like MMA anyway, too much of a threat they think. Our TKD team did well in China but were cheated out of medals so that doesn't give MMA people confidence that we will do well in the Olympics. All in all there seems little to gain from MMA being in the Olympics _from our point of view_. Can't speak for other countries though.

If GSP were to compete in the London Olympics I would be there like a shot lol!

I love the idea of Pankration coming *back* into the Olympics in all it's glory and lack of rules!


----------



## Jade Tigress

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful. Thanks.


----------



## Steve

I think that we all need to remember that there are no plans by anyone, anywhere to introduce MMA into the Olympics.  This is a "what if" thread that is completely hypothetical.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> I can be as argumentative as you wish dear boy but I choose not to be when you are clearly just trying to wind me up. There's no plot to take over the world or even MMA, I posted tongue in cheek which obviously went straight over the top of your head. Do you seriously think people hate MMA that much they would conspire together to take it over, good grief!  :lol:
> 
> MMA is growing but not so much that there would be enough countries putting teams in to make it worth having a competition. The TKD and JUdo people would be anxious to keep MMA out, the UK Judo team did badly at the last Olympics and have been threatened with having their sports grant taken away or at least made smaller, they won't want competition. MMA people here don't want it in the Olympics as they feel it will castrate the sport, turn it into something else they won't like. We have a *small *wrestling team which did well last week in the Commonwealth Games, they won't want competition either for grants or places. The boxing team which again was a disappointment in China though the Home Country boxers did well last week, were like the Judo team, had a huge amount of money given to them but failed to perform. Again more opposition to MMA, boxing here generally does not like MMA anyway, too much of a threat they think. Our TKD team did well in China but were cheated out of medals so that doesn't give MMA people confidence that we will do well in the Olympics. All in all there seems little to gain from MMA being in the Olympics _from our point of view_. Can't speak for other countries though.
> 
> If GSP were to compete in the London Olympics I would be there like a shot lol!
> 
> I love the idea of Pankration coming *back* into the Olympics in all it's glory and lack of rules!



mostly I'm trying to get you to look up the word argument.

Since _yet again_ you haven't, here are three definitions.

1)A fact or assertion offered as evidence that something is true; "it was a strong argument that his hypothesis was true.

2)In logic, an argument is a set of one or more meaningful declarative sentences (or "propositions") known as the premises along with another meaningful declarative sentence (or "proposition") known as the conclusion.

3)A series of statements organized so that the final statement is a conclusion which is intended to follow logically from the preceding statements, which function as premises

And now I really am done reading your words.


----------



## Tez3

:EG:  I'm female, Jewish and a Scorpio which bit of argument do you think I don't understand ROFLMAO!

But I'm not here to *argue,* just to enjoy the *conversation*.


----------



## Tez3

stevebjj said:


> I think that we all need to remember that there are no plans by anyone, anywhere to introduce MMA into the Olympics. This is a "what if" thread that is completely hypothetical.


 
Absolutely! I'd like to see sports in the Olympics that can be trained and competed for cheaply! That way as many countries could compete as possible, there's no way that small developing countries can compete against the bigger, rich ones. I actually think shin kicking would be a good sport (yes, it's a real one) or cheese rolling, definitely cricket though. Not golf though, never golf! Love to see Kabbadi in though, it's like a martial arts ball game! the British Forces have teams, so we might win some medals for a change! Rugby sevens would be a good one especially if the Kiwis win and do their Haka bare chested as they did last week after winnng the Commonwealth Games Gold....wow just wow!

Going to have to go and lie down now.......................


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> :EG: I'm female, Jewish and a Scorpio which bit of argument do you think I don't understand ROFLMAO!
> 
> But I'm not here to *argue,* just to enjoy the *conversation*.


 
The DEFINITION OF THE WORD. Thxbye.


----------



## Tez3

Josh Oakley said:


> The DEFINITION OF THE WORD. Thxbye.


 

Look, you may here to argue with people but I'm not. 

It's already been pointed out, this is a hypothetical question, my posts were in that spirit, I'm not arguing anything with anyone nor am I taking it so seriously that I get upset about someone else's posts. You asked a question, I answered tongue in cheek, that's all, nothing else. My sense of humour is obviously different from yours, it happens.


----------



## Bruno@MT

Did someone use the word 'Argument'?


[yt]teMlv3ripSM[/yt]

[yt]WdS7ffB-usY[/yt]


----------



## MJS

Guess the nudge was missed earlier by Jade.  Come on folks, lets chill k? 

Anyways...in the early UFCs there was a limited rule set.  Today, we see a much larger list of "Do Not Do's" with fighter safety in mind.  So....assuming that MMA did make it in, what changes would there be?


----------



## Tez3

MJS said:


> Guess the nudge was missed earlier by Jade. Come on folks, lets chill k?
> 
> Anyways...in the early UFCs there was a limited rule set. Today, we see a much larger list of "Do Not Do's" with fighter safety in mind. So....assuming that MMA did make it in, what changes would there be?


 
The problem with MMA at the moment is the general public's ignorance of it and as these are the people any Olympic city has to sell the tickets to there would be big problems. Talking to friends who were at the UFC in London the other night a great many people are turning up expecting a huge bloodfest of what we call car parks fights. One friend was sat with half a dozen empty seats beside him when half way through the night some lads came in and sat down, some English the others Irish. They asked him if there were any English fighters on it, (der!) then when Bisping had caught his opponent in the unmentionables the Irish guys laughed and said they knew the English had no balls! he had to point out that Bisping was the English guy, his opponent wasn't. There were loads of chavs dressed in Tap Out who had no idea what they were looking at booing every time a fight went to the floor and shouting out the most stupid comments showing their ignorance of what they were looking at. We don't get these idiots coming to any other promotions just the UFC, I guess thats because of the name. The night wasn't a sell out anyway, it never is. One wit on an MMA site suggested that to fill the empty seats the UFC trawl through the local pubs offering free tickets. Now thats fanciful but the UFC has moved people from the furthest away seats before on shows here to the cageside to fill them up so it looks better on television.
Other friends got fed up of the chavs asking them questions which showed they had no knowledge of MMA at all.

These aren't the people nobody wants at the Olympics and we don't want people thinking these are the normal people who follow the sport, these are the UFC chavs.

On the other side you have the 'anti blood sport' types who want MMA banned and would be horrified if it was even suggested it goes into the Olympics.

As in Judo which has decided it's Olympic compettion has to have spectator appeal ie lots of throws and less 'boring' groundwork I imagine we'd end up with some sort of kickboxing with the occasional throw and groundwork not longer than a minute or two, perhaps a rule saying subs within a minute or be stood up! The standard 4 oz gloves would be changed to those awful padded training ones, head guards, body shields, shin and foot pads compulsory, short rounds. Refs stopping at fight at the slightest hint of blood. Definitely no cage or ring, mats like Judo and TKD with judges at each corner. Probably two refs instead of one. Points given when an opponent touches the other, no KOs, maybe even disqualification if you draw blood! perhaps even semi contact or no contact at all lol!


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Tez3 said:


> The problem with MMA at the moment is the general public's ignorance of it and as these are the people any Olympic city has to sell the tickets to there would be big problems. Talking to friends who were at the UFC in London the other night a great many people are turning up expecting a huge bloodfest of what we call car parks fights. One friend was sat with half a dozen empty seats beside him when half way through the night some lads came in and sat down, some English the others Irish. They asked him if there were any English fighters on it, (der!) then when Bisping had caught his opponent in the unmentionables the Irish guys laughed and said they knew the English had no balls! he had to point out that Bisping was the English guy, his opponent wasn't. There were loads of chavs dressed in Tap Out who had no idea what they were looking at booing every time a fight went to the floor and shouting out the most stupid comments showing their ignorance of what they were looking at. We don't get these idiots coming to any other promotions just the UFC, I guess thats because of the name. The night wasn't a sell out anyway, it never is. One wit on an MMA site suggested that to fill the empty seats the UFC trawl through the local pubs offering free tickets. Now thats fanciful but the UFC has moved people from the furthest away seats before on shows here to the cageside to fill them up so it looks better on television.
> Other friends got fed up of the chavs asking them questions which showed they had no knowledge of MMA at all.
> 
> These aren't the people nobody wants at the Olympics and we don't want people thinking these are the normal people who follow the sport, these are the UFC chavs.
> 
> On the other side you have the 'anti blood sport' types who want MMA banned and would be horrified if it was even suggested it goes into the Olympics.
> 
> As in Judo which has decided it's Olympic compettion has to have spectator appeal ie lots of throws and less 'boring' groundwork I imagine we'd end up with some sort of kickboxing with the occasional throw and groundwork not longer than a minute or two, perhaps a rule saying subs within a minute or be stood up! The standard 4 oz gloves would be changed to those awful padded training ones, head guards, body shields, shin and foot pads compulsory, short rounds. Refs stopping at fight at the slightest hint of blood. Definitely no cage or ring, mats like Judo and TKD with judges at each corner. Probably two refs instead of one. Points given when an opponent touches the other, no KOs, maybe even disqualification if you draw blood! perhaps even semi contact or no contact at all lol!


If you dont mind me asking, what is a 'chav'?


----------



## MJS

Tez3 said:


> The problem with MMA at the moment is the general public's ignorance of it and as these are the people any Olympic city has to sell the tickets to there would be big problems. Talking to friends who were at the UFC in London the other night a great many people are turning up expecting a huge bloodfest of what we call car parks fights. One friend was sat with half a dozen empty seats beside him when half way through the night some lads came in and sat down, some English the others Irish. They asked him if there were any English fighters on it, (der!) then when Bisping had caught his opponent in the unmentionables the Irish guys laughed and said they knew the English had no balls! he had to point out that Bisping was the English guy, his opponent wasn't. There were loads of chavs dressed in Tap Out who had no idea what they were looking at booing every time a fight went to the floor and shouting out the most stupid comments showing their ignorance of what they were looking at. We don't get these idiots coming to any other promotions just the UFC, I guess thats because of the name. The night wasn't a sell out anyway, it never is. One wit on an MMA site suggested that to fill the empty seats the UFC trawl through the local pubs offering free tickets. Now thats fanciful but the UFC has moved people from the furthest away seats before on shows here to the cageside to fill them up so it looks better on television.
> Other friends got fed up of the chavs asking them questions which showed they had no knowledge of MMA at all.
> 
> These aren't the people nobody wants at the Olympics and we don't want people thinking these are the normal people who follow the sport, these are the UFC chavs.
> 
> On the other side you have the 'anti blood sport' types who want MMA banned and would be horrified if it was even suggested it goes into the Olympics.
> 
> As in Judo which has decided it's Olympic compettion has to have spectator appeal ie lots of throws and less 'boring' groundwork I imagine we'd end up with some sort of kickboxing with the occasional throw and groundwork not longer than a minute or two, perhaps a rule saying subs within a minute or be stood up! The standard 4 oz gloves would be changed to those awful padded training ones, head guards, body shields, shin and foot pads compulsory, short rounds. Refs stopping at fight at the slightest hint of blood. Definitely no cage or ring, mats like Judo and TKD with judges at each corner. Probably two refs instead of one. Points given when an opponent touches the other, no KOs, maybe even disqualification if you draw blood! perhaps even semi contact or no contact at all lol!


 
If we look at some of the forums, we'll often see MMA folks who do what you described about the folks at the London show.  These people, along with the other uneducated ones, ie: the ones who think its nothing but a blood-bath, are the proverbial 'bad apples that ruin the bunch,' IMO.  I mean, its kinda hard to judge something if ya dont know what it is. 

I for one, enjoy the UFC.  My wife can attest to the rather large collection of fights that I have.   A few years ago, I went to an event here in CT, and enjoyed it very much.  Even got a few autographs (Randy and Tim) and saw Chuck.  Good times! 

As for the watering down....I'll use TKD as an example.  People bash it left and right, saying its nothing but a sport, yet they talk about the combat side of it.  While I dont do TKD, I can't help but agree with those that say its nothing but a sport.  If there is in fact a 'combat' side to it, its rare that you see it.  So, if the art of TKD was 'watered down' for the sake of sport, the Olympics, etc., it seems to me that if MMA was to enter the Olympics, it would probably be as you described.


----------



## Tez3

Chavs should all be put down lol! See them on You Tube and cringe, we do. The blight of the UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav

It's not the UFC as such it's what it attracts in our cities plus the UK shows don't generally get the same standard of fighters from the States as those on home soil. We simply don't get the big names, we do get local fighters which is good but the chavs are woefully ignorant of them too! the other side is that the tickets are a hundred times more expensive than any UK show and money is tight for normal working people.

If the rules were left alone for the Olympics we could still be left with only a few countries competing, France has only just made it legal, I know Australia has some very good ones, Japan obviously, Russia has good fighters as does Poland, they tend to be quite ferocious. Germany has fighters and fight shows, The Netherlands too but not sure about any other Europeans. The Balkans are producing fighters as is Norway and Spain but I'm not sure there's enough worldwide interest to make the Olympic commitees think it's a worldwide sport. North America has enough Canadians and Americans but it may only be Brazil that has any in South America? If the African countries don't have fighters (though I do know a couple who fight here) it won't be accepted.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Scout200 said:


> Should the MMA be part of the Olympics? I personally think so.. What are your thoughts?
> 
> -Scout


Should?  I don't know.  It certainly has plenty of merit.  

I'd trade out quite a few of what I consider to be pointless events for MMA.

Probably won't happen though.  Too technical for most people to follow: once it goes to the ground, the average person cannot follow it.

Daniel


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Absolutely! I'd like to see sports in the Olympics that can be trained and competed for cheaply! That way as many countries could compete as possible, there's no way that small developing countries can compete against the bigger, rich ones. I actually think shin kicking would be a good sport (yes, it's a real one) or cheese rolling, definitely cricket though. Not golf though, never golf! Love to see Kabbadi in though, it's like a martial arts ball game! the British Forces have teams, so we might win some medals for a change! Rugby sevens would be a good one especially if the Kiwis win and do their Haka bare chested as they did last week after winnng the Commonwealth Games Gold....wow just wow!
> 
> Going to have to go and lie down now.......................


MMA is actually one sport that can be trained very cheaply.  While it can certainly be done high tech, there are lots of good gyms here (and I presume in the UK) that operate with very little in the way of high tech equipment.  A couple thai bags, mits, couple of wrestling mats maybe.  Ivan Saliverry's gym up in Seattle is very simple.  He's got a boxing ring, wrestling mats, several heavy bags and a couple of speed bags.  

Frankly, the rest of your suggestions sound silly.  I can't tell whether you're being serious or not, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and presume you were joking.  



MJS said:


> Guess the nudge was missed earlier by Jade.  Come on folks, lets chill k?
> 
> Anyways...in the early UFCs there was a limited rule set.  Today, we see a much larger list of "Do Not Do's" with fighter safety in mind.  So....assuming that MMA did make it in, what changes would there be?


They'd have to make it more fun to watch.  Most of the changes in Judo are to make it more accessible to the lay audience.  So, I'd expect time limits on the floor... like judo.  If there's not any continuous action on the floor, stand them up.  So, the ground game would, I'm guessing, move to favor wrestlers who get points for the take down.  Then both sides would stall until they get stood back up.    Ultimately, I'd say it would end up looking a lot like San Shou. 

That being said, I think I'd prefer to see San Shou represented.



MJS said:


> If we look at some of the forums, we'll often see MMA folks who do what you described about the folks at the London show.  These people, along with the other uneducated ones, ie: the ones who think its nothing but a blood-bath, are the proverbial 'bad apples that ruin the bunch,' IMO.  I mean, its kinda hard to judge something if ya dont know what it is.
> 
> I for one, enjoy the UFC.  My wife can attest to the rather large collection of fights that I have.   A few years ago, I went to an event here in CT, and enjoyed it very much.  Even got a few autographs (Randy and Tim) and saw Chuck.  Good times!
> 
> As for the watering down....I'll use TKD as an example.  People bash it left and right, saying its nothing but a sport, yet they talk about the combat side of it.  While I dont do TKD, I can't help but agree with those that say its nothing but a sport.  If there is in fact a 'combat' side to it, its rare that you see it.  So, if the art of TKD was 'watered down' for the sake of sport, the Olympics, etc., it seems to me that if MMA was to enter the Olympics, it would probably be as you described.


I think that the ranges at work in MMA would save it from that fate, and it would change as I described above.  Olympic boxers are still used to punching with full contact.  

Finally, Tez, if you're stating a position (You believe that MMA would be a bad choice for the Olympics) and backing it up with rationale (all of the reasons you stated), you're arguing.  An argument doesn't have to be contentious.  Just throwing that out because I can't take the back and forth anymore arguing about what an argument is.


----------



## Tez3

Nah I'm having a conversation just the same as I do face to face, people say something, someone else says something etc etc. It doesn't have to be backed up, proved or even be logical. It's a conversation such as you have at a dinner party or at work, nothing more. Arguments between men and women should always end with the man having the last word....ie 'yes dear' 
sorry Chris, had to do it lol!

I'm serious about having sports that can be trained simply and cheaply to allow as many people as possible participate in it. MMA does meet that criteria in many places. I'm not serious about shin kicking though it is a competitive sport here, very competitive actually! Cheese rolling is a dangerous sport, more people get hurt doing that that at MMA. The suggestions weren't serious but weren't silly either as they are sports enjoyed by real people. Absolutely serious about the NZ rugby team with shirts off though!










