Why is everyone so crazy about MMA?

[Freestyler777]

It seems like everyone implicitly accepts that MMA is the real world, and that everything else is a 'style' rather than a 'system'.

I am a fan of MMA, but I practice Judo, and I believe both have SD efficacy.

This debate, between throwing (judo) and submission (MMA) has been going on since the ancient greeks three thousand years ago!!!

Some say it is better to throw uki down and not go to the ground with him.

Some say it is better to have a wide range of skills, so you can handle any 'style' of attack the aggressor might throw at you.

In my opinion, completeness is good, but MMA is not the only truth in combat. The Ancient Greeks had three brutal combat sports: Kickboxing (Pugme) Throwing (Ortho Palle) and Pankration (what is now called submission, or MMA). Many great military men believed in throwing, and to this day the U.S. Armed Forces trains its soldiers in Greco-Roman Wrestling, a style of throwing without a jacket.

Then again, Alexander the Great was a big fan of pankration, and he had these type of athletes with him when he conquered India, which may have given rise to Oriental Martial Arts.

I think both work, it depends on the situation, but it's just speculation.

:soapbox:

 

[Em MacIntosh]

It seems like everyone implicitly accepts that MMA is the real world, and that everything else is a 'style' rather than a 'system'.

I am a fan of MMA, but I practice Judo, and I believe both have SD efficacy.

This debate, between throwing (judo) and submission (MMA) has been going on since the ancient greeks three thousand years ago!!!

Some say it is better to throw uki down and not go to the ground with him.

Some say it is better to have a wide range of skills, so you can handle any 'style' of attack the aggressor might throw at you.

In my opinion, completeness is good, but MMA is not the only truth in combat. The Ancient Greeks had three brutal combat sports: Kickboxing (Pugme) Throwing (Ortho Palle) and Pankration (what is now called submission, or MMA). Many great military men believed in throwing, and to this day the U.S. Armed Forces trains its soldiers in Greco-Roman Wrestling, a style of throwing without a jacket.

Then again, Alexander the Great was a big fan of pankration, and he had these type of athletes with him when he conquered India, which may have given rise to Oriental Martial Arts.

I think both work, it depends on the situation, but it's just speculation.

:soapbox:

Alexander the great TRIED to conquer india. He had one victory but the attrition to achieve it caused his soldiers to march home with or without him so he chose to go home as well. Macedonians are definitely up there with spartans and vikings though. As for pankration, it's one of my favorites. I don't even see the difference between it and BJJ. I think people are taught to see differences that aren't really there. This takes away from the fluidity of the fighter. Combat to me is combat. You develop a fighting mode and you use what works for you. In real combat you have to win. You have no other choice. Wether a slam, throw or submission, make it work, make it hurt, make it count!

 

[Freestyler777]

I finally met someone mature enough to see that MMA is the new pankration.

Really, there is no style, everyone does what is best for him, no need to draw distinctions between this and that.

I think everyone should keep doing what they do and not be obsessed with MMA. I asked Officer Lowenthal, a cop I met who trains at Gleason's Boxing Gym, "what is the best self-defense?" and he said, "Anything you can do reflexively, second nature."

Simple!

 

[Tez3]

MMA is a sport. Self defence is self defence ie what works. I think that only in the States is MMA touted as a reality self defence, in the UK and Europe it's a sport.We train differently for MMA than we do for self defence. Of course doing MMA helps but it's not self defence!

 

[Freestyler777]

Thank you Tez. At least I found a couple of like-minded individuals.

Not many people are familiar with the word pankration, but that is the old name for the sport of MMA, which was only recently revived.

 

[Tez3]

Thank you Tez. At least I found a couple of like-minded individuals.

Not many people are familiar with the word pankration, but that is the old name for the sport of MMA, which was only recently revived.

Pankration clubs have been going in Greece (where else lol!) for a long time now, I saw a documentary on one a while back. I think it's better known here and in Europe, there's several pankration clubs around.
I think, like the craze for kickboxing, a lot of people are jumping on the bandwagon aiming to make money of out teaching MMA. Over here it's a fashion things for girls especially to say they do kickboxing (what they are actually doing is Tae-bo type fitness classes). If MMA is advertised as the answer to everything you are more likely to get people in through your door and stumping up the cash. In fairness though a lot of TMA places do the same!

