Why are people uninterested of fighting other styles?

[shincheckin]

Machida beating many opponents of different training backgrounds and winning the ufc lhw title is significant. It would be more accurate to say 'one guy many times doing many different things from his style to beat many different oponents'.
Also american and european kickboxing is largely karate based, so in that sense tons of mma fightere are actually using karate to an extent.

Again, if more traditional styles realistically trained and sparred as much as muay thai you would see much more of it in mma, so how you train is key to making it work.

Muay thai in any case is actually a TMA also, but one that has a ring sport part which makes the training more realistic than most other TMA's.

As I mentioned wrestling/bjj/muay thai/boxing is most common for US mma.

For Russian mma it is wrestling/sambo/judo/kickboxing/boxing

Again, all arts that are also sports and have a competition and sparring focus which is why they more often produce fighters that can use the techniques live and make them work.

yeah were pretty much saying the same thing thats why i was thinking you didnt fully read my post. as machida is a example of what I was saying where generally speaking the TMAs are not very effective, compared to other styles. Not that TMAs are ineffective, or that they cannot be effective, just that there are other styles that are more effective. And that doesnt mean that a karate guy cant beat a MT guy, or that a TKD guy cant beat a MT guy, and as you mentioned machida is a example of it being done and there are others. Mcgregors striking style consists of some karate and tkd as well. There is something beneficial in every martial art, some are just more so than others. if we take bruce lees concept of taking what is useful and rejecting what is useless, we can see that principle has been done in MMA and we can see the result of it, and what those martial arts predominantly used are......theres a reason they are the predominant ones. Again its not to say that you couldnt take something beneficial from tangsudowtaedo and apply it as well.

we can even take your example of "For Russian mma it is wrestling/sambo/judo/kickboxing/boxing" I dont think anyone would argue with you that those martial arts arent effective. But what we see here are again, more or less of the same things in MMA across the world, you can remove MT and replace it with kickboxing, but its more ore less the same thing, of course you got boxing and wrestling, im sure BJJ is in the mix. It doesnt matter where in the world you go, guys that are fighting MMA are using mainly the sane things, because they have proven themself in the cage. Every martial art on the planet has had an equal amount of time to prove itself in the cage, yet the more effective martial arts are the ones that are dominating MMA. We all know what those are, other can be supplemented it, but they are just that, added ingredients, extra components, the main martial arts of boxing/MT-kickboxing/wrestling/BJJ are always there, doesnt matter where in the world you go. so russian MMA has judo and sambo added to the mix, japanese MMA probably has karate in there, but the main ones are not removed, rather the other martial arts are just added.

I dont think anyone would argue that for MMA, anywhere in the world you go, they are training/using BJJ. because it has proven its effectiveness, tai chi on the other hand has not. That being said I think there are some beneficial aspects that could be taken from practicing tai chi that could be related to fighting, such as body control and strength from certain poses. Is tai chi a effective martial art? no. Are there beneficial things in tai chi that can be taken and applied/used towards fighting? yes.

im sure your probably already aware of this

 

[Robocok]

Is there any majority consensus on what is effective/ineffective?

I'm sure I'm forgetting a few but here's my list:

Effective- boxing, kickboxing/muay thai, tkd, sambo, bjj, wrestling, karate, judo, jeet kune do (first mma?)

Ineffective- wing chun, aikido, kung fu, tai chi, sumo

Unsure- krav maga, capoeira, hapkido, kenpo, ninjutsu, tang soo do

 

[shincheckin]

Is there any majority consensus on what is effective/ineffective?

I'm sure I'm forgetting a few but here's my list:

Effective- boxing, kickboxing/muay thai, tkd, sambo, bjj, wrestling, karate, judo

Ineffective- wing chun, aikido, kung fu, tai chi, sumo

Unsure- krav maga, capieira, hapkido, kenpo, jeet kune do, ninjutsu, tang soo do

i would agree with all that, however I bet you could find something useful from everything on the ineffective and unsure tabs as well if you dig hard enought. The jab in JDK is very similar to a flick jab in boxing for example.

