Mixed Martial Arts, One of the oldest forms of fighting.

[jubaji]

and all of them chose to specialize in one sport primarily

Deion Sanders and Bo Jackson. Both played pro football and pro baseball. Charlie Ward played for the Knicks, but was a Heisman award winner. Roy Jones was a boxing champion who played basketball in the minor leagues. .

What's that you keep crying about? "Exceptions, not the rule"?

[Uke]

If they're so well-rounded (possessing a wide variety of skills) why don't they focus on competing in more specific contests?

This is stupid, even for you.


When you watch a football game (I doubt you do, actually - it would be far too threatening to your fragile ego to see professional athletes) and the announcer comments on how well-rounded an athlete one of the players may be, do you start screaming at the TV, "Oh yeah? Why isn't he an olympic sprinter then? Why isn't he a major league pitcher then?"

Idiot.

Deion Sanders and Bo Jackson you fucking retard. Both played pro football and pro baseball. Charlie Ward played for the Knicks, but was a Heisman award winner. Roy Jones was a boxing champion who played basketball in the minor leagues. Athletes who are well rounded can compete at the highest levels. But what you failed to address by selectively highlighting that one passage was the fact that I stated MMA fighers are not well rounded but only proficient in their skill set.

But at least you wrote more than a one liner. I'm training you well.

[Uke]

Finally, Uke,
You made it clear that most people won't spend the time it takes to rise to the level of MMA practitioners in the upper echelon of the sport? Well, it's equally true that most people will not spend the time or effort needed to rise to the level of expert in other arts that might give them that ability to deliver non-telegraphic slashes with a knife or Rob Leatham accuracy with a gun. It all takes work. And while we're talking in probablility, the true life fact is that most street altercations are not all that serious. The ones that are are generally ambushes. So since the vast majority of fights are the kind where a choke hold is a better answer than a broken jaw, doesn't it make sense to train that kind of thing against people who can punch, kick, and stop your choke?

I know what you're saying, bro. And I'm not coming after you personally. What I'm trying to address is that MMA training is likely - likely, not certainly - more useful than you believe. I'm also trying to point out that you are heavily biased, based on your posts, and not simply "pointing out differences." You don't post in support of MMA in any respect, and yet you feel a real pull to reply to any post similar to this that draws a comparison. You tend to come in on the downside of MMA any time the topic comes up. That's not comparative, my friend. It's a one-sided opinion that has thus far refused to even acknowledge the opposing viewpoints. You're not wrong in saying that MMA alone is not a good answer for street confrontations. You're exactly right, in fact. But you're talking to someone who's been in a lot of fights, and I mean a lot. I've been in them in bars, in hospital psych wards, in alleyways and pool halls, and in the line of duty while armed. I've seen it from a lot of sides. And that experience, those bruises, bumps, scrapes, cuts, punctures, and life lessons have taught me that the kind of training MMA people do is invaluable to anyone who's looking to get better at real-world self-defense. It does teach you to work hard in training. It does teach you to be tough. It does teach you to expect pain. And if used in a supplemental role, it teaches you what to do when you find yourself in the far more commonly encountered situation of not having to kill someone. Address those points, Uke, and I'll buy the line that you're just comparing. Comparing, though, includes pointing out the positive right along with the negative. So far, all I've seen from you on this topic is why MMA will never have a place in a streetfighter's training regimen, and that's not only horribly biased and unfounded, it's just not true.

Well Mike you're right. I have been one sided on this topic. But I have expressed in other topics MANY TIMES that MMA fighters are in superior shape and are tough athletes with a superior work ethic. Those words HAVE to sound familiar because I've said them many, many times.

And Mike, just because everyone here doesn't write about their past doesn't mean that they don't have one. I live in NY. I've been gang affiliated. I've worked in bars and clubs in Queens and Manhattan. I've done many things to people that I am not proud of and with age have realized that there are better ways of dealing with people than aggression. But I'm not here to talk about how tough I am. I am here to talk about the things that I know and have kept me alive to type this post. And it wasn't sports.

In almost every post, I've gone on and on about the work ethic, training methods and sport science in MMA. I have given high praise to those methods and have even gone as far to suggest that TMA's who wish to compete in MMA should adopt the training methods and sport science, but keep their original skill sets.

How you missed those posts, I have no idea.

There is value in almost anything, Mike. But there is a place for everything and everything in it's place.

[jubaji]

If MMA fighters are so damn skilled and well rounded at fighting in the ring, tell us all Mike why they don't dominate other combat sports like K-1 or professional boxing?

If they're so well-rounded (possessing a wide variety of skills) why don't they focus on competing in more specific contests?

This is stupid, even for you.


When you watch a football game (I doubt you do, actually - it would be far too threatening to your fragile ego to see professional athletes) and the announcer comments on how well-rounded an athlete one of the players may be, do you start screaming at the TV, "Oh yeah? Why isn't he an olympic sprinter then? Why isn't he a major league pitcher then?"

Idiot.

[JkD187]

Uke and Mike you guys all make some good points...espically what Mike said about MOST fights not being that serious.If everytime a street confrontation got deadly then most people wouldnt be alive since espically as teens there are tons of fights due to many different variables.I honestly believe the best SD is COMMON SENSE.If your leading a good life in the first place and not going out to the clubs/bars all night long getting drunk or hanging around with the wrong crowd on street corners then 98% of all those "street" encounters will be avoided.Now that just leaves the 2% of Deadly encounters you will have in your whole life....now to me 2% is pretty low and im not really worrying about it too much.

[Uke]

I think it's an effective way to train because it instills physical courage, conditioning, open-mindedness, cross training, toughness, and contact as an everyday part of training. Those are all things that apply in real life, and they are woefully absent from many of the so-called "street fighting" oriented schools out there.

Those things may be missing from YOUR school Mike. Not from other top self defense schools. Maybe that's why you needed to go to MMA to supplement what you didn't get. But that's a broad sweeping statement that is predicated on your say so and nothing else. Where are your facts? What did you right to back up that statement? You didn't because its based on Mike's opinion, not on any one fact.

Most of the people winning right now aren't doing it on toughness. They're doing it because they're smarter, more well-rounded, and more tactically sound than their opponents. There are slugfests, to be sure. But look at Silva vs Franklin or St. Pierre vs. Hughes and tell me that those were won on toughness. I use them as an example because they are the pinnacle - the example of how the sport looks at the top. And in both cases, the victor was the man who had the better game. In both cases, the victor won without being really rocked or having to show superior toughness. They won because they were better. Saying what you just said there is like saying there's nothing to boxing except being tougher than the other guy. It's borderline dumb.

They are more well rounded that who? Who are you assuming that these men are more well rounded than? Are you suggesting that MMA fighters are more well rounded than Urban combatants or just better conditioned? See, this is what I'm talking about. This is a minor point in the scope of the conversation, but you nitpick on this minor detail instead of addressing the main part of my argument.

The point is in the distinction between real and mocked combat. Methods that were created and tailored to deal with weapons and methods that are sportive for the ring. You AGAIN make this into a case of me attacking MMA fighters for describing what they are and what it is they do when that isn't the case. There were a dozen of other points that I made in my posts, and out of all of them, THIS IS THE ONE YOU CHOSE TO ADDRESS???

I wrote:

BUT THE REAL ISSUE I HAVE HAD HERE ON THIS FORUM IS THAT WHEN THE QUESTION IS ASKED CONCERNING WHAT ART TO TRAIN IN FOR SELF DEFENSE AND PROTECTION PURPOSES, PEOPLE HERE ALWAYS ANSWER BJJ AND MUAY THAI EVEN THOUGH YOU(Mike) AND OTHERS HERE ADMIT OUTRIGHT THAT THE COMBINATION IS SPORTIVE AT BEST!!!

but you never went anywhere near this.

I wrote:

My point is that if your goal is to become proficient at self defense and urban combat then your time would be better spent focusing on those aspects and systems that offer instruction in those methods.

but you never went anywhere near this.

I wrote:

But don't tell people that a method like that is the most comprehensive way to defend yourself or even attack unless you're willing to prove it outside of the ring in competitions that almost always involve weapons. The Dog Brothers competition is probably the most famous, but it isn't the only one or the oldest. These competitions allow grappling and kicking, so there's no reason for MMA fighter's to feel limited in these competitions.

but you never went anywhere near this.

I wrote:

As I said earlier Mike, the scope of reality is based upon weapons because weapons will determine what is and isn't practical. Sure, you can do all types of crazy and risky maneuvers in the ring because you KNOW that you're not going to die for your troubles. When you're training to deal with edged weapons and blunt objects, you can't afford to be shooting in and doing flying knees. I've seen some instructors advocate this in terms of self defense, but ONLY when the attacker is using a knife in a clumsy, looping manner with wide swings. Unless the guy mugging you has no experience whatsoever, he won't be attacking you in that McDojo fashion.

but you never went anywhere near this.

I wrote:

Anybody who would teach their students to attempt risky, unnecessary and flashy techniques doesn't deserve to have students. When your justification of teaching sportive methods to your students as a means of self defense is "I've pulled it off before", then you should never teach.

But you DEFINITELY never went anywhere near that.

My point is that out of all the points that were made, you chose to address the ones that you could pass off opinions as real answers. You could have chosen to discuss any and all of the things I listed, but instead you chose to write about MMA offering benefits that I never denied, and going on about the well roundness of MMA fighters and how skilled they are.

If MMA fighters are so damn skilled and well rounded at fighting in the ring, tell us all Mike why they don't dominate other combat sports like K-1 or professional boxing? Could it be that they are not as skilled and well rounded as you think? Could it be that they just master their own skill sets in their own events and compete against others who use the same skill sets? Why call them well rounded if they fail in other sport-fighting events where specific ranges are tested, and the majority of MMA fail? I said majority, not all. You, like others want to call out the few exceptions, but refuse to acknowledge the rule. When less than 5% of MMA succeed in other events despite being professional athletes in top shape, it DIRECTLY reflects on their skills, not their toughness. You're absolutely right about that, Mike.

You can call into question how combative practitioners would do, but they are not professional fighters or in the shape that professional fighters are in. However, MMA's can always enter the full contact weapon events to see if they are as well rounded as Mike implies, but you don't see that often. And there's no wonder why.

Just so its clear, I'm not being hostile about this. This is way too easy to have to get emotionally invested in.

[Tom Yum]

MMA is like a marine mentality method that teaches to "out-tough the son of a bitch by using guts and a superhuman work ethic". I'm sure that appeals to a lot of people.

You forgot about the marine mentality part where every marine is an expert rifleman. Not a bad mentality for self-defense, I'd say since we were discussing urban combatives.

Since he applies that superhuman work ethic and toughness into his rifle, pistol and blade skills, he would be able to protect himself and others rather well.

And no that would not appeal to alot of people, because they'd think there would be some kind of short-cut to higher proficiency in those skills.

Mostly young, energetic guys who want to "feel" tough and accepted by the guys they admire.

Are you an avid runner, Uke? I know a half-marathon (13 miles) is nothing for some folks, but how many people do you know can run 1 much less 2 miles and still have the wind, energy and courage to fight, much less 13...

There's no getting around hard work if you want to get better at anything. If you take shortcuts, you're only shortchanging yourself.

MMA is designed for empty-handed self defense and is probably the best training method given the short training time required to be effective, but the most important concept is the theme of cross-training. Many MMA type schools are also affiliated with FMA/edged weapon instructors.

Personally, I have always been a supporter of cross-training because there is always something new to learn about self-defense whether its from tiger-crane gong fu or savate.

I may never become a sifu in that style, but I will take what I've learned and try to use it whether it be just playing around or sparring.

Who knows? I may fall in love with a system and get married to it...

[jubaji]

Sure you'll find yourself being taken down on some occasions, but you don't stay there! You work your way back to your feet ASAP .

...and of course the best way to prepare yourself to do that isn't to actually take the time and trouble of becoming a competent grappler. No, its much more effective to buy into the fraudulent fantasy of something like 'anti-grappling' and then just tell yourself you've got it all covered. After all, that's what is says on the T-shirt they gave you at the one day seminar!

[Uke]

I've only been rude in response to assholes like jubaji whose only function is to antagonize, provoke and berate others who have contributed their time and experience here. Trolls like them NEVER discuss martial arts, technique or concepts because they have no idea about them. Instead they just comment by using emoticons and tirades and occasionally detailed accounts of how they survived life threatening odds by using gymnastics and WWF styled wrestling techniques. I'm not kidding.

Jubaji is like the energizer rabbit. He just keeps on confirming and confirming and confirming ....

[jubaji]

They don't work eight hours a day then go train for an hour or two. They spend all day eating special diets, working out and sparring. THAT'S WHERE THE SUCCESS OF MMA COMES FROM. Not from the fact that anyone has found new methods or techniques.

...is what dishrags like you have to believe, because your physical shortcomings are so unavoidably obvious that you have to believe that you have some secret 'technique' that makes the fact that you are physically inferior somehow irrelevant.

That way you can play with your rubber knives all day and convince yourself that you don't need anything else.

[jubaji]

But here's the point: Most people in this world are NOT going to be professional fighters.

Therefore you should only train to defend yourself against the oldest, slowest, most out of shape people imaginable!

Yeah, that's a good idea. That way dishrags like pUke won't have to feel bad about themselves.

[jubaji]

I'd like to start off by saying that defending myself is getting tiresome.

That's funny, 'cause reading your bullshit over and over and over is getting tiresome as well.

[jubaji]

Trolls like them NEVER discuss martial arts, technique or concepts because they have no idea about them. Instead they just comment by using emoticons and tirades and occasionally detailed accounts of how they survived life threatening odds.

As opposed to trolls like you who keep repeating the same tired old biased nonsense over and over and over because their deep and obvious insecurity compel them to.

[Uke]

You have an interesting aspect on SSD thats for sure however Next time if you put it in the UC forum so many trolls woulnt pop up....i mean people obviously feel as if your putting down BJJ and MMA espically in this forum.SSD is an interesting topic no doubt just next time lets keep it where it belongs.

Point taken and said like a gentleman, JKD187.
Even though you said you have no interest in UC, I hope you will come over and contribute from time to time.

[Uke]

By the same token, this is the MMA forum. You pointed that out yourself. Why then, and this is the question of the day ladies and gentlemen, do you feel a need to talk to people about what will or won't be effective in a streetfight in a forum dedicated to the sport of MMA?

Uke, you know I like you and I really respect your analysis when it comes to fight sports, but I think you have a hang-up about MMA that's pretty biased. It's as if you cannot allow yourself to accept that people who train in MMA can possibly handle themselves in a real fight, and you can't bring yourself to see the sport as anything but kickboxing and submissions. I still say it's telling that you're such an avid and knowledgeable boxing fan, and you see no problems with that at all, but when it comes to MMA, you get all wound up. What gives? Why the need to preach at everyone about how ineffective their sport is when it's MMA, but not boxing or any of the other sport martial arts?

I'd like to start off by saying that defending myself is getting tiresome. I've never said that an MMA fighter couldn't do ANYTHING. I don't speak in absolutes, Mike. But what I have been preaching is that MMA is not the best, most effective or most efficient way to spend your time training for reality.

Its amazing to me that no MMA advocate or practitioner wants to take any of the responsibility for debates like this. Sure, I think MMA is a great and entertaining sport. The practitioners reap incredible benefits both physically and mentally. I think MMA sports science and medicine is trying to approach that of boxing and pro football. The athletes are in far better shape than any non-professional practitioner.

BUT THE REAL ISSUE I HAVE HAD HERE ON THIS FORUM IS THAT WHEN THE QUESTION IS ASKED CONCERNING WHAT ART TO TRAIN IN FOR SELF DEFENSE AND PROTECTION PURPOSES, PEOPLE HERE ALWAYS ANSWER BJJ AND MUAY THAI EVEN THOUGH YOU(Mike) AND OTHERS HERE ADMIT OUTRIGHT THAT THE COMBINATION IS SPORTIVE AT BEST!!!

When that fact is brought up, then Mike and the rest of you have gone on to cloud the discussion by claiming that I stated that an MMA fighter couldn't do this or do that. You guys need to get the facts straight. An MMA fighter who does nothing but train could do anything if he received the right instruction and put the time in. That isn't my argument or my point.

My point is that if your goal is to become proficient at self defense and urban combat then your time would be better spent focusing on those aspects and systems that offer instruction in those methods.

What's the purpose of learning how to fight sportive if all you really wanted to do was learn how to protect yourself and stay alive in a mugging or a knife assault? Combat systems do train to improve physical conditioning, but not to a professional level in most cases. But here's the point: Most people in this world are NOT going to be professional fighters. Most won't be pro boxers, kickboxers or MMA fighters. Most DON'T WANT TO!!!! Most don't have the time to invest into that level of conditioning training for the simple fact that they have jobs! They don't have sponsors who afford them the free time to train!

When you advocate MMA, you're telling people that MMA is a great system because you see it work in the ring where its proven. What you leave out is that these men who win in MMA are professionals that do nothing but work and train to improve their craft. They don't work eight hours a day then go train for an hour or two. They spend all day eating special diets, working out and sparring. THAT'S WHERE THE SUCCESS OF MMA COMES FROM. Not from the fact that anyone has found new methods or techniques that are superior to what was being used before the debut of the UFC. That's the beef that every self defense combatant has with the gospel of MMA.

There are more normal people in this world who need to protect themselves than there are MMA athletes who dedicate their days to being professional ring fighters. Normal people who do not devote the amount of time that successful MMA fighters do to their training will NOT be effective using MMA tactics and methods. If anything, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT MMA HAS SHOWN THE WORLD. I respect MMA's toughness and work ethic. Its phenomenal. Anyone who aspires to be successful at competing in MMA must be a workaholic. But that's my point. You're training in methods that you have to work harder with in order to produce a desirable effect.

The philosophy of combatives/self defense has ALWAYS been work SMARTER, not HARDER.

MMA is like a marine mentality method that teaches to "out-tough the son of a bitch by using guts and a superhuman work ethic". I'm sure that appeals to a lot of people. Mostly young, energetic guys who want to "feel" tough and accepted by the guys they admire.

But don't tell people that a method like that is the most comprehensive way to defend yourself or even attack unless you're willing to prove it outside of the ring in competitions that almost always involve weapons. The Dog Brothers competition is probably the most famous, but it isn't the only one or the oldest. These competitions allow grappling and kicking, so there's no reason for MMA fighter's to feel limited in these competitions.

As I said earlier Mike, the scope of reality is based upon weapons because weapons will determine what is and isn't practical. Sure, you can do all types of crazy and risky maneuvers in the ring because you KNOW that you're not going to die for your troubles. When you're training to deal with edged weapons and blunt objects, you can't afford to be shooting in and doing flying knees. I've seen some instructors advocate this in terms of self defense, but ONLY when the attacker is using a knife in a clumsy, looping manner with wide swings. Unless the guy mugging you has no experience whatsoever, he won't be attacking you in that McDojo fashion.

MMA advocates will tell you that its okay to lay on the ground and work submissions while any competent combatives instructor tell you that its the worst possible place you can be in a fight. Sure you'll find yourself being taken down on some occasions, but you don't stay there! You work your way back to your feet ASAP before any real factors come into play like weapons or other attackers.

Mike, your entire argument has been that anything is possible and that anything can work. But what you discuss as possible, and it is possible, is improbable and has been deemed so through years of finding out what kept people alive OUTSIDE of the ring. While anything can work, even jump spinning back kicks, flying armbars and rolling leglocks, combatives is about what is practical and is time proven in most scenarios.

I'm sure Mike could pull off omaplata on a guy he's bouncing at the local bar or club. But if Mike tried that against a man who knew nothing but how to cut and slash without the telegraphed swings and wide strokes, he'd be dead. The man wouldn't even have to be a martial artist. Just a mean S.O.B. who felt like hurting Mike that night. Now, Mike usually asks at this point "Do you think you'd do better?" And my answer is OF COURSE I WOULD! Because I wouldn't be stupid enough to try sportive maneuvers in a life or death situation. I wouldn't willingly go to the guard in a situation with tons of unknown factors. There are other methods than BJJ to get dirty on the ground so that you can get up. And if I found myself there, all my energy would go towards using them to get up, not laying down to work submissions. And if you ask how I know Mike would do those things, its because he's admitted that he has before and they worked for him.

Anybody who would teach their students to attempt risky, unnecessary and flashy techniques doesn't deserve to have students. When your justification of teaching sportive methods to your students as a means of self defense is "I've pulled it off before", then you should never teach.

JKD187 at least admitted that he had no interest in training for SD/UC, but acknowledged that if he did he at least understood the distinction between MMA's sportive methods and SD/UC's more practical and efficient methods. Mike, you seem to be caught up in still trying to give a cow balls to make it seem like a bull when you constantly liken MMA to reality combatives. You've come a long way since our original debate about MMA and SD, but its not my bias that fuels this debate between you and I. Its your insistence that I'm trashing MMA practitioners when I'm only keeping the distinction between them and combatives plain and clear. For some strange yet fascinating reason, you just don't like that distinction, Mike.

In the end, I have respect for most of you as long as you keep it civil.