mma is a made up martial art.

[drop bear]

There seems to be some confusion regarding mma and making stuff up as we go along.

mma as it stands now Is a result of an art adapting to a competition. Rather than a competition deriving from an art.

so the art itself is a fluid concept. There is a constant testing innovating and re testing of ideas. The contest is the crucible in which the art is created.

this fluidity means that new terms and new ideas are created constantly..

yes we make stuff up as we go along. Different gyms will call the same techniques different things. Or have entirely new techniques.

so in doing mma or talking to a mmaer you may have to deal with terms like the abracadabra kick or the vertical round house.

my point still is here so long as you can do it. And so long as you can make yourself understood. The names are less important.

 

[drop bear]

the showtime kick.

(it is a made up name by the way. And probably a made up kick)

 

[Buka]

All Martial Arts are made up when you think about it.

 

[Steve]

Most modern martial arts in which people train were formalized within the last 100 years or so.

The difference between Mma and some other, traditional styles is training emphasis.

Mma focuses on efficacy, specifically in the ring.

Traditional styles focus on doing it exactly the way your instructor does it, first and foremost.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Xue Sheng]

Most modern martial arts in which people train were formalized within the last 100 years or so.

The difference between Mma and some other, traditional styles is training emphasis.

Mma focuses on efficacy, specifically in the ring.

Traditional styles focus on doing it exactly the way your instructor does it, first and foremost.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree with all but this

Traditional styles focus on doing it exactly the way your instructor does it, first and foremost.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reason I disagree is because it is not possible, no one can do something exactly the way their instructor does, it is not physically possible. You learn from your instructor and adapt it to yourself. I do not do Taiji the exact same way as my sifu and he does not do it the exact same way as his and his sifu does not do it exactly the same way has his sifu.

I would go with traditional martial arts tends to follow more of a template than many modern Martial Arts. But even with modern martial arts as an example...most there are, at least in the beginning, trying to do things just like their teacher

 

[ballen0351]

MMA isnt a style. Its a combo of already know styles. Depending on where you train. Some schools pair Boxing Muay thai and BJJ others pair different arts Im in a shopping center right now that has an MMA school its TKD, BJJ, and Judo.
MMA doesnt make up nonsense like a vertical roundhouse.

 

[Tez3]

There seems to be some confusion regarding mma and making stuff up as we go along.

mma as it stands now Is a result of an art adapting to a competition. Rather than a competition deriving from an art.

so the art itself is a fluid concept. There is a constant testing innovating and re testing of ideas. The contest is the crucible in which the art is created.

this fluidity means that new terms and new ideas are created constantly..

yes we make stuff up as we go along. Different gyms will call the same techniques different things. Or have entirely new techniques.

so in doing mma or talking to a mmaer you may have to deal with terms like the abracadabra kick or the vertical round house.

my point still is here so long as you can do it. And so long as you can make yourself understood. The names are less important.

There's is no confusion. MMA is what it says it is MIXED MARTIAL ARTS. Note the word ARTS, it is not AN art adapting to anything, it is techniques from many styles being used together in on competition. The arts are ones we all know and love therefore there aren't 'new made up' techniques just the adapting of existing techniques for a specific competition.
It is becoming a style with it's amalgamating of techniques, as people train MMA as opposed to single styles. Those of us who were early into MMA didn't have the luxury of being able to train MMA as an entity, we had trained single styles and had to meld them together ourselves.
No, we don't make stuff up as we go along, what we do is find techniques we like for our size, weight, build etc and adapt them to suit us, we discard those techniques we find don't work for us BUT they remain techniques that you will find in martial arts so they will retain the names they had then. An 'abracadabra' kick is a front kick, it will always be a front kick that someone has slightly adapted to make it work better for him, now most people have a kick they think is 'magic' for them, it doesn't mean we all now call that kick 'the magic kick'!

