Ring vs battlefield versions of MAs

[Grenadier]

Ladies and Gentlemen...

Once a warning has been issued by a forum staff member, we expect people to heed it.

Please keep this conversation civil. If you don't like what someone is saying, then use the ignore feature.

-Ronald Shin
-MT Assistant Administrator.

 

[Cyriacus]

Name ONE.....just one, TMA tournament in the USA from 1993-present time, that is more realistic than UFC 1-4 or even the current UFC's.

Russian Storm Fighting.

 

[DocThailand]

Muay Thai vs. Muay Boran

I have been in Martial Arts for 10 years and now Muay Thai for 20 years.

I just had a young man stay with me in Thailand for 3 months and he learned 3 amazing lessons in Muay Thai that he would have never learned in Muay Boran the Martial Arts form from Thailand.

1. You first Opponent in a Fight is YOUR Self.
2.
3.

Here is the Magazine Article on this =
Muay Thai Article … page 50 … wow !!
http://issuu.com/krabimagazine/docs/km_dec_2012

What do you think is the difference between battlefield versions of certain martial arts and their sporting counterparts?
Do you think the sport versions are more effective regardless of environment? Do you think the training of one is more effective?
Do you think the sport version limits its techniques in breadth and severity because of the artificial environment?
Do you think the gloves/mats play a significant role in which techniques are applicable as it's harder to break one's hand or easier to break one's fall?

Examples
Judo/bjj vs. jujitsu
Muay Thai vs. Muay Boran
Boxing vs. old bareknuckle boxing
greco/American wrestling vs. catch wrestling

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Chinto wrote:

Battlefield/SD arts such as Okinawan Karate, or Kungfu are much more effective then ring/sport styles. this is because there is not any consideration for the other guys safety when taught properly. Sports are sports, for entertainment and making money. War, and self defense arts are about disable or kill the attackers [emphasis added]

I am indeed intrigued when I read posters discuss the "battlefield" heritage of Okinawan karate. However the conventional wisdom is that karate was designed for empty-hand self-defense, one defender against a single unarmed attacker. Battlefield combat has always and will always rely on weapons, and teams of fighters. Battlefield fighting is not one against one. It is many against many. Any unarmed person on the battlefield that is misfortunate enough to face multiple armed enemies would have a very, very short life expectancy.

Battlefield combat has the goal of victory through the death of as many of the enemy as need be to ensure victory, along with the survival of as many as need be to ensure victory. Mankind has been smart enough for as long as we've been on the earth to utilize weapons when fighting for life on the battlefield.

I would be grateful if you could please elaborate on what you have written here. First, are there any historical sources you can cite to support this claim of battlefield origins of karate. I am interested if you know of any mention from the chroniclers of early karate (Funakoshi, Miyagi, Motobu, Nagamine, and others) that claim that what has been handed down as karate (hoju undo training, ti techniques including vital point striking and locking, and extensive practice of kata likely of Chinese origin) had battlefield origins.

Second, do you know of any examples of movements in karate that appear to be designed for battlefield combat.

Thank you.

 

[Flying Crane]

The classic "boxers fracture" is of the 4th or 5th metacarpal, (which are caused by just plain punching incorrectly) but the term can also include the 2nd and 3rd, especially if the fracture was caused by punching something.

yeah the 4th or 5th is a result of a hooking motion that lands on the pinkie side, on a hard target like the skull. But underneath it all I believe it comes from lots and lots of training with heavily wrapped and gloved hands, that allows the boxer to land punches incorrectly without injury. If he never trains his punches without all that protection, then he's at risk of a break if he ever needs to throw an unprotected punch. He has simply never developed the ability nor the knowledge of how to throw an effective unprotected punch without injury. The mechanics and proper striking surface and whatnot. Training with wraps and gloves interferes with that development.

Personally, I don't compete and I never train with wraps or gloves. When I hit the heavy bag, it's bare-knuckles, always. I want the feedback from the bag to tell me if I did something wrong, and to develop comfort and familiarity with what it feels like to hit something for real. If I ever need to defend myself, there's no time to wrap up and don the gloves.

