Is it just me or has the introduction of BJJ and submission Martial arts killed what MMA was or could have been. After watching UFC lately it seems that the only reason people are striking these days is to find an opening for a shoot to go to ground then look for a submission. When BJ Penn took the belt off Matt Hughes is their anybody who really believes that he was better fighter. He was without question the better submission guy but I think that if it was a stand-up fight the fight A - would have been alot better and B - could have resulted in a different outcome. I can understand the reasoning that the life span of a professional MMA fighter might be significantly reduced if submission wasn't allowed but I think that if that seriously was the case then we wouldn't see such dedicated and talented Muay Thai fighters around. I for one think that MMA should take a step back and really think about how the rules that they employ have changed the face of MMA and I think that the fan base is going to suffer for it. If I want to see rounds and divisions I will watch K1 or professional boxing. Bring back your style onto mine or at least fight to the finish not till a bell goes.
Submissions has killed MMA
- Thread starter silatman
- Start date
silatman said:
When the UFC first started, you saw many one style fighters. As time went on, they began to see the need to cross train/cross referrence other arts to further round out their skills. Being able to use set-ups to find an opening, is part of the fight game. Also keep in mind, that at one time, the UFC was banned from PPV. There is also an article on this forum talking about how is was banned in Boston. This was mainly due to people who had no clue about these events. Looking at them, it appears that they are such brutal events. In order for them to make a comeback and to be sanctioned, rule changes had to be added.
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24647
Mike
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
I'll admit that I'm not a big fan of UFC, and silatman's reasoning is part of it. (Note: I'm making a distinction between UFC and MMA as I have not watched K-1 or Pride events and to me, "UFC" is to "MMA" what "TKD sparring" is to "TKD").
Most UFC matches I've seen, or at least he recent ones, I think are pretty boring. I just watched UFC: Revolutions and I didn't care for it. Like he said, each round was a little bit of 'striking' trying to set up an opportunity to get the other guy down in a submission and hold him there. Not always, of course, but that seemed to be the bulk of it. A minute and a half of punching in the face, three and a haf minutes of trying to hold your opponent or trying to get out of your opponent holding you.
Part of it may be my expectation. When I first heard the idea of "MMA" I thought it sounded really good. Some guy who had skills from various arts and could apply them as needed; kick like TKD, trap like Hapkido, hand strike like Karate or something, grapple like Judo, something like that. What I see in UFC is a sorta reductionism. Kicking is very rare and is mostly to the thigh. 'Hand striking' is just 'punch the other guy in the face more times and harder than he punches me''. No real defensive hand work; blocks, traps, etc (and no defensive footwork to evade). I can't speak to the grappling/ground arts but I seriously doubt that entire art of Judo or BJJ are reduced to two or three moves. I think maybe the rules or the scoring rules have ended up with this reductionism. In the same way that the sparring rules of TKD end up with a very limited set of TKD techniques used in sparring that is well short of the total range of TKD, and leave out a lot of very effective TKD techniques, UFC fighting seems to have been reduced to five or six techniques.
I don't think it's really "tha'ts what's the most effective" so much as "that's what's the most effective to win rounds in UFC". "If I stand in with a guy and punch him for two minutes, that's two minutes he's punching me, too...but if I can get him down and hold him for two minutes...that's two minutes I'm not getting punched in the face. If I can win a round by punching him 50 times while he punches me 40 times...or I can win a round holding a dominant sumbmission position...hmm..." To to say submissions are easy or anything, but because the point scoring is simply ten points or nine points, and you can win a round by holding a guy down longer..it's easy to see that submissions would be an attractive way to try to win a round.
A counter example is TKD olympic sparring. A kick is one point, a kick to the head is two points, a kick to the body is *supposed* to be a point but is rarely awarded. The manner of awarding points has shaped what techniques and strategies are used. In any competition, how points are awarded determines what techniques are used.
If UFC used a point-per-technique approach, I think you'd see a lot more variety, particularly in striking. Just as an example.
What I seen in UFC, though, is a lot of things that are, frankly, not that smart if you were to do it in a street fight, so it's hard to say that UFC has honed down to a set of techniques that are effective. They are effective at winning UFC matches, definitly. But watch a UFC match with four things in mind; weapons, friends, asphault, 60 lb differential between opponents, and you'll see what I mean.
