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

[Hanzou]

Actual alive akido.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4mGjDjsCWGY

Meh.

Might as well do Judo instead if you're going to fight like that.

 

[RTKDCMB]

I think you would agree that an Okinawan Karateka can defend themselves against a wrestler trying to take them down yes? So why exactly can't an Okinawan Karateka defend themselves against a wrestler trying to take them down in a ring or arena?

Additionally, if you can escape from a grappler on the ground in a SD situation, why couldn't you escape from a grappler in a ring or arena?

Because there are some things that you may need to use that you are not allowed to use in the ring or cage.

 

[Steve]

i think you'll find that having not sparred what will happen is the same as some masters in 1950s who also thought that but when sparring they did this wu vs chan 1954 (taichi versus white crane) - YouTube

Thank you for sharing that video.

Here's the thing, guys, and I really believe it. They say that you will fight how you train. I agree with this, but only if you are training for the task. I've gone on before about instructional theory, and how people learn. But here is a perfect example. The match we saw bore very little resemblance to the way these "masters" trained. If you don't train well, using common sense instructional theory, you will not fight how you train. You will fight like someone with virtually no training.

So, to answer Hanzou's original question. Why do "TMAs" (in quotes, because it really is a subjective term) have more difficulty in the ring/octagon? The answer is common sense. The reason Muay Thai does better is because they train using solid instructional theory. Muay Thai develops skills in a logical, progressive manner that ends with functional application. Muay Thai starts with basic instruction in appropriate technique. Muay Thai incorporates drills that reinforce the technique and exercises that prepare the body to execute the technique. And then, throughout the training process, you are required to execute the technique and apply it in combination with every other technique in an unscripted environment where you receive clear and immediate feedback. "Crap, I didn't slip that jab and it hurt my face."

And as a result, when a Muay Thai trained martial artists gets into a fight, they fight like they train. They have developed skills that work for them under pressure. This common sense, instructional theory is the way we teach everyone to do everything, except martial arts. Some styles think that common sense is too common, and they want to be uncommon. Fine, but I challenge you to think of another area of expertise where someone doesn't do what they are training to do to application. And further, I believe that on some level, everyone here knows whether they're walking the talk or not. Are you training to use your techniques in a fight? Or are you training to perform the perfect kata or form? Are you training to perfect your chi sau, or are you training to use WC in a fight?

I want to make it clear that this is why I get a chuckle in conversations like this. Could WC work? Probably. I think it could. Any style could work. It's not the techniques (usually). It's the way the techniques are trained. It's the way skills are developed. If it's trained to application... which, based upon the conversations I've seen over the years, is not common. Could Shotokan Karate work? Sure, but only if you train it to application.

BJJ is not inherently better than any other art. The criticisms of BJJ are well found, in general. It is very specific. But BJJ has an advantage over a lot of other styles. I KNOW that I can choke you out. I KNOW that I can take you to the ground if I want to, and I KNOW that I can maintain a dominant position and disengage (that means stand back up) if I want to. How do I know? Because I do these things. I have developed these skills in the same way that I learned to play the clarinet, ride a bike, read, play chess and every thing else I've ever learned.

What's the difference between Pee Wee football and Tiny Tigers TKD classes? Answer: In Pee Wee football, the kids are learning to play football. in Tiny Tigers TKD, the kids are learning "respect."

The problem isn't the style in question. It's how the style is trained. And so when people talk about "traditional" the big difference is application.

Good or bad, competitive martial arts DO fight like they train. But, the implication on the part of the TMA mindset is that you will ALSO fight like you train, and you train deadly, for the street. But when we see videos like the one above, and we can also see in EVERY OTHER THING WE DO OR LEARN, this is not true. If you don't train using common sense, fundamentally sound, instructional theory, you will not fight like you train. You will fight like someone who is virtually untrained.

 

[K-man]

Okay, so what if someone wants to use Goju for MMA, why can't they use it? What rules prevent Goju from being fully effective in NHB competition?

