Art effectiveness

[thetruth]

I was watching the UFC Fight Club interview with Frank Mir on UFC.com (go to the video section and it's just after all of the ufc 98 post fight interviews) and he made some very valid points with regards to Karate's effectiveness in the UFC and Lyoto Machida's ability to use it so effectively.

The main point was that Machida practices his Karate moves that we see him use in fights under duress in training so he has the ability and confidence in those particular moves when he steps into the octogon.

Another point he made was that alot of styles don't practice some moves under stress because they claim they are too dangerous. He follows on from that by saying he would rather have a less lethal move he knows will work under duress than a move that is supposed to work but can never be tested.


I tend to agree with him on all counts.

What is everyone elses take on this???

Cheers
Sam:asian:

 

[geezer]

The main point was that Machida practices his Karate moves that we see him use in fights under duress in training so he has the ability and confidence in those particular moves...

Another point he made was that alot of styles don't practice some moves under stress because they claim they are too dangerous. He follows on from that by saying he would rather have a less lethal move he knows will work under duress than a move that is supposed to work but can never be tested.

Sounds like good common sense to me. An as far as "lethal moves" go, they aren't going to be very lethal if you can't land 'em... so practicing landing good shots "under duress" and with heavy resistance from a non-compliant training partner seems like a smart way to train. Then you can always add protective gear if you want to work the more dangerous, self-defense techniques.

 

[Tez3]

I was watching the UFC Fight Club interview with Frank Mir on UFC.com (go to the video section and it's just after all of the ufc 98 post fight interviews) and he made some very valid points with regards to Karate's effectiveness in the UFC and Lyoto Machida's ability to use it so effectively.

The main point was that Machida practices his Karate moves that we see him use in fights under duress in training so he has the ability and confidence in those particular moves when he steps into the octogon.

Another point he made was that alot of styles don't practice some moves under stress because they claim they are too dangerous. He follows on from that by saying he would rather have a less lethal move he knows will work under duress than a move that is supposed to work but can never be tested.


I tend to agree with him on all counts.

What is everyone elses take on this???

Cheers
Sam:asian:

But this is what MMA is! using strikes under pressure, it's why we like and enjoy it so much. MMA competitions will remain compettitons with rules and refs but it is the nearest you can get to testing your techniques and nerve without going out on to the streets and starting fights.
MMA fighters will test their techniques before going into the cage/ring, they will plan out their moves to use against their opponent.
Has this only just come as a surprise to people just because someone with karate as their core style has won a fight in MMA?

 

[terryl965]

All I can say is I totally agree with what has been said.

 

[shihansmurf]

Mir is absolutely right.

Fact is, I wouldn't rely on a technique in a fight that I couldn't land in sparring. Compliant partner drills have their place in training but nothing take the place of a resisting opponent.

I think that as so many martial arts have moved away from the fighting and hard contact competition aspect of the martial arts and into the point sparring and x-ma type stuff that so much of the practical application has been lost, simply due to the fact that without actually fighting you can't learn to fight. If you are taking martial arts for some other reason thats fine, but if your desired end state is the development of actual applicable fighting skills then you gotta step on the mat and throw leather at some point or you will simply won't be able to perform the techniques under pressure.

Mark

 

[searcher]

I agree with Mir.

It makes me wonder though, about the "lethal" techniques. If they don't try them out, are they that lethal? They may never know(though some are obvious).

And why can't they practice them with HIGH Gear or with a Redman Suit? It seems reasonable to me.



Just adding fuel to the fires of discussion.

 

[arnisador]

I'd just add that while this is all absolutely true, remember that not all situations are duels. This doesn't take into account fighting multiple opponents or when taken by surprise. Pressure-testing your techniques against a knife is harder--will you use a real knife? I'm a big fan of the logic given here, but it applies to a limited scenario. Ingraining some responses to other situations isn't a bad idea if you don't know how or when you'll be attacked!

 

[shihansmurf]

I'd just add that while this is all absolutely true, remember that not all situations are duels. This doesn't take into account fighting multiple opponents or when taken by surprise. Pressure-testing your techniques against a knife is harder--will you use a real knife? I'm a big fan of the logic given here, but it applies to a limited scenario. Ingraining some responses to other situations isn't a bad idea if you don't know how or when you'll be attacked!

Good points, but specifically in regards to the knife scenario, I would think that if one could afford it that shock knife could go a long way towards closing the gap between compliant partner drill and actual stabbing with a live blade for training purposes. Same holds true for things like paint ball guns(with appropriate safety equipment, of course), and padded clubs that the partner is attempting to really whack the snot out of you with. No training situation is ever going to be 100% accurate, but I think that most places can do a lot better than they do, if their goal is actually teaching realistic fighting skills.

Just my view.
Mark

 

[jks9199]

There are various ways to practice the most dangerous techniques. You don't have to deliver them to your training partner at full speed and full force; you can develop power and force on tools like bags and pads. You can practice techniques slower, with different levels of speed and resistance with your partner. It takes discipline to spar at half-speed or even three-quarter speed and not "cheat" -- but it's worth it, because speed is one of the things that you can easily control for training, and generally takes care of itself in the real deal. Kata and drills are tools to hone the efficiency and muscle memory of the techniques.

