The "Reality" of UFC/NHB fighting, pressure testing sports moves, and the Real World.
- Thread starter Edmund BlackAdder
- Start date
- Status
How many Kata have you done? If you haven't experienced it correctly, yuo cannot compare. I've done kata. There is a right way to do them. Sadly, most people really only do air dance.RoninPimp said:
-Have you read anything I've posted? MMA prepares you for the str33t when when a particular str33t confrontation is 1 on 1 with no weapons. The only thing effective with multiple oponents and weapons is running, avoidence, or a firearm. What do you do that will help you in those situations that I don't?Edmund BlackAdder said:
-I have been in dozens, but not past my teens. With one exception when I punched a neighbor that had it coming. Not really a str33t fight that one.
-OK, so you can avoid fighting like all reasonable adults. What does that have to do with the actual empty hands techniques?
OP
OP
Edmund BlackAdder
<B>Rabid Wolverine</B>
Maybe thats where my training has gone beyond the "only effective 35% of the time" level that it seems yours is stuck at. I've read what you post, but it hasn't impressed me much, due to your limited training background. There's this guy "Clyde", does a thing called "Kenpo". He's over on the mudpit. Look him up. He might show you a few "dance steps" that will educate you a bit better.
And, who the hell said I was a reasonable adult? I want that person brought up on charges. Charges I say!!!!!
And, who the hell said I was a reasonable adult? I want that person brought up on charges. Charges I say!!!!!
I liked the "fool" comments Flying Krane made, they were awesome.
I think it ignorant to think that thousands of years worth of TMA training is worthless and un-street worthy with their eye pokes, biting, groin shots, etc.
I also think its equally ignorant to believe that MMA guys couldnt adquately defend themselves with their spending lots of time against resisting opponenets, delivery systems, aggressive training, etc.
You know, someone mentioned that this debate has been had over and over and has never changed anyones mind. Ive always managed to stay out of this debate, and I think I liked it much better that way.
Peace
I think it ignorant to think that thousands of years worth of TMA training is worthless and un-street worthy with their eye pokes, biting, groin shots, etc.
I also think its equally ignorant to believe that MMA guys couldnt adquately defend themselves with their spending lots of time against resisting opponenets, delivery systems, aggressive training, etc.
You know, someone mentioned that this debate has been had over and over and has never changed anyones mind. Ive always managed to stay out of this debate, and I think I liked it much better that way.
Peace
The school where I train has had some rather well qualified rollers teach at it. I've spent a fair amount of time on the mats with them up to about a year ago. I'll honestly say I' think I've been tapped more times in 30 minutes than Ron Jeremy's been kissed in a year, LOL! See this guy? Fun guy to roll with. We had some Sombo at last years MT M&G, looking likely to have more this year as well.RoninPimp said:
I've done both, so I feel confident making a rough comparison.
OP
OP
Edmund BlackAdder
<B>Rabid Wolverine</B>
I'm not here to teach you, and I doubt you could afford my fees. I told you where to look for an answer. There are many more. You just won't like them.RoninPimp said:
20 years is not much compared to 50+? I once watched a man in his mid 70's toss guys in their 30's around like toys. They weren't playing. He took on all comers, the only rule is, once you are down, you're out, and only 2 at a time max. He hit Hard! for an old geezer. I'm in my mid 30's, decent shape, good endurance. He was better. Period. We didn't "cuddle", or go for a take down or a tap out. It was come and get me, so we did, and we went splat. No dance steps there, just smoooooth!
Your training is limited because you dismiss centuries of refined techniques, simply because they are "old", or "not real". The Filipinos have some wicked knife stuff, old school Karate has some solid punches, and what is boxing, but a refined version of the gentlemans art? Even Savate can be very effective. I'd rather kick you than punch you. More mass and momentium in my boot than my hand.
I cannot explain in a few paragraphs how to deal with group situations. That requires a tactical mindset that you sadly do not seem open to, convinced that 1-on-1 training and practice is good enough. It isn't. If it was, that is all the military and cops would do. They don't. They drill more.
They do not do NHB training. Because Sport Fighting is NOT the same as practiced battlefield techniques. Period.
OP
OP
Edmund BlackAdder
<B>Rabid Wolverine</B>
For the record. The person in question was a Tai Chi master, from China, at a Kenpo event in the mid west.
