MMA vs. SD

[Daniel Sullivan]

those are post-restoration arts.

I don't know that I'd call them that. Kano's was actually not restoring so much as modernizing and embracing a more sport/competition rout, complete with the dan system from Go.

Funokoshi simply 'Japanized' Okinawan karate from what I understand.

right, but some arts are STILL Traditional in the definition you have here. and some are not. they do exist.

Both Judo and Shotokan are considered traditional. Taekwondo is considered 'traditional' and is probably less 'traditional' than Shotokan. Even so, I do know what you mean. Seems that traditional today means anything that is self contained, has a belt system, and isn't MMA. I see 'traditional' as having become more of a format.

as far as the military indoctrination goes, my experience in the marine corps says different.

there is some literature out there about studies conducted in ww2 concerning the 'killer instinct'. they found many soldiers fired over the heads of the enemy. military indoc was changed accordingly. at least in the Corpse.

I am aware of the studies you referrence, but I don't consider being willing to kill one's enemies in war to be the same as being a sociopath. Being a sociopath can have (I would think) negative consequences in a working unit.

Daniel

 

[BrandonLucas]

Yep...soapbox time. Here goes:

It is entirely pointless to argue the facts for both sides for any part of this subject, for many reasons. And not only is it pointless, it makes all of the people who argue the facts look uneducated.

Basically, these all sound like fanboy arguments to me. Fanboys for both TMA's and MMA.

1. MMA is not a MA in and of itself. It is a collection of parts of different MA's that is used to defend yourself in a competant manner, and to play to your strengths and guard your weaknesses. Most of the time, 1 MMA'ist will train in different arts than another MMA'ist, all depending on what their strengths and weaknesses are. MMA, by itself, is not a MA in the sense that a TMA is a MA. In other words, there is no set cirriculum.

2. TKD is not better than anything else out there. No one art is better than the next, even if it is considered MMA in the sense of mixing and matching techniques to fit a fighting style. It all depends on who's using it. A gun is no better than a knife...it all depends on who's using the weapons.

3. How exactly would anyone here know what is deadly in a MA? Really? Has anyone here ever killed someone else with that technique? The point is that you have no idea what will work and what won't work until you're faced with making that decision at that moment. You won't know if your pressure point hold is going to work unless you have a seriously resisting opponent that you're trying to defend yourself against.

4. When intent comes into play, how do you train for that? It's the same thing as the "deadly" argument. Unless you truly "intend" on harming your training partner, or your training partner truly "intends" on harming you, then you don't effectively train for that, either.

5. For sport and competition purposes, anything and everything gets watered down. My TKD and this person's MMA is going to get watered down the second we step in the Octagon or whatever ring we are competing in. It all boils down to who's the more athletic and able to work within the realm of rulesets.

6. An athlete is going to have the edge over someone not trained. Pure and simple. That doesn't mean that he'll win everytime, but the odds are more in his (or her) favor. I agree that proper technique is understood to be a strong technique, but the problem here is timing. An athlete has the edge in timing as well...and if you think about it, the more someone trains in an art, the more athletic they become...so really, the point here is moot. If you're a martial artist that actively trains and is serious about training, then you're an athlete, which gives you the edge. So now we're seeing someone who is trained in MMA vs someone who is trained in a TMA...no matter if there are rules or it's NHB, you can't tell who is going to be the one left standing. Not unless you can predict the future. In which case you should send me a PM of the winning lotto numbers for GA.

Basically, the whole reason this argument has been done to death is because there is no clear cut answer as to which is better.

So what if MMA is the easy way out? If I train in MMA, and I glean parts of different TMA's to help make me a better fighter all the way around, and I can put you out of comission, then who cares what I'm trained in??

Like I said before, all of these arguments as far as whether MMA is legit for SD or if TMA can compare to MMA are all basically fanboy arguments. Respectable people who train in either TMA's or MMA are able to see the strengths and weaknesses of their art, and usually other arts as well.

Is my TKD better than your TKD? We may never know, unless we were actually in the position to have to find out. And personally, I would rather not know. But, it won't be a question of whether I'm a higher rank than you, or if you're a higher rank than me, or if your TKD is more "modern" than mine is, or whatever. It will simply be a question of who trains harder, who is more athletic, and who is more opportunistic.

I think that if everyone crosstrained in something, even if it's underwater basket weaving, they can benefit from it.

If I offended anyone, my deepest appologies. I'm just tired of seeing these same tired arguments that go nowhere.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Excellent post, Brandon. I had expressed similar sentiments much earlier in this thread.