Anyway just rambling/ranting
Most UFC matches I've seen, or at least he recent ones, I think are pretty boring. I just watched UFC: Revolutions and I didn't care for it. Like he said, each round was a little bit of 'striking' trying to set up an opportunity to get the other guy down in a submission and hold him there. Not always, of course, but that seemed to be the bulk of it. A minute and a half of punching in the face, three and a haf minutes of trying to hold your opponent or trying to get out of your opponent holding you.
Part of it may be my expectation. When I first heard the idea of "MMA" I thought it sounded really good. Some guy who had skills from various arts and could apply them as needed; kick like TKD, trap like Hapkido, hand strike like Karate or something, grapple like Judo, something like that. What I see in UFC is a sorta reductionism. Kicking is very rare and is mostly to the thigh. 'Hand striking' is just 'punch the other guy in the face more times and harder than he punches me''. No real defensive hand work; blocks, traps, etc (and no defensive footwork to evade). I can't speak to the grappling/ground arts but I seriously doubt that entire art of Judo or BJJ are reduced to two or three moves. I think maybe the rules or the scoring rules have ended up with this reductionism. In the same way that the sparring rules of TKD end up with a very limited set of TKD techniques used in sparring that is well short of the total range of TKD, and leave out a lot of very effective TKD techniques, UFC fighting seems to have been reduced to five or six techniques.
I don't think it's really "tha'ts what's the most effective" so much as "that's what's the most effective to win rounds in UFC". "If I stand in with a guy and punch him for two minutes, that's two minutes he's punching me, too...but if I can get him down and hold him for two minutes...that's two minutes I'm not getting punched in the face. If I can win a round by punching him 50 times while he punches me 40 times...or I can win a round holding a dominant sumbmission position...hmm..." To to say submissions are easy or anything, but because the point scoring is simply ten points or nine points, and you can win a round by holding a guy down longer..it's easy to see that submissions would be an attractive way to try to win a round.
A counter example is TKD olympic sparring. A kick is one point, a kick to the head is two points, a kick to the body is *supposed* to be a point but is rarely awarded. The manner of awarding points has shaped what techniques and strategies are used. In any competition, how points are awarded determines what techniques are used.
If UFC used a point-per-technique approach, I think you'd see a lot more variety, particularly in striking. Just as an example.
What I seen in UFC, though, is a lot of things that are, frankly, not that smart if you were to do it in a street fight, so it's hard to say that UFC has honed down to a set of techniques that are effective. They are effective at winning UFC matches, definitly. But watch a UFC match with four things in mind; weapons, friends, asphault, 60 lb differential between opponents, and you'll see what I mean.
Anyway just rambling/ranting
I suppose you could just watch Muay Thai if you don't like grappling...silatman said:
There are also a good number of fighter that have strong counter takedown skills, like to keep the fight standing, and fight for knockouts. In fact the biggest name with a belt right now does just that (Chuck Liddell)
Submission are what make the sport unique, and why I enjoy it.
You wear a guy down with strikes, burn out his energy and look for a finish. Like in any strategy game. If they get overly agressive and sloppy the fight can be turned around in a second.
The beauty of MMA is that there are so many different strategies that can be used, fighters cannot rely as much on physical attributes, toughness and raw power. They have to know all the skills, and how to deal with them to be competitive.
You have to figure out where you can beat the guy, and them figure out how to get the fight to go there and how to keep it there.
But you are right, strikes are used to set up takedowns and submissions. Just as the threat of takedowns and submissions can be used to set up strikes. See Randy Couture... has out struck much better strikers because if they tried to return he would be able to take them down.
MMA is a sport that the more you understand it, the more you appreciate it.
I have watched most of the UFC events & lots of Pride events & King of the Cage . I agree that there could definatly be big improvements . Lately there has been some decent stand up action , but usually only happens when both participants don't want to go to the ground . Even then it looks more like a boxing match . I think that there is alot of cross training that goes on & that will ultimatly make you a better fighter , but the skills are learned just to the level were it helps them to get to there desired position . So you will see alot of technical mistakes . especially when a grappler is doing stand up stuff , but he knows enough to set up the takedown . It's really more covering up , faking & timeing . I also think another thing that makes it totally differant then a street fight is the element of suprise . These fighters have either fought each other or seen the others fights & they have months to train for just that one type of fighter . Even though they all cross train they all have there own strengths & weaknesess . So really alot of the technics are just used as conduits to get them where they really want to be . When ever I watch the fights I always say were are all of the blocks that we all have learned ? Were is the good foot work ? Generally speaking you won't see alot of either . Although it isn't perfect I still watch it & learn alot , especially about submisions
. I am entertained by maybe 30% to 40 % of the fights .There tends to be alot of stalling if a fighter thinks he is ahead . Also they do a great job of keeping the fighters relativley safe . Nobody wants to see any serious injuries . I'm refering to life threatening injuries . I definatly agree with you guys . I'd love to see more "martial arts" instead of clutching & grabbing . That being said I am a fan of MMA it has alot of good points & has taught us alot about combat .
