JohnnyS

The main problem with Aikido as I see it is the practitioners and the training methods. The few Aikido classes I've seen or participated in have been full of "hippys" and people trying to use their "ki". I showed one of these people an interview in a magazine with a 7th dan aikido master who basically said (I'm paraphrasing) "It's all about technique and Ki is not a substitute for technique" and the guy I showed the article to was not impressed. The old guys who trained in Aikido with Ueshiba, especially when he was developing his art, used to train really hard and had developed a lot of their attributes from their training in other styles. The people who train these days (from my limited experience) don't seem to want to train that hard. My other main gripe is the training methods, although this goes hand-in-hand with the people training as the training seems to be too soft and too co-operative. There doesn't seem to be any competitive aspect or resistance to the training. The most important aspect of an art is the set-ups. You can have the best punches, kicks or wrist-locks in the world, but if you don't have the set-ups you'll never land or apply those techniques. To get good set-ups you need to practise against a resisting opponent and see what they do to avoid your techniques, then work out your counters, or, see what they throw at you and work out your counters. If the person isn't trying to knock your head off, or defend themselves whilst you're trying to apply your techniques, then anything you do is just theory.

There aren't a lot of chokes you can do from the mount with no-gi. I'll try to explain some, but it's hard to understand without seeing. One you can try is to put your right arm under his head, your right hand on your left bicep, put your left arm over his neck and grab your right forearm or bicep. Now walk your hand back towards your wrist which should choke him. The other is head-arm choke, or as some people call it, arm-triangle choke. Go to http://www.bjj.com.au/techniques.html and check out the head-arm choke by my instructor. Here's another way, starting from side control: Say you're on his right side and he lifts his left elbow high. Drop your head under his tricep so he can't put his arm back on the ground. Now slide your left arm under his head and put your right hand on his left knee. Jump over to the other side of his body, pushing down on his knee so he can't put you in guard. Then tilt him up onto his side and get your left arm as deep through as you can so that your left bicep is against his neck. Put your left hand on your righ bicep, your right hand on your ear, squeeze your elbows together and lean forward so your whole body is flat on the ground on his left side. This is a great choke and my favourite for no-gi.

Jerry Love wrote: "Where can I watch some UFCs done in sneakers and on asphault? I'd like to look at those fights (certainly, fighters don't mind having matches that way, you've already declared it a non-issue)." What an assinine statement. It is a non-issue in a fight, not in a "sport match". Are you proposing that someone like Mark Coleman or any MMA fighter is not going to defend themselves in the street because their opponent has sneakers on or because they'd have to fight on asphalt (because that is essentially what you're now saying) ? Are you saying that they would throw out their grappling techniques and strategy so they wouldn't get scrapes whilst defending their lives ?

Warp Spider, MMA does not favour grapplers, fights favour grapplers because its easier to move in on an opponent than to keep distance. As for the " It is not hard to flip a double leg around so you land on top of the grappler", maybe you should go and show this to the Olympic wrestling team and they need never worry about being taken down again.

TJS, I agree. It was enough in the early days, but nowadays anyone entering MMA will at least work their takedown defenses if they're primarily a striker.

I think Grappling only can get you through a MMA fight, whereas striking only can't. Ideally though, a fighter needs both: Striking and grappling ( takedowns, ground-grappling)

Your arguments are weak Warp Spider. The early UFC's had no rules regarding prohibited strikes, yet the strikers didn't win. Ryan Parker, a former regular on rec.martial-arts was a karate expert who claimed he couldn't be armbarred and his pressure point strikes would give him victory. He lost via armbar to Remco Pardoe (hardly a great grappler). The flooring is a non-issue. You think someone fighting for money is going to care about scrapes and bruises, or landing hard ? Even in the early days where it was two strikers fighting, the fighters always ended up grappling. This clearly shows that a fight will always get closer and closer, not stay at striking distance. For an MMA fighter to be successful these days, they have to know grappling.

wrestlingkaratechamp17 is correct, though the number would be closer to 100%. I can't think of any M.A's not fighting in MMA who could beat him or Randy Couture.

I'll go with Europeans because they were always fighting each other and invaders (i.e. goths, vandals, huns, tatars etc ). The Japanese were such an insular society that rules grew up around who could fight who etc, even in battle. Draeger mentions that standard practice was to face off with one enemy and engage in a protracted "psych out" period of verbal insults, reciting one's lineage,bragging about how cool your sword was, etc. The Japanese apparently even tried this protocol with invading foreign armies of mongols and were predictably slaughtered in a mass engagement. The arts of war (the bugei) were developed according to highly idiosyncratic Japanese ideals. Warriors were expected to behave in certain ways and they were trained to fight in certain way which their rival Warriors were aware of. The few times that the Japanese tried imperial expansionism before the Meiji period (when Japan Westernized its army and industry) were failures. The type of fighting that was useful between rival clans of Samurais simply did not work outside of Japan.

