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

[Brian R. VanCise]

Love watching Metamoris!!! Very good solid technical matches with brilliant grappling!

 

[Hanzou]

A lot more of the straight guard game. Rather than the more top dominant wrestling game. I think 90s been was less active as well.

Randomly picked.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EUNkDacnDrM

Maybe just a more transitional game these days.

The thing I hated about Metamoris 3 was how nearly everything began with pulling guard. I would have liked to see more variations on take downs.

I mean seriously guys, Guard is a great position and all, but wouldn't you rather fall into side control and work from there?

That said, I loved the grappling. Eddie Bravo is like freaking Spider-Man with his holds. He really proved that the 10th planet stuff is legit.

I still prefer Gracie-style Bjj though.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The thing I hated about Metamoris 3 was how nearly everything began with pulling guard.

One concern that I have about the MMA rule set is if you use a perfect "leg lifting" to throw your opponent, you won't get any credit in MMA game. This is why people take the short cut, skip the throwing training, and just use "pulling guard" instead.

 

[Hanzou]

One concern that I have about the MMA rule set is if you use a perfect "leg lifting" to throw your opponent, you won't get any credit in MMA game. This is why people take the short cut, skip the throwing training, and just use "pulling guard" instead.

Don't worry, Ronda will save us all;

 

[Flying Crane]

, it showed several Kung Fu styles in a sparring or fighting format across regions, eras, and nationalities, and it all looked very similar. Yet it looked nothing like the popular image of how a Kung Fu stylist fights, how Kung Fu is portrayed in MA magazines, or how Kung Fu looks in its forms.

ever stop to consider that possibly the "popular image of how a kung fu stylist fights" might be just that: a popular image. It *might* not reflect reality. Too much Hollywood influence mixed in there.

Fighting is fighting. Kung fu "style" is just a training method that teaches the body how to engage in a certain way. That "stylized" kung fu doesn't reflect what it looks like when used for fighting. Principles are being put to use. But fighting looks like...well, fighting.

If you train under a good sifu, you come to understand this. If you've only watched movies and people who don't really understand the method, then you won't understand this.

 

[Hanzou]

ever stop to consider that possibly the "popular image of how a kung fu stylist fights" might be just that: a popular image. It *might* not reflect reality. Too much Hollywood influence mixed in there.

Fighting is fighting. Kung fu "style" is just a training method that teaches the body how to engage in a certain way. That "stylized" kung fu doesn't reflect what it looks like when used for fighting. Principles are being put to use. But fighting looks like...well, fighting.

If you train under a good sifu, you come to understand this. If you've only watched movies and people who don't really understand the method, then you won't understand this.

So if the end result has you looking like a kickboxer, or a MMA fighter, why not just practice kickboxing or MMA instead? What's the purpose of learning all those forms and weapons if in the end you just look like a MMA guy with less crisp technical ability?

Again, this is assuming that the Kung Fu practitioners in those videos are a good representation of what a Kung Fu exponent can accomplish in a fight via training.

 

[jezr74]

So if the end result has you looking like a kickboxer, or a MMA fighter, why not just practice kickboxing or MMA instead? What's the purpose of learning all those forms and weapons if in the end you just look like a MMA guy with less crisp technical ability?

Again, this is assuming that the Kung Fu practitioners in those videos are a good representation of what a Kung Fu exponent can accomplish in a fight via training.

An MMA guy looks like an MMA guy.

This goes back to the start of things, people learn a MA for different reasons. It's MMA that looks like Kickboxing, Boxing, Kung Fu, BJJ moves mixed together.

Anyhoo, I don't care what I look like, and I care less what other people think I look like. I train <Insert MA Here> therefore my actions are a result of that MA.

It's like saying an F1 drivers is really a mixture of Soccer Mum, Taxi Driver, Learner Driver and Fully Licensed driver. They have some fundamentals that are identical, but the differences are the rule set. I've never got a lift home from the pub by an F1 driver.