Kabbadi if you've never seen it is a very good sport I think many martial artists would enjoy and yes we have Service teams here. The US has a team which competes in the Kabbadi World Cup, Canada has a team too. It would be a good sport to put into the Olympics, much better than MMA.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7110012.stm


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Nah I'm having a conversation just the same as I do face to face, people say something, someone else says something etc etc.


If that's the case, you argue a lot in real life.  Better, I think, to know it.





> It doesn't have to be backed up, proved or even be logical. It's a conversation such as you have at a dinner party or at work, nothing more.


Arguments don't have to be logical, backed up or proven.  Effective ones do, perhaps, but anytime you're stating a position on anything, and backing up the assertion with support, you're framing an argument.  

For example: "Gee, the weather around here sucks.  It's always so cold and dreary.  I'd much rather live in Australia, because the weather there is always sunny, the women glow, the men plunder and they have vegemite, which I love."  

Here's another example: "I think we should redefine the terms 'conversation' and 'argument' because when I'm arguing, I don't like to call it that.  It's unbecoming and makes me feel too... argumentative." 



> Arguments between men and women should always end with the man having the last word....ie 'yes dear'
> sorry Chris, had to do it lol!


I don't necessarily disagree with this.





> I'm serious about having sports that can be trained simply and cheaply to allow as many people as possible participate in it. MMA does meet that criteria in many places. I'm not serious about shin kicking though it is a competitive sport here, very competitive actually! Cheese rolling is a dangerous sport, more people get hurt doing that that at MMA. The suggestions weren't serious but weren't silly either as they are sports enjoyed by real people. Absolutely serious about the NZ rugby team with shirts off though!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kabbadi if you've never seen it is a very good sport I think many martial artists would enjoy and yes we have Service teams here. The US has a team which competes in the Kabbadi World Cup, Canada has a team too. It would be a good sport to put into the Olympics, much better than MMA.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7110012.stm


MMA meets the definition of cheaply trained as much as soccer or boxing do.  I don't think that cheaply trained and allowing for as many competitors as possible disqualifies MMA.  On that criterion alone, almost every country could field a competitive MMA team.  

Once again, I don't think that MMA is well suited for the Olympics.  BJJ would be much better, and better received overall, I think.


----------



## Tez3

Sigh, okay, *here, where I am* 'arguing' and 'having an argument' are things one does in a temper, or when a disagreement goes too far. It's fighting with words. It isn't a pleasant pastime, it causes divorces when spouses argue, children get told off for arguing and I arrest people when arguments go too far which they often do. It's not something one should encourage. Now 'debating' is something different, that's fairly structured and has give and take. I dislike arguing with people either in person on in post therefore I try not to argue. If someone wants to debate something with me, I'd prefer they don't start off with an antagonistic attitude ( not not you Steve!) throwing words down as if in a challenge match. 

We are coming from different view points on the meaning of words, it's a shame that there seems no middle ground for some.

I'm not arguing about MMA I'm saying it's my opinion that it shouldn't be in the Olympics and tbh I don't have to justify my opinion to anyone. The OP asked for opinions he got them. He didn't ask for a full blown debate on it, if he had I would have given the pros and cons and bored you all silly with a very long list of reasons why I think the way I do.


----------



## ATC

A lawyers opening statement is known as an opening argument in just about every country. To argue is to debate, that is the simple term. One does not have to be in anger to argue a point, although many people because of disagreeing points, tend to be agitated or angry due to the disagreement, but that has no bearing on the definition of the term argument. The simple fact that two or more people hold different points of view and choose to debate those points of view defines the term argument.

Argument and Debate are synonymous.

Just thought I&#8217;d mediate.:asian:


----------



## Tez3

ATC said:


> A lawyers opening statement is known as an opening argument in just about every country. To argue is to debate, that is the simple term. One does not have to be in anger to argue a point, although many people because of disagreeing points, tend to be agitated or angry due to the disagreement, but that has no bearing on the definition of the term argument. The simple fact that two or more people hold different points of view and choose to debate those points of view defines the term argument.
> 
> Argument and Debate are synonymous.
> 
> Just thought I&#8217;d mediate.:asian:


 

Ta, ducks.

However the way it is employed on here often when someone says you are arguing it's meant as an accusation. I was neither arguing nor debating on this thread. It was just an opinion, nought else, then it seemed to me that I was being accused of arguing and being told I was arguing my point and my argument didn't hold up. why would it, it was an opinion given lightly.

Opening arguments in courts are done if not in anger certainly with the view to being combatative. It's not the pleasant exchange of views a conversation is. Each side is literally trying to best the other, it isn't a place for the coming together of agreement. It's an argument as I described it. Arguments end in discord, debates don't.

The thing is too, if that's how I've been educated and brought up, that arguing is not the done thing, even if I'm wrong, I don't see why I should be harrassed for not arguing! It's how I see things rightly or wrongly, there's little need for people to get agitated about it and assume things about me that aren't true.


----------



## ATC

Tez3 said:


> Ta, ducks.
> 
> However the way it is employed on here often when someone says you are arguing it's meant as an accusation. I was neither arguing nor debating on this thread. It was just an opinion, nought else, then it seemed to me that I was being accused of arguing and being told I was arguing my point and my argument didn't hold up. why would it, it was an opinion given lightly.
> 
> Opening arguments in courts are done if not in anger certainly with the view to being combatative. It's not the pleasant exchange of views a conversation is. Each side is literally trying to best the other, it isn't a place for the coming together of agreement. It's an argument as I described it. Arguments end in discord, debates don't.
> 
> The thing is too, if that's how I've been educated and brought up, that arguing is not the done thing, even if I'm wrong, I don't see why I should be harrassed for not arguing! It's how I see things rightly or wrongly, there's little need for people to get agitated about it and assume things about me that aren't true.


 Your points and opinions are noted.

OK everyone back to a pretty good thread please. See my next post.


----------



## ATC

MJS said:


> ...As for the watering down....I'll use TKD as an example. People bash it left and right, saying its nothing but a sport, yet they talk about the combat side of it. *While I dont do TKD*, I can't help but agree with those that say its nothing but a sport. If there is in fact a 'combat' side to it, its rare that you see it. So, if the art of TKD was 'watered down' for the sake of sport, the Olympics, etc., it seems to me that if MMA was to enter the Olympics, it would probably be as you described.


If you don't do TKD, then why use this as an example? How can you example something that you have no knowledge in? Any MA that is converted into a sport will be modified or altered for the sake of safety. There is no way any TKDist can use a great many techniques and concepts in the ring. You would have a lot of crippled or people. That can be said for any Martial Art.


----------



## MJS

ATC said:


> If you don't do TKD, then why use this as an example? How can you example something that you have no knowledge in? Any MA that is converted into a sport will be modified or altered for the sake of safety. There is no way any TKDist can use a great many techniques and concepts in the ring. You would have a lot of crippled or people. That can be said for any Martial Art.


 
Why use it as an example?  LOL, because its all over the internet, on here, on youtube...all billed as sport.  People say the combat side is there, I dont see it.  I made a simple statement, nothing more.  No need to get huffy because I said something about your art.  So, that being said, if all people see is the sport side, of course they're going to think that its all watered down, even if its supposedly not.

Judo is in the Olypics correct?  Is it watered down?  I was simply asking if MMA, which, as I said earlier, has already been watered down from its early days.  I'm asking how much more it'd be watered down.


----------



## Bob Hubbard

Just re add gladiatorial combat to the mix.  It'll serve the same purpose, and bump the ratings up a bit. There'd also be no question on effectiveness or 'sport' or watered down.


----------



## Carol

I'm actually with BloodMoney, I would LOVE to see Pankration in the Olympics, especially with the history it has.

Now if the "Co-Ed Naked..." franchise from the 80s is still around, I want to license "Co-Ed Naked Pankration".  Because, of course, its all about the history.  :lol:


----------



## Steve

ATC said:


> If you don't do TKD, then why use this as an example? How can you example something that you have no knowledge in? Any MA that is converted into a sport will be modified or altered for the sake of safety. There is no way any TKDist can use a great many techniques and concepts in the ring. You would have a lot of crippled or people. That can be said for any Martial Art.


Warning:  The following post contains an argument.
Disclaimer:  I am not mad, nor am I trying to make anyone else so.  

TKD is a good example because, based on the opinions stated by credible TKD stylists, there is a growing divide between TKD self-defense instruction and TKD competitive instruction.  I can't speak for MJS, but for me, I take the word of people who are credible.  Even you have agreed in the past on this forum that there is a world of difference between 'Olympic' TKD and traditional TKD.    

I understand that you are a fan of Olympic TKD and that you're heavily involved in the sport.  I get that.  However, even to a lay person watching the TKD competition in the Olympics, you can see that it bears little resemblance to any kind of self defense.  

The point isn't whether Olympic TKD is a good sport.  It's fine, if you're into it.  The point is whether the changes in TKD as a whole largely due to its involvement in the Olympics has been a good thing or a bad thing.  And continuing on, whether good or bad, would it have a similar affect on MMA?  

Personally, I think it's been bad only because ultimately the reputation of TKD on the whole has suffered outside the sport.  Right or wrong, TKD has cultivated a reputation as the quintessential "kiddie", afterschool daycare MA. 

I'd hate to see that happen to MMA.


----------



## Steve

Carol said:


> I'm actually with BloodMoney, I would LOVE to see Pankration in the Olympics, especially with the history it has.
> 
> Now if the "Co-Ed Naked..." franchise from the 80s is still around, I want to license "Co-Ed Naked Pankration".  Because, of course, its all about the history.  :lol:



Hehe, but then it couldn't be coed.  It would have to be men only, and women who sneak in to watch would be killed.  

But I'm all for naked beach volleyball.  On second thought... that's not necessary.   I wouldn't change a thing.


----------



## ATC

MJS said:


> Why use it as an example? LOL, because its all over the internet, on here, on youtube...all billed as sport. People say the combat side is there, I dont see it. I made a simple statement, nothing more. No need to get huffy because I said something about your art. So, that being said, if all people see is the sport side, of course they're going to think that its all watered down, even if its supposedly not.
> 
> *Judo is in the Olypics correct? Is it watered down?* I was simply asking if MMA, which, as I said earlier, has already been watered down from its early days. I'm asking how much more it'd be watered down.


Yes Judo has been altered from it original form. What you see in the Olympic is not the original *Kano Jiu-Jitsu or Kano Jiu-Do.*

And not huffy at all. Based on your statement* "I don't do TKD"* I just found it quite profound that you would example something that you don't do. I would have stated the same thing if you had instered any art in place of TKD.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

MJS said:


> As for the watering down....I'll use TKD as an example. People bash it left and right, saying its nothing but a sport, yet they talk about the combat side of it. While I dont do TKD, I can't help but agree with those that say its nothing but a sport.


Sport taekwondo is what is seen in the olympics, and yes, *that* is a sport.  Also the national sport of Korea.  The style of sparring was developed, if memory serves, by the Jidokwan in the late sixties/early seventies as a means of differentiating taekwondo tournaments from karate tournaments.

The "watering down" of taekwondo is really not due to the olympics and began prior to the olympics.  It has everything to do with commercialism and liability control.  

Also, you need to specify which taekwondo you are talking about, as there are two major groups.  ITF taekwondo sparring looks nothing like the WTF sparring and a lot more like sport karate.

Though I have shifted away from taekwondo to hapkido, I practiced for a very long time and I can assure you that there is plenty of combat worthiness to both the ITF and Kukkiwon systems.

Just another point of clarification: the WTF regulates the sport of taekwondo.  It establishes the rule set, the standards for competitive poomsae, and is the IOC recognized governing body for the sport.

The Kukkiwon regulates all the rest, from establishment of curriculum to ranking of taekwondoists.  



MJS said:


> If there is in fact a 'combat' side to it, its rare that you see it. So, if the art of TKD was 'watered down' for the sake of sport, the Olympics, etc., it seems to me that if MMA was to enter the Olympics, it would probably be as you described.


Really, the art has not been watered down for the sake of sport; the two are separate entities with some overlap.  Nothing more.

Kukki taekwondo (the style associated with the WTF and from which the competitive poomsae in the WTF come) contains a great deal that is not part of sport taekwondo.  Finding a school that teaches it that way can be hard, however, depending upon where you are, and WTF sport taekwondo garners the lions share of attention, as the WTF is the largest governing body.

The ITF teaches Chang Hon taekwondo, and there is a substantial practical element to it.  But the ITF is fractured (I believe that there are three of them) and ITF schools are outnumbered substantially by those that teach Kukki/WTF taekwondo.  Hard to compete with a nationally backed federation that is also the recognized olympic NGB.

There is also the ATA, which teaches Songahm taekwondo and is world wide is called the Songahm Taekwondo Federation.  ATA/STF is its own unique animal and is probably hammered on the most for lack of practicality on the web, but from what I have seen, the system contains all of the necesary tools for a solid and practical system; the ATA simply markets to the suburban family/afterschool program customer, and does so very well.

There is nothing inherently bad or inherently superior about any of the three groups; they simply offer very different products.  The WTF pours the most energy and money into marketing, so needless to say, it is the one that everyone is familiar with.

Daniel


----------



## ATC

stevebjj said:


> Warning: The following post contains an argument.
> Disclaimer: I am not mad, nor am I trying to make anyone else so.
> 
> TKD is a good example because, based on the opinions stated by credible TKD stylists, there is a growing divide between TKD self-defense instruction and TKD competitive instruction. I can't speak for MJS, but for me, I take the word of people who are credible. Even you have agreed in the past on this forum that there is a world of difference between 'Olympic' TKD and traditional TKD.
> 
> I understand that you are a fan of Olympic TKD and that you're heavily involved in the sport. I get that. However, even to a lay person watching the TKD competition in the Olympics, you can see that it bears little resemblance to any kind of self defense.
> 
> The point isn't whether Olympic TKD is a good sport. It's fine, if you're into it. The point is whether the changes in TKD as a whole largely due to its involvement in the Olympics has been a good thing or a bad thing. And continuing on, whether good or bad, would it have a similar affect on MMA?
> 
> Personally, I think it's been bad only because ultimately the reputation of TKD on the whole has suffered outside the sport. Right or wrong, TKD has cultivated a reputation as the quintessential "kiddie", afterschool daycare MA.
> 
> I'd hate to see that happen to MMA.


Your warning has been recognized.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




TKD as an after school day care or kiddy art has nothing to do with the Olympics. That has been a strong marketing choice by many Dojang owners to create or increase profit to sustain a living.

Olympic TKD, is only a byproduct of TKD and not TKD. Kiddy TKD is very different than adult TKD. Many techniques that adults use aren't even taught to children or even teen for that matter.

I have to stand by my argument that to example something that you don't do or know about is bad. If he would have just stopped at his example then fine. But to state they you don't do something, so you don't know, how can you in the next sentence state that you agree with anything one way or another.

So you don't do, so you don't know, but you agree with someone. Not very smart to me. If I don't know or don't do then it is just that, I don't know. I have to obtain some knowledge to make even an opinion. Any opinion based on no knowledge is just mind boggling to say the least.


----------



## Steve

ATC said:


> Your warning has been recognized.





> TKD as an after school day care or kiddy art has nothing to do with the Olympics. That has been a strong marketing choice by many Dojang owners to create or increase profit to sustain a living.
> 
> Olympic TKD, is only a byproduct of TKD and not TKD. Kiddy TKD is very different than adult TKD. Many techniques that adults use aren't even taught to children or even teen for that matter.


Do you think that TKD as a whole has a good reputation, either within or without the MA community?  I can think of some TKD people here and in real life whom I am guessing run top notch programs.  But they are among the people who lament the most about how commercialism, selling out for profit and inclusion in the Olympics have led to the current state of TKD in the world.  

Edit to add:  At some point, how you measure success or failure needs to be stated, as well.  I mean, it's clear that there are many people who are perfectly happy with how TKD is going and don't see any reason to change a thing.  


> So you don't do, so you don't know, but you agree with someone. Not very smart to me. If I don't know or don't do then it is just that, I don't know. I have to obtain some knowledge to make even an opinion. Any opinion based on no knowledge is just mind boggling to say the least.


At some point, we have to make decisions about credibility.  No one can know everything about anything.  It's all different degrees of ignorance.  I'm more ignorant of TKD politics and history than other people.  

But in a situation like this, lay opinions are relevant.  What people who aren't fans of MMA think of MMA is relevant because that speaks directly to its marketability in a venue like the Olympics.  In the same way, lay opinions of TKD are relevant, ie, what effect the Olympics have had on public perception of the art of TKD.


----------



## MJS

ATC said:


> Yes Judo has been altered from it original form. What you see in the Olympic is not the original *Kano Jiu-Jitsu or Kano Jiu-Do.*
> 
> And not huffy at all. Based on your statement* "I don't do TKD"* I just found it quite profound that you would example something that you don't do. I would have stated the same thing if you had instered any art in place of TKD.


 
Just going on what I see and hear from people.    Just because someone doesnt do an art, doesnt mean that they cant make an observation. I'll defer to Steves post.


----------



## ATC

MJS said:


> Just going on what I see and hear from people.    Just because someone doesnt do an art, doesnt mean that they cant make an observation. I'll defer to Steves post.


That is my point. Just because someone says something, if you don't know you can only say they said it. But to agree with what someone says without any first hand knowledge just can't be done.

I saw this girl and she was gorgeous!!! No one can agree, disagree or have any type of opinion without also seeing the girl. That is an over simplified analogy but it fits none the less. All anyone without seeing can say is that I said she was gorgeous.

