# Muay Thai in MMA



## EMT

There is no modern MMA without Thai Kickboxing. Low kicks, elbow and knee strikes are integral parts of Mixed Martial Arts. Stand up striking in the UFC is just Muay Thai and Western Boxing of course with some marginal amount of other martial arts. My point is that while there's a lot of boxing gyms in the US and also should be more Muay Thai gyms that would allow fighters to learn basics and progress to more advanced Muay Thai techniques. MMA is not a discipline on it's own - it is rather a combination of core martial arts. If you start with Muay Thai and then move with it to MMA your life will be easier than when chaotically trying to learn some basic Muay Thai striking in the middle of an MMA course...well my point is that a lot of people are trying to build a house starting with a roof but look at the most dominant champion -= they've always started with one style and then added up more and then maybe trained some MMA to smooth it up and not the other way around.


Muay Thai in MMA explained


----------



## Headhunter

So basically you're saying Muay Thais the best...sorry but I disagree on your post, how many pure Muay Thai fighters are there in mma right now,...Anderson silva, shogun, Joanna, valentina and that's about it. Most others come from different bases. Yes there's a lot of good stuff in Muay Thai for mma but there's also some not so good stuff like the high stances. These days there's people from pretty much every striking style in mma. There's high level karate fighters, taekwondo fighters, boxers, Muay Thai, kick boxers. 

My point is you want to say Muay Thai is the best style to have well no it's not there is no /best/ style since you need a mix of pretty much every style. I'm not hating on Muay Thai because I train but I just can't agree with what you say


----------



## CB Jones

While I don't think you have to be Muay Thai....I do agree that you should focus on either striking or grappling as a base and after you become very proficient at that then start learning the other.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

CB Jones said:


> While I don't think you have to be Muay Thai....I do agree that you should focus on either striking or grappling as a base and after you become very proficient at that then start learning the other.


What makes you say this? I would think that grappling and striking are different enough that you could learn both together without interfering with each other, as long as you accept you'll progress in both slower (due to time spent on each decreasing).


----------



## DanT

Disagree. Although Muay Thai is a great style, other styles can be used for stand up effectively in mma such as karate (machida), and sanda (cung le). You need to be good in one stand up style and one grappling style at least. You can be:
Boxing and wrestling
Sanda and BJJ
Muay Thai and BJJ
Karate and Judo
Etc.
You can be even really good at 3 styles! Like
Boxing, Karate, BJJ
Tae Kwon Do, Wrestling, Judo
Sanda, Judo, Wrestling
Etc.
I do agree that you should have a solid base in one or two styles before moving to more.


----------



## CB Jones

kempodisciple said:


> What makes you say this? I would think that grappling and striking are different enough that you could learn both together without interfering with each other, as long as you accept you'll progress in both slower (due to time spent on each decreasing).



I just feel like being able to completely focus on one before the other would be more efficient and easier.


----------



## JowGaWolf

EMT said:


> There is no modern MMA without Thai Kickboxing. Low kicks, elbow and knee strikes are integral parts of Mixed Martial Arts.


The kick, elbow, and kneed strikes that you see used in MMA are not only restricted to Muay Thai.  The thing about MMA is that the much of the striking that is done is just good basic techniques.  Striking in MMA aren't advanced techniques.  They are for the most part basic techniques that are performed at a high skill level.  It's sort of like that saying " I don't worry about the guy who practices 1000 techniques.  I worry about the guy who practices 1 technique 1000 times."   



EMT said:


> If you start with Muay Thai and then move with it to MMA your life will be easier than when chaotically trying to learn some basic Muay Thai striking in the middle of an MMA course...well my point is that a lot of people are trying to build a house starting with a roof but look at the most dominant champion -= they've always started with one style and then added up more and then maybe trained some MMA to smooth it up and not the other way around.


If a person learned "traditional" Muay Thai  (not the sporting one). Then they probably wouldn't need much in terms of an MMA Course.  



. 

Some of the newer MMA fighters who don't come from a Traditional Martial arts background are often times not patient enough to want to spend the time it takes to become really good in 1 systems.  They seem to prefer what ever techniques that get them into the ring fast.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

CB Jones said:


> I just feel like being able to completely focus on one before the other would be more efficient and easier.


I would agree with that for two similar arts, but not a striking and grappling art. It wouldn't necessarily be more efficient, since it's just like having two hobbies instead of one and progressing with both of them. It would also prevent issues that might arise later from having a purely striking/grappling stance/mentality, and having to adjust that.

I'm definitely not a fan of learning a ton of techniques to get you in the ring quickly, like @JowGaWolf is suggesting some people do, but I see nothing wrong with practicing one striking and one grappling art simultaneously.


----------



## drop bear

Doesn't help you are miles sway from Thailand.

You will find countries play to their strengths.


----------



## EMT

Headhunter said:


> So basically you're saying Muay Thais the best...sorry but I disagree on your post, how many pure Muay Thai fighters are there in mma right now,...Anderson silva, shogun, Joanna, valentina and that's about it. Most others come from different bases. Yes there's a lot of good stuff in Muay Thai for mma but there's also some not so good stuff like the high stances. These days there's people from pretty much every striking style in mma. There's high level karate fighters, taekwondo fighters, boxers, Muay Thai, kick boxers.
> 
> My point is you want to say Muay Thai is the best style to have well no it's not there is no /best/ style since you need a mix of pretty much every style. I'm not hating on Muay Thai because I train but I just can't agree with what you say



Not the best style in general - cause you cannot compare Muay Thai to grappling styles - but most likely the best one for stand up striking. Like I said, train and build the core style and then add up some other techniques from different styles. If you choose Muay Thai as your core then you can augment it with some wrestling for takedown defence to be a more complete fighter. I'm not saying just use pure Thai Kickboxing in the cage cause that wouldn't work in MMA formula. Pick one style and build around it and I think Muay Thai is  a perfect martial art to augment with different style. We cannot forget that Muay Thai absorbed Wester Boxing techniques from foreign fighters to make it more effective. It is a flexible style to combine with other styles.

Also, to your list of Muay Thai fighters in the UFC I would add Jose Aldo, Rafael don Anjos and Karolina Kowalkiewicz. Like you see with Joanna, Valentina, Anderson an the rest they make quite an impressive bunch of champions


----------



## drop bear

EMT said:


> Not the best style in general - cause you cannot compare Muay Thai to grappling styles - but most likely the best one for stand up striking. Like I said, train and build the core style and then add up some other techniques from different styles. If you choose Muay Thai as your core then you can augment it with some wrestling for takedown defence to be a more complete fighter. I'm not saying just use pure Thai Kickboxing in the cage cause that wouldn't work in MMA formula. Pick one style and build around it and I think Muay Thai is  a perfect martial art to augment with different style. We cannot forget that Muay Thai absorbed Wester Boxing techniques from foreign fighters to make it more effective. It is a flexible style to combine with other styles.
> 
> Also, to your list of Muay Thai fighters in the UFC I would add Jose Aldo, Rafael don Anjos and Karolina Kowalkiewicz. Like you see with Joanna, Valentina, Anderson an the rest they make quite an impressive bunch of champions



Yeah but if you have wold class boxing then that is the base you use for mma.

This is why Brazil fighters tend to be BJJers and not wrestlers.

Australian fighters quite often have a base in muay thai. and genterally pretty craptastic wrestling.


----------



## Headhunter

EMT said:


> Not the best style in general - cause you cannot compare Muay Thai to grappling styles - but most likely the best one for stand up striking. Like I said, train and build the core style and then add up some other techniques from different styles. If you choose Muay Thai as your core then you can augment it with some wrestling for takedown defence to be a more complete fighter. I'm not saying just use pure Thai Kickboxing in the cage cause that wouldn't work in MMA formula. Pick one style and build around it and I think Muay Thai is  a perfect martial art to augment with different style. We cannot forget that Muay Thai absorbed Wester Boxing techniques from foreign fighters to make it more effective. It is a flexible style to combine with other styles.
> 
> Also, to your list of Muay Thai fighters in the UFC I would add Jose Aldo, Rafael don Anjos and Karolina Kowalkiewicz. Like you see with Joanna, Valentina, Anderson an the rest they make quite an impressive bunch of champions


There is no best style every striking style apart from boxing has punches kicks knees and elbows


----------



## Headhunter

CB Jones said:


> I just feel like being able to completely focus on one before the other would be more efficient and easier.


Not at all plenty of fighters now don't start off with one style. That's why there's mma classes not just striking or grappling class. The best example is Rory MacDonald he had no previous martial art experience before he started training and has become very well rounded


----------



## Tez3

The OP is basically an advert for his website.



EMT said:


> trying to learn some basic Muay Thai striking in the middle of an MMA course...




Whether the misunderstanding is deliberate or not I don't know but no one does a course of MMA, you train it or you don't, you don't wander off and do a course as if you were learning a language.



EMT said:


> Like I said, train and build the core style and then add up some other techniques from different styles.





EMT said:


> Pick one style and build around it and I think Muay Thai is a perfect martial art to augment with different style.




No that's not the way it's done anymore, that's how we did it when MMA was just emerging.Fighters coming onto the scene now train MMA as a whole with the intent of competing. We did see this would happen and it's a good thing, it means well rounded fighters with MMA as their core style not a fighter with one style doing catch up with other styles. Coaches and fighters have been for quite a while now have been 'collecting' techniques from many styles and melding them into one core style MMA. Yes MT is in there for many, it's a very good stand up style but you will find these days it is part of a whole in an MMA fighters arsenal rather than a style on it's own with others tacked on. I find it's a good thing that MMA is becoming a tighter, more rounded sport. There will still be those who come from one style and fancy having a go at MMA so train a couple of others styles but MMA is evolving and that's going to be the 'old fashioned' way of doing it ( if it isn't already!)
Nice try at promoting your blog and website, I admire passion but really these days when it comes to MMA you are wrong.


