joe Rogan on martial arts

[Kickboxer101]

Just saw an interesting video of joe rogan talking about martial arts. I agree with all of his points the guy does know his stuff.

 

[Hanzou]

I'm also forced to agree with all the points represented. Of course Rogan is coming from the BJJ/MMA viewpoint, but its important to remember that someone who practices those styles can kill or cripple someone quite easily with a great deal of efficiency. When you consider that the only counterpoints to that argument are multiple opponents and weapons and Rogan's point becomes even stronger.

 

[JowGaWolf]

A person that trains in a fighting system will almost always have an advantage over someone who doesn't. It's not magic or some great knowledge. It's really simple, one person trains to fight the other doesn't. The average day person doesn't train to fight or to be good at self defense. It's a good BJJ promotional video, but the underlining point is that someone who trains is almost always going to do better than someone who doesn't regardless of what activity or fighting system it is.

There are exceptions to my statement for stuff like this.lol

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm also forced to agree with all the points represented. Of course Rogan is coming from the BJJ/MMA viewpoint, but its important to remember that someone who practices those styles can kill or cripple someone quite easily with a great deal of efficiency. When you consider that the only counterpoints to that argument are multiple opponents and weapons and Rogan's point becomes even stronger.

IMO, the biggest advantages of the person training for something like MMA fighting is that they are training to take abuse and that they develop a high level of fitness. The downside is that most people can't maintain that past their 40's (most probably not even into their 40's). There's too much punishment to the body, and too much of what they do relies on strength and the ability to accept punishment. It would be difficult to argue that MMA-style fight training isn't as good as something else for street effectiveness. Will it have holes (multiple attackers, awareness, weapons, bad surfaces, weird attacks, etc.)? Sure - what doesn't? It's highly effective training that will, in fact, translate to the street. I'm just not sure how effective it is for long-term development. Someone training at a moderately high level takes a lot of punishment, and uses many techniques they may not be able to continue to rely upon as their body ages.

So, to me, the real counter-argument is simply a question of whether it's good long-term self-defense. Of course it is, so the only question left is whether there's something else that's just as effective in the long haul. In my opinion, there are other types of preparation that can be just as effective once we get past the physical prime years.

Where I think we get in trouble is when we try to compare an athlete at even a moderately high level to someone who isn't an athlete. Even the average black belt in a TMA only trains a few hours a week, at most. Many MMA fighters train far more, and far harder. The advantage is mostly in the amount an intensity of training, not the style. As always, it comes down to what we arrive at in many discussions here: it's the fighter and the training intention/intensity, more than the style.

 

[Hanzou]

IMO, the biggest advantages of the person training for something like MMA fighting is that they are training to take abuse and that they develop a high level of fitness. The downside is that most people can't maintain that past their 40's (most probably not even into their 40's). There's too much punishment to the body, and too much of what they do relies on strength and the ability to accept punishment. It would be difficult to argue that MMA-style fight training isn't as good as something else for street effectiveness. Will it have holes (multiple attackers, awareness, weapons, bad surfaces, weird attacks, etc.)? Sure - what doesn't? It's highly effective training that will, in fact, translate to the street. I'm just not sure how effective it is for long-term development. Someone training at a moderately high level takes a lot of punishment, and uses many techniques they may not be able to continue to rely upon as their body ages.

So, to me, the real counter-argument is simply a question of whether it's good long-term self-defense. Of course it is, so the only question left is whether there's something else that's just as effective in the long haul. In my opinion, there are other types of preparation that can be just as effective once we get past the physical prime years.

Where I think we get in trouble is when we try to compare an athlete at even a moderately high level to someone who isn't an athlete. Even the average black belt in a TMA only trains a few hours a week, at most. Many MMA fighters train far more, and far harder. The advantage is mostly in the amount an intensity of training, not the style. As always, it comes down to what we arrive at in many discussions here: it's the fighter and the training intention/intensity, more than the style.

Well keep in mind Rogan was also talking about Bjj. I would argue that the Bjj-based guys definitely can maintain well into old age because Bjj is far easier on the body than MMA. Extremely high levels of Bjj has been compared to Aikido or Tai Chi. Relson is in his 60s and he's still a nasty SOB to roll against. I wouldn't say that the old guys can compete against the best MMA fighters in the world, but some untrained guy or run-of-the-mill martial arts "master" picking a fight with Relson, Rickson, Royce, Renzo, or Eddie Bravo is going to have a very bad time.

 

[Hanzou]

There are exceptions to my statement for stuff like this.lol

While amusing, a lot of people get suckered into that nonsense and think its real. Why? Because they want fighting to be like that; Easy and clean. Truth be told, people don't want to be hit, they don't want to be slammed, they don't want to be choked, they don't want some big hairy dude sitting on top of them cranking their arm, they'd rather wear pretty silk outfits and knock someone down with a tap on the shoulder.

Thus, junk like "Empty Force", and "no-touch Ki" will always be with us.

 

[Buka]

I'm a fan of Rogan's anyway, but that was a great vid/talk. Thanks for posting that, Kickboxer101.

 

[Buka]

While amusing, a lot of people get suckered into that nonsense and think its real. Why? Because they want fighting to be like that; Easy and clean. Truth be told, people don't want to be hit, they don't want to be slammed, they don't want to be choked, they don't want some big hairy dude sitting on top of them cranking their arm, they'd rather wear pretty silk outfits and knock someone down with a tap on the shoulder.

