Martial Artists vs. Professional Fighters

ap Oweyn

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
398
Reaction score
32
Location
Alexandria, VA
But I would bet that a knife or group situation I would go with the MA, mostly because they except these situations as their training, and many schools apply these situations in training just as rigoursly and focused as an mma fighter fighting one on one in an octagon in training (basically, the training is the same but the situation and circumstances arent), only difference is that the ma fighter wont make a career or come out on tv for it.

They don't really accept those situations, though, do they? I mean, they aren't practicing full-contact, multiple attacker knife engagements on hazardous terrain with anywhere near the verisimilitude of an MMA match.

They're both major abstractions. The questions are only 1) where you do your compromising and 2) whether you can make the necessary adjustments at "go time."

People who train in nonsportive styles (myself included) like to tell ourselves that it would be no great change from our training to actually crush someone's windpipe, gouge their eyes, and so on. In the same breath, we act like it's a Herculean feat for a sport fighter to shift his jab a couple of inches downward, targeting the Adam's apple instead of the face.

The deal seems, to me, to be this: 1) Training is different from the actual event. And the more variables there are to try and address, the more potential there is for distortion. But the MA and the PF both have plenty of variables to overcome for a real fight. The MA has to actually perform all those techniques with more committment than ever before, in many cases. Additionally, given that we're training a much broader skillset, we're trying to implement our training with much less direct experience of any given technique. (After all, an hour is an hour for each person. So an hour spent covering knife disarms, multiple attackers, etc. is spread thinner than an hour spent covering takedown defense.) To spend the same amount of time on every aspect of their skillset, the MA you describe would have to actually be devoting a lot MORE training time than the professional fighter.

2) Any competition fight is a known quotient. A K1 match is always a K1 match. A UFC bout is always a UFC bout. But a "streetfight" or "self-defense situation" could encompass a whole universe of possibilities. And I contend that we're not really training to cover that universe. Not fully.


Stuart
 

repz

Green Belt
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
195
Reaction score
3
Location
Brooklyn, NYC
They don't really accept those situations, though, do they? I mean, they aren't practicing full-contact, multiple attacker knife engagements on hazardous terrain with anywhere near the verisimilitude of an MMA match.

They're both major abstractions. The questions are only 1) where you do your compromising and 2) whether you can make the necessary adjustments at "go time."

People who train in nonsportive styles (myself included) like to tell ourselves that it would be no great change from our training to actually crush someone's windpipe, gouge their eyes, and so on. In the same breath, we act like it's a Herculean feat for a sport fighter to shift his jab a couple of inches downward, targeting the Adam's apple instead of the face.

The deal seems, to me, to be this: 1) Training is different from the actual event. And the more variables there are to try and address, the more potential there is for distortion. But the MA and the PF both have plenty of variables to overcome for a real fight. The MA has to actually perform all those techniques with more committment than ever before, in many cases. Additionally, given that we're training a much broader skillset, we're trying to implement our training with much less direct experience of any given technique. (After all, an hour is an hour for each person. So an hour spent covering knife disarms, multiple attackers, etc. is spread thinner than an hour spent covering takedown defense.) To spend the same amount of time on every aspect of their skillset, the MA you describe would have to actually be devoting a lot MORE training time than the professional fighter.

2) Any competition fight is a known quotient. A K1 match is always a K1 match. A UFC bout is always a UFC bout. But a "streetfight" or "self-defense situation" could encompass a whole universe of possibilities. And I contend that we're not really training to cover that universe. Not fully.


Stuart

Depends on the organisation and under what over-seer. Your assumption could be questioned to. You cant really pidgeonhole a whole system of arts because you havent seen it or trained with these concepts. I seen tma shotokan schools do this frequentely, thats where i got the idea from, only school i didnt see this at was a shorinjikempo school and a shorin ryu one. Figured if we are speaking self defense arts, I would talk about those really geared to self defense, I dont really see this as extreme unless this is an alien concept to you, but I guess it could be taken as extreme for some but either way this is the example I would use as appropriate training for self defense for any style.

And how would it be devoting more time? Techniques are a skill set (agreed), many schools drill self defense techniques, adding obstruction, and team sparring is just switching awareness for comfortability. I dont see how that could require extra time. You have a skill set of stand up, stand up grappling, these schools should have time devoted to self defense. Even mma fighters dont bang each other up, they take it slow and spar, when I was in kickboxing and i was preparing for a fight I would spar slowly picking it up gradually as not to get hurt or cut before a fight working on technique and conditioning, it wasnt all hard sparring all day.