----------



## Headhunter

EMT said:


> There is no modern MMA without Thai Kickboxing. Low kicks, elbow and knee strikes are integral parts of Mixed Martial Arts. Stand up striking in the UFC is just Muay Thai and Western Boxing of course with some marginal amount of other martial arts. My point is that while there's a lot of boxing gyms in the US and also should be more Muay Thai gyms that would allow fighters to learn basics and progress to more advanced Muay Thai techniques. MMA is not a discipline on it's own - it is rather a combination of core martial arts. If you start with Muay Thai and then move with it to MMA your life will be easier than when chaotically trying to learn some basic Muay Thai striking in the middle of an MMA course...well my point is that a lot of people are trying to build a house starting with a roof but look at the most dominant champion -= they've always started with one style and then added up more and then maybe trained some MMA to smooth it up and not the other way around.
> 
> 
> Muay Thai in MMA explained


Also to add there are no advanced techniques in Muay Thai. It's the same as boxing there's only a small set of moves which you learn very quick but can put them together in multiple combos. You're making it sound like if you don't do Muay Thai you can't do mma which quite is just ignorant to say. Look at Stephen Thompson, lyoto machida, chuck liddel, George's st Pierre, Robbie Lawlor, rampage Jackson and hundred of others who don't use Muay Thai as their main striking style yet they've all done okay for themselves I think


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Australian fighters quite often have a base in muay thai. and genterally pretty craptastic wrestling.



Much easier to go to Thailand from Oz than it is for us in UK/US, long haul for us. I think the MMA fighters will start becoming more rounded as MMA expands and becomes more mainstream, it's doing not too badly at the moment, a way to go yet before it's up there with boxing, rugby and Aussie rules lol but fighters will have to 'up their game' if and when it becomes a global sport which I hope it does.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Tez3 said:


> Much easier to go to Thailand from Oz than it is for us in UK/US, long haul for us. I think the MMA fighters will start becoming more rounded as MMA expands and becomes more mainstream, it's doing not too badly at the moment, a way to go yet before it's up there with boxing, rugby and Aussie rules lol but fighters will have to 'up their game' if and when it becomes a global sport which I hope it does.


I don't watch much of it these days but it appears that there is a small increases of traditional martial artists who have become better with applying their system which is aways good. Hopefully they will eventually become teachess and coaches that will pass on their understanding of the techniques.


----------



## CB Jones

I still think there are many more that started in a specific style whether it be Karate, Boxing, Muay Thai, wrestling, judo, etc... and developed a core or base fighting style.  And this will continue....wrestlers, boxers, etc... will continue to make that switch as they decide they want to try and be pros.

Once they decided they wanted to be a pro fighter they then began training in MMA and learning to be more well rounded.

But most of them tend to start with a base style and build from it.

Look at Connor Macgregor---striking background and then focused on ground game later.

Anthony Johnson---wrestling background and then learned striking later we decided to go pro


----------



## Tez3

CB Jones said:


> I still think there are many more that started in a specific style whether it be Karate, Boxing, Muay Thai, wrestling, judo, etc... and developed a core or base fighting style.  And this will continue....wrestlers, boxers, etc... will continue to make that switch as they decide they want to try and be pros.
> 
> Once they decided they wanted to be a pro fighter they then began training in MMA and learning to be more well rounded.
> 
> But most of them tend to start with a base style and build from it.
> 
> Look at Connor Macgregor---striking background and then focused on ground game later.
> 
> Anthony Johnson---wrestling background and then learned striking later we decided to go pro



Well yes that's a given because MMA is still young, still evolving but more and more we are seeing the young ones coming into MMA to train rather than taking it one style at a time. Sooner or later those who come from another style will find they've been left behind, as those who train MMA come to the fore. We are seeing it already, this next generation of upcoming fighters will be single style. McGregor in his late twenties, those ten years and more younger than him aren't going to be doing a single style then another then another, in his coach's gym already they are just training MMA.


----------



## CB Jones

I agree that you will see a lot of guys that have strictly MMA training.

But I think the majority of top guys will always be guys that have a strong background in either striking or grappling and have become exceptional at it.


----------



## Tez3

CB Jones said:


> I agree that you will see a lot of guys that have strictly MMA training.
> 
> But I think the majority of top guys will always be guys that have a strong background in either striking or grappling and have become exceptional at it.



I have to disagree simply because of what I see coming up in the gyms and clubs now, of what we and other coaches are training. They aren't coming to us from other styles very much now, we do get older students who do but not the young ones. Youngsters are seeing MMA fighters and are going straight to MMA training bypassing single styles. It's the future, for now and I daresay quite a few years to come the best will be those who have a strong base style but watch the youngsters coming up.


----------



## CB Jones

We shall agree to disagree then and time will tell.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Much easier to go to Thailand from Oz than it is for us in UK/US, long haul for us. I think the MMA fighters will start becoming more rounded as MMA expands and becomes more mainstream, it's doing not too badly at the moment, a way to go yet before it's up there with boxing, rugby and Aussie rules lol but fighters will have to 'up their game' if and when it becomes a global sport which I hope it does.



And that is the thing though.  You can't do muay thai as a base for MMA if the boxing in your area is better.


----------



## drop bear

CB Jones said:


> I agree that you will see a lot of guys that have strictly MMA training.
> 
> But I think the majority of top guys will always be guys that have a strong background in either striking or grappling and have become exceptional at it.



You don't have much mma competition for kids.  So if you want to start training and competing at 6 you are probably going to grapple.


----------



## Tez3

CB Jones said:


> We shall agree to disagree then and time will tell.



I did tell you my opinion is based on what I see? It's not just my opinion either. Are you involved in MMA or just a watcher of the UFC?


----------



## KangTsai

You don't need to formally train muay Thai to have a base in MMA.


----------



## CB Jones

To me a guy that is a master of one facet will impose his will and force the jack of all trades to fight his type of fight.

More times than not the well rounded fighter will strike with strikers and grapple with grapplers.

I think guys that are great at both are exceptions to the rule not the norm.


Tez3 said:


> I did tell you my opinion is based on what I see? It's not just my opinion either. Are you involved in MMA or just a watcher of the UFC?



Watch a lot of MMA plus we have two friends that are currently pros.


----------



## CB Jones

Tez3 said:


> I did tell you my opinion is based on what I see? It's not just my opinion either. Are you involved in MMA or just a watcher of the UFC?



But mainly just observation from watching and discussions.

I guess I just want to see the proof first.

And so far I just haven't seen that guys that come up doing just MMA are better off than guys that come up with a background in a specific style.


----------



## KangTsai

CB Jones said:


> But mainly just observation from watching and discussions.
> 
> I guess I just want to see the proof first.
> 
> And so far I just haven't seen that guys that come up doing just MMA are better off than guys that come up with a background in a specific style.


Virtually all UFC fighters never began training in "MMA" specifically. Whether it be boxing, wrestling, BJJ, taekwondo, kung fu, capoeira or karate, every fighter had their routes in a single art and THEN transitioned into meta-game all-rounding of styles not too long before their careers kicked off. If you see anyone who began training MMA (simultaneous training of kickboxing and grappling), it'll usually be the younger fighters.


----------



## drop bear

KangTsai said:


> Virtually all UFC fighters never began training in "MMA" specifically. Whether it be boxing, wrestling, BJJ, taekwondo, kung fu, capoeira or karate, every fighter had their routes in a single art and THEN transitioned into meta-game all-rounding of styles not too long before their careers kicked off. If you see anyone who began training MMA (simultaneous training of kickboxing and grappling), it'll usually be the younger fighters.



Yeah but that was because MMA training wasn't available. It is more so now. 

I have not been allowed to do the mma class before unless i proved myself in a thai and bjj class. 

Nowadays you just walk in and train with mma veterans.


----------



## Tez3

CB Jones said:


> But mainly just observation from watching and discussions.
> 
> I guess I just want to see the proof first.
> 
> And so far I just haven't seen that guys that come up doing just MMA are better off than guys that come up with a background in a specific style.




You won't see 'the proof' yet as I said it's the young up and coming, I said give it ten years or so. I train, coach, ref, judge, corner and promote MMA so when I say it's from my experience I see youngsters coming into MMA without training anything else it's because that's what we are starting to see.



KangTsai said:


> Virtually all UFC fighters never began training in "MMA" specifically. Whether it be boxing, wrestling, BJJ, taekwondo, kung fu, capoeira or karate, every fighter had their routes in a single art and THEN transitioned into meta-game all-rounding of styles not too long before their careers kicked off. If you see anyone who began training MMA (simultaneous training of kickboxing and grappling), it'll usually be the younger fighters.




Current UFC fighters yes but they are inspiring youngsters to come along even at a young age to come into MMA without trying other styles first. MMA isn't old enough yet for there to be UFC age fighters not to have come from a single style then branch out to train MMA.


----------



## KangTsai

Tez3 said:


> Current UFC fighters yes but they are inspiring youngsters to come along even at a young age to come into MMA without trying other styles first. MMA isn't old enough yet for there to be UFC age fighters not to have come from a single style then branch out to train MMA.


Well, exactly.


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> If a person learned "traditional" Muay Thai  (not the sporting one). Then they probably wouldn't need much in terms of an MMA Course.
> 
> 
> 
> .
> .



Then they'd get taken down all day, and grounded & pounded. Pure strikers are like flipped over turtles on the ground.


----------



## FriedRice

What makes Muay Thai superior to other standup striking MA styles is that it gets right to the point, which is training to knock the other guy the F out, using relevant and practical techniques, right from day #1....which works for both the ring and the streets. Western Boxing will usually get someone from "0" to fighter, quicker, as MT trains kicks, clinch work, etc. But once MT catches up, the low leg kicks will be a big problem for pure Boxers (w/the same amount of training).


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> What makes Muay Thai superior to other standup striking MA styles is that it gets right to the point, which is training to knock the other guy the F out, using relevant and practical techniques, right from day #1....which works for both the ring and the streets. Western Boxing will usually get someone from "0" to fighter, quicker, as MT trains kicks, clinch work, etc. But once MT catches up, the low leg kicks will be a big problem for pure Boxers (w/the same amount of training).



Again though there's that proviso which is  there with all martial arts....it's how you train that matters. I have seen some pretty sloppy Muay Thai fighters and the places they train at. It's not necessarily superior, it very much depends on the person using it....as we keep saying on all the other style v style threads! MT fighters rarely get in the ring with 'pure' boxers though do they?

'Conversations' in the style v style vein are frustration because of it depending so much on the fighter rather than the style. In MMA being honest it matters less what style your stand up or groundwork is than whether you can make it work against your opponent, and having that skill that you also have the heart to fight. All the skills in the world won't help if you don't have the fighter's heart.


