Why do TMAs have more difficulty in the ring/octagon?

[K-man]

Who else did the Gracie's issue challenges to early on? We know Boztepe, Tyson, Benny "The Jet" Urquidez, who else? It was brilliant marketing!

A little bit here ..
Gracie Challenge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i think it was probably a two way thing with others also challenging the Gracies, but it seems there were often rules attached.
:asian:

 

[Hanzou]

Again you didn't read what I wrote. They didn't use him, they attempted to use him in the same way they used other well known fighters in the early stages to promote their style and their competition. Sure some guys did well out of it but most didn't. They took the money and the Gracies built their brand. I've not suggesting they did anything wrong. It was brilliant marketing. But to bag Boztepe because he didn't want to be part of it is wrong. He knew what they were doing and recognised that there was little if any upside in it for him.

I'm not "bagging" Boztepe. I'm merely disturbed by his crazy claims. It borders on ki master levels of martial silliness.

Actually there would have been a huge upside- If he had won. Clearly he didn't think he was going to win, which is why he backed out of it, and the challenge itself.

 

[MJS]

In another thread, a poster informed me that Brazilian Jiujitsu and other grappling arts had a distinct advantage in the first UFC, which caused many TMA practitioners to get easily defeated in the early UFC competitions. Clearly this advantage has continued 20 years later, because TMA is still absent from the curriculum of many MMA practitioners, who choose Muay Thai kickboxing or Bjj over Wing Chun, Eagle Claw Kung Fu, Aikido, or Shorin Ryu Karate.

Why is this the case? What makes some styles have such a distinct disadvantage in combat sports, while other styles tend to dominate?

I definitely see your point, but all things being equal, why can't a karate practitioner simply out maneuver a grappler and punch and kick them into submission? I mean, there's a difference between rules that completely eliminate your ability to fight (like a grappler not being allowed to grapple), but what rules limit a Karate or Kung Fu practitioner from beating the crap out of an opponent with footwork, kicks, and punches?

As others have said, it's a specific goal. Of course, IMO, as I've said before, some arts just aren't used to dealing with a quality grappler. It's easy to out maneuver, punch and kick someone, when they really don't have a clue as to what the hell they're doing.

 

[K-man]

I'm not "bagging" Boztepe. I'm merely disturbed by his crazy claims. It borders on ki master levels of martial silliness.

Actually there would have been a huge upside- If he had won. Clearly he didn't think he was going to win, which is why he backed out of it, and the challenge itself.

So what are his crazy claims? I have a number of his videos which I find really helpful. I also think he is among the best WC, or in his case WT, guys around. And you need to check the fine details. He didn't back out of any challenge at all. He declined the conditions imposed on him and in return offered to fight with no rules. That also was knocked back. In fact he had much to lose and nothing to gain by competing. He explained some of that in the video that was posted, if you had bothered to listen.

 

[Reedone816]

Who else did the Gracie's issue challenges to early on? We know Boztepe, Tyson, Benny "The Jet" Urquidez, who else? It was brilliant marketing!

Le bell against their current best, of course he refuse. he rechallenge them to fight helio as to him comparable age wise.

 

[Steve]

So what are his crazy claims? I have a number of his videos which I find really helpful. I also think he is among the best WC, or in his case WT, guys around. And you need to check the fine details. He didn't back out of any challenge at all. He declined the conditions imposed on him and in return offered to fight with no rules. That also was knocked back. In fact he had much to lose and nothing to gain by competing. He explained some of that in the video that was posted, if you had bothered to listen.

We have evidence that he actually fights nothing like he trains. It looks really impressive in an artificial environment, but when in an actual altercation, he looks completely untrained.

And even, as we saw in the video just posted, some of the artificial stuff is really unrealistic. So, yeah. Crazy claims. I'm sure his theory is top notch.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[K-man]

We have evidence that he actually fights nothing like he trains. It looks really impressive in an artificial environment, but when in an actual altercation, he looks completely untrained.

