What age do you stop sparring?

[andyjeffries]

As a mate used to say to me "big guys still have knees", referring to the fact that even a poorly timed, untrained kick to someone's knee will still usually result in a full knee reconstruction

Really? I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA and often they are fine afterwards (i.e. no visible issue). These aren't poorly timed, untrained kicks - but those delivered by professional fighters (and often to "big guys").

Anderson Silva often does it. Jon "Bones" Jones does it. Lyoto Machida started doing it back to Jones. A lot of fighters do it when they're on their back and their opponent is standing over them.

There are moves people can claim are dangerous/life threatening/serious/whatever, but quite a few moves are actually tested full contact against big/strong guys in the MMA rings so we can put the debate about them to bed. Knee kicks - unless they happen to be to an unexpecting opponent - aren't always going to result in serious damage.

 

[Cyriacus]

Really? I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA and often they are fine afterwards (i.e. no visible issue). These aren't poorly timed, untrained kicks - but those delivered by professional fighters (and often to "big guys").

Anderson Silva often does it. Jon "Bones" Jones does it. Lyoto Machida started doing it back to Jones. A lot of fighters do it when they're on their back and their opponent is standing over them.

There are moves people can claim are dangerous/life threatening/serious/whatever, but quite a few moves are actually tested full contact against big/strong guys in the MMA rings so we can put the debate about them to bed. Knee kicks - unless they happen to be to an unexpecting opponent - aren't always going to result in serious damage.

Out of interest, and this goes to Ralph also;
Are You referring to the classical Instep/Shin VS Knee, or the less common Heel/Ball-of-Foot VS Knee?

 

[Tez3]

Really? I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA and often they are fine afterwards (i.e. no visible issue). These aren't poorly timed, untrained kicks - but those delivered by professional fighters (and often to "big guys").

Anderson Silva often does it. Jon "Bones" Jones does it. Lyoto Machida started doing it back to Jones. A lot of fighters do it when they're on their back and their opponent is standing over them.

There are moves people can claim are dangerous/life threatening/serious/whatever, but quite a few moves are actually tested full contact against big/strong guys in the MMA rings so we can put the debate about them to bed. Knee kicks - unless they happen to be to an unexpecting opponent - aren't always going to result in serious damage.

Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA, that includes the knee. If you aimed a kick at the kneecap you'd be penalised. Kicks in MMA are usually to the thigh a la Muay Thai, body ie liver shot/solar plexus or to the head KO.
The shot that is considered the most dangerous in MMA is the downward elbow to the head and is banned.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA, that includes the knee. If you aimed a kick at the kneecap you'd be penalised. Kicks in MMA are usually to the thigh a la Muay Thai, body ie liver shot/solar plexus or to the head KO.
The shot that is considered the most dangerous in MMA is the downward elbow to the head and is banned.

Thanks Tez, I thought that was the case. I havent seen a lot of MMA, but from what I have seen there doesnt seem to be people kicking knees. I cringe just imagining a kick aimed at the top of the knee, either to the side or straight on, the knee just doesnt bend that way. Footballers slightly extend their knee and dont play for weeks, a deliberate kick to the knee is just not good, if its a good kick, well aimed with power, thats just nasty, but any kick is very risky. Just talk to a sports doctor/physiotherapist about it.

 

[andyjeffries]

Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA, that includes the knee. If you aimed a kick at the kneecap you'd be penalised.

Linear Knee Strikes
After a discussion prompted by the Silva-Leites bout, the Committee reviewed the issue of linear strikes to the knee joint and agreed that this technique should remain a legal technique.
http://www.abcboxing.com/unified_mma_rules.html

The only reference to joints is "small joint manipulation" being a foul. Nothing about strikes to joints.

 

[andyjeffries]

Out of interest, and this goes to Ralph also;
Are You referring to the classical Instep/Shin VS Knee, or the less common Heel/Ball-of-Foot VS Knee?