 

[Mz1]

Russian Storm Fighting.

Not even close to MMA's brutality now in the UFC, let alone compared to UFC 1-4.

Look at all the padding that they're wearing. In the UFC, there's only mouthguard, thin gloves and a cup.

And it's ridiculously sloppy and not even in the USA.

 

[Mz1]

So you suggest going out full tilt and knocking people out or being knocked out?

I thought Chris Benoit was dead.

average sparring. Hard to explain to people who aren't from fighting gyms.

 

[Mz1]

Your confusing me with someone else. I've never described how I train in this thread or any conversation with you on this forum. Maybe you should re-read what you think I said.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

you too and stop Assuming.

 

[Tez3]

average sparring. Hard to explain to people who aren't from fighting gyms.

You are having credibility problems with those who do come from 'fighting' gyms. Of course what you mean is 'your' gym because it's the only one that is 'true'. Still when shown to pro fighters I know, your comments have proved a source of amusement simply because coming across as a fanboy is always amusing.

 

[Mz1]

Hmm, interesting. If you don't agree with what I say, I am lying. Seeing as the majority of your posts consist of telling everyone that they are wasting their time by doing anything other than MMA, arguing about what people think you said, or calling folks liars, I don't need to hear any more from you. Thankfully there is the ignore feature.

Uh what? Now you're just trying to change the subject because you can't follow through with your false allegations.

You were making accusations that Art Davies and Rorion Gracie were BIASED and stacked the tables against all others styles of MA competitors in order to give their BJJ the advantage in the early UFC's.

You merely made such accusations with providing any TECHNICAL proof to support any of this, ZERO. Not only did I call you on this, but I actually provided such technical arguments as to why you're wrong and how the rules were even changed (in the early UFC's) to make it more exciting yet hurting the BJJ/Grappler's strategies and favoring standup fighters.....even before being sanctioned by Nevada, which it is today and far more favors the standup fighters than ever.

 

[Mz1]

You are having credibility problems with those who do come from 'fighting' gyms. Of course what you mean is 'your' gym because it's the only one that is 'true'. Still when shown to pro fighters I know, your comments have proved a source of amusement simply because coming across as a fanboy is always amusing.

Nice try in trying to take what I wrote out of context. But I find you amusing too, like Joe Pesci in Good Fellas. And pro fighters, really? There are UFC champions and UFC contenders at some of the gyms I train at too. But what's the big deal. Anybody can train in the same gym, just sign the 1-year contract and pay the high dues. Or if they can't fight, just sign up to be a ring girl or cheerleader and embark on a journey of pretentiousness and name droppings, right?

 

[Tez3]

Nice try in trying to take what I wrote out of context. But I find you amusing too, like Joe Pesci in Good Fellas. And pro fighters, really? There are UFC champions and UFC contenders at some of the gyms I train at too. But what's the big deal. Anybody can train in the same gym, just sign the 1-year contract and pay the high dues. Or if they can't fight, just sign up to be a ring girl or cheerleader and embark on a journey of pretentiousness and name droppings, right?

I once alerted a PRO BOXER that one of his shoelaces were untied. Dang, I potentially saved him from serious injuries....wow, this must mean that I've "coached pro fighters" right? Now I can add coaching pro fighters, along with ring-girl and cheerleader to my resume now.

I love that you think I've been a 'ring girl' you really are being silly. As for cheer leading, my daughter is a cheer coach and I can say for certain you have absolutley no idea what they do.
We don't do contracts here for MMA gyms, nor are the fees high. You seem to be the perpetual Mr. Angry, so cocksure that you are the only one that is right, there's been warning for people to be polite on here yet you persist in calling people liars. What's with the rage?
As for taking what you said out of context, there was no context, you are intent on alienating everyone on here, you are intent on being the only person who 'know's MMA and you are intent on being someone who it is difficult to have a conversation with. The OP is about battlefield martial arts versus their sports counterparts. MMA has never been a battlefield art so it doesn't have a sporting equivilant, it is the sport. You continue to drag this back to MMA and how much you know about it, fine, keep thinking you know it all, you will come down to earth with a bump. I know what I do and I know what I know lol, I don't care what you think about me, because what you write reflects on you not me.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Originally Posted by Mz1
Name ONE.....just one, TMA tournament in the USA from 1993-present time, that is more realistic than UFC 1-4 or even the current UFC's.