----------



## stonewall1350

EMT said:


> There is no modern MMA without Thai Kickboxing. Low kicks, elbow and knee strikes are integral parts of Mixed Martial Arts. Stand up striking in the UFC is just Muay Thai and Western Boxing of course with some marginal amount of other martial arts. My point is that while there's a lot of boxing gyms in the US and also should be more Muay Thai gyms that would allow fighters to learn basics and progress to more advanced Muay Thai techniques. MMA is not a discipline on it's own - it is rather a combination of core martial arts. If you start with Muay Thai and then move with it to MMA your life will be easier than when chaotically trying to learn some basic Muay Thai striking in the middle of an MMA course...well my point is that a lot of people are trying to build a house starting with a roof but look at the most dominant champion -= they've always started with one style and then added up more and then maybe trained some MMA to smooth it up and not the other way around.
> 
> 
> Muay Thai in MMA explained



I actually think we are seeing a big change. MMA is becoming its own fighting style. A jack of all trades art almost. Look at some of the fighters with excellent skills on one art? They end up losing to another athlete.

I still agree in learning a base art. Mainly to determine where your comfort lies. Grappling? Striking? Counter? Clinch? Sweeps? Trips? Throws? Takedowns? Shooting? I wouldn't mind seeing more Muay Thai, but boxing and kickboxing are also good. Not everyone is a clinch fighter :shrug:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JowGaWolf

FriedRice said:


> Then they'd get taken down all day, and grounded & pounded. Pure strikers are like flipped over turtles on the ground.


The Muay Thai that I'm speaking of has grappling in it.


----------



## Tez3

stonewall1350 said:


> MMA is becoming its own fighting style. A jack of all trades art almost.



That contradicts itself, it cannot be a style of it's own yet a jack of all trades. It is evolving into a style, using techniques from other styles but modified to a fighter's personal liking. That doesn't make them a jack of all trades at all. Most people these days can't, when they watch a fight, tell which style a technique is from, the fighters have made them seamless and flowing one to another. It is becoming a whole not a mishmash of techniques.
There will come a time when people won't be discussing which base styles to have, which techniques to take but will learn MMA as a whole entity in it's own right. I guess many styles won't want that to happen because they lose their bragging rights about what works in MMA, they won't be able to boast as many do that such and such fighter came from their style so 'it must work'. Times move on, we must too or else MMA will disappear as many fads do.
I find it quite exciting, I hope I'm around to see it!


----------



## Buka

What I've seen over the years is -  more people, nowadays, are coming into MMA competition with MMA training as their base experience. It's because of the availability now. I think what opportunities/resources they have at their disposal tend to make their paths from there.

I think what also might factor in - say you first start MMA training, let's say it's a really good gym, well rounded. Some part of your training it is going to come more natural for you. (It is for everyone) If the grappling seems like your strong point, you might decide to focus any extra time on that. I know, I know, you should focus on your weaker attributes, but that's not how human nature always works.

Another thing to consider - if I'm competing against you in MMA and I happen to know your base art is a striking art, do you think I'm going to let you dictate the fight into a striking match? I don't think any of us would hesitate to take away that part of the opponents game - IF we knew how.


----------



## Tez3

Buka said:


> I happen to know your base art is a striking art, do you think I'm going to let you dictate the fight into a striking match?



That's the main part of the coach/manager's job. To firstly find a fighter that is a good match for theirs. Next to learn their strengths, weaknesses and tells, then come up with the tactics for the fight. No fighter should be going into their fight not knowing their opponent's game and with no plan/tactics, that's a recipe for disaster.


----------



## drop bear

JowGaWolf said:


> The Muay Thai that I'm speaking of has grappling in it.



Probably not enough though.


----------



## stonewall1350

Tez3 said:


> That contradicts itself, it cannot be a style of it's own yet a jack of all trades. It is evolving into a style, using techniques from other styles but modified to a fighter's personal liking. That doesn't make them a jack of all trades at all. Most people these days can't, when they watch a fight, tell which style a technique is from, the fighters have made them seamless and flowing one to another. It is becoming a whole not a mishmash of techniques.
> There will come a time when people won't be discussing which base styles to have, which techniques to take but will learn MMA as a whole entity in it's own right. I guess many styles won't want that to happen because they lose their bragging rights about what works in MMA, they won't be able to boast as many do that such and such fighter came from their style so 'it must work'. Times move on, we must too or else MMA will disappear as many fads do.
> I find it quite exciting, I hope I'm around to see it!



Well that is kind of what I mean by "jack of all trades." It doesn't really specialize. It is what you make it. Not all arts are like that, but some can be. There will always be an advantage in training more grappling than the other guy. Or more striking.

What will really change the game is if they make it an Olympic sport. But I don't think that will happen. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> The Muay Thai that I'm speaking of has grappling in it.



Muay Boran? That's like going to BJJ for striking techniques.


----------



## JowGaWolf

FriedRice said:


> Muay Boran? That's like going to BJJ for striking techniques.


What gets me is that fighting on the ground is nothing new.  Kids do it from early ages with horse playing.  People fought on the ground during wars, or when they are attacked on the roads.  Greeks practice wrestling even though they had shields and long spears.  So when history shows us things that are involved in hand to hand combat, why do so many think that a system that was used in combat is void of valid grappling techniques?   Even in WWI soliders were taught grappling techniques and hand to hand techniques even though they had guns, bomb, planes, and chemical warfare.  Do you really think there was less grappling in war as we go back in time before guns?  or more?  Do you actually think that soldiers back then only knew how to kick, punch, and use a sword?


----------



## JowGaWolf

JowGaWolf said:


> What gets me is that fighting on the ground is nothing new.  Kids do it from early ages with horse playing.  People fought on the ground during wars, or when they are attacked on the roads.  Greeks practice wrestling even though they had shields and long spears.  So when history shows us things that are involved in hand to hand combat, why do so many think that a system that was used in combat is void of valid grappling techniques?   Even in WWI soliders were taught grappling techniques and hand to hand techniques even though they had guns, bomb, planes, and chemical warfare.  Do you really think there was less grappling in war as we go back in time before guns?  or more?  Do you actually think that soldiers back then only knew how to kick, punch, and use a sword?


oh by the way. You think people in BJJ don't know how to strike?


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> Again though there's that proviso which is  there with all martial arts....it's how you train that matters. I have seen some pretty sloppy Muay Thai fighters and the places they train at. It's not necessarily superior, it very much depends on the person using it....as we keep saying on all the other style v style threads! MT fighters rarely get in the ring with 'pure' boxers though do they?
> 
> 'Conversations' in the style v style vein are frustration because of it depending so much on the fighter rather than the style. In MMA being honest it matters less what style your stand up or groundwork is than whether you can make it work against your opponent, and having that skill that you also have the heart to fight. All the skills in the world won't help if you don't have the fighter's heart.



It's not just the fighter. It's the fighter, the style and the coaching. There are sloppy MT fighters, but there are way more sloppy whatever else fighters. Most people who sets out to become UFC Fighters, rarely take the route other than the base of BJJ + Muay Thai with Boxing + Wrestling as secondary styles.

Base in other styles can work, but it's rare. MT fighters rarely get in the with pure Boxers is usually because Boxers don't want to get kicked.


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> What gets me is that fighting on the ground is nothing new.  Kids do it from early ages with horse playing.  People fought on the ground during wars, or when they are attacked on the roads.  Greeks practice wrestling even though they had shields and long spears.  So when history shows us things that are involved in hand to hand combat, why do so many think that a system that was used in combat is void of valid grappling techniques?   Even in WWI soliders were taught grappling techniques and hand to hand techniques even though they had guns, bomb, planes, and chemical warfare.  Do you really think there was less grappling in war as we go back in time before guns?  or more?  Do you actually think that soldiers back then only knew how to kick, punch, and use a sword?



If you think that that evolution of BJJ for the past 25 years since UFC 1 is akin to kids fighting on the ground, then you're quite ignorant. Grappling in warfare, usually also involves weapons, so a great grappler of that time can still get killed by some peasant soldier who's sucked at grappling. We are obviously talking about unarmed combat in modern times.

Many TMA'ists used to say during the early days of the UFC that it was just a fad. Well, it's been 25 years now and I just came back from my MMA gym, where the  kid's BJJ class had about 20 kids in the 1st class and 15 in the 2nd kid's class (competition). The adult's beginner BJJ had around 15 and the all levels BJJ, it was around 30-35. This is an average day, and BJJ is 6 days/week in the mornings and evenings with other classes such as MT, Self Defense, Boxing, Conditioning, etc. It costs $160/month to train 3 classes /week with a 1 year contract and this school has been around since 1996.


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> oh by the way. You think people in BJJ don't know how to strike?



If you think that the majority of BJJ only people can strike well, then that just says a lot about your own striking skills.


----------



## kuniggety

FriedRice said:


> Muay Boran? That's like going to BJJ for striking techniques.



Muay Boran isn't/wasn't a martial art. It's very often misused. All of the old school Thai martial arts are collectively referred to as Muay Boran. The sport Muay Thai, on top of pulling techniques from a variety of Muay Boran arts, had influences from Western boxing and judo. Grappling is a fundamental part of it. Rolling around on the ground like wrestling and BJJ? No, but gripping someone, pulling them into a clinch, and throwing them are.


----------



## JowGaWolf

drop bear said:


> Probably not enough though.


I don't think it will be as extensive, unless they were able to take part of the grappling and used it as a training tool.  I'll have to see if there is a thai wrestling sport out there.


----------



## JowGaWolf

This one is for you Drop Bear.  Not exactly from Today's Thailand so I'll have to do some research to see how when the martial art was created and if it was during a time period where Thailand rule covered more area.


----------



## JowGaWolf

FriedRice said:


> If you think that the majority of BJJ only people can strike well, then that just says a lot about your own striking skills.


 lol.  I guess you haven't seen my videos.  You definitely haven't sparred with me, because my sparring partners would tell you differently.

Just because someone knows BJJ doesn't mean they lack the skills or ability to punch your lights out.


----------



## JowGaWolf

FriedRice said:


> If you think that that evolution of BJJ for the past 25 years since UFC 1 is akin to kids fighting on the ground, then you're quite ignorant.


My point is that if kids are fighting on the ground then the act of fighting on the ground is nothing new. UFC didn't invent ground fighting. BJJ didn't event ground fighting.  If you think that people fought in wars without ever fighting on the ground, or that the law enforcers of that time never had to fight on the ground, then that's your ignorance.  I can't help that you think no human has ever had to fight on the ground until UFC and that UFC is the ultimate test of ground fighting.


----------



## JowGaWolf

JowGaWolf said:


> lol.  I guess you haven't seen my videos.  You definitely haven't sparred with me, because my sparring partners would tell you differently.
> 
> Just because someone knows BJJ doesn't mean they lack the skills or ability to punch your lights out.