There is nothing new under the sun, the times we've had someone come in and claim they have found a 'new' technique only for them to show us and we say yeah, it's been done before, it may differ slightly but it's not new. there are only so many ways you can actually kcik punch and even grapple. yes people do things a bit different from each other but the techniques are the same whoever is doing it and rarely to be honest do people call things by very different names.

Al this talk of 'crucibles' and 'testing, innovating, creating' etc is publicity speak, what you get from commentators hyping up a fight night. I can tell you now that the techniques we use now would have been used in Pankration way back in Ancient Greece!

Do we make things up as we go along...no. What we do is watch, learn, adapt, see what works, see what doesn't in techniques that come from all and any arts that have been around a long time.

I think you miss the point about what is exciting about MMA. it's not the training, it's the competition against yourself. We train the techniques we know work for us, we have them honed sharp and ready to use, we know our game plan and then we fight, the challenge of getting your opponent where you want them, avoiding them getting you where they want you, thinking tactically while striking, thinking moves ahead when grappling, see if you can take that hit and carry on and more. That's the excitement, the draw and lure of MMA. We used martial arts techniques that people have been using for years, we mix them up and we fight. That's enough, that's excitement, that's life if you love competition and challenging yourself.

It's nonsense to say we make up kicks, we make up strikes because I can tell you for a start in any given fight I can tell you what techniques are used and most likely what style or art they are used in, any competent martial artist can. It does matter what things are called because it allows people to understand what you are talking about....'a vertical roundhouse kick' tells people nothing other than ther is no such thing.

Oh and the 'showtime kick'?.....it's a mawashigeri, a roundhouse kick, that he comes off the cage and spins afterwards doesn't make it anything different. It's not made up at all, the spin at the end? it can be used to go into another technique, a lot of styles can do that.

 

[Mephisto]

Tez3, I agree that there's probably nothing new but as for making things up? I'd disagree with your outlook. If you modify a technique from the way it was taught to you than you are innovating and changing and thus making up your own applications. If you modify a technique some more dogmatic practitioners within a system might infer that you're doing it wrong. I've been accused of this, I wasn't told I was wrong but fellow practitioners that only do exactly what the GM teaches asked me what the hell I was doing. I like to focus on sparring and with sparring you need to make things work for you, you must innovate and make things up and try them out. What you change or come up with has probably been done by someone else somewhere but if it's new to you than, yes it's made up. Guys that don't spar are more rigid and less apt to change things. They may perform a move with an emphasis geared toward their body type but their changes are due.to their anatomy not necessarily a need to make something work in combat.

IMO we should be experimenting and changing things, each generation should be able to build on the strengths of the last. The GM should not permanently be the best fighter in a system, if he successfully imparts all of his knowledge to his students they should surpass him and he should be proud. Change is necessary and it can be cyclical a generation may favor a set of moves only to have a future generation revisit older less popular techniques and reinnovate them.

 

[jks9199]

Maybe a different word than "made up" is in order. Mixed Martial Arts is becoming an assembled, eclectic martial art. It draws on ring experience and modern sport training methods to prepare participants for fighting in various sports environments and rule sets that allow a wide range of combative techniques to be used.

 

[Tez3]

Tez3, I agree that there's probably nothing new but as for making things up? I'd disagree with your outlook. If you modify a technique from the way it was taught to you than you are innovating and changing and thus making up your own applications. If you modify a technique some more dogmatic practitioners within a system might infer that you're doing it wrong. I've been accused of this, I wasn't told I was wrong but fellow practitioners that only do exactly what the GM teaches asked me what the hell I was doing. I like to focus on sparring and with sparring you need to make things work for you, you must innovate and make things up and try them out. What you change or come up with has probably been done by someone else somewhere but if it's new to you than, yes it's made up. Guys that don't spar are more rigid and less apt to change things. They may perform a move with an emphasis geared toward their body type but their changes are due.to their anatomy not necessarily a need to make something work in combat.