But good clinch skills is martial artssayoc FF said:
I do know what you mean, not great for tv, but give it a try. Do a little clinch work and get a better understanding of what is actually going on in there, I bet you appreciate the clutching and grabbing a lot more afterwards
Andrew,Andrew Green said:But good clinch skills is martial arts
I do know what you mean, not great for tv, but give it a try. Do a little clinch work and get a better understanding of what is actually going on in there, I bet you appreciate the clutching and grabbing a lot more afterwards
You are absolutly correct . I do practice alot of clinch work & I understand about how technical it really is . I didn't mean to diminish it's value . Like you said maybe not great for TV . In a close quarters fight if you don't know how to clinch & use your underhooks your in big trouble . You also brought up some great points in your first post ! I think that they are always working hard to make it more entertaining & keeping it safe .
R
RMACKD
Guest
In Seikendo events submission are not alowed but striking standing up, wrestling and striking on the ground is. You could watch thatif you do not like submissions.
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
I think there needs to be a distinction between MMA and UFC. MMA is just "Mixed Martial Arts", it's knowing and training in many different arts. UFC is a sport competition that allows techniques that happen to come from various martial arts areas. UFC is not really MMA fighting, though. One thing Andrew said was "You wear a guy down with strikes, burn out his energy and look for a finish". That works in UFC but is not a good fighting strategy.
The UFC strategy seems to be "strike until you go down", and if you perfer striking than the strategy becomes "get back up out of of the grapple to go back to striking" and if you prefer grappling and submissions than it's "stay down and try to gain the advantage position".
Also, as has been pointed out, they seem to know who they are fighting a long time in advance. I doubt most people who get n fights have time to study the tapes of their opponent's last fights to form a strategy
In fighting, whether MMA or not, you don't get five or fifteen minutes to wear your opponent down. If you prefer striking, you break is leg, break his arm, shatter his trachea, but him down fast and hard *now*. You make the other person want to stop the fight, and if they dont, you make them unable to fight. If your prefer grappling and submissions, then get the guy down where he's in no position to move, but make sure you keep yourself strong and in control. Getting a guy into a guard may keep him still, but if he's got friends then you've got a problem. Also if you are expending more energy to hold him then he is to escape, than faitigue is an issue and there's no clock to save you.
An example, TKD is, rightly, criticized because the scoring encourages high kicks that would not be nearly as effective on uneven or difficult terrain. UFC I think does the same thing. Try shooting in on someone with a knife, trying holding a guard against someone while you are lying on asphault or sand or broken trash
So I think, in regards to the original post, that I don't think submission has killed MMA. MMA is still MMA and if you train mixed martial arts for fighting than I think you are likely to avoid those issues because your focus is different.
Rather I think that submissions allow one person to 'control' a round, at least for a length of time, if you will, which makes it a good way to win a round and therefore it's an attractive place to go, so within the scoring of UFC, submissions has led UFC to become rather narrow in it's focus.
Now, if you *like* to watch submission fighting, and that's your own perogative, than it's just a matter of taste. For myself, personally, I'd like to see a wider variety of applied techniques; better use of footwork, both defensively to evade and offensively to close in. I'd like to see more variety in the punches such as to the solar plexus or kidneys. If you are defensively fast enough to block a punch then you should be fast enough to trap it and knife hand strike the tricep. Lot of ways to strike to remove the will and the ability to fight then just punching someone in the face. Etc, etc...etc... I mean, for my personal taste there is a lot I would *rather8 see, but it's just personal taste.
UFC has become what UFC has become because the the rules they use and the way they award points. If you like it or don't, that depends on what you like to see.
The UFC strategy seems to be "strike until you go down", and if you perfer striking than the strategy becomes "get back up out of of the grapple to go back to striking" and if you prefer grappling and submissions than it's "stay down and try to gain the advantage position".
