More mma bashing....

[Spinedoc]

Does anyone else here find it ironic that the OP is complaining about "MMA bashing", yet many of the replies in this thread (and many others) are bashing more traditional martial arts? IE; "they don't train like us, and don't fight in a ring like us, therefore their art is not as good". I find this slightly amusing. LOL.

Mike

 

[RTKDCMB]

I think the whole "my art's deadly techniques aren't allowed in the ring" argument is a bit silly.

Most of the time when that argument is made it is made by a ring sport/combat art person about the 'too deadly' art.

 

[Transk53]

Does anyone else here find it ironic that the OP is complaining about "MMA bashing", yet many of the replies in this thread (and many others) are bashing more traditional martial arts? IE; "they don't train like us, and don't fight in a ring like us, therefore their art is not as good". I find this slightly amusing. LOL.

Mike

Ironic perhaps, but here it would be normal from my own personal viewpoint.

 

[Mephisto]

Does anyone else here find it ironic that the OP is complaining about "MMA bashing", yet many of the replies in this thread (and many others) are bashing more traditional martial arts? IE; "they don't train like us, and don't fight in a ring like us, therefore their art is not as good". I find this slightly amusing. LOL.

Mike

Yeah, it was me complaining about this guy in the blog complaining. It's kind of funny but obviously it's made a fairly interesting discussion topic. For the record, I'm only referring to TMA guys like the one in the blog that view mma as ineffective for the street or in the words of the blogger "horrible for pressure testing". If you are willing to admit that mma is one valid approach to self defense your in the same boat as me. Some believe that mma is terrible for self defense and that they are better off without sparring, these guys actually believe compliant drills are superior for learning self defense. there are many TMA guys who like mma and see its value as a training approach, I'm not lumping all TMA together here.

 

[Steve]

Why is this so important to you? Why does it matter that others don't agree with you? And frankly, I really don't think you have given up trying to change others opinions.

Totally agree. I tried to make this point earlier. It's ABSOLUTELY okay for people to have different opinions. And there's nothing wrong with trying to influence someone's opinions or bring someone around to your way of thinking. Often, though, that is a sure path to frustration. And typically, changing one's opinion is something for everyone else to do. People advocating that other people change their opinions are very unlikely EVER to budge from their own position. It's human nature.

Sometimes martial artists that purport to teach self defense outside the ring fail completely at that purpose.

The author of this article is one such example.

Absolutely. This just appears to be another person with little actual experience in something claiming to be an expert.

Absolutely but you can still pressure test a street system. Either by sparring in some manner or by fighting people. Otherwise without some sort of grounding you confuse what should be with what is.

Confirmation bias i think is the term.

If the instructor is a real expert, then he/she should be able to bring a student to the point where they can independently demonstrate proficiency. In other words, the teacher should be an expert. But at some point, as a student, I need to stand on my own and demonstrate proficiency independent of my instructor. It's perfectly valid to say, "This system is legimate and useful because my instructor can demonstrate that it works." This is not, however, the same as saying, "I can make this sytem work." And unless you have established yourself as an expert, independent of your instructor, you shouldn't (IMO) consider teaching the system. That's trouble.

Does anyone else here find it ironic that the OP is complaining about "MMA bashing", yet many of the replies in this thread (and many others) are bashing more traditional martial arts? IE; "they don't train like us, and don't fight in a ring like us, therefore their art is not as good". I find this slightly amusing. LOL.

Mike

I chuckle every time I open the thread. But, it's kind of a circular thing. I mean, even the statement, "Another example of a TMA guy bashing MMA," is perceived by some as bashing TMA.

Yeah, it was me complaining about this guy in the blog complaining. It's kind of funny but obviously it's made a fairly interesting discussion topic. For the record, I'm only referring to TMA guys like the one in the blog that view mma as ineffective for the street or in the words of the blogger "horrible for pressure testing". If you are willing to admit that mma is one valid approach to self defense your in the same boat as me. Some believe that mma is terrible for self defense and that they are better off without sparring, these guys actually believe compliant drills are superior for learning self defense. there are many TMA guys who like mma and see its value as a training approach, I'm not lumping all TMA together here.

This is an extremely important distinction. Some MMA guys are complete a-holes. Some BJJ guys, some TKD guys and so on and so on. We shouldn't feel compelled to own the a-holes within our own systems. And the term TMA is so broad and poorly defined that it's pointless for anyone to take umbrage at its use.