 

[TheMaster]

As I have reiterated again many times, the sparring and live training methodology is what makes things effective regardless of the style. Of couse boxing will always be used more than TKD as punches are easier to land then spinning kicks, but training them live allows both to be used effectively much more.

So in Russia, Judo and Sambo replaces BJJ as a core base but they are all based on live training (and all are really substyles of Kodokan Judo)

Japanese Ju jutsu (without live training) = ineffective.

Japanese ju jutsu styles with live training = transformed into Judo then BJJ so effective.

And Muay thai and kickboxing may be interchangeable as options but are still different styles but again both live sparring.

Is there any majority consensus on what is effective/ineffective?

I'm sure I'm forgetting a few but here's my list:

Effective- boxing, kickboxing/muay thai, tkd, sambo, bjj, wrestling, karate, judo

Ineffective- wing chun, aikido, kung fu, tai chi, sumo

Unsure- krav maga, capieira, hapkido, kenpo, jeet kune do, ninjutsu, tang soo do

Jeet kun do was MMA before MMA.

Otherwise your list simply is of what is trained with live sparing.
Wing chun plus live training = Tony Ferguson so you can add that to the list.
Plus alot of WC handfighting and infighting is like boxing or dirty boxing and muay thai also so it works just fine if trained live.

Also some styles are for self defence like krav maga.
In fact Aikido against a knife is far more useful than wrestling, since aikido is a wrist control and sword/knife disarm style so different applications. Add a good punch or ability to finish with a choke and aikido can be very useful against weapons, whereas pure wrestling or BJJ would most likely just get you stabbed or killed. So you need to remember the context.

It is great having these discussions with mma fans who may or may not only train or just be aware of mma to introduce them to the wider world of martial arts.

 

[Inquisitus]

I echo prioritizing the sport you compete in or are enjoying. The other thing IMO is the ruleset. When you spar WKF karate and you're sambo; what rules? No gloves, small gloves, shins, allow full range of throws, GNP, groundwork, etc.

Sporting styles are easier to cross because of well defined rules. That was the point of K1 vs. FTR MT.

 

[spacetime]

Before Michael Venom Page and Stephen Thompson, nobody thought freestyle point Karate works in MMA. We just don't know until elite guys try it out

 

[Eisenhans]

because they dont want their traditional style to be "exposed" for not working or what not

not to bash TMA's, and not that there arent good things to take from them, or that a TKD guy cant beat a MT guy, so on and so forth, blah blah blah.

Modern martial arts have the same "problem". In fact, you have an easier time getting a TMA guy to spar other styles than a modern sports guy - the latter just doesn't have anything to win from this. Worst case, he gets hurt and can't compete. Best case, he wins against someone who isn't in his sport anyway, so who cares.

Generally speaking, the more "effective" martial arts are what is predominantly used in MMA, due to their effectiveness. We all know what those martial arts are.

Hopefully we dont have to hear someone come along and say "not true because this one time this one guy did this one thing" as like I said generally speaking, and not that there arent beneficial things in TMAs or that a TMA style cannot beat another style.

This is the typical American way of seeing things (because you guys don't really have deadly unarmed street fights - you have guns for that - while they are the norm everywhere else) and it's wrong. "Effective" in this case obviously means fighting, but what's effective in MMA or combat sports isn't necessarily effective in a real fight. And only people who never have been in a real fight (bouncing drunks at a club doesn't count, anyone can do that) disagree with that.

I hopefully don't have to link the ugly video about Yuri Vlasko getting killed in a street fight. Or the news reports about Hatton getting mugged in China or Khan getting beat up by "literally who" in Birmingham.

 

[Dougall]

Again, if more traditional styles realistically trained and sparred as much as muay thai you would see much more of it in mma, so how you train is key to making it work.

