So what's a better "test" for martial arts other than MMA?

[Steve]

And it is the rules and gentlemen agreement that prevent it from resembling what a life and death encounter occurs.
Interesting you mention Kano as other schools were doing what he was doing in fact his classical style is where he originally learned it from.

The 1886 judo vs jujutsu matches never happened? [Archive] - E-Budo.com
History - Kodokan vs Other Jujutsu | Jiushin Kan Malta | Martial Arts | Jiushin Ryu Jujutsu - Jiu-Jitsu - Ju-Jitsu | MJER Iaijutsu - Iaido
A Historical Question Concerning Kano Sensei [Archive] - E-Budo.com

When I first saw the UFC I did not think it was realistic and put it in the same category as TV wrestling or roller Derby, no realism is people going to war, cops facing a knife wielding maniac on PCP, or the mugger, or the serial killer. The argument that MMA is real is silly and maybe it is for the group of demographic male 15 to 30 crowd who think so. Good luck in your training

If the UFC isn't real, then how you train also isn't real. Right? Unless... Do you guys assault each other in class?

Edit just to add a little more context. I didn't think that the UFC was real when I first saw it either. I still don't, and agree with those who (IMO) correctly point this out. However, this idea that any other self defense training is MORE realistic than MMA just doesn't hold water.

It's different, and as I said before, if self defense is one's goal, my personal opinion is that the more different tests, the better. I wouldn't expect someone who wants to be competent in self defense to spend a ton of time training MMA. But testing your skills with competent MMAists just seems like common sense to me. Just like testing your skills in any other way.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

You're free to disagree, but you reply is incorrect on many levels. Let's examine:

I disagree. MMA rules (and the rules of various MMA-friendly styles) are in place to ensure the safety of the fighters...

Lets' stop right there and spend a moment. Your phrase 'MMA rules' thus disqualifies the premise of your OP. It only tests the effectiveness of MMA that adheres to the specific rule set in the specific artificial environment that is thus created. That in no way shows it's effectiveness or ineffectiveness in regards to another sport MA or a traditional MA or a defense/offense MA.

to maximize certain techniques that can be performed over and over again in order to gain mastery of those techniques and use them on a multitude of opponents.

Some techniques can be used in multiple environments, some cannot. For example, taking someone to the ground in hopes of putting them in a submission, in an artificially created environment, with a specific rule set is fine and can get you the win. In the street it's pretty stupid. Sure, against someone that's surprised and/or inexperienced it may work. Against someone experienced and armed and/or with additional assailants it's just about the worst thing you can do.

Thus...

I keep hearing that MMA isn't the best test for the effectiveness of MA styles

Is apples to oranges. A MA that focuses on non-competition techniques (or competition techniques in a completely different venue i.e. MMA vs. kick boxing) can't have MMA results used as a measuring stick.

For example, you can't practice eye gouging, groin striking, or biting to a level of mastery

Why can't you? Sure, you can't gouge out the eyes of your classmates, but there are many types of safety gear in use that allows for many such techniques. Gouging the eyes by-the-way is more about commitment than mastering. It is the ability to get into a position to do so and then committing to the act rather than the act itself.

Training under "rules" or safety conditions simply leads to better martial artists.

False. It only leads to someone conditioned for the rule set. In a MA with a different focus, rules aren't used, needed or desired. And a MA that is focused on SD for example, rules are a detriment. I've covered this in-depth before. Multiple times.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

If the UFC isn't real, then how you train also isn't real. Right? Unless... Do you guys assault each other in class?

Question wasn't directed at me, but it's been covered before. Scenario-based training.

 

[Steve]

Question wasn't directed at me, but it's been covered before. Scenario-based training.

So, that's a no, then. Scenario based training is one way to evaluate skill among many. And scenario based training can be really good or it can really suck. And it is always "not real" by definition. No more or less "real" than MMA.

But, yeah. If self defense were the goal, scenario based exercises is a great idea... in addition to many other "tests."

 

[Hanzou]

And it is the rules and gentlemen agreement that prevent it from resembling what a life and death encounter occurs.

The problem is that all training has rules and gentleman agreements, and this includes "life or death" training and scenarios. If they didn't, you wouldn't have a lot of training partners left.

Interesting you mention Kano as other schools were doing what he was doing in fact his classical style is where he originally learned it from.

