MMA, UFC, The Cage, what does it prove?

[chinto]

In the first UFC's there were two rules.....no biting and no eye gouging.

The first UFC's lead to many TMA practioners retorting 'Well...my art is just too deadly to compete in the Octagon'......but the reality in most cases was that their art was just ineffective in anything but an even MORE controlled setting than the Octagon.......the only exception were weapons practioners who's art was too deadly to compete in the Octagon......at least in this day and age.

i can not really comment on that. I have no first hand knowledge. but I say again, any of the older arts were designed and developed for survival in a life and death situation.

They obviously were effective and efficient, or they would would not have survived to be taught today. ( this of course is applicable to the ones that are taught in general for that porpoise, and not for sport. ) So I would say that the older styles of samurai Jujitsu and Kung Fu and Okinawan Karate , Kali and other arts such as that are by definition effective and efficient in the real world. ( real world being where to loose is to die.) but as in any thing the practioner is a big factor too.

the older arts survived where the looser was the one who was dead! so to say that a sport confrentation with any rules some how invalidates any art is rediculous.

Please understand that does NOT mean that a cage fighter of say UFC or any other MMA is not compitent. They are highly conditioned and good fighters as are any good boxer. They are all dangerous people by definition. the person and not the art are often the deciding factor. all of the older arts teach you to kill the attacker quickly and efficiently from what i have seen. Please also remember that most of the techniques are from TMA's or modifed versions of techniques from the older arts.

I would say any well trained special ops soldier, trained in Karate, jujitsu or what have you with combat experiance and in a live and death strugle would be more dangerous then most MMA fighters. This is becouse they are trained as most TMA people who train for Self Defense are, to think of it as life and death, and because they will kill to survive and most have proven that in real life.

I think the bigest facter is " the safety catch" that most have on, and some have off.
the willingnes too kill is not as common as some believe.

If you face a man who would rather die the loose and will kill with out hesitation.... I suggest you LEAVE HIM ALONE!! unless of course our desire is suicide. such a person is extremely dangerous by any ones estimation!!!

 

[BLACK LION]

Escape and evade yes.... Or you meet them with 3x the ferocity and more violence than they are willing to stand for...

When faced with life or death there is no reasoning with it... its do or dont do... live or die...

Rules and regs create a moral pressure switch which will only go so far.... those that train devoid of rules and regs have a much greater threshold switch...it cuts off when they can no longer think and move...most often upon death...


Sport fighting or combat competition is great but it does not train you to protect your life in an asocial environment.... whereas the martial arts it is based off of for the most part, did/does.... society made a sport out of it... they domesticated the violence of battle into a cozy cable event....

This reminds me of a conflict of interest I am having because a freind of mine wants to start training again but he wants something more along the lines of combat and not competitive...he also wants his son to attend but his son is contracted by affliction and is currently training with Dean Lister and some other mma guys.... I know I can train the friend becuase he is older and is not a competitive fighter...I am not comfortable training his son becuase you cant turn this into "competitive mode" and take it inot the ring.... someone would get injured or disqualified...

 

[Andrew Green]

ssure switch which will only go so far.... those that train devoid of rules and regs have a much greater threshold switch...it cuts off when they can no longer think and move...most often upon death...

Everyone trains with rules. Sometimes they are fouls and enviroment rules as in a combat sport, other times they are more even more restrictive. Rules like "Attack this way, and I will defend, after your initial attack go with whatever I do."

Sport fighting or combat competition is great but it does not train you to protect your life in an asocial environment.... whereas the martial arts it is based off of for the most part, did/does.... society made a sport out of it... they domesticated the violence of battle into a cozy cable event....

Nonsense, sport fighting and martial arts are not two separate things. Sport fighting has been the heart of martial arts for a very long time. Right back to Ancient Greece and further.

Even in the Asian martial arts. Lei Tai in China, read some of the "old" stories from Okinawa and they are full of references too matches and contests.

Western styles like fencing, boxing and wrestling are centered around the competitive format.

The Dai Nippon Butokai in Japan was built on sport fighting (Kendo & Judo, then later karate). Sumo is a huge sport there, with a very long history.

The rejection of the "competitive" or "sparring" aspect of the martial arts is not a common thing historically, and is more often a part of systems that are more ceremonial then combative.

Entering competitions might not be necessary for good training, but training in a way that is "competitive" is IMO. Otherwise your rules are far more restrictive then anything a combat sport has ever put on paper.