If they trained more realistically then they loose what makes them traditional. Very rarely you will see traditional karate dojos kit up in shinguards, gloves and headgear and spar with intention. And this is because some Japanese guys a few years ago didnt, so we wont either. And if they do start to do this, over a long enough time we see a shift away from the traditional karate it once was to an evolution of something new. Look at dutch kickboxing for example, started out as a few guys teaching kyokushin, thought theyd add boxing punches/combinations cause knew they worked, took knees and a clinch from muay thai cause it was piratical and now you have a style that looks completely different from what it started as. I think what makes karate, karate is the traditional aspect; the katas, the repetitive basics etc. When you remove this and train for practicality/realism you get kickboxing in a Gi.

As I have reiterated again many times, the sparring and live training methodology is what makes things effective regardless of the style. Of couse boxing will always be used more than TKD as punches are easier to land then spinning kicks, but training them live allows both to be used effectively much more.

This pretty much sums it up, punches are more effective and easier to learn and more intuitive. Not alot of guys want to spend a year learning spinning kicks while they could spend a year improving punches/boxing. And I know spinning kicks might be piratical and have their uses, you cant deny that, but punches are always going to be a higher percentage technique even if both are trained to similar levels.

 

[shincheckin]

Modern martial arts have the same "problem". In fact, you have an easier time getting a TMA guy to spar other styles than a modern sports guy - the latter just doesn't have anything to win from this. Worst case, he gets hurt and can't compete. Best case, he wins against someone who isn't in his sport anyway, so who cares.


This is the typical American way of seeing things (because you guys don't really have deadly unarmed street fights - you have guns for that - while they are the norm everywhere else) and it's wrong. "Effective" in this case obviously means fighting, but what's effective in MMA or combat sports isn't necessarily effective in a real fight. And only people who never have been in a real fight (bouncing drunks at a club doesn't count, anyone can do that) disagree with that.

I hopefully don't have to link the ugly video about Yuri Vlasko getting killed in a street fight. Or the news reports about Hatton getting mugged in China or Khan getting beat up by "literally who" in Birmingham.

an MMA fight is as close as you are going to get to a "real fight", what works in MMA will generally work in a 1 on 1 fight. I agree that everything in MMA wont work in a "real fight" but this is opening down a rabbit hole i dont want to go down with too many variables, you can cheap shot somoene, use a weapon etc. all in a "real fight". When 2 dogs fight they dont use some mystical mumbo jumbo, they fight they way their bodies are designed and capable of. Its the same thing with humans, were animals, humans fight the way humans fight. This is why fighting martial arts work and fantasy martial arts do not.

also what are we going to classify as a "real fight"? a boxing match? a mma match? a school yard fight? a bar fight? a random street fight in the walmart parking lot? a gladiator fight in the Colosseum?

 

[shincheckin]

As I have reiterated again many times, the sparring and live training methodology is what makes things effective regardless of the style. Of couse boxing will always be used more than TKD as punches are easier to land then spinning kicks, but training them live allows both to be used effectively much more.

So in Russia, Judo and Sambo replaces BJJ as a core base but they are all based on live training (and all are really substyles of Kodokan Judo)

Japanese Ju jutsu (without live training) = ineffective.

Japanese ju jutsu styles with live training = transformed into Judo then BJJ so effective.

And Muay thai and kickboxing may be interchangeable as options but are still different styles but again both live sparring.

i understand what you are saying and agree with the live training, such as in kyokushin for example.

"So in Russia, Judo and Sambo replaces BJJ as a core base but they are all based on live training (and all are really substyles of Kodokan Judo)"
- But BJJ is still there, its always there no matter where in the world you go, because it has proven its effectiveness.

"Of couse boxing will always be used more than TKD as punches are easier to land then spinning kicks, but training them live allows both to be used effectively much more."
- Boxing will always be apart of the training no matter where in the world you go, because it has proven its effectiveness.

"And Muay thai and kickboxing may be interchangeable as options but are still different styles but again both live sparring"
- correct but again, doesnt matter where in the world you go, they will both always be apart of the training. Where something like TKD is not used across the world as a base, becuase it has not proven itself as effective as MT/KB. Not that its not effective or cant be used its just simply not as effective as MT/KB. This is what I mean by more effective martial arts theres no denying that there are martial arts that are more effective or "better" than others. Doesnt take anything away from the other ones or mean that they arent effective or cant be used. Just that some are alot more practical than others. MT is my thing, but i can openly admit that if someone was to only learn 1 martial for self defense, BJJ is probably the best to learn as its the most dangerous, greatest size equalizer, etc. etc. Generally speaking grappling beats striking.