 

[ShotoNoob]

Does anyone else here find it ironic that the OP is complaining about "MMA bashing", yet many of the replies in this thread (and many others) are bashing more traditional martial arts? IE; "they don't train like us, and don't fight in a ring like us, therefore their art is not as good". I find this slightly amusing. LOL.

Mike

|
All this bashing talk comes across to me as wanting to sound important to the world by posting opinionated text on a forum board.
|
I feel MMA makes a great laboratory to test one's anyone's martial arts concepts & skills in a condoned, full contact environment.
|
In the shoes of an MMA competitor, you are facing a guy who is determined to punch or maybe kick you into UN-fightable condition,
GNP you to same, or choke or lock your body into non-usable form. To me, there's a physical confrontation that's definitely one of 'pressure testing.'
|
As a traditional karateka, the style vs. style debate makes MMA particularly interesting. Prime examples of karate-based fighters are two well-known UFC competitors, Lyoto Machida & "Wonderboy" Thompson."
|
A favorite bout of mine there, was the Thompson vs. Brown UFC fight, where Wonderboy lost. My concern, from viewing Wonderboy's pre-fight open workout vid, was that his sport-based exhibition wouldn't be strong enough to handle Brown's "in-your-face" aggression.
Results proved my fears. As a karateka, was rooting for Wonderboy all the way; Brown got the deserved win.

 

[hoshin1600]

"i dont belive in styles anymore,,unless human being have three arms and four legs, we will have a different form or fighting. but basically we only have two hands and two feet. so styles not only begin to separate man, because they have their own doctrines and the doctrine became the gospel truth"
Bruce Lee

for myself i have made this my own belief. i dont belive in styles. when i read or hear conversation like this thread i often think of two little boys arguing over who's daddy can beat up the others daddy.
every art form has its own end result purpose as a guiding factor in its training. MMA wants to win in the octagon. RBS looks at street defense. TMA varies but also has its own image of what it is aiming for as an end result. each art and practice has its own unique tool box. some of these tools over lap and some are unique to that tool box. what i see, is people arguing over both tool sets in an attempt to validate their own beliefs.
all systems or tool boxes include a basic punch. if that punch is truly valid then it should be valid under any circumstance and any venue. the same punch will work on the street and in the octagon, with weapons or without or one adversary or multiple opponents. if a basic punch does not work in any one venue then it probably will not work in any.
any true comparison should always be apples to apples and oranges to oranges. it is futile to compare eye gouges to double leg take downs and a sticky hands drill to a rubber guard. this is like rock, paper, scissors. anyone can beat anyone on any given day. the argument that MMA doesnt allow eye gouges is quite frankly a dumb premise and so is the idea that a TMA guy wouldnt stand a chance in the octagon. both statements are at the same time true and false on any given day.
The underlying problem is that each person has their own internal vision of what reality is "their systems doctrine has become their truth". when one persons vision of reality clashes with what another person holds as their reality there is a conflict that each person has the need to "defend" and protect their reality that they have created and invested so much time and energy into. people need to defend their own "truth" for fear that if there is one small crack in that belief than maybe, possibly there is flaw in the entire "truth".
this causes conflict here in the forums and in the world as a whole. Christians and Muslims are indeed guilty of this.

the quote of "never talk about religion or politics in polite company" should probably add martial arts to the list.
.

 

[Transk53]

"i dont belive in styles anymore,,unless human being have three arms and four legs, we will have a different form or fighting. but basically we only have two hands and two feet. so styles not only begin to separate man, because they have their own doctrines and the doctrine became the gospel truth"
Bruce Lee

for myself i have made this my own belief. i dont belive in styles. when i read or hear conversation like this thread i often think of two little boys arguing over who's daddy can beat up the others daddy.
every art form has its own end result purpose as a guiding factor in its training. MMA wants to win in the octagon. RBS looks at street defense. TMA varies but also has its own image of what it is aiming for as an end result. each art and practice has its own unique tool box. some of these tools over lap and some are unique to that tool box. what i see, is people arguing over both tool sets in an attempt to validate their own beliefs.
all systems or tool boxes include a basic punch. if that punch is truly valid then it should be valid under any circumstance and any venue. the same punch will work on the street and in the octagon, with weapons or without or one adversary or multiple opponents. if a basic punch does not work in any one venue then it probably will not work in any.
any true comparison should always be apples to apples and oranges to oranges. it is futile to compare eye gouges to double leg take downs and a sticky hands drill to a rubber guard. this is like rock, paper, scissors. anyone can beat anyone on any given day. the argument that MMA doesnt allow eye gouges is quite frankly a dumb premise and so is the idea that a TMA guy wouldnt stand a chance in the octagon. both statements are at the same time true and false on any given day.
The underlying problem is that each person has their own internal vision of what reality is "their systems doctrine has become their truth". when one persons vision of reality clashes with what another person holds as their reality there is a conflict that each person has the need to "defend" and protect their reality that they have created and invested so much time and energy into. people need to defend their own "truth" for fear that if there is one small crack in that belief than maybe, possibly there is flaw in the entire "truth".
this causes conflict here in the forums and in the world as a whole. Christians and Muslims are indeed guilty of this.