And yes, I believe that anyone can gather up the thought process of targeting the neck for example, even non trained people, no one in my post did i argue against that. But there are systems thats whole basis is hitting vital areas, and if they stepped into competition, pre-adjustments are needed, which was the point to my message.

I wasnt really picking a side, I didnt jump on the bandwagon of karate and completely forget my past training in sports, I see positives and negatives on both sides of the table, atleast as far as to how I train.
 
Last edited:

ap Oweyn

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
398
Reaction score
32
Location
Alexandria, VA
Depends on the organisation and under what over-seer. Your assumption could be questioned to. You cant really pidgeonhole a whole system of arts because you havent seen it or trained with these concepts. I seen tma shotokan schools do this frequentely, thats where i got the idea from, only school i didnt see this at was a shorinjikempo school and a shorin ryu one. Figured if we are speaking self defense arts, I would talk about those really geared to self defense, I dont really see this as extreme unless this is an alien concept to you, but I guess it could be taken as extreme for some but either way this is the example I would use as appropriate training for self defense for any style.
I don't see that it does depend on the organization. And this isn't a suggestion that MMA is superior. It's simply an acknowledgment that the gap between MMA training and the event for which they're training is smaller than the gap between self-defense training and the event for which they're training. Because the target in MMA is clearly defined and the skillsets are more limited.

But, honestly, it doesn't matter what style you come from. You haven't cut someone down with a katana. Many of us won't have broken anyone's neck. Or smashed anyone's knee. Or any of the other hard core tactics that often come up in these discussions.

And if we haven't actually done them, I believe it's premature to claim that we're prepared. We're prepared-ish.

I've trained in eskrima for more than 20 years now. But I'd be a fool to think that I was now like a fish in water when it came to life-or-death machete fights. Whereas I'd expect that a 20-year veteran of competitive martial arts would be quite at home in their chosen venue. And WE'D BOTH be in deep water in an actual armed conflict with multiple attackers, bad terrain, and all the other variables that come up in these discussions.

And how would it be devoting more time? Techniques are a skill set (agreed), many schools drill self defense techniques, adding obstruction, and team sparring is just switching awareness for comfortability. I dont see how that could require extra time. You have a skill set of stand up, stand up grappling, these schools should have time devoted to self defense. Even mma fighters dont bang each other up, they take it slow and spar, when I was in kickboxing and i was preparing for a fight I would spar slowly picking it up gradually as not to get hurt or cut before a fight working on technique and conditioning, it wasnt all hard sparring all day.
Even a well versed MMA fighter is basically addressing standup and groundfighting. He's not piling, on top of that, mastery of a plethora of edged and impact weapons, for starters. If we claim that our style addresses weapons, multiple attackers, grappling, empty hand... then we need to be committing very significant amounts of time to developing skill in each. It's common sense.

And it's why it's a no-brainer that a pro boxer is going to demolish a martial artist who incorporates Western boxing into his regimen. Both are boxing. But one is committing more time to a smaller skillset, so that within that skillset, he'll dominate. Having a broader skillset may benefit a person if they can put their opponent into that space. But it's still common sense that a person who spends comparable time on a broader set of skills is going to be less developed in any one given skill, though he may be more versatile.

So the question is "What's more important? Versatility or focused skill?" And I think that one's unanswerable. We've all seen video of some Russian(?) bodyguard who keeps three or four attackers at bay with nothing but a series of (backpedaling) good stiff jabs. But we can also imagine scenarios in which a fight may take us over hill and dale, requiring a broader skill set.

"Real fight" is simply too broad a concept to be neatly addressed by either group.

And yes, I believe that anyone can gather up the thought process of targeting the neck for example, even non trained people, no one in my post did i argue against that. But there are systems thats whole basis is hitting vital areas, and if they stepped into competition, pre-adjustments are needed, which was the point to my message.
I didn't say, at any point, that you'd said this. I said "we act like..." We, as a community. I included myself in that determination, and didn't target you at all.

I wasnt really picking a side, I didnt jump on the bandwagon of karate and completely forget my past training in sports, I see positives and negatives on both sides of the table, atleast as far as to how I train.