----------



## Tez3

stonewall1350 said:


> There will always be an advantage in training more grappling than the other guy. Or more striking



Actually, no there isn't because a fighter has to have more than one fight and they can't go on just fighting people who they have one advantage over. A fighter can't just train one style more than another, they have to be able to fight whoever otherwise they will never get title fights etc, they will be stuck fighting just one type of person. The advantages fighters have is in preparing for a fight, knowing their opponent and working out tactics and getting their prefight training worked out. There is no advantage though in training one style more than another, other fighters will know this and work out their plans accordingly so if you train striking more your opponent will work his tactic out so they do more groundwork, you see it's not an advantage really. Far better to be well rounded and as good at everything as you can be so you are never surprised or outflanked.



FriedRice said:


> It's not just the fighter. It's the fighter, the style and the coaching. There are sloppy MT fighters, but there are way more sloppy whatever else fighters. Most people who sets out to become UFC Fighters, rarely take the route other than the base of BJJ + Muay Thai with Boxing + Wrestling as secondary styles.
> 
> Base in other styles can work, but it's rare. MT fighters rarely get in the with pure Boxers is usually because Boxers don't want to get kicked.




No, there aren't more sloppy fighters from other styles, not sure why you would say that. You cannot base all your opinion on one promotion. Unless you have seen multiple promotions and thousands of fighters you can't call it like that. Until recently fighters didn't set out to be 'UFC' fighters ( not sure whether you mean MMA fighters here, you seem to confuse MMA and UFC) it's still relatively new so people were coming into MMA from a variety of backgrounds. Many fighters came from a TMA background, MT has been available for a while but only recently has become popular. Likewise BJJ, many fighters I know came from a Judo background, wrestling is still a rarity in the UK. Most French fighters I know are from a Judo background as that is a very strong sport in France. BJJ is becoming more widespread here and in Europe as more train and become instructors but Judo is still ahead in numbers. Wrestling again is a rarity, though popular in Eastern Europe as well as the Middle Eastern countries like Iran.


----------



## Buka

JowGaWolf said:


> What gets me is that fighting on the ground is nothing new.  Kids do it from early ages with horse playing.  People fought on the ground during wars, or when they are attacked on the roads.  Greeks practice wrestling even though they had shields and long spears.  So when history shows us things that are involved in hand to hand combat, why do so many think that a system that was used in combat is void of valid grappling techniques?   Even in WWI soliders were taught grappling techniques and hand to hand techniques even though they had guns, bomb, planes, and chemical warfare.  Do you really think there was less grappling in war as we go back in time before guns?  or more?  Do you actually think that soldiers back then only knew how to kick, punch, and use a sword?



I'm just nitpicking here, not remarking on your post in general. My dad fought in WW1 (U.S. Army) We had many conversations about his training in boot camp. (I was already into the Arts) He related that it was brief at best, they just wanted them all pushed through boot camp as fast as possible and onto the front lines.

The U.S. involvement in World War one started a hair shy of one hundred years ago. Damn, I'm fricken old.


----------



## Tez3

Buka said:


> The U.S. involvement in World War one started a hair shy of one hundred years ago.



We have had commemorations here since 2014, which is when the war started. Next year will be the culmination of them as the ending of the war.


Off topic I know....but does anyone think it would be worth us on MT doing something next year to commemorate the end of the war? It affected so much of the world and the events such as the Second World War that followed as a consequence. I will start a new thread if anyone thinks it's something we could do, rather than derail this one.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Tez3 said:


> We have had commemorations here since 2014, which is when the war started. Next year will be the culmination of them as the ending of the war.
> 
> 
> Off topic I know....but does anyone think it would be worth us on MT doing something next year to commemorate the end of the war? It affected so much of the world and the events such as the Second World War that followed as a consequence. I will start a new thread if anyone thinks it's something we could do, rather than derail this one.


Definitely a topic for a different thread, but did you have something specific in mind?


----------



## Tez3

kempodisciple said:


> Definitely a topic for a different thread, but did you have something specific in mind?



Not at the moment but people here are pretty inventive, I'll post up a new thread in a couple of days, have a full weekend ahead so pretty busy at the moment.


----------



## FriedRice

kuniggety said:


> Muay Boran isn't/wasn't a martial art. It's very often misused. All of the old school Thai martial arts are collectively referred to as Muay Boran. The sport Muay Thai, on top of pulling techniques from a variety of Muay Boran arts, had influences from Western boxing and judo. Grappling is a fundamental part of it. Rolling around on the ground like wrestling and BJJ? No, but gripping someone, pulling them into a clinch, and throwing them are.



Well this is just getting overly picky. Like saying that "Kung-Fu" just means "hard work" or whatever and it should be called Wushu, or whatever instead.  There are Muay Boran schools that rolls around, albeit sloppily, on the ground like BJJ...but they still do it it and call themselves Muay Boran.


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> lol.  I guess you haven't seen my videos.  You definitely haven't sparred with me, because my sparring partners would tell you differently.
> 
> Just because someone knows BJJ doesn't mean they lack the skills or ability to punch your lights out.




Take a deep breath, and go google the word "MAJORITY".


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> My point is that if kids are fighting on the ground then the act of fighting on the ground is nothing new. UFC didn't invent ground fighting. BJJ didn't event ground fighting.  If you think that people fought in wars without ever fighting on the ground, or that the law enforcers of that time never had to fight on the ground, then that's your ignorance.  I can't help that you think no human has ever had to fight on the ground until UFC and that UFC is the ultimate test of ground fighting.



Yea, I knew what your point was, which was why I told you that you're ignorant of the evolution of  BJJ and even Wrestling.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> No, there aren't more sloppy fighters from other styles, not sure why you would say that.  .



Change that to, there are more fighters produced...in MT/BJJ/MMA gyms.... to fight at the highest levels of full contact, combat sports; with the highest being The UFC.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Buka said:


> I'm just nitpicking here, not remarking on your post in general. My dad fought in WW1 (U.S. Army) We had many conversations about his training in boot camp. (I was already into the Arts) He related that it was brief at best, they just wanted them all pushed through boot camp as fast as possible and onto the front lines.
> 
> The U.S. involvement in World War one started a hair shy of one hundred years ago. Damn, I'm fricken old.


WWI was a mess over all in terms of military training and tactics.  They learned a lot of what that they shouldn't do in modern warfare (modern for that time period). Fighting in and out of trenches, calvary, mustard gas etc.  Big mess.

And yes you are old but make sure you write some of those stories down of what your father shared because it's important.


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> Change that to, there are more fighters produced...in MT/BJJ/MMA gyms.... to fight at the highest levels of full contact, combat sports; with the highest being The UFC.



That doesn't make sense. The purpose of these gyms is to turn out pro fighters, they don't do anything else. Bodybuilding gyms turn out bodybuilders, gymnastic gyms turn out gymnasts ( who knew?) and these gyms turn out fighters. It doesn't mean other styles are sloppy.


----------



## JowGaWolf

FriedRice said:


> Yea, I knew what your point was, which was why I told you that you're ignorant of the evolution of  BJJ and even Wrestling.


  You still don't understand.


----------



## kuniggety

FriedRice said:


> Well this is just getting overly picky. Like saying that "Kung-Fu" just means "hard work" or whatever and it should be called Wushu, or whatever instead.  There are Muay Boran schools that rolls around, albeit sloppily, on the ground like BJJ...but they still do it it and call themselves Muay Boran.



I don't think it's being nit-picky. I think there's an important distinction. It's not the same as saying what the definition of kung-fu is... it's moreof lumping all Chinese martial arts under the umbrella term of kung-fu and saying "you learn this in kung-fu", when in reality you could be studying grappling in shuai jiao, centerline theory in wing chun, shifting of balance in tai chi, or movement styles from an animal system. There's hundreds of arts all completely different from each other.


----------



## Headhunter

Tez3 said:


> I did tell you my opinion is based on what I see? It's not just my opinion either. Are you involved in MMA or just a watcher of the UFC?


I love it when guys who do nothing but watch it try and tell everyone how it needs to be done and gives advice from what they see on tv or from the sidelines. its so fun making them looks silly lol


----------



## FriedRice

kuniggety said:


> I don't think it's being nit-picky. I think there's an important distinction. It's not the same as saying what the definition of kung-fu is... it's moreof lumping all Chinese martial arts under the umbrella term of kung-fu and saying "you learn this in kung-fu", when in reality you could be studying grappling in shuai jiao, centerline theory in wing chun, shifting of balance in tai chi, or movement styles from an animal system. There's hundreds of arts all completely different from each other.



That's interesting, but still doesn't answer my question of why there are Muay Boran schools that grapples on the ground like all White Belt BJJ's?


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> You still don't understand.



Says you.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> That doesn't make sense. The purpose of these gyms is to turn out pro fighters, they don't do anything else. Bodybuilding gyms turn out bodybuilders, gymnastic gyms turn out gymnasts ( who knew?) and these gyms turn out fighters. It doesn't mean other styles are sloppy.



Name 10 of these gyms in your country that turns out high level MMA fighters w/o employing Muay Thai.


----------



## FriedRice

Buka said:


> My dad fought in WW1 (U.S. Army) We had many conversations about his training in boot camp. (I was already into the Arts) He related that it was brief at best, they just wanted them all pushed through boot camp as fast as possible and onto the front lines.



Usually it's only people who never served that thinks that there are some secret sauce that the military teaches in their H2H training, that  transforms brand new soldiers into magical killing machines w/their hands; within a very limited amount of time and practice, ie. boot camp...that they can easily kill trained fighters or whatever.  The secret sauce, really, are their rifles. Or just rage stabbing with their knife or bayonet, etc. Plenty of soldiers, special forces, Marines, etc. trains at MMA gyms. In general, if all that they had were the average training in their perspective military dept. then they're about at an intermediate White Belt.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

FriedRice said:


> Name 10 of these gyms in your country that turns out high level MMA fighters w/o employing Muay Thai.


This is a really trolly question, simply because you're expecting her to be familiar with >10 gyms in her country that are capable of turning out high level MMA fighters, on that already use Muay Thai. While I'm less familiar with high level fighter producing gyms, I'm familiar with a lot of gyms in my area, and a decent number of my friends are involved competitively, but it would be tough for me to name off the top of my head 10 gyms that produce fighters in general (although a majority of them combine either boxing or kickboxing and BJJ since that's whats popular over here).

