Opinion on UFC

[KempoTiger]

It is the ego that drives us to compete and be better than all the rest. It is humility that teaches us that we can always be better than we are.

I heard a muted trumpet in the background when I read that.....sorry the corny cliche'dness of that comment seems too much for me to bear

[SubGrappler]

UFC is a sport with rules and a soft mat. Some say the rules favor the strikers, some say they favor the grapplers. Personally, I think it favors grapplers.

Please offer what leads you to believe that the UFC competitions favor grapplers over strikers. Is this an observation you've made after watching many events, or is this the opinion you heard of someone else?

UFC does not represent the best that martial arts have to offer. It represents the best that UFC competitors have to offer.

Sure it does. There are martial artists pulled in from every possible venue to fight. You cant claim to be the best, or even among the best, if you cant somehow validate your claims. Its like Muhammed Ali saying "Im the best ever" and never stepping into the ring. You can, however, claim to be the best if you fight all those who challenge you and leave that challenge open to any and all comers who wish to take you up on it.

Many superb (I’d argue most) martial artists have zero desire to fight in competitions. It doesn’t mean their style is ineffective. Also, when a fighter loses a fight, he loses…not his style. .

It is true that many people have no desire for competitions. Even most BJJ practitioners (which has the label of being UFC hungry power mongrels) have no desire to do any form of mixed martial arts. Now, as far as a fighter losing and not the style, this is true.... to an extent.

If I bring together two anonymous fighters- one striker, one grappler- and have them fight, just because one loses doesnt mean their style is ineffective or that they dont know how to fight. This is the basis of any scientific experiement- the more times you repeat your experiment, the more valid your claims become. If instead of only two people, I bring together a hundred, or perhaps a thousand people, then my results will eventually start to be more and more realistic. This is what happened in the early days of mixed martial arts competition- it wasnt just one particular fighter who was unable to make work, but it was a collection of fighters who all met a similar fate. After all that evidence builds up, it starts to point to a conclusion, which was that some styles were superior to others when they were isolated.

There are numerous factors that go into a fighter wining or losing a fight. And just because a fighter says he trains in so-and-so style does not mean he is truly being train’d by an authentic instructor. There are many more hacks than true schools out there..

There were many competitors who had "legit" lineages. I feel that if these MMA competitions would have been around when karate and ju jitsu were being established, you wouldnt have as many hacks as you claim.

In the beginning, “No Rules” were hyped but I didn’t see anyone carry’n a bat or gun in the ring. Also, the styles were more varied in the beginning. Strikers faired well and so did grapplers.

Be serious- it was no rules unarmed combat- what does having a bat or gun have to do with learning how to punch, kick, and grapple? Also note that the strikers did not fair well in the early competitions at all. People began to make the assumption that striking arts were obsolete after seeing grapplers defeat them time and time again (these assumptions were premature however, as time saw strikers cross train and learn how to defend against takedowns and how to defend themselves on the ground- then we would see the strikers start to defeat the grapplers).

However, one sided fighters didn’t fare to well. Mr. Gracie show’d the world that if you can’t defend against someone who will grapple you on the ground, you’re in for a long day. Because of this, more and more emphasis was placed on the “ground fight” rather than “stand up fighting”..

More emphasis was placed on the ground fight because thats where most of the fights went, even if the two fighters happened to be strikers. The evidence was piling up after a few events, and it showed that strikes were not as effective as keeping someone from getting a hold of you as previously thought.

UFC doesn’t depict real fights you’ll encounter on a daily basis. There are only a small percentage of people training in any martial art. If in a fight, one is a martial artist, most likely the other isn’t.

Very true, but that doesnt change what happens in the UFC. The UFC asked a single question- which style of martial arts is the best- if a bunch of martial artists who were considered masters in their respective arts were brought together and squared off against each other, who would win?

In doing so, it started to set standards for fighting styles, and after awhile there was a clear heirarchy of styles that were having success as opposed to those that werent.

. Even with all the moves I know, if I can hit you in the nuts to end the fight, you’re gonna get hit in the nuts. I’ve seen the earliest fights in UFC where groin strikes were allow’d and not only were they used a lot, they work’d.