Same here. I'm much more of a traditionalist in my training history. But we need to be balanced in acknowledging the leaps that both sides must make in applying their art in reality. Because training (any training) isn't reality.
 

repz

Green Belt
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
195
Reaction score
3
Location
Brooklyn, NYC
Ah, point taken.

Honestly, I just like Martial Arts. In the example I put above as a Shorin Ryu not having have I termed self defense that targets what I think would be important, is actually the style I have been looking into.

I started with boxing as a kid, and very rarely has the typical "street fight" in brooklyn needed more then the jab and cross, I can even push this further and say everything from kickboxing to san shou also has also not have needed more then a good jab and a cross (though I have become much of a kicker over the years). The chances of me running into any martial artists, let alone pro-fighter, let alone an actually good fighter (which isnt as common as many think) isnt so common on the street.

At this point, I just want to train. And training in something I can take into my older years.
 

Archangel M

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
4,555
Reaction score
154
The way I look at it. Who is more likely to know what it's like to REALLY take a shot and give a shot?

Everybody has an opinion till they get punched in the face-to paraphrase Iron Mike.
 

sgtmac_46

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
4,753
Reaction score
188
Another VS thread...

The way I see it if you take a Martial Arts and want to compete effectively against a one on one sport enviornment you have to do the following.

-Change the concept of self defense to sport. Drop the world of illegal hits and destruction to rules and points. Alot of techniques in self defense are not for tapping out, its for limb destruction, if it is effective or not is not the question, but even in old mma destroying fingers and wrists to get an edge isnt a sport, a competetion would not grow from that as you will have a fight of no-named alternates fighting each round with players getting their eyes damaged and fingers ripped off and windpipe crushed.

-Since vital areas are illegal, strike areas that are legal and dont bother with hand conditioning as the gloves absorb impact

-Since your options are low (no obstruction, strictly one on one, clean ground, no outside distraction) you can work on ranges that are usually deemed unsafe in the streets, like ground and long clinches, with no attention to outside awarness or awareness of weapons.

-Eliminate knife disarms and other techniques. In mma, you dont focus on one target like the hand, they arent armed. They are pro fighters, their whole body is a weapon, and you would never have to worry about a weapon, its just wasted awareness.

This is effectively called, "playing their game". This is the route Kyokushin, Judo, BJJ, Full Contact Karate aka kickboxing, and Muay Thia did. If you are willing to give up all that, which is essentially the ABC's of self defense, then you can stand a chance in sport mma. Lyoto Machida has people scratching their heads to his karate, and Belfort is taking up shotokan karate too, so tma does offer different perspectives to fighting that can keep the boxing and muay thia mma fighters guessing their fighting patterns. They modified what was once only used for self defense.

I would go further and mention that a MA (as titled in this post) will also have a difficult time beating a MMA if they meet in a situation similar to sport mma (which isnt so uncommon to face one on one in an opened area like a street or bar as though it stays one on one).

But I would bet that a knife or group situation I would go with the MA, mostly because they except these situations as their training, and many schools apply these situations in training just as rigoursly and focused as an mma fighter fighting one on one in an octagon in training (basically, the training is the same but the situation and circumstances arent), only difference is that the ma fighter wont make a career or come out on tv for it.

Best bet it to embrace both worlds, have both work together. Spar with more protected gear that allows you to target the eyes and throat (full face masks as worn in shorinjikempo), train in group sparring, and perform knife sparring with rubber weapons in obstructed spaces, bascially take the formula of mma (which is sparring) and apply it to common self defense situations. Be just as comfortable in this chaos as you are with an octagon.

Sparring still isn't the same as fighting, even with rules to the fight. Fighting is where another person is actually trying to hurt you and win the fight. Sparring is hard training. Sparring is good, but actually fighting takes it to an entirely different level. Those who proof test their art in fighting, even with rules, develop the kind of skill that can't be developed merely by training alone.

That's why the Dog Brothers beat each other with sticks........yes, there are rules even there.........but actually fighting with rules, beats training for a fight without rules that you never fight.
 

MattJ

Brown Belt
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
429
Reaction score
11
Location
Pennsylvania
I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused here.

Sparring still isn't the same as fighting, even with rules to the fight. Fighting is where another person is actually trying to hurt you and win the fight. Sparring is hard training. Sparring is good, but actually fighting takes it to an entirely different level. Those who proof test their art in fighting, even with rules, develop the kind of skill that can't be developed merely by training alone.

