MMA_Jim

One cant really compare JJJ with BJJ. As was said, BJJ has more in common with Judo than with ju jitsu. BJJ trains live randori, much like judo, which JJJ does not have, or has very seldomly. BJJ has exceptionally improved upon the unarmed combat aspect of JJJ. Techniques arent new, but how well the people who teach them know the techniques is always the decided factor. To compare the unarmed fighting aspect of JJJ to BJJ (I've trained with many JJJ black belts) a JJJ black belt is somewhere around the level of a tough white belt in BJJ. This is not meant as an insult to JJJ, but simply a testement as to how much more BJJ furthered things. JJJ has many other things involved in it, such as sword drawing, knife throwing, and other aspects not involved with unarmed modern day combat, but very much so involved with samurai type warfare. Also, many of the strikes of JJJ were designed with the idea in mind that both the person delivering the strikes and the person recieving were armored and this greatly affected body movements and targets of attack which may otherwise seem very odd and unneccessary for modern day fighting.

The first full contact tournaments showcased that just because one has the desire to win he or she isnt always going to. In the case you mentioned, the husband is going to fight harder because the MMA fighter is going to be able to play around with him like a child-doesnt matter how much fight is in your system- if you dont know how to defend a choke, punch, or a takedown, no amount of willpower will help you prevail. In regards to the UFC and cagefighting favoring grappling, where does this statement come from? Since its start, cage fighting has slowing adapted to fit the needs of the strikers and not the grapplers! Case in point- the very first UFC's- no time limit, no gloves, no rules. Modern cage fighting favors strikers by: Giving them 4oz gloves- this prevents people from breaking their hands, which happened alot during the early bareknuckle days. It also inhibits alot of sensitivity of the grapplers (its exceptionally difficult to land a rear naked with gloves than without). Time limits and rounds: every new round starts on the feet, regardless of where the previous round ended. Elbows to the spine:: a terrific weapon to use on someone when you take their back- Bustamante used to use this one very often. With this, you can beat someone into submission with elbows to their spine. Strikes like this are no longer allowed (and elbows to the spine have never stopped a takedown when they were legal). Inactivity on the ground leads to restarts on the feet- wheres the logic in this? If someone holds long enough a ref will stop them and start them back on their feet? To use what is already so abused, there are no refs in real life Perhaps we should start inactive strikers on the ground when they refused to engage. These are just a few examples, but I can go on and on...

Far from it- have you ever trained with a high level mixed martial artist? Mixed Martial Arts will take a lifetime striving for perfection. Hardly watered down, it incorporates the BEST that other styles have to offer. University of Jiu Jitsu in San Diego is run by the two best Jiu Jitsu fighters the world has to offer- and its a MMA gym on top of a Jiu Jitsu school. Chute Boxe has the best Muay Thai fighters that Brazil has to offer, and they incorporate jiu jitsu and wrestling into their school and cirriculum. Such "watered down" fighters in UFC are the best fighters the world has to offer. Honor, respect, humility- these have absolutely nothing to do with real fighting. It has to do with ones way of life. Fighting is about fighting- its violent, brutal, fast, and chaotic. Most TMA's cant stand the fact that someone can be good at fighting and be of a questionable character. Thats life. Mixed Martial Arts led many people to question what karate and TMA's were preaching for so many years. These types of fighters cut the fat and got right into what people wanted to learn-how to fight and how to fight effectively. As a result, many in the TMA community have a vendetta against MMA> Once again, things such as kata, honor, respect have nothing to do with real fighting. You can apply them to your lifestyle if you choose, but you can be the worst person in the world, devoid of any honor, respect, or humility, and be the best fighter in the world. The reverse is also true. No matter how respectfull or honorable one is, these traits alone will not make them a better fighter- practicing how to fight will.