Based on the amount of troll responses you've been giving everyone in this thread and others, I'm just going to "ignore" you. I'm not writing this to let you know, I'm writing it to remind others of that option before they waste even more time arguing with you pointlessly.


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> Name 10 of these gyms in your country that turns out high level MMA fighters w/o employing Muay Thai.



What on earth are you talking about? I don't actually think you are following the same conversation as we are.



FriedRice said:


> Change that to, there are more fighters produced...in MT/BJJ/MMA gyms.... to fight at the highest levels of full contact, combat sports; with the highest being The UFC.



This is what you said, I told you then your sentence doesn't make any sense because all you are saying is these gyms turn out fighters, which as I said is their job. Where do you get this thing that it's without Muay Thai. Of course the Muay Thai gyms turn out Muay Thai fighters, how would they train MT if they didn't do it? 
Many gyms train 'striking/stand up' this will be a mixture of techniques that the coaches find works, they can make it so that training is personalised for individual fighters, or they can make it general for a class. It's not 'pure' anything, some coaches come from a MT background, some form boxing, others TKD or karate, they mix up their techniques to find the best possible outcome for their fighters.
One of the things I like about training MMA is the 'looseness' of techniques, being smaller and lighter many techniques from traditional styles which have to be done for gradings etc have to be done perfectly, in MMA you can tweak, play with and manipulate techniques until you make them work for you. On a figure four arm bar for example the strong men with longer arms do it one way, I've been shown another way that makes it work better for me, there's no 'perfect' way to do it that's going to be judged, if it works it's a winner.

There's no 'pure' MT in MMA just as there is no 'pure' any style, we change it, mould it until it works. We do it all the time to all styles so everything we do in MMA is as effective as we can make it. In this respect many styles that have standup are just as good as MT.


----------



## Tez3

kempodisciple said:


> simply because you're expecting her to be familiar with >10 gyms in her country that are capable of turning out high level MMA fighters



I am familiar with 10 gyms who turn out high level MMA fighters but see my post for explanation of how standup/striking training is done.


----------



## Tez3

The thing to also understand is that many gyms have separate classes too in MT, TKD, fitness, yoga, boxercise etc because it helps pay the bills. It doesn't mean the fighters necessarily use this classes, though the standard of MT and the others will be high and worth taking if you want to go into MMA. We do have some of the best MT clubs in Europe btw. Most have dedicated classes for fighters which are often invitation only so don't appear on the class lists.
Any way your list of ten ( I can give you more including our own) MMA gyms/clubs that turn out high levels fighters, whatever style they chose to use. No 6, they use boxing because that's what Ian trained in. It's also a place mostly for 'ard men ( if you knew Ian you'd know why) lol though Ian's daughter is embarking on an MMA fight career.

1. Trojans
2. London Shoot ( has the added advantage of having members who embark on multi million bank raids)
3. Leicester ( some of the very best BJJ in the country, Nathan is a great guy besides)
4. Dogs of War ( Welsh look you)
5. Dinky Ninjas ( some of my favourite men)
6 Ian Freeman's
7. Tillery Combat ( Jack Marshman's 'home', he's from boxing not MT)
8 Griphouse ( Scottish, more favourite men)
9.Wolfslair ( should be known to most)
10. Next Gen ( Liverpool)

Tillery Combat is typical of the gyms I was talking about, they have 'stand up classes'. Their standup coach is a boxing coach. Jack Marshman is also a coach there when he's home, he's a serving Para.
London Shoot offers classes in  a lot of different styles and has pro fighters sessions for which you need instructors permission to attend.
I've never said MT isn't used or taught, so strange to think you read that in what I said, I just don't think you understand how it's used.


----------



## drop bear

John wayne parr on muay thai and MMA  He is kind of Mr muay thai.

John Wayne Parr: Training with GSP - Interview - Blitz Martial Arts Magazine


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> John wayne parr on muay thai and MMA  He is kind of Mr muay thai.
> 
> John Wayne Parr: Training with GSP - Interview - Blitz Martial Arts Magazine



I don't want to admit how long I've followed his career, he's nearly as old as me lol!

I think if MMA had 'started' earlier when he was younger he would have been more tempted to give it a proper go, perhaps lol.


----------



## JowGaWolf

FriedRice said:


> Usually it's only people who never served that thinks that there are some secret sauce that the military teaches in their H2H training, that  transforms brand new soldiers into magical killing machines w/their hands; within a very limited amount of time and practice, ie. boot camp...that they can easily kill trained fighters or whatever.  The secret sauce, really, are their rifles. Or just rage stabbing with their knife or bayonet, etc. Plenty of soldiers, special forces, Marines, etc. trains at MMA gyms. In general, if all that they had were the average training in their perspective military dept. then they're about at an intermediate White Belt.


He was talking about World War 1.  How do you get MMA out of that?


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> Usually it's only people who never served that thinks that there are some secret sauce that the military teaches in their H2H training, that  transforms brand new soldiers into magical killing machines w/their hands; within a very limited amount of time and practice, ie. boot camp...that they can easily kill trained fighters or whatever.  The secret sauce, really, are their rifles. Or just rage stabbing with their knife or bayonet, etc. Plenty of soldiers, special forces, Marines, etc. trains at MMA gyms. In general, if all that they had were the average training in their perspective military dept. then they're about at an intermediate White Belt.



No one here said or thinks that soldiers have a 'secret sauce' etc etc. No one thinks soldiers are turned in 'magic killing machines, no one said that. Not sure what your point is here.
MMA is regarded by the military as a sport alongside martial arts, rugby, hockey etc. As with all sports it's useful because it encourages team spirit, competitiveness and bravery and keeps them out of mischief, all things necessary for the military. The training they get in hand to hand fighting _is_ limited but is quite different from MMA/martial arts, it focuses only on killing/maiming rather than sport. ( we don't have white or any other colour in MMA btw)

'Rage stabbing', well no, here our military are taught to use a bayonet properly, rage doesn't come into it. Yes, our soldiers have used bayonets in Afghan, yes I know what I'm talking about.

No one is disputing MT is a very useful part of MMA but it isn't the only useful weapon in the arsenal. I'm not sure what your argument is other than to just argue.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> No one here said or thinks that soldiers have a 'secret sauce' etc etc. No one thinks soldiers are turned in 'magic killing machines, no one said that. Not sure what your point is here. .



I wasn't even talking to you.



> The training they get in hand to hand fighting _is_ limited but is quite different from MMA/martial arts, it focuses only on killing/maiming rather than sport.



But since you wanted to talk about this with me....there, you just proved my point. You are that someone who thinks that there is some kind of secret sauce to kill people by hand, that's implemented in the military's H2H systems, that's unknown to MMA.



> 'Rage stabbing', well no, here our military are taught to use a bayonet properly, rage doesn't come into it. Yes, our soldiers have used bayonets in Afghan, yes I know what I'm talking about.



Tell me, what type of rifle did their bayonet attach to.



> No one is disputing MT is a very useful part of MMA but it isn't the only useful weapon in the arsenal. I'm not sure what your argument is other than to just argue.



Show me where I said that MT is "the only useful weapon in the arsenal" of MMA. If you can't, then it sounds to me that you're the one looking to argue by making things up, that I didn't say in the first place, just to argue.


----------



## FriedRice

kempodisciple said:


> This is a really trolly question, simply because you're expecting her to be familiar with >10 gyms in her country that are capable of turning out high level MMA fighters, on that already use Muay Thai.



You playing the Troll Card? But I also don't think that you understand what we were arguing about....maybe due to your last sentence being unintelligible, so can you clarify?



> While I'm less familiar with high level fighter producing gyms, I'm familiar with a lot of gyms in my area, and a decent number of my friends are involved competitively, but it would be tough for me to name off the top of my head 10 gyms that produce fighters in general (although a majority of them combine either boxing or kickboxing and BJJ since that's whats popular over here).



I can certainly name 10 gyms.



> Based on the amount of troll responses you've been giving everyone in this thread and others, I'm just going to "ignore" you. I'm not writing this to let you know, I'm writing it to remind others of that option before they waste even more time arguing with you pointlessly.



Interesting how you think that you're so much above other people that you  need to help them with this.


----------



## kuniggety

FriedRice said:


> That's interesting, but still doesn't answer my question of why there are Muay Boran schools that grapples on the ground like all White Belt BJJ's?



Because just like the umbrella term of kung fu there are things like shuai Jiao that teach grappling. I'm not well versed in the Boran arts but some are: "Muay Chaiya," "Muay Thasao," "Muay Lopburi," and "Muay Korat." If you look into their curriculums, in sure one or two of them involve rolling around in the dirt.


----------



## FriedRice

kuniggety said:


> Because just like the umbrella term of kung fu there are things like shuai Jiao that teach grappling. I'm not well versed in the Boran arts but some are: "Muay Chaiya," "Muay Thasao," "Muay Lopburi," and "Muay Korat." If you look into their curriculums, in sure one or two of them involve rolling around in the dirt.



And they're all still way more inferior to BJJ when it comes to grappling on the ground, which was the original argument. MMA, in general (if ever), do not train these Muay-X variations for its grappling base for this reason.


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> I wasn't even talking to you.



Ooo get you sunshine.



FriedRice said:


> But since you wanted to talk about this with me....there, you just proved my point. You are that someone who thinks that there is some kind of secret sauce to kill people by hand, that's implemented in the military's H2H systems, that's unknown to MMA




ROFLMAO, as someone who has actually served in HM Forces ( Intelligence Officer in the RAF, who worked with the Det. among other units), whose other half was in the RAF Regiment ( one of the Sqns he was onhttp://www.eliteukforces.info/raf-regiment/   ) and who has spent most of my life working with the military I can categorically say you are talking a load of bollocks. You are spoiling for a fight mate, because you seem not want to understand what people are saying to you. I repeat, as there is* limited* hand to hand training taught, they concentrate on killing/maiming techniques. I shall explain as simply as I can for you, they concentrate on those techniques because the training is *limited*, *they don't spend a lot of time on it*, I didn't say those 'techniques' are unknown in MMA at all, that's your thinking not mine. In the *limited lessons* they have the instructors only teach a couple of things that may be useful. If you go onto to spec forces training they spend more time on hand to hand fighting but again it's restricted to techniques they can teach in a short time, too much to learn to spend time on something that may or may not be useful. Stop with the 'magic sauce stuff' you really have no idea what you are talking about.
As British squaddies like fighting they don't actually need much hand to hand combat instruction, you will learn everything you need to going out with them on a night lol.



