Would you label MMA its own martial art?

[baronbvp]

In my opinion, MMA has progressed to the point where it deserves to be called its own martial at. Bruce Lee had the idea with Jeet Kune Do: an intensive study he undertook in the 60's to figure out what worked most effectively and discard what didn't. Today's MMA has taken the form to a new level. Striking, trapping, clinching, and grappling/ground fighting are advanced and integrated well now. While there is not complete standardization of styles, there is IMO a general consensus on the four areas of fighting or fight distances, if you will, required to be a well-rounded MMA fighter.

The best practitioners of MMA, both male and female, have transcended the term "martial artist" to become martial athletes. They are in peak physical condition; they train in stand-up and ground fighting; and they compete in full-contact, NHB events on the local, regional, national and international levels. Whether they train specifically in muay Thai, BJJ, shootfighting, san shou, vale tudo, etc, they all are excellent fighters.

Would you agree that MMA has progressed to the the point where it deserves to be its own style of martial art, or do you think the term "MMA" still represents a competitive idea or arena where various styles are used against each other?

[cross]

Would you agree that MMA has progressed to the the point where it deserves to be its own style of martial art, or do you think the term "MMA" still represents a competitive idea or arena where various styles are used against each other?

Definetly agreed. A trend appearing these days is that schools will train you specifically to compete. So you dont have to go out and learn the complete system of MT and then the complete system of BJJ and then mix them together. You are taught the applicable skills from each with the direct goal of using them in a ufc style competition.

Also its been a long time since something "new" has been seen in the ring. If you are training for NHB these days its pretty clear what to expect from your opponent and in a way you already know your enemy, its just a matter of training hard and being better than them, not a matter of using a different style or surprising them with other skills that have not been seen.

[username8517]

A trend appearing these days is that schools will train you specifically to compete. So you dont have to go out and learn the complete system of MT and then the complete system of BJJ and then mix them together. You are taught the applicable skills from each with the direct goal of using them in a ufc style competition.

This is exactly why I don't consider it a martial art, but rather a fighting style for a competitive arena. Certainly there are exceptions to this in the MMA world though.

[bushido_man96]

You make a some very good points, Baron. I think that the term MMA itself will remain a sportive idea. However, I do feel that the result of the MMA competitions has really brought about its own martial style, very much similar to what Pankration was in the Ancient Greek games.

Although it may never be termed its own style, I really think that it is.

[marie curie]

I think that it is it's own martial art. Yes, it is a sport with it's own set of rules, but so is Olympic style TKD, and we generally consider that an art. It does take from a bunch of others, but -as stated above- so do other arts (ie. BJJ came from Judo and was built upon).

[baronbvp]

I don't consider it a martial art, but rather a fighting style for a competitive arena.

bearich, could you elaborate? What is the difference in your mind between a martial art and a fighting style?

[username8517]

bearich, could you elaborate? What is the difference in your mind between a martial art and a fighting style?

Sure, but first let me preface this by saying this is my opinion and I realize not everyone might agree with it. So don't take it as me saying this should be written in stone.

But the difference primarily comes from the training involved.

To me there are a few distinctions between a martial art and a fighting style. First is that a martial art should be a complete system. Now when I say a complete system I don't mean that it has to cover all the ranges of attack (long range, close quarters, grappling), but rather it should teach the practioners to use anything and everything they have at their disposal at the time should they ever need to. By training primarily for a competition based end result, whether it be the UFC, point based kumite, etc, you are effectively conditioning your mind to always stay within the parameters of the rules you're training under. Removing a effective avenue of attack because it fall outside the rules of said competition is just taking one more tool away from someone.

I believe this from first hand experience. When I was younger and studied karate at a different dojo we regularly did light-to-no contact sparring on a regular basis under normal tournament rules. Then years later at my current dojo when I went to spar under a different set of rules (basically unpadded medium contact and no groin, throat, or eye strikes--other rules are enforced if the two participants agree to such rules), I kept pulling my punches short of hitting their target and expecting my opponent to cease their attack because of the "open shot" they took. After a few shots in retaliation I quickly learned that I was a severe disadvantage until I broke my habit.

Certainly martial arts of the past did spar with each to test their skills and abilities, but they did so to improve their fighting skill, not to win money, fame, or to see who could beat who.

