MMA is like Facebook?

[Chris Parker]

Because I've trained in the arts for over 20 years, I know the key aspects of my own art, I know the tell-tale signs, postural concepts, distancing, striking ideas, grappling approach, tactical concepts, and more. The fact that you would ask speaks volumes.

What do I look like when I fight? Very different to the way I'd look when sparring.

 

[drop bear]

Because I've trained in the arts for over 20 years, I know the key aspects of my own art, I know the tell-tale signs, postural concepts, distancing, striking ideas, grappling approach, tactical concepts, and more. The fact that you would ask speaks volumes.

What do I look like when I fight? Very different to the way I'd look when sparring.

Thought you didn't spar.

Can you show an example of ninja fighting then. Maybe I can get a gauge on the differences between pretend ninja and a real one.

 

[Chris Parker]

I don't spar (you might have noticed that I said "than I'd look", not "than I look"… small things, I know&#8230, although I have in some of my previous training systems (TKD, karate, BJJ, boxing, MMA), and probably will in another art I'm looking to take up. If it's something that works in the context of the systems (as it was in the above listed ones), it's great, if it's not, then it's not needed… the tricks understanding what the actual needs are, the benefits, the limitations, and so on… and understanding that not every system has the same requirements or approach.

In terms of showing you something, I could show some examples of kata training, but it's commonly done as embu, not keiko.. and the difference is fairly big. Same with the difference between jiyu waza and oyo waza… and I'm not sure of any public footage of such. But hey, you're asking, so I'll show what there is:

 

[ballen0351]

MMA is going to beat most TMA's because we train and do, knock people out as part of our training and this isn't even stepping into the cage to fight yet. .

 

[SandaBoxing]

Okay.

Scott Morris and Steve Jennum are probably the two best known MMA competitors with a "ninjutsu" background… the other clips I've seen (including the one you posted) are kids who don't have any connection to ninjutsu at all, outside of some deluded fantasy.

Morris got whooped pretty bad and Jennum just punched like any other puncher. Then Jennum did that sloppy armbar from the full-mount where he yanked the Boxer's arm up w/o maintaining bottom pressure. Luckily the Boxer was clueless.

And it's pretty pompous of you to call the Black kid in that video deluded just because he represented himself as a Ninjitsu stylist. You make it sound like being a Ninjitsu practitioner means a great deal of something. It certainly doesn't mean much in the fighting world today I can tell you that, that's why they were making fun of him in that video. But the kid stepped up and fought, which I give big props to him for. That was also Dominique Cruz that beat him, who later went on to beat Uriah Faber for the UFC Title. He's a Wrestler and in that video vs. the Ninja, still a BJJ WHITE belt.

 

[SandaBoxing]

Actually, no, it's not. It's highly context-dependant. The forms of fighting encountered and needed by a sports competitor are fairly different to the requirements of a self-defence practitioner, which is different again to a military form of fighting, different again to what's encountered and needed by LEO's and security personnel, which is very different to that encountered in various historical systems… even in modern societies, differences in cultures give you wild differences in what constitutes "fighting".

All of that hocus pocus never seems to work when I visit Krav Maga gyms to spar. Jabs and footwork stops the magic show and then, here comes the powerhand combo. Plenty of cops and soldiers train at MMA gyms and if all they had was their department's training + some TMA, then they usually get their butts whooped like any other White belts.

I do hope you're not trying to imply some form of superiority there… or that such things are unique to MMA training…

Very much so when it comes to hand to hand combat. People who trains to fight and actually do fight full contact will always be better than those who trains light contact only.

Well, I've knocked people out, both in class and outside of it, and all that without sparring at all… hmm…

Cool, I hope those women were ok afterward. Just kidding. And you don't spar at all? Now I'd really like to know who you KO'ed.

Of course, it has to be said that if your'e knocking each other out before getting into a cage, then there's some issues to be looked at in your training approach…

Not all the time, but it does happen. But didn't you just brag about doing the same by knocking out people in your gym?