Padded suits are another tool for training -- but they have their own limitations. While there's a person inside, they are limited in how well they can replicate real anatomy and movement. They are great for creating scenario-based training, because the person inside can react and respond -- though you've got to watch out for the "They've got the Redman gear on -- we get to pound 'em" effect...

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I think in the end it is very important to have compliant training to build technique and muscle memory. Non compliant training to enhance technique and the ability to switch into another technique in the moment. Then of course you need pressure testing and force on force training so that you will not be shocked of the reality of violence in the moment. Bottom line if you go to far one way or to far the other you may miss some thing and that is why you need walla......... balance in your training!

 

[K-man]

A lot of the more lethal techniques of the MAs don't involve striking so you wouldn't be using those techniques in the ring anyway. Despite its brutality, UFC is still just an extreme sport with more liberal rules. These fighters train to use moves allowed to them. At that level you don't waste time training techniques you can't use! :asian:

 

[MJS]

This is something that I've been saying for a long time....its how we train our art. I think its a plus for the TMA guys, to see someone like Machida come into the ring and use TMA. People always like to throw the 'if it doesnt work in the ring, it wont work' card, but we're seeing it right here.

As for the 'deadly' strikes that everyone always talks about....again, it all comes down to how you train. Think about it....if we can train chokes without always choking out our partner, we can train eye shots. As for whether or not those shots are hard to apply...sorry, I dont buy it. How many times have we seen a MMA fight get stopped because of an 'accidental' eye shot or groin hit? Happens alot.

Of course, as I've also said before, I hate when I hear people refer to something as deadly. There is no one magical shot. Its an accumulation of hits, not just one deadly shot.

 

[thetruth]

As for the 'deadly' strikes that everyone always talks about....again, it all comes down to how you train. Think about it....if we can train chokes without always choking out our partner, we can train eye shots. As for whether or not those shots are hard to apply...sorry, I dont buy it. How many times have we seen a MMA fight get stopped because of an 'accidental' eye shot or groin hit? Happens alot.

Of course, as I've also said before, I hate when I hear people refer to something as deadly. There is no one magical shot. Its an accumulation of hits, not just one deadly shot.

I have been is various classes in the past where 'deadly' moves have been mentioned and it is said they can never be practiced. I don't think eye shots are what I would call deadly, very effective but not deadly.

When people mention thinks such as ripping out throats etc is when I sit back and say (a) How easy is that? and (b)Is it necessary to do that in order to defend yourself? I don't think some of these techniques are necessary even if you are in a lethal situation. I think there are plenty of devastating techniques that can be practiced under stress that could severely maim or kill your opponent and as mentioned they are not just 1 shot.

Cheers
Sam:asian:

 

[dnovice]

This is knowledge that has been out there for a long. It's sad that it takes a famous guy to bring it to the forefront. But c'est la vie, right...

Although, I don't practice karate and never have but I can tell from kata that it's vicious. You obviously have to get the timing and the right times to use the moves before they can b truly effective. It's like having a loaded but not knowing how to shoot/aim.

 

[Steve]

Interesting discussion. I am a big fan of Machida's, mostly because I like the idea that there is still room to expirement with regards to what a "Mixed Martial Arts" recipe looks like. As someone said earlier, over the last 10 years or so, MMA has really become somewhat formulaic. Take equal parts Muay Thai, BJJ and Wrestling. Add a dash of something else for flavor. While there are exceptions to this, MT, BJJ and Wrestling are the core arts for the majority of fighters. It's nice to see that someone can apply a completely different striking art effectively.

On the other hand, as we congratulate Machida for his ability to apply Shotokan Karate in the cage, I want to point out that he is also a black belt in BJJ and a very good wrestler. I say this not to take anything away from him or Shotokan Karate, but only to emphasize that if you really want to be a well rounded fighter, you have to be able to fight at all ranges of combat. And most arts, whether traditional or not, don't address all ranges of combat.

 

[zDom]

Something to think about: look at the list of UFC rules and then ask yourself WHY those things are against the rules.



On a related but different note, anybody else see that show (forget which one — Fight Quest maybe?) when the MMA guy rushed in for a "shoot" on a guy and took a downward elbow to the spine?

UFC is a rough game and it cover PARTS of real fighting (just like ALL fighting games do) but it is STILL just a game and there ARE things that can be done in a real fight that are just too effective to be part of a game.

It doesn't make them foolproof Super Techniques that guarantee victory, either.

Just things to think about.

 

[Steve]

Something to think about: look at the list of UFC rules and then ask yourself WHY those things are against the rules.

Why do you think, zDom? I'm guessing because you think they're fight stoppers or perhaps too deadly for MMA. I personally think that it's because they lead to short careers for guys who are trying to make a living doing what they do. It's a subtle, but very distinct difference, IMO.

We saw in the initial UFCs few, if any rules. Hair pulling was allowed. Blows to the back of the head, neck and spine were allowed. Knees, elbows and kicks were allowed at all positions. In UFC 1, the ref could only stop the fight if a competitor was unconscious, submitted or his corner threw in the towel. They were brutal.

