The "Reality" of UFC/NHB fighting, pressure testing sports moves, and the Real World.

[RoninPimp]

As someone, I believe Andrew said, there are ways to train for that safely. A quality instructor has the tools and knowledge to do so.

Gun disarms - use paint ball guns (with proper eye protection and the guns chronoed). Hurts like a SOB up close. Safe, but immediate feedback.

Knife work - use a hard rubber or dull metal trainer. You feel it, you'd be cut. You don't have to train with live steel, but as if it were live steel.

Multiple opponents - realize that if they clinch you, it's a boot party and your head is the dance floor. Work on divide, separate, avoid techniques. Yes, running like hell is a valid self defense technique.

Eyes, Groin, etc - Goggles, RedMan suits, etc. The cops don't play patty cake, the marines sure don't. Why should you?

Am I making sense here?

In the end, you can train for most situations. But, until you need to really use it, not just 'test with rules', no one knows for certain. Thats the pucker factor. When there is no tap backs, time outs, or DQ's.

-So are you for the sport training method then? Because that's what you listed. The MMA training method is the empty hands version for what you listed.

 

[RoninPimp]

My style works.

I'm still here.

Last fight wore out a pair of nikes, and ended up with a black eye and damn sore jaw. Left an impression on my opponent. He tasted awful btw. It's interesting how someone will often let you go when in a fight, you grab their groin and purr at them.

-So your style works because you're here. What about everybosy else that's still here? Must be dumb luck huh? Strange logic indeed...

 

[RoninPimp]

Talk to guys like Hoch Hochheim, Mark Hatmaker, Jim McCann and Tim Tackett. They train people to survive, not just win a match.

-I've seen some of Hock's material. It aint that impressive.

 

[RoninPimp]

Bottom line:
Yes, there are overlaps. But anything with rules is limited in it's effectiveness to test effectiveness.

NHB/UFC/Kendo/Fencing/Karate Tournaments/etc. All are a great way to test yourself and have fun within a particular set of guidelines and rules. Yes, the things that work in that environment can work in the street, IF! one trains to pull them off in the manner needed in that environment. There are ways to do that, safely. But pretending that what works in a cage fight 1 on 1 will work against 3 weapon wielding attackers is pure stupidity. Unfortunately, too many hot bloods seem to feel that their sport fighting is just as good as, or better than the stuff done by guys who do train for the real no-rules world.

-Who has ever pretended that MMA will work against 3 weapon weilding attackers? That is a strawman. The fact of the matter is outside of a firearm, 3 guys with weapons always win against one.

 

[Rich Parsons]

-Who has ever pretended that MMA will work against 3 weapon weilding attackers? That is a strawman. The fact of the matter is outside of a firearm, 3 guys with weapons always win against one.

Ronin et al,

While the intelligent MMA practitioners know this. While the intelligent people not in MMA also recognize this as well.

It is always the few who want what they are studying to be the BEST and unbeatable. Adn they figuratively beat their chests and posture about how this specifically will be the end all or is the end all.

I would add even if three opponents with boots are a major problem when you are on the ground. Weapons just make it that much worse.


Good Points being made here. Thank you guys please keep it coming.

 

[RoninPimp]

I do not believe that fighting in the ring prepares you any better for real life fighting than true traditional Martial arts training.

-It's not about getting in the ring. Its about "pressure testing" techniques in training so you actually know they work. The evidence is overwelming that many traditional MA techniques don't work that well.

As for pressure testing by going out an picking fights, that is dangerous and will eventually get those who partake in that activity seriously hurt, thrown in jail or worse.

There is always someone out there that is bigger, stronger, meaner, luckier, crazier or better trained. And if your goal is to go out and pick fights to see how good you are eventually you will run into one of these people. And if you are real lucky you will only have a brief hospital stay.

-Nobody I know would ever advocate that.