Heel/Ball of Foot vs Knee.

Try to find some video online of UFC 115 (Silva vs Leites) as that's the one the ABC specifically discussed regarding kicks to the knee (and afterwards decided they should remain legal).

 

[Tez3]

Linear Knee Strikes
After a discussion prompted by the Silva-Leites bout, the Committee reviewed the issue of linear strikes to the knee joint and agreed that this technique should remain a legal technique.
http://www.abcboxing.com/unified_mma_rules.html

The only reference to joints is "small joint manipulation" being a foul. Nothing about strikes to joints.

These are American rules we have no such thing here, we in fact have no ruling body or unified rules at all. If refs here see you kicking a knee you will be warned the first time, second time disaqualified. We don't train to do knee kicks for comps only for SD.

 

[andyjeffries]

These are American rules we have no such thing here, we in fact have no ruling body or unified rules at all. If refs here see you kicking a knee you will be warned the first time, second time disaqualified. We don't train to do knee kicks for comps only for SD.

OK.... I'll respond in two parts:

Part 1

You disputed my statement "I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA" with your own "Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA".

All I'm saying is that I've seen them (I've given enough evidence of this, I'm sure), they haven't done considerable damage/required full knee reconstruction and they aren't illegal in "MMA". I concede they may be illegal in "UK MMA", but that's not the whole of MMA and my point was simply that they happen and they aren't as serious as they are often made out to be.

That was the discussion at hand. Can you deny that they are legal in at least some parts of MMA (e.g. the UFC, Strikeforce and their US ilk)? And that these kicks have taken place without requiring full knee reconstruction?

Part 2

That said (the on topic portion), regarding them being a disqualification offence in the UK - I raise this for interest :

http://www.fightukmma.co.uk/event-rules/ seems to show the Unified MMA Rules as their rules (and don't disallow joint kicking, only small joint manipulation)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAMMA#Rules (hardly authoritative I know) says they use the Unified MMA Rules as their rules

http://www.ultimatewarriorchallenge.co.uk/varcont.php?id=UWC%20RULES only shows the Unified MMA Fouls as their rules.

While I don't 100% dispute your superior knowledge based on the fact you do MMA and I am just a spectator; I am disappointed that there is a standard for MMA rules (seemingly in America and in the top UK organisations) but referees decide to disqualify contestants based on things not in the rules. I would hope there would be a dispute procedure in place for this - and the referees involved should be disciplined for it!

 

[Tez3]

OK.... I'll respond in two parts:

Part 1

You disputed my statement "I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA" with your own "Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA".

All I'm saying is that I've seen them (I've given enough evidence of this, I'm sure), they haven't done considerable damage/required full knee reconstruction and they aren't illegal in "MMA". I concede they may be illegal in "UK MMA", but that's not the whole of MMA and my point was simply that they happen and they aren't as serious as they are often made out to be.

That was the discussion at hand. Can you deny that they are legal in at least some parts of MMA (e.g. the UFC, Strikeforce and their US ilk)? And that these kicks have taken place without requiring full knee reconstruction?

Part 2

That said (the on topic portion), regarding them being a disqualification offence in the UK - I raise this for interest :

http://www.fightukmma.co.uk/event-rules/ seems to show the Unified MMA Rules as their rules (and don't disallow joint kicking, only small joint manipulation)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAMMA#Rules (hardly authoritative I know) says they use the Unified MMA Rules as their rules

http://www.ultimatewarriorchallenge.co.uk/varcont.php?id=UWC RULES only shows the Unified MMA Fouls as their rules.

While I don't 100% dispute your superior knowledge based on the fact you do MMA and I am just a spectator; I am disappointed that there is a standard for MMA rules (seemingly in America and in the top UK organisations) but referees decide to disqualify contestants based on things not in the rules. I would hope there would be a dispute procedure in place for this - and the referees involved should be disciplined for it!