 

[Flying Crane]

Are you absolutely sold on the value of everything in your system? Does every technique make sound sense? Can you pull them off? You and I both walked away from kenpo because we had doubts about the training method, so I know you are a critical thinker, you don't accept things "as sifu says." I don't test the system to prove it to others, I do so to prove it to myself. Yes I can work with my students to practice different techniques, but can I pull it off when they are fully resisting? Good, and then because I know that working only with your own group can cause a bias in the testing sample, I then have to go outside the group and since I am not getting into street fights, that requires competition. Competition has taught me lessons that make me a better instructor. I see things even in my own systems that are clearly artifacts of people not pressure testing the material, going very kenpoish with a lack of resistance training, I won't do that to my students.

obviously these are all legitimate points that i don't disagree with. As I keep saying, if you are interested in competition, then do it. It certainly can teach you something.

but if you are not interested in competition, don't do it.

in terms of my own belief in the techniques of my system, that's not quite how we look at it. what we are really training is principles, as they are expressed by techniques. but it's the principle that is important, less so the specific technique. once you understand the principle, you can apply it with any movement, even if it's not a "proper"technique. it makes for a direct and very uncomplicated approach to combat. So to answer your question, I'll say that I do believe in the training approach that we use. being concerned with every technique, or every movement from every form, well that's not what we stress in our training. a whole lot of it distills down to variations on about a half dozen applications anyway.

 

[Flying Crane]

I agree to an extent. I don't stress about this stuff. But when it comes up in a thread like this, I do have concerns that people might not be learning what they think they're learning. And the stakes are high in self defense training.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk H

i agree, and I don't stress it either. The problem is, Seems to me that threads like this are really a thinly camouflaged opportunity for some people to be derisive of everything other than what they do. It's obnoxious really, and it's been done a million times here.

So I say, no, ya don't gotta compete if you aren't interested in it. And no, every style does not need to be "represented"in mma competition.

 

[Flying Crane]

So if the end result has you looking like a kickboxer, or a MMA fighter, why not just practice kickboxing or MMA instead? What's the purpose of learning all those forms and weapons if in the end you just look like a MMA guy with less crisp technical ability?

Again, this is assuming that the Kung Fu practitioners in those videos are a good representation of what a Kung Fu exponent can accomplish in a fight via training.

it doesn't matter what you look like when you fight. Why are you so concerned about it? You don't understand traditional Chinese martial arts, but you think it should somehow match up to a hollywood image.

and i haven't bothered to watch any of the videos, 'cause i honestly don't care what's on them. i understand the integrity of my own training. that's what matters to me. i'm not concerned with what everyone else in the world is doing.

 

[Tez3]

I've known quite a lot of people who want to compete just the once, whether it's MMA or their own style. many just want to test themselves in a competitive arena, perhaps to see if they can take a full contact strike or perhaps to see if they have the confidence to go in and fight. I've also known a lot of people who like to train 'opposing' styles such as a stand up one and a ground one, sometimes it's for extra techniques for self defence sometimes it's just for interest. We've had people who are very serious about their own style but like to come in to train MMA for relaxation believe it or not. Most martial artists are curious about other styles and do respect them, so training MMA is an exploration. Very few people are professional fighters doing nothing but fighting every so often. We have a lot of amateur fighters who fight professional rules, they will get a purse of course but are still amateur in the fact they have careers and jobs elsewhere. There's several people from CMAs who fight MMA, at least here there is, they enjoy their own training but like to have a go in the cage and why not, it's a sport. Most of the MMA gyms I know are cool so come in and play if you fancy, it's hard but fun. If you don't fancy that's cool too, no one should stress about what they look like if they are confident in their techniques and abilities. MMA is TMA there's no conflict there honestly! Just train what you love and enjoy.

 

[Steve]

A lot more of the straight guard game. Rather than the more top dominant wrestling game. I think 90s been was less active as well.

