Sharing with other Arts

[hardheadjarhead]

MichiganTKD in bold:

I think the "my art is better than your art" and "traditional martial arts are useless" attitude has directly paralleled the rise of UFC, Pride, and K-1.

The "my art is better than your art" attitude is perennial, a part of human nature, and will never disappear. It manifests itself in your own attitude towards MMA, Wallace, Norris and point fighters, though you've attempted to veil it by essentially saying, "if it works for them, fine." MMA'ers and progressive stylists also adopt this pose. It is, at best, condescendingly generous.

These guys make it a point to pick and choose techniques from many different styles, not realizing how superficial the end result is.

Or perhaps, not caring whether it is superficial or not. Their attitude, if anything, is western. Yours is an eastern mindset, more specifically limited to those formalized arts from Korea and Japan and exclusive of those arts from southeast Asia and much of China.

While I personally prefer traditional Tae Kwon Do because it works for me, it seems to be the aforementioned students who have carried disrespect for other styles to new heights. But then, they are following in the steps of their spiritual godfather, Bruce Lee.

An amazing contradiction once again, as you have shown nothing but disrespect for Lee and other progressive martial arts in your posts throughout this forum. It is as if you're saying, "Each to his own...but THOSE guys, cheez..."

Marginal in bold:

Not saying there aren't reasonable MMA'ers, but there tend to be very vocal, obnoxious people in MMA circles that are more than happy to lay down what they perceive as "the cold truth".

Their attitude is little different than MichiganTKD's. They're polar opposites insofar as personal philosophy, but carry the same level of disrespect. However; the MMA'ers and progressives don't fall into a category of hypocrisy. They don't pretend to politeness and then show little of it. They don't give undue veneration to respect only to dance around the issue so as to look down on other methods.

But I can readily see why they hold little regard for traditionalists. The latter, for years, have held the public's attention as being the ultimate in unarmed self defense. Suddenly their cherished status is gone, and they're left with touting their method as being morally and ethically superior...a "way" that cultivates character. However beneficial that might be (and I'd defend it is, within a measure of reason), the arts have lost much of their mystique. There are no TKD people entering the Octagon. Nobody yet has made a pressure point technique work in any MMA ring. Ninjas have yet to be seen in a K-1 or "Rage in the Cage" match...but then, we all know how good they are at not being seen.

That no traditional art has survived for very long in an MMA setting is revealing on many levels. Most arts today have no testing ground other than the sparring ring. Rules are adopted to prevent injury to contestants and to keep the art within certain parameters of performance. MMA, while it has adopted quite a few rules since the days of the first UFC (remember the "There are NO rules" tag line?) still has one thing going for it---it fights at all empty hand ranges. It does throws and takedowns. It does submissions. It hits and kicks. No other formal art has ever approached this level of complete competitiveness or been this popular.

But the trash talk, while keeping these details in mind, is born of competitiveness itself. Traditionalists and MMA'ers and Progressives are all vying for a market share--not for dollar shares--but for validation.

Regards,


Steve

 

[MichiganTKD]

The reason why you seldom, if ever, see traditional martial artists in UFC, Pride, or K-1 "Steel Cage " matches is because they won't stoop to that. And refusing to take part in those matches does not mean their technique doesn't work. it means they refuse to be a part of that environment.
Being a good UFC fighter means nothing. It means you happen to be good against a similar fighter who trains the same way you do. It doesn't mean your technique is particularly good. it means your technique works in the framework of that particular scenario. You want realistic? Make one of them drunk or high, give him a knife or gun, and allow ANY kind of contact-eyes, groin, biting, headbutts, joint breaking etc. That's called streetfighting. And traditional martial artists train to avoid those scenarios. Anyway, what's the average career span of a UFC fighter? 10 years max? You can do martial arts your whole life. I've seen it done.
Honestly, I've watched Pride and K-1 matches just to see how good these guys really were. You know what? It almost put me to sleep. Two guys with no footwork or movement, focusing on punching, and kicking the legs once in a while. That's supposed to be exciting? These guys are primarily boxers, and it's pretty obvious they learn just enough kicking to get by in the ring. They certainly are not martial arts or kicking experts. It's just PKA for the modern era.
And I can certainly respect their right to practice what makes them happy, but disagree with what they do. Happens all the time. Doesn't make me a hypocrite at all.
As for Bruce Lee, I'll admit he was a marvelous physical specimen and quite talented. He also died at the age of 33 because he refused to slow down, was hotheaded, and openly contemptuous of those who didn't follow his line of thinking. So there were some aspects of him I admire, but a helluva lot I don't.

