Hi,
I've been watching as this thread went from a non-question to a very succinct answer on the very first page through to the general wackiness we find here... been a fun ride, hasn't it? I've so far resisted posting here because I thought it was already covered, but let's see if we can sum it all up, shall we? Maybe put this one to bed? Okay, here we go....
Has MMA surpassed TMA? Yes. And no. Let's look at both.
MMA has surpassed TMA in the public mentality to a great degree with the advent of UFC-style competitions gaining mainstream popularity, hence the term being far more widespread (ask an average viewer of such events about MMA, and they'll immediately have a reference point. Ask about TMA, and expect a blank stare until you explain that you mean the disparate individual systems classed under this umbrella term). So that's one to MMA.
But if you ask those same viewers about "martial arts" without the "mixed" part, then they will reference many things being refered to here as TMA. MMA almost isn't classed as a "martial art" in many senses, as the familiar uniforms aren't used, flashy (leaping, spinning etc) style techniques aren't commonly seen, and it doesn't look like the type of things people see in movie choreography. And that is where the majority of the public get their knowledge about martial arts. Essentially, they will class MMA in the same category as boxing, wrestling, or kickboxing. Sport, yes. Martial art, no. After all, can you get a Black Belt in MMA? Or boxing? This one is a draw, as MMA is taken out of the same category as TMA systems.
MMA is limited. Very limited. In fact, it is limited to the degree that it can be a liability in self defence terms. And that comes down to it being a sport system. But first we'll cover what MMA actually is, because that has come up once or twice here as well. As we all know, MMA stands for Mixed Martial Arts, and has become a catch-all term for the type of training people go through in order to compete in a particular type of competition. And as such, as pointed out earlier, it is a mis-nomer.
A better term may be "Multi Range Unarmed Combat Themed Sport", but the acronym just ain't as catchy. Hmm, MRUCTS... no, doesn't work. It came out of competition between distinct systems (the original UFC), in which a number of people felt that they were lacking in one area or another (most commonly ground-based grappling, as it was set up to be very grappler friendly, and unsurprisingly, grapplers tended to have a great deal of success. More power to them, I say!), and sought ways to "tack on" these aspects to their existing training... instead of looking to the answers in what they already had. Sparing you my very definate views on this, I don't believe this was the best or healthiest approach...
So Strikers began grappling, and Grapplers developed their striking abilities. In the end, there were no real systems or styles to differentiate the competitors, just different approaches to similar skill-sets, based on the strengths and weaknesses, as well as personal preferences of the trainee and trainer (coach or gym). This non-art became the common term MMA, but as you can see, it is really not an "art" in the same way that, say, Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu is. Oh, and I use the same criteria on Kendo and other sport-based systems as well, by the way, but those that have what we are calling a TMA approach keep the art side at least in part, so I consider them a hybrid. For instance, when doing the kata for Kendo, that is the art side. The tournaments are sport.
But there was a reason each of these different gyms/coaches/competitors all ended up doing basically the same thing. It is what worked/works in the environment it is designed for. And that is a competitive ring-based match fight environment. It is not a self defence environment. It is not a battlefield environment. It is not a security environment. It is not a law-enforcement environment. It is not bar environment. It is not a club environment. It is not, in fact, any type of environment other than a competitive ring-based match fight environment. And that is what it is best suited for, because that has been it's forge. But that does raise the question, what exactly is that environment, and how is it different to all the others? Well, without going into every possible environment around, let's explore this one.
A match fight is very simple to understand. It is clear, defined, monitored, and (to a real degree) predictable. By that I mean that a competitor will have a fair degree of understanding of what they might expect to encounter in the ring, what attacks they might face, what weapons they might need to defend against (swords in Kendo, fists and feet in Tae Kwon Do, throws and chokes in Judo, chokes and armbars in BJJ, fists, feet, throws, arm-bars, chokes in MMA as examples), and the rough expected timelines and conditions (3 x 5 minute rounds, what the ground surface will be, when the ref will stop it etc). The other very important thing to realise is that a competition style system will focus on attacking, as that is how you gain points and win. We'll get back to this.
A self defence environment, on the other hand, has none of the above clarity. It could happen at any time, in any location, you could be facing any number, any weapons, any attacks, and no-one is going to step in and stop it (no ref). There is no preditable condition (are you on grass, or concrete? Is it just shouting, or are there going to be punches? Is it over in a few seconds [the most common are, by the way], or are you going to have to deal with an ongoing encounter?). These are just a few ways in which MMA and self defence are very different.