Thus, junk like "Empty Force", and "no-touch Ki" will always be with us.

May the farce be with us.

 

[Kickboxer101]

I'm also forced to agree with all the points represented. Of course Rogan is coming from the BJJ/MMA viewpoint, but its important to remember that someone who practices those styles can kill or cripple someone quite easily with a great deal of efficiency. When you consider that the only counterpoints to that argument are multiple opponents and weapons and Rogan's point becomes even stronger.

I know rogans main focus is jiu jitsu but he's also a taekwondo black belt and former national champion plus has trained kicboxing here's a recent video of him hitting pads so he does know other styles to Jacked Joe Ruins Pads, Makes UFC Rookies Look Bad

 

[Hanzou]

I know rogans main focus is jiu jitsu but he's also a taekwondo black belt and former national champion plus has trained kicboxing here's a recent video of him hitting pads so he does know other styles to Jacked Joe Ruins Pads, Makes UFC Rookies Look Bad

Of course, but in the past he has stated that his time in TKD was largely a waste, and that training with the Machados and Eddie Bravo was a big eye-opener for him.

 

[Buka]

Do you know the first style Joe trained as a kid? Kenpo. My buddy trained him.
The first time the UFC was in Boston, as the weigh ins were about to start, Joe Rogan saw my friend, Joe, who was on the Athletic Commission at the time. Rogan started yelling and stopped everything for a minute, telling everyone that "this is the guy who caused me to fall in love with Martial Arts!" Hugged him and nearly shook his hand off.

Class move.

 

[kuniggety]

I'm not saying this to brag because I am really terrible at BJJ. Aside from white belts in class, I have sparred with my coworkers who are military and thus in half way decent shape and most younger than me. I took a guy who likes to lift weights and I had him tapping out in <30 seconds three times in a row from a starting standing position. Knowing what to do with your body makes a world of difference in a physical confrontation. Joe Rogan is just spot on.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well keep in mind Rogan was also talking about Bjj. I would argue that the Bjj-based guys definitely can maintain well into old age because Bjj is far easier on the body than MMA. Extremely high levels of Bjj has been compared to Aikido or Tai Chi. Relson is in his 60s and he's still a nasty SOB to roll against. I wouldn't say that the old guys can compete against the best MMA fighters in the world, but some untrained guy or run-of-the-mill martial arts "master" picking a fight with Relson, Rickson, Royce, Renzo, or Eddie Bravo is going to have a very bad time.

Agreed. Much of BJJ uses good principles of body mechanics to create damned slippery movements that don't require a lot of effort (strength) - Relson makes that apparent when you watch him. The only issue with BJJ comes with things like arthritis that can remove groups of the tools, but that can happen with any art. For me, I just don't like the concentration on the ground game. It's the focus, not the capability, that bothers me. If it was 80% standing and 20% ground game, using the same principles, I'd like BJJ better for street defense. That's an old debate, though.

 

[Hanzou]

Agreed. Much of BJJ uses good principles of body mechanics to create damned slippery movements that don't require a lot of effort (strength) - Relson makes that apparent when you watch him. The only issue with BJJ comes with things like arthritis that can remove groups of the tools, but that can happen with any art. For me, I just don't like the concentration on the ground game. It's the focus, not the capability, that bothers me. If it was 80% standing and 20% ground game, using the same principles, I'd like BJJ better for street defense. That's an old debate, though.

Well, 80% standing and 20% ground game is Judo, and frankly I'd put Bjj above Judo in self defense.

That said, I know a lot of martial artists have concern about the ground focus of Bjj, but once you understand why that focus exists, and you have control over fighting from that range, your stand up skills actually increase exponentially. For example, my favorite standing techniques are actually standing variations of the Guillotine and Rear Naked Choke. Since I'm not afraid of getting put on my back, I'm more capable of seeing openings and adjusting distances. Judo and Bjj taught me that better than Karate ever did.

Also you gotta love stuff like this;

The ultimate expression of skill and technique over strength and power.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well, 80% standing and 20% ground game is Judo, and frankly I'd put Bjj above Judo in self defense.

That said, I know a lot of martial artists have concern about the ground focus of Bjj, but once you understand why that focus exists, and you have control over fighting from that range, your stand up skills actually increase exponentially. For example, my favorite standing techniques are actually standing variations of the Guillotine and Rear Naked Choke. Since I'm not afraid of getting put on my back, I'm more capable of seeing openings and adjusting distances. Judo and Bjj taught me that better than Karate ever did.

Also you gotta love stuff like this;

The ultimate expression of skill and technique over strength and power.

As Judo currently stands in most schools, I'd agree. We've discussed that before, of course. The technical sides of both BJJ and Judo are suitable to SD. BJJ (even the competition-only varieties) seems to have kept more of what would be street-applicable. The Judo I learned (barely) many years ago was still sport-centered, but wasn't the same thing I see today. And I agree about the openings ground skill can create. It's part of the reason I do more ground work now than I did 20 years ago, and part of the reason I still think I need to add to my ground arsenal (what I use and what I teach). My feeling is that there are some very key ground moves in BJJ that could be the basis of a good ground game without having to get into how to beat a ground expert (which is what happens), leaving more time to work on great standing work. It wouldn't be BJJ then, so I don't suggest BJJ change. We need that art, both for the pressure it puts on others and for those who want to study that much on the ground. It's not a failing in the art, at all, but a place where I find it to be not optimal for SD within its own physical principles. I also don't think it was meant to be, though I could be wrong.