Why do TMAs have more difficulty in the ring/octagon?

[Hanzou]

In another thread, a poster informed me that Brazilian Jiujitsu and other grappling arts had a distinct advantage in the first UFC, which caused many TMA practitioners to get easily defeated in the early UFC competitions. Clearly this advantage has continued 20 years later, because TMA is still absent from the curriculum of many MMA practitioners, who choose Muay Thai kickboxing or Bjj over Wing Chun, Eagle Claw Kung Fu, Aikido, or Shorin Ryu Karate.

Why is this the case? What makes some styles have such a distinct disadvantage in combat sports, while other styles tend to dominate?

 

[Grenadier]

In another thread, a poster informed me that Brazilian Jiujitsu and other grappling arts had a distinct advantage in the first UFC, which caused many TMA practitioners to get easily defeated in the early UFC competitions. Clearly this advantage has continued 20 years later, because TMA is still absent from the curriculum of many MMA practitioners, who choose Muay Thai kickboxing or Bjj over Wing Chun, Eagle Claw Kung Fu, Aikido, or Shorin Ryu Karate.

Why is this the case? What makes some styles have such a distinct disadvantage in combat sports, while other styles tend to dominate?

Grappling arts had the advantage during the early UFC's, simply because the competitors who trained solely in stand-up striking arts weren't familiar with the ground game. The game has changed a lot since then, and everyone who competes in MMA has a decent level of proficiency with some type of grappling art. At the same time, pure grapplers who weren't accustomed to striking had to learn striking arts as well.

Regarding the lack of "traditional" martial arts in the ring, if I were to guess, it's because those who want to compete in MMA are going to go with systems that can get you ready in a shorter time. After all, the lifespan (competition, not actual) of a MMA competitor isn't going to be very long at all, and most of the competitors are going to be out of the game by the time they're in their 30's. While it's true that Randy Couture competed in his mid 40's, he's more of the exception rather than the rule.

If you wanted to become a proficient MMA competitor in the shortest time possible, then training in wrestling and boxing can get you there pretty quickly. If you started at the young age of 20, and if your goal were to become a champion at MMA competitions, you probably wouldn't want to spend the years it would take getting to the black belt level in a respectable Karate and Judo dojos, when you could be ready in under a year of intense training in boxing and wrestling.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

In another thread, a poster informed me that Brazilian Jiujitsu and other grappling arts had a distinct advantage in the first UFC, which caused many TMA practitioners to get easily defeated in the early UFC competitions. Clearly this advantage has continued 20 years later, because TMA is still absent from the curriculum of many MMA practitioners, who choose Muay Thai kickboxing or Bjj over Wing Chun, Eagle Claw Kung Fu, Aikido, or Shorin Ryu Karate.

Why is this the case? What makes some styles have such a distinct disadvantage in combat sports, while other styles tend to dominate?

I'll offer some points of consideration. First, a TMA may have a specific overall slant that it focuses on in training. For example, TKD specializes in kicking. This can be great in a competition such as kick boxing or TKD specific competition. Of course, since it doesn't have a specific component for training on the ground it generally doesn't do well in a venue that allows it. The opposite would apply as well if a BJJ competitor entered a TKD or kickboxing tournament but the 'ground-n-pound' or submissions weren't allowed.

Another consideration are the inclusion of rules, any rules. Karate can, and is an effective form of self defense and can be altered to fit into a sport venue. And using karate as a further example, serious karate training has a plethora of body-unfriendly movements designed to injure the other person. But these movements can't be done in a competition format. Thus many of the principles/techniques from the TMA aren't allowed within the context of competition. Again, using BJJ as a counter-example, removing takedowns and submissions would drastically limit and alter the art.

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

In my opinion its the theres a few factors that take the TMA out of the lime light of MMA fights.

The first is that most TMA practitioners dont have that mind set of wanting to go to the gym to train & spar hard to prepare them to go fight in a ring for fun or cash. Most of the people that attend TMA schools are usually looking for something to do in their spare time that will make them healthier and help them defend themselves if they are ever attacked.

The Second thing is if you do get a serious TMA guy that wants to go MMA let's face it it would be better to go to a full contact competitive art where you can get those much needed hours of full contact sparring logged.

The third thing is if you had a serious TMA practitioner (with out a lot of grappling time logged) that wanted to compete in a UFC style match he would not do the best when he came across a great grappler or take down practitioner. This is why most MMA practice a grappling art with a striking art.

But what people forget is that allot of these MMA champs did come from a TMA background and then stared training MMA or other full contact competitive sports.