So you judge the quality of the sport by the fans? There are lots of boneheads that watch boxing- I used to see them at the club every weekend night when a fight was one. You know those guys "I could have gone pro, but....." Just because theres a bunch of beered up ignoramous fans here in the US doesnt mean they speak for everyone. Watch an even on Japanese soil- those people are into the game- you could hear a pin drop while the two fighters are in the ring. Mixed Martial Arts simply implies what the ruleset is and suggests that a fight isnt limited to any one range of fighting or any one style. As to whether or not MMA is better than boxing, well thats a relative statement. What constitutes "better"? Is it entertainment? If so than it depends on the audience and what they want to see. Does better= better fighters? If thats the case then yes, MMA by its very definition is better than boxing. A boxer can only fight on his feet with a ref to keep someone from clinching him. A mixed martial artist trains to fight as if there were no ref involved. Bear in mind this doesnt mean that one is more or less technical than the other-just a better fighter. There are plenty of other great fighters in the game of MMA. Hayato Sakurai is well rounded with great judo, Matt Hughes is a phenominal wrestler , Hidehiko Yoshido is an Olympic Gold Medalist, Gabriel Gonzaga Marcio Pe de Pano, and Fabricio Werdum are all World Champion Jiu Jitsu fighters. One doesnt have to look pretty to be a good fighter. There are plenty of people who look less than impressive with their skills, but that applies to every sport you'll watch (including boxing, hence the reason for its decline). If you want to include any type of philosophical learning in your martial arts training, thats entirely up to you. Mixed Martial Arts is great for people who have an interest in fighting and none in budo or karma or anything else people swear by. What makes one a good fighter is fighting, and learning fighting techniques- not studying an ancient dogma. Its a physical skill just like anything else. You could apply that same dogma to any other sport, and in the end it doesnt really matter-reading books, practicing religion, or trying to lead a good life will in no way influence your skills as a fighter. It is best to keep the two aspect seperate from one another. -

No one wants to get stuck on the ground in MMA either- figure that when a fight hits the ground, at least one of the fighters isnt too pleased to be there (usually the one on the bottom). If he isnt exceptionally trained in the ground game, hes going to be in for a painfull night. During a street/self defense scenario, it could be fatal. MMA fighters are no longer one dimensional- they train all aspects. After training against other professionals on a daily basis, a self defense situation against a bunch of untrained people is actually a fun and entertaining event.

Such high level karate and judo masters didnt do very well considering... Fighters nowadays wear fight trucks so as to avoid giving an opponent any type of advantage or something to grab (such as a gi). Its illegal to wear one in the US, but then again, why would you want to? What you are watching is exactly what real fighting is. Its going to hit the ground, and the less you know about the ground the more pain you're going to be in when it does (such as those karate masters from the first UFC's) Take the time to learn what the ground game is all about, and you'll understand just how incredibly complicated and technical it really is. Even something that looks brutish and raw such as wrestling is very beautiful and technical when you understand exactly whats going on and how moves are set up. I'll admit, when I first watched the first UFC videos, I used to fast forward when it hit the ground because it was "boring."

In my opinion, most Krav isnt going to be very good, for reasons stated above. The only thing worthwhile from Krav are their weapon defenses and disarms. Everything else of their hand to hand combatives I feel is very lacking when taken into account. Alot of their hand to hand is borrowed from other styles- mostly boxing, muay thai, judo, wrestling, and BJJ. That being said, its almost a crash course in MMA and can be fairly worthwhile (ASSUMING you have a decent level instructor) while at the same time not being on the same level as learning from actual boxers/thai fighters/grapplers. I find the styles over-reliance on eye gouges and groin attacks to be one of its biggest weaknesses.

Jason Fairn was an Aiki Ju Jitsu fighter- fought in UFC 4 (I believe it was- was either 3 or 4) against a very standup oriented Guy Metzger. Fairn was taken down and mounted by a very green grappler in Metzger and how no idea on how to escape the mount.

Front Kicks are used often, just simply as a push kick rather than a direct attack. A well placed tiip though still spears directly into the diaphragm and does decent damage. A rear push kick (or strong front kick if you will) simply takes alot of time to set up and is therefore more easily defended. Side kicks are difficult to use for a couple of reasons. Someone mentioned stance- you cant stand sideways or use a traditional karate stance in MMA, or else you'll either get taken down or be at the mercy of cut kicks all fight long. Being the best position for utilizing sidekicks this stance is extremely disadvantagous, so you're less likely to see their application. A second reason is that sidekicks can be easily countered. You can counter one the same way you counter a tiip (push kick) and deflect it to the side. When either kick is countered, it leaves a very vulnerable opponent, with a free attack to the hamstrings (very painfull area to recieve a cut kick) the back, or for closing the distance for takedown attempts. The best application for a sidekick is more like in a mule kick scenario. When one is trying to run from an opponent and that opponent starts to gain ground, planting and kicking may work well (Imagine a gazelle running from a lion). This being a purely self defense situation you wouldnt see in a cage fight.