But again, are you really saying that MMA is the only approach that covers such things? Hmm…

I never said that, I just implied that MMA is currently the best today when MMA is defined as employing BJJ & MT to produce fighters and champions. While it's still possible for MMA gyms to go with other routes such as BJJ & Karate to produce champions, it's still not the best and certainly not with Ninjitsu.

 

[SandaBoxing]

Because I've trained in the arts for over 20 years, I know the key aspects of my own art, I know the tell-tale signs, postural concepts, distancing, striking ideas, grappling approach, tactical concepts, and more. The fact that you would ask speaks volumes.

What do I look like when I fight? Very different to the way I'd look when sparring.

Well you just heralded Steve Jennum and Scott Morris as LEGIT Ninjas, yet Steve Jennum looked just like some dude throwing wild punches and Scott Morris looked just like some dude eating a ton of wild punches & elbows from Pat Smith.

How is this any different from the Black kid whom you labeled "deluded" just because he claims to be a Ninja just because he got beat up by Dominique Cruz in that video?

 

[ballen0351]

All of that hocus pocus never seems to work when I visit Krav Maga gyms to spar. Jabs and footwork stops the magic show and then, here comes the powerhand combo. Plenty of cops and soldiers train at MMA gyms and if all they had was their department's training + some TMA, then they usually get their butts whooped like any other White belts.

Oh boy here we go again.

Very much so when it comes to hand to hand combat. People who trains to fight and actually do fight full contact will always be better than those who trains light contact only.

So you train full contact huh? So how many broken jaws and fractured orbital bones have you had? Because as a cop ive had to hit people "full Contact" before and that's what happens in "full contact"

Cool, I hope those women were ok afterward. Just kidding. And you don't spar at all? Now I'd really like to know who you KO'ed.

At lease we know who Chris is and his back ground. You show up and in your first 10 posts here proceeded to bash TMAs and tell hows how bad as you are yet we no nothing about you or your training.

Not all the time, but it does happen. But didn't you just brag about doing the same by knocking out people in your gym?

Then young lady if your going "full contact" and people are only knocked out every once in a while your not really going "full contact" but if it makes you feel more bad *** keep telling us how "full contact" you are

I never said that, I just implied that MMA is currently the best today when MMA is defined as employing BJJ & MT to produce fighters and champions. While it's still possible for MMA gyms to go with other routes such as BJJ & Karate to produce champions, it's still not the best and certainly not with Ninjitsu.

Says who?

 

[Chris Parker]

Morris got whooped pretty bad and Jennum just punched like any other puncher. Then Jennum did that sloppy armbar from the full-mount where he yanked the Boxer's arm up w/o maintaining bottom pressure. Luckily the Boxer was clueless.

Context, son. I didn't put them forwards as great, perfect, or even good examples… simply as two of the best known examples of people who do have an actual ninjutsu background (although RBWI really is it's own beast, when it comes down to it)… I know of a couple of Bujinkan members who have a semi-amateur involvement as well, but they're not easy to find any footage of. The point, though, was that most of what's identified as "ninjutsu" isn't.

And it's pretty pompous of you to call the Black kid in that video deluded just because he represented himself as a Ninjitsu stylist.

No, it's not pompous, it's accurate. If someone said they were a Judo player, and did nothing but bad attempts at TKD leaping and spinning kicks, would it be pompous to say that he wasn't showing any Judo?

You make it sound like being a Ninjitsu practitioner means a great deal of something.

No, just that it is a specific thing, which was not seen anywhere in the clip provided.

It certainly doesn't mean much in the fighting world today I can tell you that, that's why they were making fun of him in that video.

He was being made fun of because he came in with a head full of fantasy, and because the only reference the guys there had was equally based in fantasy… so that's where they put him (mentally).

But the kid stepped up and fought, which I give big props to him for.

Eh, doesn't mean anything to me, frankly. If he wants to engage that way, go for it… but it's hardly something I'm going to be impressed by.

That was also Dominique Cruz that beat him, who later went on to beat Uriah Faber for the UFC Title. He's a Wrestler and in that video vs. the Ninja, still a BJJ WHITE belt.