 

[BLACK LION]

I am making reference to what I see when I turn on the boob tube...wether its the spike channel or a cable event... I am not referring to the way it was long ago. Yes I do consider sporting events to be a watered down version that is more entertaining than anything else. Its a spectacle... someone getting thier throat crushed is not...
I understand they are the same...yet I understand they are different... the way it is now is a far cry from the way it was...

 

[jarrod]

the sport approach is much truer to the original intent of martial arts than prearranged, cooperative but more "deadly" training.

jf

 

[sgtmac_46]

i can not really comment on that. I have no first hand knowledge. but I say again, any of the older arts were designed and developed for survival in a life and death situation.

They obviously were effective and efficient, or they would would not have survived to be taught today. ( this of course is applicable to the ones that are taught in general for that porpoise, and not for sport. ) So I would say that the older styles of samurai Jujitsu and Kung Fu and Okinawan Karate , Kali and other arts such as that are by definition effective and efficient in the real world. ( real world being where to loose is to die.) but as in any thing the practioner is a big factor too.

the older arts survived where the looser was the one who was dead! so to say that a sport confrentation with any rules some how invalidates any art is rediculous.

Please understand that does NOT mean that a cage fighter of say UFC or any other MMA is not compitent. They are highly conditioned and good fighters as are any good boxer. They are all dangerous people by definition. the person and not the art are often the deciding factor. all of the older arts teach you to kill the attacker quickly and efficiently from what i have seen. Please also remember that most of the techniques are from TMA's or modifed versions of techniques from the older arts.

I would say any well trained special ops soldier, trained in Karate, jujitsu or what have you with combat experiance and in a live and death strugle would be more dangerous then most MMA fighters. This is becouse they are trained as most TMA people who train for Self Defense are, to think of it as life and death, and because they will kill to survive and most have proven that in real life.

I think the bigest facter is " the safety catch" that most have on, and some have off.
the willingnes too kill is not as common as some believe.

If you face a man who would rather die the loose and will kill with out hesitation.... I suggest you LEAVE HIM ALONE!! unless of course our desire is suicide. such a person is extremely dangerous by any ones estimation!!!

Young Male Hierarchical combat is the traditional way male warrior societies train........they fight each other in competitions where they stop just short of death.

MMA, rather than being something new as opposed to 'TMA' is really about something very very OLD.........the Greek arts of Pankration, Wrestling and Boxing are 3,000 to as much as 4,000 years old, and arguably predate ALL modern TMA's by 2,000 or more years.......they were arts devoid of serious ritual, practiced in competitions, and refined for the use in war!

The Spartan's were masters at Pankration to the point that they weren't invited to many Greek games.

It's also of interest to point out Pankration quite possibly could represent the ROOT art of MANY modern Asian TMA's.......how? Alexander the Great's conquest of India! It is believed that many modern Asian TMA's have their root in the Indian subcontinent.......which occurred AFTER Alexander's conquest and influence in India..........wouldn't it be quite ironic that Pankration, which is essentially MMA, inspired many of the TMA systems themselves......it would make Pankration the ULTIMATE TMA........

 

[Andrew Green]

I am making reference to what I see when I turn on the boob tube...wether its the spike channel or a cable event... I am not referring to the way it was long ago. Yes I do consider sporting events to be a watered down version that is more entertaining than anything else. Its a spectacle... someone getting thier throat crushed is not...
I understand they are the same...yet I understand they are different... the way it is now is a far cry from the way it was...

I think a stronger case could be made that much of modern "traditional" styles is the watered down form, too many restrictions have been put in place and hard contact freestyle training has been replaced with taking turns against non-resisting opponents who play the part of an attacker.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I think a stronger case could be made that much of modern "traditional" styles is the watered down form, too many restrictions have been put in place and hard contact freestyle training has been replaced with taking turns against non-resisting opponents who play the part of an attacker.

Bingo! And in the minds of many practioners over the years which is which has gotten twisted.........and everything old is new again!

 

[BLACK LION]

I think a stronger case could be made that much of modern "traditional" styles is the watered down form, too many restrictions have been put in place and hard contact freestyle training has been replaced with taking turns against non-resisting opponents who play the part of an attacker.

I agree.
I dont rattle that cage though as others are far better at articulating in that realm... such as yourself.

 

[Uchinanchu]

Everyone trains with rules. Sometimes they are fouls and enviroment rules as in a combat sport, other times they are more even more restrictive. Rules like "Attack this way, and I will defend, after your initial attack go with whatever I do."