RoninPimp said:
Good point about real assaults. In my experience, most of the serious street altercations that are not easily avoidable invove multiple and/or armed attackers. The one on one fisticuff type scenario is generally avoidable by mature adults.
Heres the thing about empty hands, IMO: unarmed is unarmed no matter how good you are. This argument over what does the "most bestest" training, thus to me is a bit pointless. As the saying goes; "to a man with a hammer, everything is a nail". To many martial artists, MMA and others, everything is a situation where unarmed techniques will save you - therefore you MUST practice always in the most realistic manner (manner debatable, obviously). The truth is that in many situations, NO level of unarmed proficiency will have ANY utility. If we want to talk about and debate reality, therefore, let's put our smart money on the study of assault prevention and escape and stop debating how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.
Ok, you think an MMA competitor will have the edge on the street over a similiarly experienced TMA. So what? Both will be at an almost total disadvantage against a sixteen year old at distance with a handgun, no hesitation and no conscience.
Edmund BlackAdder said:
BTW, my Tai Chi instructor, the late Mr. Tri of Sacramento, CA could (and did) do the same things.
On any given day, anyone can get lucky and come out on top.
bushidomartialarts
Senior Master
so seriously, what's with all the chest-thumping over this?
you'd think anybody with (did ronin say 20? doubtful since he spells 'street' with arabic numerals...) years experience would have gotten past the "my art can beat up your art" thing.
martial arts is, ultimately, about becoming a better human being. evolving and growing. to get all swole up about whether your road to the mountain is better than some other guy's road to the mountain sort of misses the point, don't you think?
you'd think anybody with (did ronin say 20? doubtful since he spells 'street' with arabic numerals...) years experience would have gotten past the "my art can beat up your art" thing.
martial arts is, ultimately, about becoming a better human being. evolving and growing. to get all swole up about whether your road to the mountain is better than some other guy's road to the mountain sort of misses the point, don't you think?
Kinda the way I see it. 
-I didn't address the comments by Flying Krane because I didn't make any of the statements he refered to.cfr said:
-"Thousands" of years of TMA is a horiible exageration. TKD and Karate are 20th century arts. CMA documentation iirc goes back only a few hundred years. The oldest documentation, again iirc, on Koryu arts only go back to the late middle ages.
-At any rate I have not stated that TMA's are worthless. I have said they are demonstratably less effective than MMA where empty hands are concerned. Nobody has been able to refute this with any evidence. Only opinion.
I dunno. He's actually competed, and won, several times. Seems holding a few titles would be credible, even if they aren't the PPV leagues. He'll be at the MT M&G this year. Stop in, I'll introduce ya.
Here's my take, everyone likes to use the extreme views on the other side to argue against, and while there are a few people that seem to believe those, they are generally not people with more then a few months training.
From my point of view:
MMA is a competitive format, in the old days it had no real rules, apart from the environment. It started a system of showing what did and did not work in that environment.
It may not be real, and has grown even less real, but, there are fairly good methods of testing what is and what is not a reliable technique in a restricted arena.
Yes, it is not "real", neither is a wind tunnel or computer simulation, but if the plane crashes in those I wouldn't want to be onboard for a real test flight.
Training, is like the simulations before a test flight, on a plane we will likely never have to fly. We can get get close to reality, but never match it. It's a lab, for experimenting.
What MMA practitioners tend to say is that certain things will not work, now some are naive and say this because they didn't see anything like it on the UFC. Others say this because they are experienced and have tried this stuff, had it tried on them, been hit with it and come to realise, it's not reliable in a fight.
They will also offer up the proof, "try it yourself" and give the parameters to demonstrate the experiment, try it on a reasonably skilled fighter, at least in the skills the technique is supposed to work against.
Now of course there are situations where physical techniques can be used that are not fights, wrist locks, come alongs, off balancing, etc. Not to mention that a lot of stuff that doesn't work on skilled fighters, works really well on unskilled ones, better then the stuff that works on skilled ones even.
Another thing that I have found is that most MMA practitioners with reasonable experience are not prone to making claims about the "street", it is a uncontrolled environment with far too many variables. Anything can happen, and strange things can work.
