Discussion in 'MMA' started by DougJitsu, Jan 6, 2006.
Well professional footballers can kick harder than most martial artists
That happens already does it not? UFC MMA doesn't have to deal with kicks or knees to the head of a downed opponent, therefore the "style" used is different than Pride MMA. Safe defensive positioning is different, effective attacks are different, therefore it is dictated by the rules of the game.
You could be harsh and say it is already a limited form of cross training specific for the sporting rules in which it is used. There are plenty of realistic and proficient techniques in various ranges that are not trained, and nor are the defences to them. eg the headbut, small joint manipulation, fish hooking, elbow strikes in Pride or the previous example of UFC's grounded opponent
I'm not saying the techniques it uses don't work, but to remember when saying how great and proficient MMA is that not all of the techniques are removed because they don't work. Some of them were removed because they work all too well.
Cantona used to get it confused if I remember
Sorry, I'll disagree there (don't mean to always be disagreeing with you)
I think exactly the opposite will happen. As effective techniques become standardised and ALL clubs learn them, people will look at other techniques to use that are outside of the normal scope of training to give them an edge. Look at how Sakuraba changed the attacking game with his jumping/diving attacks past the guard. Before that, everyone just kicked the legs or stood back...
And I think more and more clubs will bring in specialised instructors to teach the elements of the different ranges.
well it is a filter process, and at the moment, heavy focus is placed on whats working at the moment.
I believe the fact that it will become somewhat streamlined due to rules . This places a box on techniques you can and can't use, therefore limiting things to a degree. It can only go so far with "what works" because "what works" is governed by other people. This will contribute to the consolidation of techniques to a degree. That means, of course, that it could concieveably become a "system" or "style" or whatever term you like - all due to the fact that there are competitive rules.
Taught in a different manner though, you may just call it "effective from all ranges", or "street fighting". But then you must include ALL combative weapons such as eye-gouging, groin kicks, small joint manipulations, etc. This is of course outside the competitve arena and stricly addressing the "McDojo" idea.
However, to change it to actual "no holds barred" combat would absolutely prevent it from becoming anything near this, but I don't believe that will happen any time soon. I will agree to the fact that it is in danger of becoming a set of organized or preset combat techniques - I believe that is the definition you guys were seeking when using "system" or "style"
Of course the best part of all of this is the fact that as soon as it becomes more organized and predictable, it becomes easier to dissect and beat
So yes, I agree, there are defiantely more standardized "MMA" schools and techniques, and it does create a less talented BJJ or MT crowd because they only think they "need a bit of both" to survive in the ring. That of course does not apply to the proverbial streets, because even though I train in many aspects of "MMA", if you get me in a clinch next to a bar, I will be more likely to break a bottle over your head or throw you off and run away when your boys start to jump in, instead of pushing you up against the bar and trading shots for 30 seconds and battling for position.
Competitively - in danger
Real world situations - not so much.
That's all I can say about that. I like the good conversation going on here.
On a different note, let me state that I believe that "MMA" is the epitome of Westernization of martial arts. It cuts away anything resembling traditions and goes straight to teaching techniques(I am not stating this as negative or positive, merely stating it). Couple this with the fact that it is becoming immensely popular and you do have somewhat of a dangerous mix. I read a thread in the FMA forum a couple of days ago regarding the "freedom of teaching our martial art". A lot of good points were made there about their ideas falling into the wrong hands or becoming too open because they are so devastating and cause great harm. This directly ties into the typical American psyche of "I'm a badass". This is something that Traditional MA's ALWAYS TRY TO COMBAT. Also, this is something that "MMA" does not combat at all. This is the most dangerous to me. But, the arguement could be made that it will fall by the wayside, much like Karate and Judo of the early 20th, JKD of the 60's, and so on. Mainly because the majority of Western cultures find it hard to stick with something that is in need of very hard work and dedication. I just felt that point needed to be made, becuase that is the bigger danger of "MMA". Anybody see what I'm saying?
Yeah but come on man, even with the rules we have now it's hardly a game of patty cake. They still beat the living tar out of each other. I don't believe it's got to the point where the rules really ruin its effectiveness.
I really don't think you do. IMO, the only advantage you would get from including absolutely everything in your training like this is that you would be able to say "we cover everything" and thus prevent people from being able to accuse you of being too ring-oriented. I think the actual effective techniques you use will not be much different.
Nothing will ever be no holds barred and be legal.
