SevenStar Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 I would also like to make clear that if you put someone in situation that is outside of their element, the odds are against him. TMA guys were way out of their element, but we only saw a few Styles compete in the early UFC's. Logically if you put a ring fighter in a dojo with a boken in his hand going against a kenjutsu master his going to get killed, he's out of his element. It doesn't mean that his training is not effective, he's just not in his element. I'm not so sure that's the case - they kick, punch, etc. The only thing they didn't do was grapple. They weren't out of their element at all - they weren't training properly. just because you train a TMA doesn't mean you're out of your element if you can't use eye gouges and groin strikes. a grappler in a boxing match is out of his element. a striker in a grappling match is out of his element. The tma guys were in a venue where they could strike and grapple - they weren't out of their element per se - the grapplers took them down - THEN they were out of their element, and they didn't know how to get back into their element.
1ONEfighting Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 "OK you're back to training methods not technique. If you read what I said both have weapons. Obviously someone well trained with a weapon is going to have the clear advantage over someone who is not well trained. This is what I mean by being out of your element." What if only one of them has a weapon? Is he the better fighter? I measure a fighter by who wins in a one-on-one, unarmed encounter. That is when all things are equal. Otherwise the winner is just the guy with the bat. I train with weapons, I know it is important in developing into a truly well-rounded martial artist. But when you strip it down to the bare minimum, it's just you against the other guy. Whomever has the skill, toughness, and aggressiveness is the better fighter. You aren't the better fighter because you shot the other guy, even though you won. Fighting is antiquated. It is completely obsolete with modern weapons available. The problem is, modern weapons are not always available, they can jam, get caught, you left it in the car, etc. Nobody ALWAYS has a weapon. Trainwreck Tiemeyerwishes he was R. Lee Ermey.
Treebranch Posted December 4, 2003 Author Posted December 4, 2003 TJS your just not seeing the bigger picture, not anyone can jump into the NBA you have to be a certain kind of person as well, you have to have the character and responsibility of being a pro, that doesn't mean they are less talented. I think those guys are the best MMA fighters in the world, but it all depends on the context. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
1ONEfighting Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Yeah, our NBA heros are all pillars of society. Trainwreck Tiemeyerwishes he was R. Lee Ermey.
Reklats Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 I would also like to make clear that if you put someone in situation that is outside of their element, the odds are against him. TMA guys were way out of their element, but we only saw a few Styles compete in the early UFC's. Logically if you put a ring fighter in a dojo with a boken in his hand going against a kenjutsu master his going to get killed, he's out of his element. It doesn't mean that his training is not effective, he's just not in his element. If the kenjutsu master has become a master by doing kata all day every day and has never actually swung his ...boken...do you swing a boken? Or do you fire it?.... anyway... has never actually tried using his weapon against a resisting dodging counter-attacking enemy, then I'd say its about even money.
Stold Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 In the first UFC there were no rules, you were just fined a certain amount of money for certain attacks. And...Well...All the kung fu guys still got beaten up.
SBN Doug Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 On the contrary, MMA does have rules, it is the watered-down version of early no-holds-barred/vale tudo fighting. The term MMA was coined to give the sport (yes, it is a sport) a less menacing public appearance. Then our definitions of MMA are different. Mine is Mixed Martial Arts, which to me means a blending of different martial arts. To me, it does not mean Mixed Martial Arts Competition. The competition would have rules. A method of training, where you take the quickest to learn, and most effective aspects of different martial arts and blend them together, has no rules. Kuk Sool Won - 4th danEvil triumphs when good men do nothing.
Treebranch Posted December 4, 2003 Author Posted December 4, 2003 Reklats you are completely wrong here they do have full contact in certain dojos with armor. These guys know their craft. You are simply uninformed about it. I can't believe you even said that. If the kenjutsu master has become a master by doing kata all day every day and has never actually swung his ...boken...do you swing a boken? Or do you fire it?.... anyway... has never actually tried using his weapon against a resisting dodging counter-attacking enemy, then I'd say its about even money. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
1ONEfighting Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 KSN, pre-UFC, there was no MMA. We all just called it crosstraining. MMA is a marketing ploy. Trainwreck Tiemeyerwishes he was R. Lee Ermey.
Recommended Posts