Sport And TMA....Again
- Thread starter MJS
- Start date
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
So groin shots work? I seem to recall about 50 pages ago someone saying groin shots and biting and neck shots don't work.
Keith Hackney is the guy with the sweet mullet, punching the guy in the red trunks in the groin repeatedly.
Did you miss my post regarding the "rules" of the early UFC's
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Its not that they don't work, it's that they shouldn't be relied on to get you out of sticky situations. There are more efficient (and smarter ways) to get out of holds, mounts, and control positions. Furthermore, its risky to do "dirty tactics" when you don't have the dominant position.
As Bas Rutten says "I got you in a choke, you bite my arm, I snap your neck."
Yes. :ea72:
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Yeah smartest way to get out of it is to not get in it in the first place.
Also if bas has me in a choke around me teeth its not much of a choke. He's a silly man
There were 4 UFC's that could be classified as no rules (even though the were some), after they started adding rules which brought the competition further away from the art versus art format. So 40 martial artists fought in the first 4 UFC's, how many martial arts schools were around in 1993? How many people were doing martial arts in 1993? So 40 out of literally hundreds of martial arts schools and millions of martial artists is insignificant in terms of sample size (and so is the amiount of people who have competed in the UFC as a whole for that matter). In the first UFC Royce Gracie defeated only 3 people and somehow that is offered up as proof the BJJ beats everything?
I think you might have the wrong guy. I'm the one that said the first UFCs were real tests, or close to real. In those first fights the other fighters had a reasonable chance but to say there were no rules is a little bit out. Despite the fact that you were technically allowed to use a downward elbow to the spine, would anyone really do it in a sport setting knowing that the guy you hit could be crippled for life? Given the opportunity would you drive your elbow into his temple knowing that you might kill him? So there were rules, even if unwritten.
My arguement was that after the rules were introduced the contest was turned the way of the grappler. So I hope you can see I was not ignoring anything and you used a lot of exclamation marks unnecessarily.
:asian:
He won. If you care to go back through the thread you will find where I posted the whole fight. After pounding the groin Hackney reached up and started squeezing Son's larynx. That was the end of the fight and pretty much the end of the no rules bit.
:asian:
frank raud
Master of Arts
1993 called and ask for it's thread back.
Have you a time machine? We are only up to 1215. Perhaps you could let us know how the thread progressed, was Hanzou finally banned, did we pass 200 pages and did we ever resolve the issue?
:asian:
lklawson
Grandmaster
I'll tell you why, but you may not find the answer particularly helpful or satisfying.
The term "Martial Art" is a western civilization term which predates the introduction of Asian martial arts to the west. Dating back to Medieval times and going up past the Renaissance, the term "art" was applied to "skills," both mental and physical. A highly skilled brick layer would be an "artist" skilled in the "art" of brick laying. Not because his brick laying is beautiful or is conveying a message, emotion, commentary, or any other stuff that we now think "art" is supposed to do, but because it is a skill that is better expressed the more skillfully it is performed. Philosophers were skilled in the "arts" of philosophy. Fighters were skilled in the "arts" of "Mars."
Ju Jutsu is the "gentle skills." Karate is "Chinese Hand/Empty Hand."
Fencing is the "Art of Defense."
Is an Electrician's work a form of self expression? If you answer 'yes' then so is a martial art.
Which is an unfortunate misunderstanding of the way "martial art" was applied to what we should now refer to as "martial skills" or, better yet, "fighting skills."
That would allow us to go back to arguing with each other about what a "real fight" is and whether or not System X, Y, or Z is any good for it.
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
lklawson
Grandmaster
What about the Gracie in action fights and the open Gracie Challenge? Thing is we can sit back with our heads in the sand saying "nothing is proven! Nothing is proven!" Or we can look at a clan that put together an art and challenged the martial arts world with it. No more hyperbole, no more talk, no more nonsense, no more death touches and no more "chi". Just fighting and testing.
and it's fine if certain arts didn't want to take the challenge, didn't feel a need to etc. but if you wanted to deny GJJ's claims. There was an open format to do it, for real.
And maybe it's just the way I was brought up in the fighting world. It was a very practical, no nonsense type of fight training. First with a bonafide street fighter, then a JKD specialist that allowed open expression, then the era of the Gracie Challenge and style vs style actually fighting. Then Catch Wrestling, MMA standup, No Gi BJJ/Judo and straight BJJ.
sorry but the whole my art or my moves are to deadly and dangerous nonsense just doesn't fly anymore.
sorry but the whole my art or my moves are to deadly and dangerous nonsense just doesn't fly anymore.
Similar threads