 

[Adept]

The reason why you seldom, if ever, see traditional martial artists in UFC, Pride, or K-1 "Steel Cage " matches is because they won't stoop to that. And refusing to take part in those matches does not mean their technique doesn't work. it means they refuse to be a part of that environment.

Not entirely true, I dont think. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of traditional martial artists around the world. Not all of them feel that stepping into the ring or octagon would be 'stooping' to any kind of level. You dont see people using tradtional martial arts in the ring because for the most part they just dont work. Many MMA fighters have a background in traditional martial arts.

Being a good UFC fighter means nothing. It means you happen to be good against a similar fighter who trains the same way you do. It doesn't mean your technique is particularly good. it means your technique works in the framework of that particular scenario.

Michigan. you can say the exact same thing about any kind of martial art, be it mixed or traditional. The bonus MMA has in that regard is that the 'style' the practice is a lot more free-form and a lot closer to 'reality' than most, or any, traditional martial arts.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

The reason why you seldom, if ever, see traditional martial artists in UFC, Pride, or K-1 "Steel Cage " matches is because they won't stoop to that. And refusing to take part in those matches does not mean their technique doesn't work. it means they refuse to be a part of that environment.


Right.

You just go on believing that. I'm sure it'll bring you some comfort.

Here I'll state it clear and direct. Their technique simply won't work in those environments. The very best Olympian TKD man would be manhandled in those matches. The reason you don't see them in that ring is that they're well aware it isn't something they can adapt to without drastically changing their methodology and adopting methods from other systems (Gasp! Such heresy!)

Tae Kwon Do...and other traditional arts...are far too one dimensional to survive in an MMA ring. Long before MMA became popular these arts suffered horribly when they were pitted against Muay Thai fighters. Why? Traditionalists hadn't the full contact training, the clinch work, nor any way to properly defend against shots to the legs and knees to the body. The were eaten alive.

Refreshingly, certain Muay Thai fighters have adapted kicking methods from Tae Kwon Do and incorporated them into their systems. The flow rarely goes the other way, which is sad. It'd be interesting to see TKD'ers incorporate some Muay Thai clinch work into their game--not for sport, certainly--just to broaden their self defense skills. I think it'd be a nice synergy.

Or how about if TKD'ers learned a proper way to defend a shot and a double leg takedown? Here in the midwest there are an AWFUL lot of wrestlers who can take a TKD'er down with little effort, and once there on the ground, humiliate him.

Wouldn't it be zippy if a TKD'er took some of those hyung movements in which he's so well schooled and adapted them to some Filipino weapons training? Sort of like those hundreds of wonderfully open minded Europeans did in Denmark last Easter at their training camp. And...ohmigosh...in the next room they were learning some Kenpo!

But that's beneath you.

That's your story, anyway. Make sure you stick to it.


Regards,


Steve

 

[MichiganTKD]

Steve,

The fact that I am taking Aikido means that I am interested in expanding my horizons a bit. But just like Bruce Lee, you get bent out of shape because I'm not expanding my horizons in a way that you think useful. I don't practice Kenpo or Thai boxing because they don't interest me. Do they have their strong points? Sure, but rather than trying to cover all bases, I make my TKD work for me and practice Aikido because it is something totally different yet fascinating. I also don't care whether aikido would work in a UFC ring or not.
Just because the TKD fighters you mention get beaten in the UFC ring doesn't mean they all would. I've practiced with guys that scared the piss out of me. Guys I was literally afraid to spar because I knew the damage they could do. They might get beaten in a UFC ring. Then again, they might not. Just because the fighters you know are bad examples of TKD power doesn't mean they all are.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

MichiganTKD in bold:

The fact that I am taking Aikido means that I am interested in expanding my horizons a bit. But just like Bruce Lee, you get bent out of shape because I'm not expanding my horizons in a way that you think useful. I don't practice Kenpo or Thai boxing because they don't interest me. Do they have their strong points? Sure, but rather than trying to cover all bases, I make my TKD work for me and practice Aikido because it is something totally different yet fascinating. I also don't care whether aikido would work in a UFC ring or not.
Just because the TKD fighters you mention get beaten in the UFC ring doesn't mean they all would. I've practiced with guys that scared the piss out of me. Guys I was literally afraid to spar because I knew the damage they could do. They might get beaten in a UFC ring. Then again, they might not. Just because the fighters you know are bad examples of TKD power doesn't mean they all are.