I think this is the crux of the issue, and the problem you seem to be having with accepting the wisdom, experience and knowledge base of the members here that have been participating in this thread. While MMA is/can be wonderful training for those interested in this sport venue (and that is fine)...you seem to think of it as realistic. I'm not sure if you're really, thoughtfully considering what people have been saying to you in this thread. MMA, though a fine sport venue isn't realistic in terms of real world battlefield conditions/requirements or that of serious self-defense in general.

If the training requires a referee, it isn't realistic.
If the training has safety equipment, it isn't realistic.
If the training requires a limited skill set that is used against an opponent that has also agreed to the same limited skill set, it isn't realistic.
If the training is designed for a contest, where the opponents have agreed to meet at a specific, prearranged and agreed upon time, it isn't realistic.
If the training/competition takes place on a soft, level, dry surface that is free of obstructions and is well lit, it isn't realistic.
If the training allows time outs, tap outs, pep talks, advice from outsiders, it isn't realistic.
If the training doesn't allow the use of weapons, improvised weapons or the possibility that the opponent won't/can't use the same, it isn't realistic.
If the training is against a single opponent with no possibility of multiple opponents joining in, it isn't realistic.

This doesn't mean MMA sucks or isn't a viable pursuit of one's time. It means that MMA was designed for a purpose and that purpose is sport. Nothing wrong with that if that is your goal. But don't stretch it to cover something it was never designed to address. When you have people in this thread that have been in the martial arts for decades, have been/are soldiers or law enforcement or serious private citizens that gear their training towards SD, telling you that you are incorrect in what you're saying....you need to listen and not have a chip on your shoulder. Otherwise you're simply going to alienate yourself from those with more experience which is like cutting your nose off to spite your face. Be open and learn. That is what this board is all about and why it has been around as long as it has. Take advantage of this.

 

[chinto]

You are way off and should do your research first. I have all of these early UFCS in AVI. Early UFC's were never sanctioned. This was why they only held it in Colorado, Alabama, etc. Then there was outcries of brutality, probably started by Nevada's sanctioning bodies due to them not getting a piece of the action. Congressmen such as John McCain started pushing for the banning of the UFC and similar MMA organizations such as EFC, WCC, etc. Which even caused the UFC to go over to Japan and Brazil in order to conduct their tournaments.

UFC 1-4 allowed all head stomping, soccer kicking of heads of downed opponents, etc. Elbows to the back of the head was allowed. Headbutting, groin shots, etc. Throat strikes and eye jabs were fine....pretty much anything goes. Only eye gouging, fish hooking and biting caused a fine of $1,000 per infraction but did not stop the fight nor disqualified the fighter. The purse was $60,000 so that was more than enough to pay for these $1k infractions but still made it worthwhile should the fighters had to risk using such anti-rape tactics in order to win or get out of submissions.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/album.php?albumid=254&attachmentid=17505

Can you prove this? It's not BJJ's fault that it whooped up on all of those oblivious to ground fighting, including Judokas, wreslters, shoot-fighters, etc. who Gracie dominated.



How does an MMA fighter knocking you out and then stomping on your unconscious head until your skull caves in while on the battlefield not effective?

if as you say the rules were such, and I do not believe it, then the fighters agreed among themselves not to strike things like throats and not to cripple or kill. REAL FIGHTS LAST SECONDS! The military did a study from the time two men saw each other till a fight to the death was over in a hand to hand encounter was an averidge of less then 15 seconds! sport fights are just that. if you do not believe that look at fights in prisons and places. Even when an edged weapon is not involved its short and nasty. look at all the manslaughter cases out of drunken bar fights by untrained people that go to conviction every year in every state! people are a lot less unbreakable then you think.