Randomly picked.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EUNkDacnDrM

Maybe just a more transitional game these days.

Love watching Metamoris!!! Very good solid technical matches with brilliant grappling!

The thing I hated about Metamoris 3 was how nearly everything began with pulling guard. I would have liked to see more variations on take downs.

I mean seriously guys, Guard is a great position and all, but wouldn't you rather fall into side control and work from there?

That said, I loved the grappling. Eddie Bravo is like freaking Spider-Man with his holds. He really proved that the 10th planet stuff is legit.

I still prefer Gracie-style Bjj though.

All great comments. I enjoyed some of the Metamoris matches more than others. In general, though, it's an example of how different competitions can have radically different rules. And as a result, the competetive strategies look very different. A commonly held belief is that a Mixed Martial Artist will attempt to use the same tactics in a street fight. Further, some people seem to think that they won't be able to help it.

I think this is just silly. For anyone. A MMAist is no more likely to pull guard in a street fight than a karateka is to break someone's neck or gouge their eye out in a bar fight. Just as an MMAist isn't going to punch or kick someone in a grappling match, or attempt to grapple in a boxing match. People move in and out of different situations.

What I mean is, if we're to learn any lessons from Metamoris, early UFCs and modern MMA, it's that martial artists can "fight like they train" but can also modify tactics to suit the situation without freezing, becoming indecisive or ineffective. Josh Barnett punches the hell out of guys in MMA, but he didn't punch Dean Lister once in their grappling match. He did, on the other hand, put on a very nice display of CaCC Wrestling. We see guys move from boxing or Muay Thai into MMA, and back again.

 

[Cirdan]

Welcome back Tez

MMA is TMA there's no conflict there honestly! Just train what you love and enjoy.

Indeed, it is all fist meets flesh. The only conflict comes from insecurity or plain old love of dead horse bashin.

 

[Steve]

i agree, and I don't stress it either. The problem is, Seems to me that threads like this are really a thinly camouflaged opportunity for some people to be derisive of everything other than what they do. It's obnoxious really, and it's been done a million times here.

So I say, no, ya don't gotta compete if you aren't interested in it. And no, every style does not need to be "represented"in mma competition.

You say this with MMA in mind, but seriously, step back and look. You and others are sharing thinly veiled derision just as much as anyone else.

Regarding competition, I agree. The point I was making earlier has to do with the qualifications of an instructor, more than the choices of a student. If you're learning from someone who has never actually found out whether they're doing it right, you risk finding out yourself when it's too late. "Oh no! I'm being mugged and my training didn't adequately prepare me!" That's too late.

Once again, it's not about technique. It's about YOUR ability or MY ability to execute the techniques. The advantage of competition is that it is a very effective way to lower the stakes. It's not the only way, but in the safe world in which most of us live, it's the most effective, IMO.

 

[Steve]

it doesn't matter what you look like when you fight. Why are you so concerned about it? You don't understand traditional Chinese martial arts, but you think it should somehow match up to a hollywood image.

and i haven't bothered to watch any of the videos, 'cause i honestly don't care what's on them. i understand the integrity of my own training. that's what matters to me. i'm not concerned with what everyone else in the world is doing.

Speaking only for myself, it's not what you look like. It's how closely your fighting resembles the techniques, demonstrations and philosophies of the style. What we've seen and heard in the controlled environment of training is radically different than examples we've seen of unscripted, uncontrolled interactions. The closest I've seen so far of a demonstration of the WC philosophies outside of compliant or scripted demos is the one where the kid is sparring with the muay thai guy. That was neat, really, and the way he jammed up the other kid and pushed him back was interesting. But as everyone said, the two kids weren't well trained.

So, you say we don't know what it looks like. Well, I'd love to see some examples of what it looks like. Please share some examples. It would be awesome.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Bas Rutten on eye pokes versus grappling (At 3:00 mark)

Joe Rogan Podcast With Bas Rutten Talking About Fake Martial Arts People - YouTube

While I generally agree with Bas on this there are two overlooked things that need to be taken into account.