FriedRice said:


> Tell me, what type of rifle did their bayonet attach to.



SA80 

Soldier who led Afghanistan bayonet charge into hail of bullets honoured






The video was taken at the Infantry Training Centre, Catterick Garrison. Next time don't call me a liar, don't even infer it.


You might want to read through this is you are interested in squaddie's views, I take no responsibility for any bad language, shocking behaviour, sarcasm and squaddieness you may find inside this army site. Hand to Hand Combat
Every one else enjoy the views of squaddies, I can translate any words you don't understand.


----------



## Tez3

"And the final point to be made â facetious, but true â is that Infantry soldiers have more than enough practice at fighting in their own time without some half-arsed jap slapping being taught to them. When it comes to it it is just about aggression and will. As someone once pointed out to me, a ninja may be hard, but he's not as hard as a glass ash tray. Neither is he as hard as a bayonet, UGL smashed repeatedly in his face, or seven other blokes whose weapons still work.

You train your mates to be black-belts and give every one a pistol. I reckon my Infantry Company will knock your heads in every time."

"I used to do karate until I discovered Smith&Wesson"

"The Public Safety and Public Order instructors course teaches restraint and other techniques to stop bad people doing badness - It is a requirement for each unit to have at least one instructor on the books. I think unarmed combat isn't taught because generally you'll have something to hand to poke/gouge/beat etc with rather than trying to unleash vulcan neck grips."


"back in the day the preferred Dojo was outside a bar around midnight :evil:
The view expressed by grownups was if the lads knew how to fight they'd only do each other more damage.
the only time I ever face a martial artist who appeared to know what they were doing terror and rage and a Barstool stopped him :twisted: "


"I think you'll find there's not much unarmed combat training â there's not even a great deal of it for sneaky beaky stuff â because it's not considered worth the investment of time and energy. Barring a few very rare situations, guns and arty are what you need. Long range mayhem trumps chop-socky every time. Unless both you *and* the enemy have run out of guns or ammo, the battle is over, innit?

It takes a lot of time to train someone to be highly effective in unarmed combat, time which most militaries recognise is better spent in training soldiers to shoot well, maintain their weapons properly, and be fit enough to carry a sh1tload of ammo.

Ok, yes, it is fairly quick and easy to train a fit soldier in the basic rudiments of self-defence â how to overcome a knife attack or defeat someone close by who's holding a gun â but even that's of debatable effectiveness because in situations like that the psychology is at least as important as the physical skills. Taking a pistol off someone close to you isn't that hard physically ... but you have to steel yourself, and nerve up, to do it ... and I'd suggest that is much harder than many people might imagine. Hollywood this ain't."

"unarmed combat, surely the boys get enough done over the weekend down the town to be able to manage a scrap on the battlefield!!
where the fook do these comments come from, id rather know time and money was invested in my weapon, my equipment and myself to ensure it all worked and i could keep the enemy at a safe shooting distance rather than unarmed combat
get real about this sort of crap, its not like in the films"

"From my old perspective there's nothing better than on the job training. I used to walk into town on a Friday night knowing that eventually some bloke somewhere would call me some sort of mong and that I'd have to go toe to toe with him.
I usually lost but eventually I could put up a good scrap!
Utrinque get beatupus"

Hand to Hand Combat


PS if you aren't easily shocked and want a laugh go to the 'Naafi' section, probably best only for those who have served, military sense of humour is an acquired taste.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> Ooo get you sunshine.
> 
> ROFLMAO, as someone who has actually served in HM Forces ( Intelligence Officer in the RAF, who worked with the Det. among other units), whose other half was in the RAF Regiment ( one of the Sqns he was onhttp://www.eliteukforces.info/raf-regiment/   ) and who has spent most of my life working with the military I can categorically say you are talking a load of bollocks. .



Wait, do you know this guy from the RAF?









> You are spoiling for a fight mate, because you seem not want to understand what people are saying to you. I repeat, as there is* limited* hand to hand training taught, they concentrate on killing/maiming techniques. I shall explain as simply as I can for you, they concentrate on those techniques because the training is *limited*, *they don't spend a lot of time on it*, I didn't say those 'techniques' are unknown in MMA at all, that's your thinking not mine. In the *limited lessons* they have the instructors only teach a couple of things that may be useful. If you go onto to spec forces training they spend more time on hand to hand fighting but again it's restricted to techniques they can teach in a short time, too much to learn to spend time on something that may or may not be useful. Stop with the 'magic sauce stuff' you really have no idea what you are talking about.
> As British squaddies like fighting they don't actually need much hand to hand combat instruction, you will learn everything you need to going out with them on a night lol.



That's quite a lot of early 2000's "LOL's". So we teach 2nd day BJJ White Belts how to rear naked choke. Is this also a special sauce, death move?




> SA80
> 
> Soldier who led Afghanistan bayonet charge into hail of bullets honoured
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The video was taken at the Infantry Training Centre, Catterick Garrison. Next time don't call me a liar, don't even infer it.
> 
> 
> You might want to read through this is you are interested in squaddie's views, I take no responsibility for any bad language, shocking behaviour, sarcasm and squaddieness you may find inside this army site. Hand to Hand Combat
> Every one else enjoy the views of squaddies, I can translate any words you don't understand.



Scary. Looks a lot like rage stabbing to me though. Do bayonets really work though? How come there aren't any women in those videos? Not a good idea?


----------



## Tez3

So, let's see how many of the rules here on MT you are breaking here, sniping, baiting, attacking a poster not the post. Tell me why are you on here? You seem to take a delight in trolling people and trying to set off arguments.
Sorry I'm not biting, you are the worse kind of troll... a boring one.

*As for your disrespect of the military,* some of those soldiers in the videos were killed or wounded in Afghanistan, *says everything we need to know about you.*

Bye, have a nice safe civilian life and leave the real work of guarding your freedom and safety to those who serve honourably.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> So, let's see how many of the rules here on MT you are breaking here, sniping, baiting, attacking a poster not the post. Tell me why are you on here? You seem to take a delight in trolling people and trying to set off arguments.
> Sorry I'm not biting, you are the worse kind of troll... a boring one.
> 
> *As for your disrespect of the military,* some of those soldiers in the videos were killed or wounded in Afghanistan, *says everything we need to know about you.*
> 
> Bye, have a nice safe civilian life and leave the real work of guarding your freedom and safety to those who serve honourably.



People in the military can't take a joke? Or are you trying real hard to get offended? Relax a little maybe?


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> The thing to also understand is that many gyms have separate classes too in MT, TKD, fitness, yoga, boxercise etc because it helps pay the bills. It doesn't mean the fighters necessarily use this classes, though the standard of MT and the others will be high and worth taking if you want to go into MMA. We do have some of the best MT clubs in Europe btw. Most have dedicated classes for fighters which are often invitation only so don't appear on the class lists.
> Any way your list of ten ( I can give you more including our own) MMA gyms/clubs that turn out high levels fighters, whatever style they chose to use. No 6, they use boxing because that's what Ian trained in. It's also a place mostly for 'ard men ( if you knew Ian you'd know why) lol though Ian's daughter is embarking on an MMA fight career.
> 
> 1. Trojans
> 2. London Shoot ( has the added advantage of having members who embark on multi million bank raids)
> 3. Leicester ( some of the very best BJJ in the country, Nathan is a great guy besides)
> 4. Dogs of War ( Welsh look you)
> 5. Dinky Ninjas ( some of my favourite men)
> 6 Ian Freeman's
> 7. Tillery Combat ( Jack Marshman's 'home', he's from boxing not MT)
> 8 Griphouse ( Scottish, more favourite men)
> 9.Wolfslair ( should be known to most)
> 10. Next Gen ( Liverpool)
> 
> Tillery Combat is typical of the gyms I was talking about, they have 'stand up classes'. Their standup coach is a boxing coach. Jack Marshman is also a coach there when he's home, he's a serving Para.
> London Shoot offers classes in  a lot of different styles and has pro fighters sessions for which you need instructors permission to attend.
> I've never said MT isn't used or taught, so strange to think you read that in what I said, I just don't think you understand how it's used.


I may be mistaken, but I think you and fried rice are actually arguing the same position.

Oh, nevermind,   Things got personal.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Tez3 said:


> No one here said or thinks that soldiers have a 'secret sauce' etc etc


No one _here _in this current discussion, correct. That's because most of us have a fair amount of experience.



Tez3 said:


> No one thinks soldiers are turned in 'magic killing machines, no one said that. Not sure what your point is here.



There's a fairly common misconception out there that because the military engages in deadly conflicts that their hand-to-hand combative training must be especially lethal and effective. This is (for just one example) used as the basis for most Krav Maga marketing. If I was willing to spend some time digging, I could even find some past examples of people who should know better making this sort of argument on this very forum.



Steve said:


> I may be mistaken, but I think you and fried rice are actually arguing the same position.



Yep.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

JowGaWolf said:


> oh by the way. You think people in BJJ don't know how to strike?





FriedRice said:


> If you think that the majority of BJJ only people can strike well, then that just says a lot about your own striking skills.





JowGaWolf said:


> Just because someone knows BJJ doesn't mean they lack the skills or ability to punch your lights out.



Personal observations here:

The majority of BJJ classes these days don't teach striking at all
Those BJJ classes which do teach striking, present it at a fairly rudimentary level, mostly just to help set up grappling techniques.
Notwithstanding the above, I'd say that of the BJJ black belts I know personally, probably 70% of them are also at least black belt or black-belt equivalent in at least one striking art. It's never a good idea to assume that somebody knows only one thing.


----------



## Tez3

Tony Dismukes said:


> There's a fairly common misconception out there that because the military engages in deadly conflicts that their hand-to-hand combative training must be especially lethal and effective. This is (for just one example) used as the basis for most Krav Maga marketing. If I was willing to spend some time digging, I could even find some past examples of people who should know better making this sort of argument on this very forum.



'Out there' being? Most Brits know enough about the military here to know that they don't engage in hand to hand combat, perhaps we're had more coverage of recent wars than Americans which disabuses people of any false ideas about what combat is. We've had a lot of programmes about the military in training as well as in combat zones.
KM isn't hugely marketed here nor is it that popular so we don't see this marketing.


