Best Karate Ruleset Transition to MMA

[Hotora86]

BTW all the fighters I have seen so far are shotokan or ryu stuff based. Which ones are the kudo fighters, anyone?

There's only one so far:
https://www.karate.com/fighters/nikita-yanchuk

 

[CI]

the cobra kai ruleset: strike first, strike hard, no mercy

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

There's only one so far:
https://www.karate.com/fighters/nikita-yanchuk

Just watched the fight thanks. Is it just me or he has an english accent in Russian ??

 

[Hotora86]

Just watched the fight thanks. Is it just me or he has an english accent in Russian ??

No, he has rhotacism, that's why it sounds off to you. He's basically Elmer Fudd from the alternate universe where everyone's a fighter.

 

[Hotora86]

oooh, how did I miss this?
New KSW champ Daniel Torres is a Shotokan Karate man!
@KBE6EKCTAH_CCP check it bruh!
https://fight-library.com/2021/01/27/daniel-torres-calming-of-the-mind/

 

[JohnPJones]

Yes indeed Karate Combat is very legit. I am not saying that all point karate ex shotokan are legit, though. Many of them are also shit, obviously.

The problem with shotokan is its emphasis on unrealistic movements and kata that are far too removed from real combat movements (the whole retracting the fists to the hip thing, all the blocks which look like a caticature of what an actual block may look like, the weird stances, etc.) and yes the focus on limited contact grooms bad habits like punching single punches with no power and off balance. I see this all the time shotokan footage from the top level. Oh also, a clear tendency to have one's torso pulled backwards. I just don't know why anyone still thinks all this stuff is a good idea in 2021 and why anyone would chose that over boxing /KB.

The line I draw between point karate and shotokan is that I think there are styles out there that train for points BUT with proper fundamentals. It's karate but no bullshit karate. Like american karate / which is not that far away from shiny pants or savate. Not the best style for full contact in a ring but still legit.

Shotokan is a relic from the 70's or whatever. The people that are successful with it in full contact situations are successful not because of it but despite it, and invariably cross train.

Oh look someone who doesn't actually understand karate criticizing hikite...how unique and novel...

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Oh look someone who doesn't actually understand karate criticizing hikite...how unique and novel...

Hipster flexing about nikita will not make it a valid combat style.

 

[JohnPJones]

Hipster flexing about nikita will not make it a valid combat style.

No hipster flex, I'm sorry you're too ignorant to do some research.

It actually takes more effort to remain ignorant in the modern era than it takes to educate youreself

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

No hipster flex, I'm sorry you're too ignorant to do some research.

It actually takes more effort to remain ignorant in the modern era than it takes to educate youreself

yeah sure. Enjoy those hidden bunkai things in your ridiculous katas while I shadow box. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[JohnPJones]

yeah sure. Enjoy those hidden bunkai things in your ridiculous katas while I shadow box. Whatever floats your boat.

No hidden bunkais.

Have fun doing kata while I make up my own kata's...Jesus you're stupid

 

[shincheckin]

Kyokushin of course. The one most similar to mt/kb

 

[destroyer4147]

Kyokushin of course. The one most similar to mt/kb

Gosh, you'd think so, but based on the replies, the statistics favor Pointfighters in MMA

 

[Azam]

IKO-1 I believe is the only Kyokushin organization that had some rule revisions, notably:
- sweep = waza-ari
- land a high kick + "zanshin" pose = waza-ari

where 2 waza-ari = ippon = victory

Therefore, you can pretty much win your match by sweeping your opponent twice, or landing two high kicks, or one of each.

The new rules have been criticized by many who feel this was a step toward being more "point-like." If this makes IKO-1 fighters more "pointlike" than the rest of their Kyokushin peers, could that give them a higher likehood of success in MMA than the remaining Kyokushin fighters who haven't adopted the new rules?

Tbh I think the rule changes from the IKO1 were positive. I'm saying this as an ex-IKO1 member as well.

A lot of people left the IKO-1 over the rule change but I think the rule change was what knockdown competition really needed. It put more of an emphasis on technique and technical ability rather than just bull rushing your opponent.

The reason why the reaction to the rule change was so negative in some areas (mainly Russia) was because people felt it was leaning more into point fighting. IMO the new rules make fighters more well rounded and makes it a touch more realistic.

IMO for too long a lot of sweeps or techniques that made opponents to lose balance in competition were never counted as waza-ari even though according to the rules they should have been. IMO a technique that puts you off balance should score very highly. A technique that you throw that puts you off balance should score against you.

The high kick & zanshin pose IMO makes more sense - it shows that you are in a position/intention to land something else whereas just throwing a high kick then being awarded a waza-ari if it lands (even if you are too far away or too slow to follow up) - is less realistic imo.