Just a few I can think of is Bas Ruten, Lidell and Machida have a TMA foundation before going to MMA.

 

[Blindside]

The short answer is training method. The early UFCs certainly highlighted the ground grappling range, and that wasn't just with regard to TMA, you had legit kickboxers and boxers (combat sports specialists) who just hadn't studied the range losing as well.

Groups that train their techniques against resisting opponents are generally going to do better than those groups that don't.

 

[Hanzou]

I'll offer some points of consideration. First, a TMA may have a specific overall slant that it focuses on in training. For example, TKD specializes in kicking. This can be great in a competition such as kick boxing or TKD specific competition. Of course, since it doesn't have a specific component for training on the ground it generally doesn't do well in a venue that allows it. The opposite would apply as well if a BJJ competitor entered a TKD or kickboxing tournament but the 'ground-n-pound' or submissions weren't allowed.

Another consideration are the inclusion of rules, any rules. Karate can, and is an effective form of self defense and can be altered to fit into a sport venue. And using karate as a further example, serious karate training has a plethora of body-unfriendly movements designed to injure the other person. But these movements can't be done in a competition format. Thus many of the principles/techniques from the TMA aren't allowed within the context of competition. Again, using BJJ as a counter-example, removing takedowns and submissions would drastically limit and alter the art.

I definitely see your point, but all things being equal, why can't a karate practitioner simply out maneuver a grappler and punch and kick them into submission? I mean, there's a difference between rules that completely eliminate your ability to fight (like a grappler not being allowed to grapple), but what rules limit a Karate or Kung Fu practitioner from beating the crap out of an opponent with footwork, kicks, and punches?

 

[TSD Bean]

I definitely see your point, but all things being equal, why can't a karate practitioner simply out maneuver a grappler and punch and kick them into submission? I mean, there's a difference between rules that completely eliminate your ability to fight (like a grappler not being allowed to grapple), but what rules limit a Karate or Kung Fu practitioner from beating the crap out of an opponent with footwork, kicks, and punches?

If I had to give a definitive answer, it would be because when you throw punches and kicks, you open yourself up to grabs, clinches, and throws. If someone's intent is to get you to the ground, out-maneuvering them is far easier said than done. A skilled grappler just needs to wait for you to throw something they can work with. For example, for a period of time in my classes I had a habit of catching the person's leg when they kicked. In fact, I wasn't always doing it on purpose, I'd just reflexively hook their leg before then could put it down. If my instructor allowed throws, takedowns would have been a no-brainer. Instead, because it was a TMA class, when I did it the match was stopped and we reset after I got chastised.

To truly have the upper hand against a grappler is very hard for someone who just knows standing martial arts. It isn't a simple thing to avoid, and every time you go for a strike you open yourself up to a counter offensive.

 

[Argus]

I definitely see your point, but all things being equal, why can't a karate practitioner simply out maneuver a grappler and punch and kick them into submission? I mean, there's a difference between rules that completely eliminate your ability to fight (like a grappler not being allowed to grapple), but what rules limit a Karate or Kung Fu practitioner from beating the crap out of an opponent with footwork, kicks, and punches?

Part of it is training, I think. Not many Karate or Kung Fu practitioners have practiced avoiding takedowns and grapplers, and it would take quite a bit of training and familiarity with grappling to learn to do so in a UFC setting. Most people just accept grappling, and counter grappling with grappling, as opposed to learning to avoid the ground.

The other thing is that the rulesets still favor grappling and takedowns iin comparison to many TMA contexts. Striking is somewhat handicapped, or at least changed by the use of gloves, and rulesets are actually more strict than people give them credit. Some of the obvious and very vulnerable and accessible targets, such as the neck, are completely off-limits -- the significance of which, I believe, anyone who hasn't trained in a TMA with open hands will not appreciate. You can't do things like kick downed opponents, and even the ring itself is designed to allow practitioners to drop to their knees without injury.