You assume a great deal.

First, I am not getting "bent out of shape" because I think you are expanding your horizons in directions that aren't useful. I think any art is useful, and would urge anyone to study Aikido, Shotokan, Judo or any other "Do" art that is ethically based. I find they have technical merit for self defense, are interesting, and have merits in inculcating a person into the history and martial cultures of those arts. This is, in fact, where I part with many JKD people (not all, as Paulson and Inosanto seem quite respectful of other systems, to name just two of note).

Anybody who knows me well, and there are a few who post to this forum, can attest to my respect for traditional arts as well as for progressive methods. I have trained in both classifications of arts and offer the same through my school. I do not tolerate stylistic bigotry of any form in my students and constantly encourage them to cross train in either traditional or progressive methods...whichever makes the deepest emotional impact upon them.

My grievance isn't with your narrow focus so much as the way you arrogate yourself, MTKD. Your posture here and elsewhere in dealing with other arts has been supercilious and condescending. Were you an MMA'er doing the same thing to traditionalists I'd still let fly the hammer.

As for the efficacy of TKD fighters, no doubt there are those who are quite effective. One of them broke my fibula once. Another came within an inch of killing me with a spin kick to my unprotected cervical atlas. The Master I studied with was frightening when angered, and had more than his share of scrapes back in Seoul...as did his peers I came to know.

That said, if you were to magically remove the ravages of age and put them in the MMA ring, these men would do very poorly with standard Tae Kwon Do techniques. That environment is such that it quickly nullifies the kicking skills of a TKD'er, the reverse punch of a Shotokan adept, and virtually all contemporary Aiki techniques. Those arts have their place in a self defense context, but not in a ring with professionals who fight across the spectrum of ranges. To think otherwise is, frankly, delusional.

I do not anticipate this statement will be proven wrong anytime soon. Clearly, just as all MMA'ers are uncultured peasants, all traditionalists are of such high moral stature that they won't dare sink to the levels of the Octagon and stain their character. That must be the reason, surely.

Or not.


Regards,


Steve

 

[arnisandyz]

Any martial (military) art should adapt to its surroundings. I was told TKDs high flying kicks were developed to knock opponents off of horses. I'm guessing back in that day an age, since some of the enemies were mounted high on horses, they felt a need to counter that. So why not adapt to today's world? Perhaps traditionalists don't enter MMA events beause they know they would have to modify and adapt to the fighting style and that goes outside of thier comfort level. Fighting against other styles doesn't mean you have to learn another art, but it does mean you have to make your art work against your opponent. Michigan TKD, you say you've made TKD work for you, but If you don't fight, spar, play with people outside your style your only learning how to fight against a mirror of yourself. Can you make your TKD work against things your not familiar with? Maybe, maybe not, but you will never know (until its too late) if you don't share outside of your system. Sometimes people think of "sharing" as somebody giving you new techniques to add, but the best sharing comes from the interaction, the communication of movement and your reactions.

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
- Sun Tzu

When you start believing that the art is the answer, its time to start asking more questions.

 

[MichiganTKD]

I'm not going to turn this into a "Why don't you fight UFC?" debate. Because I don't want to, that's why. UFC is just glorified grappling anyway. Do you honestly think that fighting in open tournaments or UFC matches is the way to determine the effectiveness of your art? I might as well just go outside and start picking fights with people to test myself. All open tournaments do is provide a snapshot of how you do with a particular person that moment in time.
I'll say this again (and type slowly so you guys can understand): I do not practice Tae Kwon Do to enter open matches, UFC/Pride/K-1 fights, or be a streetfighter. If someone else wants to, fine. I don't have to agree with it, but respect their right to do. It's their body. It's one thing to learn how these fighters operate. It is perfectly acceptable to want to know how a judo student, or a grappler, or a Thai boxer thinks so that you better understand them. It is quite another to frequently fight in open tournaments and the others to test yourself. Just because it is helpful to understand how a streetfighter thinks doesn't mean I need to hang out with and associate with them. Otherwise I run the risk of becoming one of them.
Those who stare too long into the abyss should take care that the abyss does not stare back at them.