The 1886 judo vs jujutsu matches never happened? [Archive] - E-Budo.com
History - Kodokan vs Other Jujutsu | Jiushin Kan Malta | Martial Arts | Jiushin Ryu Jujutsu - Jiu-Jitsu - Ju-Jitsu | MJER Iaijutsu - Iaido
A Historical Question Concerning Kano Sensei [Archive] - E-Budo.com

Ah yes, the "sour grapes" argument consistently brought up by the classical Jujutsu community. Look real closely at the people who question whether or not the judo vs. JJJ match ever happened. Do you see any Japanese source questioning that it happened? No. All you see are a bunch of American and European Japanophiles who have an axe to grind because their particular style of Japanese jujutsu has fallen by the wayside.

Consider if those matches never happened, why did Kano jiujitsu (later called Judo) become so popular? Why did several prominent Jujutsu practitioners join his school? Why did so many classical Jujutsu masters surrender their art to Kano and his Kodokan?

When I first saw the UFC I did not think it was realistic and put it in the same category as TV wrestling or roller Derby, no realism is people going to war, cops facing a knife wielding maniac on PCP, or the mugger, or the serial killer. The argument that MMA is real is silly and maybe it is for the group of demographic male 15 to 30 crowd who think so. Good luck in your training

So you can't tell fantasy from reality? Well that explains quite a bit of your posts on here.

 

[oaktree]

If the UFC isn't real, then how you train also isn't real. Right? Unless... Do you guys assault each other in class?

Edit just to add a little more context. I didn't think that the UFC was real when I first saw it either. I still don't, and agree with those who (IMO) correctly point this out. However, this idea that any other self defense training is MORE realistic than MMA just doesn't hold water.

It's different, and as I said before, if self defense is one's goal, my personal opinion is that the more different tests, the better. I wouldn't expect someone who wants to be competent in self defense to spend a ton of time training MMA. But testing your skills with competent MMAists just seems like common sense to me. Just like testing your skills in any other way.

The UFC isn't real because you are not dealing with the variables and pressure the street encounters provide.
It is why the majority of RBSD choose a different approach to deal with the variables and condition the mindset for a life and death encounter over a sporting mind set. Most MMA gyms are training people to compete or to deal with an opponent one on one they are not teaching how to deal with knives, different types of weapons, multiple attackers, rushed attacks, guns, dirty fighting, in close spaces, attacks in cars, fighting on stairs the list goes on but you can see that RBSD is geared towards self protection and is better equipped for life and death encounters because the person is conditioned to have a life or death fight over a sporting competition.

IF UFC training is the realist it can get than why are most securities, law enforce and the likes training in cage matches?
Why are most on here saying that it isn't the realist for self defense? Come on man its a sport it even advises itself as one

 

[oaktree]

The problem is that all training has rules and gentleman agreements, and this includes "life or death" training and scenarios. If they didn't, you wouldn't have a lot of training partners left.



Ah yes, the "sour grapes" argument consistently brought up by the classical Jujutsu community. Look real closely at the people who question whether or not the judo vs. JJJ match ever happened. Do you see any Japanese source questioning that it happened? No. All you see are a bunch of American and European Japanophiles who have an axe to grind because their particular style of Japanese jujutsu has fallen by the wayside.

Consider if those matches never happened, why did Kano jiujitsu (later called Judo) become so popular? Why did several prominent Jujutsu practitioners join his school? Why did so many classical Jujutsu masters surrender their art to Kano and his Kodokan?





So you can't tell fantasy from reality? Well that explains quite a bit of your posts on here.

As I said before a conditioned mindset in sports goes into a fight with a sporting mindset,
a person from a gang goes into a fight to kill or be killed it is a different way of thinking.
I have said before having met BJJ guys who think they can go for take downs and stuff but when it comes to a guy with a knife knowing how to use it and who's mindset and intent is to kill that guy they have no clue what to do or how to approach it. I think its like me describing war and you saying well football is like war its the closest you can get is how this conversation is. As for the Judo and Jujutsu comment it had to do with people who were there during the time period and written by a third party source since kano word is not as trusting on the issue. Please actually read it the works were dug up by actual researchers

 

[Hanzou]

You're free to disagree, but you reply is incorrect on many levels. Let's examine:



Lets' stop right there and spend a moment. Your phrase 'MMA rules' thus disqualifies the premise of your OP. It only tests the effectiveness of MMA that adheres to the specific rule set in the specific artificial environment that is thus created. That in no way shows it's effectiveness or ineffectiveness in regards to another sport MA or a traditional MA or a defense/offense MA.