But the greatest difference, I think, is the fact that Traditional Martial Arts tend to deal more with "earnest" fighting, whereas sporting competition is much more of a "game" -- or, at least, the "game" is different in either case. Traditional Martial Arts tend to deal with committed attacks against an opponent who is truly trying to get in your space quickly and hurt you. Your attacker does not have time to feel you out, and he has to decisively engage you or else you can simply walk or run away, or perhaps even draw or grab a weapon in the case of unarmed fighting. Therefore, he can't be too cautious about attacking you -- he doesn't have time to play games and feint and poke at you from a distance. He's never seen you before. He's never fought you before. He doesn't even know if you're trained or not, or if so, what kind of training you have. He doesn't know if you will fight back or just try to run away. He may have a weapon, or he may not; he may have freinds, or he may not; he may be engaging you in an alley, on pavement, on a dirt road, or indoors; there may be sticks, pipes, bottles, chairs, rocks, and other implements laying about that you or he could grab. All of this impacts the way he will approach the engagement, and the way you will respond to it. The same contrasts could be made for a battlefield context, or a beimo context, or any other form of combat. Traditional Martial Arts are an answer to these specific contexts just as sportive martial arts are an answer to sportive contexts. The intention of the combatants, and context of the combat, are different in each case. It's not a surprise, therefore, that sportive systems tend to excel in sportive environments.

It is also a matter of training, as some have mentioned. If you want to be a successful UFC fighter, are you going to do all of the extra work that is required to make a TMA work in the ring, or are you just going to go with proven methods that will yield more success in less time? If you care about winning, which you probably do, you'll go with the latter, and stick to conventional method. Competition, in this case, cuts down on diversity and ingenuity to some extent (or rather, I should say, focuses it along a narrow path), as it leads to very serious specialization.

At least, that is my perspective. But I'll add the usual caveat that I may not know what the hell I'm talking about

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I definitely see your point, but all things being equal, why can't a karate practitioner simply out maneuver a grappler and punch and kick them into submission? I mean, there's a difference between rules that completely eliminate your ability to fight (like a grappler not being allowed to grapple), but what rules limit a Karate or Kung Fu practitioner from beating the crap out of an opponent with footwork, kicks, and punches?

The other thing is that the rulesets still favor grappling and takedowns iin comparison to many TMA contexts. Striking is somewhat handicapped, or at least changed by the use of gloves, and rulesets are actually more strict than people give them credit. Some of the obvious and very vulnerable and accessible targets, such as the neck, are completely off-limits -- the significance of which, I believe, anyone who hasn't trained in a TMA with open hands will not appreciate. You can't do things like kick downed opponents, and even the ring itself is designed to allow practitioners to drop to their knees without injury.

^This

As I mentioned in my post, many of the elements of a TMA are removed in order to subscribe to the artificial rule set imposed in a competition. The mind set is also different. In a MMA match, taking someone to the ground or being taken to the ground is part of the game. It can be quite different in TMA training. For example, in the context in which I train/teach, being taken to the ground is considered deadly force. As a result, deadly force is authorized as a response. This means taking any action/movement to cause great bodily harm up to and including death on the person so taking you to the ground. Gouging the eyes, striking the throat, crushing the testicles, striking to or grasping the back of the neck/spine area is frowned upon generally. This doesn't mean one is superior to the other in-an-of-themselves, only that they are two different things that occur in two different venues. If the rules were changed, the results may change as well.

 

[Buka]

I believe the fight game to be sport specific. An analogy would be automobile racing. Jeff Gordon seems to be the guy in NASCAR, Doug Kallita is leading the rankings in NHRA Fuel dragsters, Scott Dixon in Indy style racing, Tom Kristensen won Le Mans nine times in his life and Bryan Morris is leading off-road carts racing circuit right now. None of them would come close to winning in each others sport, despite the fact they all drive really fast cars and are used to racing. And my guess is they're pretty good drivers in real life as well.

Same thing for the fight game in my opinion. Same thing for MMA guys and TMA guys. And for all of us and the folks we train with. I know a lot of guys who train MMA, but you won't be seeing them in the UFC anytime soon. I know a lot of traditional Martial Artists, but you won't see them winning any competitions that their club might compete in. I could go on about boxers, wrestlers and us American Karate bastards but you know what I mean.

We sure all can sling the bull, though.

 

[Argus]

If I had to give a definitive answer, it would be because when you throw punches and kicks, you open yourself up to grabs, clinches, and throws. If someone's intent is to get you to the ground, out-maneuvering them is far easier said than done. A skilled grappler just needs to wait for you to throw something they can work with. For example, for a period of time in my classes I had a habit of catching the person's leg when they kicked. In fact, I wasn't always doing it on purpose, I'd just reflexively hook their leg before then could put it down. If my instructor allowed throws, takedowns would have been a no-brainer. Instead, because it was a TMA class, when I did it the match was stopped and we reset after I got chastised.

To truly have the upper hand against a grappler is very hard for someone who just knows standing martial arts. It isn't a simple thing to avoid, and every time you go for a strike you open yourself up to a counter offensive.