Training is important very important, but the goal of training, at least in traditional martial arts, should be for more than fighting. Yes it is part of it, but so are self-knowledge, self-cultivations, self-confidence and just plain physical fitness and health.

-Those things are great and I agree, but they are very subjective things. And aren't true for everybody. Those things are also a part of just about every sport from boxing to surfing.

Training good, pressure testing bad, that is my point.

-They are one in the same and I think that's where some of the confusion lies. Pressure testing does NOT mean seaking out violence.

There are no bad martial arts

-This is the typical PC kind of answer. I disagree. Some produce fighters, other just produce dancers.

 

[RoninPimp]

>They empiracly show what works one on one with no weapon>

Has anyone thought of comparing MMA tactics systematically to what actually happens in street assaults? I've seen a fair number of these, and very few of them bore any resemblance to a MMA bout. "Ground and pound" does happen on the street, and bouncers do use submission holds to convince aggressive drunks to cooperate, but otherwise there's very little connection. The typical street assault begins in extreme close distance, from surprise, and involves one man putting the other on the ground immediately and then hurting him from a standing position. The mere fact that both people in a MMA fight know it's a fight beforehand makes such events totally dissimilar to street violence- therefore, they prove nothing about street violence.
But that doesn't mean any other style is all that similar to street violence either.

-That's why awareness is the cornerstone of SD. If you don't see an assult coming, you can't do much about it no matter how good a fighter you are. 2 untrained people fighting doesn't look like MMA because most people suck at fighting.

 

[Xue Sheng]

-It's not about getting in the ring. Its about "pressure testing" techniques in training so you actually know they work. The evidence is overwelming that many traditional MA techniques don't work that well.

Please, feel free to produce this evidence.

--They are one in the same and I think that's where some of the confusion lies. Pressure testing does NOT mean seaking out violence..

Then explain pressure testing so I no longer have this misconception.

--This is the typical PC kind of answer. I disagree. Some produce fighters, other just produce dancers.

Amazing..

That is the first time in my life I have ever been accused of being politically correct. Would it still be a politically correct statement if I said I have bee saying that for over 20 years? Long before politically correct was a term.

Now, if I may,
Are you then saying the without pressure testing martial arts are a waste of time?


And I would also be very interested in what you considered traditional martial arts training?

 

[Andrew Green]

[/quote]
And I would also be very interested in what you considered traditional martial arts training?[/quote]

Oh dear, I see this getting ugly based solely on word play here...

"Traditional Martial Arts" is a faulty term, in that different arts will train very different. Boxing is traditional in a sense, but it is not usually called that, even though it is older and more engrained in our history then most that are.

By "traditional" what is probably being meant in this context is a reliance on "old knowledge / beliefs". Meaning that things are done a certain way, because that is the way they where done by the person that started this lineage.

"Non-traditional" would be where things are done because they are believed to be the best way to do them. And if something else comes along, that way will be adapted and the other discarded.

This is different then "traditional arts" because the old ways can not be discarded. If some Shotokan practitioners decided more boxing like punches would be better, and a good chunk of the time should be devoted to ground work and kata should be eliminated they would no longer being doing Shotokan, regardless of whether or not their ability to fight got better or worse.

Now, if I may,
Are you then saying the without pressure testing martial arts are a waste of time?

I would say it depends on your objective. I'd imagine the majority of Tai Chi practitioners do not pressure test their stuff, yet I'd also say they are not wasting there time. They are enjoying themselves, improving balance, strength, helath, etc. Getting exactly what they wanted out of it.

Now if your only goal was to be a fighter, and you didn't pressure test anything I'd say you are seriously misguided in your efforts...

But as long as people are enjoying what they do they are not wasting there time. If it is giving secondary benefits like fitness, conditioning, ability to fight, coordination, stress relief, etc. That's all just a bonus.

 

[RoninPimp]

Please, feel free to produce this evidence.

-Watch the early UFC's. The one diminsional traditional MAers didn't do well to put it midly.

