The big question is why

[jaddensinn]

What I don't understand is what the big slam on MMA is. MMA has just as much to offer in training as other styles do. I think that some people feel that if the art doesn't have that "traditional feel" of wearing uniforms, bowing to instructors, that it can't be classified as a true Martial discipline.

I don't think it is really a fad. I'm pretty sure that it will stick around in some form or another for a long time. Its already been over 10 years since the first UFC, and it was in existence in other countries before that; Vale Tudo, Pancrase, Jim Arvanitis' Pankration, and we can't leave out the old Pankration from ancient Greece.

I think you hit the nail on the head with why people don't like MMA. It's not traditional, its not that graceful, its a bit coarse and fairly gritty at times. I know there's also a huge rift between the worlds of Boxing and MMA... Boxing officials are not fans of the UFC...

You just have to kind of appreciate MMA for what it is, its pretty much the pinnacle of martial arts competition today but it shouldn't be the poster child for discipline or respect.

[jaddensinn]

Oh and I checked and you are correct as far as I can tell, I was mistaken about Chuck Norris he was a non-contact competitor. I shall hang my head in shame for my error

[Kuma]

Oh and I checked and you are correct as far as I can tell, I was mistaken about Chuck Norris he was a non-contact competitor. I shall hang my head in shame for my error

That's because everyone knows if you got kicked by Chuck Norris, you would explode!

[jaddensinn]

I've also heard that if tapped, a Chuck Norris roundhouse kick could power the country of Australia for 44 minutes...

That'll be the only one I do, I swear. I just couldn't resist.

[tallgeese]

As to the comment above about what mma is like- not traditional, sometimes not graceful, course, and kinda gritty....sounds more like a real fight than what lot's of arts will portray.

No, they shouldn't be held as poster children for anyone, but how many of us should. At the end of the day, if martial arts are about fighting, these guys are pretty good examples of that.

So the current form of mma might be a good example of the question at hand (although I agree with bushido man- this has been around in one form or another for quite awhile). You have a set of movements, many taken from various arts, deliniated over the past decade or so into a fairly recognizable pattern that works very well for what it's designed for. It's tools that have been around, codified into a set of operational parameters (their rules) that are new.

I'd say that it seems to work well given the fact that you can see what's effective by it's continued use in match after match year after year with success. That seems to make it legitmate to me. It has it's own value system in competitive record instead of belt rank.

Now, if this has happened for a combat sport, how much different is it to apply it to combat itself? I'd say not much. You're essintally doing the same thing, just using slightly diffent tools at times and altering the mindset to deal with the street and not a ring. We've seen ligitimate bad men grow out of the process, why not more?

As bushido man points out, JKD is a great example of just the sort of thing we're talking about. If Lee hadn't made movies his art would have have been every bit as effective, we just wouldn't all have heard of him. The mere fact that his fame is based on ma films seem to give him legitimacy even though the films have little to do with JKD as a whole. For purposes of him ma legacy, it's his development of JKD that sets him apart.

How many others, without the fanfare of films, could have done similar?

Oh, and Chuck Norris dosn't do push ups, he pushes the earth down.

[Grego]

I don't have any issue with MMA (Army Combatives effectively is MMA, based on BJJ with some striking, ect)

I have issues with the fact that MMA is the new "McDojo" draw. Instead of offering children "karate", these same places are offering MMA to adult. In effect, they're cheating the children, and then their parents and older siblings.

I have issues with these fads, because it cheats people. And i also have issues with the posers that MMA seems to produce. I know that all martial arts produce posers, but the MMA sort are especially annoying.

[tallgeese]

I personally haven't seen too many McDojo type places that cater to the mma crowd. Most of the training is just too heavy on the cardio and elicits too much work for them to be supported by the country club ma crowd. But that's just my experiance, mileage may vary.

And if someplace wants to cater to adults rather than kids, so be it. It probibly means that the art or system or combat sport or whatever will retain it's core prinicples longer. Personally, the only kids I teach are my own.

I don't want to turn this into a mma/non-mma debate, just give my view on the issues brought to light above in light of me using it as an example. I'm still interested in hearing more feedback in regard to the intial issue on both sides. Good question.

[bushido_man96]

You just have to kind of appreciate MMA for what it is, its pretty much the pinnacle of martial arts competition today but it shouldn't be the poster child for discipline or respect.

The thing is, we can't just respect anyone without knowing who they really are. With the way the media is today, it seems like people want to take more liberty in assuming what someone is like by seeing them on TV, or what they do in a 5 minute interview after a fight. Its isn't right. If you want to respect someone, then you take the time to get to know them, their principles, their likes and dislikes, etc. Not watch them in a pre- or post-fight interview.

I have issues with the fact that MMA is the new "McDojo" draw. Instead of offering children "karate", these same places are offering MMA to adult. In effect, they're cheating the children, and then their parents and older siblings.

I don't see MMA as a McDojo draw at all. In fact, I think it would be tougher as a McDojo draw, because the skill set is so comprehensive that it would be more difficult to incorporate it at any level of success.

I'd say that it seems to work well given the fact that you can see what's effective by it's continued use in match after match year after year with success. That seems to make it legitmate to me. It has it's own value system in competitive record instead of belt rank.

I agree.

[Traymond]

Really, creating your own "style" is over-rated.

When you integrate a bunch of different Martial Arts, it becomes Mixed Martial Arts, which you can learn at any McDojo in the united states.

There are some instances when I think its cool (my own sensei broke away from the United States Chito-ryu federation, and formed the American Chito-ryu Kempo Federation). Most of those reason are political. When your federation is stepping on your toes.

I'm not saying that you're guilty of this, but it seems that there are alot of people out there who create their own style for the sake of creating their own style. While you are probably legitimate, there are hundreds out there that aren't.

I extremely understand what you mean especially since that most styles do end up being a Mcdojo, but I think that is something you can move past. Dont teach something that your not a black belt in, even if that is sketchy dont teach something that you think looks bad in your eyes. I know lots of martial arts styles and I have a couple of black belts over shodan level, but I will never teach something I dont think looks good in my own form, such as akamine no jiwa. No matter what I dont think it looks right, I have been told by teachers such as Eisu Gushi (The main man for this form) that is looks ok, but I dont want to teach something that my students can come up and ask "Why does that look so sloppY"?.

I created a style called Shinchuurou Te, I do have a black belt in that style of course, but its not my only black belt either. It is basically a mixture of all the traditional martial arts I have taken.

Bagua Five animal

Fukien White Crane

Shotokan

Uechi/Goju Ryu

Judo

Muay Thai.

My style's emphasis is on Kata and Kumite, nothing else really I do teach spiritual and philosophical aspects to those that are extremely hungry for the budo knowledge.

But I agree that mose MMA schools are overrated especially since the debut of the Never Back Down movie...whuh.

But im done now...

[akedm]

I think that the new styles capture the attention mostly of the people who want to push the envelope - like any new thing does.

I'd equate a truely new style to Monet, Piscasso, Van Halen, Metallica, Chuck Berry, Bach, Doom (the PC game), Atari, iPod, DaVinci, Stephen Hawking, Darwin. It does happen and quite often, it's inevitable in everything, and transformations begat new fields of study.

Paint was still used but Monet gave it a new direction. Sometimes it's in the person, and sometimes it's how they use the tools. The trick is how many of us know a Monet when we see it, or is it just another McDojo knockoff?