All that said, I do think that, as TSD Bean mentions here, many people who practice striking arts do not have enough familiarity with or appreciation for what grapplers can do. A lot of strikers seem to allow grapplers to get underneath them, and then are under the illusion that they can deliver effective strikes to the back of the head or neck while they're being uprooted and thrown to the ground. It just doesn't work that way.

 

[TSD Bean]

But the greatest difference, I think, is the fact that Traditional Martial Arts tend to deal more with "earnest" fighting, whereas sporting competition is much more of a "game" -- or, at least, the "game" is different in either case. Traditional Martial Arts tend to deal with committed attacks against an opponent who is truly trying to get in your space quickly and hurt you. Your attacker does not have time to feel you out, and he has to decisively engage you or else you can simply walk or run away, or perhaps even draw or grab a weapon in the case of unarmed fighting.

I agree with the rest of your post but I do want to comment on this statement. Yes, MMA has distinct limitations due to it being sport. No option to retreat, restrictions on striking, etc, do differ from TMA to an extent. However, the reason for the disparity between grapplers and TMA practitioners itself lies in the idea that grappling isn't a necessary to those TMAs. Jackie Chan once criticized MMA for it's promotion of the "barbaric" tendency to ground and pound. To him, "honorable" TMAs wouldn't follow up a fall with such a thing, especially in sport. Earnest fighting would itself have to consider the what if. What do you do if someone throws you to the ground and starts beating on you? It happens all the time in real world scenarios.

This is not to disagree with your point. The rules instated do handicap the efficiency of TMAs in the ring, just as it can infuriate me to watch some competitive TKD fighters walk around with their hands and their sides, because blocking with the elbow could break someone's foot. However, the attitude of 'earnest' fighting can itself be an intricate debate when you start to break down the philosophies behind a certain style.

Working within the rules of the game, it's easy to see why grappling could have such a big advantage.

 

[Hanzou]

It is also a matter of training, as some have mentioned. If you want to be a successful UFC fighter, are you going to do all of the extra work that is required to make a TMA work in the ring, or are you just going to go with proven methods that will yield more success in less time? If you care about winning, which you probably do, you'll go with the latter, and stick to conventional method. Competition, in this case, cuts down on diversity and ingenuity to some extent (or rather, I should say, focuses it along a narrow path), as it leads to very serious specialization.

I believe the fight game to be sport specific. An analogy would be automobile racing. Jeff Gordon seems to be the guy in NASCAR, Doug Kallita is leading the rankings in NHRA Fuel dragsters, Scott Dixon in Indy style racing, Tom Kristensen won Le Mans nine times in his life and Bryan Morris is leading off-road carts racing circuit right now. None of them would come close to winning in each others sport, despite the fact they all drive really fast cars and are used to racing. And my guess is they're pretty good drivers in real life as well.


Same thing for the fight game in my opinion. Same thing for MMA guys and TMA guys. And for all of us and the folks we train with. I know a lot of guys who train MMA, but you won't be seeing them in the UFC anytime soon. I know a lot of traditional Martial Artists, but you won't see them winning any competitions that their club might compete in. I could go on about boxers, wrestlers and us American Karate bastards but you know what I mean.


We sure all can sling the bull, though.

Well why doesn't TMA work in the ring by default? Why do I need to do extra work to make a fighting art work in an environment with light restrictions? If a TMA training method is to stop an adversary with a punch or a kick, what exactly is preventing this same fighter from doing it in the ring as opposed to the street? Does the inability to strike the neck or the groin render some TMA styles completely useless?

If we took this in reverse, would anyone here doubt that Floyd Mayweather could knock someone out in a streetfight, just like he can in the ring? Does anyone doubt that Rickson Gracie could choke out someone outside the cage as well as inside? Anyone think that Ronda Rousey couldn't throw some drunk a-hole to the ground and snap his arm? So why can the "sport arts" translate to various applications, but a TMA cannot?

 

[K-man]

All that said, I do think that, as TSD Bean mentions here, many people who practice striking arts do not have enough familiarity with or appreciation for what grapplers can do. A lot of strikers seem to allow grapplers to get underneath them, and then are under the illusion that they can deliver effective strikes to the back of the head or neck while they're being uprooted and thrown to the ground. It just doesn't work that way.

Depends if you train against being taken down.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVKxEdCdBog
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TRvgw1qIqE0

Or is they are already in ..
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTNDHodUISw
:asian:

 

[K-man]

So why can the "sport arts" translate to various applications, but a TMA cannot?

