Dangerous habits

[Stealthy]

Which common place techniques facilitated by the protection the Rules offer lend themselves to becoming quite deadly without the Rules for protection?

For example sitting down in front of a person and hugging his leg seems like a pretty crazy move that would more than likely result in a knee in the face or elbow to the back of the head or spine.

 

[Cyriacus]

The Standard Takedown. If met with a Sprawl, and Elbow or Hammerfist to the Back would be childs play.

 

[Tez3]

Dangerous habit no 1.. dropping your hands. No 2 .. dropping an arm while kicking.

 

[Stealthy]

Dangerous habit no 1.. dropping your hands. No 2 .. dropping an arm while kicking.

Not relevant to the question, got any other ideas?

 

[Chris Parker]

Which common place techniques facilitated by the protection the Rules offer lend themselves to becoming quite deadly without the Rules for protection?

Hmm, I'm not sure that anything really comes under the description you mention here. I can't think of any techniques that become "deadly" (to the performer of them) outside of the rules. There are a number of reasons for this, including the fact that, in competition, MMA athletes are used to defending against these techniques, and working them in ways that make them very hard to defend against.

The argument against training methods such as MMA specifically for self defence aren't anything to do with the techniques (which are very solid!), or even the ruleset (because it really isn't limiting in a self defence scenario). It's more to do with the tactics and strategies employed, the mindset utilised, and the vast difference in the timetables, as well as the differences in the form and effects of adrenaline between the two. But the techniques of MMA, rules or no, work. As does their training methods. It's just geared towards a different result.

For example sitting down in front of a person and hugging his leg seems like a pretty crazy move that would more than likely result in a knee in the face or elbow to the back of the head or spine.

"Sitting down in front of a person"? When have you seen that? I've seen the athletes end up on the ground in front of their opponent, but that's about as close as it gets. And as far as getting a knee in the face or an elbow to the back of the head, I've seen that in MMA competition, under the rules. So this doesn't seem to be a good example, to my mind.

The Standard Takedown. If met with a Sprawl, and Elbow or Hammerfist to the Back would be childs play.

Ha, the standard MMA answer to that would be "try it". Personally, I feel that "child's play" is taking things a little lightly... but again, how would that be against the rules of MMA competition?

 

[Tez3]

Dangerous habit 3.. giving your back up.


What the OP seems to be trying to say is the old thing about 'fighting as you train' and the old chestnut that MMA fighters can only fight by the rules which leaves them open when it's 'non rules' fighting.

There's dangerous habits you can get into full stop.

 

[Cyriacus]

Ha, the standard MMA answer to that would be "try it". Personally, I feel that "child's play" is taking things a little lightly... but again, how would that be against the rules of MMA competition?

Fair Question.
Though in MMA, you cant hit someone in the Spine, so i doubt you could really "Try" it.
Im not going to Claim anything about Myself VS MMA Competition Rules, since ive not Competed in enough of anything to be comfortable debating such things. Yet.

 

[Steve]

Just to add with the takedown, sprawling isn't as easy in practice as it sounds in theory. The "child's play" remark gets right to the heart of the entire "aliveness" issue.

As a tactic, in the UFC, fighters take advantage of the ban on kicks/knees to the head of a "downed opponent." I remember an old episode of TUF... can't remember who said it now, but someone suggested as a tactic putting a knee down to avoid knees/kicks to the head. There was outrage at the very idea, but then it started showing up in matches.

So, I would say that the tactic of dropping to one's knee or putting a hand on the ground in a fight is a bad idea. But, to be clear, there aren't bad techniques. Just bad tactics and I believe that any MMA'ist would know better than to do these things in a survival type setting.

 

[Stealthy]

1. Butting with the head
2. Eye gouging of any kind
3. Biting
4. Spitting at an opponent
5. Hair pulling
6. Fish hooking
7. Groin attacks of any kind
8. Putting a finger into any orifice or any cut or laceration of an opponent
9. Small joint manipulation
10. Striking downward using the point of the elbow
11. Striking to the spine or the back of the head
12. Kicking to the kidney with a heel
13. Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea
14. Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh
15. Grabbing the clavicle
16. Kicking the head of a grounded opponent
17. Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent
18. Stomping a grounded opponent
19. Holding the fence
20. Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent
21. Using abusive language in fenced ring/fighting area
22. Engaging in any unsportsmanlike conduct that causes injury to an opponent
23. Attacking an opponent on or during the break
24. Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee
25. Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the round
26. Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury
27. Throwing opponent out of ring/fighting area
28. Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee
29. Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck
30. Interference by the corner
31. Applying any foreign substance to the hair or body to gain an advantage

These are the rules, I posted in this forum because I specifically wanted to ask the MMA guys and gals what they thought due to the very valid "try it" argument. For those not already familiar with the rules here they are.