And even, as we saw in the video just posted, some of the artificial stuff is really unrealistic. So, yeah. Crazy claims. I'm sure his theory is top notch.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Sorry, I must have missed something. Where was the video of him fighting, except for the years old video of the William Cheung fight which was before he developed the system he teaches now? Or are you talking about the introduction to the interview video? Sure it is nothing like what you would find in a BJJ or GJJ school but it is very similar to what you would find in a Systema school. I don't think he claims anywhere to be a specialist grappler.

I don't have a dog in this fight but in the pursuit of fairness here is a pretty comprehensive account of what actually happened between Emin Boztepe and the Gracies. How the superfight got started - Sherdog Mixed Martial Arts Forums
:asian:

 

[Steve]

Sorry, I must have missed something. Where was the video of him fighting, except for the years old video of the William Cheung fight which was before he developed the system he teaches now? Or are you talking about the introduction to the interview video? Sure it is nothing like what you would find in a BJJ or GJJ school but it is very similar to what you would find in a Systema school. I don't think he claims anywhere to be a specialist grappler.

I don't have a dog in this fight but in the pursuit of fairness here is a pretty comprehensive account of what actually happened between Emin Boztepe and the Gracies. How the superfight got started - Sherdog Mixed Martial Arts Forums
:asian:

Kman, you really don't see the red flags and intellectual claxon alarms that should be going off? You asked about crazy claims.

Here's a guy who looks like a total badass in his demos (except for his truly ridiculous ground techniques). We have video of him in an unscripted altercation, taken to the ground by someone with no functional grappling experience, and looking like he had zero training of any kind. And so... What? He had an epiphany? He invented a new system, and is suddenly credible? Have his training methods changed?

You're seriously asserting that, yeah, he looked like junk in the video, and his training was functionally inert. but it's cool because he fixed it and now it's really effective.

Yes. Crazy claims. At least, claims that should be approached with healthy skepticism.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[jezr74]

I do believe that style is irrelevant. I personally think it comes down to training method. The problem is that often times the style is heavily tied to a training method.

And yeah, if someone pops up and shakes up the MMA world with an underused style, the entire landscape changes and that style rises in popularity because of it. Judo is getting a resurgence because Rhonda Rousey is dominating her opponents with it. However, that only happened because Rhonda Rousey showed what you can do with no-gi Judo, and because Judo already had the training methodology in place to allow something like that to happen.

Well I agree with you, but I think it's the opening thread and title causing confusion. (Well for me at least)

In another thread, a poster informed me that Brazilian Jiujitsu and other grappling arts had a distinct advantage in the first UFC, which caused many TMA practitioners to get easily defeated in the early UFC competitions. Clearly this advantage has continued 20 years later, because TMA is still absent from the curriculum of many MMA practitioners, who choose Muay Thai kickboxing or Bjj over Wing Chun, Eagle Claw Kung Fu, Aikido, or Shorin Ryu Karate.

Why is this the case? What makes some styles have such a distinct disadvantage in combat sports, while other styles tend to dominate?

I guess personally I don't see MMA as a style in the traditional sense of the term, to me it's just cherry picked moves from other systems (or developed moves from experience) to use that work within the rules of the sport they are playing. And I think that's fine, if that's what your after, why not.

I wouldn't expect any single modern or "traditional" style to be able to compete long term in that environment in it's pure form without updating your skill set. You might get a few wins up your sleeve but since it's something that is a monitored state, others will adapt and develop counters, changing with the game as well. Which is what learning MMA is, a mixture of martial moves to get the desired result in the context of the sport.

Think you all actually agree, just talking different languages.

 

[K-man]

Kman, you really don't see the red flags and intellectual claxon alarms that should be going off? You asked about crazy claims.

Here's a guy who looks like a total badass in his demos (except for his truly ridiculous ground techniques). We have video of him in an unscripted altercation, taken to the ground by someone with no functional grappling experience, and looking like he had zero training of any kind. And so... What? He had an epiphany? He invented a new system, and is suddenly credible? Have his training methods changed?