Because MMA is God's gift to the world?
:hmm:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

What makes some styles have such a distinct disadvantage in combat sports, while other styles tend to dominate?

I'll say the "solo form training" is the major problem.

When you learn a form, it will become your burden for the rest of your life. The day that you throw away your forms, the day that you will be free. You can then concentrate on your

- kick,
- punch,
- lock,
- throw,
- ground work,
- ...

 

[Buka]

Well why doesn't TMA work in the ring by default? Why do I need to do extra work to make a fighting art work in an environment with light restrictions? If a TMA training method is to stop an adversary with a punch or a kick, what exactly is preventing this same fighter from doing it in the ring as opposed to the street? Does the inability to strike the neck or the groin render some TMA styles completely useless?

If we took this in reverse, would anyone here doubt that Floyd Mayweather could knock someone out in a streetfight, just like he can in the ring? Does anyone doubt that Rickson Gracie could choke out someone outside the cage as well as inside? Anyone think that Ronda Rousey couldn't throw some drunk a-hole to the ground and snap his arm? So why can the "sport arts" translate to various applications, but a TMA cannot?

I didn't realize we were talking about street fighting. But, okay, I agree that Mayweather could knock someone out in a street fight. But I think he'd get smoked in MMA. I know Rickson could choke out someone outside the cage, but he'd lose in a boxing match. I think Ronda could snap anyone's arm, anywhere.... and look damn good doing it, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by "So why can the "sport arts" translate to various applications, but a TMA cannot?" I don't think sport arts translate to other sport fighting arts at all, which was my point in my last post. I get the feeling you are headed to the conclusion that a TMA person can't win in a street fight. Yes? No? Not applicable to this conversation?

 

[Hanzou]

^This

As I mentioned in my post, many of the elements of a TMA are removed in order to subscribe to the artificial rule set imposed in a competition. The mind set is also different. In a MMA match, taking someone to the ground or being taken to the ground is part of the game. It can be quite different in TMA training. For example, in the context in which I train/teach, being taken to the ground is considered deadly force. As a result, deadly force is authorized as a response. This means taking any action/movement to cause great bodily harm up to and including death on the person so taking you to the ground. Gouging the eyes, striking the throat, crushing the testicles, striking to or grasping the back of the neck/spine area is frowned upon generally. This doesn't mean one is superior to the other in-an-of-themselves, only that they are two different things that occur in two different venues. If the rules were changed, the results may change as well.

I'm pretty sure all of that was allowed in Vale Tudo, and grappling styles still did extremely well.

 

[Hanzou]

I didn't realize we were talking about street fighting. But, okay, I agree that Mayweather could knock someone out in a street fight. But I think he'd get smoked in MMA. I know Rickson could choke out someone outside the cage, but he'd lose in a boxing match.

Well yes, because Mayweather would have to deal with grappling, and Rickson wouldn't be allowed to grapple. However, NHB rules don't limit something like Kung Fu the way boxing rules would limit Rickson Gracie. Also, we all know that Boxing is heavily limited to hand techniques. TMAs are supposed to be complete systems of fighting, so they should cover all the bases, including grappling defense.

Am I wrong?

I'm not sure what you mean by "So why can the "sport arts" translate to various applications, but a TMA cannot?" I don't think sport arts translate to other sport fighting arts at all, which was my point in my last post. I get the feeling you are headed to the conclusion that a TMA person can't win in a street fight. Yes? No? Not applicable to this conversation?

Well no. I was merely pointing out that martial athletes are good fighters outside the cage as well as in. If you're a good fighter, you're a good fighter period. If the goal of a TMA is to develop a good fighter, why would a couple of rules hinder their abilities?

Again, extreme rule sets like Boxing, TKD, Judo are understandable, but we don't even see strong TMA representation in MMA/NHB where the rule sets aren't all that prohibitive for martial arts.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Another reason is TMA may attract different kind of people which is different from those people that MMA may attract.

The students in a

- Taiji class are different from the students in a Sanda/Sanshou class.
- BJJ class are different from the students in a Judo class.

If you don't want to get

- hit on the head, you may take Taiji instead of Sanda/Sanshou.
- thrown on the ground, you may take BJJ instead of Judo.

Since MMA all require to be

- hit on the head,
- thrown to the ground,

People that are interested in MMA may just be a special group of people. Many good wrestlers have good wrestling skill, since they don't want to be hit on the head, you just won't see them in MMA.