mma is a made up martial art.

[Steve]

Well, Dana White certainly believes in marketing the UFC as an entertainment spectacle. That's not to say the individual fighters necessarily are more concerned with entertainment than with testing themselves and their art. (Some certainly do buy into the whole entertainment game - see Chael Sonnen - but not all.)

Then again, I don't think that "sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll" or the absence thereof has a lot of relevance to whether someone has a moral compass.

Spectacle in combat sports is nothing new. And, I'd say that the UFC has actually toned it down from where MMA was/is in Japan. I remember the entrances and spectacle involved in Pride FC. Crazy stuff. The Japanese LOVE that stuff, and you know, if it's what they want, then I don't see anything wrong with it. Not my cup of tea, but whatever.

We just have to remember that combat sports, like any other sport, make money by selling tickets and getting people excited about the individual matchups. What the spectacle looks like really depends upon the culture of the viewership. Pride FC was different than the UFC. Tez says all the time that she doesn't care for the UFC, and historically, the UFC doesn't do as well in the European market (although it doesn't do poorly). It's just a different culture and the spectacle has to adapt.

Regarding the individual fighters, the UFC is currently being sued for fixing salaries and a monopoly on the market. They may have a case, but of course, the UFC will fight it in court. The point is that professional fighters want to make a living, and in the current environment, there are few ways to become a brand than to compete and succeed in the UFC. You don't hav to make a mint while fighting in order to create a reputation sufficient to open a gym and make a living training others. But in order to get noticed by the UFC, you HAVE to do something noteworthy, and winning fights alone just won't do it. And as we've seen in cases like Sonnen, just being a mouth will get you a payday. You don't have to win the fights. You just have to make the UFC money. And if you also win fights, even better.

Look at Rousey in Strikeforce. She didn't "earn" her title shot. But she was so damned marketable, they made an exception. Since then, she's more than validated that choice, but even if she lost, it's okay because she made Strikeforce a lot of money!

true the original ufc or MMA matches where people from different disciplines competing against each other. Karate against boxing, wrestlers vs judo, bjj vs kung fu, etc. The funny thing about that is they told the kung fu people they could not go to the ground and fight from there after a few fights. BUt mostly it was set up with les than great people to match against the Gracies at that time


that is my thought on it also but it is fast becoming a way to train and will be considered a form of martial art by those who look back on it in the future

Just a quick point. What the UFC was prior to the unified ruleset and what it has since become are two different things.

I do agree with you that MMA is normalizing. But as for it being its own art, it will, I think, but only in the same way Western Boxing is considered an "art." Which is to say that it will be to some and will not be to others.

 

[drop bear]

No I have a very broad view of mma and the UFC in particular. I do not see mma as bad or the UFC as bad. I actually enjoy watching mma and in particular the UFC. My experience with mma practitioiner's in real life has always been positive. My experience with BJJ practitioner's who were also mma fighters has been steller. Yet, there are mma practitioner's that I do not want to associate with. Like with anything and any business their are shades or grey. Everything is not all cut black and white!

ok. There are bad mma people out there. We all accept that.

what conclusion are you making from this?

 

[drop bear]

Spectacle in combat sports is nothing new. And, I'd say that the UFC has actually toned it down from where MMA was/is in Japan. I remember the entrances and spectacle involved in Pride FC. Crazy stuff. The Japanese LOVE that stuff, and you know, if it's what they want, then I don't see anything wrong with it. Not my cup of tea, but whatever.

We just have to remember that combat sports, like any other sport, make money by selling tickets and getting people excited about the individual matchups. What the spectacle looks like really depends upon the culture of the viewership. Pride FC was different than the UFC. Tez says all the time that she doesn't care for the UFC, and historically, the UFC doesn't do as well in the European market (although it doesn't do poorly). It's just a different culture and the spectacle has to adapt.

Regarding the individual fighters, the UFC is currently being sued for fixing salaries and a monopoly on the market. They may have a case, but of course, the UFC will fight it in court. The point is that professional fighters want to make a living, and in the current environment, there are few ways to become a brand than to compete and succeed in the UFC. You don't hav to make a mint while fighting in order to create a reputation sufficient to open a gym and make a living training others. But in order to get noticed by the UFC, you HAVE to do something noteworthy, and winning fights alone just won't do it. And as we've seen in cases like Sonnen, just being a mouth will get you a payday. You don't have to win the fights. You just have to make the UFC money. And if you also win fights, even better.

Look at Rousey in Strikeforce. She didn't "earn" her title shot. But she was so damned marketable, they made an exception. Since then, she's more than validated that choice, but even if she lost, it's okay because she made Strikeforce a lot of money!
Just a quick point. What the UFC was prior to the unified ruleset and what it has since become are two different things.