What they usually advocate is that the best method to prepare, even though this should not be the goal, is having a solid base in all areas of fighting, and being able to adapt to different situations. And the best way to get this is by allowing yourself to be put in all sorts of situations through sparring with limited rules. Because if you end up in a fight, your best bet will be experience fighting live, even if the experience was gained in more controlled environments. Like if you suddenly have to fly a plane, you'd have been better logging hours in a simulator that gives many different sorts of problems to work around rather then just knowing the manual, which hasn't actually been tested in recent memory.
Where the feuds usually start is where a fanboy from either side comes in and starts making claims about what the other does. This can be a UFC fan claiming traditional styles are worthless because they don't work in the UFC. Or it can be from a traditional stylist claiming his fancy technique will KO anyone that trys to shoot on them.
One thing I have learnt is that it is near impossible to do everything. There simply isn't enough time. And the more you try to do, the less skill you will have at the individual parts. A MMA fighter is never going to be as good at boxing as someone that only boxes.
So we have different systems focusing on different areas. Some hit there area better then others, some don't seem to hit any area well...
But, the problems all seem to start when people make claims about there art fitting in other peoples areas of expertise. (ex. "No, you cannot drop to horse stance and drop and elbow to stop a shot, it's been tried, didn't work...")
Street fighting however, is outside everyones area, at least everyone not in jail anyways... so it gets all wierd.
From my point of view:
MMA is a competitive format, in the old days it had no real rules, apart from the environment. It started a system of showing what did and did not work in that environment.
It may not be real, and has grown even less real, but, there are fairly good methods of testing what is and what is not a reliable technique in a restricted arena.
Yes, it is not "real", neither is a wind tunnel or computer simulation, but if the plane crashes in those I wouldn't want to be onboard for a real test flight.
Training, is like the simulations before a test flight, on a plane we will likely never have to fly. We can get get close to reality, but never match it. It's a lab, for experimenting.
What MMA practitioners tend to say is that certain things will not work, now some are naive and say this because they didn't see anything like it on the UFC. Others say this because they are experienced and have tried this stuff, had it tried on them, been hit with it and come to realise, it's not reliable in a fight.
They will also offer up the proof, "try it yourself" and give the parameters to demonstrate the experiment, try it on a reasonably skilled fighter, at least in the skills the technique is supposed to work against.
Now of course there are situations where physical techniques can be used that are not fights, wrist locks, come alongs, off balancing, etc. Not to mention that a lot of stuff that doesn't work on skilled fighters, works really well on unskilled ones, better then the stuff that works on skilled ones even.
Another thing that I have found is that most MMA practitioners with reasonable experience are not prone to making claims about the "street", it is a uncontrolled environment with far too many variables. Anything can happen, and strange things can work.
What they usually advocate is that the best method to prepare, even though this should not be the goal, is having a solid base in all areas of fighting, and being able to adapt to different situations. And the best way to get this is by allowing yourself to be put in all sorts of situations through sparring with limited rules. Because if you end up in a fight, your best bet will be experience fighting live, even if the experience was gained in more controlled environments. Like if you suddenly have to fly a plane, you'd have been better logging hours in a simulator that gives many different sorts of problems to work around rather then just knowing the manual, which hasn't actually been tested in recent memory.
Where the feuds usually start is where a fanboy from either side comes in and starts making claims about what the other does. This can be a UFC fan claiming traditional styles are worthless because they don't work in the UFC. Or it can be from a traditional stylist claiming his fancy technique will KO anyone that trys to shoot on them.
One thing I have learnt is that it is near impossible to do everything. There simply isn't enough time. And the more you try to do, the less skill you will have at the individual parts. A MMA fighter is never going to be as good at boxing as someone that only boxes.
So we have different systems focusing on different areas. Some hit there area better then others, some don't seem to hit any area well...
But, the problems all seem to start when people make claims about there art fitting in other peoples areas of expertise. (ex. "No, you cannot drop to horse stance and drop and elbow to stop a shot, it's been tried, didn't work...")
Street fighting however, is outside everyones area, at least everyone not in jail anyways... so it gets all wierd.
-You are avoiding the question, and I never asked for instruction.
How does this story help your argument?
-I have said their empty hand techniques are less effective than MMA. The evidence is overwhelming. Nobody has been able to refute this with solid evidence.
-You are avoiding the question. Again. I have ran into scores of LEO's in Judo and BJJ. And the new Army combatives manual if full of basic BJJ.
-I never said it was. Please stop with this strawman.
- Status