IMO we should be experimenting and changing things, each generation should be able to build on the strengths of the last. The GM should not permanently be the best fighter in a system, if he successfully imparts all of his knowledge to his students they should surpass him and he should be proud. Change is necessary and it can be cyclical a generation may favor a set of moves only to have a future generation revisit older less popular techniques and reinnovate them.

However I think what you are saying is more relevant to TMA than MMA. We don't have GMs who tells you that you are doing it wrong or who are the 'best fighters'. When we do things differently we get interest. We don't have people who don't spar and we do everything with a view to competition/combat. I don't disagree with you just I don't see that it applies so much to MMA.
I don't see, I'm afraid, that if it's new to you then it's made up. It surely just means it's new to you?
What has been presented to us is videos of 'made up' kicks but when you look at them they aren't, they are martial arts staples. The fighter's leg in the actual kick has been in the exact position it should be for that type of kick, so no it's not a made up kick. The lead up may have been a bit different, and after may have been a bit different but the kick? The kick is a known and well used martial arts kick. So what techniques are made up?

 

[Buka]

Tez3, I agree that there's probably nothing new but as for making things up? I'd disagree with your outlook. If you modify a technique from the way it was taught to you than you are innovating and changing and thus making up your own applications. If you modify a technique some more dogmatic practitioners within a system might infer that you're doing it wrong. I've been accused of this, I wasn't told I was wrong but fellow practitioners that only do exactly what the GM teaches asked me what the hell I was doing. I like to focus on sparring and with sparring you need to make things work for you, you must innovate and make things up and try them out. What you change or come up with has probably been done by someone else somewhere but if it's new to you than, yes it's made up. Guys that don't spar are more rigid and less apt to change things. They may perform a move with an emphasis geared toward their body type but their changes are due.to their anatomy not necessarily a need to make something work in combat.

IMO we should be experimenting and changing things, each generation should be able to build on the strengths of the last. The GM should not permanently be the best fighter in a system, if he successfully imparts all of his knowledge to his students they should surpass him and he should be proud. Change is necessary and it can be cyclical a generation may favor a set of moves only to have a future generation revisit older less popular techniques and reinnovate them.

Good stuff, that.

And you know what every teacher should strive for - make your students better Martial Artists than you are. Otherwise, what would be the point?

 

[Tez3]

What I'm tending to think is that some people who train MMA are being exposed to techniques they haven't seen before because they come from arts they aren't familiar with so are assuming the fighter using them has 'made up' those techniques.

 

[Hanzou]

Maybe a different word than "made up" is in order. Mixed Martial Arts is becoming an assembled, eclectic martial art. It draws on ring experience and modern sport training methods to prepare participants for fighting in various sports environments and rule sets that allow a wide range of combative techniques to be used.

So is Bjj, for similar reasons. Our school has Judo, Wrestling, and No-gi classes on top of old school Gracie Jiujitsu. Our competition/nogi instructor started teaching Catch Wrestling last month. Frankly, we learn all of that to make us better fighters overall. Not just for the ring, but for self defense as well. Bjj is a MMA by default.

In my view, its one of Bjjs big advantages over Judo, and other grappling arts.

 

[Tez3]

Good stuff, that.

And you know what every teacher should strive for - make your students better Martial Artists than you are. Otherwise, what would be the point?

In MMA that is exactly what coaches strive for...to make the 'perfect' fighter. There is no 'holding back' on techniques simply because there is no point. It might be for slightly selfish reasons of course, the fighter's abilities are going to be there for all to see and reflect the coach. The more successful the fighter, the more successful the coach.

 

[Transk53]

This is a very strange thread. So for example, when I go back to Wing Chun and probably in six months or so, if I added a knee practising Chi Sau, would that be in affect be making things up. Sorry I just fail to see that, surely the knee is a add on and has no tangible affect on Wing Chun? Surely if MMA was making things up as it goes along, where is the coherence in that. Someone tries a new move been made up, a kick to the neck for example would likely paralyse. Sorry, I just don't get it.