This holds true for anything. Also I would have to know something about the comparative also. Because if I only know the one thing then how can I compare it to anything other than what I know.

This is why these arguments are silly but fun at best and can't be taken seriously. Not many people are really qualified to judge but do without any knowledge of what it is they are judging. They may know one thing but not another but somehow they can give an opinion.

Yes everyone can have an opinion but even opinions require some knowledge. No one can make an opinion worth anything without it.


----------



## Josh Oakley

ATC said:


> That is my point. Just because someone says something, if you don't know you can only say they said it. But to agree with what someone says without any first hand knowledge just can't be done.
> 
> I saw this girl and she was gorgeous!!! No one can agree, disagree or have any type of opinion without also seeing the girl. That is an over simplified analogy but it fits none the less. All anyone without seeing can say is that I said she was gorgeous.
> 
> This holds true for anything. Also I would have to know something about the comparative also. Because if I only know the one thing then how can I compare it to anything other than what I know.
> 
> This is why these arguments are silly but fun at best and can't be taken seriously. Not many people are really qualified to judge but do without any knowledge of what it is they are judging. They may know one thing but not another but somehow they can give an opinion.
> 
> Yes everyone can have an opinion but even opinions require some knowledge. No one can make an opinion worth anything without it.


 
You have quite a compelling armument, to wit, I believe you argued convingingly.


----------



## Josh Oakley

My argument is that entering MMA into the olympic world would not change normal MMA any more than Olympic Taekwondo changed traditional Taekwondo, or any other olympic martial art has changed the traditional martial art. Boxing, wrestling, taekwondo, fencing... all have both olympic and non-olympic counterparts, both continue to grow in their own ways, and often differ from one another. 

But I would also argue that olympic MMA would possibly be less entertaining than professional MMA, in the same vein as my prior argument.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Josh Oakley said:


> My argument is that entering MMA into the olympic world would not change normal MMA any more than Olympic Taekwondo changed traditional Taekwondo, or any other olympic martial art has changed the traditional martial art. Boxing, wrestling, taekwondo, fencing... all have both olympic and non-olympic counterparts, both continue to grow in their own ways, and often differ from one another.
> 
> But I would also argue that olympic MMA would possibly be less entertaining than professional MMA, in the same vein as my prior argument.


Good point. I often hear that tkd has 'changed' since its inception to the olympics. It has added another dimension to the art that some clubs focus on but it has not changed traditional tkd at all. I train at a traditional tkd club and absolutely nothing has changed since tkd became an olympic sport so I think even if mma did join the olympics there would still be plenty of places around teaching the 'old school' stuff.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

stevebjj said:


> The point isn't whether Olympic TKD is a good sport.  It's fine, if you're into it.  The point is whether the changes in TKD as a whole largely due to its involvement in the Olympics has been a good thing or a bad thing.  And continuing on, whether good or bad, would it have a similar affect on MMA?
> 
> Personally, I think it's been bad only because ultimately the reputation of TKD on the whole has suffered outside the sport.  Right or wrong, TKD has cultivated a reputation as the quintessential "kiddie", afterschool daycare MA.


I agree with your conclusion, but do not believe that olympic inclusion is the cause.

The process that led to the perception of taekwondo as an after-school program began before olympic inclusion.  About the only thing that olympic inclusion did in this area was to be used by commercial McDojangs as yet another marketing tool.  

Commercially oriented schools use everything as a revenue generator.  Look at what has been done with the black belt.  

If olympic TKD being practiced in average schools that touted it as "olympic" always looked as serious as the practices in a real boxing gym, people would respect the training and dedication even if they didn't think of it as practical SD.

Ultimately, if you are going to tout the olympics, run your classes as if the students were potential olympic hopefuls make them work hard.  The kids on the football team may be in an "after school" program, but they're running hard and practicing outside in full gear.  Even with football camps and such, nobody perceives NFL football as a wimpy kiddie sport.

Because the training standards for MMA as a competitive sport are already well established, I don't see olympic inclusion as being an issue in that regard.

What I would see as an issue is potential monkeying with the rules to make it more television friendly to a wider audience and MMA gyms then altering their curriculum and sparring to accommodate it.  

Daniel


----------



## MJS

ATC said:


> That is my point. Just because someone says something, if you don't know you can only say they said it. But to agree with what someone says without any first hand knowledge just can't be done.
> 
> I saw this girl and she was gorgeous!!! No one can agree, disagree or have any type of opinion without also seeing the girl. That is an over simplified analogy but it fits none the less. All anyone without seeing can say is that I said she was gorgeous.
> 
> This holds true for anything. Also I would have to know something about the comparative also. Because if I only know the one thing then how can I compare it to anything other than what I know.
> 
> This is why these arguments are silly but fun at best and can't be taken seriously. Not many people are really qualified to judge but do without any knowledge of what it is they are judging. They may know one thing but not another but somehow they can give an opinion.
> 
> Yes everyone can have an opinion but even opinions require some knowledge. No one can make an opinion worth anything without it.


 
Have you ever said it?  According to Steve, he's seen you say it on here.  Go to YT...all you see is sport TKD.  Is there anything else out there aside from the sport side?  If so, where is it?  I take it reading things on here, and seeing video clips on youtube, isnt good enough?  Do I have to drive around to every TKD school in my area, to confirm?

I think we're a bit off topic here anyways.  I used TKD, you saw that and ran with it.  Like I said, you're very into TKD, your kids are, and thats all fine.  I still think I hit a bit of a nerve though.  

As for your good looking girl statement....you could see her and think shes great, I could see her and think shes ugly.  I dont have to personally know her to determine that she's ugly.  Those are our opinions.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

MJS said:


> Have you ever said it?  According to Steve, he's seen you say it on here.  Go to YT...all you see is sport TKD.  Is there anything else out there aside from the sport side?  If so, where is it?  I take it reading things on here, and seeing video clips on youtube, isnt good enough?  Do I have to drive around to every TKD school in my area, to confirm?
> 
> I think we're a bit off topic here anyways.  I used TKD, you saw that and ran with it.  Like I said, you're very into TKD, your kids are, and thats all fine.  I still think I hit a bit of a nerve though.
> 
> As for your good looking girl statement....you could see her and think shes great, I could see her and think shes ugly.  I dont have to personally know her to determine that she's ugly.  Those are our opinions.


I respect your opinion but please dont use youtube as a guide. Most people training traditional tkd have better things to do than upload vids of themselves on youtube. I learnt a long time ago not to "learn" about anything by using youtube as a research tool. I train traditional tkd at a club with over 4000 members, I am tkd through and through and yet wouldnt even know the ruleset for "sport" tkd, and Im not alone.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

stevebjj said:


> Do you think that TKD as a whole has a good reputation, either within or without the MA community?  I can think of some TKD people here and in real life whom I am guessing run top notch programs.  But they are among the people who lament the most about how commercialism, selling out for profit and inclusion in the Olympics have led to the current state of TKD in the world.
> 
> Edit to add:  At some point, how you measure success or failure needs to be stated, as well.  I mean, it's clear that there are many people who are perfectly happy with how TKD is going and don't see any reason to change a thing.
> At some point, we have to make decisions about credibility.  No one can know everything about anything.  It's all different degrees of ignorance.  I'm more ignorant of TKD politics and history than other people.
> 
> But in a situation like this, lay opinions are relevant.  What people who aren't fans of MMA think of MMA is relevant because that speaks directly to its marketability in a venue like the Olympics.  In the same way, lay opinions of TKD are relevant, ie, what effect the Olympics have had on public perception of the art of TKD.


Do I think tkd has a good reputation either within or without the martial arts community? Well outside the martial arts community it obviously has a great reputation or it wouldnt be growing at the rate it is. I regularly have people ask me about tkd because they want to get either themselves or their children into it. Schools are even looking into adding it into their physical education program and they wouldnt be adding things with a bad reputation. Within the martial arts community its hard to say because most (not all) of the tkd bashing comes from people who havent actually done tkd and I find it hard to accept bashing of an art from someone who hasnt actually trained in it. Actually most martial artists Ive heard bashing tkd couldnt even tell you the difference between ITF and WTF tkd. I would also say that karate cops just as much of a bashing from other martial artists.


----------



## Jade Tigress

*ATTENTION ALL USERS*

*Please return to the original topic. 

Pamela Piszczek
MT Asst Admin *


----------



## ATC

MJS said:


> Have you ever said it?  According to Steve, he's seen you say it on here.  Go to YT...all you see is sport TKD.  Is there anything else out there aside from the sport side?  If so, where is it?  I take it reading things on here, and seeing video clips on youtube, isnt good enough?  Do I have to drive around to every TKD school in my area, to confirm?
> 
> I think we're a bit off topic here anyways.  I used TKD, you saw that and ran with it.  Like I said, you're very into TKD, your kids are, and thats all fine.  I still think I hit a bit of a nerve though.
> 
> As for your good looking girl statement....you could see her and think shes great, I could see her and think shes ugly.  *I dont have to personally know her to determine that she's ugly.  Those are our opinions.*


As I stated that is a very simple analogy, but you can't know nothing about her, you have to see her and that is knowing something.

Just because you see some clips or hear someone that does not do TKD say some things really qualifies your opinion?

Where is it you ask, well it is out there. Just because you haven't gone out there to see it does not mean something does not exist. I can tell you that just practicing the sport of Olympic TKD is only a small part of what we do. Most of the adult in our dojang won't even every compete at any tournament so they don't do it at all. We do as much SD and Hapkido as we do kicking. We also infuse a lot of boxing hand techniques into our training as well, not to mention the endless classes on forms and basics.

Yes, there are many schools that only train Olympic sport TKD but there are also many schools that also practice much much more.

I see many Wushu demos and tournaments that just look like a dynamic dance to me but since I have no knowledge of Wushu I know I am not qualified to really say what it is.

TKD is one of the most populous arts practiced so it is out there the most to be seen. Just like any art most people are crap at it. Not everyone can be good and most are not. Only a select few are ever really good at anything.

I can bet dimes to dollars that most people that post here on MT are crap at what they do, but that does not make the art crap.

I can say the same for just about every other art out there. YT has many clips of crappy people doing just about every art. Now those arts are not in the Olympics so no one says anything but I see no difference. But there is a difference, I don't do them so I really don't know if what I see is just crappy people or a crappy art so I won't form an opinion because I don't know.

I have done some other stuff and each are good but all have limitations. But none suck. Only the people suck.

They Olympics water down nothing, something new is only created, what use to exist still exist.


----------



## Steve

MJS said:


> Have you ever said it?  According to Steve, he's seen you say it on here.  Go to YT...all you see is sport TKD.  Is there anything else out there aside from the sport side?  If so, where is it?  I take it reading things on here, and seeing video clips on youtube, isnt good enough?  Do I have to drive around to every TKD school in my area, to confirm?


Just to be clear, ATC has acknowledged that there is a difference between sport TKD and traditional TKD for self defense.  

Okay.  couple of questions here.  Let's presume that MMA is going to be in the next Olympics.  They're introducing it.  What ruleset is used?  What techniques will be illegal?  Elbows?  Knees to a downed opponent?  Soccer kicks?  

Let's just say, hypothetically speaking, that MMA IS an Olympic sport.  All of us doomsayers... what's it look like?  How bad do we think it will be? 

Personally, I think that the following rules would be instituted in order to make it more palatable for the general public.   Elbows are out.  Knees are in while standing, but out on the ground.  No soccer kicks.  A strict time limit on ground fighting along the lines of modern Judo, where constant progress toward a submission must be made or they get stood up.  Ground and pound gets functionally lost as a result as does any real advanced, technical groundfighting.   

Bigger gloves and head gear, too.


----------



## ATC

MJS said:


> Have you ever said it? According to Steve, he's seen you say it on here.


I don't think he has said that.


----------



## ATC

stevebjj said:


> Just to be clear, ATC has acknowledged that there is a difference between sport TKD and traditional TKD for self defense.
> 
> Okay. couple of questions here. Let's presume that MMA is going to be in the next Olympics. They're introducing it. What ruleset is used? What techniques will be illegal? Elbows? Knees to a downed opponent? Soccer kicks?
> 
> Let's just say, hypothetically speaking, that MMA IS an Olympic sport. All of us doomsayers... what's it look like? How bad do we think it will be?
> 
> Personally, I think that the following rules would be instituted in order to make it more palatable for the general public. Elbows are out. Knees are in while standing, but out on the ground. No soccer kicks. A strict time limit on ground fighting along the lines of modern Judo, where constant progress toward a submission must be made or they get stood up. Ground and pound gets functionally lost as a result as does any real advanced, technical groundfighting.
> 
> Bigger gloves and head gear, too.


I think that none of that would have any affect on any of the MMA orgs. The Olympic MMA would be just that, Olympic MMA. Something that happens once every 4 years. MMA is year round, on TV so it is clearly seen by the masses.

Sport Judo and sport TKD are not on TV and what you see in the Olympics is all the public really sees. Yet TKD in a real Dojang has not changed.

I don't think MMA in the Olympic would change anything about the MMA that we know of today. Just like Olympic boxing is different from pro boxing as is basketball and so on. You would just have Olympic MMA.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

stevebjj said:


> Let's just say, hypothetically speaking, that MMA IS an Olympic sport. All of us doomsayers... what's it look like? How bad do we think it will be?
> 
> Personally, I think that the following rules would be instituted in order to make it more palatable for the general public. Elbows are out. Knees are in while standing, but out on the ground. No soccer kicks. A strict time limit on ground fighting along the lines of modern Judo, where constant progress toward a submission must be made or they get stood up. Ground and pound gets functionally lost as a result as does any real advanced, technical groundfighting.
> 
> Bigger gloves and head gear, too.


That is about what I would expect.  Is it doom?  Hard to say.  The major question is how much an olympic rule set would influence MMA outside of the olympics on a broad scale.

Daniel


----------



## MJS

ATC,

I'm assuming you can read, but apparently you missed the return to topic note.  Guess ya gotta get in one last dig because on cracked on your art.  I'll be sure to RTM your other off topic posts as well, but if you wish to continue the off topic debate, lets take it to PM.


----------



## Bob Hubbard

*Lets focus on the topic please.*


----------



## Tez3

ATC said:


> I think that none of that would have any affect on any of the MMA orgs. The Olympic MMA would be just that, Olympic MMA. Something that happens once every 4 years. MMA is year round, on TV so it is clearly seen by the masses.
> 
> *Sport Judo and sport TKD are not on TV* and what you see in the Olympics is all the public really sees. Yet TKD in a real Dojang has not changed.
> 
> I don't think MMA in the Olympic would change anything about the MMA that we know of today. Just like Olympic boxing is different from pro boxing as is basketball and so on. You would just have Olympic MMA.


 

We have both Judo and TKD on television, recently too, the World Championships for Judo, and I think it was the Europeans for TKD only last week. They are on Sky and Eurosport. Judo was expecially good, saw armbars and chokes as submissions which I haven't seen in the Olympic Judo. TKd was the Irish dancing type though not so good. Watched the the Golden Glory kickboxing from Amsterdam on Saturday night, MC was Bas Rutten, very cool.

Oh guys at what point can I say 'I told you so' about arguing not being good? :lol2:


----------



## ralphmcpherson

I think to a degeree this has stayed on topic. If you suggest anything becoming an olympic sport the obvious reaction of most people is if the sport will become "watered down" due to olympic involvement. It is therefore only natural that people will use examples of sports that have been accepted into the olympics to use as a guide as to how they have been affected. It is interesting to hear the misconceptions (particularly regarding tkd) as the only tkd people see is the 'olympic style'. I think it can be a real eye opener to some to realise that what you see in the olympics is only a very small part of tkd. This can then be related back to mma and what changes could/should be made if it were to seek olympic involvement and more importantly, how it may change people's perceptions of mma, such as what has happened with tkd. Sorry if Ive drifted off topic.


----------



## mook jong man

Just look at how synchronized swimming has become watered down .

I long for the old days when they used try and drown each other  , give each other nipple cripples underwater and other dirty tricks like pinching together the other girl's nose clip.

Its a far cry from the brutal sport it used to be .


----------



## The Last Legionary

I think there are legitimate arts that deserve a place in the Olympics.  I don't count MMA as one since unlike legitimate traditional arts such as Karate, Judo and Kung Fu, MMA is just a bunch of random techniques someone tossed together, usually using a bastardized BJJ base.  Disagree?  Fine, then what is your curriculum and training structure? How about unique content? Didn't think so. It's a bit of this, a bit of that, punch the bag, roll roll roll, ground n pound, and "The UFC makes me legit". Blech.


----------



## Steve

The Last Legionary said:


> I think there are legitimate arts that deserve a place in the Olympics.  I don't count MMA as one since unlike legitimate traditional arts such as Karate, Judo and Kung Fu, MMA is just a bunch of random techniques someone tossed together, usually using a bastardized BJJ base.  Disagree?  Fine, then what is your curriculum and training structure? How about unique content? Didn't think so. It's a bit of this, a bit of that, punch the bag, roll roll roll, ground n pound, and "The UFC makes me legit". Blech.



Oh brother.  Troll much?  since when are the olympics about rewarding sports you deem "legitimate"?  While I still think that its a bad idea, suggesting that another style is more deserving because thy are more traditional is idiotic.