 

[Langenschwert]

I like MMA, not because it's reality, but because it can be a really good show. That being said, it's nice seeing some of the unarmed components of many arts brought to bear at a high level. I never get tired of seeing a good hip throw.

Like any other MA competition, it's not the real thing. There isn't the same experience of tunnel vision, adrenaline dump (though those do happen in competition), uneven terrain, hidden/improvised weapons, outnumbering, and believing that someone is trying to kill you that affect one's mental state in a "real" encounter.

It can be good to go to the ground with someone, and it can be suicide, depending on the situation. Taking someone who has a knife to the ground is a bad idea, if you go with him. It's even harder to defend against a knife while on the ground than it is standing up.

MMA is good, it's cool, but it's not the be-all end all of MA.

Best regards,

-Mark

 

[Freestyler777]

I particularly like to see throws, so I watch Judo. I think the aesthetics of a martial art is what attracts people initially to the system they end up studying.

I find MMA boring, unless Karo Parisyan is fighting, because it's all the same thing: punch, clinch, takedown, ground n pound, stall in guard, etc....

But I like Judo better. Everything about it is cool, like the gi, the big throws, the great variety of 'styles' in judo (ex: russian judo, classical judo, pick-ups, unorthodox...) the complexity of the sport, so on and so forth.

People should do what is right for them, not everybody hop on the current fad, MMA. You have to do what is right for you.

 

[Steel Tiger]

It's very interesting that MMA is being compared to Pankration. The comparison goes beyond just techniques though. Ancient pankration practitioners were professional fighters who competed throughout the years toward the ultimate goal the Olympics. Don't be fooled by the modern Olympics, the ancient games were contested by fierce professionals.

Ancient Pankration was, of the three Olympic fighting disciplines the most rules controlled. Boxing continued until one competitor was unable to continue (usually due to being unconscious), wrestling continued until one competitor was unable to continue (often simply due to exhaustion), but pankration competitors were allowed to surrender a bout. Interesting isn't it?

I think the current craze, which is dying down somewhat, over MMA actually has its roots in Bruce Lee's JKD philosophy. Bruce was all for keeping the effective and throwing out what didn't work. MMA works along similar lines. As a consequence, a lot of less knowledgeable practitioners have come to the conclusion that anything with forms is of no value and are vehement in their assertions that MMA is better because it simulates the 'real world'. I guarrantee that the most vociferous have no idea what the real world is like.

 

[Andrew Green]

Ancient Pankration was, of the three Olympic fighting disciplines the most rules controlled.

How do you figure? Everything allowed in wrestling or boxing was allowed in pankration?

Boxing continued until one competitor was unable to continue (usually due to being unconscious),

or the opponent gave up, and if it went too long they could end it be exchanging undefended blows. I remember something about fighters standing on a platform exchanging and the person that got knocked off first lost as well from a history of sport class I took a few years back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_Boxing

wrestling continued until one competitor was unable to continue (often simply due to exhaustion),

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Wrestling

or points or submission.

but pankration competitors were allowed to surrender a bout. Interesting isn't it?

Not really, as both boxing and wrestling could end by submission as well.

 

[exile]

Freestyler, this is my reading of what's gone on with MMA (in the US, anyway—as Tez observes the culture seems to be quite different in the UK).

Start from the premise that the ultimate goal and purpose of the MAs is to allow you to defend yourself against an unsought, violent attack in one or another `everyday' environment. This is a position that an awful lot of people take.