Nonsense, sport fighting and martial arts are not two separate things. Sport fighting has been the heart of martial arts for a very long time. Right back to Ancient Greece and further.

Even in the Asian martial arts. Lei Tai in China, read some of the "old" stories from Okinawa and they are full of references too matches and contests.

Western styles like fencing, boxing and wrestling are centered around the competitive format.

The Dai Nippon Butokai in Japan was built on sport fighting (Kendo & Judo, then later karate). Sumo is a huge sport there, with a very long history.

The rejection of the "competitive" or "sparring" aspect of the martial arts is not a common thing historically, and is more often a part of systems that are more ceremonial then combative.

Entering competitions might not be necessary for good training, but training in a way that is "competitive" is IMO. Otherwise your rules are far more restrictive then anything a combat sport has ever put on paper.

You have to be careful with the term 'sport', when referencing histories and cultures. What we view as sport today, and what was considered sport in ancient Greece, would not be viewed in the same context by most people today.
In ancient Greece, the spectator 'sport' of wrestling had very few rules from my understanding. One was that the participants wore no clothing at all. This was supposedly done to keep the lady folk from trying to enter said competitions (I honestly do not know if there is any truth to that theory).
The other, if you can call it a rule, was that the winner was the one left standing at the end of the 'match'. Deaths apparently occured quite often.
As for the matches/bouts in Okinawa, such open matches were not sanctioned and any rules made were usually nothing more than a verbal agreement between the two combatants (if any such agreement were even made).

 

[Andrew Green]

In ancient Greece, the spectator 'sport' of wrestling had very few rules from my understanding. One was that the participants wore no clothing at all. This was supposedly done to keep the lady folk from trying to enter said competitions (I honestly do not know if there is any truth to that theory).
The other, if you can call it a rule, was that the winner was the one left standing at the end of the 'match'. Deaths apparently occured quite often.

Lack of clothes was more of a cultural thing. The Olympics and similar events where about showcasing the human body, too do so it needed to be visible.

Matches where sort of early UFC in rules, biting and eye gouging where forbidden, time limits where non-existant and victory came by way of submission (raising a finger, not tapping, but same idea)

Deaths in events did happen, however their frequency is often exaggerated. It was seen as a bit of a accomplishment to die though, as part of the ideal was giving everything in the pursuit of excellence, dieing in the sport, whether it combat sport or otherwise, was a sacrifice in pursuit of excellence.

I do remember one story of a pankration fighter who submitted his opponent, and then collapsed on top of him (dead), he was considered a hero, had statues built, etc.

Pankration was considered safer then boxing though, but many of the competitors entered both.

As for the matches/bouts in Okinawa, such open matches were not sanctioned and any rules made were usually nothing more than a verbal agreement between the two combatants (if any such agreement were even made).

Which does not make them "sportive" in nature. They still agree to a set of rules (no weapons, one-on-one, etc) and both no what they are getting into. No different then the idea of dueling in western culture, which evolved into ring sports when pistol and sword duels dissappeared.

 

[tallgeese]

Despite rules associated with MMA competitions, they are very useful in determining preperation for combat.

For instance, the methods used to train MMA fighters are often built around movement based drilling, signifigant contact and training at speed against a fully resistive partner. This more clearly mimics conditions of an actual fight than many methodologies used in TMA training.

Yes, there are weapons that are not utilized in competition. Groin kicks,eye gouges, throat attacks, ect. But, many of these are simple extensions of movements already used by these fighters. How much different is it to flick in an eye gouge than to apply a jab? NOt much really. So, if a figher is dominant without these tactics, imagine what he can do when he utilizes them.

Does MMA exactly translate to street combat, no. But TMA's do not either. It's a question of closely approximationg those conditions in training to increse survivability in actual situations. In this case, MMA often comes closer than TMA's.

 

[blindsage]

MMA comes closer than which TMA's? Muay Thai? Kyokushin karate? Goju-Ryu karate? Boxing? Choy Li Fut kung fu? Xingyiquan? Shuai Jiao? Arnis? Silat? Ju-Jitsu? Pankration?

I've seen all of these (and many more) train exactly as you describe MMA training (movement based drilling, contact, fully resistant partners). So then where is the actual distinction you're talking about? Which TMAs are you talking about? And what MMA? Are you talking about Muay Thai/BJJ MMA training? If so then aren't you talking about TMAs?