Regarding intent, if your intent in SD is one of defense, disarm and escape, then you can train with full intent; I fully intend to put my partner on the ground and make haste to get away, or I fully intend to prevent my partner from striking me, either with a foot, fist, or simulated weapon, or I fully intend to disarm my opponent, take the weapon away.

I think that when we talk about SD, we should keep in mind that unless we are in the military and in a military engagement, we are dealing with civilian self defense, so being lethal is not necesarilly the goal. In fact, being lethal can cause you a substantial amount of legal problems. Military personel off of the battlefield are constrained by the same SD laws that the rest of us are.

In regards to civilian SD, groundwork is less important than awareness and escape, though having a good groundgame I'm sure can be helpful in extracating one's self from some situations.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

So now we're seeing someone who is trained in MMA vs someone who is trained in a TMA...no matter if there are rules or it's NHB, you can't tell who is going to be the one left standing. Not unless you can predict the future. In which case you should send me a PM of the winning lotto numbers for GA.

And I'd like the ones for Maryland.

Daniel

 

[redantstyle]

I don't know that I'd call them that. Kano's was actually not restoring so much as modernizing and embracing a more sport/competition rout, complete with the dan system from Go.

Funokoshi simply 'Japanized' Okinawan karate from what I understand.

my understandings on this are drawn from the standard fare, which tends to assert that the arts became 'watered down' at that point. and here i am pretty much referring to most all 'modern ma'. the modifications to sport changes the intent and in many cases makes certain techniques or motions 'illegal'. these concessions are what differentiates modern arts from traditional, imo. i can be taken to task on that definition in many ways, but that is how i view it in the overall.

'teh d33dly' is purest sarcasm from me. i train in the Ironic Fist. I can simulate a neck break like nobody's business, and most likely do glorious battle with my machetes, batons, daggers, and other weapons in my magnificent arsenal.

'cept i wont.

cause that's psycho...


i was advised that my use of the word 'sociopathic' might be considered inappropriate or extreme. i do believe that was the original intent behind martial arts systems. that term might seem a bit harsh, but killing or injuring other people isnt exactly sociable. military systems and all ma, to one extent or another, have at their core a desensitization to violence.

and from some prior responses, i see that i should be careful to flesh out my remarks a bit more. what i had say earlier was not a personal preference, just an observation.

Both Judo and Shotokan are considered traditional. Taekwondo is considered 'traditional' and is probably less 'traditional' than Shotokan. Even so, I do know what you mean. Seems that traditional today means anything that is self contained, has a belt system, and isn't MMA. I see 'traditional' as having become more of a format.

oh definately. i should have explained my 'classification' system a little better. i assumed that you, you know, knew what i meant...

I am aware of the studies you referrence, but I don't consider being willing to kill one's enemies in war to be the same as being a sociopath. Being a sociopath can have (I would think) negative consequences in a working unit.

it's either controlled sociopathology or a necessary psychological profile in society, depending on how you want to look at it. im sure that the incidence of 'bezerks' is less frequent these days. in context of the thread, i tend to think they may have fostered them a bit more in 'teh old days'.

regards,

mike.

 

[Tez3]

Belts, gradings, curriculums are all 'modern' additions to martial arts, MMA is far more traditional than you are giving it credit for. If anything MMA is going back to the 'old' ways of teaching martial arts. Still as I said before, have a read of the book I recommmended and also have a good look at what Iain Abernethy does, his stuff on the karate grappling methods is very good.

 

[Hagakure]

Is this debate STILL going on here?

I'd not posted for some years, for a variety of reasons (mainly due to not practising any arts!) but this debate was around 2 or 3 years ago.

Stop it. All of you. You should ALL know that MY MA, is better than YOUR MA, even IF you do the same as me.

Big willy fights, that's all this boils down to.

I'll start a new one. British sports cars are better than American sports cars. Yours don't corner well, are cheaply made, and lack the prestige of ours, simply because we're British don't you know.... Ok, so your companies own ours, but that's not the point! I think we get the point. At least, I hope we do, or, I've made myself look very silly on the internet.

 

[Tez3]

Is this debate STILL going on here?

I'd not posted for some years, for a variety of reasons (mainly due to not practising any arts!) but this debate was around 2 or 3 years ago.

Stop it. All of you. You should ALL know that MY MA, is better than YOUR MA, even IF you do the same as me.

Big willy fights, that's all this boils down to.

I'll start a new one. British sports cars are better than American sports cars. Yours don't corner well, are cheaply made, and lack the prestige of ours, simply because we're British don't you know.... Ok, so your companies own ours, but that's not the point! I think we get the point. At least, I hope we do, or, I've made myself look very silly on the internet.

:lfao:

Nice post!

 

[Hagakure]

:lfao:

Nice post!

Why thank you.

 

[Steve]

Is this debate STILL going on here?