----------



## Tez3

The Last Legionary said:


> I think there are legitimate arts that deserve a place in the Olympics. I don't count MMA as one since unlike legitimate traditional arts such as Karate, Judo and Kung Fu, MMA is just a bunch of random techniques someone tossed together, usually using a bastardized BJJ base. Disagree? Fine, then what is your curriculum and training structure? How about unique content? Didn't think so. It's a bit of this, a bit of that, punch the bag, roll roll roll, ground n pound, and "The UFC makes me legit". Blech.


 
Unique content, don't know who told you that but it's called mixed martial arts, ie a mixture of different martial arts.

I assume however you aren't looking for a serious answer and are just chucking oil on the flames.


----------



## The Last Legionary

stevebjj said:


> Oh brother.  Troll much?  since when are the olympics about rewarding sports you deem "legitimate"?  While I still think that its a bad idea, suggesting that another style is more deserving because thy are more traditional is idiotic.



Troll? Always.  Read on McDuff.



Tez3 said:


> Unique content, don't know who told you that but it's called mixed martial arts, ie a mixture of different martial arts.
> 
> I assume however you aren't looking for a serious answer and are just chucking oil on the flames.



I don't use oil, I go straight to bear mace.

But let me be serious for a moment. It will be a strain but I can do it, really.

By it's name, "Mixed" martial arts are just that. Mixed.  As I said, it's a bit of this, bit of that, little bit of some other thing.  There is no such thing as "The MMA". It's all different. So, how do you judge it? Where is the standardized MMA system? It doesn't exist.  So I can take Tai Chi, USMC Sniper tech, 5 pages out of Ashida Kim's "most excellent" ninja books, and a few moves I learned from the TV and I'm now a "l33t MMA dude". Can't say otherwise. I mixed some martial arts together, that's what it means right? "Mixed Martial Arts". MMA.  So, don't tell me I'm doing it wrong, I'm not. Just because your gym rolls around on the floor in obscene sex positions with punching bags, and another has a really cool cage that they play slapsy on Saturdays in, doesn't make your mixture of things better or worse than mine.  

Don't point at PRIDE, UFC or the rest either.  I highly doubt any of those guys will take 2-4 years off of competition so they can live on donations and hand outs for 5 minutes of fame and a $50 medal. So that leaves the "wanna bes", the guys who think the UFC is "IT", and who argue on web boards about "real training" and "NHB" crap, but have all these rules and conditions for a fight.

Even if you can find a few people to live on nothing and devote 4 years of their life to getting in top condition, you still have to define rules and limits, set judging standards. Something you can't do when dealing with a black bag full of mixed up people who picked and chose from a hundred different arts in a thousand different ways.

We have fencing, we have kendo, we don't have "couple of yobs swinging wall hangers with moves they got off the telly".
We have football, we have soccer, we don't however have "street rules, the blue car's the end zone".
We have sharp shooting, we have archery, we don't however have "nerf dart shoots".

MMA is a nice fad for PPV. It's value as an Olympic Sport however is minimal. Something 30 years old or less, certainly we have many more established and legitimate sports to include. Roller Derby for example, which is older and more respectable, yet shares many similar traits. 

If I'm wrong, point me at the MMA system information, a non-UFC MMA Sport group, and a proven scoring system for it, and I'll be happy to reconsider my position that it's little more than a program for people who can't hack it in a real martial arts school past white belt.

Hell, why not just add in roller ****ing? It'd boost the ratings at least. Can you read between the lines here, or should I highlight the letters of the sekrit missige?


----------



## Bob Hubbard

*Enough.*


----------



## Josh Oakley

The Last Legionary said:


> I think there are legitimate arts that deserve a place in the Olympics. I don't count MMA as one since unlike legitimate traditional arts such as Karate, Judo and Kung Fu, MMA is just a bunch of random techniques someone tossed together, usually using a bastardized BJJ base. Disagree? Fine, then what is your curriculum and training structure? How about unique content? Didn't think so. It's a bit of this, a bit of that, punch the bag, roll roll roll, ground n pound, and "The UFC makes me legit". Blech.


 
Well, I'll go ahead and disagree on multiple counts.

*A)MMA isn't legitimate*
   Well, that depends on what you define as "legitimate". Let's analyze 3 possibilities:
_1_
_a_ *:* lawfully begotten; _specifically_ *:* born in wedlock 

_b_ *:* having full filial rights and obligations by birth <a _legitimate_ child> 
2
*:* being exactly as purposed *:* neither spurious nor false <a _legitimate_ grievance> <a _legitimate_ practitioner> 

3
_a_ *:* accordant with law or with established legal forms and requirements <a _legitimate_ government> 
_b_ *:* ruling by or based on the strict principle of hereditary right <a _legitimate_ king> 

4
*:* conforming to recognized principles or accepted rules and standards <a _legitimate_ advertising expenditure

(source: mirriam-webster online)

So for the first definition, I would take your meaning of "legitimate" to be synonymous with "traditional". If so, then it would be a tough call to declare Judo "legitimate" when it was first demonstrated in 1932 (with it's founder leading the demonstration, no less), or even in 1964, when it was a mere 80 years old (the blink of an eye, compared to jujutsu--from which it derived-- which had a couple hundred years on it). Or we could look at Taekwondo, which was formed around 1955, and became an official olympic medal event in 2000... 45 years. Even less time than judo.

In comparison, if we were simply going with the term MMA, we could ostensibly say that MMA's tradition only goes back 17 years to the first UFC event. _However_, the UFC was an extension of Brazil's Vale-Tudo which in turn began in the '20s with the Gracie Challenge. And really, mixed-art challenges go back a _lot_ further. So if "legitimate" is "traditional", than MMA would have more "legitimacy" than Taekwondo had from inception to inclusion as a medaled event in the Olympics_,_and about as much "legitimacy" as judo had.

For the second definition of legitimate--being exactly as purposed; neither spurious nor false-- you would have a tough time showing that MMA is: a)anything other than what it is purposed to be, or b)spurious or false. And I say you can't prove MMA to truly be spurious because of its Vale-Tudo pedigree.

For definition 3a, MMA operates in accordance with established legal forms and requirements, and for 3b, I don't think it applies. (and if 3b DOES apply, I re-posit my arguments from definitions 1 and 2).

For definition 4, MMA conforms to recognized principles and accepted rules and standards... atleast within itself.

*B) Unlike Karate, Judo, and Kung Fu, MMA is a bunch of random techniques thrown together...*

Well, I have two objections to this: 

1) Of the three counter-examples you listed, only Judo has a single unifying set of techniques. Karate and Kung Fu are both umbrella terms that apply to a large number of styles, many of which, under each umbrella, will often have divergent techniques. As far as whether or not they were thrown together.... who can say? This is especially true with kung-fu...

2)MMA, in all its names, has had at least 80 years to test their techniques in the ring, and what doesn't work gets thrown out. Especially in the current of competition, a fighter that doesn't have a systemized strategy and set of tactics just won't be able to react quickly enough on the professional level to last long. Name me one top-performing Mixed Martial Artist who has a belt AND a bunch of techniques "thrown together.

3) It would be tough to say an organization like Mileti

*C)...usually using a bastardized BJJ Base.*

This actually shows you aren't very knowledgeable on MMA in general. A number of different bases are used, the most common being boxing, Muay Thai, wrestling, or og course BJJ. Here's a sampling of some of the well-known, _recent _names:
_1) Rashad Evans:_ While he _has_ a black belt in BJJ, he only got it at the begining of _this year_. His base is in wrestling.
_2) Chuck Liddel_: has studied BJJ, but his primary arts are Kenpo, Koei-kan, and kickboxing. He also has background in wrestling.
_3) Matt Hughes: _Wrestling, followed by Milletich Fighting Systems
4) _Randy Couture: _Wrestling (in fact, her was an alternate for the Olympics), though he has boxing and bjj.
5) _Anderson Silva: *1st bb: TAEKWONDO. 2nd bb: JUDO* 3rd: BJJ._
_6) Brock Lesner: _Oh snap! Another wrestler! NCAA and... WWE!
:rock:
*D) MMA lacks curriculum and training structure.*
    Go actually look up different MMA camps. You'll find you're mistaken. Many camps have an established curriculum and training structure. They're just not unified in their structure. Then again, neither is Karate or Kung Fu.

*E) MMA lacks unique content.*
    Well, so what? Why does it have to be unique content to be legitimate? And really, since you value tradition AND uniqueness? Generally, if something is unique, it's not traditional.

*F) MMA is a bit of this, bit of that, roll roll roll, ground and pound, and "UFC makes me legit".*
Shall we go with _reductio ad absurdum, _or is a simple strawman fallacy enough for this one?

Seriously, man, you just posed the exact same generalized stereotyping Tez3 said people DO with MMA. Your argument is just asinine, and frankly it's insulting to people who take the time to hone their skills in MMA. 


(See, Tez, I'm an equal opportunity bastard. And I think there are many who could _argue_ that point. It is quite an easy _argument_ to make!):wavey:


----------



## Josh Oakley

Oh, goody! More!



> By it's name, "Mixed" martial arts are just that. Mixed. As I said, it's a bit of this, bit of that, little bit of some other thing. There is no such thing as "The MMA". It's all different. So, how do you judge it? Where is the standardized MMA system? It doesn't exist.




The state of New Jersey created unified rules in 2010, and since then most states have conformed to this rule-set.
http://www.state.nj.us/lps/sacb/docs/martial.html




> So I can take Tai Chi, USMC Sniper tech, 5 pages out of Ashida Kim's "most excellent" ninja books, and a few moves I learned from the TV and I'm now a "l33t MMA dude". Can't say otherwise.


 

No more than you can do that to any other art to set yourself up as an overnight master. But no, generally you won't get away with that, since success in MMA depends on your actual fight record.




> I mixed some martial arts together, that's what it means right? "Mixed Martial Arts".


 
I guess we're back to _reductio ad absurdum_, or straw man. But I should point out a number of "legitimate traditional" martial arts are a mix of multiple arts: many forms of Karate, (ie: shotokan), many forms of Kung Fu (Shaolin's been mixing it up for centuries!), Taekwondo, etc. 

But we don't really call these MMA, right? Of course not! That is because MMA has developed distinction from other arts as a result of state laws and competition.




> So, don't tell me I'm doing it wrong, I'm not. Just because your gym rolls around on the floor in obscene sex positions with punching bags, and another has a really cool cage that they play slapsy on Saturdays in, doesn't make your mixture of things better or worse than mine.


 
I guess we're back to _reductio ad absurdum_, or straw man. 




> Don't point at PRIDE, UFC or the rest either. I highly doubt any of those guys will take 2-4 years off of competition so they can live on donations and hand outs for 5 minutes of fame and a $50 medal. So that leaves the "wanna bes", the guys who think the UFC is "IT", and who argue on web boards about "real training" and "NHB" crap, but have all these rules and conditions for a fight.


 
Compared to what? ACTUAL practitioners of traditional martial arts, or the wannabes who think Kodokan is "IT" and argue in web boards about "tradition" and "legitimacy" crap, but post under a pseudonym and don't bother to post their actual martial arts experience?




> Even if you can find a few people to live on nothing and devote 4 years of their life to getting in top condition, you still have to define rules and limits, set judging standards. Something you can't do when dealing with a black bag full of mixed up people who picked and chose from a hundred different arts in a thousand different ways.


 
So... are we keeping, or throwing our our previous statement of it all being bastardized BJJ?




> We have fencing, we have kendo, we don't have "couple of yobs swinging wall hangers with moves they got off the telly".





> We have football, we have soccer, we don't however have "street rules, the blue car's the end zone".
> We have sharp shooting, we have archery, we don't however have "nerf dart shoots".




Huh?




> MMA is a nice fad for PPV. It's value as an Olympic Sport however is minimal. Something 30 years old or less, certainly we have many more established and legitimate sports to include. Roller Derby for example, which is older and more respectable, yet shares many similar traits.


 
Roller derby would be more comparable to pro wrestling. 




> If I'm wrong, point me at the MMA system information, a non-UFC MMA Sport group, and a proven scoring system for it, and I'll be happy to reconsider my position that it's little more than a program for people who can't hack it in a real martial arts school past white belt.


 
http://www.state.nj.us/lps/sacb/docs/martial.html
or any state that falls along the same lines.

I'm also going to go out on a limb and guess you've never sparred with an MMA guy, or run a martial arts school and had an MMA guy sign up? 

Amazingly, there are differences in quality in almost EVERY art. MMA is no exception.




> Hell, why not just add in roller ****ing? It'd boost the ratings at least. Can you read between the lines here, or should I highlight the letters of the sekrit missige?


 
Is the secret message that you would rather generalize and stereotype based on a highly speculative, heavily biased, seemingly unreasearched personal viewpoint than actually take the time to develop a cogent argument? 

Is it that you'd rather tangent _ad nauseum_ than string together your random statements into a straightforword position?

...Is it that you're maybe a little too much into roller derby?

Failing any of those, you may need to break out the highlighter.


----------



## The Last Legionary

The highlighter fumes make my posts incomprehensible. Problem with going back to the Gracies is the Olympics won't let them rig the matches in their guys favor, so maybe that's a bad historical reference? Either way, you missed my point. 

Straight forward position? Straight forward position? I would have thought that was obvious. My position is that MMA is already a sport, just one where you make it up as you go. It's the Calvin-Ball of the arts. As to my art's effectiveness in the ring, well, toss out that silly rule book that just makes it favorable for the groundies, and let me use all my stuff.  Love to see Bas or Tank or Shamrock try and take me down while I've got a steel spike up their noses. hahaha. As to competition success, I'll have you know that once we took take downs and hitting out of the mix in our fed, those Ashida Kim techs made me the local world pooterweight champion. Belts on back order though, so you'll have to wait for the pics. :rofl:

And what's wrong with roller derby? Those chicks is tough, hot and vicious. Much better competition than that skinny kid trying to get in the UFC on SPIKE.   

You point out all the wrestlers. Well, the Olympics already HAS wrestling, and it HAS Boxing, so adding in MMA slap fights would be redundant.  TV time is limited as it is. Why add something that people can say "eh saw it already". 

Adding MMA to the Olympics is plain stupid. There are better and more deserving things that should be in there.


----------



## Carol

bob hubbard said:


> *enough.*



qft.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

The Last Legionary said:


> As to my art's effectiveness in the ring, well, *toss out that silly rule book that just makes it favorable for the groundies, and let me use all my stuff.*


Be careful what you wish for. If that silly rule book gets tossed out, they can use all of their stuff too, from spikes to guns to knives to GTO's. Funny how *most* of the time, the guys who make the 'throw out the rule book' comments are usually the guys who really can't fight and use the 'rule book' to give themselves a false sense of superiority over the guys and gals who did the work to actually be able to fight.

Not saying that you fall into that category; I've never seen you train, so I won't make assumptions about you personally. I will say that your arguments against MMA in general are poor and lack any real substance.

Most of our 'so called' traditional arts are cobbled together and really the only traditions that they have are cultural and unrelated the actual practice of the art. 




The Last Legionary said:


> So I can take Tai Chi, USMC Sniper tech, 5 pages out of Ashida Kim's "most excellent" ninja books, and a few moves I learned from the TV and I'm now a "l33t MMA dude". Can't say otherwise.


Actually, I can. Being an elite MMA player requires an excellent fight record against top fighters in your weight class. 

Also, MMA and Mixed Martial Arts are accepted nomenclature denoting a specific type of competitive rule set. You cannot do what you describe and claim to be an MMA player any more than I can make up my own game using an eliptical ball and claim to be a football player. 

Using your logic, you could call almost any martial art taekwondo. Taekwondo essentially 'way of the foot and fist' but everyone knows that the term taekwondo and the initials TKD apply to a specific Korean art with three large and established branches (Kukki, Chang hon and Songahm). Hapkido, Kuksulwon, Tangsudo, Hwarangdo, and a variety of other Korean arts use feet and fists too, but nobody calls them taekwondo. Because they aren't.

By the way, the result of assembling pieces of different arts together to make one art is not MMA. Those are called _hybrid arts_, such as hapkido and (believe it or not) taekwondo (the KMA, not the WTF sport). 

And at long last, you address the OP: 



The Last Legionary said:


> Don't point at PRIDE, UFC or the rest either. I highly doubt any of those guys will take 2-4 years off of competition so they can live on donations and hand outs for 5 minutes of fame and a $50 medal. So that leaves the "wanna bes".


This is essentially true, though it doesn't leave 'wanna bees'; it leaves amateurs.  Not the same thing.  Given that the Olympic competitors were required to be amateurs until the nineties, and are still overwhelmingly made up of amateurs, this probably would not factor into olympic inclusion. 




The Last Legionary said:


> You point out all the wrestlers. Well, the Olympics already HAS wrestling, and it HAS Boxing, so adding in MMA slap fights would be redundant. TV time is limited as it is. Why add something that people can say "eh saw it already".


This is probably the primary reason that MMA will not make it into the olympics. The IOC seems to want little overlap between the sports included in the olympics and, as you say, TV time is limited.

Daniel


----------



## Josh Oakley

The Last Legionary said:


> The highlighter fumes make my posts incomprehensible. Problem with going back to the Gracies is the Olympics won't let them rig the matches in their guys favor, so maybe that's a bad historical reference? Either way, you missed my point.


 
Neither will the UFC




> Straight forward position? Straight forward position? I would have thought that was obvious. My position is that MMA is already a sport, just one where you make it up as you go.


 
Again, showing you have no real knowledge of the UFC, or MMA in general. You seem more content with your strawman than with actual knowledge.