The new rules also allow for more parrying, allows you to push and now allows you to grab in a limited context.

IMO the rules are designed to favour technical ability and well roundedness over physicality.

The reason for the negativity/criticism is because much of the kyokushin community doesn't want knockdown rules to change (even though they have gradually changed from the 70s).

 

[Azam]

So statistically:
- Knockdown translates better than Pointfighting in Oriental Rules Kickboxing/Muay Thai
- Pointfighting translates better than Knockdown in MMA

The main difference between KB/MT and MMA is obviously the ground game. Is it then safe to assume the presence of the ground game is the key factor in giving Pointfighting the edge over Knockdown in MMA?

Why does Pointfighting translate better than Knockdown into MMA, but not better than Knockdown into KB/MT? Why does the distance transfer advantage that Pointfighting enjoys over Knockdown in MMA not appear as evident for Pointfighting in KB/MT? In MMA as well as KB/MT, shouldn't the fighting distance similarty to pointfighting favor the Pointfighter over the Knockdown fighter in both cases?

Point fighters generally fight from a slightly longer distance and tend to do a much better job with distance management/footwork and in/out movement (i.e. hit first and without getting hit back). This translates well to MMA because you can only engage in grappling at close range and that's hard to do when the other guy is excellent at not letting you get close and darting in/out of range quickly. Not to mention the reflexes and defensive capability a ruleset like point fighting - as well as the familiarity of punching someone in the face without getting punched yourself (similar to boxing in a sense). Then you combine the 4oz gloves and that skillset becomes even more effective.

Whereas knockdown fighters generally fight from up close, have excellent conditioning but imo generally poor footwork (in comparison) and not as familiar with avoiding being punched in the face. Now you throw that into MMA and you run into problems: in range to be grappled, easier for punches to slip through your guard (especially when in punching range) and then add the not so great footwork - doesn't translate as well.

With kickboxing - knockdown fares much better because the range is a bit closer, gloves provide some more protection than 4oz gloves (like shelling up) and more importantly they are better at absorbing shots than their point-fighting counterparts.


TBH it's not generic weakness in either style that's at fault. No fault with the styles themselves. The fault lies more in the competition rulesets and the habits those rulesets form.

 

[destroyer4147]

The high kick & zanshin pose IMO makes more sense - it shows that you are in a position/intention to land something else whereas just throwing a high kick then being awarded a waza-ari if it lands (even if you are too far away or too slow to follow up) - is less realistic imo.

In the past, if fighter lands a high kick that doesn't score a knockdown or visibly hurt the opponent, then that high kick is ignored and the fighters just keep fighting. The judges then factor in that landed high kick when declaring a winner. I would think this version makes more sense and is more realistic.

A complaint with the current rule is that there are fighters that try to steal waza-ari by landing a fast but not so powerful high kick + zanshin, and essentially with two of those, you can score what basicallly amounts to the equivalent of a TKO even if the other fighter isn't hurt . Fighters can essentially develop strategy to take advantage of this. It'd become a trend. Weaker, faster high kicks will be favored over stronger ones. Habits and trends will develop with this which, if carried over to UFC or MMA, will get an IKO-1 fighter killed! (Imagine a fast, weak high kick + Zanshin being done in KB/MMA)

At worst, it could turn a whole generation of Kyokushin fighters into something like fast-kicking TKD fighters who put more emphasis in the value of scoring the double-waza-ari over developing a high kick that can actually hurt someone. It might be like WTF TKD, which although it is full-contact in that it permits full-contact techniquies, one doesn't necessarilty HAVE to use full-contact techniques to win.

Just out of curiosity, why are you an "ex-IKO-1 member?" Why did you decide to leave? I myself am a current IKO-1 member, and from what I understand, leaving the IKO requires a formal resignation or membership into a rival organization. As far as I know, cross-training in other martial arts doesn't get me kicked out of the IKO

 

[Azam]

In the past, if fighter lands a high kick that doesn't score a knockdown or visibly hurt the opponent, then that high kick is ignored and the fighters just keep fighting. The judges then factor in that landed high kick when declaring a winner. I would think this version makes more sense and is more realistic.

A complaint with the current rule is that there are fighters that try to steal waza-ari by landing a fast but not so powerful high kick + zanshin, and essentially with two of those, you can score what basicallly amounts to the equivalent of a TKO even if the other fighter isn't hurt . Fighters can essentially develop strategy to take advantage of this. It'd become a trend. Weaker, faster high kicks will be favored over stronger ones. Habits and trends will develop with this which, if carried over to UFC or MMA, will get an IKO-1 fighter killed! (Imagine a fast, weak high kick + Zanshin being done in KB/MMA)

At worst, it could turn a whole generation of Kyokushin fighters into something like fast-kicking TKD fighters who put more emphasis in the value of scoring the double-waza-ari over developing a high kick that can actually hurt someone. It might be like WTF TKD, which although it is full-contact in that it permits full-contact techniquies, one doesn't necessarilty HAVE to use full-contact techniques to win.