I'd not posted for some years, for a variety of reasons (mainly due to not practising any arts!) but this debate was around 2 or 3 years ago.

Stop it. All of you. You should ALL know that MY MA, is better than YOUR MA, even IF you do the same as me.

Big willy fights, that's all this boils down to.

I'll start a new one. British sports cars are better than American sports cars. Yours don't corner well, are cheaply made, and lack the prestige of ours, simply because we're British don't you know.... Ok, so your companies own ours, but that's not the point! I think we get the point. At least, I hope we do, or, I've made myself look very silly on the internet.

I would say that, overall, you're spot on with regards to self defense and cars. But, I think you give us too much credit. The Germans own Mini, the Malaysians own Lotus and MG/Rover is owned by the Chinese. I think we still have the Rolls, the Mercedes and the Jag... and does Ford still own Aston Martin? But those aren't really sports car companies.

This has been a public service announcement.

Oh, and my gung fu is strong... strong enough to defend myself from you and your army of ninjas.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Rolls was purchassed by BMW and VW simultaneously about seven or eight years ago. I'm not sure how that can happen, but in the ensuing legal finageling, Rolls was divested of Bentlly, which went to Vee-Dub and BMW got Rolls Royce. Incidentally, BMW is the owner of Mini.

Jaguar, Rover, and Aston-Martin all got snatched up by Ford back in the nineties and Ford is desparately trying to sell them, if they haven't already. Tata was at least interested in the purchase of Jag, though I don't know if that went anywhere.

In consolation, Ford, BMW, and Vee-Dub were much more caring with the marques that they acquired than Mercedes was when they ate Chrysler. Jag and Aston have benefited greatly from Ford, though Ford never got anything like the return on their investment that they'd hoped for. In fact the cash tied up in acquiring and modernizing Jaguar in particular prevented Ford from doing much with their domestic line except trucks and the Mustang.

I'll stop here: this is waaaayyyy off topic.

Daniel

 

[BrandonLucas]

Nope. Rolls was purchassed by BMW and VW simultaneously about seven or eight years ago. I'm not sure how that can happen, but in the ensuing legal finageling, Rolls was divested of Bentlly, which went to Vee-Dub and BMW got Rolls Royce. Incidentally, BMW is the owner of Mini.

Jaguar, Rover, and Aston-Martin all got snatched up by Ford back in the nineties and Ford is desparately trying to sell them, if they haven't already. Tata was at least interested in the purchase of Jag, though I don't know if that went anywhere.

In consolation, Ford, BMW, and Vee-Dub were much more caring with the marques that they acquired than Mercedes was when they ate Chrysler. Jag and Aston have benefited greatly from Ford, though Ford never got anything like the return on their investment that they'd hoped for. In fact the cash tied up in acquiring and modernizing Jaguar in particular prevented Ford from doing much with their domestic line except trucks and the Mustang.

I'll stop here: this is waaaayyyy off topic.

Daniel

I'm pretty sure a BMW can take my TKD and squash it any day...and I'm willing to bet that Ford > MMA as well...

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Okay, this last direction of posts has given me an idea for a very silly thread that will likely only be appreciated by car nut martial artists. I'll post it in General Martial Arts.

Edit: It is posted and here's the link: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1112792#post1112792

Daniel

 

[Hagakure]

I would say that, overall, you're spot on with regards to self defense and cars. But, I think you give us too much credit. The Germans own Mini, the Malaysians own Lotus and MG/Rover is owned by the Chinese. I think we still have the Rolls, the Mercedes and the Jag... and does Ford still own Aston Martin? But those aren't really sports car companies.

This has been a public service announcement.

Oh, and my gung fu is strong... strong enough to defend myself from you and your army of ninjas.

You may be right with the cars, it just seems as though all of our (UK) car manufacturers were at some point owned by either the Germans, or the Americans. Which, let's face it, they couldn't be any worse run than they were by UK management, or therein lack of, so I can't complain.

Your gung fu will NEVER defeat my army of samurai-monkey-ninjas! My TMA will defeat any of your sport orientated MMA any day of the week, and twice on Sundays! Sorry... Let's not go there again.

Apologies for creating an off-topic monster by the way.

Back on track. Ahem. MMA is better than TMA.

No it isn't TMA is better than MMA.

No it isn't MMA is better than TMA.

No it isn't TMA is better than MMA ad finitum.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

My TKD defeats all comers! I have my army of tiny tigers, little dragons, and nano-ninjas who swarm my enemies at my command, muahaha!! And my enemy never expects it, as they use their cuteness-chi power before the attack, muahaha!

And if that doesn't work, I use the black belt club: a billy club like weapon with a black belt wrapping the grip.

Daniel