Actually it does, since Boxers, Kickboxers, Jiujitieros, Muay Thai fighters, brawlers, etc. can all participate. The term "MMA" simply means mixed martial arts. Nothing stops a traditional (unarmed) martial artist from participating in a MMA fight or competition.

Some techniques can be used in multiple environments, some cannot. For example, taking someone to the ground in hopes of putting them in a submission, in an artificially created environment, with a specific rule set is fine and can get you the win. In the street it's pretty stupid. Sure, against someone that's surprised and/or inexperienced it may work. Against someone experienced and armed and/or with additional assailants it's just about the worst thing you can do.

And what if someone takes YOU to the ground, or you're a female who is taken to the ground and pinned by your larger and stronger attacker?

On the flip side, what if you need to control someone without hurting them? What if you need to make sure your assailant doesn't get up again but you're unwilling or unable to do a lot of damage to them? In all of those cases, learning to fight off the ground, on the ground, or learning to take someone down is vitally important.

Why can't you? Sure, you can't gouge out the eyes of your classmates, but there are many types of safety gear in use that allows for many such techniques. Gouging the eyes by-the-way is more about commitment than mastering. It is the ability to get into a position to do so and then committing to the act rather than the act itself.

You know as well as I do that actually gouging out someone's eyes is far different than pretending to gouge someone's eyes through safety goggles. Just like pretending to bite someone in a class is far different than trying to bite someone on top of you punching you in the face or smashing your head into cement.

False. It only leads to someone conditioned for the rule set. In a MA with a different focus, rules aren't used, needed or desired. And a MA that is focused on SD for example, rules are a detriment. I've covered this in-depth before. Multiple times.

Which is nonsense. We have several examples of people (typically women) utilizing "sport" techniques in self defense situations and choking out their assailants or breaking their limbs.

 

[drop bear]

So, that's a no, then. Scenario based training is one way to evaluate skill among many. AndN scenario based training can be really good or it can really suck. And it is always "not real" by definition. No more or less "real" than MMA.

But, yeah. If self defense were the goal, scenario based exercises is a great idea... in addition to many other "tests."

It would still need to be competitive. And not too restricted by its own rules.

These thing normally require a dungeon master of sorts. And i am not sure how you would control that factor.

 

[Steve]

The UFC isn't real because you are not dealing with the variables and pressure the street encounters provide.

Neither are you in training, regardless of the approach. If it's not "real" than by definition it is some shade of pretend.

It is why the majority of RBSD choose a different approach to deal with the variables and condition the mindset for a life and death encounter over a sporting mind set. Most MMA gyms are training people to compete or to deal with an opponent one on one they are not teaching how to deal with knives, different types of weapons, multiple attackers, rushed attacks, guns, dirty fighting, in close spaces, attacks in cars, fighting on stairs the list goes on but you can see that RBSD is geared towards self protection and is better equipped for life and death encounters because the person is conditioned to have a life or death fight over a sporting competition.

Who knows whether that is true? it's like a vitamin commercial. The only difference is that, by law, those vitamin commercials are now required to say, "These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA."

IF UFC training is the realist it can get than why are most securities, law enforce and the likes training in cage matches?
Why are most on here saying that it isn't the realist for self defense? Come on man its a sport it even advises itself as one

Many do. I don't know about you, but the BJJ and MMA schools around here are full of cops, security guards, jail guards, and DT instructors.

Seems to me that if you're training for self defense, you should be realistic about what you actually can and can't do. And MMA is one really good way to do that. Competition in general. You're delusional if you think 100% of any one training or evaluative model is going to do the trick. If you can't punch or kick or grapple well enough to even work out with an MMA gym, I sincerely hope you aren't teaching other people or promoting yourself as an expert. God help those poor people whom you are conning out of their money.

So, just to be clear. I'm not suggesting that MMA is the one test. I'm saying it should be one of many. The more diverse the training and the evaluations of skill are, the better. Because ultimately, it's all make believe unless you're actually... you know... assaulting each other. Which I hope you're not doing.[/quote][/quote]

 

[Hanzou]

As I said before a conditioned mindset in sports goes into a fight with a sporting mindset,
a person from a gang goes into a fight to kill or be killed it is a different way of thinking.

And like I said we have numerous examples of people using "sport" styles just fine in self defense situations, so this idea that people have "sport conditioned mindsets" is nonsense. It's like that dumb argument where people believe that a Judo player isn't going to kick you in the face once you hit the concrete simply because they do Judo.