So if as you say there were not any rules really, then the fighters themselves were effectively making them. I garentee you that most martial arts teach you techniques that kill very readily. Jujitsu, yes, Karate, yes, Kung fu, yes and the list goes on!

 

[Kong Soo Do]

REAL FIGHTS LAST SECONDS! The military did a study from the time two men saw each other till a fight to the death was over in a hand to hand encounter was an averidge of less then 15 seconds!

Absolutely yes! As I've mentioned before, a L.E. statistic is that an average fight (and I'm talking a real world fight with an attacker and someone the attacker believes is a victim) last 7 seconds with injury occurring in the first 3 seconds. This is very close to the above military study.

I garentee you that most martial arts teach you techniques that kill very readily. Jujitsu, yes, Karate, yes, Kung fu, yes and the list goes on!

Again, absolutely yes! One point along this line is joint manipulation. Before 'manipulation' was joint 'destruction'. The arts mentioned above and a plethora of others are designed to end the fight as quickly as possible by whatever method is appropriate to the situation.

 

[Flying Crane]

The military did a study from the time two men saw each other till a fight to the death was over in a hand to hand encounter was an averidge of less then 15 seconds! sport fights are just that.

I would need to see the study and how they collected the data. A fight to the death done hand-to-hand, as you describe it, is certainly not something that can be set up as an experiment. So it must be encounters reported by survivors and witnesses in military encounters. Such reports can be notoriously unreliable due to things like adrenaline and chaotic confusion and whatnot, particularly when accounting for the passage of time under heavy stress. It's not like there's a statistician and time-keeper accompanying every military unit to record such things.

 

[Cyriacus]

Not even close to MMA's brutality now in the UFC, let alone compared to UFC 1-4.

Look at all the padding that they're wearing. In the UFC, there's only mouthguard, thin gloves and a cup.

And it's ridiculously sloppy and not even in the USA.

Hehe.

Theyre wearing gear, therefore it isnt brutal. Right.

Ridiculously sloppy is where im amused. I thought experience in HARD SPARRING FOR KOS was more important than technique, according to you?

And it isnt in the USA, im aware of that. But it is something ongoing to the present day, unlike the old UFC. And im comparing the old UFC to it.

I never even implied such. Training helps, it's better than nothing. Like pretend-fighting in SD class, certainly is better than nothing. Training and being experienced in fighting is much better. Trying to really KO someone on a regular basis as part of training, is such experience. But it's not guaranteed to prevail in every situation....just gives you a much better chance of winning.

Well obviously, instinct and muscle memory would kick in. An experienced sports fighter would have way better chances than someone who only trains by pretend-fighting.

Which still goes back to the crux of my argument, which is an experienced sports fighter will still be better equipped due to having been pressure tested regularly under real conditions of duress (as possible) through sparring for full KO's.

I never argued against any of these points. Especially against the last one, which is an all or nothing, definitive one. My point has always been that training and fighting in MMA will better equip a person for H2H combat situations over most other styles, especially the TMA ones. But always carry at least a knife and a gun, whenever possible/legal.

They just got ridiculous when they keep boasting about how "real life" they were compared to MMA yet won't allow me to punch my sparring partner in the face hard (repeatedly) while he's trying to grab my wrist to pull a ninja-move during sparring. And I'd rather not waste my time doing lots of fluffy TMA kata and tap sparring when it's a lot more effective (and fun) to actually try to KO someone out for real.

Ok, so you're afraid to spar hard for KO's, that's fine. I'm not surprised based on your responses. We wear headgear. Yes, concussions do happen. This is part of being a fighter. You're more of a health & fitness and maybe some Asian fetish-type martial artist. I respect that. Just don't try to tell me how we shouldn't be sparring for KO's when you're not a fighter. Obviously you've never been in an MMA fighting gym. Heck, boxers have been sparring for KO's REGULARLY.....forever now and way before the UFC or MMA hit the scene. This is nothing unusual. Yet people who never fought before usually freak out when I purposefully use this phrase, "sparring for KO's".

