Is Boxing Chess? Is MMA Poker?

[Orange Lightning]

Like blocking mode and punching mode?

What? xD
You can block stuff from any position. Standing, clinching, grappling, and you block any kind of attack from anywhere. But "standing" next to your opponent has a different set of things that can occur when they are "standing" next to you. How you play standing is different.

But we are digressing. I would like to focus on the thread topic.

 

[Spinedoc]

Well, now you are talking about Game Theory. While I practice medicine, I also have a PhD in organizational science, with much of my research focused on patient decision-making. Much of this research is founded in game theory. Basically, you can mathematically model a fighter, boxer, or mixed martial artists decisions they will make, based on risk aversion and probabilities.

Risk in Hand-to-Hand Combat Applying an Operational Risk Assessment Model to better understand the function of Martial Arts James Acutt - Academia.edu

 

[Orange Lightning]

MMA is chess, boxing is checkers at best. Compared to MMA, boxing is closer to throwing cards in a hat.

How so?

 

[Orange Lightning]

Well, now you are talking about Game Theory. While I practice medicine, I also have a PhD in organizational science, with much of my research focused on patient decision-making. Much of this research is founded in game theory. Basically, you can mathematically model a fighter, boxer, or mixed martial artists decisions they will make, based on risk aversion and probabilities.

Risk in Hand-to-Hand Combat Applying an Operational Risk Assessment Model to better understand the function of Martial Arts James Acutt - Academia.edu

Dude, this link is awesome. I'm downloading the pdf and I'll probably be spending a lot of time on that site. Thanks a lot.

It's kind of big though. I'll read it later.

 

[Tez3]

Well, now you are talking about Game Theory. While I practice medicine, I also have a PhD in organizational science, with much of my research focused on patient decision-making. Much of this research is founded in game theory. Basically, you can mathematically model a fighter, boxer, or mixed martial artists decisions they will make, based on risk aversion and probabilities.

Risk in Hand-to-Hand Combat Applying an Operational Risk Assessment Model to better understand the function of Martial Arts James Acutt - Academia.edu

Does this take into account that in MMA a fighter's tactics are decided in advanced based on the abilities and weaknesses of his opponent as well as his own?

 

[Buka]

Well, now you are talking about Game Theory. While I practice medicine, I also have a PhD in organizational science, with much of my research focused on patient decision-making. Much of this research is founded in game theory. Basically, you can mathematically model a fighter, boxer, or mixed martial artists decisions they will make, based on risk aversion and probabilities.

Risk in Hand-to-Hand Combat Applying an Operational Risk Assessment Model to better understand the function of Martial Arts James Acutt - Academia.edu

Oh, sure, hit me with that first thing in the morning...

Wish I didn't have to go to work today. Read the first twenty pages with much interest. Then I googled the author and see he's written a lot, some of which I'm dying to read.

Thanks, Doc, there goes April.

Do you know the guy, or anything about him? Does he still train?

 

[tshadowchaser]

Spinedoc...............Thanks for that link Looks like I'll be reading more than I play games on the net for the next few days

 

[Orange Lightning]

Does this take into account that in MMA a fighter's tactics are decided in advanced based on the abilities and weaknesses of his opponent as well as his own?

Yes.
Even knowing what your opponents cards might be, there are still more cards to play.

 

[Orange Lightning]

Up until this point, the thread has entirely focused on the metaphor comparing Boxing to Chess and MMA to Poker, but nothing at all about the other questions regarding the topic.
Do you think a calculated calm ruthlessness is more effective for deploying your strategy? Or does an aggressive behavior work better, allowing your reflexes and training to do the make the decisions for you?

 

[Shai Hulud]

I'd liken MMA more to Snakes & Ladders. You take certain risks and roll dice in MMA. If you succeed, you advance. If your gamble fails, you get knocked back a few steps, if not down and out.

 

[Shai Hulud]

Up until this point, the thread has entirely focused on the metaphor comparing Boxing to Chess and MMA to Poker, but nothing at all about the other questions regarding the topic.
Do you think a calculated calm ruthlessness is more effective for deploying your strategy? Or does an aggressive behavior work better, allowing your reflexes and training to do the make the decisions for you?

Calculated Ruthlessness. I like that. Let's go with that. I have a little over a dozen official bouts (not incl. Sambo) under my belt, and I find that learning to channel aggression in a strategic manner works best for me. Reflexes and primal instinct are nice, but years of Judo has taught me that even reflexes can be fooled. You must develop focus and hone your skills in training so that you are collected yet intense in a match. Xingyiquan is similar in this respect. Your "Xin" (emotional mind) is running all over the place with aggression, yet your "Yi" (wisdom mind) guides it.

 

[Buka]

I don't have ruthlessness. And, personally, I won't knowingly go up against a person who's "ruthless", at least not as a civilian. At least not as I've known that word.

But if I can reword the question as "a calculated, calm cunning" (or whatever) vs an "aggressive behavior", I'll go with the former. Aggressiveness is all show. But if show is what's needed, it can sometimes work just fine. (just be wary of cameras, they're everywhere and you'll look like an A-hollah)

Have to adapt to the situation. Being able to adapt is probably the most important skill we can develop. Our "reflexes and training" can't make the decisions. Our reflexes are just that, they will do what they do, physiology/kinesiology wise. Our training is tools we hone, then choose which ones to use.

No wonder this is such a long, damn road we're on.