Just out of curiosity, why are you an "ex-IKO-1 member?" Why did you decide to leave? I myself am a current IKO-1 member, and from what I understand, leaving the IKO requires a formal resignation or membership into a rival organization. As far as I know, cross-training in other martial arts doesn't get me kicked out of the IKO

True but we've all seen head kicks that might temporarily stun the opponent (not enough to hurt or incapacitate) and a waza awarded (before the rule change - not just in the IKO1 either). At the end of the day it boils down to ref/judges and what they consider an effective high kick + zanshin. I'm not for a moment suggesting there won't be mistakes or fighters that might try to take advantage of the rule change - but fighters like this will always try to work around the rules to find a competitive advantage regardless of what they are. I haven't seen any tip tap high kicks + zanshins in the last world tournament (not that I recall - I could be wrong). I feel as though the worry of a light high kick + zanshin is not borne out with evidence - I think this issue is overstated - by that I mean it's not happening enough in tournaments that it is a problem. I'm happy to change my mind if you show me tournaments where it is happening and frequently enough where it could be considered an issue.

I didn't switch organisation - I just fell out of love with the art. I saw holes in the art that made me decide that it wasn't the art for me anymore. I switched to Daido Juku Kudo - and have been doing it since.

I'm still fond of the art in the sense that it gave me a bite down on your mouthpiece and push through attitude but also equally mixed with an ex scientology member that wants people to know that the church of scientology is an osu osu cult.

 

[destroyer4147]

I'm still fond of the art in the sense that it gave me a bite down on your mouthpiece and push through attitude but also equally mixed with an ex scientology member that wants people to know that the church of scientology is an osu osu cult.

Hahaha. I sorta get what you're saying regarding "osu osu cult," but can you expand on this more? I'd love to have it spelled out for me. Sorry.

Any traditional martial art, such as any that includes bowing, is an "osu osu cult," right? Is there something about the IKO or Kyokushin as whole that makes it more so than other traditional arts? Isn't Daido Juku also an "osu osu cult" as well, having been derived from Kyokushin?

 

[Hotora86]

Tbh I think the rule changes from the IKO1 were positive. I'm saying this as an ex-IKO1 member as well.

A lot of people left the IKO-1 over the rule change but I think the rule change was what knockdown competition really needed. It put more of an emphasis on technique and technical ability rather than just bull rushing your opponent.

The reason why the reaction to the rule change was so negative in some areas (mainly Russia) was because people felt it was leaning more into point fighting. IMO the new rules make fighters more well rounded and makes it a touch more realistic.

IMO for too long a lot of sweeps or techniques that made opponents to lose balance in competition were never counted as waza-ari even though according to the rules they should have been. IMO a technique that puts you off balance should score very highly. A technique that you throw that puts you off balance should score against you.

The high kick & zanshin pose IMO makes more sense - it shows that you are in a position/intention to land something else whereas just throwing a high kick then being awarded a waza-ari if it lands (even if you are too far away or too slow to follow up) - is less realistic imo.

The new rules also allow for more parrying, allows you to push and now allows you to grab in a limited context.

IMO the rules are designed to favour technical ability and well roundedness over physicality.

The reason for the negativity/criticism is because much of the kyokushin community doesn't want knockdown rules to change (even though they have gradually changed from the 70s).

This is very interesting, thank you. Is there a new name for the new rules as well? Like knockdown-2 or something?

 

[Kertol]

I have noticed myself that guys who come from the semi-contact styles have actually had more success than guys from knockdown karate maybe it’s a coincidence but let’s not forget Bas Rutten was the most successful karate fighter in mma during the 90s I don’t think it’s a coincidence though for the same reasons others have mentioned here earlier.

The people who say guys like GSP or Chuck didn’t use much Karate in mma are deeply mistaken as it was deeply embedded in their striking games. Only thing is that they never trained for point karate tournaments so that distinct element was never part of their game to begin with that guys like Gunnar Nelson, Horiguchi and Machida have that partly made them unique. This resulted in GSP and Chuck’s striking not looking much different then others in mma because at the end of the day a hook is a hook no matter what style you learned it from but if you look closely you can still see the karate in them.

 

[Kertol]

Lovely rear leg sidekick

I think this one against Shields was with a spin beforehand

non-switch chambered snap roundhouse

Ok I’m done