You have better alternatives to using pressure points when you're grappling, and they're not going to work against someone who is himself a grappler. Chokes and joint locks are better alternatives

You're assumptions are somewhat correct, and somewhat incorrect. Karate and other standing styles of martial arts dont teach ground work because they simply dont know it. Even schools that claim to teach groundwork or grappling holds, they fall very much short of real grappling styles. So, the hit and run style of karate fighting- yeah I agree with what you said. It (karatesque styles) are not designed for a fight- its for one shot and run away. People always assume that the ground fight= longer fight- mostly because thats what they see on TV. Bear in mind when you watch jiu jitsu at work on tv, you have two well trained professional athletes who have both trained in the same styles. Regardless of the fight being on the feet or on the ground, its not going to end fast. So people who try to sell you something by saying "we train to end the fight quickly" are doing just that- trying to sell you something. EVERYONE would like to end a fight as quick as possible. Submissions will end a fight just as quickly as a KO will- A good boxer ko's an untrained opponent quickly because his opponent doesnt know the very basics of boxing, namely protecting himself from getting hit. The same thing applies to a good grappler in the same situation- he will quickly choke his opponent unconcious because his opponent has no idea what the proper defense for the choke is. As to karate fighters being the exception to going to the ground, thats mostly inaccurate as well. Early UFC's had standup fighter vs standup fighter and they still found themselves on the ground. The reason is that in any standup exchange, one is bound to get the better of the other, in which case the person on the recieving end usually grabs the other to keep from getting hit. A struggle ensues, and lack of proper grappling base makes for people more often than not simply falling down on the ground. As for those who argue against fights not going to the ground- most of them will. I've worked in a prison and a bar for close to 7 years. The only times the fights dont end up on the ground is when one person tries to hit and run- but thats mostly in the prison. Bar fights end up on the ground alot. One person cold cocks the other and follows him to the ground almost every time

Kicking with the instep is a bad hangover from point sparring and improper technique. You're more likely to break the small bones in your foot than you are a large bone like the tibia. Not only that, but a conditioned thai fighter makes weapons out of his shins. A cut kick from a foot doesnt really hurt (and will almost certainly break if checked). A cut kick from a shin bone hurts like a mother, and is much more suitable for the job

That really says it all- are you really going to put all your faith into a technique that you've never ever used, and possibly even the person that trained you never ever used, when you're in a fight for your life? I can teach someone to practice an armbar from the guard 1000 times over. The way you learn to apply it changes drastically when you actually attempt it against a resisting opponent.

Sigh...... heres the biggest problem with all these theories about deadly pressure point strikes- they dont seem to take into account that these nerves have MUSCLES surrounding them! Your muscles are like armor, and even where theres chinks in the armor, the muscles adjacent to each other push up against each other so as to still protect. It takes more than a little hypothesis- as these are NOT theories (theory =/= something I thought of) Show it ACTUALLY happening. Its been passed down from generation to generation- so is sickle cell anemia- it doesnt mean its GOOD. More people train karate or any other traditional striking art than do jiu jitsu the world over. I can show you over 100 examples of a rear naked choke or an armbar being applied as proof nevermind that they are ALSO being applied against world class fighters- is 1 example too much to ask?

Even with your opponents elbow higher up, you may still run the risk of crushing your groin- your opponents arm is ideally off to the side as if you're tucking his wrist under your armpit- then again, if you're caught in your situation, theres a reason why you have 2 of most organs.... Reminds me of a story of a russian judoka. Russians are notorious for refusing to tap, mainly because they get paid based on how well they perform at the tournaments. So, say for instance you do really well at a big tourny or another, you may get an extra couple thousand dollars a year as a result (since you are, in russia, a professional athlete/judoka). My friend tells me a story of a russian judoka who got his opponent in an armbar that rested right against his testes- and he decided that winning a better yearly salary for his family was more important. He squeezed and arched, and he testicle had to be removed after he had crushed it. On a side note, just wear a pair of underarmor or other kind of compression shorts.