You have to understand there is no governing body in the Uk for MMA, we bascially do exactly what we want. Whether that's good or bad is open to a debate somewhere else.
Kneekicks come under the 'not sporting behaviour' rule, there's a few other things that aren't considered sporting as well and while not in the rules it is clearly understood by all. At the rules meeting fighters will be told what's not acceptable and kneekicks are one of those things. In the FightUKMMA this is rule 22, in BAMMA again rule 22, UWC rule 21. It's there, you didn't know it. I believe this is also in the rules for UFC etc, it's just they've decided kneekicks are sporting, we don't.

You can appeal to the promotion is you feel a ref has been unfair, it will be looked at and all sides have their say.

 

[andyjeffries]

You have to understand there is no governing body in the Uk for MMA, we bascially do exactly what we want. Whether that's good or bad is open to a debate somewhere else.
Kneekicks come under the 'not sporting behaviour' rule, there's a few other things that aren't considered sporting as well and while not in the rules it is clearly understood by all. At the rules meeting fighters will be told what's not acceptable and kneekicks are one of those things. In the FightUKMMA this is rule 22, in BAMMA again rule 22, UWC rule 21. It's there, you didn't know it. I believe this is also in the rules for UFC etc, it's just they've decided kneekicks are sporting, we don't.

You can appeal to the promotion is you feel a ref has been unfair, it will be looked at and all sides have their say.

Surely BAMMA can't use rule 22 (unsportsmanlike conduct basically) for this, given that they specifically state they use the Unified MMA rules and they explicitly allow it.

Also, you missed replying to Part 1 ;-)

Cheers,


Andy

 

[Tez3]

Surely BAMMA can't use rule 22 (unsportsmanlike conduct basically) for this, given that they specifically state they use the Unified MMA rules and they explicitly allow it.

Also, you missed replying to Part 1 ;-)

Cheers,


Andy

Unified as in what? We don't have any organisations that are 'unified', it means nothing to be honest, there's no licencing, no laws, no anything that says the rules have to be 'unified' ones. Just words. Here, each organisation is on it's own, has it's own rules which maybe are copied from the UFC or maybe not each ref and promotion will decide what's allowed. The fighters are told at the rules meeting what is allowed and what's not, 'unified' means nothing other than what the promotor wants it to mean, you can't make them keep to anything. If they don't want kneekicks or heel hooks etc they won't have them, end of story.

Okay, using kneekicks, apart from being unsporting, they are quite difficult to do properly in MMA, I would suggest the ones you saw weren't done properly so there wouldn't be any injury.

 

[andyjeffries]

Unified as in what? We don't have any organisations that are 'unified', it means nothing to be honest, there's no licencing, no laws, no anything that says the rules have to 'unified' ones. Just words.

I'm beginning to wonder if you're continuing this just for the sake of arguing... Considering that I'm treating this as a virtual pub and we're two brits debating this over a virtual pint, I'll continue too...

Do a Google search for "Unified MMA Rules". Keep the quotes (so Google keeps it as a phrase not individual words). There is a set of rules (linked to earlier on the ABC site) which is called the "Unified MMA Rules".

There's a video of "Big" John McCarthy explaining them that is for me the second link.

Come on, are you seriously saying you've never heard the phrase "Unified MMA Rules"? When people say "Unified MMA Rules', capitalised as such, you can be fairly sure they're referring to a named set of rules rather than a generic unified set of rules.

Here, each organisation is on it's own, has it's own rules which maybe are copied from the UFC or maybe not each ref and promotion will decide what's allowed. The fighters are told at the rules meeting what is allowed and what's not, 'unified' means nothing other than what the promotor wants it to mean, you can't make them keep to anything. If they don't want kneekicks or heel hooks etc they won't have them, end of story.

I understand this, but they've happened and haven't caused full knee reconstruction and aren't "illegal in [all of] MMA". Agree?

Okay, using kneekicks, apart from being unsporting, they are quite difficult to do properly in MMA, I would suggest the ones you saw weren't done properly so there wouldn't be any injury.