> It's the Calvin-Ball of the arts.


 
Guess you didn't actually READ my link. I can't say I'm entirely supprised. That would make you have to reconsider your position, in your own words. The Unified Rules have been around for 10 years!




> As to my art's effectiveness in the ring, well, toss out that silly rule book that just makes it favorable for the groundies, and let me use all my stuff.





> Love to see Bas or Tank or Shamrock try and take me down while I've got a steel spike up their noses. hahaha. As to competition success, I'll have you know that once we took take downs and hitting out of the mix in our fed, those Ashida Kim techs made me the local world pooterweight champion. Belts on back order though, so you'll have to wait for the pics. :rofl:




Anderson Silva usually wins by knock out. And what _is _your martial art and organization? What _is _it that you do? Also, you're pretty much the only one laughing at your jokes. Either try harder to be funny, or be serious.




> And what's wrong with roller derby? Those chicks is tough, hot and vicious. Much better competition than that skinny kid trying to get in the UFC on SPIKE.


 

Other than their smell, loudness, and poor fashion sense? Nothing. But mostly, they have absolutely nothing to do with the conversation.





> You point out all the wrestlers. Well, the Olympics already HAS wrestling, and it HAS Boxing, so adding in MMA slap fights would be redundant. TV time is limited as it is. Why add something that people can say "eh saw it already".


 
Well, greco-roman and freestyle wrestling are _both_ olympic events. Moreover, MMA has its own flavor. I don't think it would be redundant.




> Adding MMA to the Olympics is plain stupid. There are better and more deserving things that should be in there.


 
See it's hard to agree with you, since you don't judge MMA based on its actual merits or deficiencies. You have, to this point, built up a strawman, and are so focused on it, that trying to hold a conversation with you about this subject is impossible. So when you're ready to have a REAL discussion, I'm around. Frankly, I don't think you have what it takes to form a cogent argument.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Josh Oakley said:


> Well, greco-roman and freestyle wrestling are _both_ olympic events. Moreover, MMA has its own flavor. I don't think it would be redundant.


I do agree with you.  And to those of us who know what we're looking at, no, it is not redundant.  But to the general public, and likely the IOC, it would certainly appear to be redundant.

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Frankly, as the olympics are now, I would say that MMA should not be included.  Primarily because there are way too many events in the olympics already, some of which are, to me at least, absurd.

There is no way to adequaetely cover and televise every event in the olympics.  And I really don't think that the olympics need another event.  

Is MMA *deserving*?  Definitely.  But so are many other sports. 

Another issue is that for many sports, the olympics are either a vital or viable part of success (boxing and wrestling, for example) or are the ultimate goal (figure skating, gymnastics, WTF TKD) mainly because those sports do not boast high salaries and are dependent upon sponsors and such, and the olympics are a great way for amateur athletes to obtain sponsors.  

MMA is like NFL football and does not have, nor need that component.  MMA has at least one well established league that is international if I am not mistaken (the UFC) which manages plenty of air time on cable networks.

Now, if the IOC decided to start with a clean slate and begin including sports based on merit, by all means, I believe that MMA should be included.  But the IOC is not going to do that.

Daniel


----------



## Steve

legionairre, the unified rules for MMA can be found online.  These have been the de facto ruleset for all sanctioned USA events and most events overseas.  Like in Boxing, there are exceptions, but again, like with Boxing, the rules are pretty consistent from promotion to promotion.  These are the rules that most professional promotions use.   Just do a quick google search and you'll run across them.  Or just take a look here:  NJ, back in about 2002/2003 was the first State to propose them and Nevada was the first State to sanction an event under them: http://www.state.nj.us/lps/sacb/docs/martial.html


Regarding the rest, I just can't understand what makes you think that a codified sport has to be something more than that in order to be in the Olympics.  Your entire argument seems to boil down to an Olympic sport has to be Asian, more than 30 years old and liked by you.  Weird criteria, if you ask me.  Again, you're blatantly trolling the thread, and so far seem to be getting away with it.


----------



## The Last Legionary

> Your comments show a distinct lack of knowledge and are intentionally inflamatory.



Yes, yes they are. My argument is this: "MMA" belongs in the Olympics as much as Paintball does. Actually, Paintball and Roller Derby both have more right to be in there as they are unique.  MMA is just "boxing" combined with "wrestling", both of which already have their spots. Doesn't have to be "Asian" Steve. As to trolling, sure I am.  I'm not a Gracie Nutrider Fan Boi, so I must be trolling. After all I'm against cuddlebudding for medals. The only reason you people want MMA in the Olympics is so you can finally be seen as a legitimate art, and not the "couldn't hack it in a real dojo" crowd. But of course I'm a troll. I'm off topic here, what was it again? Oh yeah "Should MMA be in the Olympics". Nope. Not off topic. Wait, maybe I'm not being respectful enough to the memory of Graciedom? Well, you gots me on that one as I don't consider them anything special. Ah, I must be trolling because I disagree with people and have actually pointed out very specific reasons why MMA doesn't belong. By my same argument, "Western Sword Fighting", SCA Larping and American Pro Football also doesn't belong in there. Neither does Iron Chef. UFC style belongs as much as WWE/TNA does. No scripted or predetermined sports-entertainment does. 

So in conclusion, I say no to MMA. It doesn't belong, it doesn't deserve to, and it never will. Pfffft!


----------



## MJS

:drinkbeeropcorn:  Well, this thread will probably implode shortly, so on that note, I'll just bow out, kick back and watch the show.   I'll just go with what I said earlier...odds are, you'll never see it in the Olympics, given the fact that many people already have a distorted vision of what MMA is, some sort of change will probably have to be made, in addition to the current ruleset that we already see.  OTOH, whats the worst that could happen if they did include it?  Trial basis perhaps?


----------



## The Last Legionary

Reasons for MMA to NOT be included in the Olympics:

- Main components are wrestling and boxing. Both are already in the Olympics. Inclusion would be redundant.
- MMA already has an established amateur system, as well as professional coverage via UFC. 
- Lack of a definite "MMA System". The only requirement for a technique to be considered an MMA Tech is "someone used it in a competitive fight". 
- Low Standards.
- There are many requirements to be considered, including the existance of an international regulatory body and what percentage of countries practice that sport.  MMA is NOT big outside of a few nations.
- American MMA fighters would get their asses beaten regularly by government funded brutes from Russia.
- The established MMA rulesets would have to be greatly dumbed down to meet Olympic safety guidelines. Hard to do a takedown right when you're wearing giant mittens.
- There are numerous other competitive arts that deserve a spot. Arts such as Paintball, Roller Derby, Laser Tag, and snowball fights to name a few. One could also argue that Kick Boxing and Muay Thai belong in there, however Female Boxing is supposed to be included in 2012, making it less likely either will qualify.

Also:
- Removing top current competitors from the UFC and similar pro leagues for the time period needed for them to heal and train to compete is unrealistic. Most will not go for the income cuts it would entail or the loss of limelight. Promoters will likewise be resistant to losing top drawing stars for PPV's.
- Politics. Sure am American wouldn't have a problem smacking another Yank around, but lets see you get the Brazilians to fight each other. I hear they don't like the idea, so you'd have a lot of quitters to contend with.
- The Promoters will lose millions.  Put 2 top contenders like say, Silva and Lawler head to head in the Olympics. That's a big ticket pay out on PPV regardless of outcome, but you'll see it free on NBC.  I don't think so Charlie.
- Can't limit it just to Amateurs. The Russians will field a competition team that ate, slept, and breathed training for 4 years, all subsidized at gov. expense. If the US sends wannabes, they'll get destroyed. Hey, it's hard to work out 8 hrs a day while flipping burgers to pay the rent.
- MMA has a reputation of being barbaric, blood and thuggery. MMA fights aren't legal in many US states. How can you field a team that can't even compete in half the country legally?

Chew on that if you will. I'm done. MMA will never be in the Olympics. Period.


----------



## Steve

The Last Legionary said:


> Yes, yes they are. My argument is this: "MMA" belongs in the Olympics as much as Paintball does. Actually, Paintball and Roller Derby both have more right to be in there as they are unique.  MMA is just "boxing" combined with "wrestling", both of which already have their spots. Doesn't have to be "Asian" Steve. As to trolling, sure I am.  I'm not a Gracie Nutrider Fan Boi, so I must be trolling. After all I'm against cuddlebudding for medals. The only reason you people want MMA in the Olympics is so you can finally be seen as a legitimate art, and not the "couldn't hack it in a real dojo" crowd. But of course I'm a troll. I'm off topic here, what was it again? Oh yeah "Should MMA be in the Olympics". Nope. Not off topic. Wait, maybe I'm not being respectful enough to the memory of Graciedom? Well, you gots me on that one as I don't consider them anything special. Ah, I must be trolling because I disagree with people and have actually pointed out very specific reasons why MMA doesn't belong. By my same argument, "Western Sword Fighting", SCA Larping and American Pro Football also doesn't belong in there. Neither does Iron Chef. UFC style belongs as much as WWE/TNA does. No scripted or predetermined sports-entertainment does.
> 
> So in conclusion, I say no to MMA. It doesn't belong, it doesn't deserve to, and it never will. Pfffft!


More evidence that you haven't even read the thread in which you're trolling. Most people are against including MMA in the Olympics, just for... you know... actual, reasonable, rational reasons.  

MMA is a sport that has participants from just about all over the globe.  It's trained in the middle east, asia, europe, australia and the americas.  The rules are codified.  The promotions are successful.  To suggest that it bears more of a resemblance to paintball than tai chi, kung fu or most karate styles is just you stirring the pot.  I'm not sure what got into you, but you're blatantly violating the ToC and making no bones about it.


----------



## Bob Hubbard

> MMA fights aren't legal in many US states.


In NY, it's only allowed on indian reservations AFAIK.


----------



## Bob Hubbard

*Final Warning. Enough!*


----------



## Bob Hubbard

stevebjj said:


> More evidence that you haven't even read the thread in which you're trolling. Most people are against including MMA in the Olympics, just for... you know... actual, reasonable, rational reasons.
> 
> MMA is a sport that has participants from just about all over the globe.  It's trained in the middle east, asia, europe, australia and the americas.  The rules are codified.  The promotions are successful.  To suggest that it bears more of a resemblance to paintball than tai chi, kung fu or most karate styles is just you stirring the pot.  I'm not sure what got into you, but you're blatantly violating the ToC and making no bones about it.


Steve, other than UFC, are the promotions really successful? I know close to nil on it all, but I recall something about some of them failing, some buy outs, etc.  To a casual viewer, all there is is UFC.  As to codified rules, are those rules the ones UFC uses? Or do they have their own modifications in there?  The local fights on the reservations from what I hear allow things UFC doesn't. Of course, insurance is also optional there too I hear.  

I have to agree with at least 1 point too. I can't see any main stream promotion allowing their main eventors to take off for a few years to compete in the Olympics.  After all, their value is as a winning fighter, not a guy in a gym who hasn't really fought in years.  

Maybe a rephrase to the question should be "Should MMA be included in the Olympics, and Why?"


----------



## Tez3

The Last Legionary said:


> Troll? Always. Read on McDuff.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't use oil, I go straight to bear mace.
> 
> But let me be serious for a moment. It will be a strain but I can do it, really.
> 
> By it's name, "Mixed" martial arts are just that. Mixed. As I said, it's a bit of this, bit of that, little bit of some other thing. There is no such thing as "The MMA". It's all different. So, how do you judge it? Where is the standardized MMA system? It doesn't exist. So I can take Tai Chi, USMC Sniper tech, 5 pages out of Ashida Kim's "most excellent" ninja books, and a few moves I learned from the TV and I'm now a "l33t MMA dude". Can't say otherwise. I mixed some martial arts together, that's what it means right? "Mixed Martial Arts". MMA. So, don't tell me I'm doing it wrong, I'm not. Just because your gym rolls around on the floor in obscene sex positions with punching bags, and another has a really cool cage that they play slapsy on Saturdays in, doesn't make your mixture of things better or worse than mine.
> 
> Don't point at PRIDE, UFC or the rest either. I highly doubt any of those guys will take 2-4 years off of competition so they can live on donations and hand outs for 5 minutes of fame and a $50 medal. So that leaves the "wanna bes", the guys who think the UFC is "IT", and who argue on web boards about "real training" and "NHB" crap, but have all these rules and conditions for a fight.
> 
> Even if you can find a few people to live on nothing and devote 4 years of their life to getting in top condition, you still have to define rules and limits, set judging standards. Something you can't do when dealing with a black bag full of mixed up people who picked and chose from a hundred different arts in a thousand different ways.
> 
> We have fencing, we have kendo, we don't have "couple of yobs swinging wall hangers with moves they got off the telly".
> We have football, we have soccer, we don't however have "street rules, the blue car's the end zone".
> We have sharp shooting, we have archery, we don't however have "nerf dart shoots".
> 
> MMA is a nice fad for PPV. It's value as an Olympic Sport however is minimal. Something 30 years old or less, certainly we have many more established and legitimate sports to include. Roller Derby for example, which is older and more respectable, yet shares many similar traits.
> 
> If I'm wrong, point me at the MMA system information, a non-UFC MMA Sport group, and a proven scoring system for it, and I'll be happy to reconsider my position that it's little more than a program for people who can't hack it in a real martial arts school past white belt.
> 
> Hell, why not just add in roller ****ing? It'd boost the ratings at least. Can you read between the lines here, or should I highlight the letters of the sekrit missige?


 
Sigh, why do do think it's amusing to write such complete and utter bollocks? Okay so you don't like MMA, there's no law says you have to but there are rules however on MT that make conversations and discussions about our relative arts interesting and sometimes educational. I could point out a whole loads of proven facts about MMA to refute your trash talking but for the life of me I can't think why I should be bothered. If I were being personal and insulting which of course is against the rules I would have said thats a bad case or verbal diarrhoea and mental constipation you have there but of course I wouldn't dream of saying here so I won't. 


Just grow up son.


----------



## The Last Legionary

Tez3 said:


> Sigh, why do do think it's amusing to write such complete and utter bollocks? Okay so you don't like MMA, there's no law says you have to but there are rules however on MT that make conversations and discussions about our relative arts interesting and sometimes educational. I could point out a whole loads of proven facts about MMA to refute your trash talking but for the life of me I can't think why I should be bothered. If I were being personal and insulting which of course is against the rules I would have said thats a bad case or verbal diarrhoea and mental constipation you have there but of course I wouldn't dream of saying here so I won't.
> 
> 
> Just grow up son.



It's good that you didn't say that, because that would be a personal attack, something that I have refrained from making here. As to growing up, no, never. I'm leaving this world after spending my last year the same way I did my first. Wearing a diaper, sitting in my own crap and having someone spoon feed me mashed peas. So Naaaah! :toilclaw:

Considering the people who get PAID to advise the heads of the companies like UFC, PRIDE, etc agree with me is of more importance than what the fans think. Sorry my position isn't popular, and I'm sorry you all can't read past the smart *** comments to the meat. I tried to even spell it out to be clear.

So, take your head out of "angry land" and pay attention to what I actually wrote, rather than read it as pure bash fest. 

Why are MMA events produced by networks ENTERTAINMENT divisions, not their SPORTS divisions? Maybe the networks don't see it as legitimate sport either. When MMA fights are on Network TV in Prime Time, not on some cable channel that 1 third of the US doesn't even see, you have an argument for consideration of inclusion, or at least that it's "big". 

If you do include it, what format will the matches take? You have 2 weeks to compete.  204 nations participated in the 2008 Olympics. That's a hell of a lot of matches. If you go single elimination, how many times will someone have to fight full tilt matches until they win? 8 fights in 2 weeks. So, how many guys will have to drop out from injury allowing lesser competitors to advance? Is 8 fights in 2 weeks realistic? You all claim I don't know anything, so you tell me.

Oh wait, I'm just trolling. Sorry


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

The Last Legionary said:


> Why are MMA events produced by networks ENTERTAINMENT divisions, not their SPORTS divisions? Maybe the networks don't see it as legitimate sport either.


 
In order to reach the primary viewer demographic, which includes the same demographic that watches WWE.  It really has no bearing on whether or not MMA is fit for olympic inclusion, however.




The Last Legionary said:


> When MMA fights are on Network TV in Prime Time, not on some cable channel that 1 third of the US doesn't even see, you have an argument for consideration of inclusion, or at least that it's "big".


Very few of the myriad of sports in the olympics can be seen on prime time.

Not much curling, volleyball, bobsledding, luge, or figure skating on prime time, but they are all olympic events.




The Last Legionary said:


> If you do include it, what format will the matches take?




Presumably the same format used in other martial olympic sports such as judo, wrestling, boxing, fencing, and taekwondo.




The Last Legionary said:


> You have 2 weeks to compete. 204 nations participated in the 2008 Olympics.





The Last Legionary said:


> That's a hell of a lot of matches. If you go single elimination, how many times will someone have to fight full tilt matches until they win? 8 fights in 2 weeks. So, how many guys will have to drop out from injury allowing lesser competitors to advance? Is 8 fights in 2 weeks realistic? You all claim I don't know anything, so you tell me.