We are talking about mma's effectiveness in unarmed fighting, not what you would do if you got attacked by 20 blokes with broken glass bottles and a dog with rabies.
As for the whole "creating a less talented pool" idea, I don't see this happening. There are those who want to cross train for MMA and there are those who just prefer to do one art on its own. Plus there is no "only" about having a bit of both, because it actually works better to train that way. Time and energy is a finite resource, to become efficient you have to make sacrifices somewhere.
MMA is not a style
Pancrase is a style
PRIDE is a style
UFC is a style
ZST is a style
In the same way "hitting someone" is not a style but "Boxing" or "Kyokushin" are or "grappling" is not a stlye but "submission wrestling" and "Brazilian jiujitsu" are very different subsets of 'grappling'. A style is dictated by its intentions, in this case a largely open ended competition, and by its restrictions, in this case whatever the rules of the event are. In this way the style of PRIDE is much different than the style of the UFC because in PRIDE elbows are not allowed but conversely in the UFC soccer kicks are banned. This is a radical difference and so someone fights much different in PRIDE than UFC.
Within each style there are a million and more permutations and possibilities, just as there are with any other martial art. No one doubts that Judo is a unified style, but my Judo is vastly different from others'. My Judo involves my forcing the fight to the ground by any means I can and finishing the match by submission. I do not focus on scoring ippon or powerful throws, but I'm as much a black belt as anyone else. Everything in my Judo is done within the stricture of the style of Judo.
So, what Judo becomes is everything permissable under its rules, guided by cultural and personal preference. However, within those confines are the hundred or so techniques that comprise "standard" Judo. Not because they are immovable or infallible, but because they have proven to be repeatedly successful in the confines of what makes Judo... therefore they become the base everyone uses to construct their own intreprations and preferences in the sport.
In MMA, and especially in the particular organizations, the same holds. In the UFC a hundred or so techniques are used by the fighters as their base because these are the things that have proven themselves to be effect within the confines of the UFC. From this base, a fighter finds what they are best at and specialises to create their own sub-UFC style. For instance, Matt Hughes will have the same overall knowledge of the base techniques as Andrei Arlovski, but clearly they have different strengths and neither of them can be said to fight in a similar manner, but they're still adherents to UFC Style.
This prevents homogenisation because not everyone can be equally balanced and skilled in everything, and therefore they must specialise. But, it prevents too great insularity and specialisation because the game is so broad and diverse. For instance, where would Chuck Liddell or Maurice Smith be without their excellent sprawls...clearly not from their kickboxing past. Similarly, Randy Couture would never have been champion without learn submission positioning, submissions, and striking, though his obvious strength coming into MMA was his ability to control the top.
And the UFC is far different from PRIDE. A fighter such as Kenny Florian, who has superior elbows trained by some of the best in Thailand, would not fare so well against similarly skilled opposition in PRIDE because his second most dangerous tool (after his grappling) has been removed and replaced with something he has little experience with (soccer kicks).
So, no. MMA is not in danger of becoming a style, nor are the styles dictated by the organizations in danger of becoming stagnant any more than Muay Thai, Judo, or boxing are. In fact less, because the permutations of MMA are far greater. MMA is not kind to generalists and very few have succeeded, because being a generalist means that it is difficult to play to a dominating strength, and you have more general weaknesses for an opponent to exploit. The rare exceptions, men like Georges St. Pierre and Fyodor Emelianenko, are given more than their share of talent, and so are able to excel at everything where mere mortals may not.
Think of the UFC as a package of two hundred Lego pieces. Split two of these identical packages among two different people, so each gets a single whole package. Come back in two hours and you will see that even with the exact same pieces, the results are startlingly different. So it is with MMA.
This is the second post in a row that I have read from you (haven't seen your other posts yet) that I thought was brilliant. Well thought, articulate, balanced, and insightful. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and I look forward to reading your posts in the future.
Ideologic, let me make this simple for you. Get in the cage. tell them yourself.
Try your hand at MMA and then get back to us.
Given the intelligence and bias backing your posts, i'm assuming you have absolutely no MMA experiacne what so ever. I don't think that the UFC/Pride are in question here. They have athletic commissions to adhere to, but MMA as a whole does not.
So how's your MMA record these days tekkengod?
I actually think Ideologic's points were well made and constructive.
Agree with that 100% and its the exact reason why so many self proclaimed badasses think they can train for 6 months and then fight. The west wants everything immediately and without any effort.
Timmyboy - And your MMA record is...?