 

[Robocok]

i understand what you are saying and agree with the live training, such as in kyokushin for example.

"So in Russia, Judo and Sambo replaces BJJ as a core base but they are all based on live training (and all are really substyles of Kodokan Judo)"
- But BJJ is still there, its always there no matter where in the world you go, because it has proven its effectiveness.

"Of couse boxing will always be used more than TKD as punches are easier to land then spinning kicks, but training them live allows both to be used effectively much more."
- Boxing will always be apart of the training no matter where in the world you go, because it has proven its effectiveness.

"And Muay thai and kickboxing may be interchangeable as options but are still different styles but again both live sparring"
- correct but again, doesnt matter where in the world you go, they will both always be apart of the training. Where something like TKD is not used across the world as a base, becuase it has not proven itself as effective as MT/KB. Not that its not effective or cant be used its just simply not as effective as MT/KB. This is what I mean by more effective martial arts theres no denying that there are martial arts that are more effective or "better" than others. Doesnt take anything away from the other ones or mean that they arent effective or cant be used. Just that some are alot more practical than others. MT is my thing, but i can openly admit that if someone was to only learn 1 martial for self defense, BJJ is probably the best to learn as its the most dangerous, greatest size equalizer, etc. etc. Generally speaking grappling beats striking.

I think a good case can be made for wrestling being the most dangerous. Bjj can be very effective of course but I think working off your back in guard is generally a bad idea on a hard surface like concrete. I know lots of guys who easily sub me from the bottom wherever but in general I think that having top position is better if you're not on a mat. Maybe this is a good discussion for the grappling forum.

 

[shincheckin]

I think a good case can be made for wrestling being the most dangerous. Bjj can be very effective of course but I think working off your back in guard is generally a bad idea on a hard surface like concrete. I know guys who would still sub me from the bottom wherever but in general I think that having top position is better if you're not on a mat. Maybe this is a good discussion for the grappling forum.

your probably right, i would agree with that. I used to not really think much of wrestling in my younger days, but now as I am older, and doing martial arts for a long time, I consider myself a martial artist and as a martial artist, I can see that wrestling is a very effective and dangerous martial art as well. Its probably the most natural human form of fighting as well, maybe the oldest too?

 

[thugpoet]

Is there any majority consensus on what is effective/ineffective?

I'm sure I'm forgetting a few but here's my list:

Effective- boxing, kickboxing/muay thai, tkd, sambo, bjj, wrestling, karate, judo

Ineffective- wing chun, aikido, kung fu, tai chi, sumo

Unsure- krav maga, capieira, hapkido, kenpo, jeet kune do, ninjutsu, tang soo do

I always found it odd that people considered meet June do ineffective considering it was created specifically to be a effective form of tma.

I'd agree with your list except I think wing Chun gets a bad rap because it's a tma. I think a decently trained fighter can be ok in most situations.

 

[thugpoet]

your probably right, i would agree with that. I used to not really think much of wrestling in my younger days, but now as I am older, and doing martial arts for a long time, I consider myself a martial artist and as a martial artist, I can see that wrestling is a very effective and dangerous martial art as well. Its probably the most natural human form of fighting as well, maybe the oldest too?

Maybe but there's something about punching a guy in the face that seems pretty natural haha

 

[Robocok]

I always found it odd that people considered meet June do ineffective considering it was created specifically to be a effective form of tma.

I'd agree with your list except I think wing Chun gets a bad rap because it's a tma. I think a decently trained fighter can be ok in most situations.

Ya, I read Bruce Lee's book last year and admired his philosophy of fighting on being in the moment and utilizing whatever works so I think it should be classified as effective. I always associated kicking at an opponent's knee like Jon Jones did to Rampage as something that Lee was known for. I'm going to edit my post.

