elbows_and_knees

I have seen several fights go to the ground, and have recently been involved in one. The result? The guys without any ground knowledge got beaten. The one I was recently in involved multiple attackers. No offense, but that is because you don't know what you are looking at. Many people think grappling is boring - that it merely looks like rolling on the ground. Once you learn how grappling works and what they are trying to do, you see more art. Also, they are FIGHTING, not training, sparring, etc. Fighting typically isn't pretty. actually, blocking can be quite inefficient when dealing with repeated strikes. It's like walking backward - the guy walking forward will always catch you eventually. you can't block everything' eventually, you will get hit. consequently, movement is preferred. Not all fighters like to move - some prefer to stand there and duke it out, hoping they do more damage first - it's all personal preference. As for only looking for submissions, you don't watch any recent MMA stuff, do you? most of the action now is standing and not on the ground. It doesn't and never will. they are MARTIAL arts, after all. As I said, fighting isn't pretty. because they are using what has worked time and time again. this is what research over hundreds of fights has shown us. Can a butterfly kick work in a fight? sure, it CAN, but from what we've seen, less flashy techniques are more effective. When someone goes on a winning streak using unconventional techniques, you will then see people begin to re-evaluate. Until then, don't expect to see it... Also, nobody from those other styles is willing to step up and put themselves on the line like that. it's rare that you see a traditional stylist who is willing to compete.

There was one posted on this forum a while back. try searching.

chuck has grappled all his life. he was a division 1 wrestler in college and has been training bjj for 7 years.

As I said earlier, all traditional thai arts are now taught as muay boran. Muay boran is the collective of the remains of various older thai styles. All have pretty much been abandoned in favor of muay thai, which is part of the reason why so much of the old stuff has been lost. Also, not everything in that movie was thai fighting. jaa admitted that he made some of the stuff up. Much of it is real stuff that I've seen in some fashion before though.

There have been threads on this in the past - do a search. FWIW though, Why_Worry is NOT describing a thai roundhouse.

Off topic, I like your handle - I was listening to that joint the other day.

most likely the boxer would still win. His training methods emphasize fighting moreso than the traditional guy... ESPECIALLY the traditional guys, as they spent most of their time doing kata - they didn't want sparring introduced to karate...

It seems the line has been drawn and--I have to agree with Hansen.Not only is a palm strike more effective in a real fight (and yes I have used it in real fights, not UFC or some other tourny) than a closed fist but, having your hands up & palm open has the added benefit of making yourself look less like an aggressor in the event the police show up and want to cart your expert butt off to jail. Not to take anything away from a punch, if you have good striking ability and focus so as not to miss your target, then a punch is a great tool. But, it is easier to cause damage to your opponent when you engage in a fight, especially if in the beginning of that fightyou have the knowledge that your knuckles are not hard enough to withstand the impact--did you do your knuckle pushups today? Let's try to remeber what part of the body we are talking about here--you ever hear of "Iron Fist" training? Or is it always "Iron Palm?"--ok,I was kidding, that was a rhetorical question Actually, yes, there is a such thing a iron fist training. Iron palm is more popularized because many chinese styles tend to emphasize palm strikes. Okinawan and japanese styles like the fist - how often do you palm a makiwara? The palm isn't necessarily the best for striking in the street - there is no such thing. A fist to the stomach will do more damage than a palm to the stomach. a palm to the skull is safer than a fist to the skull - they both have their advantages. That said, I have never broken my hand in a fight. As for the use of gloves, they have a couple of purposes. good wrapping protects the small bones on the back of the hand, and when wrapped professionally, the knuckles as well. They also protect the wrist. The gloves are for the benefit of the person getting hit - the surface area is wider than the smaller knuckle, so less extensive damage is done, and a KO is harder score, although still very possible.

True. It also leaves you wide open for leg reaps, like o uchi gari and the single leg takedown.

coincidentally, I got into a BIG fight two weeks ago - 4 of us, 7 of them. I will respond to each of your bullet points in reference to how the fight went: 1. a hard throw onto the concrete neither injured nor crippled him and the fight kept going. 2. I got dragged across jagged concrete - skin scrapes are the only damage I sustained. 3. I used a kimura in the confrontation while we were on the ground. Granted, I was hit by someone afterward, but that was by my own doing - as a bouncer, we are supposed to restrain people. I coulda easily snapped his shoulder well before I got hit. 4. those things are all easy to talk about, but bottom line is that most people do not think that way. Also, there is not always something lying around. There were no sticks outside on the concrete, no bottles, no dirt, etc. 5.