A Martial Art is based on coherence honed by generations, making something up on the fly is all well and good, but has to based on coherence of whatever art you do. The sandbox is simply not that vast. Is MMA not made up of Boxers, Wrestlers and Grappler's, what new move made up could possibly be safe on the fly. Rambling over, going to go and be confused.com elsewhere.

 

[Buka]

In MMA that is exactly what coaches strive for...to make the 'perfect' fighter. There is no 'holding back' on techniques simply because there is no point. It might be for slightly selfish reasons of course, the fighter's abilities are going to be there for all to see and reflect the coach. The more successful the fighter, the more successful the coach.

I believe it true in Arts not interested in competition as well. All I ever wanted was my students to be better Martial Artists than I was/am at every level of their development. The hardest part for me early on, was realizing students aren't in the Arts for the same reason I was, or as crazy and dedicated. (They actually had lives

It took a while, a lot of trial and error over the years, to see which parts of training would better help someone over, say, a five year period. But it's working out nicely. A lot of them are better grapplers than I am, which thrills me to no end. The kids all grapple as part of their training (Bjj based) as opposed to the kids pre - 2000.
I can't wait to see what some of them will be like ten years from now. I hope I'm alive to see it.

 

[Buka]

This is a very strange thread. So for example, when I go back to Wing Chun and probably in six months or so, if I added a knee practising Chi Sau, would that be in affect be making things up. Sorry I just fail to see that, surely the knee is a add on and has no tangible affect on Wing Chun? Surely if MMA was making things up as it goes along, where is the coherence in that. Someone tries a new move been made up, a kick to the neck for example would likely paralyse. Sorry, I just don't get it.

A Martial Art is based on coherence honed by generations, making something up on the fly is all well and good, but has to based on coherence of whatever art you do. The sandbox is simply not that vast. Is MMA not made up of Boxers, Wrestlers and Grappler's, what new move made up could possibly be safe on the fly. Rambling over, going to go and be confused.com elsewhere.

I don't think anyone is making up something on the fly. Adapting is a key component in fighting, in life.....hell, even in relationships.
To me, he who is not capable to adapt - is screwed

 

[Transk53]

I don't think anyone is making up something on the fly. Adapting is a key component in fighting, in life.....hell, even in relationships.
To me, he who is not capable to adapt - is screwed

Totally agree buka at least with the latter. The former though, I am still not sure.

 

[K-man]

Tez3, I agree that there's probably nothing new but as for making things up? I'd disagree with your outlook. If you modify a technique from the way it was taught to you than you are innovating and changing and thus making up your own applications. If you modify a technique some more dogmatic practitioners within a system might infer that you're doing it wrong. I've been accused of this, I wasn't told I was wrong but fellow practitioners that only do exactly what the GM teaches asked me what the hell I was doing. I like to focus on sparring and with sparring you need to make things work for you, you must innovate and make things up and try them out. What you change or come up with has probably been done by someone else somewhere but if it's new to you than, yes it's made up. Guys that don't spar are more rigid and less apt to change things. They may perform a move with an emphasis geared toward their body type but their changes are due.to their anatomy not necessarily a need to make something work in combat.

IMO we should be experimenting and changing things, each generation should be able to build on the strengths of the last. The GM should not permanently be the best fighter in a system, if he successfully imparts all of his knowledge to his students they should surpass him and he should be proud. Change is necessary and it can be cyclical a generation may favor a set of moves only to have a future generation revisit older less popular techniques and reinnovate them.

Have you ever heard of Shuhari? What you have described is simply the way the Japanese teach many things including the martial arts. Changing something to make it work for you is not making something new. It is modifying an existing technique to suit you. If you then start teaching you might teach someone to do something your way only to find that in time they change it back to the original to make it work for them.

 

[drop bear]

I hadn't seen a superman punch before mma.