Would a single art survive in UFC?

[Odin]

I never said mma wasn't useful for self defense, I am just defending the usefulness of other arts. The UFC has caused people to soley believe that mma is the way to go for self defense and other arts are no good just because of what they see in the controlled environment of the octagon.

Cheers
Sam:asian:

I understand what your saying, but one thing I've noticed about martialtalk is there are alot of people on this site that attack MMA's usefullness in the streets....its mentioned in almost all MMA debates i read.

 

[Tez3]

I understand what your saying, but one thing I've noticed about martialtalk is there are alot of people on this site that attack MMA's usefullness in the streets....its mentioned in almost all MMA debates i read.

I've noticed this too, it's as if people really want MMA to be seen as alright for a competition but it's not for 'real' whereas whatever style/art they study is. It's a shame.

 

[Shotgun Buddha]

I've noticed this too, it's as if people really want MMA to be seen as alright for a competition but it's not for 'real' whereas whatever style/art they study is. It's a shame.

If MMA is seen as purely for competition, then it means they don't have to care about anything to to with it. Thus its pressure testing can be safely ignored.
Its basically people being a little too wrapped up in their own style to pay attention to anything else.

 

[zDom]

Once again, this has little to do with possibilty so much as reliabilty.
A person might be able to kill a mountain lion by putting out its eye with their thumbs.
But if you had to plan how to kill one, would you plan on doing with a sniper rifle or with your thumbs?
Thats what we're doing when we train, we're making a plan.
Sorry if I seem rambling.

Ahh: but there, indeed, is the rub:

Self defense isn't something you PLAN for like a cage match; it is something that just happens — like an animal attack.

If you are PLANNING to go out and kill a great white shark or mountain lion, sure: grab a sniper rifle or a harpoon.

But then to take THAT logic and then say, "Why bother training eye strikes? A sniper rifle or harpoon is proven to be MUCH more effective ..." doesn't make sense.

If you are planning to compete in a UFC match, I can see the benefit of coming up with a specific plan for dealing with a specific opponent. That makes perfect sense.

But then again, to address the topic of "well rounded," if you are tailoring your responses based on what you see in the ring, you could very well be unprepared for some of the things that happen OUTside the ring.

And don't take this wrong: I'm not saying training MMA is not effective for self defense.

But one thing that has been proved over and over again is, "training is highly specific."

Experience has shown me (from newbies showing up at the dojang) that completely untrained people are very often unpredictable*— it stands to reason, therefore, that having a wider range of possible responses is desirable if training for self defense is your primary goal.

And something that is reliable IN the ring — pulling guard, muay thai clinch, rear naked choke — could put you in a position to be seriously HURT outside the ring where the possibility of additional attackers is real and even in some places likely.

Sorry about the tangent; it always seems to happen in these discussions, eh?

 

[matt.m]

People train to defend themselves or to compete or both. Look in all honesty if you practice single leg takedowns enough you will be good at them. If you practice front snap kicks enough you will be good at them.

 

[Tez3]

As I've said before, we train MMA in the MMA class,self defence in the self defence class and TMA in the TMA class! Perhaps the most important class is actually the cardio class! Hard to do any of the above if you are breathing out of your backside after a few seconds! The best kick/punch/takedown in the world is no good if you can't move having no fitness! You certainly couldn't run away which is one of my favourite moves.

 

[Rook]

Ahh: but there, indeed, is the rub:

Self defense isn't something you PLAN for like a cage match; it is something that just happens — like an animal attack.

If you are PLANNING to go out and kill a great white shark or mountain lion, sure: grab a sniper rifle or a harpoon.

But then to take THAT logic and then say, "Why bother training eye strikes? A sniper rifle or harpoon is proven to be MUCH more effective ..." doesn't make sense.

I don't understand your point here.

If you are planning to compete in a UFC match, I can see the benefit of coming up with a specific plan for dealing with a specific opponent. That makes perfect sense.

Agreed.

But then again, to address the topic of "well rounded," if you are tailoring your responses based on what you see in the ring, you could very well be unprepared for some of the things that happen OUTside the ring.

Before we go too far on this strain, remember that what you see in the UFC and PRIDE are the cream of crop in terms of pro fighters - at the lower rungs you will see more "street rush" style attacks and unskilled fighters. In sparring, you will deal with that, especially when dealing with new people.

And don't take this wrong: I'm not saying training MMA is not effective for self defense.

But one thing that has been proved over and over again is, "training is highly specific."

Experience has shown me (from newbies showing up at the dojang) that completely untrained people are very often unpredictable*— it stands to reason, therefore, that having a wider range of possible responses is desirable if training for self defense is your primary goal.

I think you should train against the less trained, and train with very open rulesets that allow people to use similar attacks at least within the realm of unarmed tactics. This will allow you to figure out how you will work against whatever someone will throw at you.

What I see alot of groups doing is deciding what a "street situation" looks like, then developing a "defense" against a parody of that scripted attack done by a compliant opponent who does not have the attributes of the attacker it is supposed to prepare you for. RBSD is guilty of this even more than TMA.

And something that is reliable IN the ring — pulling guard, muay thai clinch, rear naked choke — could put you in a position to be seriously HURT outside the ring where the possibility of additional attackers is real and even in some places likely.

Well, anyone can be hurt from any position. How do you propose to figure out which ones are more practical or less likely to get you hurt?

