So, then, the answer to the OP is yes, MMA does work in an actual fight. Whew, I'm sure glad we hammered that one out in only 192 posts!
No, actually. The answer is "it might"... but there are also enough gaps to mean there can't be a straight yes/no answer. It provides a particular fighting skill, geared towards a particular form of fighting, but that's about as clear as you can be, frankly.
see I just don't agree with at all that the moves are not important nor are they what "work"..... Infact I don't even know what that means.
Yeah, I get that you don't follow what I'm saying... I'll see if I can describe it better for you. Firstly, the idea of techniques not being important... provided they're relatively solid/mechanically sound (you're not trying to block a sword with your forearm, for example... and yes, that's a real example....), then there really isn't much of importance to them. Whether you apply a full RNC, or a kata hagai jime, or a half choke, or whatever, really doesn't matter. If you hit the temple, or the point of the chin, or the solar plexus, and the other guy goes down, the technique really doesn't matter. It's not important at all. It's just a single possible interaction that can occur. If the technique was the important thing, everyone would be doing the same.
From there we get to the idea of the techniques not being what "works"... well, the first thing you have to look at is what it means for something to "work" in the first place. Of course, the standard response to that is "it's effective"... okay, effective at what? Let's keep it where you think things are, and just look at a violent encounter... you're looking at a choke, or a punch, or an armbar being what is "effective"... but how do you get that armbar on in the first place? How does the punch have an opportunity to land? How do you get to a place where you can choke? And, if you're in a place where you can choke, can you do other things? Could you hit from that position? Or move into some other hold? Obviously, the answer is yes.
So what's important isn't the technique itself... what you do is kinda by-the-by, really. What's important is the tactical application of it... and the ability to put things together in a way that allow the techniques to work. If you don't have the ability to actually enable the techniques, the techniques won't mean a thing. The idea of getting caught up in "this technique, this armbar, this choke" is honestly a very basic, to my mind, beginner mentality. When you first learn a language, you want to know the words... but that doesn't let you speak it. The grammar, the sentence structure does. This is no different.
I do think having real fight experience is important for sure, I've stated a couple times that I think an average BJJ Blue Belt would have issues with an athletic, tough street fighter.
That of course begs the question of whether a contrived sporting encounter is really "real fight experience". It is, but it's only experience at one type of fight. And not necessarily the most valid for all contexts.
But I gotta ask.... "an athletic, tough street fighter"? What do you actually think they'd be like?
well when I speak of Self Defense I'm talking about being able to defend yourself against an attacker. moves that will help you defend yourself. You are maybe talking about escape and deescalation, etc. while it have been talking about actual contact, when the attack or fight is going to happen.
Honestly, I don't think you understand just what these attacks are like... and that's the issue. I've asked before, but I'll ask again (can't remember if I asked you or Kofo, really)... what do you know of social violence and asocial violence? Because, while a fair bit of what I am talking about as needing to be covered for actual self defence training includes things like escape and de-escalation, it's also about understanding and recognising the realities of different forms of violence, rather than sticking to a single form (and, before you misunderstand that, I'm really not meaning "striking vs grappling" or anything of the kind when I talk about different forms of violence).
You yourself have stated there are no SD martial arts for today's world, so why not take the best fighting art out there? MMA! And work from there.
Because that's not the same. It's like saying there's no teacher in my area for guitar, so why not learn the flute and figure guitar out from that? They're both musical instruments, and both play notes... but that's where it ends. Additionally, you're making one hell of a leap there... frankly, MMA is only the best fighting art for MMA competition. That's it. There is nothing that makes it "the best" in any other context. So the assumption of that being your best place to start is already somewhat off base (there are much better arts for self defence, really...) to begin with.
Could be, but MMA is trained at much more intense pace than many other martial arts and there is a lot more hard sparring, cardio, toughness. Etc.
Er... you think so, do you? Hmm....
Really, all MMA is in terms of it's training methodology, is geared towards MMA's aims of success in MMA competition. Cardio just isn't that important in self defence... sparring can be detrimental, when it all comes down to it... and as for "toughness", all I can say is "HA!"
Im not sure why you would be offended by someone saying for a street fight it doesn't matter how hard you train if the art you train isn't realistic for SD or fighting. I didn't mention "all TMA's or even Krav". I wasn't putting down TMA's in.
I think the implication that MMA is it and a bit, when that's simply not the case, is at the heart of it....
The context I was addressing was the technique isn't important if you're training hard in regards to fight.
Yeah... but you didn't get what was meant, of course...
Thee are many great reasons to train all martial arts I'm sure, but in this context if the techniques of the art don't work well in an actual fight, it doesn't matter how hard you train them.
The problems are that that is not the only context, and that "work well in an actual fight" is hardly a single answer issue. What kind of fight? What do you mean "works"? And, of course, what is the actual aim of the hard training?
I have delt delt with plenty of "MMA" fighters and gyms that trained there asses off to fight on my MMA shows and they get there asses handed to them because they are not training what works or training under a guy who doesn't know his stuff, doesn't mean I'm "disrespecting" MMA. Just means hard work isn't going to trump training techniques and arts that actually work.
Yeah... there's that "what works" thing again... Look, the thing is that this is so vague as to be completely meaningless.
Its funny, just because I'm an advocate for MMA & BJJ doesn't mean I don't like and respect all arts .
You hide it well.
So technique is not important?
Ultimately? Nope.
So technique is important?
On a basic level (in that the techniques need to be mechanically sound), yeah.
Technique is always important, if you have horrible technique then the technique you use will be ineffective and won't very well work no matter how hard you train.
No, not really. Techniques are simply the way that the actual important parts are applied.
Good grief! 207 posts and we have finally agreed that technique is important. :idunno:
Ha, nah, I don't agree with that...