It was never intended to be a litmus test. However, at this time, that IS the closest thing to one, so anyone using it as one is technically justified. The skills that you learn there will have definite benefits in a real situation, and it offers benefits that some other styles / venues do not. Who would you rahter have your back in a fight - chuck lidell or some unknown guy who claims he is skilled and has had one streetfight? Why?

size matters - a lot. you will see this when these guys start getting as skilled as you. Size becomes more of a factor as skill levels become closer, because in addition to having the same (or greater) skill level than you, I also have a size and power advantage.

bjj is a different animal... you almost have to be like that there, because you start rolling from the get go, with no experience at all. It is that drive to win that keeps you above the water. Later, when you get some mat time and some technique under your belt, you begin to relax into what you are doing. But your will was forged in the beginning phase. You are constantly getting tapped by the higher ranked guys though, which keeps the ego in check. It's part of the learning process.

yeah, they show old ones. that doesn't mean it's popular. Heck the timeslot shows that they aren't popular. I usually get to watch them, as they keep at least two of the TVs at the club I bounce at on ESPN. There is a lot of money in boxing. Moreso than in kickboxing. The money will always attract more elite athletes.

that sounds like a personal issue.... one of control. When the bell rings, you stop. While the fight is on, you want to hurt him - when not fighting, it's all friendly. I've even been offered to go for drinks to celebrate with guys I've beaten. A guy who beat me regularly comes to our school to train, as he learned a lot from our fight. that's how it should be.

The thing is, not everyone trains for the sole purpose of learning to fight. Actually, I'm willing to bet that more than half of them don't. Even less train to compete. To go back to the original topic though, I have a second job as a bouncer at a popular downtown club, so I fight quite a bit.

I dunno... I've thought about that before, and I'm not sure it applies here. Sure, it's a similar stance you are in, but horse stance training is static... just like any other isometrice exercise, it only builds endurance in the position you are holding. So, The depth you hold your horse is where you benefit - it doesn't teach you how to explode afterward. This is why you won't see boxers doing stance training.

what is or isn't traditional is in the eye of the beholder. boxing and wrestling can both be considered VERY traditional MA. traditional typically refers to traditional eastern arts, but shouldn't be limited to just that. Also, some people define traditional as styles that don't compete in modern fight sport. Others define it by it's training methods... It may not be what you consider close to real, but it's far more real than what you encounter in many traditional schools. you aren't kicking people full power in the knee of eye gouging them. At least in an mma venue, there is hard contact and resistance. MMA is effective because of it's training methods. If you were a business person, are you gonna hire a guy fresh out of college with no experience, or the guy fresh out of college who has done internships with major companies his whole college life? you want the intern most likely. Why? he was trained better.

Although I agree with your assessment 110% in this instance, I do so feel compelled to play devils advocate and say that if one trains in an effective style, and puts all of their effort and focus into learning it's secrets, that they could theoretically become a thousand times more efficient than one who just samples and tastes a bit of each. To use an analogy, if you spend a year learning 12 languages, a different one every month, instead of being fluent in all of them, you'd be able to only introduce yourself and ask where the bathroom is in some of them. Like I said though, I agree for the most part The flaw here is that you are limiting yourself by time. The other flaw with this analogy is that you are talking about something that doesn't require multi faceted skill - If I am learning to speak german, the learning japanese will not help me at all. My german will not become any more effective by learning japanese. On the other hand, my MA will become much stronger if I am learning both grappling and striking. Moreso than if you only focus on one. Since you train kempo, let's use it as an example. How much grappling is associated with kempo? it's not a grappling style. Consequently, it will not be a focus. you can train kempo for 10 years and will likely get out grappled by someone who has only been doing mma for 2 years. Why? because they have a large focus on grappling. The thing that most people don't seem to understand is that mma isn't about "sampling and tasting" each as many styles as they can. it's about making your game well rounded - striking and grappling. period. By taking the time to figure out your style's "secrets" you are only succeeding in re-inventing the wheel. Why spend time trying to figure out how to use your kempo on the ground when there are arts that have been doing ground work for ages?

same principle, different rule set though, I believe. Also, sport pankration is an art, wherea mma is a term describing a training methodology and fighting venue.

LOL, I was hoping someone would catch that one.

I've got the book. It's not a mass building workout by any means. If you are a complete newb, then in conjunction with increased caloric intake, you can put on some pounds, but it is in no way a mass program.

Good point , however , there are more kickboxers than thai boxers popularity. thai boxing is more common in europe and asia than in the US and canada.

I would disagree. on a most basic level, there is american kickboxing. The do not allow clinching, knees or leg kicks. Next, there is international rules - they allow clinching, but no knees or elbows. Next is modified muay thai - they allow knees. Finally, muay thai allows elbows_and_knees. Also, kickboxing technically has absolutely NOTHING to do with muay thai. kickboxing came about because point style karate guys wanted to hit harder than the light contact they were allowed. They followed a boxing format - ring, gloves, round length, etc. And hence, kickboxing was born. Thai boxing was around WAY before kickboxing and developed independent of it. The reason why they are associated together now is that may people call it "thai kickboxing", so people tend to associtate the names. On a technique level, they differ greatly - way more than just lack of elbows. Stance, footwork, evasion, etc. It's all different between the two.

It's not so much is commercial success as it is it's goal... judo as a whole really isn't that popular in america at all. But, the goal of most judo clubs these days is to merely continue the tradition of judo... and naturally, this is best done through kids. I'm lucky enough to train at a gym with some serious competitors - guys who compete on national, international and world levels - but there are many great gyms. Actually, given the nature of judo - lots of randori and drilling - I bet even the hobbyist guys are well suited to defend themselves. True but i find its getting harder and harder to find a real good quality judo dojo out there, because of its commercial success.