Second is a belief that martial arts are a tool of self-defense. This is not saying that martial artists need to study zen mediation or follow the bushido. But to use karate each style has something to the extent of "there is no first attack in karate." This wasn't because karateka of the past were holy men walking around, but rather because the karate they practiced was designed to end confrontation as quickly and efficently as possible, regardless of what had to be done and the consequences of fighting were very serious and occassionally deadly.

Fighting competitions have an inherent safety net that protects both participants from serious injury. Taking the UFC as an example, should a potentially serious injury occur to Fighter B a ref and/or medical doctor will step in to examine it. Now if that injury was caused by an illegal move, Fighter A would be immediately disqualified from the competition (with other potential consequences from the governing body to come later). Once again, this falls back on the training involved. If Fighter A knows that small joint manipulations are illegal in a MMA competition, what are the odds that he/she will practice these, despite the fact they can be highly effective in a grappling situation?

And the distinction I use between martial arts and fighting styles can be used across the board. I'm not using fighting style to only represent MMA, but any place that trains their students for an end result of a sporting competition--whether it be boxing, MMA, karate, TKD, Judo, etc. Show me a MMA gym that trains all aspects of their system and I'll call it a martial art. Show me a karate dojo that focuses on tournament sparring and I'll call it a fighting style.

And lastly I'm not saying that what I call fighting styles as being ineffective--just a different way of training for people with different goals than me.

[James Bullock]

To me personally I do not see MMA as its own fighting style. MMA is a training methodology that can be employed by any and all systems. Look at Randy Couture. He is primarily from a Greco Roman Wrestling background, he adapted by adding strikes, ground defense, ground attack, and submissions. I would say his style is his way of fighting. Same goes for Vanderli Silva, Andre Arlovski...or any fighter. If they were to train you to compete you would be learning their competitive fighting style. The training methodology to prepare you for the competition is MMA....the competition is UFC, Pride, etc...The fighting style is the individuals fighting style...

In the old days of the UFC their were pure stylists that fought...pure BJJ...pure boxing...pure karate etc. The evolution over the last 16-17 years has been the implementation of well roundedness to have any possibility of success in these types of competition. So to me MMA is most definitely a training methodology and not a martial art or fighting style of its own.

All my opinion of course...

[Ottman]

I also don't see MMA as it's own fighting style, but the problem is that a lot of people do, so now it's becoming a marketed style with a particular meaning: i.e. you will get UFC style competition training if you train at an MMA school, which kind of defeats the purpose of MMA, as you are training with a set of rules in mind, and it certainly defeats the purpose of what Bruce was trying to do with JKD. I think that's why so many put a clear distinction between a JKD school and JKD concepts. The whole point of JKD was that you couldn't really create a standardized style out of it.

There are a lot of techniques/systems/styles that work for a lot of people, but only one style will work for you: Yours. So although MMA has become a style in itself, I think it should be referred to as 'MMA' instead of the full Mixed Martial Arts, as it has, in its commercial evolution, taken on a different connotation than true mixed martial arts.

Try to find an 'MMA School' that teaches Tai Chi, or Nami Ryu, or Aikido, or Chi Na, or . . .

You'll probably come across a bunch teaching Muay Thai (or some form of kick boxing) mixed with BJJ, but that's about it. Other arts are not getting into the 'MMA' craze, so how can it really be called Mixed Martial Arts?

Don't get me wrong, I love UFC style competition, but it doesn't get the full spectrum (philosophical, and spiritual aspects are particularly missing) of a true martial art.

[bushido_man96]

Wow, there are a lot of good points here.

The main thing that I see is the point that Martial Sports and Martial Arts are two very different things. There are several that see it this way. However, I think that they are the same, but that is just me.

I think that MMA is an appropriate term, because that is what is going on. Just because all of the arts are not being mixed, I don't think that detracts from the concept of what is happening.

If we look back to the days of Pankration, would it be a fighting style, or a rule set? I think MMA competitions have brought it full circle.

What Bruce Lee did with JKD was his own experience in fighting. It is well known that Bruce did not have any use for competition fighting. However, his concepts of picking and choosing, and taking what works, and stripping away the excess, has translated nicely to the viewpoints of MMA competition.