Hughes is much more than a better wrestler than Royce- hes just simply a better grappler. Being from a very modern (and successfull) MMA gym such as the Miletech camp, Hughes has top notch instruction. They have their own BJJ black belt instructor in Garth Taylor. Im not saying that Royce isnt himself a skilled jiu jitsu fighter, but Hughes is without a doubt significantly better. This is argumentive simply from his record: Hughes has notable wins over the following fighters: George St Pierre Frank Trigg Renato Verissimo BJ Penn Joe Doerkson Carlos Newton Hayato Sakurai Being game enough to avoid the submissions from the guard of Verissimo, who himself has a much better guard game than that of Royce, defeating a world champ jiu jitsu fighter in BJ Penn, and submitting a skilled submission fighter in St Pierre. Who has Royce beaten decisively? (win via submission or ko/tko) Once again, Im not attempting to bring Royce or his accomplishments down. While Hughes may be the better fighter and grappler, I'll guarentee that Royce is a much better instructor. Thats the premise of Gracie Jiu Jitsu- its not having an aggressive guard game like you see from Nogueira, or worrying about appealing to the crowd with numerous submission attempts or winning on the cards. Its first and foremost about defending yourself. The type of jiu jitsu you see in modern day UFC is aggressive because it has to be, but its not the type that the Gracies prefer. Simply put, you cant teach a feeble non athletic person to put out that kind of effort. Matt Hughes may not be able to teach everyone how to fight on the ground, but Royce will.

This is true. However, I think what hurt Gracie the most in that match, in which all of the real action took place on the ground, was that Hughes, despite not being as skilled on the ground, was skilled enough that when combined with his strength advantage he was able to dominate on the ground. Sure, he had to pound Royce with strikes to finish the fight, but, he achieved that feat by gaining superior postion. A position which Royce, who is a far better grappler, couldn't escape. Both of you have made an incorrect assumption- Royce is nowhere near the calibre grappler that Matt Hughes is. Hughes won his fight against Royce because hes a better submission grappler, a better wrestler, a better striker, bigger fighter, stronger fighter, and just simply better in all areas. Hughes is a 4X NCAA Division I All American Wrestler and Abu Dhabi veteran who holds notable wins against name submission fighters. Royce's only real claim to fame is his 3 UFC victories. While itself being no small feat, Hughes accomplishments are much more impressive. Just because his last name is Gracie doesnt mean hes a better grappler. Hughes is a far better grappler than is Royce- the edge I would give to Royce is self defense jiu jitsu.

1: That statement is made by someone who has no or very limited knowledge of grappling. It seems as if its constructed so as to favor whatever "anti grappling" system he may be selling. 2: Ancient Greeks did Pankration, which utilizes an awful lot of grappling. 3: United States Marine Corps Martial Arts Program was developed in part by Rorion Gracie due to the great success BJJ had against all other styles of martial arts (including the "deadly" military ones). 4: Ground fighting involves two people- the first person to hit the ground usually got killed because the other person was more skilled at takedowns and grappling in general. For every person that got killed because they ended up on the ground there is another person who lived and won the fight because they took that fight there in the first place.

Helio did quite an amazing job. About the only thing that Japanese Ju Jitsu and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu have in common is the name (albeit spelled incorrectly by the Brazilians). His innovations to Ju Jitsu/ Judo were just as incredible as were Kano's innovations when he derived Judo from Ju Jitsu

"Modern Combatives" sounds like a regular catch phrase used by many people in the martial arts business to get students to sign up under the impression they're doing something new, wild, or as these schools prefer to say, "street effective." My definition of modern combatives is a styles of fighting that isnt taught while holding on to rigid myths, legends, or traditions. For example, many striking arts have finely tuned areas to hit on the body- developed based on armor technology at the time. Attacking someone under the armpit is kinda pointless when you consider attacking the body or head. Most styles associated with mixed martial arts are modern combatives. Older, more rigid styles, such as japanese ju jitsu, are not

