MMA vs. Traditional...again

Discuss sparring, training applications in a competition environment, or even in real-life (fighting, self-defence). Please no violence!
And stay on topic.

Moderators: nyang, Dvivid, Inga

Postby John Noonan » Mon Jun 20, 2005 2:03 pm

Even if a true master decides to simplify, its not going to be what will tap you out. Its gonna be what can kill you the fastest.


A rear naked choke can kill as easilly as a dim mak :wink:
Fighting Style: The One Style, to rule them all

Frodo: The letters, it's some form of subtitle.
Gandalf: It is the language of Miramax, a dubbing that I will not utter here.
Frodo: Miramax!
-Quote from Crouching Smeagol, Hidden Gollum
John Noonan
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:10 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Postby John Noonan » Mon Jun 20, 2005 2:09 pm

if I fight you for real, I am not going to grapple with you..this is not a ring. I would go for eyes,throat,vital areas with strikes..you grap one arm for an armbar, I jab a finger in your eye or fish hook your mouth. You are fighting with rules!!


Also, that's the "anti-grappling" argument. The magic bullet of the eye gouge, fish hook, crotch bite, whatever against the grappler. Truth is it doesn't work. A good grappler can not only counter those techniques (reaching for the eye opens you up for the armbar) but do them to you, and more effectively as well. Who do you think will win in an eye gouging competition, the guy on the bottom of the groundfight, or the guy on the top?
Fighting Style: The One Style, to rule them all

Frodo: The letters, it's some form of subtitle.
Gandalf: It is the language of Miramax, a dubbing that I will not utter here.
Frodo: Miramax!
-Quote from Crouching Smeagol, Hidden Gollum
John Noonan
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:10 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Postby John Noonan » Mon Jun 20, 2005 2:09 pm

if I fight you for real, I am not going to grapple with you..this is not a ring. I would go for eyes,throat,vital areas with strikes..you grap one arm for an armbar, I jab a finger in your eye or fish hook your mouth. You are fighting with rules!!


Also, that's the "anti-grappling" argument. The magic bullet of the eye gouge, fish hook, crotch bite, whatever against the grappler. Truth is it doesn't work. A good grappler can not only counter those techniques (reaching for the eye opens you up for the armbar) but do them to you, and more effectively as well. Who do you think will win in an eye gouging competition, the guy on the bottom of the groundfight, or the guy on the top?
Fighting Style: The One Style, to rule them all

Frodo: The letters, it's some form of subtitle.
Gandalf: It is the language of Miramax, a dubbing that I will not utter here.
Frodo: Miramax!
-Quote from Crouching Smeagol, Hidden Gollum
John Noonan
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:10 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Postby OnlyMe » Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:37 pm

John Noonan wrote:
if I fight you for real, I am not going to grapple with you..this is not a ring. I would go for eyes,throat,vital areas with strikes..you grap one arm for an armbar, I jab a finger in your eye or fish hook your mouth. You are fighting with rules!!


Also, that's the "anti-grappling" argument. The magic bullet of the eye gouge, fish hook, crotch bite, whatever against the grappler. Truth is it doesn't work. A good grappler can not only counter those techniques (reaching for the eye opens you up for the armbar) but do them to you, and more effectively as well. Who do you think will win in an eye gouging competition, the guy on the bottom of the groundfight, or the guy on the top?


How do you know it doesnt work? Do you have one eye? I am not saying that having no rules makes it an automatic win for TMA, its not the truth. What I am saying is the playing field gets a little leveler when there is no rules. A grappler would have more to fear reaching or charging into a grapple knowing that vital areas could be struck.

As to who wins an eye gouge competition on top or bottom, I would assume its whoever gets the thumb in the eye first loses.
OnlyMe
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:38 pm

Postby John Noonan » Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:34 pm

Well, in a fight, I'd much rather have a working knowledge of groundfighting techniques than none at all.

http://www.compfused.com/filedl1/20npse ... Expert.wmv

I like this video because it shows exactly how helpless someone without groundfighting skills can be. I'm sure that there are examples of strikers who take out grapplers, but this video made me at least study some groundfighting to prevent this from happening to me.

As to who wins an eye gouge competition on top or bottom, I would assume its whoever gets the thumb in the eye first loses.