But you can't actually tell, as a rule, how `good' your MA is for the purpose, right? Unless you regularly engage in street combat, how do you know what your art can do in the domain of real combat? Eh? Starting to feel a little insecure, now, are we? And there are plenty of people around who are happy to feed that insecurity, who trashtalk other MAs for a living, so to speak. If you want an example, just look through the pages of any issue of Black Belt and count the number of pages devoted to advertising of the `Fear no man!!' variety, telling you, in effect, that your art sucks, but that the guy who paid for the ad spent years developing a special secret system of combatives for the British Special Boat Squad or Commandos or the Israeli Paratroop service or the American Green Berets or Delta unit or... is gonna help you correct that unfortunate situation. One thing all these guy seems to agree on: the quickest way to part you from your $$ is to convince you that your art has no true martial content and you'd better get some quick or you'll probably be dead by the end of the week. If you want another example, just paw around in MartialTalk's archives and you'll find loads of threads of the `my martial art can beat up your matial art.' The passion and anger expressed in some of these arguments (some of which degenerate pretty quickly into variants of `You idiot!' `No, you idiot') tell you just how many exposed nerves that kind of argument touches—which wouldn't be case, I very strongly suspect, if everyone were serenely secure about the combat effectiveness of their own art, and training in that art.

So everyone—obviously, not everyone but many, maybe even most MAists—is really anxious about this point. So how to resolve it? Looks bleak, doesn't it: not having access to alternative worlds that split off from the present as a result of different choices, it's not possible to take a random collection of street fights and run through each of them by substituting in turn an exponent of TKD, of Gojo-ryu, of Silat....and then, of course, on top of that is the fact that no two exponents of any given art are quite the same, or exactly as good, etc. etc. etc. So there's this burning question with no good way to get an answer.

The MMA promoters, however, have figured out how to leverage this state of affairs into a special privileged position for what it is their fighters do. You can't see how any give MA is going to work under real street conditions, for the reasons just given—fine. But we can show you that our boys and girls can beat any of you TMAists in the cage. And if that's so, that must mean that there's an inherent superiority to what our boys and girls do that carries over to the street. So there's the answer you were asking for, but it's not the one you wanted, mate: none of your separate, parochial TMAs are any good compared to our best-of-each-world synthesis. Now even if this were true, it's not surprising that MMAists will tend to defeat non MMAists under MMA rules and conditions, right? But a lot of TMAists get upset and try to argue the point, along the lines of, well, X beat Y recently and X is a striker of a standard karate/kickboxing/KMA type, so that shows you're wrong; and then there's the comeback, and on and on it goes.

But it doesn't matter who wins that particular argument, because what the MMA promoters (and the fans who do their work for them on internet discussion boards) have succeeded in doing is getting everyone to talk about MMA. It's MMA vs. this, or MMA vs. that. How many JKD vs. MMA arguments have we heard? As vs. JKD vs. Aikido, or Hapkido vs. Silat, or whatever? Who's always one of the parties in the argument, regardless of which one the other is? It's almost always MMA, right? By playing the insecurity of TMAists about their arts, the MMA crowd has in effect made their own operation one of the two parties involved in any debate about `reality-effectiveness', regardless of who the other party is. And isn't that another way of putting the question you asked: why is everyone always arguing about whether or not MMA is better than X, regardless of what X is in any given case?

The bottom line is, trashtalking can get you all the attention you could ever want. By the completely spurious claims that (i) the tendency of MMAists to defeat non-MMAists in MMA events indicates the superiority of MMA to any TMA and (ii) the art style that is most successful in the arena will be the one that's most successful on the street, the MMA gang have staked a claim to the title of `most realistic/effective fighting style'. You can pretty much tell what I think of the logic of that claim, but that's how they've done what they've done, I think.

 

[Tez3]

I particularly like to see throws, so I watch Judo. I think the aesthetics of a martial art is what attracts people initially to the system they end up studying.

I find MMA boring, unless Karo Parisyan is fighting, because it's all the same thing: punch, clinch, takedown, ground n pound, stall in guard, etc....

But I like Judo better. Everything about it is cool, like the gi, the big throws, the great variety of 'styles' in judo (ex: russian judo, classical judo, pick-ups, unorthodox...) the complexity of the sport, so on and so forth.

People should do what is right for them, not everybody hop on the current fad, MMA. You have to do what is right for you.