And? You're now saying that a top name in the sport beat a kid with a head full of delusions, and you're considering this… what? Impressive that someone who professionally trains for MMA beat a no-name kid? Not surprising because he trains professionally, and the kid was nobody? And I'm not sure what the reference to his (then) BJJ white belt has to do with anything, especially if he was already a fairly seasoned wrestler… and, if it didn't make any difference, then why was it important that the kid was claiming to be a ninjutsu practitioner? Obviously you're saying that the person matters (which is the case in sports systems, honestly) more than the system… I mean, MMA loses as much as it wins (each MMA match has an MMA competitor win, and an MMA competitor lose&#8230, so is the system really that good? I mean, you're as likely to lose with it as anything else…

All of that hocus pocus never seems to work when I visit Krav Maga gyms to spar. Jabs and footwork stops the magic show and then, here comes the powerhand combo. Plenty of cops and soldiers train at MMA gyms and if all they had was their department's training + some TMA, then they usually get their butts whooped like any other White belts.

What hocus pocus? What the hell are you talking about? You said that "fighting is fighting", I pointed out that it's not, as it's highly context-dependant, and gave examples of a range of different influences on exactly what constitutes a "fight" in a range of contexts… there was no "hocus pocus" at all… Oh, and you don't really want to play the "plenty of cops train MMA" route… that argument can be made for almost any system on the planet… Troy Wideman, the gent in the first clip I showed on the previous page, has been an LEO for decades, for example… the Bujinkan has many military, security, LEO members, as does almost any other art I could come up with.

But here's the thing… if an LEO used an MMA approach, he'd probably get suspended or fired… and if a soldier used it, he's probably already dead from the armaments of his opponent. Really not a good argument.

Very much so when it comes to hand to hand combat. People who trains to fight and actually do fight full contact will always be better than those who trains light contact only.

I'll reiterate… do you really think such things are unique to MMA? Cause, if you do, you really should do a bit more looking around… MMA is just a johnny-come-lately in all this, when all's said and done… many other systems have been doing it longer, harder, and far more seriously than you have a clue about.

Cool, I hope those women were ok afterward. Just kidding. And you don't spar at all? Now I'd really like to know who you KO'ed.

Careful, son.

Who have I knocked out? Two students (within a week of each other), and two people in real life. And no, we don't spar… we do have a form of free-form training, and do a lot of scenario work, but the idea of trading blows/sports-style sparring is ineffective, counter-productive, and detrimental to our approach.

Not all the time, but it does happen. But didn't you just brag about doing the same by knocking out people in your gym?

No, I didn't "brag", I mentioned it to demonstrate that MMA is not unique in the way you think it is… oh, and I don't have a "gym"…

I never said that, I just implied that MMA is currently the best today when MMA is defined as employing BJJ & MT to produce fighters and champions. While it's still possible for MMA gyms to go with other routes such as BJJ & Karate to produce champions, it's still not the best and certainly not with Ninjitsu.

The question was whether or not you thought that MMA was the only approach that "fought or sparred hard", not what you thought was the best (I think it's pretty obvious what you think is the best… I'd disagree, but it's just opinions at that point, and I have no need to change your mind… if you like it, great, if you get value, even better… but you really should realise that your opinion doesn't necessarily translate to fact). But again, you're still missing context… "champions" means absolutely nothing to me… it's artificial garbage, and nothing to do with martial arts (the way I approach them). If you want to win MMA matches, you need to train MMA… which is a particular training methodology, and is the best suited for that context… if you have other needs, then other approaches are better. That's what you're simply not getting.

Well you just heralded Steve Jennum and Scott Morris as LEGIT Ninjas, yet Steve Jennum looked just like some dude throwing wild punches and Scott Morris looked just like some dude eating a ton of wild punches & elbows from Pat Smith.

"Heralded"? No. I just brought them up as more credible examples (when it comes to their background).

How is this any different from the Black kid whom you labeled "deluded" just because he claims to be a Ninja just because he got beat up by Dominique Cruz in that video?

They have legitimate, credible backgrounds in what they claimed to have. You seriously had to ask that question?

 

[drop bear]

Context, son. I didn't put them forwards as great, perfect, or even good examples… simply as two of the best known examples of people who do have an actual ninjutsu background (although RBWI really is it's own beast, when it comes down to it)… I know of a couple of Bujinkan members who have a semi-amateur involvement as well, but they're not easy to find any footage of. The point, though, was that most of what's identified as "ninjutsu" isn't.