And no, the person with more control, say someone in the mount, would win.
Fighting Style: The One Style, to rule them all

Frodo: The letters, it's some form of subtitle.
Gandalf: It is the language of Miramax, a dubbing that I will not utter here.
Frodo: Miramax!
-Quote from Crouching Smeagol, Hidden Gollum
John Noonan
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:10 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Postby OnlyMe » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:33 am

John Noonan wrote:Well, in a fight, I'd much rather have a working knowledge of groundfighting techniques than none at all.

http://www.compfused.com/filedl1/20npse ... Expert.wmv

I like this video because it shows exactly how helpless someone without groundfighting skills can be. I'm sure that there are examples of strikers who take out grapplers, but this video made me at least study some groundfighting to prevent this from happening to me.

As to who wins an eye gouge competition on top or bottom, I would assume its whoever gets the thumb in the eye first loses.


And no, the person with more control, say someone in the mount, would win.



Again with competition.....thats what that video is...competition. Thats not real life. Real life most likely will involve someone thats not a martial artist at all. Of course if you happen to get into a real fight with a MMA, its gonna be one tough fight. Then you would need to know about ground fighting. But that will rarely happen. Its not the movies. The only real time that will happen is in the ring where MMA has the advantage becuase thats what they train for.

Again you are competely wrong. A finger in the eye is a finger in the eye, I would say if your in the mount the chances are better for you to win. But it doesnt mean that you will win. Whoever strikes first wins. Thats it!

Your changing this into a TMA vs. MMA again. I am not saying any one is better than the other. They have their differences, but they are both respectable.
OnlyMe
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:38 pm

Postby John Noonan » Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:35 pm

I'm not trying to make it MMA vs. TMA, I'm just saying that someone who trains groundfighting skills is more likely to come out on top of a fight against someone who doesn't. Unfortunately, most TMA schools do not teach any sort of groundwork because it's either 1) "Below them" 2) not flashy enough to sell to the public, or 3) not part of the traditional teaching passed down from my great great grandfather squared. Are any of those reasons good enough to leave yourself vulnerable to an entire area of combat?

About 90% of fights end up on the ground. You're right, this is not the movies. People slip, get tackled, or knocked down from a blow. Does anyone want to take the chance that 9 out of 10 times their training is all for nothing because they slipped?

You can take that chance if you want, but I'm not too thrilled about those odds.
Fighting Style: The One Style, to rule them all

Frodo: The letters, it's some form of subtitle.
Gandalf: It is the language of Miramax, a dubbing that I will not utter here.
Frodo: Miramax!
-Quote from Crouching Smeagol, Hidden Gollum
John Noonan
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:10 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Postby OnlyMe » Tue Jun 21, 2005 1:48 pm

John Noonan wrote:I'm not trying to make it MMA vs. TMA, I'm just saying that someone who trains groundfighting skills is more likely to come out on top of a fight against someone who doesn't. Unfortunately, most TMA schools do not teach any sort of groundwork because it's either 1) "Below them" 2) not flashy enough to sell to the public, or 3) not part of the traditional teaching passed down from my great great grandfather squared. Are any of those reasons good enough to leave yourself vulnerable to an entire area of combat?

About 90% of fights end up on the ground. You're right, this is not the movies. People slip, get tackled, or knocked down from a blow. Does anyone want to take the chance that 9 out of 10 times their training is all for nothing because they slipped?

You can take that chance if you want, but I'm not too thrilled about those odds.


You still looking at through a ring though. I mean if you end up on the ground mostly likey the person is not going to know jack about what to do once he is there either, so its a gamble either way. But I do agree that its probably good to learn it. I just wouldnt want to emphasis training it. I do have a book about ground fighting. I like it. I pick up little things here and there.

Not all schools believe there is no reason to go to the ground, or its beneath them. I think they just dont emphasis it as much as a MMA schools do. I know just recently we were doing takedowns, and head locks on the ground in sparring class. Again, we dont practice this all the time, but it is there.
OnlyMe
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:38 pm

Postby No.6 » Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:54 pm

'Traditionally' martial arts included less groundfighting because armies fought hand-to-hand and trying to wrestle someone to death was only a good way to get your opponent's compatriots' sword or spear in your back assuming you'd obtained a guard position. I really don't know how practical groundwork is against multiple opponents. In such a situation I'd really like to keep my feet.