OK, then this also helps refute the point from Ralph where he says "the fact that even a poorly timed, untrained kick to someone's knee will still usually result in a full knee reconstruction". If we can have elite MMA fighters (and I personally don't like Anderson Silva, but he is UFC champion and is arguably considered by many to be one of the best pound-for-pound fighters in the world) who can't execute them properly against someone they are evenly weight-matched with, then surely an average skill martial artist relying on them against a bigger tough guy is on a hiding to nothing.

We've debated the rules and I've shown they are legal in at least some (most) MMA competitions and I've shown that they happen in professional elite MMA matches without serious side effects. Is there anything left to debate on this?

 

[Tez3]

I'm not continuing this for the sake of arguments sake. However I don't think you understand MMA here. Each promotion is owned by the promoter, there is no governing body, there are no laws that say we have to be licenced, there is nothing laid down anywhere that says how a fight night has to be run, we don't even need to have medics. MMA in the UK is run by consensus, if the fighters don't like the promotion they don't fight on it. The unified rules are used by promoters here as a guideline, they will add or subject as they wish, I know promoters that hate heel hooks so they are out, another doesn't like neck cranks so they are out, none of us like knee kicks so they are out. Other promoters have stomps to the head in, if you don't like them you don't fight on their shows. There's nothing anywhere that says 'unified rules' have to be followed, hell we don't have anything that says any rules have to be followed! Just because the promotion says unified rules doesn't mean they are followed to the letter and are the same as the UFC, it's a guideline of what to expect. Before the fights start after the weigh in there are rules meetings where everything is explained, what's allowed, what's not. You can even ask to have things taken out or added, if your opponent agrees that will be the rules for that fight, fighters often want spinning back fists taken out.

If you have the money you can set up your own MMA fight night, you can ref, your auntie can judge along with your dog. You can have rules or not, you can have rules that say no punching if you wish, you can have what you like, the only thing stopping that show would be whether you'd get fighters on it.

The UFC is a business, a promotion, their rules aren't the last word in MMA, its their rules along with what is allowed in America by their licensing people.The allowing of kneekicks in UFC was only allowed after a specific fight, it's a bit like stopping someone and doing them for drunken driving then deciding because a celebrity was done, it was unfair and the laws would be changed. The UFC isn't MMA, just because they allow it doesn't mean MMA does, I think the thousands of MMA promotions all over the world who run MMA comps with illegal knee kicks are more likely to speak for MMA than one big and rich promotion that tries to impose its rules on everyone else does. Grassroots and international comps don't have knee kicks, the UFC does, it says more about them than it does about MMA.

 

[andyjeffries]

I'm not continuing this for the sake of arguments sake.

OK.

However I don't think you understand MMA here. Each promotion is owned by the promoter, there is no governing body, there are no laws that say we have to be licenced, there is nothing laid down anywhere that says how a fight night has to be run, we don't even need to have medics. MMA in the UK is run by consensus, if the fighters don't like the promotion they don't fight on it. The unified rules are used by promoters here as a guideline, they will add or subject as they wish, I know promoters that hate heel hooks so they are out, another doesn't like neck cranks so they are out, none of us like knee kicks so they are out. Other promoters have stomps to the head in, if you don't like them you don't fight on their shows. There's nothing anywhere that says 'unified rules' have to be followed, hell we don't have anything that says any rules have to be followed! Just because the promotion says unified rules doesn't mean they are followed to the letter and are the same as the UFC, it's a guideline of what to expect. Before the fights start after the weigh in there are rules meetings where everything is explained, what's allowed, what's not. You can even ask to have things taken out or added, if your opponent agrees that will be the rules for that fight, fighters often want spinning back fists taken out.

If you have the money you can set up your own MMA fight night, you can ref, your auntie can judge along with your dog. You can have rules or not, you can have rules that say no punching if you wish, you can have what you like, the only thing stopping that show would be whether you'd get fighters on it.