You're seriously asserting that, yeah, he looked like junk in the video, and his training was functionally inert. but it's cool because he fixed it and now it's really effective.

Yes. Crazy claims. At least, claims that should be approached with healthy skepticism.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Not at all. The fight you are referring to was in 1986. Boztepe would have been about 24 at the time. If you read about it Boztepe had about the same judgement of his fight as you do. Nearly 30 years ago my training was totally different to what I train now. My knowledge has hopefully been extended and I have trained in four other styles of Martial art. So yes, I would dismiss totally what he did 30 years ago and look at what he is doing now. Obviously if I wanted to improve my grappling skills I wouldn't look to Boztepe. Obviously I would go for BJJ. But if I was looking to improve my sticky hands skills then he has some very good material out there.

Now could he change? Of course he could. It was a ballsy effort to challenge Cheung in his own environment as Cheung was putting himself up as the best WC fighter in the world at the time. The fact that it was so scrappy and that neither man 'won' possibly demonstrates that they were about equal in ability at that time. Did he create a new system as a result? No he didn't. He took what he had and modified his training to make his system more effective.

Now I have no doubt that Boztepe's knowledge and ability outweigh mine by miles. I certainly wouldn't be putting my hand up to take him on in a NHB fight. But nor am I saying that he is the best either. We will never know, and in actual fact it is of no consequence. Nor have I the first idea as to what he is like as a person. But either way I believe he is a very talented martial artist and deserves a bit of respect for what he had achieved in his MA career.
:asian:

 

[Flying Crane]

Who else did the Gracie's issue challenges to early on? We know Boztepe, Tyson, Benny "The Jet" Urquidez, who else? It was brilliant marketing!

I actually saw Royce Gracie's article in Blackbelt Magazine back in about...1996 or so, where he "challenged" Tyson. It was actually really really stupid, even embarrassing to read.

 

[Flying Crane]

The issue that you have is we do not have a very good system of testing a martial arts any other way. So yes you are on the money with the idea that MMA testing is flawed. But you can't use that to suggest that any martial art that does not test in any way is as good.

It is my position that NOT using MMA competitions to test is in no way an indictment against any particular system. As I've said before, MMA competition is not THE yardstick against which all martial arts must be tested.

People say they train for the street. But they either don't get into street fights or can't prove they get into street fights. Which is fine that is the sensible option. But we are stuck with testing by competition.

no, we are not "stuck" with that. People can do that if they wish, but they can also NOT do that if they wish.

We could just go by as many news articles we can find relating to martial artists foiling robberies and defending themselves but tmas dont over represent well there either?

a collection of such news articles would tell us nothing.

 

[K-man]

I actually saw Royce Gracie's article in Blackbelt Magazine back in about...1996 or so, where he "challenged" Tyson. It was actually really really stupid, even embarrassing to read.

Another article by Bill Wallace in which he says that Tyson had everything to lose and nothing to gain from fighting Gracie.
Black Belt - Google Books

 

[Blindside]

It is my position that NOT using MMA competitions to test is in no way an indictment against any particular system. As I've said before, MMA competition is not THE yardstick against which all martial arts must be tested.

Is there a different yardstick?

How do systems test themselves these days if it isn't in the ring?

Do traditional systems keep up with changing methods of attacks? Are they taking into account that with the popularization of MMA that maybe more attackers are going to take the situation to the ground because it is now viewed as a successful strategy as opposed to a more punching oriented attacker from the media of boxers in the past?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

How do systems test themselves these days if it isn't in the ring?

Agree!

Assume you can use "single leg" to take people down on the wrestling mat. If you don't test your skill where kicking and punching are allowed, how will you be able to know that your "single leg" is good enough to be used against a good striker?

 

[drop bear]

It is my position that NOT using MMA competitions to test is in no way an indictment against any particular system. As I've said before, MMA competition is not THE yardstick against which all martial arts must be tested.



no, we are not "stuck" with that. People can do that if they wish, but they can also NOT do that if they wish.



a collection of such news articles would tell us nothing.