OK. Although it is not the way most traditional Okinawan based Goju karateka go there are a couple who have gone on to the UFC and a few others from traditional Okinawan karate. There is no reason why Goju would not be effective in that type of competition if someone wanted to go that way. Just that very few choose to.

Neil Grove is the Ultimate Challenge UK HW Champion. He holds a shodan in Goju-ryu Karate and won all his fights by way of TKO.

Gunnar Nelson, Goju-ryu black belt, Iceland's most promising up-and-coming Karate talent of 2005, currently undefeated in 10 bouts.

Not Goju but still from traditional styles ...

Gustavo Sampaio is a 3rd Dan in Uechi-ryu Karate and a multiple-time champion in Full-contact Karate. None of his 5 MMA wins have gone the distance and the only loss came via decision.

Jesse Bongfeldt, amateur Canadian WW Champion, Amateur Western Canadian LHW Champion, 2x TKO WW Champion, RITC WW and MW Champion. A brown belt in Isshin-ryu, Jesse said in an interview: "I started training young, as all of my family was in Judo and I loved Karate!"

Brian Rogers is a brown belt in Isshin-ryu Karate who currently fights for Bellator. 8 of his 9 wins have come by a way of KO.

Mike Ciesnolevicz built his base on Karate, Judo and kickboxing, honed his wrestling skills at Lock Haven University and eventually joined Pat Miletich in MFS. Mike is a blackbelt in Shorin Ryu Karate under John Korab. After leaving the UFC Mike began training Karate again and returned to his winning ways.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Imagine if a TMA practioner dominated an MMA tournament. That praciticioner would be set for life. I find it hard to believe that every TMA pracitioner in the entire world has no desire for fortune or fame, or to enhance the health of their style of choice if they had the ability to do so.

Four things:

1) Getting a job is a much more reliable way of getting money than fighting.

2) Who wants to be famous anyway, people always bugging you and asking for autographs, no privacy, people scrutinizing your every move, no thanks.

3) The best way to enhance the health of your style (whatever that means exactly) is to concentrate on your style and not try to turn it into something it isn't.

4) Not everyone who does martial arts wants or needs to compete, its not always about having something to prove or boosting your ego or showing how badass you are.

 

[Steve]

Four things:

1) Getting a job is a much more reliable way of getting money than fighting.

Unless fighting is your job. I only point this out because it's pretty subjective. What's reliable depends upon a lot of things having nothing to do with the UFC, MMA or competition at large.

2) Who wants to be famous anyway, people always bugging you and asking for autographs, no privacy, people scrutinizing your every move, no thanks.

Again, this is very subjective, and frankly, it's a deflection. It's like someone saying, "I love my job, and even if I won the mega millions lottery, I'd still work every day." BS, but we tell ourselves what we need to in order to be happy. "I wouldn't want to be rich. PDiddy said it right. More money, more problems." LOL. Frankly, I'd give fame a shot and so would most people, particularly if it was through the application of expertise, such as with an MA. What I mean is, there is a difference between the fame and noteriety of being acknowledged as a pioneer in a field of expertise, and being famous because you started an internet meme on YouTube or Instagram.

3) The best way to enhance the health of your style (whatever that means exactly) is to concentrate on your style and not try to turn it into something it isn't.

This is also a great way to stagnate and foster a learning environment that is more concerned with dogma and tradition than practicality and efficacy of skill.

4) Not everyone who does martial arts wants or needs to compete, its not always about having something to prove or boosting your ego or showing how badass you are.

True, and most people who train in BJJ, MMA or other styles enjoy the benefits of the learning style and never compete. Even if you don't compete, you benefit from those who do.

 

[Flying Crane]

Question: How does a system get a rep for being good at fighting?
Answer: It fought.

Somehow, somewhere it made a name for itself, practitioners went out and kicked ***.

...

But if you claim to have a fighting art designed to defend against other skilled fighters, your system or some representatives of that system better go out and promote the brand. Right now that arena is MMA or kickboxing or submission grappling, heck the options for weapon tournaments are opening up these days, have you seen those HEMA guys? At some point living off the rep of some long dead founder doesn't count anymore.