I have said before having met BJJ guys who think they can go for take downs and stuff but when it comes to a guy with a knife knowing how to use it and who's mindset and intent is to kill that guy they have no clue what to do or how to approach it.

I seriously doubt anyone would attempt a takedown against someone wielding a knife.

I think its like me describing war and you saying well football is like war its the closest you can get is how this conversation is.

Uh no. I said that ALL training has rules, even your hardcore realistic boogey-man fighting system. Your analogy sucks because people actually die in war. I seriously doubt anyone's dying in your "hardcore" Kung Fu class.

As for the Judo and Jujutsu comment it had to do with people who were there during the time period and written by a third party source since kano word is not as trusting on the issue. Please actually read it the works were dug up by actual researchers

And again, look at the sources. The people saying it didn't happen aren't the Japanese who were there, it's Europeans and Americans translating text much later and jumping to conclusions because they can't except that their "dangerous Japanese Jujutsu" was beaten by a "lowly" sport style.

 

[drop bear]

The UFC isn't real because you are not dealing with the variables and pressure the street encounters provide.
It is why the majority of RBSD choose a different approach to deal with the variables and condition the mindset for a life and death encounter over a sporting mind set. Most MMA gyms are training people to compete or to deal with an opponent one on one they are not teaching how to deal with knives, different types of weapons, multiple attackers, rushed attacks, guns, dirty fighting, in close spaces, attacks in cars, fighting on stairs the list goes on but you can see that RBSD is geared towards self protection and is better equipped for life and death encounters because the person is conditioned to have a life or death fight over a sporting competition.

IF UFC training is the realist it can get than why are most securities, law enforce and the likes training in cage matches?
Why are most on here saying that it isn't the realist for self defense? Come on man its a sport it even advises itself as one

How is your mindset conditioned?

 

[Steve]

As I said before a conditioned mindset in sports goes into a fight with a sporting mindset,
a person from a gang goes into a fight to kill or be killed it is a different way of thinking.

What if the gang member trained BJJ? Would he go in with both the sporting mindset AND the kill or be killed mindset? Would he go insane from too many mindsets? Would he cry?

Seriously... if you think that a gang member has a killer mindset because of or in spite of sport, you're delusional. And conversely, if you think that Jake the IT guy has a sport or a killer mindset because of or in spite of his training in some version of martial arts, you're equally delusional. Particularly if that person is afraid to spar or work out with an MMAist because their self defense skills don't work on them. [/QUOTE]

 

[Steve]

I seriously doubt anyone would attempt a takedown against someone wielding a knife.

And if they do, is that a systemic issue or an individual one?

And, just speaking for me, if self defense is the goal, I think JUST training for competition is a bad idea. But competition should be a part of the mix, or you just won't know what you're good and bad at. 10 minutes in a competition, win or lose, is as informative as a year in training.

 

[oaktree]

Neither are you in training, regardless of the approach. If it's not "real" than by definition it is some shade of pretend.
Who knows whether that is true? it's like a vitamin commercial. The only difference is that, by law, those vitamin commercials are now required to say, "These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA."
Many do. I don't know about you, but the BJJ and MMA schools around here are full of cops, security guards, jail guards, and DT instructors.

Seems to me that if you're training for self defense, you should be realistic about what you actually can and can't do. And MMA is one really good way to do that. Competition in general. You're delusional if you think 100% of any one training or evaluative model is going to do the trick. If you can't punch or kick or grapple well enough to even work out with an MMA gym, I sincerely hope you aren't teaching other people or promoting yourself as an expert. God help those poor people whom you are conning out of their money.

So, just to be clear. I'm not suggesting that MMA is the one test. I'm saying it should be one of many. The more diverse the training and the evaluations of skill are, the better. Because ultimately, it's all make believe unless you're actually... you know... assaulting each other. Which I hope you're not doing.

[/quote][/QUOTE]
Actually Steve having someone with a plastic knife try to cut me is as close to my real encounters with people with knives try to kill me so I can say if my training does not match anything from prison. gang fights, criminals, and finally what police have experienced as well then ya its not real. And again talking to you is like a war vet and a high school foot ball player comparing war and football. There is a lot of police foot ball leagues too doesn't mean it helps them prepare more for dealing with a knife attack from a guy on pcp

 

[Hanzou]

And if they do, is that a systemic issue or an individual one?