I do understand all that. However, remember how this conversation got started. It was claimed that knee kicks "usually" result in "knee reconstruction". I claimed that I had seen them in [some subset of] MMA and they hadn't resulted in this. You seemed to disagree saying it was illegal, and I believe I have proved that it is legal, at least in some competitions in some parts of the world (e.g. the UFC, the largest - in financial terms - MMA organisation in the world).

The UFC is a business, a promotion, their rules aren't the last word in MMA, its their rules along with what is allowed in America by their licensing people.The allowing of kneekicks in UFC was only allowed after a specific fight

That's the thing, no it wasn't only allowed after a specific fight. It has always been allowed in Unified MMA Rules. It was explicitly clarified and confirmed acceptable after UFC 115 because it was so obvious in that fight. They clarified that it is still acceptable.

it's a bit like stopping someone and doing them for drunken driving then deciding because a celebrity was done, it was unfair and the laws would be changed.

As I said though, it's not a rule change to allow it, it's confirming that it's still legal after that fight.

The UFC isn't MMA, just because they allow it doesn't mean MMA does, I think the thousands of MMA promotions all over the world who run MMA comps with illegal knee kicks are more likely to speak for MMA than one big and rich promotion that tries to impose its rules on everyone else does. Grassroots and international comps don't have knee kicks, the UFC does, it says more about them than it does about MMA.

It says more about Unified MMA Rules than UFC or MMA. Most MMA organisations around the world, as I understand it (and from a google search), use the Unified MMA Rules as codified by the Association of Boxing Commissions. Come on, this isn't some mickey mouse organisation in America making up a set of rules and saying "this is the world standard", it's a set of rules that most promotions around the world use.

Anyway, we can argue back and forth about the rules and who uses them, but it's not getting us anywhere.

Can we at least agree, based on the evidence at hand that being able to use strong knee kicks against a larger/stronger opponent is harder and aren't as devastating as some people would claim?

 

[Tez3]

OK.



I do understand all that. However, remember how this conversation got started. It was claimed that knee kicks "usually" result in "knee reconstruction". I claimed that I had seen them in [some subset of] MMA and they hadn't resulted in this. You seemed to disagree saying it was illegal, and I believe I have proved that it is legal, at least in some competitions in some parts of the world (e.g. the UFC, the largest - in financial terms - MMA organisation in the world).



That's the thing, no it wasn't only allowed after a specific fight. It has always been allowed in Unified MMA Rules. It was explicitly clarified and confirmed acceptable after UFC 115 because it was so obvious in that fight. They clarified that it is still acceptable.



As I said though, it's not a rule change to allow it, it's confirming that it's still legal after that fight.



It says more about Unified MMA Rules than UFC or MMA. Most MMA organisations around the world, as I understand it (and from a google search), use the Unified MMA Rules as codified by the Association of Boxing Commissions. Come on, this isn't some mickey mouse organisation in America making up a set of rules and saying "this is the world standard", it's a set of rules that most promotions around the world use.

Anyway, we can argue back and forth about the rules and who uses them, but it's not getting us anywhere.

Can we at least agree, based on the evidence at hand that being able to use strong knee kicks against a larger/stronger opponent is harder and aren't as devastating as some people would claim?

You're sure about that? It doesn't allow women to fight on UFC, changes it's rules to suit itself, threatens to sue anyone and everyone etc etc, I could on but it would take a page or two and people wouldn't be happy, just because it's rich doesn't make it good. Most MMA promotions around the world are the same as ours with nothing to do with boxing boards of control, in fact most of them want us banned.

As for knee kicks, if we consider them unsporting in MMA don't you think that's because they cause damage? I can use a good front kick on someones knee and it will bend the 'wrong way', that's why we teach it in SD, it's easier for me to do a low kick like that than a high kick, the larger the opponent the bigger the knee/target. My instrcutor has used them before in situations than warranted them.