We also saw that, while these techniques are definitely vicious and are potentially dangerous, they very rarely end a fight. There was a particular situation that is chronicled in the Rickson Gracie documentary, Choke (which I recommend highly to anyone interested in fighting). One of the competitors, Yuki Nakai, was gouged and eventually lost vision in that eye. In spite of this, he beat the guy who gouged him (a dutch savatte guy, IIRC), beat another guy and went on to fight Rickson in the finals.

The rules are there to protect the fighters, absolutely. But, IMO, it's more to protect the fighters long term health and careers than to protect them from a single, particularly dangerous technique. Nakai, the guy I mentioned above, had to retire as a result of this injury. It didn't stop him from fighting that night, but certainly ended his promising career.

On a related but different note, anybody else see that show (forget which one — Fight Quest maybe?) when the MMA guy rushed in for a "shoot" on a guy and took a downward elbow to the spine?

Again, if you watch early UFCs, you'll see plenty of downward elbows with little to no effect.

UFC is a rough game and it cover PARTS of real fighting (just like ALL fighting games do) but it is STILL just a game and there ARE things that can be done in a real fight that are just too effective to be part of a game.

I agree that MMA is a sport. I'm not sure that I agree that "dangerous" and "effective" are synonymous.

 

[MJS]

I have been is various classes in the past where 'deadly' moves have been mentioned and it is said they can never be practiced. I don't think eye shots are what I would call deadly, very effective but not deadly.

When people mention thinks such as ripping out throats etc is when I sit back and say (a) How easy is that? and (b)Is it necessary to do that in order to defend yourself? I don't think some of these techniques are necessary even if you are in a lethal situation. I think there are plenty of devastating techniques that can be practiced under stress that could severely maim or kill your opponent and as mentioned they are not just 1 shot.

Cheers
Sam:asian:

I agree, and this is why I personally feel, that we need to assess the situation as its presented to us. As for the more dangerous things....sure, there are techs. in which limbs are broken. Now, obviously when training these things, we can only go so far, otherwise we're going to run out of people to train with. This applies to many arts, and yes, even the folks who run around saying, 'if it can't be done in the ring......'

Just like a Military or LEO training session. There are things that need to be simulated, yet both groups still engage in that training to prep them, should they find themselves there.

 

[thetruth]

I agree, and this is why I personally feel, that we need to assess the situation as its presented to us. As for the more dangerous things....sure, there are techs. in which limbs are broken. Now, obviously when training these things, we can only go so far, otherwise we're going to run out of people to train with. This applies to many arts, and yes, even the folks who run around saying, 'if it can't be done in the ring......'

Just like a Military or LEO training session. There are things that need to be simulated, yet both groups still engage in that training to prep them, should they find themselves there.

I agree however it is common sense that you if you bend an arm too far in a certain direction i will break or if you poke someone in the eye they behave in a certain way and they have been done many times however I doubt the techniques like tearing throats out or popping eyes out or any other 'deadly technique' have ever been tried by those who preach them or anyone they know and their effectiveness is based on pure speculation.

Cheers
Sam:asian:

 

[MJS]

I agree however it is common sense that you if you bend an arm too far in a certain direction i will break or if you poke someone in the eye they behave in a certain way and they have been done many times however I doubt the techniques like tearing throats out or popping eyes out or any other 'deadly technique' have ever been tried by those who preach them or anyone they know and their effectiveness is based on pure speculation.

Cheers
Sam:asian:

I agree. Let me clarify a bit more. Yes, I think that there are some out there that really, honestly believe that the eye shot, the groin shot, and anything else they consider 'deadly'...(my God that poor word is getting abused sooo much...lol) will really end the fight. I call BS on that for the reasons I gave in an earlier post.."Of course, as I've also said before, I hate when I hear people refer to something as deadly. There is no one magical shot. Its an accumulation of hits, not just one deadly shot."

I would consider hitting the throat but to think that I'm going to be ripping it out, like some blood thirsty B rated movie killer....no, isn't going to happen...that is unless you had a blade and slit the throat, but in this case, I believer we're all talking about empty hand techniques.

Also, in addition to not being a card holding member of the 1 shot 1 kill club, I'm also not a member of the 'well, my teacher made it work, and his teacher made it work, and his teachers teacher made it work, sooo....it must work and it will work for me' club. I don't give a rats *** how many of my teachers made it work, I want to make sure that *I* can make it work. That being said, there are also nutriders around who feel that because Royce did something that they too, will be able to pull the same move. News flash...they ain't Royce..

So, to sum this all up.....I agree with your post. I think that some are living in a fantasy as to what will really happen. I think that people should find out for themselves, what works/does not work, seeing that it will not be Royce, their teacher or 10 past teachers that will be fighting, it will be that 1 person. My teachers, in the arts that I study, can pull off some pretty amazing stuff, yet there are many things that I either a) struggle with and have to drill the hell out of or b) would never even attempt to try it, because its something that I personally don't like.