And, just speaking for me, if self defense is the goal, I think JUST training for competition is a bad idea. But competition should be a part of the mix, or you just won't know what you're good and bad at. 10 minutes in a competition, win or lose, is as informative as a year in training.

I agree. My background is Relson Gracie Jiujitsu which is heavily self defense based, but has a strong competitive side, and a longstanding relationship with MMA.

As I said before, MMA is a good tester for your Bjj, since MMA guys are used to things like the Guard and will attempt to punch you in the face while in your Guard. Every Bjjer should experience that type of training. It's very good for them, and its a part of classic Bjj anyway. I actually think MMA is better than competitive Bjj for the future viability of the art. All that Berimbolo stuff looks cool in a tournament, but doesn't mean squat if someone can just lean down and sock you in the face.

 

[oaktree]

And like I said we have numerous examples of people using "sport" styles just fine in self defense situations, so this idea that people have "sport conditioned mindsets" is nonsense. It's like that dumb argument where people believe that a Judo player isn't going to kick you in the face once you hit the concrete simply because they do Judo.



I seriously doubt anyone would attempt a takedown against someone wielding a knife.



Uh no. I said that ALL training has rules, even your hardcore realistic boogey-man fighting system. Your analogy sucks because people actually die in war. I seriously doubt anyone's dying in your "hardcore" Kung Fu class.



And again, look at the sources. The people saying it didn't happen aren't the Japanese who were there, it's Europeans and Americans translating text much later and jumping to conclusions because they can't except that their "dangerous Japanese Jujutsu" was beaten by a "lowly" sport style.

And there are cases in which mma fighters have gone into the encounter and lost but your example and mine do not prove mma case either way as it is up to the individual however because MMA doesn't prepare against someone to deal with guns and knifes tie goes to the runner me
As for your takedown let me put it this way and this is coming from someone who fought in those friendly gang fights you never know what the other guy has and you never know how far he will go and a word about knives you learn about in prison the best knife attacks are the ones never seen so when you go to fight a guy you assume is empty handed side way stance and as you prepare to strike maybe go for a shoot that is when that knife does attack and that is what the UFC does not prepare you for.
As for the jujutsu judo thread Ellis who is actually well known on classical koryu stuff states
Jonathan Zwicker, who has scoured newspapers and other 19th century documents, trying to find some reference to these famous matches.
Means there are people trying to find proof of the match.
Murata Naoki, the Kodokan's chief archivist, was interviewed about this earlier this year in a newspaper and said: "historical material is scarce and unknowns are many. So dreams and legends have spread."
So there is the Kodokan themselves saying there is not enough material proof of it. There if you read shows inconsistency in Kano's story and other stories Remember the Japanese are very good record keepers and this would have been most likely well recorded but as Ellis and others have pointed out there have been more hype on the match(if one took place)
Also have you read, the a lot of ideas Kano used were already in place in other koryu arts so the myth that Kano created randori does not exist and I have cited the sources that say so.
Anyway gentleman I have business to attend and I will not be responding to the thread any more after all rehashing does get dull enjoy your debate

 

[Deleted member 34973]

hmmm....been awhile since I have been here. I'll be silent on this one.

Good to see that these subjects are still heavily debated.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

So, that's a no, then.

Well, in regards to your question;

Unless... Do you guys assault each other in class?

Then the answer is yes. Now, we don't get stupid with it. No one wants to be injured. But with some basic safety gear one can take a groin strike, bite, 'gouge' or weapon attack (safety weapon).

And this is the premise of why the OP question is not really applicable. MMA doesn't need defense inside of an elevator, on stairs or in a car. It doesn't need weapons (improvised or conventional). And SD MA doesn't need submission holds to make someone tap.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Actually it does, since Boxers, Kickboxers, Jiujitieros, Muay Thai fighters, brawlers, etc. can all participate. The term "MMA" simply means mixed martial arts. Nothing stops a traditional (unarmed) martial artist from participating in a MMA fight or competition.

And again, you've proven your incorrect in your question. You require an unarmed participant. You require a one-on-one. You require an artificial environment. Which means your attempting to justify or compare one to another with no common basis, methodology or goal. Apples and golf balls.

And what if someone takes YOU to the ground,

Then I grab and twist the groin or I bite off and ear or nose or finger or I put a thumb in the eye or I pull my edged weapon (which I always have in a position for just such a need) or I draw my firearm and shoot him in the head or neck or whatever is available...multiple times.

More later if I have time...