Define what you mean by "worked." They may be effective, but were no more effective than a punch from a good puncher, and were far from being the fight enders they were once thought to be.

[Willannem]

The UFC is fought on a mat that gives, significantly. Therefore when taking someone down for a ground fight, you don’t have to worry about injuring yourself as much in the takedown. I’ve watch’d UFC from the beginning. Most of the “takedowns” I saw would not be duplicated if the fighting surface was concrete. Strikers did fair well as long as they were taught to fight and defend against ground fighters as well. There are plenty of knockouts in the beginnings.

Here is more of why I say the UFC favors grapplers:

• No head butts That’s a strike
   
  No groin attacks Another strike removed
   
  No striking to the spine or the back of the head. More striking attacks removed.
   
  No striking downward using the point of the elbow. Another strike removed. One that would stop many takedowns in its tracks.
   
  No throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea. More strikes removed.
   
  No kicking or kneeing the head of a grounded opponent This one really bothers me because it protects people who mess up a takedown. A grapplers safety net.
   
  No stomping a grounded opponent More of the same as above. Just because your takedown fails, I can’t take advantage of the situation?
   
  No kicking to the kidney with the heel. Another strike removed.

These are all rules pull’d from the UFC’s official site. Under realistic situations, I would do any and all necessary to end the fight in my favor. You cannot look at the UFC and say this is how fights really happen. You can’t spit in the ring, either. If I have to spit in your face to distract you so I can defeat you, so be it. You have to wear gloves. While they do protect your hands, it is also padding against getting hit. A bare fisted strike is more devastating than a padded one. Also, if you wear shoes, kicking is out of the question.

Your hypothetical experiment seeking the best art (if anything) only applies to what is the best sport for the ring. The simple fact of having rules takes the “realism” out the equation.

Now I’m not bashing grapplers because it takes skill to be one. It's part of my training, also. We just don't focus on it as there are several other aspects in self defense that need equal attention. It is just very obvious that the UFC competitions favor grapplers. It has nothing to do with what works on the street because what works on the street isn’t allow’d in the ring. It has everything to do with what works in the ring.

Muhammed Ali was a boxer. Last I check’d, boxing is a sport with its own set of rules. Claiming to be the best boxer would have to be back’d up due to the nature of the sport. Martial arts is not about claiming who is the best fighter. It’s about defending you and loved ones and improving you life. Sports have evolved from traditional martial arts for the simple act of competition. That’s all it is. I too like competitions but traditional training much more.

There were many competitors who had "legit" lineages. I feel that if these MMA competitions would have been around when karate and ju jitsu were being established, you wouldnt have as many hacks as you claim.

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.

[fightingarts101]

The UFC is fought on a mat that gives, significantly. Therefore when taking someone down for a ground fight, you don’t have to worry about injuring yourself as much in the takedown. I’ve watch’d UFC from the beginning. Most of the “takedowns”

I saw would not be duplicated if the fighting surface was concrete. Strikers did fair well as long as they were taught to fight and defend against ground fighters as well. There are plenty of knockouts in the beginnings.

Here is more of why I say the UFC favors grapplers:

• No head butts That’s a strike
   
  No groin attacks Another strike removed
   
  No striking to the spine or the back of the head. More striking attacks removed.
   
  No striking downward using the point of the elbow. Another strike removed. One that would stop many takedowns in its tracks.
   
  No throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea. More strikes removed.
   
  No kicking or kneeing the head of a grounded opponent This one really bothers me because it protects people who mess up a takedown. A grapplers safety net.
   
  No stomping a grounded opponent More of the same as above. Just because your takedown fails, I can’t take advantage of the situation?
   
  No kicking to the kidney with the heel. Another strike removed.

These are all rules pull’d from the UFC’s official site. Under realistic situations, I would do any and all necessary to end the fight in my favor. You cannot look at the UFC and say this is how fights really happen. You can’t spit in the ring, either. If I have to spit in your face to distract you so I can defeat you, so be it. You have to wear gloves. While they do protect your hands, it is also padding against getting hit. A bare fisted strike is more devastating than a padded one. Also, if you wear shoes, kicking is out of the question.

