What exactly is a TMA?

[OAKS]

Hello everybody! I was wondering, what is everyones definition of a TMA? In this forum and others, I have seen the term TMA used but no real definition. How can there be any discussion on MMA vs TMA or the effectiveness of TMAs if there isn't a consensus on what the terms really mean.

[MMA_Jim]

I'll give you the simplest definition of TMA there can be.

First we'll say what is not TMA, and that would be those recognized as MMA:

Styles such as: BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai, Judo, and Sambo

Traditional styles for the most part is everything else but that. There are more classifications though- you have Reality Based Self Defense (RBSD) for example, but thats often nothing more than rehashed and repackaged TMA.

When someone says MMA or refers to it they're talking about modern fighting and styles devised for modern combat. Traditional styles study old methods of fighting that differ greatly than modern and therefore yield different results. For example, many of the movements of Japanese Ju Jitsu are devised to be done while wearing a suit of armor and flying kicks of TKD trace their influence back to attempts at unhorsing invading samurai.

We dont wear suits of armor anymore and martial arts have expanded beyond use in just warfare scenarios. MMA styles are generally the newer styles that recognized this and adapted as such

[Montana]

We'll no doubt get a lot of different opinions on this one.

For me, TMA's are those that have withstood the test of time, whereas many died out because they just didn't work, or weren't effective.

Systems like Shorin Ryu, Goju, etc have been around a long time because they worked as well 200 years ago, as they do now. Maybe not in a sporting aspect, such as the UFC and such, because that isn't what the were developed for. They work well for self-defense purposes, because that is what they were developed for.

[Throwdown0850]

I'll give you the simplest definition of TMA there can be.

First we'll say what is not TMA, and that would be those recognized as MMA:

Styles such as: BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai, Judo, and Sambo

Traditional styles for the most part is everything else but that. There are more classifications though- you have Reality Based Self Defense (RBSD) for example, but thats often nothing more than rehashed and repackaged TMA.

When someone says MMA or refers to it they're talking about modern fighting and styles devised for modern combat. Traditional styles study old methods of fighting that differ greatly than modern and therefore yield different results. For example, many of the movements of Japanese Ju Jitsu are devised to be done while wearing a suit of armor and flying kicks of TKD trace their influence back to attempts at unhorsing invading samurai.

We dont wear suits of armor anymore and martial arts have expanded beyond use in just warfare scenarios. MMA styles are generally the newer styles that recognized this and adapted as such

Actually Judo would be a TMA right? Kodokan has been around for a long long time..

[Rainbow_Warrior]

Judo is old and traditional in some aspects , but it is not traditional in the way Japense Jujutsu is....Judo uses resisting opponents as a main practice method....

I think Judo is the first modern and innovative martial art , but stills paying attention to nippon culture.

IMHO , BJJ gave much more stuff to MMA than Judo , but BJJ is the judo´s son... So we owe much to judo.

[bushido_man96]

I think that most TMAs are viewed as Eastern Martial Arts in which the students wear a uniform, bow in and out of class, and show reverence and respect to an instructor that has given many years to the study of the style.

I think that most MMAs are viewed as the newer sporting events that take place today in the octagons and rings.

The reality of which is effective and which is not is more related to the training methods of those practicing, as opposed to the relegated definitions.

I don't prefer to use the dividers TMA and MMA. Why don't we just call it Martial Art and be done with it?

[kenpo4life]

a TMA is an art that has a philosophical component built in. It is NOT about the age of the art at all. Muay Thai is hundreds of years old, as is jujitsu, MMA to me is just the combination of arts used for SPORT combat.

[The BB of C]

TMA is an ibbriviation of Traditional Martial Art. One that is old and/or is practiced with very high standards for ranking and belt testing (hard to learn), as well as some levels of culture.

MMA is an ibbriviation of Mixed (or occasionally 'Modern') Martial Art. It's usually a modern style that has punches, kicks, boxing, kickboxing, throws, takedowns and wrestling.

It's important to remember when defining the essence of Traditional and Mixed/Modern is that there are traditional styles that work on a variety of techniques like Mixed/Modern martial arts. An easy to classify Traditional from Mixed/Modern is to look at it's history. If it goes back over seventy years and/or was founded by combining two styles that did, it's most likely traditional.

[bushido_man96]

There is some confusion in some of the definitions here. There were "Traditional" MAs that were done in sport form, like the Kickboxing that guys like Bill Wallace, Benny Uriquidez, Skipper Mullins, and Chuck Norris competed in. So, why do they still get to be called TMAs?

Boxing and Wrestling are both hundreds of years old; Wrestling may very well be the oldest Martial Art there is. Why don't they get reserved for the "Traditional" tag? Because they are not from the Far East? Because they don't have Forms? Because someone didn't write a book on Wrestling called Wrestling Kyohan? I just don't see why the difference is there.

[DWx]

IMO I think TMAs tend to be those that are much stricter in the way they are taught. By that I mean that they tend to have a set syllabus and students usually have to do rank testings. Also (again this is a generalization) students are taught in more of a formulaic way, such as bowing in, lining up, practicing forms etc. MMA or "modern" styles seem to take a more liberal approach.