1) There is a difference between getting a poke in the eye and having your eye completely destroyed leaving you permanently blind in one eye for the rest of your life (and never being able to watch 3D TV ) I am sure that anyone who has had a penetrating eye injury would be able to attest to the effects as to the level of pain and shock better than any of us on this forum can. I don't know of anyone who could honestly say they would not try to avoid that possibility at almost any cost if they could.

2) Anyone who would consider breaking someone's neck and end their life had better be absolutely sure that they are mentally and emotionally prepared to do it and live with the consequences and they had better be prepared to defend themselves in court when they do (breaking someones neck because they poked you in the eye might not go down so well in the courts). An serious eye injury is nasty but it is not necessarily life threatening.

 

[MJS]

The winner of TUF 18 (2013) Chris Holdsworth was fairly pure Bjj, and he pretty decisively won the competition. If you watch his fights on the series, once he got a hold of you, it was all over. He's currently undefeated in the UFC.

I don't dispute that those folks exist. My point was simply that you had a world class grappler (Gracie) get destroyed by another grappler (Hughes) who also had more superior striking. Note that in my closing post, I said that it's important to have a good ground game, but to be sure you add in the other stuff as well.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I don't dispute that those folks exist. My point was simply that you had a world class grappler (Gracie) get destroyed by another grappler (Hughes) who also had more superior striking. Note that in my closing post, I said that it's important to have a good ground game, but to be sure you add in the other stuff as well.

Also Holdsworth is working by all accounts to substantially improve his striking game because he will not go very far in the UFC without improvements.

 

[MJS]

Just to toss in my 2 pennies on a few things you said:

I'm with you.

Agreed as well.



I don't think that anyone is saying they could do well in MMA. I know I would get my **** kicked, unless they had an Old Fart division for geriatrics. It is more that people are agreeing with your position that they simply aren't interested in the competition. [/quote]

Although some will say that their art wasn't designed for that stuff, etc. and we've seen it on this very forum. As I said earlier, if one doesn't wish to compete, they shouldn't feel as if they have to. I should be able to join a BJJ gym, for the sake of learning the art, and not frowned upon for not entering an event. Of course, as I also said, I do see an importance in competing and testing yourself. If you don't wish to test yourself in a ring, tourny, etc, then find another way. And FWIW, I've never claimed to be some Ultimate Fighter either.

Again, anyone outside of MMA with that attitude is a fool. But people always look to the champions of MMA to use as an example. If I was in a real fight with an MMA guy it would only be because I couldn't avoid the fight. But I would say straight away that my first option given the opportunity would be the point of the elbow to the face. I teach that in Krav as a primary strike in weapon disarms.


As to 100% of Aikido being legal in the ring ... not true. Even the basic takedowns you see would not be legal as the technique actually is a knee drop to the neck in real life. (Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent) Another is the elbow strike to the ribs on the way to applying nikkyo or yonkyo. (Striking downward using the point of the elbow)


Kaitenage, one of the main take downs involves a knife hand strike to the neck. (Striking to the spine or the back of the head)


Iriminage is a bicep strike to the throat, many of the joint manipulations actually go on break fingers (Small joint manipulation), after applying sankyo the follow up is the knife hand to the back of the neck followed by the knee to the face if he's still standing. (would certainly come under the unsportsmanlike rule even if not considered a grounded opponent)


All takedowns in Aikido involve turning the head away from Nage when you are on the floor. That is to protect your face from getting kicked. (Kicking the head of a grounded opponent)


Release from a shoulder grab amongst others, not done in isolation, involves a shot at the eyes. (Eye gouging of any kind) It is only if that strike fails you move to the next technique such as nikkyo or an arm bar.