To highlight that, let's look at a timeline of each next to each other. In an MMA bout, you will have any amount of time to have your general preparation. This is the time you spend working on general skill-development in your gym. Then you learn about your fight. You will then typically have 4-6 or 8 weeks specific preparation. As you will often be made aware of who you're opponent is, and you can prepare for them specifically. You will be able to study their movements, work out counters to their favourite moves, and kick up your training to be at your best for the event. The fight itself is then split into various sections. First is the pre-fight, which could last a few minutes to an hour or so. Depending on your level, it could include an interview, ring entrance, an explanation of the rules (again), your opponents ring entrance, and more. Then you get the fight itself, which may be a number of short rounds during which you get an adrenaline dump during the rounds, and an endorphin rush between. Then repeat. This may be 15 - 20 minutes. The post-fight could be again an hour or more, and is very well managed, including physios to manage injuries, trainers to tend to you, even a massage if you're lucky....
A self defence situation is a bit different. The general preparation has the same timeline (any varied amount of time), however the focus needs to cover a larger skill set than an MMA fighter would require. An MMA fighter, for instance, doesn't need to knwo how to disarm a shotgun wielding opponent, or know non-damaging security holds, but when training for real situations, these and many more skills need to be addressed. There is not really much time for specific preparation, it may be a few seconds, or a minute or so as someone yells and pushes you. Or spits in your face. Or asks you the time... As stated, the fight itself is most commonly between 3 and 10 seconds, it can last longer, but not often. And incredibly rarely the 15-20 minutes of a match fight. The post fight can be very bad. There is often no-one to help you manage injuries or any other factors, and the effects can last for years (particularly emotional and psychological factors).
So now we've gotten a better idea of the two situations, we can look at which is better suited to which. Other than the reasons mentned above, I would like to re-visit the concept of a match fighter working towards an attacking mentality. This can be very dangerous for a self defence situation on a number of levels. You can escalate a situation beyond where you could safely get away, you could stay and aggressively continue without real need, and possibly the most important, you open yourself up to legal repercussions and assault charges. If you doubt what I'm saying, check out Bas Rutens "self defence" DVDs. If you do what he suggests, you go to jail. He is very good at what he does, but he is a complete thug who thrives on the violence.
So by it's training methods, MMA training can get you prepared for a physical encounter by getting you used to physical effects of being hit and hitting, as well as handling the adrenaline dumps and endorphin hits, and can give you skills at going against a resisting opponent (oh, and that is so totally out of whack with the reality of a fight as well, by the way. A competition involves two people with the same goal of out-competing each other, a fight involves one person wanting to hurt another and one doing what they have to to not get hurt. Resistance is very different in each situation). But by it's training methodologies it is very limited, and leaves you with very few real options in a large number of situations. You don't have the option of escape trained and drilled, you don't have the option of "gentle" responce tactics (as in security holds and restraint and removal), you don't have talk-down options, you don't have multiple-person drills and training (as you won't find this in the ring), and you don't have weapon use, weapon defence, or weapon retention options as neither you nor your opponent will be carrying them. So it is good, but limited, and in that it cannot surpass anything but itself as it improves through it's own crucible.
It can certainly help, but be aware of the limitations.
There were many other things in this thread that I would like to address, but this has gotten a little long-winded as it is, and I am hoping that this will put the whole thing to bed. But I will make time for one last thing....
Suicide. Seriously, man, what is the deal? Are you just trying to get people riled up? I don't think I've seen a single thread you've started that was started with a clear premise, nor one that you have constructively contributed to. I really have to question the maturity of someone who choses the name "Suicide" to be known by, and posts in such a manner. I originally belived that you were just a kid, but looking at your profile would seem to defy that idea. Really, man, grow up. You say you learnt a lot from this thread, honestly, you haven't shown it. Let's see if we can improve in future, shall we?
I think that should about do it. I'll end with my thanks and congratulations to those who manage to get all the way through this post. You have the patience of one truly interested in having an open mind, and are exactly who should populate this forum.
As I said, it, IMO, comes down to how these things are applied. Let me give another example. If someone shoots in on me on the street, would I sprawl to defend myself? Sure. However, once thats done, I would get back to my feet and either continue the fight standing or get the hell out of there, if that was possible. I would not, once I did the sprawl, work my way around the guys back, sink my hooks in, and try for a RNC. If I don't have to prolong my ground defense, I'm not going to.