This is average sparring in Boxing right here.....and this is LA Boxing, where it's mostly overweight women who comes in to hit the bag (sloppily) set to music, not even a hardcore Boxing gym.

Also, they dont always wear that much gear, and theyre allowed to hit each other in the back of the head, and the back.

Video 1 is less gear, video 2 is a higher level competition.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqvtcLjI23c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvPDXxXPEs4&list=FLT1x1p77Z4dyVVMwU-dj07Q

They also do sticks, knives, and a bunch of other stuff. Like bayonets.

How does an MMA fighter knocking you out and then stomping on your unconscious head until your skull caves in while on the battlefield not effective?

Im pretty sure you see them doing that a few times. In these Russian Storm Fighting videos.

Last one, but also the most important one:

It has the most kicks to the head when someones down, hits to the spine and back of the head, etc.
And i believe 1 or 2 neck cranks.
Also knees to the head, chokes with elbows, and so on and so forth.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Chinto wrote:

REAL FIGHTS LAST SECONDS! The military did a study from the time two men saw each other till a fight to the death was over in a hand to hand encounter was an averidge of less then 15 seconds! sport fights are just that. if you do not believe that look at fights in prisons and places. Even when an edged weapon is not involved its short and nasty. look at all the manslaughter cases out of drunken bar fights by untrained people that go to conviction every year in every state! people are a lot less unbreakable then you think.

I'd like to see that military study. I'm not buying it that weapons were not involved. In the military H2H is not empty hand, it is still with weapons. The is virtually zero likelihood that two soldiers on the battlefield, one from each side, BOTH not having any weapon. Military combat is armed combat. Soldiers use weapons, period.

I would also like see what statistics you are citing regarding manslaughter. I just did a quick google of "bar fights manslaugher".

Four of the first six articles described the death being the result of the head hitting the concrete. One was where the guy had been knocked down and he was kicked in the head repeatedly. One died a week later in a hospital.

There is no surprise here. When men fight, it often goes until one knocks out another, or it is broken up by the bouncer. And with the thousands of bar fights that occur every year between drunk and angry men, it should surprise nobody that sooner or later, some are going to smash their head on the floor, or some other object on the way down.

Fights in bathrooms are not uncommon, since it is easy to trap someone there by blocking the exit. Numerous deaths occur each year from heads that hit urinals on the way down. That's just what happens when you knock someone out. The weight of the body falling, provides enough kinetic energy to smash skulls when they strike hard objects. Human fists typically can't generate that amount of kinetic energy.

I would be real curious at the number of deaths that were directly attributeable to a strike delivered when the two people were standing. I would bet it is tiny.

By the way, I don't agree with much of anything Mz1 has written. He seems to imply again and again, that there is some relationship between MMA and armed combat. There is none. In armed combat, soldiers have weapons. And weapons are designed to be deadly. A small man can instantly kill a large one with a bladed weapon. Battlefield fighting equals armed combat. Period. End of story. There is no relationship between skill in armed combat, and skill in MMA. In MMA one needs to be able to take a punch. One needs to be able to resist a lock. If these were lethal, there would be no MMA. But in armed combat, no person's anatomy can resist a blade. All strikes are potentially lethal.

In MMA there are only one's body parts to fight with. And while sooner or later there will be a death from an incredibly good strike, by and large, men cannot quickly kill other trained men, of the same size or larger, with their hands. You need to knock the opponent out and then kill him, or take him down, and work towards a choke to kill him. Neither is quick, and neither is military, where a knife, a bullet, or a missile does the job with little effort.

 

[Mz1]

I love that you think I've been a 'ring girl' you really are being silly.

It's all about you right? I never said anything about you, because how could I when you've been trying to tell me how you're this hotshot MMA coach who coaches and corrects Pro MMA fighters all the time.

As for cheer leading, my daughter is a cheer coach and I can say for certain you have absolutley no idea what they do.

You're funny, like Joe Pesci.