Sorry about the tangent; it always seems to happen in these discussions, eh?

Yeah.

 

[MJS]

Well, before we start to get too far off the path, here is what the original question was.

Would a single art be successful in the UFC say wu-shu or something of the sort?

 

[thetruth]

You really have no interest in actually listening here do you? You're too hung up on what you THINK im saying to actually read it properly.
Observer the simple piece of logic.
If you are attempting to create a plan, do you base that plan on a tactic you know is reliable, or a tactic you have never tested?
You obviously enough, use what is reliable as the foundation.
The unreliable, you would only use if absolutely neccessary.

I NEVER ONCE said not to use tactics that do not occur in tournaments. I said that you should not BASE your plans and tactics around something you've never tested. Instead, you use the reliable as the foundation, and then from there on use whatever the situation demands.

But if you try to start off with a foundation you don't know if you can rely on, you're tactically shooting yourself in the foot, before the first punch is even thrown.

Now, before you go and take this out of context, I'm going to make something even clearer if possible, although Ive been pretty clear on this so far.
Im not saying you should not use certain techniques, Im saying you shouldn't RELY on them.
See that word there -RELY, whole key point of this post.

And as for fighting larger opponents, THERE ARE NO SHORTCUTS.
Fighting dirty doesn't negate their size and strength, unless you've had an AWFUL lot of practice at it. So rather than making a plan out of something you can't rely on, build up the abilities you can test and train, and then add the other dirty fighting skills on top of those.

I look forward to your twisting of my words.

(Sorry all if I seem irate, a customer at the call centre just made several comments regarding what he'd like to do with my mother. The joys of tech support)

No worries mate, I wouldn't like a stranger suggesting things about my mum either.

Anyway back to the discussion at hand. I know you didn't use the word tournament in your post but unless you go out and get into fights a lot then that is the only place for a mma to test their stuff hence why I mentioned it. I also don't know of any mma schools that are not sport based. By that I mean that they concentrate only on techniques that are within the rules of their sport. Also I never said I would rely on those specific techniques but if I used this forum for a whole list of possible ways to hurt someone it would make for a long and boring post. I totally agree on not relying on just a few techniques. Anyway, that'll be all for now

Cheers
Sam:asian:

What the hell are you doing posting in here whe you should be working hard

 

[thetruth]

Well, before we start to get too far off the path, here is what the original question was.

Yes but it's still an interesting debate in some sort of round about way its answering the question or at least raising more.

Cheers
Sam:asian:

 

[MJS]

Yes but it's still an interesting debate in some sort of round about way its answering the question or at least raising more.

Cheers
Sam:asian:

However, we have already had a number of threads on the MMA vs. TMA debate. I've yet to see anything 'new' come of those, and many of them have been locked, hence the reason I am trying to nudge this one back on topic.

Mike

 

[Tez3]

To be honest I think the question is an oxymoron. People compete in the UFC using Mixed Martial Arts so why would anyone compete using a single art? Our promotions say "Mixed martial Arts Competition" so that MMA fighters only apply. You may as well ask would a Judoka win in a karate comp.Why would he/she enter in the first place?
If you are saying would a martial artist using a single art win against a mixed martial artist, leaving out the UFC part, you would probably have a different argument.

 

[zDom]

To be honest I think the question is an oxymoron. People compete in the UFC using Mixed Martial Arts so why would anyone compete using a single art? Our promotions say "Mixed martial Arts Competition" so that MMA fighters only apply. You may as well ask would a Judoka win in a karate comp.Why would he/she enter in the first place?
If you are saying would a martial artist using a single art win against a mixed martial artist, leaving out the UFC part, you would probably have a different argument.

I agree.

Even if someone STARTED as a purist, once they decide to to compete in a UFC/Pride Fight/MMA competition, they are going to cross train to be ready for the specific situation unless they are

a) simply trying to "prove" their art is ready to go, as is

b) stubborn to the point of risking injury

c) a moron!


But just to clarify, this "single art" question doesn't apply to a system that operates in a variety of ranges such as JKD, hapkido, etc.?

But then again, even if a hapkido-in decided to have a try at a UFC match, he or she would STILL have to re-tailor their training to address the specific situation that a UFC match IS, or, well, see a, b, and c above

 

[thetruth]

But just to clarify, this "single art" question doesn't apply to a system that operates in a variety of ranges such as JKD, hapkido, etc.?

Hapkido is definitely a single art and JKD is borderline as when learning one is usually at one school hence they are experiencing the jkd of that instructor only which is simply one art. I know they run on the whole take what is useful stance yada yada but that is a very individual thing. If a mma guy actually learns separate arts at his or her gym (thai boxing, bjj, wrestling etc) or travels to separate gyms to learn then this is where the multi art training of mma comes in.

One thing I will say is that alot of single arts regardless of how well rounded they are they usually don't cover wrestling takedowns which is what I would say are used in the UFC 95% of the time to put ones opponent on the mat. I am not saying other arts dont have techniques to take someone down with but they are techniques rarely seen in mma.

I simply believe that this is due to the nature of the competition in that each fighter is trained and knows what the other persons aims are so they are trained to defend it where as in the street people who attack do not know what to expect from you so other techniques are easier to pull off. Probably safer too as I wouldn't want to attempt some of the takedowns I have seen in the UFC on a concrete floor.

Cheers
Sam:asian: