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

[Uke]

It's not 100% reality. But again, it's the closest thing. You're losing the whole point. Do you contend that a MMA who is proficient in lets say... bjj, wrestling, boxing, and kickbowing would not be able to come out of a situation in an elevator with a TMA ???? If so... you are truly out of your mind.

That's not what I wrote or implied. You need to really work on your reading comprehension.

[Uke]

Did you take an extra 'stupid' pill today, pUke?

Wow, you're back Jubbi? You were so quiet for so long I thought you were on hiatus after you got embarrassed on that last topic.

Back with more one liners?

[Uke]

Your first point is just your opinion... and only a sub-par opinion at that. MMA is the sport version of Jeet Kun Do(though it has never been marketed that way, and didn't start off that way).

I have already addressed that, but its still just as stupid an uninformed as before.

I already stated that there are plenty of elite in MMA. You can't see that, then you need to take your bias clouded goggles off.

The elite who participate in NHB events are NOT MMA fighter. They are traditional fighters who compete in NHB. Crocop is a TMA. Fedor Emelianenko is a TMA. Nogueira is a TMA. Kevin Randleman is a TMA. Mark Coleman is a TMA. Hidehiko Yoshida is a TMA.

The army never adopted those. You are wrong. They adopted elements FROM them. Trained with their instructors. Never adopted them. This is official now. Bjj on the ground and stand up. Also MMA elements.

So now we're getting into semantics now? BJJ is NOT the official combat art of the armed forces. Do you know how many different systems and tactics the army goes through? This is not even a point worth debating.

Lol again wrong. They don't join becuase of the reason I stated. Not because of your idiot antics.

If you read more carefully, you would have seen that I agreed with your point about the money. But its not just money.

I know you think you've dropped some knowledge here, but you haven't, Lucky. You haven't refuted even one point. You're repeating yourself and looking foolish doing it. I believe Mike Brewer was pretty much telling you this, but in a much more diplomatic manner. Read what he wrote to you reaaaaaaal slowly.

[jubaji]

Most MMA guys won't do it because it actually takes SKILL that takes time to acquire

don't waste energy wrestling with a guy who might be twice their size. Proof that MMA isn't an efficient method is that it doesn't work once you're fighting someone significantly bigger than you.

Did you take an extra 'stupid' pill today, pUke?

[jubaji]

stay away as long as possible

Maybe I`l come back to the forum in another 4years .

Don't hurry. Make it ten years.

[jubaji]

3 years on these boards and it's always been the same sh*t, same argument. -sigh- all these argument have been argued to death. If you are not presenting a new argument please just shut up and don't post.

Very well said!

[J-Luck]

A couple of things.

I am not discussing what is better. I am pointing out some details to those who preach that MMA is the sum of all combat.

Warriors have learned what will help them in combat. But being that it is the consensus that MMA is not combat, but a sportive mock-reality event that pits kickboxers against each other with an element of ground submission wrestling, this becomes a point to debate only if we wish to waste each other's time.

Competition does NOT spur evolution, Mike Brewer. Necessity does. That's why you haven't seen any changes in MMA since NHB events spawned it. The entire reason that MMA came to be is because fighters needed a way to be able to find a way to deal with brazilian jujitsu while continuing to hone their stand up skills. Hence, the crash course that is MMA was born. But you haven't seen any innovations since because there was no need for one. That's why SD and UC systems are much more intricate, thorough and practical. Systems like FMA were fighting against knives, which meant they were fighting for survival. Not some quick fix answer to do better in mock competitions.

Its a known fact that when there is a necessity, an art will evolve and flourish to meet the needs of the people. Judo was brutal until Kano refined it and made it sportive. Aikijitsu was a maiming art before Ueshiba found religion and made it Aikido. Karate was a vicious fighting style where everything was full contact and the sparring alone was as intense as today's MMA. Now we're just talking about the sparring.

Last but not least, the creators of MMA did not do what Bruce Lee was attempting to do. Actually, they're doing the opposite. Bruce was an advocate of each man finding his own way, and his own methods while adhering to certain scientific and common sense principles. When you look at Bruce's students, their movements were different because they had different body types. You can't teach Kareem Abdul Jabbar to fight like Dan Inosanto, because they're two way different body types with different attributes. People are unique. So, he enhanced what was strong about those men and attempted to compensate for what was weak. MMA just teaches kickboxing with some submission wrestling, and because those two ranges are different they called it mixed martial arts. Its hardly the same thing.

In eclectic arts, the system may borrow certain strikes and techniques from other styles, but the methods are completely different. Just because a style uses a low thai roundhouse or knees doesn't mean that your approach to fighting will be that of a thai fighter. Just because you system uses hooks and uppercuts doesn't mean that you use a boxer's approach to fighting.

In MMA, when they adopt techniques, they also adopt the approach of using the technique from the system of its origin. If they want to call it reality, they should make the ring the size of an office elevator. They should have to stay in close quarters and forget about the posturing bullshit, because in the street there is no range except for CQ unless you're in a shoot out. But guess what? That would take away the entertainment value and they would lose money. And in the end, that's what its all about to the men who own these events.

It's not 100% reality. But again, it's the closest thing. You're losing the whole point. Do you contend that a MMA who is proficient in lets say... bjj, wrestling, boxing, and kickbowing would not be able to come out of a situation in an elevator with a TMA ???? If so... you are truly out of your mind.

[J-Luck]

J-Luck,
I'm not trying to take sides here, I swear. I have agreed with the majority of things you post here, and I have seen eye to eye with Uke (especially about sport fighting) on many occasions as well, so I have no dog in this fight.

However, I'd like to submit a comment for your consideration. Uke mentioned that boxers don't care about how their skills match up outside their own sport. He also mentioned that most MMA guys get beaten when they try their hand at events like K-1 where the rules are specifically tailored to a different kind of fighting. I don't think he's contesting that MMA guys have lots of impressive achievements in their backgrounds. I think the point (or one of them) is that once a fighter chooses MMA, that's really all his skill set supports. Sure, a good MMA guy can be average at boxing or kickboxing, but he's still best at MMA. Slap a different set of rules on him, and he loses something. It's true that only a limited number of MMA guys have done well in events like K-1, and fewer (none that I'm aware of, although Berto comes from an MMA family) have parlayed their athleticism or hand skills into success in the much higher paying world of boxing.

I don't think the argument is that MMA guys can't fight outside their own set of rules. Rather, I think it's that they will always fight better within them. Most streetfighters would fail miserably in a MMA event. Most boxers would lose pitifully at a sport BJJ event. Those are things that we can accept without egos being bruised, so why get defensive about someone saying that MMA guys are the same as the rest of us?

I agree 100%! My only point was that I could name plenty of wrestlers, sub grapplers, bjj practioners, judoka, kickboxers, muay thai fighters, sambo fighters, and so on that have done very well within those systems, and THEN IN MMA. I firmly believe in order to learn true self defense one cross-trains. Maybe I mean MY brand of MMA is truly effective(by that I mean training in multiple arts in order to become proficient in them all... not dabling here and there hoping to pick up a move or two as you progress. I believe that's what Uke is assuming MMA is. Where most MMA guys fall is somewhere in the middle of what him and I think.

[jubaji]

more pearls of stupidity from pUke

If they want to call it reality, they should make the ring the size of an office elevator.

.......................

[Uke]

It's strange, Uke. I think that concern with how one art stacks up against another is both the single greatest failing and the single greatest strength within the martial arts world. It's a paradox, I know, but think about it. By being so concerned about which art or style is better, you get a collection of people who'll likely never reach any measure of their potential because they're always doubting their own path. You also develop the mindset that it must be one way or another. Asking which style is better assumes that one must be worse, and that keeps people from taking what works for them from anywhere they find it. That is, after all, what any real warrior throughout history has done, isn't it? Learned anything that would give him an advantage in battle, regardless of where it came from?

At the same time, competition spurs evolution. We wouldn't see nearly as many people cross training and trying to become well-rounded fighters today were it not for MMA popping up. Bruce Lee tried it, but even he couldn't win over the masses like MMA did. Now everyone - even non-fighters - will tell you you have to be well rounded to win a fight. They're still in competition mindset, but it's a step in the right direction. After all, I think we can both agree that there's no fightsport more limited by the rules of its conduct than boxing, but we can both still get on board there, right? Why should MMA be any different? It encourages people to "mix" their martial arts, and I think in the long run, that's a good thing.

This topic is getting interesting...

A couple of things.

I am not discussing what is better. I am pointing out some details to those who preach that MMA is the sum of all combat.

Warriors have learned what will help them in combat. But being that it is the consensus that MMA is not combat, but a sportive mock-reality event that pits kickboxers against each other with an element of ground submission wrestling, this becomes a point to debate only if we wish to waste each other's time.

Competition does NOT spur evolution, Mike Brewer. Necessity does. That's why you haven't seen any changes in MMA since NHB events spawned it. The entire reason that MMA came to be is because fighters needed a way to be able to find a way to deal with brazilian jujitsu while continuing to hone their stand up skills. Hence, the crash course that is MMA was born. But you haven't seen any innovations since because there was no need for one. That's why SD and UC systems are much more intricate, thorough and practical. Systems like FMA were fighting against knives, which meant they were fighting for survival. Not some quick fix answer to do better in mock competitions.

Its a known fact that when there is a necessity, an art will evolve and flourish to meet the needs of the people. Judo was brutal until Kano refined it and made it sportive. Aikijitsu was a maiming art before Ueshiba found religion and made it Aikido. Karate was a vicious fighting style where everything was full contact and the sparring alone was as intense as today's MMA. Now we're just talking about the sparring.

Last but not least, the creators of MMA did not do what Bruce Lee was attempting to do. Actually, they're doing the opposite. Bruce was an advocate of each man finding his own way, and his own methods while adhering to certain scientific and common sense principles. When you look at Bruce's students, their movements were different because they had different body types. You can't teach Kareem Abdul Jabbar to fight like Dan Inosanto, because they're two way different body types with different attributes. People are unique. So, he enhanced what was strong about those men and attempted to compensate for what was weak. MMA just teaches kickboxing with some submission wrestling, and because those two ranges are different they called it mixed martial arts. Its hardly the same thing.

In eclectic arts, the system may borrow certain strikes and techniques from other styles, but the methods are completely different. Just because a style uses a low thai roundhouse or knees doesn't mean that your approach to fighting will be that of a thai fighter. Just because you system uses hooks and uppercuts doesn't mean that you use a boxer's approach to fighting.

In MMA, when they adopt techniques, they also adopt the approach of using the technique from the system of its origin. If they want to call it reality, they should make the ring the size of an office elevator. They should have to stay in close quarters and forget about the posturing bullshit, because in the street there is no range except for CQ unless you're in a shoot out. But guess what? That would take away the entertainment value and they would lose money. And in the end, that's what its all about to the men who own these events.

[Sagacious Lu]

And there probably won't be boxing champs for decades. Not only because of the money, but because boxers, unlike MMA fighters, know who they are.

This, however, is wholly and completely true. Boxers understand very, very well that they are athletes and sportsmen. You won't find many boxers who even care one way or another how their abilities stack up against some other form of fighting. Boxers do not spend any time - none - worrying about whether or not a BJJ guy could beat them on the ground, or whether a Thai boxer could knee them to death. They are totally indifferent. They love what they do, for whatever reasons they love it, and they seek accomplishment and achievement within that craft without any need for someone who has no understanding of their craft's approval or endorsement. That's one of the things I love so much about boxing - it's self-integrity and honesty. Many martial artists would do well to emulate those things.

I agree with you but your point is equally valid for all sportsmen although for some reason Uke wants to exclude MMA. MMA fighters as a whole don't worry whether they can beat a judoka in a judo comp. or a boxer in a boxing match because they train for their rule set.

[J-Luck]

This is, without exageration, one of the stupidest things I've ever seen posted on the internet.

All I gotta say is, "True dat"

[J-Luck]

Bullshit.

You could go out and learn more about combat by attending the Dog Brother's open tournaments a few times than you could doing MMA for years. But guess what? Most MMA guys won't do it because it actually takes SKILL that takes time to acquire and not just toughness and professional athlete level conditioning to win.

This is a great point because most people who want to learn how to protect themselves won't be in the shape that a professional athlete is in. But they CAN still be effective if they use the most efficient methods and don't waste energy wrestling with a guy who might be twice their size. Proof that MMA isn't an efficient method is that it doesn't work once you're fighting someone significantly bigger than you.

If a guy who is 150lbs fights a guy who is 225lbs using MMA, he's going to get into trouble. He can get lucky and I STRESS luck, but the odds are against him. He'd be basically kickboxing the bigger guy, as those are the skills that MMA push for in their fighters. Once the bigger guy landed one solid shot the smaller guy would not only be hurt, but even if he wasn't he'd be hesitant to continue fighting.

And by the way J-Luck, I'm not underestimating anyone or anything. Whatever MMA fighters do, there's a traditional martial artist that does it better. Put an MMA fighter in a kickboxing event and they get knocked out. Put them in a grappling tournament and they get tapped or choked out. Put them in the boxing ring and they'll catch a terrible beating.

So where is it that I'm underestimating something, J-Luck?



The army has adopted everything as some point or another. Boxing. Kickboxing. Kung fu. Karate. Judo. Jujitsu. Ninjitsu for stealth methods. Wrestling. So don't go on about MMA being special because the army took a stab at it. People train in MMA to be competitive, not to learn to survive. And by the way, every newaza technique you see isn't BJJ. Newaza was jujitsu way before the Brazilians knew what jujitsu was.



And there probably won't be boxing champs for decades. Not only because of the money, but because boxers, unlike MMA fighters, know who they are. They don't pretend to be something that they're not. They know that just because they can throw a decent kick doesn't make them a thai boxer. They know that just because they can fall backwards with someone in their guard doesn't make them a BJJ player. They know who they are and master their craft, something MMA fighters never seem to do. Jack of all trades but master of none.

A cougar can paint all the stripes he wants on himself, but he'll never be a tiger.

Your first point is just your opinion... and only a sub-par opinion at that. MMA is the sport version of Jeet Kun Do(though it has never been marketed that way, and didn't start off that way). How is taking the most effective aspects, strategies, and techniques of different arts innefective?? It takes a great deal of skill. You must have me mistaken for the kind of MMA guy who strictly goes to an MMA gym. I plan on going to an MMA gym(not currently a member) to bring it all together... but currently I wrestle, practice BJJ, boxing, and am hoping to start kickboxing. These are all seperate endeavors... and that, in my opinion, is how MMA SHOULD be done. It has nothing to do with luck, and everything to do with skill, technique, conditioning, and strategy.

I already stated that there are plenty of elite in MMA. You can't see that, then you need to take your bias clouded goggles off. 0.

The army never adopted those. You are wrong. They adopted elements FROM them. Trained with their instructors. Never adopted them. This is official now. Bjj on the ground and stand up. Also MMA elements.

BJJ guys took the judo principle(randori for non-dangerous techniques) and ran with it. Judo turned it into far more a sport than a martial art. Bjj brought back all of the locks not allowed or trained in Judo, and took the newaza to a whole new level.

Lol again wrong. They don't join becuase of the reason I stated. Not because of your idiot antics.

I would name all of the successful outside of MMA guys there are, but I dont have enough time, nor space. So, since you are so immeasurably wrong and misguided, give me one weight class, in the UFC, and I will give you 5 guys who are majorly successful outside of MMA in a fighting art.

You must learn to become a critical thinker, employing logic, and always asking, "why?" Rhetoric only gets you so far.

[Uke]

Many martial artists would do well to emulate those things.

Very well put.

[Uke]

This is, without exageration, one of the stupidest things I've ever seen posted on the internet.

You obviously haven't been reading what you've been writing lately.