No, it's not pompous, it's accurate. If someone said they were a Judo player, and did nothing but bad attempts at TKD leaping and spinning kicks, would it be pompous to say that he wasn't showing any Judo?



No, just that it is a specific thing, which was not seen anywhere in the clip provided.



He was being made fun of because he came in with a head full of fantasy, and because the only reference the guys there had was equally based in fantasy… so that's where they put him (mentally).



Eh, doesn't mean anything to me, frankly. If he wants to engage that way, go for it… but it's hardly something I'm going to be impressed by.



And? You're now saying that a top name in the sport beat a kid with a head full of delusions, and you're considering this… what? Impressive that someone who professionally trains for MMA beat a no-name kid? Not surprising because he trains professionally, and the kid was nobody? And I'm not sure what the reference to his (then) BJJ white belt has to do with anything, especially if he was already a fairly seasoned wrestler… and, if it didn't make any difference, then why was it important that the kid was claiming to be a ninjutsu practitioner? Obviously you're saying that the person matters (which is the case in sports systems, honestly) more than the system… I mean, MMA loses as much as it wins (each MMA match has an MMA competitor win, and an MMA competitor lose&#8230, so is the system really that good? I mean, you're as likely to lose with it as anything else…



What hocus pocus? What the hell are you talking about? You said that "fighting is fighting", I pointed out that it's not, as it's highly context-dependant, and gave examples of a range of different influences on exactly what constitutes a "fight" in a range of contexts… there was no "hocus pocus" at all… Oh, and you don't really want to play the "plenty of cops train MMA" route… that argument can be made for almost any system on the planet… Troy Wideman, the gent in the first clip I showed on the previous page, has been an LEO for decades, for example… the Bujinkan has many military, security, LEO members, as does almost any other art I could come up with.

But here's the thing… if an LEO used an MMA approach, he'd probably get suspended or fired… and if a soldier used it, he's probably already dead from the armaments of his opponent. Really not a good argument.



I'll reiterate… do you really think such things are unique to MMA? Cause, if you do, you really should do a bit more looking around… MMA is just a johnny-come-lately in all this, when all's said and done… many other systems have been doing it longer, harder, and far more seriously than you have a clue about.



Careful, son.

Who have I knocked out? Two students (within a week of each other), and two people in real life. And no, we don't spar… we do have a form of free-form training, and do a lot of scenario work, but the idea of trading blows/sports-style sparring is ineffective, counter-productive, and detrimental to our approach.



No, I didn't "brag", I mentioned it to demonstrate that MMA is not unique in the way you think it is… oh, and I don't have a "gym"…



The question was whether or not you thought that MMA was the only approach that "fought or sparred hard", not what you thought was the best (I think it's pretty obvious what you think is the best… I'd disagree, but it's just opinions at that point, and I have no need to change your mind… if you like it, great, if you get value, even better… but you really should realise that your opinion doesn't necessarily translate to fact). But again, you're still missing context… "champions" means absolutely nothing to me… it's artificial garbage, and nothing to do with martial arts (the way I approach them). If you want to win MMA matches, you need to train MMA… which is a particular training methodology, and is the best suited for that context… if you have other needs, then other approaches are better. That's what you're simply not getting.



"Heralded"? No. I just brought them up as more credible examples (when it comes to their background).



They have legitimate, credible backgrounds in what they claimed to have. You seriously had to ask that question?

And at this point back to he said she said.


But it is pretty easy. Mma can be shown in the context of resistance. A lot of martial art can be shown in this context. Not street vs sport because without a street example there is no street vs sport argument.

Mma can be shown working against resistance against other styles. Whether they be ninjitsu or not.

So quite simply show ninjitsu working against resistance. If you train for the street show resistance in the street. If not show sparring or competition.

 

[Chris Parker]

And at this point back to he said she said.

No, we're at explaining to you, and you not listening. Still.

But it is pretty easy. Mma can be shown in the context of resistance.

No, it can be seen to be applied against a form of resistance in a particular competitive context. Bit different.