Also, as has been pointed out, they seem to know who they are fighting a long time in advance. I doubt most people who get n fights have time to study the tapes of their opponent's last fights to form a strategy
In fighting, whether MMA or not, you don't get five or fifteen minutes to wear your opponent down. If you prefer striking, you break is leg, break his arm, shatter his trachea, but him down fast and hard *now*. You make the other person want to stop the fight, and if they dont, you make them unable to fight. If your prefer grappling and submissions, then get the guy down where he's in no position to move, but make sure you keep yourself strong and in control. Getting a guy into a guard may keep him still, but if he's got friends then you've got a problem. Also if you are expending more energy to hold him then he is to escape, than faitigue is an issue and there's no clock to save you.
An example, TKD is, rightly, criticized because the scoring encourages high kicks that would not be nearly as effective on uneven or difficult terrain. UFC I think does the same thing. Try shooting in on someone with a knife, trying holding a guard against someone while you are lying on asphault or sand or broken trash
So I think, in regards to the original post, that I don't think submission has killed MMA. MMA is still MMA and if you train mixed martial arts for fighting than I think you are likely to avoid those issues because your focus is different.
Rather I think that submissions allow one person to 'control' a round, at least for a length of time, if you will, which makes it a good way to win a round and therefore it's an attractive place to go, so within the scoring of UFC, submissions has led UFC to become rather narrow in it's focus.
Now, if you *like* to watch submission fighting, and that's your own perogative, than it's just a matter of taste. For myself, personally, I'd like to see a wider variety of applied techniques; better use of footwork, both defensively to evade and offensively to close in. I'd like to see more variety in the punches such as to the solar plexus or kidneys. If you are defensively fast enough to block a punch then you should be fast enough to trap it and knife hand strike the tricep. Lot of ways to strike to remove the will and the ability to fight then just punching someone in the face. Etc, etc...etc... I mean, for my personal taste there is a lot I would *rather8 see, but it's just personal taste.
UFC has become what UFC has become because the the rules they use and the way they award points. If you like it or don't, that depends on what you like to see.
hemi
Purple Belt
Code:
Most UFC matches I've seen, or at least he recent ones, I think are pretty boring. I just watched [url="http://www.netflix.com/MovieDisplay?movieid=60036081"]UFC: Revolutions[/url] and I didn't care for it. Like he said, each round was a little bit of 'striking' trying to set up an opportunity to get the other guy down in a submission and hold him there. Not always, of course, but that seemed to be the bulk of it. A minute and a half of punching in the face, three and a haf minutes of trying to hold your opponent or trying to get out of your opponent holding you.Forgive me if that quote didn't work I am still new and learning to work this thing
I have to agree, I WAS a huge fan of the UFC but now no way would i pay $30 to $50 to watch it on PPV. I loved to watch when it was a standing man vs man no rules fight till you gave up or could not get up. I am not downing any of the styles that teach grappling but to me it is boring to watch IMHO. I could just watch the WWF it that was what i was looking for.
Getting back to the origional quote "Submissions has killed MMA" . I don't think that you guys are nessesarally saying that submissions are a bad stratagy & of course I think it's been proven how effective they are . You get caught , something gets broken , torn . Basically your screwed . Me personally I would use a submission in a heart beat even in a street fight if the situation was right . I think that the main problem that exist in the UFC is that the rules really favor the grappler or submission fighters . Think about it , a striker cannot knee strike a downed opponant in the head , they cannot soccor kick a downed opponant to the head , I'm not sure but I don't think small joint manipulation is allowed (ask anybody in LE how important SJM is ) . Theres more , but I think I'v made the case for the strikers . Now the grappler or submission fighter rules : they are aloud to use armbars , chokes , leg locks (which distroy the knee , ) , heel hooks , toe holds ect ect ect ... & If you don't tap your done . Last a wrestler can take you down & pound the crap out of you with punches , elbows ect ... Now all of that being said I don't think that there will ever be any big changes in the rules basically they have there hands tied . There is to much political pressure & quite frankly, if they allowed soccor kicks & knees to the skull of a down opponant someone would most likely die or suffer servier brain damage . Another rule you can't grab hair . which I think is kind of funny , but I guess they are worried about neck injuries . I guess the points i'm trying to make are that in the street you have many many more options (Groin strikes
) So it really is alot differant then a street fight , but I would never wan't to face chuck Liddell in a street fight . As far as the rules I think it is what it is , but I'v always thought that the strikers had the deck stacked against them . Just a little , but look on the bright side it's helped to improve their ground skills . I'm a big fan of the UFC , PRIDE & MMA in general . So really I don't think that submissions or ground fighting has distroyed the UFC . I just think that the limits are there for alot of other reasons .
Sure it is, in fact it is really the only one...FearlessFreep said:
Right... Use your strengths against there weaknesses, sounds like a good idea...