You forget that* I was the one* being accused of believing that the military had the 'magic sauce' here, I was also accused of lying about our troops having used a bayonet charge and had my husband who has served in several wars made fun of. I was also accused of lying about MMA here something I know a lot about, I was told I couldn't name 10 MMA gyms here, I did, and what's more I know the people in them and who run them. If people are going to come on here, mock and troll others then they will have to expect robust answers back, if they can't take it then that's their problem. This is also the person who is following me onto other threads and putting 'funny' on my posts about rape which is frankly despicable. I don't care whether he likes me or not, but to find rape funny is surely the sign of a very strange mind.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Tez3 said:


> 'Out there' being?



It's pretty common in the U.S. at least. I've also seen it on numerous discussion boards with international membership.



Tez3 said:


> You forget that* I was the one* being accused of believing that the military had the 'magic sauce' here, I was also accused of lying about our troops having used a bayonet charge and had my husband who has served in several wars made fun of. I was also accused of lying about MMA here something I know a lot about, I was told I couldn't name 10 MMA gyms here, I did, and what's more I know the people in them and who run them. If people are going to come on here, mock and troll others then they will have to expect robust answers back, if they can't take it then that's their problem. This is also the person who is following me onto other threads and putting 'funny' on my posts about rape which is frankly despicable. I don't care whether he likes me or not, but to find rape funny is surely the sign of a very strange mind.



Oh, I totally agree that FriedRice is being generally rude to multiple people (including you) on multiple threads (including this one). I figure the moderators will be taking that up with him behind the scenes. I was just pointing out that on the original substantive issue at hand - are military hand-to-hand combative methods especially lethal and effective compared to civilian methods - you are actually saying the same thing. Hand-to-hand combatives are a very minor part of military training compared to ... well, just about every other part of military training. Wars are won through firepower, strategy, tactics, logistics, communications, unit discipline, morale, etc, not by individual skill in unarmed combat. Since unarmed fighting skills are relatively unimportant in a military context, soldiers generally receive only rudimentary training in that topic.


----------



## Tez3

Tony Dismukes said:


> you are actually saying the same thing.



Of course I am, because it's true but I was being accused of being the person that believed otherwise. It doesn't need to be explained to me, one of the camps I worked with before I retired is the Infantry Training Centre here in Catterick, I know what the training is, I also know what Royal Marine training is like having been a member of the Royal Marine Parachuting Club and spent a lot of bad weather time watching the training ( best bit...watching hotlocks of food being delivered to recruits who open them to find live chickens which they had to kill, pluck and cook for their dinner) with others who were actually instructors. One of the best MMA fighters in the UK used to be a Royal Marine PTI btw. ( 'Stapes', was on one of the TUF series). One of the camps we lived on was the RAF Regt. ( husband instructor, I used to type up his notes for teaching) basic training camp used to have to go and get my dog when he ran off to beg food from the recruits on exercise.

The subject of what training was/is done in the military was the result of the same poster being rude to someone else eye again. It had nothing to do with MMA or Muay Thai.

I don't know if this will show in the US, hopefully so as it's very interesting. RIP to the lads from there though that died in Afghanistan. 
Royal Marines Commando School - All 4


----------



## Tez3

And Krav Maga? Krav Maga: Kill or be killed. Does it really work?


----------



## FriedRice

Tony Dismukes said:


> Personal observations here:
> 
> The majority of BJJ classes these days don't teach striking at all
> Those BJJ classes which do teach striking, present it at a fairly rudimentary level, mostly just to help set up grappling techniques.
> Notwithstanding the above, I'd say that of the BJJ black belts I know personally, probably 70% of them are also at least black belt or black-belt equivalent in at least one striking art. It's never a good idea to assume that somebody knows only one thing.



Somewhat true. It's also true that you can learn proper striking and still never be able to apply it competently vs., say an intermediate level striker in MT (who does spar often). Especially black belts in TMA type striking arts can range anywhere from awesome to pure crap when it's time to spar hard. There are dudes who are awesome on the pads with good techniques and power...for many years... but when it's time to spar...they get all flustered, get jacked up and then find all the excuses to leave or not show up on sparring days....then eventually they quit. And this is in Muay Thai class. This is just my observation from a very large MMA gym (10k sq/ft. locker rooms, 6 showers, etc.) with at least 200 current students on the books.

It's like the other guy saying how rolling on the dirt wrestling is nothing new and his Kung-Fu people can do it too; which just shows that he's never trained that seriously vs. BJJ's.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Tony Dismukes said:


> It's pretty common in the U.S. at least. I've also seen it on numerous discussion boards with international membership.


The U.S. has a big survivalist market so it's probably more common here than anywhere else.  You know how Americans can be.  Always chasing the next new trend in self-defense.



Tony Dismukes said:


> Notwithstanding the above, I'd say that of the BJJ black belts I know personally, probably 70% of them are also at least black belt or black-belt equivalent in at least one striking art. It's never a good idea to assume that somebody knows only one thing.


Totally agree about not assuming that someone only knows one thing.  My rule for striking is if you can punch a bag hard, then you can punch my face hard.  If you can kick a bag hard, then you can kick me hard.  These are the only things that are required to make a strike "dangerous enough."  So even if the person hasn't trained in a striking art. If they can do those 2 things then it's a danger to me. Wild untrained strikes can be just as dangerous as trained ones if they are coming in hard


In addition striking can be done either standing up or on the ground.  If a BJJ guy is on the ground I don't assume that he can't kick me in my knee.



FriedRice said:


> It's like the other guy saying how rolling on the dirt wrestling is nothing new and his Kung-Fu people can do it too;


Shuai Jiao, Mongolian Wrestling

The ancient South Asian form of wrestling is called malla-yuddha.[2] Practiced at least since the 5th millenniun BC,[3][4]described in the 13th century treatise Malla Purana, it was the precursor of modern kushti


----------



## Tez3

JowGaWolf said:


> If a BJJ guy is on the ground I don't assume that he can't kick me in my knee.



I've seen KOs from that position in MMA fighters, an upward kick catching the opponent as he's about to jump ( well not exactly jump but I can't say go down on him can I? ) on to his downed opponent.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Tez3 said:


> I've seen KOs from that position in MMA fighters, an upward kick catching the opponent as he's about to jump ( well not exactly jump but I can't say go down on him can I? ) on to his downed opponent.


Renzo Gracie's KO of Oleg Taktarov being a classic example of this.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Tez3 said:


> I've seen KOs from that position in MMA fighters, an upward kick catching the opponent as he's about to jump ( well not exactly jump but I can't say go down on him can I? ) on to his downed opponent.


Yeah up kicks can be murder.  Even the kids can give a good up kick to the jewels.


----------



## Tez3

JowGaWolf said:


> Yeah up kicks can be murder. Even the kids can give a good up kick to the jewels.



Watched four of those fights live at venues. Cagewarriors is still going, Cage Rage sadly not, I do miss them.


----------



## FriedRice

JowGaWolf said:


> The ancient South Asian form of wrestling is called malla-yuddha.[2] Practiced at least since the 5th millenniun BC,[3][4]described in the 13th century treatise Malla Purana, it was the precursor of modern kushti



I never disagreed with you that there's grappling in Kung-Fu. I'm just telling you that such Kung-Fu's grappling is way, way below, the levels of BJJ. MMA is the world's highest level of martial arts competition with the most amount of money, fame and glory being available to the fighters, their camp, their styles and their country's pride. When was the last time that an aspiring UFC fighter said, "Ima go learn me some Shuai Jiao for my groundwork"?


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> Renzo Gracie's KO of Oleg Taktarov being a classic example of this.



There is a whole game evolving around getting that and preventing it.


----------



## Tez3

I imagine it will come as a bit of a shock for some to find that MMA  and the UFC are virtually non existent and unknown in most countries in the world who..gasp..don't actually care about it. That in many countries it's a peripheral sport as it is in the UK and most of Europe. Even in Brazil it's not the national sport, nothing will take the place of football.
Boxing is the highest level, highest paid and even with it's flaws remains the most popular martial art however much hyperbole is employed to make MMA seem more than it is.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I imagine it will come as a bit of a shock for some to find that MMA  and the UFC are virtually non existent and unknown in most countries in the world who..gasp..don't actually care about it. That in many countries it's a peripheral sport as it is in the UK and most of Europe. Even in Brazil it's not the national sport, nothing will take the place of football.
> Boxing is the highest level, highest paid and even with it's flaws remains the most popular martial art however much hyperbole is employed to make MMA seem more than it is.



most recognised womens sport?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> most recognised womens sport?



Sadly WMMA is very far behind men's, I really hope, and I do see encouraging signs ,that the women's game will catch up ( even surpass lol) the men's. Unfortunately we have countries that will not allow women to compete in most sports let along a martial one, in those same countries women aren't allow to even spectate.
On the whole I think athletics still tends to be the most recognised sport for women, it tends to have what sponsors and advertisers want as well.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Tez3 said:


> Sadly WMMA is very far behind men's, I really hope, and I do see encouraging signs ,that the women's game will catch up ( even surpass lol) the men's. Unfortunately we have countries that will not allow women to compete in most sports let along a martial one, in those same countries women aren't allow to even spectate.
> On the whole I think athletics still tends to be the most recognised sport for women, it tends to have what sponsors and advertisers want as well.


do you think India will have a future impact since it is compulsory for girls to take martial arts?


----------



## Tez3

JowGaWolf said:


> do you think India will have a future impact since it is compulsory for girls to take martial arts?



It isn't compulsory as such in India, some private schools, universities and one state have made it so but not the country as a whole though there are petitions to the government to make it compulsory which will perhaps make it compulsory but when you have places where the village elders pass sentences like gang rape on girls whose relative have 'transgressed' against village rules there has to be far more than just making martial compulsory in schools, one also has to get all girls to actually go to school as well for it to have any effect.
However it will be regarded as purely self defence and won't carry forward into competing. India however has already made it's name with female boxers, mostly due to one lady Mary Kom who now runs classes and aims to have more like her.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Tez3 said:


> It isn't compulsory as such in India, some private schools, universities and one state have made it so but not the country as a whole though there are petitions to the government to make it compulsory which will perhaps make it compulsory but when you have places where the village elders pass sentences like gang rape on girls whose relative have 'transgressed' against village rules there has to be far more than just making martial compulsory in schools, one also has to get all girls to actually go to school as well for it to have any effect.
> However it will be regarded as purely self defence and won't carry forward into competing. India however has already made it's name with female boxers, mostly due to one lady Mary Kom who now runs classes and aims to have more like her.