 

[andyjeffries]

It says more about Unified MMA Rules than UFC or MMA. Most MMA organisations around the world, as I understand it (and from a google search), use the Unified MMA Rules as codified by the Association of Boxing Commissions. Come on, this isn't some mickey mouse organisation in America making up a set of rules and saying "this is the world standard", it's a set of rules that most promotions around the world use.

You're sure about that? It doesn't allow women to fight on UFC

Again, you're confusing ABC with UFC. The ABC Unified MMA Rules don't disallow women from fighting in any promotion, and indeed Strikeforce which does have female fighters also uses the Unified MMA Rules.

changes it's rules to suit itself

When has the ABC changed the Unified MMA Rules to suit itself? What could it do to change the rules to suit itself?

threatens to sue anyone and everyone etc etc,

Who has the ABC threatened to sue?

I could on but it would take a page or two and people wouldn't be happy, just because it's rich doesn't make it good

As you might have gathered, and if you re-read my quote carefully, I was referring to the ABC. "Most MMA ... use Unified ... by the Association of Boxing Commissions". The ABC isn't a mickey mouse organisation. The UFC didn't make up the rules, they applied the rules set by the ABC.

The UFC isn't deciding whether to allow knee kicks or not, this is down to an external organisation that sets the rules.

I understand you have a strong dislike for the UFC, I get it. However, put that aside and we're talking about the Unified MMA Rules as used by all American MMA promotions and the majority of promotions wordwide.

Most MMA promotions around the world are the same as ours

Really? There are more and more taking up the Unified MMA Rules, including as previously posted, some larger UK promotions. From a Google search, everyone describes them as what the majority of MMA fighters use.

As for knee kicks, if we consider them unsporting in MMA don't you think that's because they cause damage?

The problem is "we", is "you" in this scenario. I've already proved that the ABC (and hence the "majority" of MMA promotions worldwide) don't consider them unsporting and are in fact explicitly within the rules.

I can use a good front kick on someones knee and it will bend the 'wrong way', that's why we teach it in SD, it's easier for me to do a low kick like that than a high kick, the larger the opponent the bigger the knee/target. My instrcutor has used them before in situations than warranted them.

But as you've pointed out, when professional elite fighters try to use them and can't manage to land them correctly, how effective are they really?

If your opponent is going to stand still and look the other way most techniques will work. If they're fighting back, as we've seen they are less than effective.

 

[Tez3]

Again, you're confusing ABC with UFC. The ABC Unified MMA Rules don't disallow women from fighting in any promotion, and indeed Strikeforce which does have female fighters also uses the Unified MMA Rules.



When has the ABC changed the Unified MMA Rules to suit itself? What could it do to change the rules to suit itself?



Who has the ABC threatened to sue?



As you might have gathered, and if you re-read my quote carefully, I was referring to the ABC. "Most MMA ... use Unified ... by the Association of Boxing Commissions". The ABC isn't a mickey mouse organisation. The UFC didn't make up the rules, they applied the rules set by the ABC.

The UFC isn't deciding whether to allow knee kicks or not, this is down to an external organisation that sets the rules.

I understand you have a strong dislike for the UFC, I get it. However, put that aside and we're talking about the Unified MMA Rules as used by all American MMA promotions and the majority of promotions wordwide.



Really? There are more and more taking up the Unified MMA Rules, including as previously posted, some larger UK promotions. From a Google search, everyone describes them as what the majority of MMA fighters use.



The problem is "we", is "you" in this scenario. I've already proved that the ABC (and hence the "majority" of MMA promotions worldwide) don't consider them unsporting and are in fact explicitly within the rules.



But as you've pointed out, when professional elite fighters try to use them and can't manage to land them correctly, how effective are they really?

If your opponent is going to stand still and look the other way most techniques will work. If they're fighting back, as we've seen they are less than effective.