Defence against a shoulder grab from behind involves a strike to the groin. (Groin attacks of any kind)

After any of the takedowns where you are sill standing and you have a standing wrist lock the finishing technique is the heel stomp to a vulnerable point. (Stomping a grounded opponent)

When you consider Aikido only has about 15 techniques a lot of them work outside the rules of MMA.


Sure you can say that you don't have to use those nasty moves, just as you see Aikido normally trained, but that's a little like saying you can take your gun into the fight but you can't have any bullets.

And again I would say about the Vale Tude etc, that Aikido was not represented because no one from Aikido was interested, if indeed they were even invited.

Agreed. From the UFC site:

No small joint manipulation. Aikido and Arnis, both have small joint manip. and according to the rules, it's not legal. So, while some may be, I would agree with you, in saying that 100% of certain arts can be used. Of course, it's a pet peeve of mine, when I hear people always talk about 'the deadly' things in their art. Sure, those things are all very viable, useful tools, but if that's what one needs, in order to always win, then IMHO, that person missed out on some lessons.

The results of MMA competition are really only relevant in the context of that fight. If a champion boxer was defeated in an MMA match it doesn't mean boxing is ineffective.on the street any more that it proves MMA is effective. I have no doubt both are effective. Sure you can argue that techniques are proven to work under pressure in the ring. So I can choke out an opponent in the dojo but because I don't compete in the ring I don't know that my choke will work? Yeah right! But that's pretty much what at least one person has been telling me.

True, and yet we see countless fan boys, make the claim that if it's been done in the ring, if (insert your fav fighter here) did it, then IT MUST WORK! Sorry, I call BS on that. That's just like what I've said many times...that I don't care if it works for my teacher, or his teacher, or his teachers teacher...I want to know it works for ME!!!! My high percentage, bread and butter move, might not work for the next guy, just like his might not work for me.

And I would say that instructor is a being totally unrealistic. You can minimise the risk of take down but you must be prepared to be taken to the ground. But again, just because a tactic fails in the ring against a highly trained opponent doesn't mean it will fail on the street. I teach that you take whatever you are offered. It is not realistic to say "in situation a) I will do this, if he does b) I will do that". To me that approach is wrong. It means I have to wait for my attacker to make a move before I can determine how I will respond. So if a person is trying to take me down with a shoot, sure I might use the downward elbow, but only if I've managed a sprawl or at least got one leg back first. If that's not an option, cool, I'll work from whatever situation I am in.
:asian:

Agreed once again. Situations will vary all the time. We could have 5 different people throw a punch at us, and slight variations, will alter or could alter, what our response is. I've seen some pretty questionable take down defenses in Kenpo. Of course, when I complain about them, I get, from the die hard Kenpo guys, "Well, it's because you don't understand the art. You had a crap teacher. You didn't learn the 'real' Kenpo." Sure, all of those things might very well be true. However, I'm not drinking the same kool aid as they are, so blind to other things out there, and not one to assume that my art is the ultimate. I have to wonder if those same Kenpo Gods, have ever tried, or should I say, tested, their defense against someone who really knows how to shoot in for a take down. Yes, I'm aware that the average street punk probably won't be a UFC vet, but I look at it like this...if I can make my defense work against someone who knows what they're doing, odds are high that it'll work even better against the untrained guy.

 

[Hanzou]

it doesn't matter what you look like when you fight. Why are you so concerned about it? You don't understand traditional Chinese martial arts, but you think it should somehow match up to a hollywood image.

How does someone not understand a martial art? I've been doing martial arts for many years, and I know technical skill when I see it. A lot of those videos don't show a lot of technical skill, at least not in the unscripted fighting side of things. The forms match the hollywood image, yet the actual fighting does not.

My question is simply why is that the case? I wonder why such an honest question makes you so defensive.

and i haven't bothered to watch any of the videos, 'cause i honestly don't care what's on them. i understand the integrity of my own training. that's what matters to me. i'm not concerned with what everyone else in the world is doing.

Well that's great. However, maybe you should watch them to understand exactly what I'm talking about.