When I studied TKD in the past, the Senseis (husband and wife) did not permit contact sparring. However, the husband had apparently been in a few fights--and I don't think they were in tournaments--on which he based his advice to me about striking the face. He felt that, no matter how large the opponent, shots to the face in his experience can shut someone down, even if the blows aren't necessarily powerful ones. He discovered that there are people who, if hit in the face, no matter what their size, are affected more by having been hit there than the force of the punch.I realize you're focusing on the fact that there's no "bodybuilding muscle" in the face, fallenyuyu, and that that's why you think of it as a prime target, but a sensitivity to facial strikes, even if the guy's much larger than you are, seems to fit in. There is a bit of truth to this. Heres the catch: most people dont regularly get into fights. So the dreaded "street fighter" everyones worried about doesnt brawl all that often. As such, a punch to the face jars everyone's confidence, assuming they're not used to getting hit. I've seen many people get so fired up with aggression and adrenaline just quit the fight once they get caught with a good shot to the face. Now, who are the people this isnt going to hurt a lot? Regular fighters, that is people who actually spar full contact and get hit in the face. (You can practice punching and kicking all you want- if you havent gotten hit in the face by someone trying to ko you, you're not used to getting hit). The other type would be athletes of contact sports. Football, Rugby, Ice Hockey, and those types of athletes eat physical contact every day. Taking a hit is nothing new to them.

Its a little more difficult to kill someone than to simply punch them in the throat with your knuckle and expect them to fall over. Alot of stock is invested in some of these techniques, which are overused by "self defense instructors." Women know by grammar school that boys dont like getting hit in the groin, that getting poked in the eye hurts, and that biting someone hurts them, yet thousands of rapes still occur every year. So whats a good self defense technique? Its not always an attack. Learning how to get up from your back- stand up in base. Sprawling to avoid takedowns and crude tackles. Standing and prone headlock escapes. As to which techniques you want to use to incompacitate someone without being put in jail/prison- Chokeholds are quite effective, and do no permanent damage to your attacker. Body shots are also good alternatives, say a thai clinch followed by some knees to the gut, or a solid hook to liver. Face shots stand a better chance of you hurting yourself (bone on bone hand breaks) and your attacker (broken bones, such as a nose, becomes more than a simple assault)

Leg kicks probably have no reason to be in point sparring. Im not very fond of point sparring to begin with, but nontheless many of the rules are implemented to encourage more of a spectator sport- extra points for kicks to the head and so forth. Its kinda like how Judo doesnt reward anything for a double leg takedown if your opponent doesnt fall to his back. Its a takedown, but not pleasing to the crowd. As far as the risk of injury- the knee is strong joint, despite its horrid design. Its not going to fall apart the moment it gets kicked and I think far too many people (who obviously dont practice leg kicks) invest too much stock in the whole "break his knee with a knee kick" thing. So point sparring? No, not in my opinion. Full contact like WCL or whatnot- its horrible that its not allowed, but its karate- not muay thai.

This 13 yo kid may not have the life experience, but, this 13 yo kid does have the technical capibilities per this kids Sensei. A 13yr old isnt even close to reaching physical let alone mental maturity. They simply having had enough experience to fully understand what it is they're doing- they're not old enough. Regardless of the potential this kid may have, part of being an instructor is to know what you're doing, why you're doing it, how you're doing it, and what can happen in the course of your technique. Maybe this kid can teach a half hearted technique, but all it does is give that particular student poor instruction and leads to the development of bad habits.

Tallgeese is spot on here A 13 year old CHILD does not have the intuition and know how to teach (effective) martial arts. In Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, you cant get your black belt until you're 18, and you cant even get your blue belt (1 step up from white) until 16 (15 for exceptional students). It is precisely because of this. A child is far from mastery, and far from knowing how to teach himself. Hes not even old enough to be in high school. Theres a difference between not having an ego and just being plain naiive. So even though age restrictions weren't the primary focus of this topic, it seems that age restrictions would help prevent the situation Shotokan-kex was discussing. Even if it was just a warm up what if this instructor decides to rely on her in the future? This could be a potential problem. If the instructor relies on a child to run any part of his or her class, then he or she shouldnt be teaching martial arts at all.,