A lot of martial art can be shown in this context. Not street vs sport because without a street example there is no street vs sport argument.

Sure, there's an argument… it's a tactical one.

Mma can be shown working against resistance against other styles. Whether they be ninjitsu or not.

One more time… "Ninjutsu", not (never) "ninjitsu". Okay?

Oh, and MMA is only shown as working against other styles in the context of MMA… where it's naturally going to have the advantage. So, frankly, your point is moot.

So quite simply show ninjitsu working against resistance.

The type seen in MMA competitions? Why? It's not only not what we train for, it's almost completely opposite to what we train for.

If you train for the street show resistance in the street. If not show sparring or competition.

We don't' spar, we don't have competitions, and I don't think you understand what "resistance in the street" would be… for one thing, look up a blog post called "The Myth of the Fully Resisting Opponent"… and, from there, it might be useful to realise that, when it comes to actual violence, resistance isn't actually part of the equation… as an attacker doesn't actually "resist"… some food for thought…

 

[drop bear]

No, we're at explaining to you, and you not listening. Still.



No, it can be seen to be applied against a form of resistance in a particular competitive context. Bit different.



Sure, there's an argument… it's a tactical one.



One more time… "Ninjutsu", not (never) "ninjitsu". Okay?

Oh, and MMA is only shown as working against other styles in the context of MMA… where it's naturally going to have the advantage. So, frankly, your point is moot.



The type seen in MMA competitions? Why? It's not only not what we train for, it's almost completely opposite to what we train for.



We don't' spar, we don't have competitions, and I don't think you understand what "resistance in the street" would be… for one thing, look up a blog post called "The Myth of the Fully Resisting Opponent"… and, from there, it might be useful to realise that, when it comes to actual violence, resistance isn't actually part of the equation… as an attacker doesn't actually "resist"… some food for thought…

I am fine with ninjutsu being shown fully resisted in the street. If that is your context then present it in context. Otherwise it is back to he said she said.

Otherwise you don't have an argument you have a theory.

http://chirontraining.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/myth-of-fully-resisting-opponent.html

OK sparring is more resisted than drills. A ring fight is more resisted than sparring. A street fight is more resisted than a ring fight.(sort of) Now to present that a street fight is more resisted than a street fight is fine. But if you are trying to present a method works due to that street fight resistance. Then you need to show it working in context.

You can't just show drill. Ignore sparring and say street fight. You would need to show street fight. If you want to present that.

Otherwise I could just say street fight as well. Without showing how it works in a street fight. And we both just walk hand in hand into a fantasy.

 

[Chris Parker]

I am fine with ninjutsu being shown fully resisted in the street. If that is your context then present it in context. Otherwise it is back to he said she said.

You're not listening.

Otherwise you don't have an argument you have a theory.

http://chirontraining.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/myth-of-fully-resisting-opponent.html

Still not listening.

OK sparring is more resisted than drills. A ring fight is more resisted than sparring. A street fight is more resisted than a ring fight.(sort of) Now to present that a street fight is more resisted than a street fight is fine. But if you are trying to present a method works due to that street fight resistance. Then you need to show it working in context.

No.

You can't just show drill. Ignore sparring and say street fight. You would need to show street fight. If you want to present that.

Missed the point.

Otherwise I could just say street fight as well. Without showing how it works in a street fight. And we both just walk hand in hand into a fantasy.

Yeah… you're really not getting it.

Look, you're too stuck in your own head to actually take anything you've been told on board… you seem to think that "sports" and "street" are the only contexts… my arts aren't either (my modern methods are more "street", but not any of the actual martial arts I practice), you've completely missed what I said when I told you that there really isn't' such a thing as "resistance" in the street/real violence, and you've missed that actual resistance is actually easier, more reliably gauged and applied, and more in drills than anything else.

Might I suggest you go back, re-read, and see where we end up then?

 

[drop bear]

You're not listening.



Still not listening.



No.



Missed the point.



Yeah… you're really not getting it.