Your hypothetical experiment seeking the best art (if anything) only applies to what is the best sport for the ring. The simple fact of having rules takes the “realism” out the equation.

Now I’m not bashing grapplers because it takes skill to be one. It's part of my training, also. We just don't focus on it as there are several other aspects in self defense that need equal attention. It is just very obvious that the UFC competitions favor grapplers. It has nothing to do with what works on the street because what works on the street isn’t allow’d in the ring. It has everything to do with what works in the ring.

Muhammed Ali was a boxer. Last I check’d, boxing is a sport with its own set of rules. Claiming to be the best boxer would have to be back’d up due to the nature of the sport. Martial arts is not about claiming who is the best fighter. It’s about defending you and loved ones and improving you life. Sports have evolved from traditional martial arts for the simple act of competition. That’s all it is. I too like competitions but traditional training much more.

There were many competitors who had "legit" lineages. I feel that if these MMA competitions would have been around when karate and ju jitsu were being established, you wouldnt have as many hacks as you claim.

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?

[Kajukenbopr]

Its not that we dont train hard, its the fact that their daily training and fighting is part of their every day work - not workout.

So, while I have to go to college and study(and if I was at a part time job, work too). Their main obligation is working out because they HAVE to be in top shape for their fighting in the ring. That gives them a physical condition superior to those who just work out when we have time or at practices.

We are in a similar boat. I'm out of school, but work two jobs - I am a bouncer by night and a web developer by day. I still find time to train 5 - 6 days a week though and compete when I get a chance. since I like to compete, I know that I must make time to train for it. I hit the gym on my lunch breaks, train 4 days per week and work out and train with 2 private students I have 2 days per week. competition drives us to train harder; it's the nature of the beast.

sadly I cant give that much time to my training. I have to make time for howmework, study, give time to my friends, girlfriend, family , church...

Still, like you said, you train 4 times a week, already know u train 3-5 hours per practice; I dont train that much so, for now, I consider myself in a physical league below yours.

Its not my style cant compete with yours(or vice versa), its me: my body isnt prepared to compete at that level.

--whatever your style, I respect it fully. I'm not saying I'm better than you in any way--

I do say that physical preparation plays a major role in competitions like UFC. Thats what I mean when I say that a lot of styles can compete, but thay dont because most UFC fighters train in pretty much the same styles because they are easier to develop and train in- not necesarily because the style is superior to others.

[KempoTiger]

I don't agree with William's assertion that the UFC favors one type of fighter over the other, but I think he's dead on in reference to it not exemplifying accurately the "best martial artists" or anything overly useful in the street. Now if one of these fighters ALSO trained in not a traditional martial arts style, but at least a bear minimum of basic proven and tested self defense techniques as well as self defense theories, then I think honestly they'd be the most devastating people around.

I know a few people who train for MMA type competitions, and they all seem to think that they are the best fighters to ever grace this earth, and pride themselves on how hard they train. However fairly recently one of them finally got his wish and got into a fight outside of a club, and proceeded to get into his fighting stance rather than just taking the guy out efficiently, he got into his boxing stance (because that's what works afterall right?) and he was immediately floored by the guy next to him.

Although I don't personally train everyday for the ring, but I have enough common sense on how to efficiently take control of the first guy, and get myself into a safe position so I am not getting ambushed from behind, and work from there.

I may not be the best ring fighter, but I do believe that what I know also qualifies as martial arts.

[elbows_and_knees]

I don't agree with William's assertion that the UFC favors one type of fighter over the other, but I think he's dead on in reference to it not exemplifying accurately the "best martial artists" or anything overly useful in the street.

we don't claim it to be, really.

I know a few people who train for MMA type competitions, and they all seem to think that they are the best fighters to ever grace this earth, and pride themselves on how hard they train.

I can say the same for TMA - perfect example is the one I know who says "Boxers have no skill - they just stand there and slug eachother."