Speaking of spears and swords, I don't think I'd care to try closing to grapple against someone holding a knife or something worse, or even an improvised weapon. It could be done but one mistake and you're done for.

Nonetheless, most traditional arts include groundwork, even if they don't emphasize it. If nothing else the grapplers have reminded karateka and kung fu practitioners alike to dust off part of their repertroires.

Secondly: In UFC competition there are many things you may not do. I know it says 'no holds barred' but that would be ridiculous. These are reasonable rules but they do affect the way combatants approach the contest:

Fouls:

Butting with the head.
Eye gouging of any kind.
Biting.
Hair pulling.
Fish hooking.
Groin attacks of any kind.
Putting a finger into any orifice or into any cut or laceration on an opponent.
Small joint manipulation.
Striking to the spine or the back of the head.
Striking downward using the point of the elbow.
Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea.
Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh.
Grabbing the clavicle.
Kicking the head of a grounded opponent.
Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent.
Stomping a grounded opponent.
Kicking to the kidney with the heel.
Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck.
Throwing an opponent out of the ring or fenced area.
Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent.


Several of these rules limit the effectiveness of striking outside of the clinch, in that if someone scores a knockdown using a strike they may not execute further kicks while standing (no stomping) but must also enter the ground state in order to deliver punches or elbows.

A number of these things (e.g., throat strikes, clavicle grabs, butting, eye gouging, hair pulling or biting) are things that could potentially be executed from the clinch position. Only one (small joint manipulation) really falls into the category of grappling.

90% of UFC fights end up on the ground; but where they go first? In a match of equals, there are some careful blows thrown, and then almost invariably someone closes range and the two fighters go into the clinch. In the clinch the fighters attempt to either slip behind the opponent (where they may not strike, so they do takedowns) or slip both arms under the opponent's (where the opponent cannot execute throat strikes, head bashes, or clavicle grabs, resulting in a takedown).

I wouldn't say that UFC should start allowing these crippling blows, but when we start talking about 'real' fights keep these holds that are barred in mind.

The whole ground fighting / stand-up fighting is not a matter of 'this is better' or 'that is better.' Each has its place. One without the other is like saying you should only hit with one arm and never practice with the other one.
No.6
Forum User
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:22 pm

Postby mookie » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:19 pm

I wasn't saying that you can't get those type of strikes in on mma people. I'm just saying you shouldn't trust that things will always go as planned in the "no rules" fights you speak of. One thing that ring fighting will teach you is people don't nessesarily fall so easily as they are supposed to in the videos, and class. On the other hand, I have a few naughty students who go out and fight often. and thier training is in primarily Traditional Martial Arts. They've fared quite well in their encounters. People fell like do in the videos. note on the fishook; In one of these scraps my student was "fishooked," He gave the guy an even worse beating, cause its such a cheap shot. The meaning, if you wish to use dirty tactics, you must be willing to pay the consequences. Dirty tactics are only a part of your arsenal.
mookie
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 2:05 pm

Postby scramasax57 » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:59 pm

I don't think I'd care to try closing to grapple against someone holding a knife or something worse,

this i'd like to discuss. certainly it makes sense to just concentrate on avoiding and dodging the first few attacks with any weapon, to gauge your opponent, but your only real chance at disarming him would be to close as quickly as possible. especially if it's blunt; moving closer to the opponent, further within the range of weapon, will substantially decrease the blow's power so you can trap and disarm.
aka eric hinds, 2nd stripe
n. andover, ma branch
yang's martial arts association

changchuan, baihe, and xingyi
scramasax57
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:25 pm
Location: andover

Postby No.6 » Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:30 pm

This is true; you can't disarm someone when you're in their weapon range and they're outside of your grasp.

My point was that it's quite possible that you're going to be cut (or bashed) badly on the way in, and this is going to be more damaging than a punch, perhaps a lot more damaging.