Look, you're too stuck in your own head to actually take anything you've been told on board… you seem to think that "sports" and "street" are the only contexts… my arts aren't either (my modern methods are more "street", but not any of the actual martial arts I practice), you've completely missed what I said when I told you that there really isn't' such a thing as "resistance" in the street/real violence, and you've missed that actual resistance is actually easier, more reliably gauged and applied, and more in drills than anything else.

Might I suggest you go back, re-read, and see where we end up then?

I am listening I am just disagreeing which is different.



So what context is your art then?

 

[Chris Parker]

I am listening I am just disagreeing which is different.

Hmm… I say "There really isn't 'resistance' in a street fight", you respond "so there's more resistance in a street fight"… no, you're not listening. It's not a matter of you disagreeing, you're not listening in the first place.

So what context is your art then?

Multiple and varied, depending on which system I train that you're asking about… there's about a dozen of them. Some are to do with duelling, some battle-field orientated, some are to do with a particular form of unarmed combat/defence (historic), and so on. The thing is, they're all historical systems, so you need to look at the time, culture, social group, and so on. None of them are modern self defence systems, none of them are sports.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Okay, let's talk a bit about "contexts", because I think there's a lot of miscommunication and unstated assumptions going on here. To begin with, Chris is right in that "street" vs "sport" is not sufficient to cover the topic. I disagree with Chris on a number of issues, but he has some important points that I think are not coming across to those that don't have the background to get what he's talking about.

Rather than speak in terms of generalities, let's look at some different contexts and see what tools and challenges might be present in each one.

MMA: Forget the list of current UFC rules - MMA bouts took place years before those rules were put into place and the rules have only changed some of the details around the edges. Forget arguments about whether MMA is "sport" or "real." At its essence, MMA comes down to an agreed-upon duel between two unarmed opponents with symmetrical rules and objectives.

Things you have to worry about: a skilled, determined, well-conditioned opponent.
Things you don't have to worry about: numbers, weapons, surprise, appropriate degrees of force, legal repercussions
Tools you have/need: offensive and defensive footwork, striking, grappling, feints, setups, counters to technical attacks, physical and mental conditioning, etc
Tools you don't have/need: numbers, weapons, surprise, verbal manipulation/de-escalation, escape/evasion, awareness of 3rd parties, articulation to justify your actions from a legal perspective, etc


Security work/ Club bouncer: Just as the rules of an MMA match might vary from promotion to promotion or in different time periods, so the rules of engagement can vary in different venues for folks in this line of work. Still, there are certain commonalities. At its essence this sort of job involves being able to control (potentially) violent/intoxicated/unstable people with the minimum possible damage and legal liability.

Things you have to worry about: Surprise, numbers, weapons, intoxicated/unstable opponents, degrees of force, legal repercussions
Things you don't have to worry about (probably): A highly skilled, technical, calm, prepared opponent
Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation/de-escalation skills, intimidation, surprise, numbers(maybe), at least basic physical skills, ability to stay calm, ability to assess appropriate level of force, ability to legal justify actions
Tools you don't have/need: fancy footwork, counters to sophisticated martial arts techniques, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, weapons(maybe, depending on the job), escape/evasion

Rape defense: This is a clear example of a non-symmetric conflict. The bottom line for the defender is trying to escape unhurt.

Things you have to worry about: Surprise, weapons (maybe), numbers (maybe), larger opponent (probably), intimidation, psychological/verbal manipulation
Things you don't have to worry about (probably): a highly trained martial artist with sophisticated technique who is ready for a tough fight
Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation skills, surprise, escape/evasion skills, weapons (maybe?), physical fighting skills sufficient for at least discouraging a larger attacker, psychological mindset for resisting intimidation/manipulation
Tools you don't have/need: Numbers, size, counters for technical martial arts attacks, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, etc


There are a lot of different contexts for violence. There is no one-size-fits-all approach that applies to all of them. There are certain principles, tactics, training methods, and personal attributes that can overlap between these different contexts, but there are also important differences. It's important to understand what you are actually preparing for.

 

[drop bear]

Okay, let's talk a bit about "contexts", because I think there's a lot of miscommunication and unstated assumptions going on here. To begin with, Chris is right in that "street" vs "sport" is not sufficient to cover the topic. I disagree with Chris on a number of issues, but he has some important points that I think are not coming across to those that don't have the background to get what he's talking about.