There are a few stand outs that have stood the test of time, things like Head butts, poking eyes, small joint manipulation, flesh twisting, fish hooking, clavicle ripping, throat strikes, Spiking into the canvas, abusive language(kiai), spitting, holding clothing, kneeing and kicking to the head of a grounded opponent, kidney shots with the heel, downward elbow strikes, strikes to the spine, biting, hair pulling and groin strikes all have the potential to either buy you a few extra precious milliseconds or end the fight quickly. I've deliberatly excluded the use of foreign objects which would clearly come up in a street fight.

So the real essence of the question is with the absence of these tools can the fighter over time develop an unnatural skill set which would lend itself to brutal punishment and if so which particular bad habits are they?

An often overlooked element is the use of gloves, I fought a boxer once who was substantially better than me so I knew I could not afford to let his fists get anywhere near my head or body. Since it was Bare knuckle all I had to do was punch the crap out of his hands, if he threw a punch I smashed it, if he held his guard up I smashed it, a few times he tried to meet fire with fire but he came off second best. After a while he dropped his guard so I moved in a little and started getting in body shots. As soon as his guard went back up I moved out of his range and punched crap out of his fists...the rest is as they say...history. Even the skimpy little 4oz MMA gloves would have stopped me from doing this and I would have been smashed, he was taller, faster and stronger.

 

[Tez3]

Rules 17 and 18 don't apply in all promotions fights btw.

The rules are rules only in the cage or ring, MMA fighters can just as easily ignore all of them when outside the ring/cage.

 

[Chris Parker]

So the real essence of the question is with the absence of these tools can the fighter over time develop an unnatural skill set which would lend itself to brutal punishment and if so which particular bad habits are they?

Honestly, I don't think that's really the right question, though. Each and every art has aspects that are strengths, and each and every art has aspects that can be exploited, but that's fairly different to saying that there are necessarily bad habits being developed.

Fair Question.
Though in MMA, you cant hit someone in the Spine, so i doubt you could really "Try" it.
Im not going to Claim anything about Myself VS MMA Competition Rules, since ive not Competed in enough of anything to be comfortable debating such things. Yet.

Ha, what I meant by the standard response of "try it" is that the MMA practitioner is very experienced in making their "standard takedown" against people trying to stop them, by sprawling and hitting them as they come in, and as a result, their "standard takedown" isn't anywhere near as easy to stop as you seemed to be implying. Add to that the basic biomechanics that, if you are sprawling enough to stop the takedown then your weight is in the exact wrong direction for any real power in the strikes you're describing, or, if you're upright enough to get something into the strikes, then you're going to get taken down pretty quickly.

And that really starts to get into the heart of Stealthy's question - although there are weaknesses that can be exploited (and no, I'm not giving those away here...), when you look at a system which is performance driven, the practitioners get very good at making sure that they can make things work. And that tends to lead to "good" habits, in this regard. Defences are tight, offence is direct and powerful, changes in range are smooth etc, and the rules aren't really limitations unless you decide to see them as such. With all the rules of forbidden techniques listed, who says that a self defence situation will go much past the first punch?

Really, the strength of MMA is it's training methods, and they are not to be taken lightly (for the record, although I haven't trained in MMA myself, I have trained in similar approaches in a few arts, such as BJJ and boxing, and a number of our seniors have been, and in some cases still are, cross-training in MMA, which leads to some very insightful conversations). And that training method can generate certain issues, but nothing that I would describe as a potentially dangerous (to the practitioner) habit. Some maybe less advised, but that's really not the same thing.

 

[Buka]

I don't understand the question. (I'm old and somewhat slow)

 

[Tez3]

I don't understand the question. (I'm old and somewhat slow)

I don't actually understand it either so I've answered what I think he's asking! It seems to be yet another one on how MMA fighters can't actually fight outside their ruleset because they get into 'bad' habits for self defence but hey I could be wrong...