Some shootfighters just absorb a striker's blows in closing to grappling range, and this isn't something you want to do against a weapon.
No.6
Forum User
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:22 pm

Postby scramasax57 » Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:46 am

excellent point. you can't just turtle up and rush in against a tire iron.
aka eric hinds, 2nd stripe
n. andover, ma branch
yang's martial arts association

changchuan, baihe, and xingyi
scramasax57
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:25 pm
Location: andover

Postby Lohan » Mon Nov 07, 2005 9:45 pm

Honestly, what's the real difference between "MMA" and "TMA?" I'll answer my own question: intent and training practices. Most MMA trains more realistically than most TMA. This is fact. Sorry fellow TMAers. However, I do believe that IF trained in a REALISTIC mannor, TMA can be a more realistic option for 'street' style defense.

Now.. if the question was could a typical beginner/intermediate MMAer pound a typical beginner/intermediate TMAer.. i'd say the answer is 9 times out of 10, yes. At the advanced levels, things get alot more hairy, and alot of things are left up to the old 'who is better today' saying. There is some truth in truisms, after all.

However, it is ignorant to not learn what other styles have to offer, such as grappling, just because you are relying on your moves you play out in your imaginary 'real' fights. Come on now. What if your eyegouge doesn't work? What if the 'fear factor' stuns you for that split second you were supposed to react? And it would if you are untrained, trust me. You have enough time to say 'oops' before the lights go out. This is not a reasonable risk to me. Learn all you can. We're all a big family and we should all learn from one another.

It is my conviction that TMA was born of full contact, realistic combat training. I wish there was more of this "realistic TMA" available today but the fact is the interest isn't there in the american market. Anyway, im getting off topic.

The MMAers really do train more realistically guys, they do. We should follow their example in our own way. I'm not YMAA but i would love to see TMA as a whole take this step.
Enlightenment is eating an orange.
Lohan
Forum Contributor
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:07 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby BaguaMonk » Sun Nov 20, 2005 6:36 am

Woah! I have not been to this post in a long time.

As per UFC or MMA "brawlers" I did not mean to generlize. But I have met many, and some of their attitudes have been slightly condescending towards TMA. Yet many MMA's are traditionalists in a sense, have self restraint, and a good head on their shoulders too. My comments were given towards those who have no respect for anyone, or anything, but to those who can "beat them," physically perhaps, and don't give anything else (especially traditional) the time of day. Are all MMA's like this? No, of course not.

There are many schools that teach "morality" and what not and they can be horrible schools. Schools that daddy and mommy sometimes enrole their children into because they think it will be good for them. They buy their kids belts, and boom, somehow they are 8 year old blackbelts. There are schools that say things like this and find ways to make money off the ignorant, animosity towards this type of "traditional" i understand. But what some modern fighters don't know, is that it isn't really traditional, it just seems to be a way for people to capatilize on American business (even in China many money is made off foreigners in schools).I am just as displeased by these types of practices of so called "traditionalists" as other MMAers are. I am also displeased with the amount of mysticism and legends involved in many of these arts. Some are just parts of culture, but to those who don't understand the culture, they tend to get the wrong impression.And are either taken too litterally, or simply cast down.

Martial arts mean different things to different people (obviously). What I meant by a sense of morality and what not is through actual experience, especially in fighting, not something that is just imbedded into your head through repetition. It is true, that when you are beaten egos are broken and respect is gained for others. I did not mean to say that MMA has none of this, because it obviously does. There many MMAers with a strong background in traditional arts or even a base and move onto mma. My comments were to those without respect for others, and their arts. Although I don't agree with just the "fight and overcome attitude" it is still a great progression. I think Most TMA's need some of that MMA attitude in their sparring (note I said some). Like many eastern theories, balance is key. Fighting can be very addicting, and too much of it is not good for neither the ego, or the physical body.

I just think some of both TMA schools and MMA schools seem to be heading in the wrong direction. You could say Bruce Lee had a good balance between "fighting" and "morality." Everyone's path is obviously different, but I think people should at least try to get there.