the quote of "never talk about religion or politics in polite company" should probably add martial arts to the list.
.

That is actually quite understandable and you pose good points. Especially the latter.

 

[Spinedoc]

That is actually quite understandable and you pose good points. Especially the latter.

Yep, to me, the argument about MMA vs TMA vs ?? is akin to two highly trained tennis players executing perfect shots from opposite ends of two completely separate tennis courts.

 

[Spinedoc]

Yep, to me, the argument about MMA vs TMA vs ?? is akin to two highly trained tennis players executing perfect shots from opposite ends of two completely separate tennis courts.

Shout out to Tim Minchin for that analogy….brilliant Aussie that man is.

 

[Transk53]

Yep, to me, the argument about MMA vs TMA vs ?? is akin to two highly trained tennis players executing perfect shots from opposite ends of two completely separate tennis courts.

Yeah but that would be a sniper shot!

 

[ShotoNoob]

for myself i have made this my own belief. i dont belive in styles. when i read or hear conversation like this thread i often think of two little boys arguing over who's daddy can beat up the others daddy.
every art form has its own end result purpose as a guiding factor in its training. MMA wants to win in the octagon. RBS looks at street defense. TMA varies but also has its own image of what it is aiming for as an end result. each art and practice has its own unique tool box. some of these tools over lap and some are unique to that tool box. what i see, is people arguing over both tool sets in an attempt to validate their own beliefs.
all systems or tool boxes include a basic punch. if that punch is truly valid then it should be valid under any circumstance and any venue. the same punch will work on the street and in the octagon, with weapons or without or one adversary or multiple opponents. if a basic punch does not work in any one venue then it probably will not work in any.

|
First all, I hate it when martial artists constantly quote Bruce Lee, who now in the MMA world has been replaced by ugh, Greg Jackson. We have the same thing, particular in my style of traditional karate with all sorts of instructors denoting themselves not just Masters, but Grand Masters, some even akin to the Supreme Grand Master. If Bruce Lee represented any ideal, it was INDIVIDUAL expression of marital art concepts.
|
Second, Bruce Lee was famous for his ongoing criticisms of traditional karates such a I practice. He referred to the traditional karate's as the "classical mess." Bruce Less then went on to demonstrate the superiority of his approach over the traditional karates, boxing, etc. in his demonstrations & most clearly in his films. So then you write that style doesn't matter after you quote Bruce Lee???
|
Again, I realize this is a discussion forum, but consistency in thought is important.... if you want to get your point across to instructor-level members. Replace "arguing" with "evaluation" and your post will then be a solid jumping off point for your views.

 

[ShotoNoob]

Yep, to me, the argument about MMA vs TMA vs ?? is akin to two highly trained tennis players executing perfect shots from opposite ends of two completely separate tennis courts.

|
Right, that is exactly how people come to the conclusions that Hoshin1600 complained about in the post you quoted. Analogies like yours make for clever cocktail talk are only vague rhetoric. This is exactly the significance of the legacy of Gichin Funakoshi who designed an exacting curriculum and a highly detailed syllabus on training traditional karate arts.
|
Even Greg Jackson, who I'm not fond of, is known for his detailed compendium of MMA techniques taken from different fighting styles, and his analytical decision-tree work, competitor specific.
|
The suggestion that somehow MMA & TMA are in some kind of separate, exclusive environment is ridiculous. The fact that one is a sport and one is a mental discipline doesn't mean an MMA competitor can't overcome a karateka in the Octagon, or vice versa. Physical conflict is the union.