I want to make sure I am clear on your position here. Are you saying that a reputation in mma competition is the only way you would accept that a method is useful and effective?

Are you saying that if one, or a small number, of proponents of a particular method enter mma competition and perform poorly, then the entire system that they practice is deemed ineffective?

my own answer to both of these questions is "no". But I am interested in your answers because I would like to make sure I understand your position.

 

[jezr74]

Exactly. No-gi Judo for example is now being incorporated into MMA curriculums because Rhonda Rousey is dominating with it. Before that, people figured that Judo throws were unpractical, and felt that wrestling offered better general takedowns. Now you have Rousey tossing people with Judo throws, and no one can counter them.

If someone started dominating with Wing Chun, Ninjutsu, or Aikido, the exact same thing would happen. However, its doubtful that would happen due to the training methods of those styles.

Is judo considered traditional?

So from your statement here, the style is irrelevant? If someone is skilled enough to make a move work consistently, than everyone will train it. Just needs someone to apply it in the first instance, is that what your meaning?

 

[Hanzou]

OK. Although it is not the way most traditional Okinawan based Goju karateka go there are a couple who have gone on to the UFC and a few others from traditional Okinawan karate. There is no reason why Goju would not be effective in that type of competition if someone wanted to go that way. Just that very few choose to.

Neil Grove also trained in submission wrestling.
Gunnar Nelson gave up Goju at 17 to train full time in Bjj. He has a Bjj black belt under Renzo Gracie.

My question is this; Why did both of these Goju stylists need to train in Bjj or submission wrestling before entering MMA?

 

[Hanzou]

Is judo considered traditional?

So from your statement here, the style is irrelevant? If someone is skilled enough to make a move work consistently, than everyone will train it. Just needs someone to apply it in the first instance, is that what your meaning?

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.

 

[Blindside]

I want to make sure I am clear on your position here. Are you saying that a reputation in mma competition is the only way you would accept that a method is useful and effective?

No, not the only way, but certainly the most practical and immediately visible. For me "useful and effective" has to be shown by regular use against a resisting opponent, combat sports are the simplest way to do that. As an alternate example, a system could train a large contingent of LEOs and generate its reputation on the experiences of those officers over time.

Are you saying that if one, or a small number, of proponents of a particular method enter mma competition and perform poorly, then the entire system that they practice is deemed ineffective?

No, no more than having just one, or a small number of proponents of a particular method that do well prove that it is effective. There are lots of BJJers, wrestlers, and muay thaiers who don't make the transition to MMA, but the vast majority of skillsets used in the championship levels are from those systems. Lyoto Machida by himself doesn't prove that shotokan is effective at a championship level, it is certainly pointed to as evidence, but one individual isn't proof. But if in a couple of years if the top 10 of each weight division is scattered with Shotokan strikers, then most people would take it as evidence. If every member of Whipping Willow kung fu has gotten his butt handed to him in amateur level MMA it should rightfully raise questions about the effectiveness of that system. I don't even think that you have to be a champion, if the fighters from the system can go 50/50 against other systems,

So I study PTK, the unarmed portion of the system by itself will not make a successful transition to MMA or kickboxing, and I wouldn't expect it to, it is hamstrung by the assumption of weapons being involved. So how do I "prove" effectiveness? I spar full contact both within the system and against other systems, it just isn't a MMA venue. And I am not the only guy from my system doing so, we tend to alot of fighters to these events, and it keeps the system informed about what is working and what doesn't.

 

[drop bear]

Thank you for sharing that video.

Here's the thing, guys, and I really believe it. They say that you will fight how you train. I agree with this, but only if you are training for the task. I've gone on before about instructional theory, and how people learn. But here is a perfect example. The match we saw bore very little resemblance to the way these "masters" trained. If you don't train well, using common sense instructional theory, you will not fight how you train. You will fight like someone with virtually no training.

So, to answer Hanzou's original question. Why do "TMAs" (in quotes, because it really is a subjective term) have more difficulty in the ring/octagon? The answer is common sense. The reason Muay Thai does better is because they train using solid instructional theory. Muay Thai develops skills in a logical, progressive manner that ends with functional application. Muay Thai starts with basic instruction in appropriate technique. Muay Thai incorporates drills that reinforce the technique and exercises that prepare the body to execute the technique. And then, throughout the training process, you are required to execute the technique and apply it in combination with every other technique in an unscripted environment where you receive clear and immediate feedback. "Crap, I didn't slip that jab and it hurt my face."

And as a result, when a Muay Thai trained martial artists gets into a fight, they fight like they train. They have developed skills that work for them under pressure. This common sense, instructional theory is the way we teach everyone to do everything, except martial arts. Some styles think that common sense is too common, and they want to be uncommon. Fine, but I challenge you to think of another area of expertise where someone doesn't do what they are training to do to application. And further, I believe that on some level, everyone here knows whether they're walking the talk or not. Are you training to use your techniques in a fight? Or are you training to perform the perfect kata or form? Are you training to perfect your chi sau, or are you training to use WC in a fight?

I want to make it clear that this is why I get a chuckle in conversations like this. Could WC work? Probably. I think it could. Any style could work. It's not the techniques (usually). It's the way the techniques are trained. It's the way skills are developed. If it's trained to application... which, based upon the conversations I've seen over the years, is not common. Could Shotokan Karate work? Sure, but only if you train it to application.

BJJ is not inherently better than any other art. The criticisms of BJJ are well found, in general. It is very specific. But BJJ has an advantage over a lot of other styles. I KNOW that I can choke you out. I KNOW that I can take you to the ground if I want to, and I KNOW that I can maintain a dominant position and disengage (that means stand back up) if I want to. How do I know? Because I do these things. I have developed these skills in the same way that I learned to play the clarinet, ride a bike, read, play chess and every thing else I've ever learned.

What's the difference between Pee Wee football and Tiny Tigers TKD classes? Answer: In Pee Wee football, the kids are learning to play football. in Tiny Tigers TKD, the kids are learning "respect."

The problem isn't the style in question. It's how the style is trained. And so when people talk about "traditional" the big difference is application.

Good or bad, competitive martial arts DO fight like they train. But, the implication on the part of the TMA mindset is that you will ALSO fight like you train, and you train deadly, for the street. But when we see videos like the one above, and we can also see in EVERY OTHER THING WE DO OR LEARN, this is not true. If you don't train using common sense, fundamentally sound, instructional theory, you will not fight like you train. You will fight like someone who is virtually untrained.

The thing with that also is you could theoretically fight exactly how you train. In that you can drop a guy with a pair of 16 ounce gloves.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IgOsM80W-UQ

 

[Hanzou]

Is judo considered traditional?

I wouldn't. Judo was developed for the modern world, and it's been evolving ever since its birth. Kano created it to evolve over time, which is why you have Olympic Judo, Bjj and Sambo all emerging from it. Unfortunately, I think Kano's dislike of ground fighting, and the Olympics really hampered Judo's development during the middle of the 20th century. Fortunately, the Brazilians pushed Bjj into exciting directions in the same time frame. So while. Judo was ebbing in Japan and the west, Bjj was ready to burst out of South America. While Sambo never achieved the worldwide fame of Bjj, it was still nurtured and developed in its native Russia.

Bjj showed Judo that Newaza was a powerful tool that shouldn't be neglected. Sambo showed the benefits and potency of wrestling takedowns, and leg locks. The wonderful thing happening now is the cross-training of Judo, Sambo, and Bjj, as all three look to one another to fill in perceived gaps in their styles. There's judo guys at Bjj schools, there's Bj guys at Judo clubs, and there's grapplers from both styles seeking Sambo guys to come in and share what they know. It's going to be interesting to see what develops from the "three sisters" comparing notes with one another.

We may see a new martial art emerge because of it.

 

[K-man]

Neil Grove also trained in submission wrestling.
Gunnar Nelson gave up Goju at 17 to train full time in Bjj. He has a Bjj black belt under Renzo Gracie.