 

[arnisandyz]

You say its acceptable to want to know how a judo student, or a grappler, or a Thai boxer thinks so that you better understand them. But how do you learn this if you don't associate with them? Through books or videos?

 

[glad2bhere]

".....But how do you learn this if you don't associate with them?..."

Excuse me, but I think its time for you guys to quit blowing smoke up each others' pants-leg. From where I stand I don't see that anyone is particualrly concerned about what they practice as much as dominating the other person and coming out looking like they are right. I have seen way too many of these "discussions" and it always comes out the same way..... round and round and round. Know how I know this? Because when someone says "here is what I believe", folks simply will not accept that statement. Nope. First you have to challenge it, and then you have to make the person explain himself. But even THAT is not enough! Its not as though you really want to HEAR what the other person is saying so you tell him he is wrong (regardless of what he says) and ask for an explanation ---- another one--- one that will be more acceptable to you.

I have this theory about many of these discussions. You know how they say that you will "fight as you have trained?" Well I have this idea that people here will "communicate" as they train. If you get used to banging away until the other person gives in or leaves, thats your idea of "winning"--- indicating that you were right all along. Some of what we have here really isn't a discussion in the sense of exchanging information. What we have here is competition with the substitution of words and phrases for technique.

Now, why am I carrying-on like this? Because I think that in the past people would rather do this sort of petulant bickering back and forth than actually discuss things. Bickering is the Lazy Mind's substitute for productive communication. This is also why I have become less and less disposed to participate in these kinds of threads. They go nowhere in the end and nothing is gained along the way that improves the Martial Arts. Now, here are a couple of clues.

a.) Michigan said he was not interested. Actually it doesn't matter why-- he just isn't. What part of "no" is it you don't understand?

b.) This is a forum set aside for a Korean MA-- in this case TKD. Grappling isn't a part of TKD and isn't likely to become part of TKD. Maybe you think it should be. Thats fine for you, but as I write this it isn't part of TKD.

c.) Maybe there are redeeming features to grappling and NHB competition. Fine. My suggestion would be to discuss those attributes where such things have a forum. Otherwise it begins to look like you are evangelizing inappropriately.

d.) If this is actually to be a discussion then I sense that there needs to be an exchange of facts and information. Everything else to date is opinion. Since this is a TKD forum maybe that information base needs to focus more on TKD. Can't see too many commonalities between TKD and grappling. If you know some, lets get on with the exchange of information. Otherwise, whats the point?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[arnisandyz]

".b.) This is a forum set aside for a Korean MA-- in this case TKD. Grappling isn't a part of TKD and isn't likely to become part of TKD. Maybe you think it should be. Thats fine for you, but as I write this it isn't part of TKD.

Since this is a TKD forum maybe that information base needs to focus more on TKD. Can't see too many commonalities between TKD and grappling. If you know some, lets get on with the exchange of information. Otherwise, whats the point?


Ummm, the original post and title of this thread was "sharing with other arts" right? Last time I checked, grappling was another art, so yes, grappling does apply (i'm not even a grappler), as does any art anyone brings up. The point is SHARING yes or no. I think we're getting too caught up in the NHB, grappling thing. Michigan Made a point of why he doesn't want to share, I made a point of why I share. I am fully aware that I most likely won't change his mind and others like him, he may change my mind although I haven't heard a valid reason yet for not sharing. His argument that everyone wants to be top dog is faulty to say the least. But if somebody who's mind is not made up yet or comes across a situation that has an opportunity to share and they happen to read this thread, maybe it can make a difference. There is nothing wrong with not sharing. The Amish live peaceful lives insulated from modern society. People still use quills and india ink to write. Hunters still use ball and black powder muskets. But for me, living in the world I live in, I'll use my computer to write my letters, my Glock as my sidearm, and adapt my martial art to suite todays self defense needs.

