Opinion on UFC

[Anbu Alex]

I think that MMA is far more effective than traditional in things like Pride and ufc i would never test my art out personally cause i would lose saying that when it comes to the streets and self defense i think that it goes with what ever style works for some it traditional others its MMA if it helps you to aurvive thats all that counts "to each their own" some ppl on the streets are deadly with MMA others with traditional each person's body and mentality gose with a different art which i why i believe that there are so many different styles and concepts even ancient warriors in Asia use to mix and match their arts

[Anbu Alex]

also i tend to think that it dependes on the enviorment

[elbows_and_knees]

Actually I would consider it dedication and confidence in ones martial art.

This is the ideal that made me feel like I had to quit muay Thai, the feeling of being told facts that if I dont follow I wont be able to keep up.

Some would prefer to use thier style in a way that suits them, not facts that suit them.

I see what your point and its good, however I dont think I would acheive much if I had thought like this during my life.

Just for insight...

confidence is one thing, overconfidence is another. overconfidence can lead to oversight, which leads to open holes that can and will be exploited.

[elbows_and_knees]

I find alot of Martial artists lose the essense of martial arts by only focusing on science and competitions.

maybe. but essence is in the eye of the beholder. IMO, the essence of MARTIAL arts is in the fighting and the competition. These are the things which are honing your martial skill.

In my opinion...So are wing chun practitioners, also it seems now alot of new martial arts are becoming more and more fitting to the average person...I think its the fame, money and overall population adaption have to do with MMA success.

IME, the wing chun guys I know aren't really that good with their hands at all. Especially when compared to a boxer. They have fast hands, but not necessarily good ones.

Comparing Karate alone I find is ineffective, because your judging past peoples potential, not karate's potential.

Karate I beileve should become whatever you want it to be for yourself.

but in the ende, fighting is fighting, which is what medici is saying. On another forum I post on, they use to have a saying concerning traditional fighting: "look at that guy - he reverted to kickboxing instead of using his traditional skill." That statement always irks me. Why?

1. they said it about any supposedly traditional stylist who didn't look like they were fighting with traditional technique.

2. you can't revert to something that you've never trained in.

3. it would've been sloppy kickboxing even if it were kickboxing.

4. "revert" makes it seem as if the traditional style is superior to kickboxing.

But, it did make one thing apparent to them - that fighting is fighting. On it's most basic level, pretty much all styles look alike.

[Menjo]

confidence is one thing, overconfidence is another. overconfidence can lead to oversight, which leads to open holes that can and will be exploited.

Yes, I agree, and thanks for expanding on that.

Say I had to take on 6 experianced attakers...

My logic is that I would fight like I COULD win this fight, yet chances are that I would not come out of it without some sort of loss.

My point here is that I think its important for one to NOT give into something that facts or stats tell them. In this case, generaly most people who are attacked by 6 people, will not win the fight. This is reasonable and important not to forget this, but I wont let it control my life when I have to rely on chancy circumstances. Sometimes you just gotta go out on a limb and do your best...

When it comes down to it, forget rules and forget those put downs, just do what you have to do. Your training should already be planted into your body and mind, whether it be traditional or Mixed, its always possible to make it work.

This is what I LIKE to think, of course its very hard to apply in real life!

This is a general principle, but its often lost in the modern world.

maybe. but essence is in the eye of the beholder. IMO, the essence of MARTIAL arts is in the fighting and the competition. These are the things which are honing your martial skill.

Thats valid, however, I dont think I got my message clearly across before.

So Ok, to be a little more specific...I think a practicioner of martial arts should be someone who studies and trains in BOTH sides of the term Martial Arts.

I think a healthy balance is best, but along with "traditional" schools, MMA tends to only focus on one aspect of Martial Arts.

Some might consider this an art of science I guess, but in general, I wouldn't.

But, it did make one thing apparent to them - that fighting is fighting. On it's most basic level, pretty much all styles look alike.

I pretty much agree with you there.

[Kajukenbopr]

I did get MUCH better at throwing people and at maneuvering in the ground by studying judo, I have to admit, but it is very hard to throw me off my feet in the first place. All in all, in my opinion, cross-training is good, but no substitute for studying a traditional art in depth.

thanks for the postings!

Gero

---

Nidan Traditional Shotokan

It's no substitute at all, it's a superior replacement. Let's face it, if traditional martial arts were so great to begin with, these MT/BJJ guys wouldn't be absolutely dominating the UFC and PRIDE and Vale Tudo and everything else. Even the guys who started in karate or something, looking at how they fight now, it all resembles boxing standing up, and so on. No it doesn't incorperate everything that can happen in a fight thanks to the rules, but sport martial arts evolve (evolution inherently moves towards the better) because the techniques themselves basically compete for survival. That means they're always improving themselves- which is why, for instance, boxers, are so incredibly good with their hands.

that all depends on what you train for.

if i train for the ART I will take a traditional martial art- if its taught right and I train well, it can be devastating.

if i train to fight, I'll cross-train- it will cut corners of the training and not get caught up in the philosophies of a martial art.