Yup, and most people that get in fights outside of competition are not professional fighters.Also, as has been pointed out, they seem to know who they are fighting a long time in advance. I doubt most people who get n fights have time to study the tapes of their opponent's last fights to form a strategy
Not easy to do...
Sounds like what MMA fighters try to do... unfortunately its not that simple. But I think most fighters would prefer to end it in round 1.
Umm... No... thats not the way guard works... Top guy gets tired.
Plus the grappler is not going to be the one on the bottom.
Done, its not hard to train this.
Again, the grappler is not going to be the one on the bottom. At this point you are already loosing and the asphault is the least of your worries.
Actually the techniques are all the same. The strategy might vary slightly. You might actually have to break that arm instead of making him tap. But for the most part, not much changes.
No... as soon as a submission gets on the fight is over.
I suggest you actually give it a try, it sounds like you aren't really sure about why it is the way it is.
Not much more can be added then in the old "No Rules" matches. The few rules that are there now do change things for safety, but its not a big change in how they fight.
And again, I suggest you actually give it a try. There is a reason they fight the way they do, and there is a reason body punches are less common from a distance.
Blocking gets you hit, covering is much better for protecting yourself. Trapping and striking the tricep is not very useful, and very difficult to pull off.
Well, they do this quite a bit, they train to remove the will to fight from other people. And what they do is the things that actually achieve that goal in reality, not in theory.
Points only matter to a certain point, and only when the fight goes the distance. Some fighters go for points, but not all do. Given the opportunity all fighters will end it before the time runs out.
In referance to asphalt being a problem on the ground . From my street fighting experiances in one on one battles I have more times than not taken the fight right to the ground . Reason being that I have a fair amount of grappling experiance & if I sensed that weakness in a foe I would usually take it to the ground & like you said Andrew I would end up on top . Unless the other person could grapple they were down there for the duration . people get very frustrated & worn out trying to fight back to their feet . Another thing that you have to watch out for against a good street grappler is slams . If your head bounces off of a hard surface like asphalt you will suffer severe head trauma . Alot of people with no grappling skills don't know how to fall , but alot of times if you have the fall side arm tied up the head hits first & it hits hard if you know how to throw . I know from experiance . Thats why all though people don't always agree on MMA or the UFC you have to admit it's done alot to help both strikers & grapplers . It's opened peoples minds to differant ways .
evenflow1121
2nd Black Belt
I dont have anything against grappling, I think grappling is very important, most fights end up in grappling situations, and I enjoy watching it, but like yourself I also feel that lately too many fights end up in a stale mate and on the floor as a result for a long time where either is just trying to submit the other, which can be boring to the eyes. In reality, its the nature of the beast, UFC is tough as hell, but even as tough as it is, it is not realistic, the conditions/set up and the rules prob make it more favorable for submission techniques than anything else.
Actually, if anything, the rules favour the stand up fighters right now.evenflow1121 said:
How so ? Are you refering to the fact that they will stand you back up & restart the fight on the feet if the action stalls on the ground ? I can understand that , but I really can't think of another rule that favours the stand up fighters . Could you elaborate ?Andrew Green said:
R
RMACKD
Guest
I think they should allow hair grabbing because barely any of the fighters have hair to grab. Would not make too much of a difference. If you are interested in mma with groin strikes watch the IVC, AFC, and there is also a recent swedish mma event that allows groin strikes but does not allow cups.sayoc FF said:Another rule you can't grab hair . which I think is kind of funny , but I guess they are worried about neck injuries . I guess the points i'm trying to make are that in the street you have many many more options (Groin strikes)
No I'm really not interested in MMA with groin strikes . I was just saying that to point out one defferance between most MMA & a street fight . I was really saying it jokinglyRMACKD said:
. Besides I don't like to see anyone get hurt especially there . Hair grabbing again another very effective move for the street . The UFC 185 pound champ is Even Tanner & he has very long hair . I wonder if he would cut it if they changed the rules ? I have seen MMA events were hair grabbing was aloud & it was used very effectively . You have to admit it would be pretty funny if everybody in the UFC were bald . What would the woman do if they aloud hair grabbing in female MMA ?Just go throw the list of rules and think about what range those are gonna help the most... The majority are tactics that would be used in close, when grappling.sayoc FF said:
evenflow1121
2nd Black Belt
I dont think they should allow that, eye grabbing, biting, hits to the groin, hair pulling, its a competition after all. I dont want to see any of those guys seriously injured or disabled for the rest of their lives.
Similar threads
- RMACKD
- MMA