Then explain pressure testing so I no longer have this misconception.

-Pressure testing=sparring=randori=drilling with resistance=rolling=training with "Aliveness". Take your pick of termonology.

Are you then saying the without pressure testing martial arts are a waste of time?

-I am saying they are a waste of time for learning effective SD techniques.

And I would also be very interested in what you considered traditional martial arts training?

-Arts with a kata dependant training method, with little or no sparring. Is there a more common definition?

 

[Andrew Green]

MMA, TMA, JMA, CMA, whatever you call it and train, all good and can help you a lot in a fight. But I do not think any one is superior to the other. It all comes down to the person that has done the training. There are no bad martial arts; it is the martial artist that trains in that art that makes the difference.

I'm going to disagree. There are better and worse martial arts. That is a simple fact. Of course which is better or worse depends on your goal.

Like tools, it makes no sense to say "all tools are equal" for a job, because as soon as you specify the job the question gets silly.

What's better, a screw driver or a welding torch?

Depends on what you want to do with it.

 

[Xue Sheng]

-Watch the early UFC's. The one diminsional traditional MAers didn't do well to put it midly.?

Not what I would call overwhelming proof.

-Pressure testing=sparring=randori=drilling with resistance=rolling=training with "Aliveness". Take your pick of termonology.?

Sounds an awful lot like the traditional Jujitsu and non sport TDK I first trained.

And sounds an awful lot like the traditional CMA I do train.

--I am saying they are a waste of time for learning effective SD techniques. ?

But the traditional MA that I have trained and does train effective self-defense techniques. And before you ask how I know, I once had a job where I had to use them on an all too regular basis.

-Arts with a kata dependant training method, with little or no sparring. Is there a more common definition?

And I would say you definition is a best lacking and more likely incorrect.

Kata is important to Japanese martial arts and forms are important to Chinese martial arts, but that is not all that they are.

If this is based on your experience with TMA schools then I would suggest you were not at a good TMA school

 

[RoninPimp]

Not what I would call overwhelming proof.

-You can choose to ingore the evidence. It won't change anything though. Do you have any evidence at all to counter my argument? Or just more opinion?

Sounds an awful lot like the traditional Jujitsu and non sport TDK I first trained.

And sounds an awful lot like the traditional CMA I do train.

-That's great. Do you limit techniques in your CMA sparring to CMA techniques?

I once had a job where I had to use them on an all too regular basis.

-Please be specific or that argument means nothing.

And I would say you definition is a best lacking and more likely incorrect.

-That may be. I'm not interested in debating this issue. Its not really relavant to this thread. Plus, I've never trained in a TMA.

 

[cfr]

Not what I would call overwhelming proof.

Out of curiosity, what would you call overwhelming proof then? Tomorrow is UFC 59, and we still don't see many TMA (for lack of better words) guys in them. Why do you think that is? They were in the first few but dissolved over time. Any ideas as to why? Is it because their techs are just too deadly? Again, Im not of the fixed MMA mindset, I just think that they have some awesome points on these matters that are pretty tough to argue.

 

[Xue Sheng]

-You can choose to ingore the evidence. It won't change anything though. Do you have any evidence at all to counter my argument? Or just more opinion?.

There is no evidence needed. You are stating your opinion based on a small group of people by comparison to all those that train TMA.

You are basing the UFC as evidence that all of TMA is useless and kata based. You want me to except as overwhelming proof that all Traditional martial artists all over the world are no good based on the UFC.

That is simply not overwhelming proof.

-That's great. Do you limit techniques in your CMA sparring to CMA techniques?.

I currently train 2 different CMA styles I have trained greater than 2. I have used CMA to spare, TDK, Karate, Aikido, and other CMA. Since techniques and or applications can be similar from one TMA to another I can not say which was this CMA and which was that CMA and which was jujitsu and which was TDK.

I also said I trained Jujitsu and non-sport tdk before.

-
-Please be specific or that argument means nothing.