The Judo we see now is a much watered down version as the Olympic commitee has decided they want a spectator friendly sport. I would suggest that basing your knowledge of MMA on the UFC may be a bit restricting for making your mind up about the sport. I go to shows at least once a weekend ( note the word shows) sometimes two or three, the fights are all different, few are boring. A great many of the fighters are paid fighters either, they get their expenses but do it for the love of it. Exile is right, while promoters may put on shows for the love of the sport we are also trying to make money on them! At the very least we want to make enough from one show to put on the next and cover all the expenses.
In am increasingly political correct world MMA is bucking the trend for the 'babyfication' of people where the nanny state does everything. MMA is raw sometimes, it has fighters going into the ring/cage who want to prove they can fight ( and also because it is so much damn fun!). There is a huge pool of talented fighters out there who are also entertaining.
MMA v TMA is a very old ( and boring) argument there are no new views any more, it's just going over the same ground time after time.
I train, judge and promote MMA, I'm also an active black belt TSD, the two sit very nicely together with no problems.

 

[Em MacIntosh]

Nothing against MMA but why did they soften everything. Just thinking of the Shamrock/Gracie days. Headbutts etc. Not to say you can't get injured but when you had to worry about a headbutt it changed everything about the match. You had another devastating weapon to worry about. This makes me wonder where I am on the biting/gouging thing. I wouldn't want to fight a biter.

 

[exile]

The Judo we see now is a much watered down version as the Olympic commitee has decided they want a spectator friendly sport. I would suggest that basing your knowledge of MMA on the UFC may be a bit restricting for making your mind up about the sport. I go to shows at least once a weekend ( note the word shows) sometimes two or three, the fights are all different, few are boring. A great many of the fighters are paid fighters either, they get their expenses but do it for the love of it. Exile is right, while promoters may put on shows for the love of the sport we are also trying to make money on them! At the very least we want to make enough from one show to put on the next and cover all the expenses.
In am increasingly political correct world MMA is bucking the trend for the 'babyfication' of people where the nanny state does everything. MMA is raw sometimes, it has fighters going into the ring/cage who want to prove they can fight ( and also because it is so much damn fun!). There is a huge pool of talented fighters out there who are also entertaining.
MMA v TMA is a very old ( and boring) argument there are no new views any more, it's just going over the same ground time after time.
I train, judge and promote MMA, I'm also an active black belt TSD, the two sit very nicely together with no problems.

I think it's completely legit to make money from entrepreneurship in MMA (or pretty much anything else legal), and as I say, I don't think the MMA world in Britain has that same nasty edge `We can beat you no matter what TMA you do'. Look at the last sentence in Tez' post: I train, judge and promote MMA, I'm also an active black belt TSD, the two sit very nicely together with no problems. You wouldn't catch an MMA promoter in the USA ever saying something like that, I don't think! They'd flog the supposed superiority of MMA for all it's worth. That difference alone tells you something about the contrast in the MA cultures of the two places. Would that we over here were more like the UK folk in that respect...

 

[Andrew Green]

I don't think the MMA world in Britain has that same nasty edge `We can beat you no matter what TMA you do'.

Is it anything to do with MMA? Or is it cultural differences that go beyond that?

No offence to the Americans, but American's seem to like to polarize things.

Right vs Left
Republican vs Democrat
TMA vs MMA

Other countries don't seem to make those distinctions as clear, there is a lot more gray area. To be honest the TMA vs MMA seperation never made sense to me.

You also seem to have a lot greater concentration of in your face advertising then we do up here, not sure if that is the same for the UK. But I am guessing it is, based on cultural import / export ratios (music / movies / video games / commercials / etc) that it will likely be similar.

 

[Em MacIntosh]

MMA is a smashing good time.

 

[exile]

Is it anything to do with MMA? Or is it cultural differences that go beyond that?

No offence to the Americans, but American's seem to like to polarize things.

Right vs Left
Republican vs Democrat
TMA vs MMA

Other countries don't seem to make those distinctions as clear, there is a lot more gray area. To be honest the TMA vs MMA seperation never made sense to me.

You also seem to have a lot greater concentration of in your face advertising then we do up here, not sure if that is the same for the UK. But I am guessing it is, based on cultural import / export ratios (music / movies / video games / commercials / etc) that it will likely be similar.

I wouldn't challenge any of these observations, Andrew. I'm a dual US/Canadian citizen (seriously: I hold passports from both countries, e.g.) and have lived in each of them for many years, and I think there is a definite cultural difference along the lines of your comment.