The same can be said of wrestling, judo, boxing, and taekwondo.  They all deal with the same set of issues.  Somehow,they make it through the eight weeks and hang medals around the necks of three people, the worthiness of whom is debated on the internet for weeks afterward.  I'm sure that they could figure it out.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3

The Last Legionary said:


> It's good that you didn't say that, because that would be a personal attack, something that I have refrained from making here. As to growing up, no, never. I'm leaving this world after spending my last year the same way I did my first. Wearing a diaper, sitting in my own crap and having someone spoon feed me mashed peas. So Naaaah! :toilclaw:
> 
> Considering the people who get PAID to advise the heads of the companies like UFC, PRIDE, etc agree with me is of more importance than what the fans think. Sorry my position isn't popular, and I'm sorry you all can't read past the smart *** comments to the meat. I tried to even spell it out to be clear.
> 
> So, take your head out of "angry land" and pay attention to what I actually wrote, rather than read it as pure bash fest.
> 
> Why are MMA events produced by networks ENTERTAINMENT divisions, not their SPORTS divisions? Maybe the networks don't see it as legitimate sport either. When MMA fights are on Network TV in Prime Time, not on some cable channel that 1 third of the US doesn't even see, you have an argument for consideration of inclusion, or at least that it's "big".
> 
> If you do include it, what format will the matches take? You have 2 weeks to compete. 204 nations participated in the 2008 Olympics. That's a hell of a lot of matches. If you go single elimination, how many times will someone have to fight full tilt matches until they win? 8 fights in 2 weeks. So, how many guys will have to drop out from injury allowing lesser competitors to advance? Is 8 fights in 2 weeks realistic? You all claim I don't know anything, so you tell me.
> 
> Oh wait, I'm just trolling. Sorry


 
Angry land, wheres that then? nowhere I know for sure dear boy.

I suppose you do realise I've posted up against MMA being in the Olympics, no? I did't think so. I don't know why you are addressing questions about MMA being on the Olympics to me! 
We have MMA on mainstream tv here, the satellite sports channels, ESPN and Eurosport. The other channels it's on show all sorts of programmes including a lot of sport we don't have dedicated sports channels on terrestrial tv here. 

Are we saying you don't know anything? Or are we saying you are making a complete prat of yourself with your nonsensical posts, art bashing is rarely as amusing when written down as it is in the writers head. If you have serious points they are lost in the midden of trash talk and no one will wade through the pong of that to find any pearls of wisdom. Tell us why we should wade through loads of words spending time we'll never get back just to please you who seems to delight in being infantile, it's not childish which can be charming, it's infantile and a complete waste of time. 

I've already said I won't argue and I certainly won't argue with someone flaming and trolling but I will also not have ascribed  to me emotions and feeling to me that don't exist, I'm not angry, I'm actually rather sad that someone is wasting his education, his brain and is acting like a hand to gland warrior. 

Oh by the way, you may not have made a personal attack but you have made an offensive and tasteless sexual accusation. You may like to retract that, even apologise. We could take everything else in fun but that went over the line.


----------



## Tez3

You guys need Sky Sports and Eurosport, they cover just about every sport going. Just about all Olympic (Summer and Winter) sports too. These are mainstream satellite channels, Daniel, they cover every sport you mentioned in your last post, in prime time too. 

A friend of mine, Lisa Higo went to America and won *three* MMA pro rules fights in the same night, got nice belt for it too! We took one of our fighters to Italy where he fought and beat three opponents in a night. Tournaments of this kind are common but then even as amateurs we fight professionally and train hard.


----------



## Steve

Bob Hubbard said:


> Steve, other than UFC, are the promotions really successful? I know close to nil on it all, but I recall something about some of them failing, some buy outs, etc.  To a casual viewer, all there is is UFC.  As to codified rules, are those rules the ones UFC uses? Or do they have their own modifications in there?  The local fights on the reservations from what I hear allow things UFC doesn't. Of course, insurance is also optional there too I hear.


This is the nature of the beast.  Like boxing, there are tons of small promotions that come and go.  And at the elite level, there are promotions that try to challenge the UFC's monopoly.  

But in the middle, there are tons of promotions that are successful.  





> I have to agree with at least 1 point too. I can't see any main stream promotion allowing their main eventors to take off for a few years to compete in the Olympics.  After all, their value is as a winning fighter, not a guy in a gym who hasn't really fought in years.


Again, like boxing, we're talking about amateurs building a reputation.  While pros would probably gain little by competing in the Olympics, I know that tons of amateurs would jump at the chance to receive world class training.


----------



## Steve

The Last Legionary said:


> It's good that you didn't say that, because that would be a personal attack, something that I have refrained from making here. As to growing up, no, never. I'm leaving this world after spending my last year the same way I did my first. Wearing a diaper, sitting in my own crap and having someone spoon feed me mashed peas. So Naaaah! :toilclaw:
> 
> Considering the people who get PAID to advise the heads of the companies like UFC, PRIDE, etc agree with me is of more importance than what the fans think. Sorry my position isn't popular, and I'm sorry you all can't read past the smart *** comments to the meat. I tried to even spell it out to be clear.
> 
> So, take your head out of "angry land" and pay attention to what I actually wrote, rather than read it as pure bash fest.
> 
> Why are MMA events produced by networks ENTERTAINMENT divisions, not their SPORTS divisions? Maybe the networks don't see it as legitimate sport either. When MMA fights are on Network TV in Prime Time, not on some cable channel that 1 third of the US doesn't even see, you have an argument for consideration of inclusion, or at least that it's "big".
> 
> If you do include it, what format will the matches take? You have 2 weeks to compete.  204 nations participated in the 2008 Olympics. That's a hell of a lot of matches. If you go single elimination, how many times will someone have to fight full tilt matches until they win? 8 fights in 2 weeks. So, how many guys will have to drop out from injury allowing lesser competitors to advance? Is 8 fights in 2 weeks realistic? You all claim I don't know anything, so you tell me.
> 
> Oh wait, I'm just trolling. Sorry


Whatever else you're doing, you are without a doubt also trolling.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

stevebjj said:


> Again, like boxing, we're talking about amateurs building a reputation.  While pros would probably gain little by competing in the Olympics, I know that tons of amateurs would jump at the chance to receive world class training.


I think that in this discussion, this needs to be kept in mind.  The idea of an MMA dream team like the US Basketball team that was assembled of marquee players when the amateur only rule was discarded is really out of the question.  

Amateurs are what we'd see for the most part, so in that respect, Olympic MMA would be unlikely to change anything at the already well established professional level.

Daniel


----------



## The Last Legionary

Tez, I had several replies written up, however as I really don't desire to stoop to those levels, I've tossed them. I'm sorry if any of my comments offended, however I do stand by them as being my opinion and being entitled to them. Regardless of what you all think of my choice of wording, or any incorrect assumptions on my part, I have attempted to put forth significant and serious legitimate reasons against MMA being considered for inclusion in the Olympics. For this, I am labeled a troll. I'm a smart ***. I'm a son of a ***** when needed. I'm no more a troll than any of you are here. I'm one of the first to call ******** when I see it. I've been off and on this site far longer than most if not all of you calling me "troll" and making direct insult to my being.  I would have expected a smarter response considering past interactions. In this, I fear I was in serious error. Rather than read past the sarcasm and smart assness, I'm showered with insults, slammed with hostile neg reps and threatening PM's, the later 2 reported to the staff as you have I'm certain been showering them with reports on me. Whatever.  Rather than continue to argue with people I had thought smarter and risk losing my access, again, or that this train wreck of a thread be locked, I'll bow out.  

I leave you to your discussion where only "correct" opinions and views are of importance. Do us both a favor and put me on your ignore lists so that I need not offend you again. Good Day.
:bird:


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

The Last Legionary said:


> Regardless of what you all think of my choice of wording, or any incorrect assumptions on my part, I have attempted to put forth significant and serious legitimate reasons against MMA being considered for inclusion in the Olympics. For this, I am labeled a troll. I'm a smart ***. I'm a son of a ***** when needed. I'm no more a troll than any of you are here. I'm one of the first to call ******** when I see it. I've been off and on this site far longer than most if not all of you calling me "troll" and making direct insult to my being. I would have expected a smarter response considering past interactions. In this, I fear I was in serious error. Rather than read past the sarcasm and smart assness, I'm showered with insults, slammed with hostile neg reps and threatening PM's, the later 2 reported to the staff as you have I'm certain been showering them with reports on me. Whatever. Rather than continue to argue with people I had thought smarter and risk losing my access, again, or that this train wreck of a thread be locked, I'll bow out.
> 
> I leave you to your discussion where only "correct" opinions and views are of importance. Do us both a favor and put me on your ignore lists so that I need not offend you again. Good Day.
> :bird:


Blaming everyone else for the results of your own poor behavior is pointless.  Poor behavior is poor behavior, regardless of your tenure on this site.  Understand that you not labeled or apparently reported for your opinion but for expressing it in an inappropriate fashion.

Now, had you started out with this...


The Last Legionary said:


> Reasons for MMA to NOT be included in the Olympics:
> 
> - Main components are wrestling and boxing. Both are already in the Olympics. Inclusion would be redundant.
> - MMA already has an established amateur system, as well as professional coverage via UFC.
> - Lack of a definite "MMA System". The only requirement for a technique to be considered an MMA Tech is "someone used it in a competitive fight".
> - Low Standards.
> - There are many requirements to be considered, including the existance of an international regulatory body and what percentage of countries practice that sport. MMA is NOT big outside of a few nations.
> - American MMA fighters would get their asses beaten regularly by government funded brutes from Russia.
> - The established MMA rulesets would have to be greatly dumbed down to meet Olympic safety guidelines. Hard to do a takedown right when you're wearing giant mittens.
> - There are numerous other competitive arts that deserve a spot. Arts such as Paintball, Roller Derby, Laser Tag, and snowball fights to name a few. One could also argue that Kick Boxing and Muay Thai belong in there, however Female Boxing is supposed to be included in 2012, making it less likely either will qualify.
> 
> Also:
> - Removing top current competitors from the UFC and similar pro leagues for the time period needed for them to heal and train to compete is unrealistic. Most will not go for the income cuts it would entail or the loss of limelight. Promoters will likewise be resistant to losing top drawing stars for PPV's.
> - Politics. Sure am American wouldn't have a problem smacking another Yank around, but lets see you get the Brazilians to fight each other. I hear they don't like the idea, so you'd have a lot of quitters to contend with.
> - The Promoters will lose millions. Put 2 top contenders like say, Silva and Lawler head to head in the Olympics. That's a big ticket pay out on PPV regardless of outcome, but you'll see it free on NBC. I don't think so Charlie.
> - Can't limit it just to Amateurs. The Russians will field a competition team that ate, slept, and breathed training for 4 years, all subsidized at gov. expense. If the US sends wannabes, they'll get destroyed. Hey, it's hard to work out 8 hrs a day while flipping burgers to pay the rent.
> - MMA has a reputation of being barbaric, blood and thuggery. MMA fights aren't legal in many US states. How can you field a team that can't even compete in half the country legally?
> 
> Chew on that if you will. I'm done. MMA will never be in the Olympics. Period.


...you probably would not be in the position of sulking about being called on immature behavior or violating the site rules.  This is a cogent arguement in support of your opinion.  While I do not _completely_ agree with it, I do agree with the general thrust of this post.

Daniel


----------



## Bob Hubbard

*Considering the number of complaints we've gotten, most of which seem more intended to try and use the mods to shut down a poster than actual legitimate complaints I'm a bit pissed.  There's enough mod warnings in here, all from Admins you'll note, that we shouldn't have gotten this far.

Attack the message, not the messenger people. It's not fracking rocket science.
The little shots, dings, etc are noted and being discussed.  It ends here, now.

If you'd like to discuss or debate particular points, go right ahead. But the personal shots, end, as does any further abuse of the RTM, PM or Rep systems.

I hope that's clear. *


----------



## Josh Oakley

The Last Legionary said:


> Yes, yes they are. My argument is this: "MMA" belongs in the Olympics as much as Paintball does. Actually, Paintball and Roller Derby both have more right to be in there as they are unique. MMA is just "boxing" combined with "wrestling", both of which already have their spots. Doesn't have to be "Asian" Steve. As to trolling, sure I am. I'm not a Gracie Nutrider Fan Boi, so I must be trolling. After all I'm against cuddlebudding for medals. The only reason you people want MMA in the Olympics is so you can finally be seen as a legitimate art, and not the "couldn't hack it in a real dojo" crowd. But of course I'm a troll. I'm off topic here, what was it again? Oh yeah "Should MMA be in the Olympics". Nope. Not off topic. Wait, maybe I'm not being respectful enough to the memory of Graciedom? Well, you gots me on that one as I don't consider them anything special. Ah, I must be trolling because I disagree with people and have actually pointed out very specific reasons why MMA doesn't belong. By my same argument, "Western Sword Fighting", SCA Larping and American Pro Football also doesn't belong in there. Neither does Iron Chef. UFC style belongs as much as WWE/TNA does. No scripted or predetermined sports-entertainment does.
> 
> So in conclusion, I say no to MMA. It doesn't belong, it doesn't deserve to, and it never will. Pfffft!


 
Who said I want MMA in the Olympics? I don't _care_ if it's in the olympics or not. From a business standpoint, I think it stands to make more money by staying _out _of the Olympics. I just can't stand your line of reasoning, which is wholly based on a strawman argument. Specific arguments? you have in fact made them. R_epresentative arguments? _Well, no, you haven't. 

_I resent speculative, non-representative, stereotyped, strawman arguments._ You're probably a nice guy in real life. _Your arguments, however..._


----------



## Josh Oakley

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I do agree with you. And to those of us who know what we're looking at, no, it is not redundant. But to the general public, and likely the IOC, it would certainly appear to be redundant.
> 
> Daniel


 
I don't know, man. This is the same IOC that made greco and freestyle medal events. Evidently redundancy is not an entirely huge issue.


----------



## Bob Hubbard

Just to add info regarding UFC reach:
From Wiki


> As of 2010[update] viewers can access UFC programming on pay-per-view television in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand and Italy. UFC programming can also be found on Spike and Versus in the U.S., in the United Kingdom and Ireland on ESPN, as well as in over 130 countries and 20 different languages worldwide.


2008 Olympics saw athletes from 204 nations.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Thank you for bulletpointing this! And overall, I'd say this was a _much_ better post. Here are my responses.



> - Main components are wrestling and boxing. Both are already in the Olympics. Inclusion would be redundant.


 
Well, this is a stawman, and a deviation from your previous assertion that it's "bastardized BJJ". But o.kay, by the same logic, would you say that Freestyle wrestling shouldn't be included? If, not, then this is an invalid argument, anyway.



> - MMA already has an established amateur system, as well as professional coverage via UFC.


 
Judo has both professional and amateur circuits as well. 
Taekwondo has both a professional and amateur circuit. 

So do other events in the Olympics.



> - Lack of a definite "MMA System". The only requirement for a technique to be considered an MMA Tech is "someone used it in a competitive fight".


 
The same could be said for a number of techniques in other olympic events, including boxing, wrestling, judo etc. However, it's not necessary for scoring to have a definite MMA system, so long as the point system is unified (which it is, under the unified rules of NJ).



> - There are many requirements to be considered, including the existance of an international regulatory body and what percentage of countries practice that sport. MMA is NOT big outside of a few nations.


 
You might actually be on to something there. I have no counter-argument for this one.



> - Low Standards.


 
Speculative at best, biased or even prejudiced at worst. Provide examples, as MANY counter-examples exist. 



> - American MMA fighters would get their asses beaten regularly by government funded brutes from Russia.


 
1) How is this relevant to its inclusion in the Olympics?
2) How has that actually mattered in other Olympic events that Russian "government funded brutes" lost?



> - The established MMA rulesets would have to be greatly dumbed down to meet Olympic safety guidelines. Hard to do a takedown right when you're wearing giant mittens.


 
Maybe yes, maybe no. I highly doubt it, though, as Taekwondo has the same size gloves as professional MMA. Here's a picture:






Though there probably _would _be more gear than what is used in the pro circuit, I doubt it would get in the way of a takedown. 



> - There are numerous other competitive arts that deserve a spot. Arts such as Paintball, Roller Derby, Laser Tag, and snowball fights to name a few. One could also argue that Kick Boxing and Muay Thai belong in there, however Female Boxing is supposed to be included in 2012, making it less likely either will qualify.


 
Paintball, Roller Derby, Laser tag, and snowball fights wouldn't even fit your own criterion (other than uniqueness) for inclusion. But I'm guessing you were joking. Well, at least I HOPE so.

I think kickboxing (which would include muaythai) would actually have a chance, though.



> - Removing top current competitors from the UFC and similar pro leagues for the time period needed for them to heal and train to compete is unrealistic. Most will not go for the income cuts it would entail or the loss of limelight. Promoters will likewise be resistant to losing top drawing stars for PPV's.


 
With few exceptions (basketball and hockey, for instance), the Olympics are *amateur* competitions. More likely, you'd see Olympian MMA-ers being offered pro contracts after Olympic wins; not the other way around.



> - The Promoters will lose millions. Put 2 top contenders like say, Silva and Lawler head to head in the Olympics. That's a big ticket pay out on PPV regardless of outcome, but you'll see it free on NBC. I don't think so Charlie.
> - Can't limit it just to Amateurs. The Russians will field a competition team that ate, slept, and breathed training for 4 years, all subsidized at gov. expense. If the US sends wannabes, they'll get destroyed. Hey, it's hard to work out 8 hrs a day while flipping burgers to pay the rent.


 
You _*can*_ limit it to just amateurs. And most events DO. And these amateurs _*do*_ in fact live, breathe, and sleep their event. Frankly this argument seems _*heavily*_ speculative, and apparently you think inordinately high of the Russians.