My question is this; Why did both of these Goju stylists need to train in Bjj or submission wrestling before entering MMA?

Exactly! Which is the point I have been making all along. If someone wants to compete in MMA of course they train to compete in MMA. The other point is that very few guys from traditional styles even want to make the transition. I don't really see the point you are trying to make. MMA fighters train to compete in the MMA. Most other martial artists don't. I am sure there would be literally thousands of people training MMA who would get their arses whipped if they went into the professional ring. Does that mean that MMA sucks or is it just that their training doesn't prepare them for that level of competition? I'm sure that your training has provided you with the knowledge and expertise to fight at the very highest levels of MMA. I'll bet you're a real animal in the ring. I'll confess, my training hasn't prepared me for anything like that. But at 66 I don't give a rat's. I'm still training, I'm still learning and I'm still enjoying my training. Let's see if the same can be said for you when you're 66.

 

[Hanzou]

Exactly! Which is the point I have been making all along. If someone wants to compete in MMA of course they train to compete in MMA. The other point is that very few guys from traditional styles even want to make the transition. I don't really see the point you are trying to make. MMA fighters train to compete in the MMA. Most other martial artists don't.

My point would be, why would a Goju need to train in Bjj or another form of submission wrestling? Goju and other TMAs view themselves as "complete" systems. Wouldn't Goju alone provide the tools necessary to compete in MMA?

I am sure there would be literally thousands of people training MMA who would get their arses whipped if they went into the professional ring. Does that mean that MMA sucks or is it just that their training doesn't prepare them for that level of competition? I'm sure that your training has provided you with the knowledge and expertise to fight at the very highest levels of MMA. I'll bet you're a real animal in the ring. I'll confess, my training hasn't prepared me for anything like that. But at 66 I don't give a rat's. I'm still training, I'm still learning and I'm still enjoying my training. Let's see if the same can be said for you when you're 66.

Well Helio Gracie was doing Bjj well into his 90s, so I'm sure I'll be just fine.

 

[Steve]

A question I have is why some martial artists are so helpless.

Let's get real here. It's more than training for Mma. Some martial artists aren't training for conflict of any kind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steve]

A question I have is why some martial artists are so helpless.

Let's get real here. It's more than training for Mma. Some martial artists aren't training for conflict of any kind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just to clarify, Some martial artists aren't training for conflict of any kind but think they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[K-man]

My point would be, why would a Goju need to train in Bjj or another form of submission wrestling? Goju and other TMAs view themselves as "complete" systems. Wouldn't Goju alone provide the tools necessary to compete in MMA?

I'm sure that Goju alone has the tools to compete. The question is more, does it have the tools required to compete successfully in a competition that has rules that favour grappling, without specialist training in ground work? I think you are so blinkered in your approach to other martial arts and so fixated on competition where ground fighting is actually encouraged, that you cannot see that most reality based martial arts would go to the ground only as a last resort and if you are on the ground you would be getting back on your feet as soon as possible. In Krav I teach a small amount of ground fighting of which virtually nothing has anything to do with submission.

But that is beside the point. Why can't you accept the fact that most people learning martial arts don't want to compete? Even using the generic term Goju shows your ignorance of the different styles of Goju. When I was learning Goju Kai, which does have a sport background, we did zero grappling. Why? Because right up to the World Championships there was no grappling allowed. Same with the 'All Styles' competitions that are around. They weren't training for MMA style tournaments. I am the first to say that the absence of grappling is, in my opinion a huge omission, but only if you want a more complete style. Kyokushin which is in my opinion pretty strong karate, is also very sport oriented and if you look to the UFC there are dozens of Kyokushin guys that have transitioned into MMA. Now I am training Okinawan Goju there is lots of grappling but not much ground fighting. In this area no one seems at all interested in competition. I still consider it a complete system because it is a system that fulfils the requirements of self defence.