MMA is a smashing good time.

That's what you Brisish say—you just enjoy it. In the USA, there tends to be a lot more talking about how MMAists can kick TMAikts' butts all over the place. It's as Andrew says: it has to be all polarized and in your face...

 

[Freestyler777]

Let me adress exile's post, because he has a lot of valid points, but I have some insights of my own. First of all, I am not saying that MMA is bad or ineffective in any way, I realize it is jiu-jitsu, and jiu-jitsu is almost synonymous with self-defense.

What I am saying is, does everyone need to abandon their TMA and just do MMA? Are all styles, such as Judo and Sambo (my two favorites) completely outdated and therefore are useless to practice?

From my understanding, not everyone does MMA, not even all BJJ blackbelts. Most people only have time to dedicate to one marital art, and almost all TMA have some efficacy. That's not insane is it?

Anyway, style is a rather artificial thing. We're all human beings with a wide range of abilities, some abilities that are not even practiced in the particular system that we train in!

I'm not knocking MMA, I'm just getting the impression that people hold MMA to be this revolutionary new concept, when all MA fall into one of three distinct disciplines (strking, takedowns, submissions). Completeness is good, and so is live fighting(which is essential in any system), but I think it is better to know one thing and do it well, than to be a jack of all trades, master of none. And very few are as well-rounded as Matt Hume (from the old days), Matt Hughes, or Matt Serra (who's striking coach happens to be a good friend of mine ). I'm sure you guys can think of other fighters who are also known to be well-rounded, not just talented in one aspect.

My point is, do your sport, and do it well, and don't have a comlpex about MMA. Hey, maybe I should take my own advice!

 

[Em MacIntosh]

I wouldn't challenge any of these observations, Andrew. I'm a dual US/Canadian citizen (seriously: I hold passports from both countries, e.g.) and have lived in each of them for many years, and I think there is a definite cultural difference along the lines of your comment.



That's what you Brisish say—you just enjoy it. In the USA, there tends to be a lot more talking about how MMAists can kick TMAikts' butts all over the place. It's as Andrew says: it has to be all polarized and in your face...

I'm not english, I'm a canuck. I hear what you're saying though. I was just talking about goin' to the matches, getting some popcorn and a beer and watching the show.

 

[Tez3]

Let me adress exile's post, because he has a lot of valid points, but I have some insights of my own. First of all, I am not saying that MMA is bad or ineffective in any way, I realize it is jiu-jitsu, and jiu-jitsu is almost synonymous with self-defense.

What I am saying is, does everyone need to abandon their TMA and just do MMA? Are all styles, such as Judo and Sambo (my two favorites) completely outdated and therefore are useless to practice?

From my understanding, not everyone does MMA, not even all BJJ blackbelts. Most people only have time to dedicate to one marital art, and almost all TMA have some efficacy. That's not insane is it?

Anyway, style is a rather artificial thing. We're all human beings with a wide range of abilities, some abilities that are not even practiced in the particular system that we train in!

I'm not knocking MMA, I'm just getting the impression that people hold MMA to be this revolutionary new concept, when all MA fall into one of three distinct disciplines (strking, takedowns, submissions). Completeness is good, and so is live fighting(which is essential in any system), but I think it is better to know one thing and do it well, than to be a jack of all trades, master of none. And very few are as well-rounded as Matt Hume (from the old days), Matt Hughes, or Matt Serra (who's striking coach happens to be a good friend of mine ). I'm sure you guys can think of other fighters who are also known to be well-rounded, not just talented in one aspect.

My point is, do your sport, and do it well, and don't have a comlpex about MMA. Hey, maybe I should take my own advice!

Um... I tend to keep my marital arts separate from my martial arts! Sorry I just could not resist that!

I can't really reply to this without saying what I seem always to say! I know a great many well rounded MMA fighters. We all go to judo, juijitsu, Muay Thai, Sambo seminars, many of us do other TMAs as well, Aikido, karate, TKD etc. I know some that do Chinese styles.
The MMA fighters I know are masters, they are masters of MMA.