Personally, I'd rather go with the art. it will take me longer, but I make sure my training doesnt create a weak martial artist. and right now, I dont need to fight, if it ever came to that, I wont stand and fight, I'll defend myself and get out of there- but i dont train for sport.

[elbows_and_knees]

It's no substitute at all, it's a superior replacement. Let's face it, if traditional martial arts were so great to begin with, these MT/BJJ guys wouldn't be absolutely dominating the UFC and PRIDE and Vale Tudo and everything else. Even the guys who started in karate or something, looking at how they fight now, it all resembles boxing standing up, and so on. No it doesn't incorperate everything that can happen in a fight thanks to the rules, but sport martial arts evolve (evolution inherently moves towards the better) because the techniques themselves basically compete for survival. That means they're always improving themselves- which is why, for instance, boxers, are so incredibly good with their hands.

that all depends on what you train for.

if i train for the ART I will take a traditional martial art- if its taught right and I train well, it can be devastating.

if i train to fight, I'll cross-train- it will cut corners of the training and not get caught up in the philosophies of a martial art.

Personally, I'd rather go with the art. it will take me longer, but I make sure my training doesnt create a weak martial artist. and right now, I dont need to fight, if it ever came to that, I wont stand and fight, I'll defend myself and get out of there- but i dont train for sport.

wrong mindset. you don't crosstrain to cut corners - you cross train to fill gaps. training in longfist will not make you proficient at groundfighting. training judo will not make you proficient at striking. EVER. these are gaps. Granted, i can use my judo to deal with stikes, but I still wouldn't be able to strike properly myself without crosstraining. your average kung fu practitioner will never be as good on the ground as a bjj guy or judoka. plain, simple truth. crosstraining can fill that gap.

[juey palancu]

Hey lets not forget that it's becoming clearer and clearer that the level of accomplishment of the so-called traditional art masters who competed in early ufc's was greatly over-hyped. For example, Ichihara, the karate guy from the early UFC (1 or 2?), turned out to be a nidan (2nd degree) at the time. A Nidan is only a beggining black belt! I'm a nidan in a very tough and rigourous traditional organization and i'm definitely no "master", I'm a begginer!

I cannot repeat this enough: the early masters WERE cross-trainers. It's the sport-oriented karate organizations that have gone away from it. If you follow a 'traditional' line of okinawan karate, for example, you will cross-train, learn how to work clinches, throws, thwart takedowns, etc...Hey, if you want to see a well-rounded traditional karateka, look at former shotokan competition champion Ryoto Machida who has beaten a who's who of mixed martial arts stars.

cross-training is part being prepared, which is at the heart of self-defense. Definitely not the exclusive domain of UFC, PRIDE, etc.

best, gero

[MizuRyu]

One thing that really gets on my nerves is people saying "myths" over and over again. Maybe people have forgotten what these arts were developed for or the time period in which they were developed. APPARENTLY, thousands of years of pre-firearm combat is wrong and we should all swallow our tongues and listen to the real holders of truth: sport fighters. Do not discount an entire system because of it's performance in a sport ring and, more importantly, the performance of the fighter respresenting that art, which in the end is what it really comes down to. Martial arts were NOT developed so the practitioners could sit in a big ring with gloves on and pummel eachother into unconsciousness. Regardless of your feelings as to the deeper purpose of the arts, what it has and always will come down to is maiming or killing your opponent. Hence we have different terms for 'martial arts' and 'sport arts'.

[elbows_and_knees]

One thing that really gets on my nerves is people saying "myths" over and over again. Maybe people have forgotten what these arts were developed for or the time period in which they were developed. APPARENTLY, thousands of years of pre-firearm combat is wrong and we should all swallow our tongues and listen to the real holders of truth: sport fighters. Do not discount an entire system because of it's performance in a sport ring and, more importantly, the performance of the fighter respresenting that art, which in the end is what it really comes down to. Martial arts were NOT developed so the practitioners could sit in a big ring with gloves on and pummel eachother into unconsciousness. Regardless of your feelings as to the deeper purpose of the arts, what it has and always will come down to is maiming or killing your opponent. Hence we have different terms for 'martial arts' and 'sport arts'.

I agree and disagree. there are a lot of thing tma guys talk about that are myths. such as the "fact" that groin shots are instant fight enders, or the "fact" that it's really easy to eye gouge someone.

As for sport vs martial, sport arts ARE martial. I can't believe there are still people who differentiate the two. the only difference terminology wise is that I train to compete in a sportive venue. As a bouncer, I use my "sport arts" every night. they work well. martial arts were developed to teach fighting. Doesn't matter if you are fighting in the ring or in the street. its REALLY not hard to maim or kill with my sport arts, so now, why are there different terms?