 

[shincheckin]

Maybe but there's something about punching a guy in the face that seems pretty natural haha

lol yes, if you have ever been in a "street fight" barefooted or in sandals or something, you learn real quick why to kick with the shin instead of foot too. shoes add protection and turn the foot into a weapon.

 

[Eisenhans]

an MMA fight is as close as you are going to get to a "real fight", what works in MMA will generally work in a 1 on 1 fight.

Look, you obviously never witnessed a real ugly streetfight and let's leave it at that.

I agree that everything in MMA wont work in a "real fight" but this is opening down a rabbit hole i dont want to go down with too many variables, you can cheap shot somoene, use a weapon etc. all in a "real fight". When 2 dogs fight they dont use some mystical mumbo jumbo, they fight they way their bodies are designed and capable of. Its the same thing with humans, were animals, humans fight the way humans fight. This is why fighting martial arts work and fantasy martial arts do not.

I'm not sure I can follow you. Yes, sucker punching, weapons, multiple opponents are the norm in street fights. Not sure where all the "mystic" and "fantasy" come from.

also what are we going to classify as a "real fight"? a boxing match? a mma match? a school yard fight? a bar fight? a random street fight in the walmart parking lot? a gladiator fight in the Colosseum?

Obviously, a fight without rules. The rest are "matches".

 

[shincheckin]

Look, you obviously never witnessed a real ugly streetfight and let's leave it at that.

I used to get into alot of trouble in my younger days. I have witnessed and also done things I do not want to mention or remember. I have been ko'd by someone with brass knuckles in a "real fight", the brass knuckles cut me very badly in multiple spots. you dont know wtf you are talking about and lets leave it at that.

 

[shincheckin]

Obviously, a fight without rules. The rest are "matches".

this whole "real fight" stuff everyone yaps about online is bullshit.

any form of combat sport is just as much as a real fight if not more. Yes there are rules, but the fights go the distance where as most "real fights" are typically a few seconds before someone stops, runs away, or breaks it up, or calls the cops. What all you guys consider "real fights" are usually something along the line of bar fights or since most of you are kids, meeting at the flag pole at 3 o clock. Most people in society are not dangerous criminals willing to kill you over an altercation. Those people exist but the majority of them are in prison. (i work in a jail) and the way most jail/prison fights go are either quick brawls that get stopped by the guards fairly quick, or some type of sneaky dirty unfair planned out number attack or stabbing. the point im trying to make is that level of intensity and willingness to kill or inflict damage or harm are different in every situation, yet they could all be classified as "real fights" since there are no rules. A gladiator fight in the coliseum had no rules, thats a "real fight", a bar fight has no rules, thats a "real fight", a fight in the walmart parking lot is a "real fight" with no rules. Those are all "real fight" but the level of intensity and willingness are different across for each situation. Most people are not thinking or willing to do a coliseum death match in the parking lot. However for the physical act of fighting, whats used in MMA, which is the act of fighting, is whats most successful, its simply human fighting. At the bar i could say something like please dont hurt me, let me buy you drink, and slip some poison in the drink i buy you. is that MMA no. is it fighting, no. but its something that could be done in a no rules "real fight". In the walmart parking lot I could decide to run you over rather than get out and fight. thats not fighting, but its something that can be done in a no rules "real fight". the possibilities, scenarios, and examples are endless. But as far as actually engaging in physical confrontation and the act of fighting, MMA is it. All this real fight bullshit I see all over sherdog is usually posted by keyboard warriors that dont know wtf they are talking about. such as punches to the body in a "real fight" yes they work in "real fights" and "fake fights".

 

[Eisenhans]

I used to get into alot of trouble in my younger days. I have witnessed and also done things I do not want to mention or remember. I have been ko'd by someone with brass knuckles in a "real fight", the brass knuckles cut me very badly in multiple spots. you dont know wtf you are talking about and lets leave it at that.

Says the guy who also says:

any form of combat sport is just as much as a real fight if not more.

Which is obviously wrong.

But hey, I could care less. My experience differs, that's all.