 

[Steve]

I'm sure that Goju alone has the tools to compete. The question is more, does it have the tools required to compete successfully in a competition that has rules that favour grappling, without specialist training in ground work? I think you are so blinkered in your approach to other martial arts and so fixated on competition where ground fighting is actually encouraged, that you cannot see that most reality based martial arts would go to the ground only as a last resort and if you are on the ground you would be getting back on your feet as soon as possible. In Krav I teach a small amount of ground fighting of which virtually nothing has anything to do with submission.

But that is beside the point. Why can't you accept the fact that most people learning martial arts don't want to compete? Even using the generic term Goju shows your ignorance of the different styles of Goju. When I was learning Goju Kai, which does have a sport background, we did zero grappling. Why? Because right up to the World Championships there was no grappling allowed. Same with the 'All Styles' competitions that are around. They weren't training for MMA style tournaments. I am the first to say that the absence of grappling is, in my opinion a huge omission, but only if you want a more complete style. Kyokushin which is in my opinion pretty strong karate, is also very sport oriented and if you look to the UFC there are dozens of Kyokushin guys that have transitioned into MMA. Now I am training Okinawan Goju there is lots of grappling but not much ground fighting. In this area no one seems at all interested in competition. I still consider it a complete system because it is a system that fulfils the requirements of self defence.

what exactly is your point? I don't get it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Flying Crane]

No, not the only way, but certainly the most practical and immediately visible. For me "useful and effective" has to be shown by regular use against a resisting opponent, combat sports are the simplest way to do that. As an alternate example, a system could train a large contingent of LEOs and generate its reputation on the experiences of those officers over time.



No, no more than having just one, or a small number of proponents of a particular method that do well prove that it is effective. There are lots of BJJers, wrestlers, and muay thaiers who don't make the transition to MMA, but the vast majority of skillsets used in the championship levels are from those systems. Lyoto Machida by himself doesn't prove that shotokan is effective at a championship level, it is certainly pointed to as evidence, but one individual isn't proof. But if in a couple of years if the top 10 of each weight division is scattered with Shotokan strikers, then most people would take it as evidence. If every member of Whipping Willow kung fu has gotten his butt handed to him in amateur level MMA it should rightfully raise questions about the effectiveness of that system. I don't even think that you have to be a champion, if the fighters from the system can go 50/50 against other systems,

So I study PTK, the unarmed portion of the system by itself will not make a successful transition to MMA or kickboxing, and I wouldn't expect it to, it is hamstrung by the assumption of weapons being involved. So how do I "prove" effectiveness? I spar full contact both within the system and against other systems, it just isn't a MMA venue. And I am not the only guy from my system doing so, we tend to alot of fighters to these events, and it keeps the system informed about what is working and what doesn't.

I guess I just don't see it that way. If someone is a successful competitor, then I see it as that person is successful. The style they've trained is less important and that person's success is no guarantee that the style is the magic ticket. People start to assume that, well So-and-So trained in BJJ, so they MUST be good, just look at all the BJJ in MMA. I don't make that assumption. There's plenty of lousy people in every style, including BJJ. It still comes down to the person, whether he's successful or not. What tools he chooses to use doesn't automatically guarantee anything.

I think some people who are proponents of certain styles have embraced MMA type competition. That's fine if that's what they are interested in. But their example encourages others to follow in their footsteps and pursue the same, or similar styles if they too are interested in MMA competition. So it creates a pattern that people notice: MMA has a lot of influence from things like BJJ, Muay Thai, and boxing. And people mistake this to mean that those are the only methods that work for MMA. I guess in some ways they may be correct because I'm guessing the training methods that many people follow in these systems probably has become highly tailored to be successful specifically in MMA bouts.

there's a whole butt-load of different systems of martial arts out there. I'm gonna suspect that many of them never had anyone "represent" that system in modern MMA of any kind. Their lack of a presence in MMA tells me exactly nothing about whether or not the method itself is effective, or makes good sense as a training methodology or as an approach to combat. It certainly doesn't encourage me to assume it's a poor system. The desire to compete in MMA is something that only a tiny minority of martial artists have. To think that a system must have been represented in MMA competition in order to prove its effectiveness is, in my opinion, pretty short-sighted.