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Arnisandyz:

Exactly!! The thread started off about sharing and maybe some people want to and others don't--- I really don't know. But I swear that if we let this thread run long enough ----No #### {mod. note - edited according to MT profanity policy}---- somebody would come up with something like "my art shares better than YOUR art!!" Now just to show you how things COULD have gone--- consider this.

1.) Nobody has actually talked about "how" you could make a sharing happen. By this I mean not planning the event, but what sort of things could you find in common so the "sharing" wouldn't be all one-sided. After all nobody wants to go to an event and get nothing but information about how THEIR art doesn't work, right?

2.) Nobody had actually taken time to examine those areas of commonality among the various arts represented during the discussion. What I am hearing are generalities built on thoughts like "BJJ is all on the ground" and "TKD is all with the feet" and "Hapkido is all about joint lock". I'm not saying people have stated these things they just seem like themes to me and could use some adjusting to make for a better discussion.

3.) Nobody actually discusses what they could learn from someone else. Rather it seems more along the lines of "this is how your art is deficient". For example, a ground fighter could use some help on how to acquire targets in a situation involving multiple attackers. A TKD person could use some help in making and recovering from commited strikes and kicks. A Hapkido person could use an updated application of material against more modern and committed assaults against thoroughly resistent partners.

These are just things we COULD have been talking about and, for myself, I'M not even really invested in the topic. Imagine what you guys who are truely engaged in this stuff would come up with !?! FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[terryl965]

I believe sharing is fine as long as you don't loose focus on your Art. as was stated earlier this is a TKD forum asking a question about sharing info. I regularly talk to a Kung Fu gentleman we are good friends in the MA world but we never discuss why we think are Art is better in fact we talk about the differences and stances and Kata or forms Or Poomse for us TKD'ers. We always talk about training methods that we both share in and how to get the best out of ours Kids and adults. I belive this thread was started to giscuss these items and not about UFC cage fighting.Gladetohear has broughtup some good point here and matbe everybody can learn from it. GOD BLESS AMERICA

 

[hardheadjarhead]

glad2bhere in bold:


a.) Michigan said he was not interested. Actually it doesn't matter why-- he just isn't. What part of "no" is it you don't understand?

Yet rather than move on from that simple "no" he takes great pains to justify his stance by taking snide swipes at other arts and martial artists. I, for one, have little tolerance for this.

b.) This is a forum set aside for a Korean MA-- in this case TKD. Grappling isn't a part of TKD and isn't likely to become part of TKD. Maybe you think it should be. Thats fine for you, but as I write this it isn't part of TKD.

Bruce, check the name of the thread please. Regardless of the forum it is set in, the topic is "Sharing with other arts." It didn't specifically limit those arts to the Korean peninsula. MichiganTKD started this thread with the following statement:

"Do you think it is proper for an Instructor in, say, Tae Kwon Do, to share his Art with Instructors of other styles and hang out with them?

I have read numerous posts about well known Instructors who didn't hesitate to reach and share with other martial artists."

Note that he uses the phrase "say" prior to Tae Kwon Do, indicating that was merely one example of any number of arts. By inference one can see that this thread could have been started in a number of different forums on MartialTalk and still been valid. It is debating the idea of an ecumenical approach to the martial arts and sharing with other martial artists from other arts.

c.) Maybe there are redeeming features to grappling and NHB competition. Fine. My suggestion would be to discuss those attributes where such things have a forum. Otherwise it begins to look like you are evangelizing inappropriately.

The issue is not merely grappling and NHB methodologies. Any art would apply here. The notion of whether TKD or a traditional art would survive in an MMA setting is, confessedly, a distraction. I also consider it a moot point as none to date has thus survived. Insofar as "evangelizing," please see my comments concerning MichiganTKD's indisputable assessment of his style.

d.) If this is actually to be a discussion then I sense that there needs to be an exchange of facts and information. Everything else to date is opinion. Since this is a TKD forum maybe that information base needs to focus more on TKD. Can't see too many commonalities between TKD and grappling. If you know some, lets get on with the exchange of information. Otherwise, whats the point?

