fightingarts101

There was no need for competition because those arts were developed for survival in actual battles...no refs and no rules. I'm not calling a MMA a hack by nature, I'm referring to schools who make claims to teach what they aren't truly able to teach. This applies to traditional systems alike. For some reason, you doubt the validity of battle tested systems. History tells us what work'd and what didn't on the battle field. If you don't believe this, there is nothing I can do to convince you. But to say something doesn't work in real life because a competition on TV says so is absurd. 1. Ever been on the mat in the octogon? I have. It's not soft at all, nor does it 'give' as much as you say. Sure, it's not as hard as concrete, but it's harder than many every day surfaces. Also, since you've been watching the UFC from early on, you should have seen SEVERAL matches where a fighter was knocked out by being slammed on a mat you claim has a lot of give. (See Hughes Vs. newton and Ortiz Vs. Tanner for further details) 2. Next you go on to list rules (many not even part of the original 5 UFC's) that you claim favors strikers. Lets take a look at this. No head butts No groin attacks No striking to the spine or the back of the head. No striking downward using the point of the elbow. No throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea. No kicking or kneeing the head of a grounded opponent No stomping a grounded opponent No kicking to the kidney with the heel. Head butts? MUCH easier on the ground, and from the clinch. Groin strikes? Great for guard passing, can be used in both strking and grappling. downward strikes with the point of the elbow? gee who does that favor? hmm:) kneeing a downed opponent? Grappler. Grabbing the throat? grappler. Kicking to the kidney with the heels of your feet? GRAPPLER (watch any old school royce fight) PS: the original UFC's were bare knuckled. PPS: you ARE allowed knee a person shooting a takedown. PPPS: all the kicking in the head after a failed takedown attempt stuff is legal in PRIDE, guess what? The fights still end up the same way. See? you've just named things that help grapplers more than strikers. Not to mention that our impatient american audiance does not let the fight stay on the ground because it's "boring". the UFC refs stand em' right up. again, who does this favor? By the way, Chuck Liddell is the UFC's poster boy at the moment, please dont tell me about all this 'grapplers bias' while a devistating striker is king of the cage. (on top of being a solid wrestler) 3. The best art in the ring and the best hand to hand art on the battle field have ALWAYS gone hand to hand. Look at the earliest known military fighting styles. It's not ninjutsu or even jujitsu. It's wrestling and basic pugalism. How do you think combat sports got started? Military men testing eachothers military skills in a ring/cage/backyard/dojo/roman collosiem (sp) Etc. What do the US marines learn even NOW? I assure you, it's not ninjutsu and tai chi. you DO realize where the 'martial' in "Martial arts" comes from I'm sure. Rules have always existed in training and competition to prevent those participating from getting hurt, so they may fight again (usually in real battles) rules were NOT innacted to make fighting less realistic. I'm not sure how you've come to such a conclusion. 5. you should focus on grappling, it's important. try Judo, you can grapple and stand up at the same time. and again...grappling is an imporant part of what works in the ring, and on the battlefield. There was grappling in original japanese jujutsu (used onthe battlefield), which evolved into judo. 6. Ali was a great boxer, and he'd destroy us all in a streetfight. you've given another example of how those who perform best in competitions, tend to do well on real situations. Why whould he do well in a real fight? Easy, superstrong, superfast, tecnically perfect and an over all fighting genuis. Take away the rules and he does not some how get weak, stupid, and slow. It doesn't work that way. If you take away the rules Ali murders you becasue there is nothing to stop him. Also, yes...throught the history of martial arts, martial artists, and even the very creators of the martial arts tested their style against others, and other styles, so they knew their stuff worked... and also....to claim that their style was the best. Read all about the various dojo challanges that have taken place, interesting stuff. Want to know the real reason why so many martial artists dont want to step up and compete? they'd lose. Who wants to train under a master who gets humiliated by a 19 year old college wrestler on national TV? 7. Can you be more specific on battle tested systems? I thought the arts that make up MMA were indeed battle tested...I thought I named one or 2. Are you sure YOUR art is as battle tested as wrestlin, boxing, and jujitsu?

I agree with most of your post, but disagree with a few sections. For example: 1. you base much of your improvised rating system on the "perfection" or "mastery" certain arts, and the effectivness that goes along with it. Now I see this as a very dangerous assumption. In my mind there is no such thing as perfecting an art. period. That would mean that you literally had nothing left to learn, and thus would imply that (in a fight) you could beat anyone in your style who you saw as "imperfect" in regard to their competancy. is this really how it works though? I certainly dont think so. You'll also never hear an MMA guy (or any professional fighter) talk of perfecting BJJ or muay thai or wrestling. It's not about perfecting a style, its about being able to fight well at all ranges. 2. So called "untrained street fighters" can beat anyone on the street. Martial arts teaches us to fight, yes. but there is no better way to get good at fighting thasn having to fight for your life on a regular basis. This is why many seasoned black-belts will lose in a basic bar fight. Even solid pro-MMA fighters could lose to em' ( more unlikely though) 3. At 'level 2' I'd give aspiring MMA fighters a huge edge against TMA fighters. Simply because MMA is always trained 'live' as they say. MMA BJJ Wrestling, Boxing, Muay thai students even at a beginner level are used to getting hit, used to hitting back, and used to dealing with adrenalin. Most TMA guys aren't. Heck, at level 2 (lets say 2 years of a TMA) you might still have never been in a fight, or a fighting situation. Some TMAs dont even spar. 4. It's not really about how well you can do one art (in a streetfight) it's about being able to fight in any range, because a fight can happen at any range. As stated above, in my opinion this is why MMA guys have a better chance at winning streetfights take a 'level 3' Shotokan blackbelt down to the floor, and they're not going to fare any better than a 'level one' streetfighter. not to mention the fact that a decent high-school wrestler can take *anyone* down. (this is why wrestling works so well for MMA) thus negating all the weapons our "perfect" blackbelt woud use. 5. Kicking a bent knee is a bad idea. Despite what many TMAs teach, the bent knee does not break under 8 pounds of pressure. The bent knee is used as a *weapon* simply because it is harder, and stronger than the point on the body targeted with the strike. Kicking a foward facing bent knee is akin to hitting a mans fist with your face. (the blow will almost always slide harmlessly off) 6. why use a "traditional" crane style, ridge hand choke when a RNC works better, and is more safe?

185 per month unlimited classes. I live in NY and get a+ instruction and it costs a fortune, I know I know.