And being specific would help how?

I have already stated that I use to work in a hospital that had a mental health and detox. I was security at the time, which is as specific as I will get.

-That may be. I'm not interested in debating this issue. Its not really relevant to this thread. Plus, I've never trained in a TMA.

Then your opinion about TMA could be considered invalid.

And you are then only interested in a one sided debate, is that what I am understanding here.

And how is it not relevant to the thread? If you are stating that TMA is no good without pressure testing than you have made it relevant by your own statement. If you have never trained TMA then how you would you know what it is and if it is good or not?

 

[Flying Crane]

Keep in mind that what we now call "traditaional" were actually new and cutting-edge back in their day. They are only traditional to us, because by comparison, they are older. The arts have always undergone change, as people felt they had a better way to do things. What we see now as MMA, someday will probably fall within the ranks of "traditional".

 

[Xue Sheng]

Out of curiosity, what would you call overwhelming proof then? Tomorrow is UFC 59, and we still don't see many TMA (for lack of better words) guys in them. Why do you think that is? They were in the first few but dissolved over time. Any ideas as to why? Is it because their techs are just too deadly? Again, Im not of the fixed MMA mindset, I just think that they have some awesome points on these matters that are pretty tough to argue.

First I am not against MMA and I am not saying it is a lesser of a MA than TMA. But the UFC does not the martial arts world make.

This is based on a small group of people by comparison to all those that train Martial arts. Why don't boxers do college Wrestling? Does that mean one is no good? Of course not, it is different training that is all. It does not mean one is valid and one is not.

Has there been every example of every style of TMA represented in the UFC? No, and based on the few that tried you claim all TMA is flawed. This is not enough for me to except as proof. What TMA styles tried?

You are basing the UFC as evidence that all of TMA is useless and kata based. You want me to except as overwhelming proof that all Traditional martial artists all over the world are no good based on the UFC. This would include Europe, Russia, China, Japan USA, etc.

That is simply not overwhelming proof.

 

[cfr]

First I am not against MMA and I am not saying it is a lesser of a MA than TMA. But the UFC does not the martial arts world make.

This is based on a small group of people by comparison to all those that train Martial arts. Why don't boxers do college Wrestling? Does that mean one is no good? Of course not, it is different training that is all. It does not mean one is valid and one is not.

Has there been every example of every style of TMA represented in the UFC? No, and based on the few that tried you claim all TMA is flawed. This is not enough for me to except as proof. What TMA styles tried?

You are basing the UFC as evidence that all of TMA is useless and kata based. You want me to except as overwhelming proof that all Traditional martial artists all over the world are no good based on the UFC. This would include Europe, Russia, China, Japan USA, etc.

That is simply not overwhelming proof.

Great. Any thoughts on the questions I asked?

 

[MartialIntent]

My style works.

I'm still here.

Last fight wore out a pair of nikes, and ended up with a black eye and damn sore jaw. Left an impression on my opponent. He tasted awful btw. It's interesting how someone will often let you go when in a fight, you grab their groin and purr at them.

I'm curious... What *is* your style? Is it based upon anything currently in existence or formulated through your own bare-knuckle experience?

Respects!

 

[Xue Sheng]

Out of curiosity, what would you call overwhelming proof then? Tomorrow is UFC 59, and we still don't see many TMA (for lack of better words) guys in them. Why do you think that is? They were in the first few but dissolved over time. Any ideas as to why? Is it because their techs are just too deadly? Again, Im not of the fixed MMA mindset, I just think that they have some awesome points on these matters that are pretty tough to argue.

Actually I felt I answered them.

I have no idea why, what TMA styles were they.

Since I basically stated TMA and MMA are both good. Are they too deadly no. Possibly not interested and feel they have nothing to prove. But to deadly? no.

As for overwhelming proof, not my place to say. I am just stating that what was presented to me as overwhelming proof…isn’t.

Now how about answering my questions.