However fairly recently one of them finally got his wish and got into a fight outside of a club, and proceeded to get into his fighting stance rather than just taking the guy out efficiently, he got into his boxing stance (because that's what works afterall right?) and he was immediately floored by the guy next to him.

the reverse happened to a friend of mine. He wrestled in high school and started training in longfist after he graduated. He got into a barfight and was unable to block or evade the guys punches using his longfist. He finally just double legged the guy, mounted him and started ground and pounding him.

I may not be the best ring fighter, but I do believe that what I know also qualifies as martial arts.

of course it does. Why wouldn't it?

[KempoTiger]

I don't agree with William's assertion that the UFC favors one type of fighter over the other, but I think he's dead on in reference to it not exemplifying accurately the "best martial artists" or anything overly useful in the street.

we don't claim it to be, really.

Perhaps you don't, but trust me for every soft trained traditional martial artist that thinks he's Li Mu Bai, there's a loudmouth cocky MMA guy (or even worse, untrained UFC fans!) that seem to think that training for the ring is the best way to learn to fight and defend yourself in any given situation.

I know a few people who train for MMA type competitions, and they all seem to think that they are the best fighters to ever grace this earth, and pride themselves on how hard they train.

I can say the same for TMA - perfect example is the one I know who says "Boxers have no skill - they just stand there and slug eachother."

I love those guys. Last guy to say it to me was a friend of a friend black belt in TKD. I nodded, smiled and then punched him in the stomach. After he got up I told him it seemed to work well for me. (we WERE in a dojo at the time with the intent of training....I don't go just hitting people.....usually )

However fairly recently one of them finally got his wish and got into a fight outside of a club, and proceeded to get into his fighting stance rather than just taking the guy out efficiently, he got into his boxing stance (because that's what works afterall right?) and he was immediately floored by the guy next to him.

the reverse happened to a friend of mine. He wrestled in high school and started training in longfist after he graduated. He got into a barfight and was unable to block or evade the guys punches using his longfist. He finally just double legged the guy, mounted him and started ground and pounding him.

At least he won

But the points still stand. People who train one way or the other aren't prepared for anything in reality unless they dare break away from convention (whether it be ring fighting or traditional kata) and learn to defend themselves quickly, readily, and efficiently.

In comment to your wrestler friend, he's lucky the other guy wasn't there with a few friends, because mounting in a bar setting is quite possibly one of the worst things you can do.

I may not be the best ring fighter, but I do believe that what I know also qualifies as martial arts.

of course it does. Why wouldn't it?

I respect your opinions, and to be honest my post wasn't directed really at you but rather to the general group of mixed martial artists. I was just kind of venting because of alot of the guys I encounter here (here as in real life locally) that think that training in anything but BJJ and Muay Thai is a waste of time.

I'm also sick and tired of the "oh, so you don't think it'll work? Then come take me out. Show me what works" in an overly sarcastic tone. I never said I could beat them in fight (especially one where we aren't trying to break/kill each other). Although I am considering fighting them, and just start pulling every illegal move I can think of and see how far they get. Let him mount me and give'm a good ol groin grab to say hello.

[White Warlock]

I'm also sick and tired of the "oh, so you don't think it'll work? Then come take me out. Show me what works" in an overly sarcastic tone. I never said I could beat them in fight (especially one where we aren't trying to break/kill each other). Although I am considering fighting them, and just start pulling every illegal move I can think of and see how far they get. Let him mount me and give'm a good ol groin grab to say hello.

For a period of time i studied at the Chula Vista Lion's Den, and prior to that i studied with a BB in Brazilian jujutsu. I found myself with ample opportunity to do many nasty things, but that was not the goal, and instead i played their games and fared quite well, slipping in and out of the guard, switching positions, getting back on my feet repeatedly, etc. However, had i done some of the other things i would 'normally' have done in a life/death encounter, i strongly feel i would have done far better than quite well. I didn't see it in them what i knew i possessed. They were there for sport, i practice to survive that one ultimate moment where all these skills will ultimately save my life... by a hair.

[Geng]

The fights don't have to go to the ground. But if you are a wrestler-or a good ground fighter, or you feel that you will be better on the ground, than you will probably take it to the ground.

No wrestler in their right mind will stand and trade punches with a boxer.