We don't do contracts here for MMA gyms, nor are the fees high.

Maybe that explains why we have UFC title holders and top contenders. Do you have any?

You seem to be the perpetual Mr. Angry, so cocksure that you are the only one that is right, there's been warning for people to be polite on here yet you persist in calling people liars. What's with the rage?

Wait, I'm Mr. Angry? And are we allowed to use this term, "cocksure"?

As for taking what you said out of context, there was no context, you are intent on alienating everyone on here, you are intent on being the only person who 'know's MMA and you are intent on being someone who it is difficult to have a conversation with.

You're just making this up now. Show me where I said that I was the only one who knows MMA. If you have a problem with people who don't agree with most of the things you say, maybe it'll be better for your blood pressure to not read public forums. Or just put me on ignore. You're the one who sought out my posts to respond directly to them. I usually don't even bother reading what you post unless it quotes my posts.

The OP is about battlefield martial arts versus their sports counterparts. MMA has never been a battlefield art so it doesn't have a sporting equivilant, it is the sport. You continue to drag this back to MMA

You even typed out "martial arts versus their sports counterparts" yet you're complaining about how I "continue to drag this back to MMA"???

and how much you know about it, fine, keep thinking you know it all, you will come down to earth with a bump. I know what I do and I know what I know lol, I don't care what you think about me, because what you write reflects on you not me.

Ok, then stop engaging in dialogue with me.

 

[Mz1]

I think this is the crux of the issue, and the problem you seem to be having with accepting the wisdom, experience and knowledge base of the members here that have been participating in this thread. While MMA is/can be wonderful training for those interested in this sport venue (and that is fine)...you seem to think of it as realistic. I'm not sure if you're really, thoughtfully considering what people have been saying to you in this thread. MMA, though a fine sport venue isn't realistic in terms of real world battlefield conditions/requirements or that of serious self-defense in general.

If the training requires a referee, it isn't realistic.
If the training has safety equipment, it isn't realistic.
If the training requires a limited skill set that is used against an opponent that has also agreed to the same limited skill set, it isn't realistic.
If the training is designed for a contest, where the opponents have agreed to meet at a specific, prearranged and agreed upon time, it isn't realistic.
If the training/competition takes place on a soft, level, dry surface that is free of obstructions and is well lit, it isn't realistic.
If the training allows time outs, tap outs, pep talks, advice from outsiders, it isn't realistic.
If the training doesn't allow the use of weapons, improvised weapons or the possibility that the opponent won't/can't use the same, it isn't realistic.
If the training is against a single opponent with no possibility of multiple opponents joining in, it isn't realistic.

This doesn't mean MMA sucks or isn't a viable pursuit of one's time. It means that MMA was designed for a purpose and that purpose is sport. Nothing wrong with that if that is your goal. But don't stretch it to cover something it was never designed to address. When you have people in this thread that have been in the martial arts for decades, have been/are soldiers or law enforcement or serious private citizens that gear their training towards SD, telling you that you are incorrect in what you're saying....you need to listen and not have a chip on your shoulder. Otherwise you're simply going to alienate yourself from those with more experience which is like cutting your nose off to spite your face. Be open and learn. That is what this board is all about and why it has been around as long as it has. Take advantage of this.

The MMA fighting that lead to the KO or to the ref stoppage is no different than trying to kill someone on the battlefield with your bare hands. Choking someone out is, trying to kill them. If it were on the battlefield, the same choke would kill them just as well as the multiple soccer kicks to their head once KO'ed or something. Fighting is fighting.

If you want to talk about realism then, pretend fighting and not sparring for full knockouts on a regular basis is a lot more deficient in testing out whether you're worth anything when that time comes. It's almost like Larping. Most combat vets in the past 20 years never even fought hand to hand to the death on the battlefield. Most never even swung their rifles nor stabbed anyone with their bayonets. Which is why the military doesn't even waste too much time focusing on H2H. Why would it when they've got M4's and 200+ rounds of ammo, grenades, air support, etc.

And being old doesn't necessarily make anyone more knowledgeable.