Have it your own way, I know nothing, I've only been around since MMA started, been around the UK and Europe what would I know about rules, promotions etc. Remind me again, how many shows have you promoted? How many shows in the UK and Europe have you been to? How many have you worked on? Fine, you've don't believe me so I'm the problem of course, it couldn't possibly be because you don't understand how we use the rules could it despite my explaining it to you? Oh and I suggest you contact the British Boxing Board of Control about MMA, when they've stopped explaining to you why it should be banned you might get a word in. Most boards of control in Europe feel this way btw and have nothing to do with MMA whatsoever. The ABC is an American and Canadian organisation with no say so outside those countries. The rules are as I said, like it or not. Believe me or not, please yourself.

 

[andyjeffries]

Have it your own way, I know nothing, I've only been around since MMA started, been around the UK and Europe what would I know about rules, promotions etc. Remind me again, how many shows have you promoted? How many shows in the UK and Europe have you been to? How many have you worked on? Fine, you've don't believe me so I'm the problem of course, it couldn't possibly be because you don't understand how we use the rules could it despite my explaining it to you? Oh and I suggest you contact the British Boxing Board of Control about MMA, when they've stopped explaining to you why it should be banned you might get a word in. Most boards of control in Europe feel this way btw and have nothing to do with MMA whatsoever. The ABC is an American and Canadian organisation with no say so outside those countries. The rules are as I said, like it or not. Believe me or not, please yourself.

Man alive, Tez. I've already acknowledged that you have far more practical experience with MMA than I do and infinitely more UK MMA experience. That's never under dispute.

You simply seem to be ignoring evidence that goes against your experience. You also seem to be blinded against the UFC (seemingly because of their business practices).

This started from a discussion regarding knee kicks being useful (for an average recreational martial arts practitioner against a larger/stronger opponent) as they usually have a severe effect. I said they were less useful as they have been proved in the MMA ring. I've posted examples of fighters using them, which you've argued they weren't applied correctly (in effect this helps my side of the debate about them being useful in SD, when an expert professional elite fighter can't do them corectly). You said joint kicks were illegal. I've posted the rules that show they are explicitly legal, even if it's for a subset of MMA practitioners (arguably one of the largest numbers of practitioners in that country, but still).

Somehow though you seem to think that my limited experience in UK MMA or MMA organising limits my ability to watch MMA fighters use these techniques (a couple of examples already posted) or my ability to read the rules.

Tez, we've always got on well up until this point and I'd rather not ruin that completely, so let's just agree to disagree. That much I'm sure we can agree on...

 

[Tez3]

Man alive, Tez. I've already acknowledged that you have far more practical experience with MMA than I do and infinitely more UK MMA experience. That's never under dispute.

You simply seem to be ignoring evidence that goes against your experience. You also seem to be blinded against the UFC (seemingly because of their business practices).

This started from a discussion regarding knee kicks being useful (for an average recreational martial arts practitioner against a larger/stronger opponent) as they usually have a severe effect. I said they were less useful as they have been proved in the MMA ring. I've posted examples of fighters using them, which you've argued they weren't applied correctly (in effect this helps my side of the debate about them being useful in SD, when an expert professional elite fighter can't do them corectly). You said joint kicks were illegal. I've posted the rules that show they are explicitly legal, even if it's for a subset of MMA practitioners (arguably one of the largest numbers of practitioners in that country, but still).

Somehow though you seem to think that my limited experience in UK MMA or MMA organising limits my ability to watch MMA fighters use these techniques (a couple of examples already posted) or my ability to read the rules.

Tez, we've always got on well up until this point and I'd rather not ruin that completely, so let's just agree to disagree. That much I'm sure we can agree on...