That's why the Dog Brothers beat each other with sticks........yes, there are rules even there.........but actually fighting with rules, beats training for a fight without rules that you never fight.

We agree that sparring is not fighting, but I'm a bit confused as to your position on sparring. Do you view the Dog Brothers/MMA as real fighting? I consider it sparring.
 

sgtmac_46

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
4,753
Reaction score
188
I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused here.



We agree that sparring is not fighting, but I'm a bit confused as to your position on sparring. Do you view the Dog Brothers/MMA as real fighting? I consider it sparring.

Sparring is a mutual training session with a training partner. Even heavy sparring has an agreed upon cooperative framework. Sparring is a give and take where each partner works to improve the other's skills by pressure.

It's not sparring if the goal is to bludgeon the other person in to submission or unconsciousness, even if there are a few rules as to how one must do it..........it's a fight. Granted, with the Dog Brothers, it's on the border between sparring and fighting since there is no tangible reward for winning.........but the reality is that each opponent is attempting to harm the other within the limits of the rules, and trying to impose his will by forcing submission, dysfunction or unconsciousness.

The notion that a boxing match 'isn't a real fight' is only from those who've never been in a real boxing match........it's a fight. More of a fight than most folks will ever get on the street. The fact that there are rules doesn't change that.

It's always been called a 'Prize Fight' because two men are put in a ring to fight over a prize........it's not a sparring match. It's a fight. Two men bludgeoning each other in to submission to achieve their own end.


In fact, the whole 'There are rules, so, blah, blah, blah' business is bogus........there are rules in the street, too........and people go to jail for violating them.

If there weren't any rules, the rational response to someone confronting you on the street would be to shoot them in the face, and walk on down the block. That would be the surest way of avoiding a physical confrontation that could get one injured.

But, since we acknowledge we really can't do that, we ADMIT we are operating 'with rules'..........even in the street. ;)

In fact, it might be argued that there are MORE RULES in the street than there are in some rings and cages.........when two men agree to a prize fight, they agree to legally allow the other person to physically pound them in to submission, within the rules of the fight. Fighting in the street is generally illegal even if you both agree to the fight, and in most places one may only cause enough damage to disengage and flee, not until the other person is brought in to submission of some sort.
 
Last edited:

MattJ

Brown Belt
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
429
Reaction score
11
Location
Pennsylvania
OK, I mis-read your post. We are in total agreement. I thought you were advocating for really fighting with people as a way to train, LOL. Thanks for clarifying.
 

sgtmac_46

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
4,753
Reaction score
188
OK, I mis-read your post. We are in total agreement. I thought you were advocating for really fighting with people as a way to train, LOL. Thanks for clarifying.

Fair enough.

As for really fighting with people........truly, that would be the best training........though many problems exist with that.

Since we can't really fight with people, hard sparring is the best most of us can get.

Beyond hard sparring is prize fighting, which is taking it to a level beyond even sparring.
 

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
269
Location
Olney, Maryland
I have often seen the comment made that ring fighting is not a real fight or not the same thing as self defense. Frequently, it is made as a counter to either someone asserting that it is, someone who states that training in the dojo is not real fighting, or both at once.

Really, a ring fight is a duel. You know, like in the 16th century.
A challenge is issued
Location and time are agreed upon.
Weapons are agreed upon.
Specific actions are barred (remember, duels were about skill and personal honor)
What actions constitute victory are determined in advance.
Duelists often had seconds (an entourage) who were there to make sure that the other guy did not break the prearranged rules, a surgeon or doctor on hand, and may have had something riding on it that would be decided by the outcome of the duel.

Look at a modern ring fight:
Fighters managers arrange a match (the challenge)
Location and time are prearranged (the agreed upon location and time)
Armed or unarmed combat is is predetermined, depending upon the event (the weapons agreed upon; mma and karate being unarmed, kendo and fencing being armed and with specific weapons, for example)
Specific actions are barred (remember, ring fights are about skill and personal glory)
What actions constitute victory are determined by the governing body (which is of course, in advance)
Fighters have a coach, trainer, and others in attendance (the entourage) who look out for his or her interests, there is a medical crew with doctors on hand, and there is an official ref to insure that the fighters do not break the prearranged rules
And of course there is something riding on the outcome of the duel (money, standings, titles, the belt).

