What are the differences between Sport and Tactical MMA?

Question

Please explain, in detail, the differences between Tactical MMA and Sport MMA.

Thank you.

Answer 1

A title someone has thrown onto something to make it seem more street credible.

In reality I wouldn't count on too much you see on "ExpertVillage" especially those in the Martial Arts or Self Defense arenas.

They have guys talking about MMA who are not fighters, do not train fighters, nor hold rank in any kind of art that deals with MMA.

They primarily take what they have a background in, add some eye gouges and stuff, then gear it with some "Crappling" (bad grappling) add a few more cheap shots, and call it "Tactical".

First off Tactical has a totally seperate meaning in the realm of those who actually do "Tactical" things. Adding Tactical to something in the civilan sense is a joke, because most of the guys proclaiming "Tactical" have no idea what it truly means, and have never had to be "Tactical" in their lives.

Trust me, as someone who even had to park his vehicle in a "Tacitcal" manner whilst in the Army, I have a pretty good sense of the word.

I also have a pretty good sense of what works and what doesn't.

People who seperate "Street vs. Sport" people are funny to me. Because they somehow think that by shadowboxing eye gouges they are going to be more "tactical" or "street ready" then those people who go at full speed and intensity against a STRANGER in an adrenaline based situation.

(Edit) So I just watched all of those guys videos... pretty craptastic. It isn't the worst offenses I have seen, but some of it is pretty bad. Essentially they take MMA positions (any of which if you were in, meant that you were fighting someone with a MMA background. A street fighter isn't going to put you in guard, or go for a technical mount, or North South position on you.) then they add something that might work if the guy in those positions, essentially did nothing but sit there and get hit, head butted, or took nut shots... which is never the case, for some reason in reality people don't cooperate.

They showed how you would do it in Jiujitsu (which all of their moves showed a very basic, noobish understanding of the positions and escapes... almost like they got it from a seminar or videotape) then how they would do it "Tactically" which was just horrible. Again, if you are in the positions you are already in a bad position, because they obviously know something. These guys count on reactions, and essentially that they have the freedom to do what they want against the other person, which is just never the case. If I lived in Tenneseee I would love to go to these guys' school and have them just prove they can headbutt me ONCE from inside my guard. So while they eat elbows to the top of the head (you aren't holding someone's biceps from guard, I would throw my hips forward and remove any leverage you would have to do so, including any leverage to keep your head anywhere near mine...) well I could criticise their horrible techniques all day... but it would only make this long post longer...

It isn't "Winning in the ring" it is WINNING. Eye gouges don't win on the street, nut grabbing doesn't end fights. Instead of relying on something that someone will do by nature (if found in a bad position it doesn't take years of Martial Arts to try to gouge out an eye or grab some balls, nature handles that for you, I know people without a l**k of Martial Arts training attempt to go for my eyes and nuts..). If you want to be "Tactical" you do something you can repeat under stress over and over again.

If I can dominate someone without using eye gouges and nut kicks, imagine what I can do to someone by using them?

What wins, wins... A knockout in the ring is a knockout on the street. A choke or submission, is a maimed or unconscious person on the street.

Adding eye gouges or nut shots to bad technique doesn't make it tactical.You want Tactical? Look at the Modern Army Combatatives, Look at the MCMAP Program. (both of which have pretty much MMA style mindsets, in fact the Modern Army Combatatives have tournaments, that at the highest level is essentially a MMA fight)

Killing someone isn't a magic button, it is overwhelming force, with very understandable impact. I put the person out, I stomp on their neck, that is a killing blow. A choreographed elbow to the throat is not.

Anyway, my point is "Tactical" MMA is a system someone thought up, someone with no experience in MMA, but decided to use what they saw of MMA, or learned from a Seminar or two, or some video tapes.. and combined it with some of their already flawed methodologies and claim it is "Tactical and street oriented instead of ring oriented".

It isn't, look at the top operators in the world, the people who have to kill for a living and see what they are taught, what they learn. First you will see how little of it is any kind of unnarmed hand to hand, but that which they learns follows a logical progression, not one that requires choreography, or chains. But one in which is simple, effective, and can be repeatedly sparred and practiced at high intensity.

MMA is MMA. By throwing doing c**p MMA and adding eye gouges, or nutshots, you aren't revolutionizing anything, you are doing c**p MMA and adding eye gouges or nut shots, and would NEVER work against a resisting opponent, of course they do not know that, because they don't actually train against resisting opponents...

Anyway... sorry for my book, just stuff like this bothers me, because the people who have actually had to deal with true self defense situations find this kind of stuff ridiculous...

By throwing what you think is self defense terminologies in there doesn't make it so...

'Well here my mindset is getting up and running away or dealing with multiple opponents" doesn't change the fact that what you just did and showed wouldn't work in reality.