Again, see the topic of the thread. If the Mods wish to move it to another area, that's their call.

As for commonalities or lack thereof between TKD and grappling, or for that matter, TKD and Aiki or Aiki and Kenpo...that is the point of the thread, is it not? There are few commonalities, hence the need for sharing and a search for possible synergy.

I call attention to MichiganTKD's most revealing statement in the opening salvo of this thread:

"It's not that I as a TKD Instructor can't respect other styles (usually), but because each style wants to be number one and has its own etiquette and customs, I don't think TKD Instructors do themselves any favors by teaching and associating as TKD Instructors with other stylists."

This clearly indicates that he views TKD as the pinnacle and the apex of all the martial arts here, regardless of his dabbling in Aikido. Given time I'm sure he would elevate Aikido's status accordingly to number two.

Why he does this is clear to me, given the nature of the posts he's made throughout MartialTalk. Others can come to their own conclusions from reading them. Many will find their emanations are revealing, if unsavory.


Regards,


Steve

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Steve:

Honestly, I cannot find fault with any of your observations-- not one. You are very correct in each and every one of the points that you mentioned. The point I was stressing is whether or not the arts are well served in debating the views and opinions or in discussing the techniques and information. For instance, if Michigan wants to raise the issue of being "allowed" to do something, do we want to discuss the values that guide allowing this or that, or do we want to discuss which of those values is better or worse, or which is "right" or "wrong"?

What I am pushing for is probably harder to produce. It seems as though it is always harder to speak in terms of facts and figures rather than generalizations and opinions. What I am advocating is that if we really need to talk about something lets (a.) make sure we are doing it in the correct venue for the correct reasons and (b.) stay with information people can use-- maybe to make decisions for themselves. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[TigerWoman]

(a.) make sure we are doing it in the correct venue for the correct reasons and (b.) stay with information people can use-- maybe to make decisions for themselves.

I would agree that this is a fair statement of what is happening.

I have learned in dealing with my own master, that some people have really set views and are really not open to new ideas, using new ideas, or sharing their own ideas or information. I have butt my head on the wall with him about this. But I have learned to be patient and to go about it differently in hopes of someday maybe in his old age of seeing everything in a new light. I try to go forward positively. Build rather than destroy.

I for one, love Taekwondo. I really don't care that it may not be effective in a MMA encounter. I love its traditions, its values, its art. I probably would miss its entirety if I were to go to another art. I could do Kenpo, or Tai Chi or Aikido, but I would miss TKD, because that is where my heart is, where I started a martial art. It is a way of life for me. It has become deeply ingrained. I would expect that with most if not all masters of the art.

Now for sharing, as I mentioned before, not all people share...maybe they have fear of something changing, being taken from them. I share a little of my knowledge of TKD as well as MichTKD does. But I cannot really share the total experience. For that you need to put in the time. One cannot learn a few kicks and say I know TKD, anymore than a few joint locks, and say I know Hapkido. Neither can it be combined for then we fear, the joy of the art will be lost. I, like MichTKD, want to keep this treasure intact.

But as we have already, we can share the differences in uniforms, in protocal, blocks, kicks and punches, even street self defense; but we cannot divide and combine our art with others. It is our "way". TW

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Tigerwoman:

Great post. You and I probably come out of the same place. Hapkido is my art and I accept it warts and all. I probably present a pretty silly picture cutting air with my sword, or batting away at a target with a staff. And I will be the first person to admit that Hapkido has only the most basic of ground-fighting material. Yet, it is my art of choice and I have no intentions of changing. NOW, I WILL say this. Our Brown Belt material (for instance) has a range of chokes. I know those chokes pretty well. If someone wanted to know these chokes I could teach them. And if someone observed my chokes and could make suggestions for performing those chokes with greater efficiency and effectiveness I would be willing. What I would not do is drop the material I practice because it was somehow antiquated or unacceptable to another arts' approach. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[DragonFooter]

I think we should analyse this video then make some conslusions

http://www.tkd.risp.pl/Juras_HL_Extreme.wmv
:uhyeah:

 

[TigerWoman]

Wow, he is awesome! What nationality? Thanks Dragonfooter. TW

 

[DragonFooter]

He's from poland I believe. The ring match clip is a MMA competition.