 

[Stealthy]

I don't actually understand it either so I've answered what I think he's asking! It seems to be yet another one on how MMA fighters can't actually fight outside their ruleset because they get into 'bad' habits for self defence but hey I could be wrong...

Yes, you are wrong.

 

[Cyriacus]

Ha, what I meant by the standard response of "try it" is that the MMA practitioner is very experienced in making their "standard takedown" against people trying to stop them, by sprawling and hitting them as they come in, and as a result, their "standard takedown" isn't anywhere near as easy to stop as you seemed to be implying. Add to that the basic biomechanics that, if you are sprawling enough to stop the takedown then your weight is in the exact wrong direction for any real power in the strikes you're describing, or, if you're upright enough to get something into the strikes, then you're going to get taken down pretty quickly.

Mm. This assumes you Sprawl. You only need to keep the Person still for a second - They are the one lowering themself to attempt the Takedown.

And that really starts to get into the heart of Stealthy's question - although there are weaknesses that can be exploited (and no, I'm not giving those away here...), when you look at a system which is performance driven, the practitioners get very good at making sure that they can make things work. And that tends to lead to "good" habits, in this regard. Defences are tight, offence is direct and powerful, changes in range are smooth etc, and the rules aren't really limitations unless you decide to see them as such. With all the rules of forbidden techniques listed, who says that a self defence situation will go much past the first punch?

Very True

Really, the strength of MMA is it's training methods, and they are not to be taken lightly (for the record, although I haven't trained in MMA myself, I have trained in similar approaches in a few arts, such as BJJ and boxing, and a number of our seniors have been, and in some cases still are, cross-training in MMA, which leads to some very insightful conversations). And that training method can generate certain issues, but nothing that I would describe as a potentially dangerous (to the practitioner) habit. Some maybe less advised, but that's really not the same thing.

I think were enough on the same Track for now, Good Sir

 

[jks9199]

Perhaps rephrasing your question might help... It didn't make much sense to me, either.

 

[Chris Parker]

Mm. This assumes you Sprawl. You only need to keep the Person still for a second - They are the one lowering themself to attempt the Takedown.

Actually, I took that from your first post in this thread, in which you said "If met with a Sprawl, and (an?) Elbow or Hammerfist to the Back would be childs play." And, having dealt with BJJ trained guys (and some MMA trained friends) shooting in for a takedown, you do need to sprawl. Them lowering themselves actually increases the need for it, really.

I think were enough on the same Track for now, Good Sir

Ha, cool.

Perhaps rephrasing your question might help... It didn't make much sense to me, either.

Agreed. Oh, and Stealthy? Perhaps a little less attitude in your responces will serve you better, as this:

Yes, you are wrong.

is not what turned up in my email as your actual responce.

 

[Cyriacus]

Actually, I took that from your first post in this thread, in which you said "If met with a Sprawl, and (an?) Elbow or Hammerfist to the Back would be childs play." And, having dealt with BJJ trained guys (and some MMA trained friends) shooting in for a takedown, you do need to sprawl. Them lowering themselves actually increases the need for it, really.

Hm. My Bad - I know that isnt what i was directly referring to for the most part, but I may have not included sufficient detail, and ended up Looping words a bit.

From what Takedowns ive Practiced, you need to Sprawl to stop yourself being Taken right down. But there is a Delay. Its brief, but if you were already intent on your Response it seems Viable, at least.

This is quite an Interesting Topic

 

[seasoned]

I don't actually understand it either so I've answered what I think he's asking! It seems to be yet another one on how MMA fighters can't actually fight outside their ruleset because they get into 'bad' habits for self defence but hey I could be wrong...

I would agree that at face value it sounds like this to me also.

As a side note.
I am, a firm believer that what you train in, is the way you will use it, but, I am also of the belief, that once you have underestimated another arts/sports ability, that that in itself is a

"Dangerous habit"

That must be avoided.

 

[Chris Parker]

This is quite an Interesting Topic

Intelligent conversationalists make for interesting conversation, my friend.

We have a range of takedown defences, but understanding the way such things happen in MMA approaches, a sprawl is about the only thing that'll help you. From there you may have a chance to use a few different responces, but the ones you listed are actually fairly weak, and there are better ones to look to...