(Let's not let this quite interesting debate detract into silly one upmanship. especially as half the people that post on here probably have just as little experience as either of you). A football fan that doesn't play still can have an equally valid opinion of his team's performance and where they can do better.
MMA is a style, Pride, UFC, ZST etc are just rule variations.
Although very well stated, I personally believe your arguement is flawed in that you can replace everything you stated about Judo with "MMA" and it contradicts your point. If Judo is a style (even if there are individual associations with slight rules differences - and I'll use the British examples of BJA & BJC here) then so is MMA even if individual events have different rules.
MMA is a style and individuals preferences for one technique or another within those set defined rules doesn't mean that the base skills are any different (as you mentioned yourself about Andree Arvolski & Matt Hughes). Therefore they have learnt the predefined style that is MMA and yet prefer specific aspects of that training to apply in competition.
To use your example of Kenny Florian, MMA without elbow strikes is still the basic style of MMA. Those elbow strikes can still be used to the body in Pride. And whether he would far well or poorly under those specific rules doesn't change the underlying style being used, which is MMA.
You're completely missing the point. I actually agree with Tekkengod's opinion, but he keeps telling people to get in the ring and prove it when he hasn't had an MMA fight himself. I don't say that. One-upmanship has nothing to do with it.
TekkenGod please tell me your fight record in MMA is a far sight better than your record of honesty in claims of video game championships and trophies.
I am impressed with the fact that you guys have been able to keep this conversation mature.
I definately agree with you Timmy, I was just trying to think outside the box in terms of everyday use of a "style". I am biased to this due to one fact. Recently some local entreprenuial fellows have taken it upon themselves to start up a cage fighting league. About 5,000 people attend at the local fairgrounds. During and after these fights, all you tend to hear about is how "I train with this guy" or "I could beat his ass." Now, this is 99.9% untrue, but wait for it. A friend of my little brother who does not train at all took it upon himself to fill out an application for the next set of fights coming up in March. He then proceeded to call me and say that if he talked to the promoter and was accepted, he would like to train with me in "some ground stuff".
That was part of the reason I generalized and said it had the potential of becoming watered down to some degree. I can definately see this happening all over the country, as I'm sure it is and has been for quite some time. Not to say this will dumb down any one system I.E. Muay Thai, there will just be less effective Muay Thai fighters as "MMA" becomes more popular, right? That seems logical and resonable to me. Of course there will always be specialists. But to me, using this kid as an example, a lot of people treat it like a drunken game of "tap-outs" also.
There are so many different sub-arguements here it is hard to keep up. I don't feel I need to be on the defensive however, as most of the replies to what I said have been contructive.
But as far as "getting in the cage myself" Tekkengod, come on now. I didn't say anything close to something that would warrant this response. I don't know why you came up with this response to what question or statement. My point was that certain things that work are seen frequently in "MMA" combat, therefore narrowing the field of applied techniques. That DOES NOT imply anything other than this makes it more impressive when you see a flying armbar or some kind of TKD kick connect. It makes it easier for the guys who think outside the box. Instead of "Well Joe Rogan, my main weapons are my jab-cross combo, my thigh-kicks, my knees inside, and when on the ground I like to go for the rear naked choke." This is part of mentality I was talking about. Also Timmy, I am smart enough to figure out that they will never legalize eye-poking and biting the balls in the cage.
The post about the legos hit the issue directly on the head in my opinion. Like I said, I was just thinking more towards everyday situations of saying "I practice MMA" as oppose to "I practice Judo." Because if you think about it, if you practice "MMA", you are really practicing JKD!!! HAHA! How many people are gonna get ****ed that I said that? If I try to type it my keyboard will break. Seriously though, think about that one.
Ok, so we ARE on the same page and we agree.
I never claimed to have an MMA fight record, i don't have one. I've yet to have an MMA match amature or pro.
BUT the point i'm getting at when i say that, is that Full-contact sparring by an MMA rule set would have the same eye-opening affect for critics. Which i have done plenty of.
I said that because the last thing i want to hear is someone who has never done anything along the lines of MMA to make some ugly generalization, trying your hand at it for the first time is a major wake-up call. so what you saying is that flashy crowd pleasing techniques are going to become less prominant? Joe Rogans an idiot. but what works in an MMA enviroment isn't going to instantly not work ourside of the cage or off the mat.
That happens all the time here too (at least in my area) So many people and clubs are jumping on the MMA bandwagon with no real understanding of the what the sport involves.
Separate names with a comma.