So no, a ring fight is not self defense against an attacker with no stated rules, but it is an actual fight. The catch to this is that most TMA have competitions and tournaments of their own, so it is not as if they aren't doing this as well. One could argue that the rule set of MMA is more representative of a "real fight" though one could just as easily argue that it is as removed from "real fighting" as any TMA tournament rule set is, depending upon the TMA in question.

Daniel
 

repz

Green Belt
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
195
Reaction score
3
Location
Brooklyn, NYC
Sparring still isn't the same as fighting, even with rules to the fight. Fighting is where another person is actually trying to hurt you and win the fight. Sparring is hard training. Sparring is good, but actually fighting takes it to an entirely different level. Those who proof test their art in fighting, even with rules, develop the kind of skill that can't be developed merely by training alone.

That's why the Dog Brothers beat each other with sticks........yes, there are rules even there.........but actually fighting with rules, beats training for a fight without rules that you never fight.

I am assuming you mean fighting in mma vs sparring. I see them as the same thing, mma is sparring, except they combined sparring for striking and sparring for grappling (usually referred to as rolling).

I see all sports competetion as sparring, just because they do it professional and for commerical reasons doesnt make it any easier. Its a training principle played out on tv for money.

I have sparred in classes from kyokushin, kickboxing, and did some shootfighting, we went just as hard, especially when belt tests were coming up.

Only time I took it easy was when we both agreed not to spar so hard, or before a fight or tournament, or due to injuries.

And I never argued the value of sparring, I even stated that combining elements such as knife disarms and such combined with sparring (meaning live and unpre-arranged with weapons is the best route to take).
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,381
Reaction score
4,691
Location
England
I think the title of the OP is misleading and actually means nothing other than being argumental.
MMA fighters are martial artists, most I know fight professional rules but aren't professional fighters. There are professional martial artists that run schools, organisations etc.
It's like that programme 'Deadliest Fighter' great fun watching the guys go through the weapons and what they can do, then watching the 'fight' at the end but the truth is, so much is left out of the equations we don't truly know how these fights would have really ended. The gladiator defeated the ninja but as the guy speaking for the ninjas said, he wouldn't have stood and fought he'd have run away and come back to kill the gladiator when he was asleep!

I'm with sgtmac here, sparring isn't fighting.
 

ap Oweyn

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
398
Reaction score
32
Location
Alexandria, VA
It's like that programme 'Deadliest Fighter' great fun watching the guys go through the weapons and what they can do, then watching the 'fight' at the end but the truth is, so much is left out of the equations we don't truly know how these fights would have really ended. The gladiator defeated the ninja but as the guy speaking for the ninjas said, he wouldn't have stood and fought he'd have run away and come back to kill the gladiator when he was asleep!

Or Shaka Zulu trying to block a claymore with an antelope-hide shield. They test the materials. Not the tactics. Even someone who'd never clapped eyes on a claymore before could quickly deduce that the shield didn't stand a chance.

I digress.
 

Maiden_Ante

Yellow Belt
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Location
Falkenberg, Sweden
To be honest I think alot of experience does more than years of training a MA. At least when it comes to the punching part (most people tend to use their fists).

But then again, it's impossible to have some general rule; it all depends on circumstances, who the two persons are and so on.
 

Xue Sheng

All weight is underside
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
32,551
Reaction score
7,174
Location
North American Tectonic Plate
Or Shaka Zulu trying to block a claymore with an antelope-hide shield. They test the materials. Not the tactics. Even someone who'd never clapped eyes on a claymore before could quickly deduce that the shield didn't stand a chance.

I digress.


Yeah.... well... I'm waiting for the Knights Templar vs the first armored division.... :apv::knight2::tank:


Templars all the way :D
 

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
269
Location
Olney, Maryland
To be honest I think alot of experience does more than years of training a MA. At least when it comes to the punching part (most people tend to use their fists).

But then again, it's impossible to have some general rule; it all depends on circumstances, who the two persons are and so on.
Experience in what?

And how does this relate to "martial artists" training and "professional figher" training? Do you mean experience in the ring? Out of the ring?

A person may have tons of experience in fights outside of the ring but not be a professional fighter. Or, a student of a martial art may have a rack of tournament victories, thus experience, but not get paid. Thus she still is not a professional fighter.

I am not picking at you, by the way. Just trying to see where you are coming from.:)

Daniel
 

Latest Discussions

Top