Which MMA fighters to be exact are saying they are the best fighters in the world? Why pick on MMA anyway? Muhammad Ali used to say he was the Greatest, so why not pick on him?

Warp Spider, I said that the better grappler will end up on top. What is so hard to understand about that?

It depends on the instructor. I was just given my black belt. Everyclass though is a session where you are constantly being tested because everyone is trying to beat you.

Do you guys have any actual evidence that fighting on a sprung wooden floor generates less power than fighting on aspalt? Because if so I'd like to see it. The whole "they're not fighting on cement or asphalt" is such a bogus argument. Firstly, who do you think will end up on the ground, the striker or the grappler? My guess is the person with the better throws. On the Gracie In Action video, the Gracie fighters fought against a karate school who wanted to fight on cement, believing they would have an advantage. The people who ended up on their backs on the ground were (surprise, surprise !!), the karateka. Secondly, if I'm in a fight, the last thing I'm going to be worried about is scrapes and abrasions.

I've fought in a couple of amateur MMA matches, as well as been in the corner for professional MMA fighters such as Elvis Sinosic so I've had the opportunity to see and feel the flooring on many occasions.

The floors used for the UFC are not padded - at least not padded anymore than a boxing ring. They're just a sprung wooden floor with canvas over the top - exactly the same as a boxing/kickboxing ring. I've never heard of a boxer/kickboxer saying the floor was too soft for them in a boxing match !

The Gracie's are a family from Brazil who created Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (actually they modified pre-WW2 Judo). The man considered to be the true founder of the art, Helio Gracie, was a small man who fought many NHB fights. His sons, Royce, Rickson, Royler, Relson, cousins and nephews have continued in his footsteps. Rorion Gracie was one of the co-creators of the Ultimate Fighting Championship before selling his part in the business after UFC4 or 5. They have revolutionized martial arts in the 1990's by making grappling once again popular and showing that real fighting does not look like movies.

I don't have proof but I remember reading about it on MMA.tv. Go there and post a question regarding this - there's Matt Furey and T.C supporters on the forum so they should be able to help you out.

kchenault, The UFC is NOT favourable to grapplers. With five minute rounds and stand-ups for inactivity, it's hardly working in the favour of the grappler. The UFC has been changed to make it more accessible to the public who want to see knockout's. The rules in the first four or five UFC's did not favour anyone. If you're saying that no eye-gouging and no biting favours grapplers and that your art cannot defend itself against a grappler without these techniques, then you need to find a better art.

Matt Furey no longer trains with Karl Gotch. I believe that Karl didn't really show Matt too much except fitness work and they parted ways. Matt now tries to sell his "Ghost of Farmer Burns" training programs.

Where I train we sometimes do tests for people, especially for blue belt - so that we know that person has a good base knowledge. But all gradings are based on performance - if you are terrible you don't get graded. Usually if someone is constantly beating their peers and doing well against senior belts they will just be given the belt. BJJ has a problem with sandbagging - where people are held back so they can do well in their belt division in competitions. Although this is stupid, it means that you have to be good to get promoted. BJJ is the only art I know of where people generally don't like being graded - you become a bigger target for everyone else in the class

I train 3-4 times per week, depending on injuries. When I started the only person teaching BJJ in Australia was a blue belt. It's faster now for people to get better because there are so many other people doing BJJ and more people who are better who can tell you the shortcuts. When I started there were no shortcuts and I had to work a lot of stuff out for myself because I only saw my instructor every few months.

kchenault, So are you saying that the traditional arts that were represented in the UFC were at a disadvantage because they couldn't bite or eye-gouge? How do these arts practise these techniques? Do they practise them "live"? If so, do they have many students? If not then how do you know they can get them to work against a resisting opponent - especially an expert grappler? Oh, and if you're going to ask people not to attack your character, maybe you should give the same consideration to the Gracies - saying that what they did was a "snow job" is the same as saying they're frauds.

Hi Guys, Just want to let everyone know that I was graded on the weekend to Black Belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu under John Will (Machado). I'm the first person to receive their black belt under John Will and I have to say it was a HUGE shock. I've been training with John Will since 1991 and want to thank him for all his support and his friendship over the years. John Will is the best instructor I have trained under and is a great example for anyone who wants to be able to teach well. Thanks, John Simon P.S. Here's the John Will website with instructor profiles:

Jerry, All of those rules except for the "No Biting" and "No eye-gouging" rules were added in later UFC's to make the sport more palatable for the Nevada Boxing Commission (well after the Kimo vs Royce match). In fact you could still bite and eye-gouge in the first UFC's but you would get a $1000 fine if you committed one of those acts. Oh, and in the last UFC Matt Lindland knocked himself unconscious when he slipped while attempting to suplex his opponent.

Kempocos, What you're saying is possible but not likely for the very reason that MMA is so successful - hard sparring. You can't fake being a good boxer, kickboxer, wrestler or submissions guy. As soon as you step in the ring or on the mat you have to be able to prove what you're doing or be considered a fraud. If one were to start a karate or other TMA class however, what you're suggesting would be much more easily done.