You may read the rules but you don't take it on board when I tell you they are a guideline rather than hard and fast. In Italy they favour Pride rules, when we fight there we say we don't want the stomps to the head, well you would, wouldn't you, they take them out. That's how it is in the rest of the world. It's all up for negociation.
http://www.sherdog.com/news/articles/Anarchy-in-the-UK-34824

You are used to TMA, where you have your organisation, you have hard and fast rules, the comps are always run by the same people to the same standards. When promoters in MMA say they are using 'unified' rules, it's just a word, it doesn't actually mean they are set in concrete, they are always open to negociation. Promotions say 'unified' rules because these are the easiest to download from the internet and people generally have the idea of what they are as opposed to Pride rules, some promotions will go to the bother of writing out their own but few bother. BAMMA's adoption of 'athletic commision style rules', their words, are a publicity stunt for television coverage, they've said they will be in over the next 12 months from the middle of last year. when Alex Reid fought on there against Tom Watson the rules were agreed between them. The rules the UFC use incidently are much the same as the ones Lee Hasdell set out for his shows in 1995, the UFC didn't bring in these rules until 2000 so I guess they are actually 'our' rules.

Now, I've never seen a knee kick in the cage/ring so I can't say whether it's being done properly, I assume the ones you've seen weren't done properly by the individual you saw doing it. That doesn't make it true that if it's not used in the cage it doesn't work. Whether a pro fighter can use them would depend on his training, if he's kick boxing and wrestling/BJJ I'd say he probably doesn't know how to do them. I haven't seen them in a MT fight either usually illegal, nor do we use them in karate comps, perhaps they are used in TKD comps? I would expect a karate based fighter to be able to do them though not in a comp. MMA fighters aren't all the same, some can do head kicks some can't, some can do spinning backfists some can't, just because a couple of fighters can't do knee kicks doesn't mean they don't work, you wouldn't say a spinning elbow doesn't work just because a couple of people can't do them.

I'm not blinded against the UFC, I just know too much about what they do when they are here (as well as what they do in America though someone who has fought out there a few times now) and I know too many people think the UFC and MMA is the same thing. Ask MMA people how many come up to them asking if they do UFC? the UFC is a business like many others, it is not the MCC.

I don't think we should fall out, so I agree with you there.

 

[Ludo]

There appears to be a confusion here, Tez, that "Unified rules" translates to "UFC rules" and that simply isn't the case. The California State Athletic Commission voted in the regulations that eventually became the unified rules of MMA. State Athletic Commissions regulate combat sports in America and in order to put on a legal show in the US you must abide by whatever state's rules you plan to hold the show in.

What kind of promotion lists a set of rules and doesn't follow them? They have a name for that, it's called hypocrisy.*

Every state that allows MMA in the US follows the unified rules, and some tweaks to procedure concerning weigh ins and attire vary from state to state. Your bias against the UFC is showing more and more as discussions where MMA is brought up occur. Every time the UFC is mentioned you appear to take it as an attack or a personal challenge to reply with as much tongue-in-cheek content as possible. MMA as a whole is a business, if it wasn't there wouldn't be "professional" MMA fighters. It wouldn't be a career choice if it wasn't a business. But I digress.*

You said you have been around since MMA began. I'm sure you mean MMA as it is today as in post UFC 1. While you may know the UK MMA scene it is very clear you have little interest/knowledge of MMA outside of that. Being unfamiliar with the term "unified rules of mma" which were introduced and adopted across the globe circa the year 2000 is yet another piece to that particular puzzle.*

What you may not know is that MMA has roots that stretch back directly as far as one hundred years ago in Brazil and Japan. It was commonly called "Vale Tudo" in Brazil and featured renowned fighters like Carlson and Helio Gracie, Waldemar Santana, Rei Zulu, Ivan Gomez, Mashaiko Kimura(the maneuver's namesake), among others. These bouts took place in all manners from ads put out in newspapers with open challenges for cash prizes, to in a ring in front of a crowd as exhibitions. Varied styles from catch wrestling to Judo to Jiu Jitsu and Boxing, Muay Thai, and Kickboxing specialists looked to match their art with one another.*