Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The guys who stick around and get a BJJ black belt are TMA, though. MMA guys just pick up the basics and run with them, right?
I am really curious as to who else attempts to integrate both schools of thought.
To me, it seems hard to merge when they are working toward different objectives.
To me, it seems hard to merge when they are working toward different objectives.
MMA is all about training for the ring, right? Not saying that everybody who does MMA is going to fight in the ring, but that IS where the MMA "school of thought" is based, right? On what is effective in the ring?
Cfr is asking: is possible to merge sport-oriented training with non-sport oriented training to train self-defense.
My answer: yes, but your sport training will suffer some because you are taking time away from training for your sport to concentrate on things that happen outside your sport.
I only bring this up to get back on subject. W're supposed to nbe talking about if you have attempted to incorperate MMA style training into your TMA or vice versa in order to maximize the benefits of both ways of training...right? Or am I completely wrong here?
Those that want to argue the supperiority of their way should PM each other or go back to one of the TREMENDOUS amount of threads already dedicated to that. Don't TMA's and MMA's stress discipline? Can we show some here by sticking to the topic?
Something which hasn't seemed to come up in this thread so far is the idea that a lot of TMAs were, in their most traditional forms, already pretty mixed. It's well-known by this point, for example, that Anko Itosu repackaged Okinawan karate as a simple punch/block/kick system for use in Okinawan schools as part of his campaign to get karate
included in the grade school curriculum---and took some heat from his
fellow masters for this! So an arm-lock forcing the attacker to into
position where a forearm strike to the throat could be delivered might
be sanitized as an innocent-looking inward middle block/rising block
sequence. Itosu defended himself from criticism by pointing out that
the combat application was still there, if you were willing to apply
it. What guys like Iain Abernethy, Simon John O'Neil and others have
been arguing in their detailed analyses of realistic karate/TKD
bunkai is that a full spectrum of fighting techniques---grips and
traps, joint locks, throws, strangles and chokes, neck twists, the
lot---are built into the katas/hyungs of these older striking
systems. Both Egami and Funakoshi make reference to these techniques
in their writing and enthusiastically recommend that fighters expand
their technical arsenals to include them along with standard
striking tactics.
So the problem seems to be not that TMA practicioners need to go to
MMAs to broaden their arts, but---if the Abernethy/O'Neil/Kane &
Wilder analyese of bunkai in terms of combat applications is
right---instead need to recover the full palette of fighting
techniques that are already lurking in their own systems, but which
have become eclipsed by the emergence of sport karate, Olympic-style
TKD, and so on. E.g., Abernethy has a whole *book* about the grappling
applications underlying the katas of familiar karate styles. One of
the really interesting point these guys make is that no only did the
traditional `striking' arts have a full range of techniques at every
fighting range, including grappling skills, but styles known primarily
for grappling, like judo, had in their earlier forms a lot of striking
techniques that have since gone by the wayside. The moral of the
story seems to be that in their most traditional form, TMAs *were*
MMAs---and still are, if their students do the hard work of rethinking
their katas/hyungs/etc. in terms of their original, street-practical
combat meanings.
For the purpose of this thread so we dont go sideways into what is what:
TMA = Karate, Kung Fu, etc.
MMA = Muay Thai, BJJ, etc.
I have claimed many times to be a middle of the roader between MMA and TMA. I think its lame:
For TMA guys to assume that MMA guys cant defend themselves in the street. To assume that their too dumb to not realize that theyre not in a ring and that they arent bound by rules.
For MMA guys to assume that TMA guys would be unable to defend against a live, resisting opponent. To assume that they will try to fight from a horse stance, while practicing a kata, etc.
Id say that most of what I do where we train more closely resembles MMA than TMA. Probably an 80/20 ratio, and that is what is inspiring this question. Does anyone else out there think there can be a happy medium between TMA and MMA for use in Self Defense? Does anyone else train similar to this?
I'd really like to know your thoughts on my original questions. Please, don't be shy.
Assist. Admin. Note:
There are countless debates on TMA vs. MMA and the argument has been split from this thread and moved to The Great Debate forum. If you wish to argue efficacy and viability and continue contrasting the two, then go here.
This thread will be re-opened and will return to its original topic or will be shut down again.
G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Assist. Administrator