I have no issue with not testing by competition. Just then the martial art is untested. I am not a MMA superstar I don't try and pretend to be. The guys who compete and win do so because they are technically better than me. I am also fine with people being better than I am.

I probably have the most street experience in my club but I have no illusions that I could overcome some of the quality ring only fighters I train with. They are hard fit guys who are really quite competent at hurting people.

I mean that is the concept of the thread that some tmas don't fair as well as MMAs. That some concepts are better buy the methods we can judge them.

It does seem that martial arts (and martial artists) that do fair well in competition also tend to fair well in self defence and it seems from my experience fairs well in training.

And that even a person with little training but has won a ton of street fights or even a ton of go in them tend to fair well in training and competition. Over the same person who has little training but has not fought.

So we are looking at all of these similar results but with different measures to come to an idea about what traits may make up an effective martial art.

I am basically going by what I can quantify rather than trusting too much to anecdotal information.

And I have a ton of anecdotal information. And so realise how suspect it can be.

But you don't have to do martial arts to become a combat monster. Self defence is a very small part of most peoples lives. And enough to get by is enough if you are enjoying yourself.

 

[drop bear]

Another article by Bill Wallace in which he says that Tyson had everything to lose and nothing to gain from fighting Gracie.
Black Belt - Google Books

Wayne parr kind of went through the same dilemma. Top of his game in a sport that is kind of out of vogue at the moment. But is it worth it?

He wound up not doing it and fair enough. I am doubtful I would get one over on him in a street fight either.

 

[Flying Crane]

Is there a different yardstick?

How do systems test themselves these days if it isn't in the ring?

Do traditional systems keep up with changing methods of attacks? Are they taking into account that with the popularization of MMA that maybe more attackers are going to take the situation to the ground because it is now viewed as a successful strategy as opposed to a more punching oriented attacker from the media of boxers in the past?

why does anybody "need" to test? If you are satisfied with the quality of your training, there is no need to "test" in competition. Again, if competition is your personal interest then go for it. But if not, there is no genuine need for it. There is no need to prove anything to anybody, certainly no to the world at large. why would anybody care what the rest of the world, who are probably mostly ignorant of what goes on in your training sessions, thinks of what you do?

 

[Flying Crane]

I have no issue with not testing by competition. Just then the martial art is untested. I am not a MMA superstar I don't try and pretend to be. The guys who compete and win do so because they are technically better than me. I am also fine with people being better than I am.

I probably have the most street experience in my club but I have no illusions that I could overcome some of the quality ring only fighters I train with. They are hard fit guys who are really quite competent at hurting people.

I mean that is the concept of the thread that some tmas don't fair as well as MMAs. That some concepts are better buy the methods we can judge them.

It does seem that martial arts (and martial artists) that do fair well in competition also tend to fair well in self defence and it seems from my experience fairs well in training.

And that even a person with little training but has won a ton of street fights or even a ton of go in them tend to fair well in training and competition. Over the same person who has little training but has not fought.

So we are looking at all of these similar results but with different measures to come to an idea about what traits may make up an effective martial art.

I am basically going by what I can quantify rather than trusting too much to anecdotal information.

And I have a ton of anecdotal information. And so realise how suspect it can be.

But you don't have to do martial arts to become a combat monster. Self defence is a very small part of most peoples lives. And enough to get by is enough if you are enjoying yourself.

i pretty much agree with all of this

 

[Hanzou]

Another article by Bill Wallace in which he says that Tyson had everything to lose and nothing to gain from fighting Gracie.
Black Belt - Google Books

Emin Boztepe is not Mike Tyson though. Outside of Wing Chun circles, most people have no idea who
Boztepe is. Which is probably why he supposedly keeps challenging major MMA fighters like Bas Rutten and Brock Lesnar.

Here's a video dissection of one of Boztepe's seminars:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NS65UiYqJ1o

Notice how far back his student flies from the impact of his punches. Again, it borders on Ki-power levels of martial silliness.