I do agree with you that MMA is normalizing. But as for it being its own art, it will, I think, but only in the same way Western Boxing is considered an "art." Which is to say that it will be to some and will not be to others.

side note. One fc is starting to gain ground as a promotion.

 

[drop bear]

Greg Jackson with pretty much the same theory i have.

 

[Transk53]

Greg Jackson with pretty much the same theory i have.

What just theory

 

[Dr.Smith]

Im not sure how long any of you have been in the martial arts but I have over twenty years under my belt, if I may be so bold I would like to point a few things out.
I understand what is being said about how all the fighting advances a system or an art, I mean I hope you dont think Im that dense lols.
But your really grabbing at straws to make a point when you make a statement so bold as to say that MMA is a new style. How would any rational person really believe this. All the styles that make up MMA have been around for a minimum of 100 years and some more like 3000years, pancration being the best example.
Your point as your stateing it dosent hold water with experienced and seasoned martialartists. The UFC brought martial arts fights to a huge audience, full of violence and intensity. As a result people started to train with lots of violence and intensity. The moves themselves were not new and are not new and to claim that your fifteen year old club is the founder of a whole new martial art is delusional or a flat out lie.
Thats the truth dont take it the wrong way, look at martial arts history and stop grandstanding.

 

[Dr.Smith]

Greg Jackson with pretty much the same theory i have.

What he said is true and I couldnt argue any of that.
My points still stand, first off I like MMA and Ufc fights, point blank.
Second point is that the UFC is a completeltly commercial ordeal these days.
My last point is that "MMA" arnt the first guys to mix up martial arts. At best they can lay claim to an original rule set and they can boast of haveing talented fighters. They cannot claim to have invented a new fighting style...Sorry.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Im not sure how long any of you have been in the martial arts but I have over twenty years under my belt, if I may be so bold I would like to point a few things out.
I understand what is being said about how all the fighting advances a system or an art, I mean I hope you dont think Im that dense lols.
But your really grabbing at straws to make a point when you make a statement so bold as to say that MMA is a new style. How would any rational person really believe this. All the styles that make up MMA have been around for a minimum of 100 years and some more like 3000years, pancration being the best example.
Your point as your stateing it dosent hold water with experienced and seasoned martialartists. The UFC brought martial arts fights to a huge audience, full of violence and intensity. As a result people started to train with lots of violence and intensity. The moves themselves were not new and are not new and to claim that your fifteen year old club is the founder of a whole new martial art is delusional or a flat out lie.
Thats the truth dont take it the wrong way, look at martial arts history and stop grandstanding.

Well, I've got 33 years of training under my belt, for whatever that's worth.

I don't think anyone would deny that everything in MMA comes from older arts. That doesn't really have much bearing on whether or not you consider it to be a new martial art style in itself. All of those arts that MMA draws from were themselves derived from older arts. Is Judo not its own martial art just because it was derived from Tenjin Shinyo Ryu and Kito Ryu? Is Sambo not its own art because it was derived from Judo and Russian folk wrestling? Is your own art of Zanshin Karate not a style because it is derived from Shotokan and Boxing?

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

ok. There are bad mma people out there. We all accept that.

what conclusion are you making from this?

None, just pointing out what a friend said!

 

[Transk53]

Im not sure how long any of you have been in the martial arts but I have over twenty years under my belt, if I may be so bold I would like to point a few things out.
I understand what is being said about how all the fighting advances a system or an art, I mean I hope you dont think Im that dense lols.
But your really grabbing at straws to make a point when you make a statement so bold as to say that MMA is a new style. How would any rational person really believe this. All the styles that make up MMA have been around for a minimum of 100 years and some more like 3000years, pancration being the best example.
Your point as your stateing it dosent hold water with experienced and seasoned martialartists. The UFC brought martial arts fights to a huge audience, full of violence and intensity. As a result people started to train with lots of violence and intensity. The moves themselves were not new and are not new and to claim that your fifteen year old club is the founder of a whole new martial art is delusional or a flat out lie.
Thats the truth dont take it the wrong way, look at martial arts history and stop grandstanding.

Yes, but only one person grandstanding

 

[Dr.Smith]

Well, I've got 33 years of training under my belt, for whatever that's worth.

I don't think anyone would deny that everything in MMA comes from older arts. That doesn't really have much bearing on whether or not you consider it to be a new martial art style in itself. All of those arts that MMA draws from were themselves derived from older arts. Is Judo not its own martial art just because it was derived from Tenjin Shinyo Ryu and Kito Ryu? Is Sambo not its own art because it was derived from Judo and Russian folk wrestling? Is your own art of Zanshin Karate not a style because it is derived from Shotokan and Boxing?

Your experience is completely valid and your input is valueable.
As far as it goes yes they have created their own martial arts systems and thats cool, but name those arts and then put them in the mma genre. Thats all im sayin.