 

[Orange Lightning]

Calculated Ruthlessness. I like that. Let's go with that. I have a little over a dozen official bouts (not incl. Sambo) under my belt, and I find that learning to channel aggression in a strategic manner works best for me. Reflexes and primal instinct are nice, but years of Judo has taught me that even reflexes can be fooled. You must develop focus and hone your skills in training so that you are collected yet intense in a match. Xingyiquan is similar in this respect. Your "Xin" (emotional mind) is running all over the place with aggression, yet your "Yi" (wisdom mind) guides it.

I think that one needs an aggressive mindset to allow the reflexes to take better advantage of openings, but an over eagerness will bring yourself open. The result can manifest as as a "calculated ruthlessness".
I need to look into Xingyi. I keep hearing it referenced, and I've heard of it before, but I've never seen it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Chess is a good example.

IMO, MA is very similar to the chess game. When you make one move, you should predict how many different moves that your opponent may respond. For each of his respond, you should have your next move ready for him. This way, you can be always one step or many steps ahead of your opponent.

For example, when you use roundhouse kick to kick your opponent's inner leg, your opponent can

1. step back and escape out of it. Since he just shift his weight from one leg to another leg, you can take advantage on his weight transfer.
2. meet his leg against your kick. This is force against force. You can then drop your foot behind his ankle and scoop his leg.
3. catch your kicking leg with his arm. Since he tries to use his arm to catch your leg, he will have one less arm to deal with your head punch.

If you don't have at least those counters to deal with your opponent's respond, you should not even use your low roundhouse kick in the first place.

 

[Orange Lightning]

I don't have ruthlessness. And, personally, I won't knowingly go up against a person who's "ruthless", at least not as a civilian. At least not as I've known that word.

But if I can reword the question as "a calculated, calm cunning" (or whatever) vs an "aggressive behavior", I'll go with the former. Aggressiveness is all show. But if show is what's needed, it can sometimes work just fine. (just be wary of cameras, they're everywhere and you'll look like an A-hollah)

Have to adapt to the situation. Being able to adapt is probably the most important skill we can develop. Our "reflexes and training" can't make the decisions. Our reflexes are just that, they will do what they do, physiology/kinesiology wise. Our training is tools we hone, then choose which ones to use.

No wonder this is such a long, damn road we're on.

Great point about the cameras and being watched. Looking like the actual aggressor isn't an advantage at the end of the day. I don't literally mean "ruthless" by the way. I just mean...an offensive attitude, mentally pressing the attack, even if you aren't exactly doing so physically at the moment.

Hmm. I understand what you're saying about reflexes not making decisions, but I disagree. If something catches me off guard, I probably have a automatic reflex response of some sort, for better or worse. If I have traveled into uncharted territory because I've pressed a highly aggressive offense, reflex will also probably be my response. Although, I wouldn't promote relying entirely on reflexes for all your decisions.

I think our ability to adapt is our greatest advantage as humans. Adaptability in a fight is different though. Really need to think on the fly. You need a more relaxed mind for it. I imagine it being difficult to do in a real altercation. Awesome skill though.

 

[Shai Hulud]

I think that one needs an aggressive mindset to allow the reflexes to take better advantage of openings, but an over eagerness will bring yourself open. The result can manifest as as a "calculated ruthlessness".
I need to look into Xingyi. I keep hearing it referenced, and I've heard of it before, but I've never seen it.

That works also. Nick Diaz, Wanderlei Silva and Chael Sonnen run that way.

Without going too much into it, Xingyi is a superb boxing style of Wushu. In its principles it's so utterly simple, but the applications are limitless. It's a straightforward, no-frills kind of Kung Fu. Historically the lineage (way after Shaolin temple though) starts with the legend of one of China's greatest Marshals, who taught the original art to spearmen who would lose their weapons in the heat of battle, and had to survive until they could pick one up again. There are forms that do work with the spear in the more advanced levels though, and from what I've studied it's also effective for dealing with multiple attackers. Such is the life of the classical spearman - the cannon-fodder of the old world.

Put simply, it's a style that uses offense as defense. In principle it encourages fighting in a linear fashion (drilling into the opponent and backing off, but don't take this too literally. Feel free to sidestep when necessary!) and encourages just driving through the opponent's guard (hello, linking forms, eight posts and the theory of mutual destruction) with complementing strikes. Kicks are minimal. It's not even pretty to look at lol. The the untrained eye it's just drunken pugilism on a payday friday night. But it's fast, strong, intense and aggressive.

Xingyi free-fight applications

 

[Tez3]

I'd liken MMA more to Snakes & Ladders. You take certain risks and roll dice in MMA. If you succeed, you advance. If your gamble fails, you get knocked back a few steps, if not down and out.

The best MMA fighters are a couple of moves ahead when they are fighting, they do one move with the intent of it leading to another and then another until the have the result they want so chess it is.

 

[Transk53]

You are trying to use it all at once. You don't go from standup mode to ground mode.

In a ring yeah, quite right

 

[Jenna]

@original post... Chess is predictable, finite and limited.. if you fight like you play chess do you not imply you are predictable? Jx

 

[Tez3]

@original post... Chess is predictable, finite and limited.. if you fight like you play chess do you not imply you are predictable? Jx

The comparison between chess and MMA is, as I have already posted, that in MMA like chess you are ( or should be) a couple of moves ahead not that you fight in a predictable manner.