> - MMA has a reputation of being barbaric, blood and thuggery. MMA fights aren't legal in many US states. How can you field a team that can't even compete in half the country legally?


 
Number of states in which MMA is illegal:
Amateur:6
Pro: 5

Source:http://www.ikfkickboxing.com/USAStates.htm

Hardly seems like half the country. 

As far as barbaric reputation, boxing has that too. So what?

Again, this is a _much_ better post. However, I I still disagree with you, and my previous criticisms of your logic stand on many points.


----------



## Tez3

The Last Legionary said:


> Tez, I had several replies written up, however as I really don't desire to stoop to those levels, I've tossed them. I'm sorry if any of my comments offended, however I do stand by them as being my opinion and being entitled to them. Regardless of what you all think of my choice of wording, or any incorrect assumptions on my part, I have attempted to put forth significant and serious legitimate reasons against MMA being considered for inclusion in the Olympics. For this, I am labeled a troll. I'm a smart ***. I'm a son of a ***** when needed. I'm no more a troll than any of you are here. I'm one of the first to call ******** when I see it. I've been off and on this site far longer than most if not all of you calling me "troll" and making direct insult to my being. I would have expected a smarter response considering past interactions. In this, I fear I was in serious error. Rather than read past the sarcasm and smart assness, I'm showered with insults, slammed with hostile neg reps and threatening PM's, the later 2 reported to the staff as you have I'm certain been showering them with reports on me. Whatever. Rather than continue to argue with people I had thought smarter and risk losing my access, again, or that this train wreck of a thread be locked, I'll bow out.
> 
> I leave you to your discussion where only "correct" opinions and views are of importance. Do us both a favor and put me on your ignore lists so that I need not offend you again. Good Day.
> :bird:


 

The sexual comment was bang out of order and was offensive. It's not an opinion at all, it isn't even a fact. I haven't PMd, or RTMd you, I told you up front but you still think it was your opinions that we disagreed with.
'Correct' opinions and views aren't what's needed, what is needed is posts one can read without obscenities, nonsense and insults. disagree as much as you want with posters, lord knows I do and often get fired at in return, it's all part of the fun.  


Bob you forgot to mention that most of us MMAers in the UK don't pay to watch it on ESPN we watch it on our computers :lol2: but don't tell ESPN.


----------



## Bob Hubbard

I won't, but that's just cuz I don't watch ESPN. LOL!


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> The sexual comment was bang out of order and was offensive.


 
What comment are you talking about?


----------



## Tez3

Josh Oakley said:


> What comment are you talking about?


 

Post 84

"Just because your gym rolls around on the floor in obscene sex positions with punching bags"

It was uncalled for and unnecessary. No one has to like MMA but then no one has to make comments like this about it.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> Post 84
> 
> "Just because your gym rolls around on the floor in obscene sex positions with punching bags"
> 
> It was uncalled for and unnecessary. No one has to like MMA but then no one has to make comments like this about it.


 
uhh.... perhaps you're right. However I think you're over-reacting. I got worse jokes than that as a wrestler. A better, more light-hearted response would have been "what, are you jealous of the punching bag or something?"


----------



## ATC

Tez3 said:


> You guys need Sky Sports and Eurosport, they cover just about every sport going. Just about all Olympic (Summer and Winter) sports too. These are mainstream satellite channels, Daniel, they cover every sport you mentioned in your last post, in prime time too.


I watch Sky Sports via online streaming for football. Yes American Football. Pretty funny hearing British guys commentate on American Football. They actually do quite well.

For those that want to watch other sports via the internet here are some links.

http://atdhe.net
http://channelsurfing.net/
http://vipstand.net
http://firstrow.net
http://justin.tv
http://eplsite.com

Those are just a few but you can find some interesting sports stuff as well as some TV shows as well. Great sites for when at work and don't have access to a TV with cable or satellite.


----------



## Tez3

Josh Oakley said:


> uhh.... perhaps you're right. However I think you're over-reacting. I got worse jokes than that as a wrestler. A better, more light-hearted response would have been "what, are you jealous of the punching bag or something?"


 

You speak as a bloke lol! I have huge problems getting women to train with us, their perceptions are that MMA is a men only thing, speaking to some women they didn't know us women can train and fight. Just getting them to come to the traditional classes is hard enough so comments like this will put women right off, perhaps it already has. 

I don't feel it's overreacting to be fed up of someone's coarse remarks, you can't gauge other peoples feeling's by your reactions. I don't have to put up with crude remarks just because you do. It seems if I take things as a joke I'm wrong, if I take things seriously I'm wrong also. I can't win.


----------



## ATC

The Last Legionary said:


> Troll? Always.  Read on McDuff.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't use oil, I go straight to bear mace.
> 
> But let me be serious for a moment. It will be a strain but I can do it, really.
> 
> By it's name, "Mixed" martial arts are just that. Mixed.  As I said, it's a bit of this, bit of that, little bit of some other thing.  There is no such thing as "The MMA". It's all different. So, how do you judge it? Where is the standardized MMA system? It doesn't exist.  So I can take Tai Chi, USMC Sniper tech, 5 pages out of Ashida Kim's "most excellent" ninja books, and a few moves I learned from the TV and I'm now a "l33t MMA dude". Can't say otherwise. I mixed some martial arts together, that's what it means right? "Mixed Martial Arts". MMA.  So, don't tell me I'm doing it wrong, I'm not. Just because your gym rolls around on the floor in obscene sex positions with punching bags, and another has a really cool cage that they play slapsy on Saturdays in, doesn't make your mixture of things better or worse than mine.
> 
> Don't point at PRIDE, UFC or the rest either.  I highly doubt any of those guys will take 2-4 years off of competition so they can live on donations and hand outs for 5 minutes of fame and a $50 medal. So that leaves the "wanna bes", the guys who think the UFC is "IT", and who argue on web boards about "real training" and "NHB" crap, but have all these rules and conditions for a fight.
> 
> Even if you can find a few people to live on nothing and devote 4 years of their life to getting in top condition, you still have to define rules and limits, set judging standards. Something you can't do when dealing with a black bag full of mixed up people who picked and chose from a hundred different arts in a thousand different ways.
> 
> We have fencing, we have kendo, we don't have "couple of yobs swinging wall hangers with moves they got off the telly".
> We have football, we have soccer, we don't however have "street rules, the blue car's the end zone".
> We have sharp shooting, we have archery, we don't however have "nerf dart shoots".
> 
> MMA is a nice fad for PPV. It's value as an Olympic Sport however is minimal. Something 30 years old or less, certainly we have many more established and legitimate sports to include. Roller Derby for example, which is older and more respectable, yet shares many similar traits.
> 
> If I'm wrong, point me at the MMA system information, a non-UFC MMA Sport group, and a proven scoring system for it, and I'll be happy to reconsider my position that it's little more than a program for people who can't hack it in a real martial arts school past white belt.
> 
> Hell, why not just add in roller ****ing? It'd boost the ratings at least. Can you read between the lines here, or should I highlight the letters of the sekrit missige?


Ha ha ha...This post had me in tears. As funny as it is there are some logical points. I still chuckle at some of the comments though.

However if you look at what he is really saying is that he agrees that MMA should not be in the Olympic due to some of the same issues many have stated. To do so would change the sport into something that it is not right now, making it something different from what it is today. How do you score it? What is a valid scoring techniques and such. As MMA is today you win or lose 2 ways. Submit your opponent, or dominate the majority of the rounds. There really is no point system behind it and to do so would greatly change the sport as it is today. Or create some new Olympic sport altogether.

I see what he is really trying to say. Or at least I think I do. Either way the post amused me at the least.


----------



## Carol

Tez3 said:


> You speak as a bloke lol! I have huge problems getting women to train with us, their perceptions are that MMA is a men only thing, speaking to some women they didn't know us women can train and fight. Just getting them to come to the traditional classes is hard enough so comments like this will put women right off, perhaps it already has.
> 
> I don't feel it's overreacting to be fed up of someone's coarse remarks, you can't gauge other peoples feeling's by your reactions._* I don't have to put up with crude remarks just because you do.*_ It seems if I take things as a joke I'm wrong, if I take things seriously I'm wrong also. I can't win.



First of all...for the part in bold...Bravo!  :asian:  :asian:

Personally I don't think you're wrong.

It is no secret that martial artists make denigratory sexual comments about their fellow martial artists that do BJJ/MMA, while really not paying much attention to wrestlers.   That is obvious just by looking at the various comments that have gone on here on this board.  I don't do BJJ or MMA, but I can appreciate that its your art and hearing the same stupid insults are not only tiring, but its pretty damn disgusting.

If it matters if a guy says it, SteveBJJ has said the same thing in previous conversations.  Its your art.  Its what you are investing time, energy, money, commitment, and honest training in to doing.  

If a person can't respect that...


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ATC said:


> *How do you score it? What is a valid scoring techniques and such.* As MMA is today you win or lose 2 ways. Submit your opponent, or dominate the majority of the rounds. There really is no point system behind it and to do so would greatly change the sport as it is today. Or create some new Olympic sport altogether.


How is wrestling scored in the Olympics?  How is Judo scored in the Olympics?  How is boxing scored in the Olympics? 

You have three longtime Olympic sports, two of which are grappling arts, one of which is a striking art.  Striking is easier to score; but they've obviously figured out *something* for judo and wrestling.  I cannot imagine that it would be complicate to apply that something to MMA and add in a scoring for strikes.

Daniel


----------



## Steve

Daniel Sullivan said:


> How is wrestling scored in the Olympics?  How is Judo scored in the Olympics?  How is boxing scored in the Olympics?
> 
> You have three longtime Olympic sports, two of which are grappling arts, one of which is a striking art.  Striking is easier to score; but they've obviously figured out *something* for judo and wrestling.  I cannot imagine that it would be complicate to apply that something to MMA and add in a scoring for strikes.
> 
> Daniel


MMA uses a 10 point must system very similar to boxing.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-point_must_system

If MMA ever got introduced into the Olympics, bouts would probably be run very much like they are on the Ultimate Fighter.  2 rounds with a third if necessary, 10 point must system, modified rules to account for whatever changes that the Olympic committee makes.


----------



## Josh Oakley

ATC said:


> As MMA is today you win or lose 2 ways. Submit your opponent, or dominate the majority of the rounds. There really is no point system behind it and to do so would greatly change the sport as it is today. Or create some new Olympic sport altogether.
> 
> I see what he is really trying to say. Or at least I think I do. Either way the post amused me at the least.


 
And how do you think they determine who wins the round? It's spelled out in the unified rules that have been posted on this thread numerous times...


----------



## Steve

Carol said:


> First of all...for the part in bold...Bravo!  :asian:  :asian:
> 
> Personally I don't think you're wrong.
> 
> It is no secret that martial artists make denigratory sexual comments about their fellow martial artists that do BJJ/MMA, while really not paying much attention to wrestlers.   That is obvious just by looking at the various comments that have gone on here on this board.  I don't do BJJ or MMA, but I can appreciate that its your art and hearing the same stupid insults are not only tiring, but its pretty damn disgusting.
> 
> If it matters if a guy says it, SteveBJJ has said the same thing in previous conversations.  Its your art.  Its what you are investing time, energy, money, commitment, and honest training in to doing.
> 
> If a person can't respect that...


I hope you mean that I haven't demeaned women or made unnecessary, immature jokes.  

I agree with Tez and you on this one completely.  It's tiresome to deal with guys who make childish, destructive comments.  Personally, I get the impression that they come more from that person's own sexual insecurities than any legitimate belief that there's any sexual component to grappling.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> You speak as a bloke lol! I have huge problems getting women to train with us, their perceptions are that MMA is a men only thing, speaking to some women they didn't know us women can train and fight. Just getting them to come to the traditional classes is hard enough so comments like this will put women right off, perhaps it already has.
> 
> I don't feel it's overreacting to be fed up of someone's coarse remarks, you can't gauge other peoples feeling's by your reactions. I don't have to put up with crude remarks just because you do. It seems if I take things as a joke I'm wrong, if I take things seriously I'm wrong also. I can't win.


 
Actually, this time you put forth a strong, convincing argument (and you argued it well), and convinced me that _my _argument was wrong. 

You're right about the sexual jokes. You shouldn't have to put up with them if you don't want to.


----------



## ATC

Daniel Sullivan said:


> How is wrestling scored in the Olympics? How is Judo scored in the Olympics? How is boxing scored in the Olympics?
> 
> You have three longtime Olympic sports, two of which are grappling arts, one of which is a striking art. Striking is easier to score; but they've obviously figured out *something* for judo and wrestling. I cannot imagine that it would be complicate to apply that something to MMA and add in a scoring for strikes.
> 
> Daniel


Olympic boxing is so different than Pro Boxing. That is why the best boxer does not win in the Olympics. They way they score in the Olympics is not favorable to boxer that train with a pro career in mind. That is why many pro trainers and boxer hate Olympic scoring.

In MMA would 5 jabs that land count for more points than 2 hard body blows or 1 hard wobble head shot. 5 jabs = 5 points, 1 hard head shot that wobbles you = 1 point. 5 secs. left in the round and you tag your opponent hard but the bell rings and you get no more shots in, you are still down. So a few pats from a weak fighters jab just beat you even though you rocked the guy. As it stands now in Boxing or MMA the one punch rock at the end of the round will win you the round. Not in the Olympics as it stands with Boxing.

So this is what is meant by the game would be something different. Now you try to mix the Boxing scoring system with the wrestling scoring system and you really got a fubar system. Oh I took him down but 3 times but only 1 point take downs vs. his single 5 point take down. You got a mess and some totally different sport, not MMA.

Like someone said you may get Sancho or Shoot fighting but not MMA.

I see his points.


----------



## ATC

Josh Oakley said:


> And how do you think they determine who wins the round? It's spelled out in the unified rules that have been posted on this thread numerous times...


As you see it then becomes something different. As I have stated in another post about another topic, all fighting sports are points based but when you start determining the matches as such with every takedown and every touch as a score well then you have something much different than what you see today. Then the sport becomes a game of tag only.

Example: OK I will do two or three jabs, then stall until broken up. Then do it again. I don't have to really fight just find a way to touch enough times and win.

You don't understand the Olympics. All sports in the Olympics have to have a way of scoring each and every technique. Either the ball or object goes in some type of goal or scoring zone, one athlete runs or moves down a lane faster, lifts more, or the athletes perform a technique that is judged and counted and added up. Pro Boxing and Pro MMA don't have clear cut points that are counted. Once you do that to the sport that is subjectively scored then you no longer have the same game. Submission are easy to determine the winner, just like KO's are also, but it is all that other in between stuff that will change the game.

Like I said in my above post. 20 jabs vs. 2 eight counts and the Jabber wins in Olympic boxing. In Pro boxing it is reversed. That is why Pro boxing look and is better than Olympic boxing.

What I find funny is that so many already have agreed and stated that if MMA is in the Olympics that I would not be the same game but now the same people want to argue it seem for the sake of taking a different position this point. I and TLL are saying the same thing that just about everyone is saying. MMA in the Olympics would be bad and not be the same MMA that you see as it is now. We are agreeing with you, or at least I am.:shrug:


----------



## Steve

ATC said:


> As you see it then becomes something different. As I have stated in another post about another topic, all fighting sports are points based but when you start determining the matches as such with every takedown and every touch as a score well then you have something much different than what you see today. Then the sport becomes a game of tag only.
> 
> Example: OK I will do two or three jabs, then stall until broken up. Then do it again. I don't have to really fight just find a way to touch enough times and win.
> 
> You don't understand the Olympics. All sports in the Olympics have to have a way of scoring each and every technique. Either the ball or object goes in some type of goal or scoring zone, one athlete runs or moves down a lane faster, lifts more, or the athletes perform a technique that is judged and counted and added up. Pro Boxing and Pro MMA don't have clear cut points that are counted. Once you do that to the sport that is subjectively scored then you no longer have the same game. Submission are easy to determine the winner, just like KO's are also, but it is all that other in between stuff that will change the game.


Good points here.  With the way that olympic boxing is scored, MMA would undergo some pretty weird scoring changes, in all likelihood.  Where Olympic boxing awards a single point for a punch that lands with power to a target other than the opponent's arms, MMA would likely go to something similar.  

While I have said that there is a 10 point must system, you're absolutely right in that the Olympics would probably not use this scoring system for their amateur tournament.  

Now, what's interesting about this is that there are a lot of people within MMA who would think this could be an opportunity to improve MMA scoring, believing that the 10 point must system rewards wrestlers, penalizes jiu jitiero and doesn't adequately score the sport.  alternative scoring systems have been proposed in the past.  The barrier to implementing them hasn't been a lack of interest as much as problems with getting them sanctioned.


> What I find funny is that so many already have agreed and stated that if MMA is in the Olympics that I would not be the same game but now the same people want to argue it seem for the sake of taking a different position this point. I and TLL are saying the same thing that just about everyone is saying. MMA in the Olympics would be bad and not be the same MMA that you see as it is now. We are agreeing with you, or at least I am.


I actually said this to TLL at one point, but couldn't get him to stop trolling long enough to read anything in the thread.