Trust me there are plenty of guys who get taken to the ground and don't want to be there in MMA as well. They want to stand back up because it is technically advantageous for them, that doesn't change the fact that they still get choked out, and knocked out, and dominated on the ground, despite their best efforts to stand back up. Trust me it isn't that they are a nutshot, eye gouge, bite or headbutt away. (If so, then A LOT of people would have been able to collect on the Gracie Challenge instead of getting dominated).

I could show all kinds of crazy made up c**p, that seems viable, give you some logical sounding explanation, it doesn't change the fact it is c**p and made up, and not based off experience using it against determined and aggressive foes.

As a HUGE self defense supporter, as well as a MMA Competetor, A former Soldier, and someone who has trained in Realistic self defense systems, I don't find that link to be that cool. I find those guys to be well intentioned but either ill informed, or misinformed. Half of what they showed as "Street" versions would actually be legal in MMA, and NONE of what they should would actually work, unless you fighting someone who just put you in guard and froze, or stood up in mount and froze, etc. Like I said, in a real street fight, anyone who puts you in these positions probably has a somewhat decent idea of what they were doing, since they were able to put you there to begin with. So chances are, they aren't going to allow you to do these "geared for the street" things.

Answer 2

the difference is a stupid label thrown into the name to "wow" an audience and making them think it's a whole new smart, effective system because they add a fancy word into it and basically because they say it works on the street...only an ignorant, gullible simpleton would fall for such a cheap scam...it's basically the type of thing when people try to make their own martial art, but it's an already existent art with a new name and a few tweaks.  It's stupid how you say the "common fan" like if this stupid fake style is something only hardcore MMA fans know about.  You're a fool and have obviously bought into it.  Just to show you how much c**p these people are putting into your head, I'd personally take these guys on in a street fight and destroy them with what you refer to as my "sport mma" skills!  Most likely their just wanna-be's that can't make it in the sport.

Answer 3

I don't understand why people are taking the word "Tactical" and throwing it on front of the names of other martial arts. what's next? Tactical Boxing? Tactical Taekwondo? Tactical MMA is probably just someone teaching regular MMA, just wearing camouflage shorts and a bullet proof jock strap.

Answer 4

Tactical? Dunno.

Answer 5

i'll be honest.  i've been following mma for a long time and i have never heard the terms sport or tactical used when describing it.  where by chance did you hear someone say this?

Answer 6

Even though I actually train a karate style, I beleive I know what you are talking about.

Just from a realistic perspective I would say that the main differences are what is allowed and what is trained for. I would say that sport MMA are trained within the confines of the rules that it will be fought under, with the ultimate goal being either knockout, submission, or win by decision.

Tactical MMA would be trained to survive on the street, and would include no illegal techniques. Rather then train to finish a fight with one of the above, the main goal would be to do enough so that you can safely get away.

Sport- Geared toward winning in a ring under a certian ruleset, in a one on one encounter.

Tactical - Geared towards surviving a self defense situation by any means necessary. This would probably include training against more then one attacker and weapons training as well as training in an urban environment. Park. Alley, etc.

I would say tactical MMA is MMA with the "traditional" styles mindset of not necessarilly finishing an opponent, but doing what it takes to survive and get away, rather then sport MMA mindset of winning the fight.

Edit- Very cool link.

Answer 7

In practical terms, there is a world of difference, given that "tactical" or real-world MMA is a matter of self-defense. Sport MMA is just that: a sport, a fair contest between two consenting opponents. In real self-defense, there is no such thing as a fair fight.

Simply removing the safety rules from sport MMA changes the strategy considerably. For instance, the guard is not as enviable position when your opponent can attach your eyes or bite your ear. Captures and joint locks don't work nearly as well against opponents wearing clothing and breaking fingers. Grappling doesn't work AT ALL against multiple opponents.  etc...

Real world MMA is also concerned with less-than-ideal conditions (weapons, multiple opponents, poor lighting, poor footing, surprise, etc.).  To minimize the effect of such uncontrollable factors, the general aim of self-defense should be to end the encounter as swiftly as possible, as opposed to the endurance strategies of of sport MMA.

If you're interested in tactical MMA, the best resources are military hand-to-hand training manuals. The techniques in those manuals were developed during decades of training in actual battlefield experience.  Here are a few good resources to get you started, if you're interested.

US Army Combatives system

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/l...

Kapap - Israeli Special Forces counter-terrorism system

http://www.amazon.com/Kapap-Combat-Conce...

Krav Maga - a more aggressive self-defense system also developed by Israeli Special Forces

http://www.kravmaga.com/

Sanshou - a chinese Wu Shu style geared toward self-defense

http://www.sanshou.com/

MCMAP - Marine Corps martial arts program

http://documents.scribd.com/docs/t208au9...