Rather than speak in terms of generalities, let's look at some different contexts and see what tools and challenges might be present in each one.

MMA: Forget the list of current UFC rules - MMA bouts took place years before those rules were put into place and the rules have only changed some of the details around the edges. Forget arguments about whether MMA is "sport" or "real." At its essence, MMA comes down to an agreed-upon duel between two unarmed opponents with symmetrical rules and objectives.

Things you have to worry about: a skilled, determined, well-conditioned opponent.
Things you don't have to worry about: numbers, weapons, surprise, appropriate degrees of force, legal repercussions
Tools you have/need: offensive and defensive footwork, striking, grappling, feints, setups, counters to technical attacks, physical and mental conditioning, etc
Tools you don't have/need: numbers, weapons, surprise, verbal manipulation/de-escalation, escape/evasion, awareness of 3rd parties, articulation to justify your actions from a legal perspective, etc


Security work/ Club bouncer: Just as the rules of an MMA match might vary from promotion to promotion or in different time periods, so the rules of engagement can vary in different venues for folks in this line of work. Still, there are certain commonalities. At its essence this sort of job involves being able to control (potentially) violent/intoxicated/unstable people with the minimum possible damage and legal liability.

Things you have to worry about: Surprise, numbers, weapons, intoxicated/unstable opponents, degrees of force, legal repercussions
Things you don't have to worry about (probably): A highly skilled, technical, calm, prepared opponent
Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation/de-escalation skills, intimidation, surprise, numbers(maybe), at least basic physical skills, ability to stay calm, ability to assess appropriate level of force, ability to legal justify actions
Tools you don't have/need: fancy footwork, counters to sophisticated martial arts techniques, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, weapons(maybe, depending on the job), escape/evasion

Rape defense: This is a clear example of a non-symmetric conflict. The bottom line for the defender is trying to escape unhurt.

Things you have to worry about: Surprise, weapons (maybe), numbers (maybe), larger opponent (probably), intimidation, psychological/verbal manipulation
Things you don't have to worry about (probably): a highly trained martial artist with sophisticated technique who is ready for a tough fight
Tools you have/need: Situational awareness, verbal manipulation skills, surprise, escape/evasion skills, weapons (maybe?), physical fighting skills sufficient for at least discouraging a larger attacker, psychological mindset for resisting intimidation/manipulation
Tools you don't have/need: Numbers, size, counters for technical martial arts attacks, tactics for wearing down an opponent's defenses over time, etc


There are a lot of different contexts for violence. There is no one-size-fits-all approach that applies to all of them. There are certain principles, tactics, training methods, and personal attributes that can overlap between these different contexts, but there are also important differences. It's important to understand what you are actually preparing for.

But then you have the issue of actually working in context.

I do have a bit of an issue with these lists being used for more than an ideas platform. We take that context and then think it becomes some sort of law.

So then I turn around a say for example I train in the context of rape defence. And I will be surprised he will be larger, numbers, he will not be a trained fighter and so on and this is why a sport system will not equip you to defend rape because the law of sports context. Is.a well conditioned oponant with no surprise etc.

It becomes training by speculation that becomes dogma. And I can't see how that would help.

Working in context is trying to move away from speculation and dogma. But you can't get away with being an expert in every situation.

All of this is why I don't think the street sport is very useful. As far as context I like the idea of working resisted and unscripted.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Morris got whooped pretty bad and Jennum just punched like any other puncher. Then Jennum did that sloppy armbar from the full-mount where he yanked the Boxer's arm up w/o maintaining bottom pressure. Luckily the Boxer was clueless.

Much like the one in Royce Gracie's first match.

 

[RTKDCMB]

In general, fighting is fighting and MMA is going to beat most TMA's because we train and do, knock people out as part of our training and this isn't even stepping into the cage to fight yet. In MMA, you can't help but get better at fighting than those who don't fight nor spar hard.

And what exactly do you base this opinion on?

 

[drop bear]

Much like the one in Royce Gracie's first match.

This thread needs more sakuraba.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-A2GDDNz_Sw