 

[Spinedoc]

|
Right, that is exactly how people come to the conclusions that Hoshin1600 complained about in the post you quoted. Analogies like yours make for clever cocktail talk are only vague rhetoric. This is exactly the significance of the legacy of Gichin Funakoshi who designed an exacting curriculum and a highly detailed syllabus on training traditional karate arts.
|
Even Greg Jackson, who I'm not fond of, is known for his detailed compendium of MMA techniques taken from different fighting styles, and his analytical decision-tree work, competitor specific.
|
The suggestion that somehow MMA & TMA are in some kind of separate, exclusive environment is ridiculous. The fact that one is a sport and one is a mental discipline doesn't mean an MMA competitor can't overcome a karateka in the Octagon, or vice versa. Physical conflict is the union.

That was exactly the point of my metaphorical example. Which you missed.

 

[ShotoNoob]

THE MACHIDA LEGACY:
|
The last 2 posters I quoted get A+ for presenting discussions arguments. Great for stirring the pot so to speak. How about this to focus the issue....
|
When Machida came into the MMA arena & confounded so many competitors (& their MMA trainers), we didn't observe Machida doing so by tactically punching basically the same as those he defeated. To the serious MMA observer / trainer, the question is why is Machida prevailing? Particularly when the traditonal karate base is in the definite minority of competitors and even rarer when you look at the MMA training schools such as the much lauded Greg Jackson / Mike Winkeljohn & Co.

 

[ShotoNoob]

That was exactly the point of my metaphorical example. Which you missed.

|
No you missed. Since karate & MMA come together in the Octagon, the tennis court is then the same.
|
The cleverness is in the eye of the beholder. The competence rests in the curriculum, where I gave Gichin Funakosi for karate and Greg Jackson for MMA. Are the underlying principles the same, different, share commonalites, exclusive, one or some more or less developed than another and in what way.
|
Again your metaphor a great jumping off point.... nodded to by many no doubt.

 

[ShotoNoob]

UFC 60: MATT HUGHES VS. ROYCE GRACIE.
|
I'm not a personal fan of the MMA approach, just like I personally don't practice Shotokan karate. However, the larger view is that I do study Shotokan and I really thought this match was a fascinating case study for MMA.
|
Again, Royce Gracie was another 'guru,' the champion of the BJJ revolution. BJJ was the "it" style for MMA. Practically unbeatable, with all pointing to the great success of Royce Gracie who all the TMA strikers wilted in front of ...... YEAH.
|
What a I loved about this bout, was that MH, a MMA boxer / wrestler, basically sailed right through RG's defense (if you can call it that) and flattened him like a pancake with GNP wrestling, finishing RC with yes, a submission! So much for big name gurus....
|
I'm not interested in tennis courts, but in what tools & techniques, conditioning, etc, Hughes used to make mincemeat of the 'invincible' Gracie.

 

[ShotoNoob]

BASH MMA NO WAY!
|
I'm convinced TMA is better than MMA in theory. That's my view. Bash MMA, heck no! these MMA competitors train a valid method of fighting and many are highly dedicated, such as Matt Hughes--prime example. The Gracie's popularized BJJ, which brought a greater functionality & application, certainly in some respects, than did say certain interpretations of the Japanese grappling arts. Certainly BJJ has become more widely accepted in the sporting world of MMA.
|
Again, the take on bashing appeals to an audience, it goes flat with me. My concern with MMA is safety, not it's validity as a sporting style or a fighting / self defense style.

 

[Steve]

|
Right, that is exactly how people come to the conclusions that Hoshin1600 complained about in the post you quoted. Analogies like yours make for clever cocktail talk are only vague rhetoric. This is exactly the significance of the legacy of Gichin Funakoshi who designed an exacting curriculum and a highly detailed syllabus on training traditional karate arts.
|
Even Greg Jackson, who I'm not fond of, is known for his detailed compendium of MMA techniques taken from different fighting styles, and his analytical decision-tree work, competitor specific.
|
The suggestion that somehow MMA & TMA are in some kind of separate, exclusive environment is ridiculous. The fact that one is a sport and one is a mental discipline doesn't mean an MMA competitor can't overcome a karateka in the Octagon, or vice versa. Physical conflict is the union.

What's your deal with Greg Jackson? Did he in some way personally insult you? You bring him up negatively in just about every post you write, whether it makes sense or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[drop bear]

Bruce Less then went on to demonstrate the superiority of his approach over the traditional karates, boxing, etc. in his demonstrations & most clearly in his films. So then you write that style doesn't matter after you quote Bruce Lee???

I am not sure he ever actually did that.