 

[sgtmac_46]

MMA comes closer than which TMA's? Muay Thai? Kyokushin karate? Goju-Ryu karate? Boxing? Choy Li Fut kung fu? Xingyiquan? Shuai Jiao? Arnis? Silat? Ju-Jitsu? Pankration?

I've seen all of these (and many more) train exactly as you describe MMA training (movement based drilling, contact, fully resistant partners). So then where is the actual distinction you're talking about? Which TMAs are you talking about? And what MMA? Are you talking about Muay Thai/BJJ MMA training? If so then aren't you talking about TMAs?

Actually Pankration and MMA are virtually indistinguishable.........Pankration being one of the oldest martial arts in existence, it's clear that everything old is new.

The distinction between 'MMA' and 'TMA's is clouded by the problem that folks can't even agree on what IS a 'TMA'.......a lot of the definitions seem to be self-serving to fit specific arguments.

 

[tallgeese]

I'm referring mainly to karate based stuff that most people think of when they hear "TMA".

Sure, you can find plenty of progressive places. Some will have a more well rounded approach than others. But walk into most dojos, dojang, ect. around the country and you'll be hard pressed to find whatever they are doing taught fluidly and in a manner like I'm describing.

Even arts built heavily around movements that will create a high likelihood of injury often don't train them in a manner that is building towards a mimic of actual combat. Often, it's a mindset componant that is lacking, other times.

Granted exceptions abound, but from my experiance, I've seen enough places to be comfortable with the observation above.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

The distinction between 'MMA' and 'TMA's is clouded by the problem that folks can't even agree on what IS a 'TMA'.......a lot of the definitions seem to be self-serving to fit specific arguments.

Good point! If you look at the perpective of the Koryo arts, much of what is often called traditional is considered modern, rather than traditional. By that standard, most karate, all taekwondo, hapkido, aikido, judo, and kendo are not traditional, though we certainly think of them as traditional.

It is all a matter of perspective, I suppose.

Daniel

 

[blindsage]

Actually Pankration and MMA are virtually indistinguishable.........Pankration being one of the oldest martial arts in existence, it's clear that everything old is new.

The distinction between 'MMA' and 'TMA's is clouded by the problem that folks can't even agree on what IS a 'TMA'.......a lot of the definitions seem to be self-serving to fit specific arguments.

Good points. Especially the last.

 

[blindsage]

I'm referring mainly to karate based stuff that most people think of when they hear "TMA".

Sure, you can find plenty of progressive places. Some will have a more well rounded approach than others. But walk into most dojos, dojang, ect. around the country and you'll be hard pressed to find whatever they are doing taught fluidly and in a manner like I'm describing.

Even arts built heavily around movements that will create a high likelihood of injury often don't train them in a manner that is building towards a mimic of actual combat. Often, it's a mindset componant that is lacking, other times.

Granted exceptions abound, but from my experiance, I've seen enough places to be comfortable with the observation above.

So you're comfortable with above because you've walked "into most dojos, dojangs, ect. around the country"?

Honestly, I think there is a lot of mediocre to bad self-defense training in MA studios. But the contention that TMAs are weak as a general rule compared to MMA is so broad a generalization as to be meaningless, and indicates a lack of awareness. And if you don't consider Muay Thai a TMA (traditional martial art) I recommend at the least checking out the history on the wiki page.

 

[tallgeese]

There are good and bad schools in every camp.

And I've walked into enough, or trained with the product of TMA schools to again, be fairly comfortable in my statement. A lot of guys on here can probably say the same if they want, I don't have a corner on the market of cross training.

I'm certain that MT does have a long legacy. I didn't ask when I was training in it, I didn't care that much. But even lay people have a different perception of MT than trad arts.

Time since inception and country of origin have less to the with the common perception of "trad" than do the methods of training, general outcomes, and mindset.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Prove? It proves that if you are stuck in an elevator with one of them it might get a bit nasty if something starts up.

But for the real world, not much. If one of those guys tried to bully anyone on the street they might just get themselves done in.

Even Bruce Lee told others in LA that to go around punching and kicking people would just get you shot. There are no rules on the street. Fist, feet, weapons, friends, pre-emptive attacks. No rules at all.

When you think about it, MMA cage fighting is a way to make a name. Just as boxing, golf, tennis, etc... And it allows poor people to have a chance for fame and money. And that's what it really proves. Boxing has the same thing. Once it was Irish, then Italians, then Blacks. It gave them a way to get out of poverty and to show others it could be done.

If ever you have seen Cinderella Man you would understand.

Deaf