I could care less about the TMA vs MMA argument now, or any style argument for that matter. Because in the end fighting is just fighting, if its for your life, then you better train for it. Competition based fighting can help much more then one-two sparring in many traditional schools. It is in fighting that you learn who you are, and other people are. Fighting is dirty, and when coupled with our animalistic or human nature, its real and there are no rules. Even in MMA competitions this behaviour can be apparent, to think that these guys are harmless without rules is understamating them, these guys would be even better at it when most people (without the rules). I still like to read Bruce's theories and what not nowdays, because he ecompassed alot of what martial artists seek to reach. Strong willed, an understanding of the Taoist philosophies, but not restricted by martial art BS nor structure. Fighting was just fighting, but there are ways to refine it, and morally/spritually cultivate yourself at the same time.

I could care less if I got beat in sparring. If my life were threatened then perhaps I will be able to defend myself, perhaps not. Oh well, thats life. No amount of MMA or TMA is going to change the outcome, its just how much you put into it and the circumstances. I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone, everyone has their own intrests for training. If someone is going to insult me, or my way of training, oh well. It really doesn't matter in the end.
BaguaMonk
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 435
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:32 pm

Postby elias » Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:27 pm

ive never been in a real fist fight myself, but i think when it comes down to a real life or death situation, the person who will win is the person who wants to win more. i used to argue about this a lot, but then this russian guy i know told me "in a real fight in the real world, all that matters is who wants to win. my boss is a tae kwon doe expert and he can break my ribs with one kick and bring me down, but if i really wanted to beat him and he messed up that one kick, id be on him and bite out his throat." when i thought about that a bit i realized hes right. if soem crazed lunatic with a complete desire to win and not much training went up against a gracie, and bit out his throat as they were grappling, he would win.
elias
Forum Newbie
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: boston

Postby DOM » Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:59 pm

it's called spirit,fighting spirit.I have had this discussion many of times.If you only practice on refining and making you forms and teckniques perfect you are missing a big part of training.It is great to train for perfection but one must remember to balance it out with training fighting spirit.At least once every time you train forms you should forget about perfection and do it as fast and hard as you can like you are in a real combat situation fighting multable opponants.One must also practce striking something fairly hard and heavy.You need to develope martial intent and the power to stop an attacker.Sparring for the most part should be a tecknical match but evey once in wile,you need to gear up and let loose.It a whole differant ball game when some one is attacking you with fighting spirit not letting you recover puching kicking trying to throw you or take you down qinna you and stomping you if you go down.This can be done faily safe if you have someone to over see this and two peaple who can control there selves and teckneques.You should also train sparring multable opponants at one time.If you train like this along with every thing else,you can rest a sure you will hold your own in a real fight or against a mma.This is the way traditional styles always trained,Well at least the one I trained any way.
DOM
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:17 am
Location: NEW JERSEY

all is good

Postby yeniseri » Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:25 am

I started with TKD many moons ago when stationed S.Korea and its expression of indominable spirit applies to any art. If only IMA added that with physical conditioning, stamina, with heart and skill, it would work better.
yeniseri
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: USA

Postby zipwolf » Thu Apr 13, 2006 5:39 pm

you know, i really like MMA now. I don't want to learn primarily from a modern MMA school mind you, i still want my gongfu, but i'd need ground escaping from MMA because my takedown defence may suck at exactly the wrong moment, so i'd need to learn how to get the hell UP. I do intend to compete one day.

Anyway.

Just a little thing here, if groundfighting is the argument now, people lost so badly to it in the old days because noone was expecting to be taken down so their takedown defence sucked beyond belief, and even moreso did they not expect someone to fight them on the ground. Nowadays there are kickboxers (Mirko) and others (Cung le for instance) who are kicking rear with standup on a generation of people who have done primarily ground work and arent used to good stand up. Slowly it'll go back the other way, but at the moment its the days of people who are used to great ground games and can defend themselves against it, and ground guys who arent used to a standup fighter.

live it while you can guys, it'll change again.
zipwolf
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 563
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 3:34 am

Postby DOM » Fri Apr 14, 2006 1:38 pm

every body talks as if mma is something knew.Dr.Yang stated at a seminar,that they use to refer to long fist as chop suey because it was such a mixture of differant styles.All martial styles durring war or unrest trained in every imaginable senerio.Stand up groundfighting throwing,joint locking, choking,weapons against weapons, empty hand against weapons,against multable attackers and those who wore armor and rode horses.
DOM
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:17 am
Location: NEW JERSEY

PreviousNext

Return to Sparring and Fighting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

cron