At this point, from my perspective, it's less about whether or not the Olympics would be good or bad for MMA than about what changes would occur within the sport if it ever did make it into the Olympics as a competitive sport.   While you don't think that MMA would be adversely affected by inclusion into the Olympics, I think it would be neutral at best.  I just don't think that it would make the transition well.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ATC said:


> Olympic boxing is so different than Pro Boxing. That is why the best boxer does not win in the Olympics. They way they score in the Olympics is not favorable to boxer that train with a pro career in mind. That is why many pro trainers and boxer hate Olympic scoring.
> 
> In MMA would 5 jabs that land count for more points than 2 hard body blows or 1 hard wobble head shot. 5 jabs = 5 points, 1 hard head shot that wobbles you = 1 point. 5 secs. left in the round and you tag your opponent hard but the bell rings and you get no more shots in, you are still down. So a few pats from a weak fighters jab just beat you even though you rocked the guy. As it stands now in Boxing or MMA the one punch rock at the end of the round will win you the round. Not in the Olympics as it stands with Boxing.
> 
> So this is what is meant by the game would be something different. Now you try to mix the Boxing scoring system with the wrestling scoring system and you really got a fubar system. Oh I took him down but 3 times but only 1 point take downs vs. his single 5 point take down. You got a mess and some totally different sport, not MMA.
> 
> Like someone said you may get Sancho or Shoot fighting but not MMA.
> 
> I see his points.


I think that it would definitely be a different game. That is neither good nor bad; but it would be a different game.

I only acknowledge that a coherent scoring system would not be tremendously difficult to come up with.

As to the OP's question of 'should' mma be in the olympics, I have already given my opinion, which is that it probably should not, though the changing of the game were not my specific reasons. 



Stevebjj said:


> I actually said this to TLL at one point, but couldn't get him to stop trolling long enough to read anything in the thread.


 
I also agree with some of TLL's points *after* he finally presented them concisely, though certainly not all. Unfortunately, he spent more time airing his opinion of, and making inaccurate assertions regarding, MMA than he did addressing the Olympic question. 

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Just to clarify, this is where I do (and do not) agree with TLL.



The Last Legionary said:


> Reasons for MMA to NOT be included in the Olympics:
> 
> - Main components are wrestling and boxing. Both are already in the Olympics. Inclusion would be redundant.


This is probably the strongest argument against Olympic inclusion.




The Last Legionary said:


> - MMA already has an established amateur system, as well as professional coverage via UFC.


This is probably the strongest argument against MMA-ists seeking Olympic inclucsion.




The Last Legionary said:


> - Lack of a definite "MMA System".


That is due to the fact that MMA is a rule set, not a system, and really isn't pretending to be otherwise.




The Last Legionary said:


> - The only requirement for a technique to be considered an MMA Tech is "someone used it in a competitive fight".


Incorrect. There is no such thing as an "MMA technique" because MMA is not a system. Techniques used those that are permited as per the rule set.




The Last Legionary said:


> - Low Standards.


In what regard? 




The Last Legionary said:


> - There are many requirements to be considered, including the existance of an international regulatory body and what percentage of countries practice that sport. MMA is NOT big outside of a few nations.





The Last Legionary said:


> - American MMA fighters would get their asses beaten regularly by government funded brutes from Russia.
> - The established MMA rulesets would have to be greatly dumbed down to meet Olympic safety guidelines. Hard to do a takedown right when you're wearing giant mittens.


Not so sure that the Russian comment would hold true. Besides, plenty of nations get their backsides handed to them by other nations regularly in the olympics anyway, so that is really not an argument against Olympic inclusion. I do think that your observation regarding the rules changes and the potential addition of gloves would certainly be a consideration as to the 'should' factor. I also am not aware of an international governing body, though that may fall more into the_ 'could'_ rather than the 'should' end of the spectrum.




The Last Legionary said:


> - There are numerous other competitive arts that deserve a spot. Arts such as Paintball, Roller Derby, Laser Tag, and snowball fights to name a few. One could also argue that Kick Boxing and Muay Thai belong in there, however Female Boxing is supposed to be included in 2012, making it less likely either will qualify.


So what?




The Last Legionary said:


> - Also:





The Last Legionary said:


> - Removing top current competitors from the UFC and similar pro leagues for the time period needed for them to heal and train to compete is unrealistic. Most will not go for the income cuts it would entail or the loss of limelight. Promoters will likewise be resistant to losing top drawing stars for PPV's.
> - Politics. Sure am American wouldn't have a problem smacking another Yank around, but lets see you get the Brazilians to fight each other. I hear they don't like the idea, so you'd have a lot of quitters to contend with.
> - The Promoters will lose millions. Put 2 top contenders like say, Silva and Lawler head to head in the Olympics. That's a big ticket pay out on PPV regardless of outcome, but you'll see it free on NBC. I don't think so Charlie.


The issue of top fighters heading to the olympics has already been addressed, and I think that we all can agree that they wouldn't for all of the reasons that you mentioned. 

Haven't a clue (or a care) about who likes to beat on whom, though I don't really know that your statement is accurate or how much, if at all, it would affect a theoretical bid for Olympic inclusion of MMA.




The Last Legionary said:


> - Can't limit it just to Amateurs. The *Russians will field a competition team that ate, slept, and breathed training for 4 years, all subsidized at gov. expense.* If the US sends wannabes, they'll get destroyed. Hey, it's hard to work out 8 hrs a day while flipping burgers to pay the rent.


What? And you think we wouldn't? Just substitute corporate money for government expense. 




The Last Legionary said:


> - MMA has a reputation of being barbaric, blood and thuggery. MMA fights aren't legal in many US states. How can you field a team that can't even compete in half the country legally?


This has also already been addressed and apparently, half the country is not an accurate assessment. But again, so what? Half of our country is not exactly half of the world. 

Also, Olympic MMA would be a different game. We've already established that, and by virtue of being "Olympic," it only needs to be "played" at the Olympics. 

Not to mention that as soon as you have "Olympic MMA" you now have a different game that would most likely be legal in all fifty states.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3

stevebjj said:


> MMA uses a 10 point must system very similar to boxing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-point_must_system
> 
> If MMA ever got introduced into the Olympics, bouts would probably be run very much like they are on the Ultimate Fighter. 2 rounds with a third if necessary, 10 point must system, modified rules to account for whatever changes that the Olympic committee makes.


 
We tend to have 3x3 minute rounds with Championships fights being 5 minutes rounds. We use the 10 point must system which works very well if the judges *understand how to use it properly*! Marc Goddard, the guy who taught me to ref and judge is taking seminars here to teach officials how to use the system properly. If used properly it doesn't favour either grapplers or standup people. Marking on all the components of a fight is necessary, it's quite detailed and involves the judge looking closely and consider exactly what each fighter is doing. Marc is a UFC ref. and knows his stuff. It may be worth having a thread just on MMA judging, if anyone interested I'd ask Marc to contribute.

We have three sets of rules here, amateur, semi pro and pro. It wouldn't be difficult to use them in the Olympics but as has been said before MMA would be made more 'Olympic' (therefore more advertising) friendly and other rules would be made up. The grappling part of Judo isn't liked for this reason and we see little or no wrestling on the main Olympic telesvision repeorts. We saw none of the wrestling in the recent Commonwealth Games even though England did well, it wasn't mentioned.


----------



## TheArtofDave

I don't know if MMA would work well in the Olympics. I'm not saying I'm against it by any means, as it does make for an interesting debate.

I just think tma's would be the standard for the Olympics.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

TheArtofDave said:


> I don't know if MMA would work well in the Olympics. I'm not saying I'm against it by any means, as it does make for an interesting debate.
> 
> I just think tma's would be the standard for the Olympics.


Certainly I think that it could work as well as anything else, though it would probably be with a modified 'Olympic' rule set to make it more television friendly and you could bet that cages would not be a part of it.  You'd probably see headgear required as well.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3

Headgear would be a nuisance when grappling though possibly even dangerous.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

True.  They could either do away with it and prohibit head shots (ala TKD) or allow it but restrict certain grapples.

Daniel


----------



## ForeverStudent

I think it shouldn't.

All those beautiful sports, and than MMA.

I don't want to say that MMA is not a sport, but simply it's to bloody and violent for an event like Olimpic games.


----------



## Tez3

Daniel Sullivan said:


> True. They could either do away with it and prohibit head shots (ala TKD) or allow it but restrict certain grapples.
> 
> Daniel


 

There's no head shots in amateur MMA.

It makes me laugh when people say MMA is too violent for the Olympics, look at the sports that are in there and their original uses ( watered down by the Olympics though), the Pentathlon is made up of discplines originally used for the military, there's archery, spear chucking, shooting etc etc thats without the martial arts ( remember the word martial's meaning?) Even dressage is military, the movements done by the horses was for use in battle'


Violent? Tried water polo? 
Bloody? tried boxing?


----------



## ForeverStudent

Well it's violent. Two mostly tatooed guys who looks like just got out of prison beating each other. Just the right thing for most beautiful sport event on the planet. 

Do you see archery shooting at the people? Spearin people? Yes dressage is military, moves to, but ain't there no people killing and beating each other with spears and archery.

Saying that others sport in Olimpic games are violent just because they was before, is ridicoulos.


----------



## Tez3

ForeverStudent said:


> Well it's violent. Two mostly tatooed guys who looks like just got out of prison beating each other. Just the right thing for most beautiful sport event on the planet.
> 
> Do you see archery shooting at the people? Spearin people? Yes dressage is military, moves to, but ain't there no people killing and beating each other with spears and archery.
> 
> Saying that others sport in Olimpic games are violent just because they was before, is ridicoulos.


 

Talk about generalisations! There are far more people who have no tattoos, aren't always men and who have white collar carrers who do MMA than you seem to think. You are basing your idea of MMA on films or the gutter press I'm afraid. You clearly know little about MMA. 

I rather like the idea however, it's very amusing, that I may be male, look like I come out of prison and am covered in tattoos!


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ForeverStudent said:


> Well it's violent. Two mostly tattooed guys who looks like just got out of prison beating each other.


 I have yet to see an MMA competitor that looks like Michael Milken or Martha Stewart, neither of whom were tattooed upon their release from prison and only one of whom qualifies as a guy. There are plenty of white collar criminals who get out of prison and do not fit the stereotype.



ForeverStudent said:


> Just the right thing for most beautiful sporting event on the planet.


Political favor trading, misrepresentation of the age of the competitors, fixing of events, and decades of pretending that professional athletes were ameteurs. Yes, such beauty should not be marred by honest competition. 



ForeverStudent said:


> Do you see archers shooting at the people? Spearing people? Yes dressage is military, moves to, but ain't there no people killing and beating each other with spears and arrows.


No killing in MMA either. Neither the bow and arrow nor the javelin are effective bludgeoning weapons, so it would be silly if there was beating involved. Also, archery and javelin throwing have been conducted with still targets as long as the weapons have been in existence. You can demonstrate skill in the weapon without a living target. Its kind of hard to do that with MMA.



ForeverStudent said:


> Saying that other sports in Olympic games are violent just because they were before, is ridiculous.


Please use spell check and proper grammar. It will enhance the quality of your posts and make you look less like you're trolling. 

The Olympics have boxing, fencing, taekwondo, wrestling, and judo, so the idea that violent sports have no place in the Olympics is inaccurate.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3

A _'typical tattooed male, ex con'_ MMA pro fighter aka  Dr. Rosi Sexton.

I could come up with pages and pages of fighters, British, American, European and Asian who don't fit that stereotype.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Tez3 said:


> A _'typical tattooed male, ex con'_ MMA pro fighter aka Dr. Rosi Sexton.
> 
> I could come up with pages and pages of fighters, British, American, European and Asian who don't fit that stereotype.


Hey, 'he's' cute!  And that womanly figure looks so real!  Must be the clothes.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Hey, 'he's' cute! And that womanly figure looks so real! Must be the clothes.
> 
> Daniel


 

Well I chose Rosi because not only is she brainy she's a great fighter and a very nice person! She's fighting in Ireland on Saturday, have a read of her blog, she has great fitness, health and other fighting stuff advice on it, she's very approachable and has time for any aspiring fighter male or female. Rosi's not long qualified as an osteopath, another degree to her name! 
http://rosisexton.wordpress.com/

Perhaps ForeverStudent might like to debate MMA with her?


----------



## ForeverStudent

Well than i must say sorry, but neither i feel guilty. MMA as i know it isn't MMA as you know it.

Here in Croatia news and television shows only top UFC events. Fighters i know are Randy Couture, Chuck Liddell, Mirko Cro Cop, Gabriel Gonzaga, Brock Lesnar, Cain Velasquez..

I don't know MMA any different than i saw in UFC top events.

And if you think that fights between fighters i mentioned aren't violent, then we are really think different.

And, sorry for bad grammar!


----------



## Tez3

ForeverStudent said:


> Well than i must say sorry, but neither i feel guilty. MMA as i know it isn't MMA as you know it.
> 
> Here in Croatia news and television shows only top UFC events. Fighters i know are Randy Couture, Chuck Liddell, Mirko Cro Cop, Gabriel Gonzaga, Brock Lesnar, Cain Velasquez..
> 
> I don't know MMA any different than i saw in UFC top events.
> 
> And if you think that fights between fighters i mentioned aren't violent, then we are really think different.
> 
> And, sorry for bad grammar!


 
It's a shame that the UFC is all you see but I'm pretty sure there's grassroots MMA in Croatia, we've had fighters from there on shows in the UK.  MMA is no more violent than boxing, full contact karate, K1 kickboxing even Judo at times. It's a skilful game of physical chess.

Please don't apologise for your grammar, it's far many than many peoples! In fact I didn't realise English wasn't your first language!

You have one of the best fighters in the world, Cro Cop who must surely go against your stereotype?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ForeverStudent said:


> Well than i must say sorry, but neither i feel guilty. MMA as i know it isn't MMA as you know it.
> 
> Here in Croatia news and television shows only top UFC events. Fighters i know are Randy Couture, Chuck Liddell, Mirko Cro Cop, Gabriel Gonzaga, Brock Lesnar, Cain Velasquez..
> 
> I don't know MMA any different than i saw in UFC top events.
> 
> And if you think that fights between fighters i mentioned aren't violent, then we are really think different.
> 
> And, sorry for bad grammar!


Actually, the grammar and spelling comment was for your benefit, not mine.  If nobody points it out to you, you cannot correct it.  

Sorry if I came across as a nit-picker; I tend to be a bit of a stickler for language and grammar, especially on the internet where spelling and grammar are frequently ignored by people for whom English* is* their first language.

Regarding what is seen in the UFC, were MMA to become a sanctioned sport in the Olympics, the rule set would most certainly differ.  Look at other martial sports that have large organizations and which are not dependent upon the Olympics for exposure.  All of them have different rule sets for the Olympics, generally conforming to amateur rules.  Boxing is a good example.  Headgear is mandated, and I am sure that there are other changes as well.  You generally will not see fights that resemble pro boxing in the Olympics.  

I really don't consider UFC fights to be any more or less violent than pro-boxing; they simply allow for a greater breadth of technique.  The cage is a gimmick to make the athletes more of an underground street fighter image.  Keep in mind that the UFC has kind of taken the place of the WCW and the old WWF, so a lot of effort goes into appealing to the same demographic that those orgs appealed to.

But then, Olympic MMA would most certainly differ from UFC MMA.  For starters, I'd guarantee that the cage would be the very first thing to go.  Tez has pointed out that in amateur MMA, there are no head shots.  That would certainly carry over into the Olympics, which generally align themselves with amateur sports.

Daniel


----------



## Tez3

I'd say the cage was there for safety as much as anything, our promotion has a cage and a ring. The ring we don't use much now, when grappling it's easy to slide out and cause injury. The cage is also safer as there aren't ropes to get tangles in. It also offeres a better view for spectators.


----------



## ForeverStudent

Maybe i look too much through stereotypes.

I runed into it to fast!

When i saw topic title first scene in my head was fighters ala Lesnar and Velasquez pounding each other to the mat, blood is all over them and all over the mat.

When i think better in some way it's pretty close to what olimpics were once upon a time, war game. Even a fight i described could fit into it.

After better look, MMA would fit pretty good in olympics.

Yes, Cro Cop is from Croatia, he was in Karate before he started MMA, but i don't know which style. He hold 1. Degree (don't hold me on this to much). 

Another fighter from Croatia i know for, and which i really like, beacause his base is ITF Taekwondo, is Zelg Galesic.

He impress me with how he use Taekwondo fights. He hold 4. degree.

Do you know for him?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Tez3 said:


> I'd say the cage was there for safety as much as anything, our promotion has a cage and a ring. The ring we don't use much now, when grappling it's easy to slide out and cause injury. The cage is also safer as there aren't ropes to get tangles in. It also offeres a better view for spectators.


Oh, I'm sure that they'll find some way to achieve the safety effect without the cage.  

The IOC would bill it as Mixed Martial Arts, or MMA, and will try to highlight the varied training of the athletes.  They will also want to distance themselves to the greatest degree possible from the term, 'cage fighting.' 

I think that it would be interesting.  One question though is who would the governing body be?  Probably not the UFC.

Daniel


----------



## TheArtofDave

The governing body would be who the Olympic panel deems has the most experience in sanctioning MMA events. And also enforcing what is legal & illegal in the contest.

Also I do think there would be a cage involved because of the safety, & the better view for spectators. Sadly I think the Nevada commissions that regulate boxing would still be over the judging. But its what we have until an mma panel comes along.

The Olympics weren't meant to originally be family friendly, & I do think that the elbows, & slamming would be taken out. The Olympics would want a more technical approach, than just the general view of MMA out there.

Of course if the Olympics ever get BJJ as one of the "games" I would definitely love to take part in a team. But I guess we'll see what history brings.


----------