I hope she will have a lot of success with her classes


----------



## Tez3

JowGaWolf said:


> I hope she will have a lot of success with her classes



I watched a documentary on her before the London Olympics, she's one tough lady and hopefully will have students following her into the Olympics and beyond.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Sadly WMMA is very far behind men's, I really hope, and I do see encouraging signs ,that the women's game will catch up ( even surpass lol) the men's. Unfortunately we have countries that will not allow women to compete in most sports let along a martial one, in those same countries women aren't allow to even spectate.
> On the whole I think athletics still tends to be the most recognised sport for women, it tends to have what sponsors and advertisers want as well.



I think it was afganistan or somewhere really conservative where girls were competing in karate.  They had to stop when they got married.  But its a start.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> I think it was afganistan or somewhere really conservative where girls were competing in karate.  They had to stop when they got married.  But its a start.



In Afghanistan girls need protection from acid attacks, schoolgirls especially. It's absolutely horrendous.


----------



## Steve

It will come as a surprise to some that MMA is a peripheral sport in the USA, as well.  LOL.

American Football
Major League Baseball

Men’s college football
Auto racing
Men’s pro basketball
Still very lucrative for some, but generally not for the athletes.  More of a calling than a means of gainful employment.  It's easy for folks overseas to think the UFC represents all of American MMA, but that's not quite accurate.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> I imagine it will come as a bit of a shock for some to find that MMA  and the UFC are virtually non existent and unknown in most countries in the world who..gasp..don't actually care about it. That in many countries it's a peripheral sport as it is in the UK and most of Europe. Even in Brazil it's not the national sport, nothing will take the place of football.
> Boxing is the highest level, highest paid and even with it's flaws remains the most popular martial art however much hyperbole is employed to make MMA seem more than it is.




(gasp)

"MMA is the world's highest level of martial arts competition".

I thought that was pretty clear, (gasp).


----------



## FriedRice

Steve said:


> It will come as a surprise to some that MMA is a peripheral sport in the USA, as well.  LOL.
> 
> American Football
> Major League Baseball
> 
> Men’s college football
> Auto racing
> Men’s pro basketball
> Still very lucrative for some, but generally not for the athletes.  More of a calling than a means of gainful employment.  It's easy for folks overseas to think the UFC represents all of American MMA, but that's not quite accurate.




"MMA is the world's highest level of martial arts competition".  

The UFC, currently represents the highest level of American MMA as well as worldwide.


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> (gasp)
> 
> "MMA is the world's highest level of martial arts competition".
> 
> I thought that was pretty clear, (gasp).



Really, and boxing where does that come? It's practised in just about every country, has actual world titles, is in the Olympics, has World, European Pan-American, Asian, Australasian championships as well as a world ranking system for amateurs and professionals. It has a worldwide amateur boxing authority. It's far bigger than MMA is and is the top level of martial arts competition.
I take it you don't think of boxing as martial arts because like a lot of recent MMA fanboys, MMA is ..gasp.. the thing they're crazy over this year.
In other countries such as The Netherlands kickboxing ranks far higher than MMA. That MMA is the 'world's highest level of martial arts competition' is your opinion, that's fine you are entitled to your opinion, what you aren't entitled to is your own facts.


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> The UFC, currently represents the highest level of American MMA



It's a big company dedicated to making it's money through MMA competitions, it has the most entertaining fighters, the ones who will sell the most tickets. Are they the best MMA fighters, well, that is open to debate. Ask those who don't like Conor McGregor for a start.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> Really, and boxing where does that come? It's practised in just about every country, has actual world titles, is in the Olympics, has World, European Pan-American, Asian, Australasian championships as well as a world ranking system for amateurs and professionals. It has a worldwide amateur boxing authority. It's far bigger than MMA is and is the top level of martial arts competition.
> I take it you don't think of boxing as martial arts because like a lot of recent MMA fanboys, MMA is ..gasp.. the thing they're crazy over this year.
> In other countries such as The Netherlands kickboxing ranks far higher than MMA. That MMA is the 'world's highest level of martial arts competition' is your opinion, that's fine you are entitled to your opinion, what you aren't entitled to is your own facts.



Well at least now you know that football is not a martial arts. And what Boxing organization (gasp) considers themselves a martial art organization?


----------



## Tez3

FriedRice said:


> Well at least now you know that football is not a martial arts. And what Boxing organization (gasp) considers themselves a martial art organization?



Really? I hope the Mods are noting your behaviour on here, you are trolling as well as following me to other threads so you can post 'funny' on the rape posts.
You are off to ignoreland, we have enough boorish politicians here without me having to put up with you here.


----------



## JowGaWolf

FriedRice said:


> Well at least now you know that football is not a martial arts. And what Boxing organization (gasp) considers themselves a martial art organization?


Boxing skills = Punching.  Jab, hooks, crosses, and other variations of these punches.   These same techniques can be found in other fighting systems as well.

While martial arts is often the term that is used to apply to Eastern Asian fighting systems, it doesn't exclude western fighting systems or any other fighting system that uses strikes, weapons (non-mechanical), and grappling.  I think I read somewhere that in early bare knuckle fighting (precursor to boxing) also included kicking and grappling.  I don't know much about bare knuckle history, but based on the description one would probably say that it was closer to MMA fighting than modern boxing is.

Boxing organizations may not consider themselves as being martial arts, if their definition of martial arts is solely based on it meaning Eastern Asian fighting systems with kicking.  Boxing organization also wouldn't consider themselves as martial arts because their focus is the sport of boxing.  However, my guess is that the more boxing is utilized in MMA, the more likely *boxing gyms* will begin to reclassify themselves as being martial arts. Especially now that boxing is often integrated in progressive martial art schools and MMA gyms, that teach western Martial Arts.

If anything I expect that boxing coaches will probably find success with gaining students from Eastern Martial arts backgrounds as the successful use of boxing skills in MMA fights have help renew the energy for boxing.


----------



## Steve

FriedRice said:


> "MMA is the world's highest level of martial arts competition".
> 
> The UFC, currently represents the highest level of American MMA as well as worldwide.


I agree with this.  May not always be the case, but the UFC represents the best chance for MMAists to make a lot of dough, become world famous (within the niche audience) and potentially parlay their MMA career into something more. 

While I still think that the athletes are getting the short end of the stick, the UFC does pay some of their top talent very well.  And anyone who is making a decent living in MMA owes much to the UFC for moving the sport out of the fringe and into mainstream society.  Still not as popular as most other pro sports, MMA is generally considered a "real" sport.  It receives coverage through all of the major media outlets, has recognized athletes and a unified rule set that is largely sanctioned world wide.  And regardless of which promotion or perspective you support, that is largely due to the UFC juggernaut.  (Of course, the systematic creation of what amounts to a global monopoly isn't that great).

HAS it always been the case?  No.  Promotions like Pride were stride for stride with UFC for many years.  But the corruption within that promotion led to its eventual demise. 

Will this always be the case?  Maybe not.  Maybe another promotion can rise to challenge the UFC for top quality fighters and decent events.   

But, all of that having been said, it's hard for us who like MMA and are fans to understand that most people don't give a rip about it at all.


----------



## Tez3

On the list of Forums on MartialTalk under the title 'Boxing and kickboxing is this description of boxing "*Boxing*_, the noble art of pugilism is a sport and martial art in which two participants fight each other with their fists." _so guess I'm not the only one here who thinks boxing is a martial art.

then there's this Boxing is a Martial Art
no 7 https://blog.udemy.com/top-10-martial-arts/
_Boxing - Martial Arts Style - Black Belt Wiki_

There's plenty more of course and there's those who say boxing isn't a martial art but the point is enough people consider it to be a martial art that is negates the argument that only I do.


----------



## JP3

I consider boxing a martial art, absolutely.  Think you are a bad-mamajama with the ninja-chop, kung-fu kick and Captain Kirk throw? Well then, head on up to a boxing gym and grab some headgear (you'll need it) and hop in the ring with one of those sweaty monsters who have been steadily boxing training for as little as a year and then tell me, after you get up, if you think it isn't martial in application.  Oh, yeah... no umpire or ref, just "training."


----------



## drop bear

JP3 said:


> I consider boxing a martial art, absolutely.  Think you are a bad-mamajama with the ninja-chop, kung-fu kick and Captain Kirk throw? Well then, head on up to a boxing gym and grab some headgear (you'll need it) and hop in the ring with one of those sweaty monsters who have been steadily boxing training for as little as a year and then tell me, after you get up, if you think it isn't martial in application.  Oh, yeah... no umpire or ref, just "training."



And is one of the oldest martial arts.


----------



## FriedRice

Steve said:


> While I still think that the athletes are getting the short end of the stick, the UFC does pay some of their top talent very well.   .



I agree with this. While I also recognize how much risks and hard work that the Owners of the UFC has put into this, due to their *real* love for the sport...to the tune of $10 million of their own cash at a certain point, to keep the UFC afloat.....the Fighters are still getting somewhat underpaid. Although Boxers at the mid to low levels also don't make much neither.  The life of a fighter is rough, no doubt. There's an excellent documentary on this on YouTube.

The good news for the fighters is, Connor McGregor. He's actually turning himself into the same, self-promotion model similar to Mayweather and this will help all fighters as a whole, I think.


----------



## FriedRice

Tez3 said:


> On the list of Forums on MartialTalk under the title 'Boxing and kickboxing is this description of boxing "*Boxing*_, the noble art of pugilism is a sport and martial art in which two participants fight each other with their fists." _so guess I'm not the only one here who thinks boxing is a martial art.
> 
> then there's this Boxing is a Martial Art
> no 7 https://blog.udemy.com/top-10-martial-arts/
> _Boxing - Martial Arts Style - Black Belt Wiki_
> 
> There's plenty more of course and there's those who say boxing isn't a martial art but the point is enough people consider it to be a martial art that is negates the argument that only I do.




Yea, you and a few people who aren't even pure Boxers.


----------



## FriedRice

JP3 said:


> I consider boxing a martial art, absolutely.  Think you are a bad-mamajama with the ninja-chop, kung-fu kick and Captain Kirk throw? Well then, head on up to a boxing gym and grab some headgear (you'll need it) and hop in the ring with one of those sweaty monsters who have been steadily boxing training for as little as a year and then tell me, after you get up, if you think it isn't martial in application.  Oh, yeah... no umpire or ref, just "training."



No, it is the pure Boxers, who usually don't want to call themselves such Kung-Fooey Martial Artists.


----------