 

[drop bear]

What he said is true and I couldnt argue any of that.
My points still stand, first off I like MMA and Ufc fights, point blank.
Second point is that the UFC is a completeltly commercial ordeal these days.
My last point is that "MMA" arnt the first guys to mix up martial arts. At best they can lay claim to an original rule set and they can boast of haveing talented fighters. They cannot claim to have invented a new fighting style...Sorry.

gotcha.

you are arguing two different points. One is mma is not a new style. Which i disagree with.

the other is that mma did not invent the concept of mixing styles,competition or a no holds barred approach to training or fighting. Which is correct.

 

[Dr.Smith]

gotcha.

you are arguing two different points. One is mma is not a new style. Which i disagree with.

the other is that mma did not invent the concept of mixing styles,competition or a no holds barred approach to training or fighting. Which is correct.

MMA is a martial arts genre, the fact they dont wanna give their art a name is corney.

 

[Steve]

MMA is a martial arts genre, the fact they dont wanna give their art a name is corney.

Mma is a sport, not a martial arts genre. Like most sports, the name is descriptive. Bowling, boxing, football.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Dirty Dog]

MMA is a martial arts genre, the fact they dont wanna give their art a name is corney.

It has a name. "Mixed Martial Arts" is not really any more corny than "Empty Hand Way", "China Hand" or "The Way of Kicking and Punching".

Mma is a sport, not a martial arts genre. Like most sports, the name is descriptive. Bowling, boxing, football.

It's also a martial arts genre. Let's face it, there is significant overlap between the two... Hockey could also be considered a martial arts genre...

 

[Steve]

It has a name. "Mixed Martial Arts" is not really any more corny than "Empty Hand Way", "China Hand" or "The Way of Kicking and Punching".



It's also a martial arts genre. Let's face it, there is significant overlap between the two... Hockey could also be considered a martial arts genre...

Lol. I wouldn't consider hockey a martial arts genre either. But if you do, I can understand why you would include Mma in that category.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dirty Dog]

Lol. I wouldn't consider hockey a martial arts genre either. But if you do, I can understand why you would include Mma in that category.

Are you kidding? How often have you watched hockey and wondered if a game might break out? Hockey is, in some ways, a Canadian Kendo match...

It's mixed Martial Arts... how can it not be considered a martial arts genre?

 

[Steve]

Are you kidding? How often have you watched hockey and wondered if a game might break out? Hockey is, in some ways, a Canadian Kendo match...

It's mixed Martial Arts... how can it not be considered a martial arts genre?

I guess I just don't think "genre" is the right word here.

MMA is a sport. And the sport is quite well defined. So, yeah, I agree that MMA and Hockey have some things in common. Neither, however, is a martial arts style. Both are sports with well established rule sets.

If you're saying that Mixed Martial Arts is a style of martial arts, at this time I disagree. It may become a standardized martial art in the future, but the formula for success in the cage is still very fluid.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I guess I just don't think "genre" is the right word here.

Well, the word is usually used in context with art, so if there is art in the Martial Arts, then it could be considered appropriate.

MMA is a sport. And the sport is quite well defined. So, yeah, I agree that MMA and Hockey have some things in common. Neither, however, is a martial arts style. Both are sports with well established rule sets.

If you take two or more martial arts and mash them together, do they stop being martial arts? Do those who practice the mashup stop being martial artists?

If you're saying that Mixed Martial Arts is a style of martial arts, at this time I disagree. It may become a standardized martial art in the future, but the formula for success in the cage is still very fluid.

As is the "formula" (I think that word is no more appropriate - or inappropriate - than genre) for success in many (excluding the ultra-traditional don't-change-an-angle-by-even-1-degree arts) martial arts.

 

[Steve]

Well, the word is usually used in context with art, so if there is art in the Martial Arts, then it could be considered appropriate.

If you take two or more martial arts and mash them together, do they stop being martial arts? Do those who practice the mashup stop being martial artists?

Of course not. Judo is a martial art. BJJ, Sambo, TKD, Shotokan Karate... all martial arts. When you mash them together and use them in a cage under the unified ruleset of MMA, they remain martial arts, but the sum becomes a sport.

As is the "formula" (I think that word is no more appropriate - or inappropriate - than genre) for success in many (excluding the ultra-traditional don't-change-an-angle-by-even-1-degree arts) martial arts.

Genre typically refers to a sub category of an art form: music, literature, film, painting, sculpture. If you want to push the "art" in martial art, I get where you're going, but it's not really the same thing.

That said, it's not worth arguing. I understand how you're using the term, and that's what really matters. Given your use of the term, I still disagree that MMA is a genre of martial art. If anything, it's a sport that incorporates many genres of MA according to various formulas... recipes if you will.