Why do ANTI-MMA people believe this?

Question

I keep seeing this pop up on answers to other questions in the Martial Arts section. Someone asks about learning Self Defense, someone answers and says "Try Muy Thai and BJJ or Judo" and some random person jumps out and says "Those are for the Ring, MMA isn't the same as self defense or street fighting!"

What I want to know is this, do you guys think that if you can't stop someone from throwing you on the ground and stomping your head in the ring that magically when the ring disappears you will be able to?

If you can't block a punch in the ring, or land one hard enough to stun someone do you think your accuracy and timing will suddenly improve because there aren't mats on the floor?

The ONLY way to know that you can perform in a self defense situation is to practice against resisting opponents. That's what MMA training is all about. Practicing against skilled resisting opponents in all ranges of combat. If you can hold your own there then some random drunk should be a piece of cake.

Answer 1

Why do MMA people have this "prove it" mentality??? ( < this is just me mocking the asker)

MMA people downplay kah-roh-tee because their image of it is according to what is being promoted out here as Karate.

I don't have to fight anyone to prove my art works.

If anyone wants proof all they have to do is attack me.

I will not fight with anyone... I WILL defend myself! They WILL regret it!

William P - in my book, a loss is also a victory! It is an opportunity to take a look at yourself and see where you could improve and enhance your life.

On the other hand, my loss cannot be on the battlefield, and since I don't do the sport aspect, I am referring to the street, where a 13 year old boy can be your executioner.

I'm not going to go - "toe to toe, put up my dukes", type confrontations with anyone. Whoever attacks me will never know that I am a martial artist.

In application in the dojo, where you train to perfect your technique, it is evident that the art is present.

In application in the street, no one would imagine that what they might see me execute is part a classical art's kata. They would think I am a brutal b*****d who probably just came home from a long bid in a Max-A.

It's not pretty, but it's so beautiful!

Answer 2

I think it's got more to do with retaliation than anything. MMA nutriders are almost always the first to jump into any discussion acting like messiahs delivering the traditionalists from their ancient and archaic ways (read as: TKD SUCKS!!!11 MMA RULEZZZZ!!!!)

I think that because I can't see how any person educated on the topic could possibly discredit cross training as an effective means of preparing for a fight (on the street or in the ring).

Answer 3

Interesting Question, and I agree there is no difference as a punch/kick delivered with intent is the same,but where I'd suggest  the  major difference lies is rules.

As you know there are no rules on the street and no referee conveniently placed to jump in and stop things.

Also there can be multiple attackers/weapons involved.

I understand where you are coming from but as an ex bouncer I've seen a bit ,please don't take this as boasting.

Just my humble opinion, best wishes :)***

Answer 4

I really think it is just the opposite.  Of course Muay Thai and BJJ taught correctly are effective martial arts.  What many traditional martial artist including myself get annoyed by is the assumption that works in the ring with rules will also work EXACTLY the same in the street without rules.  Now in the street a good MMA fighter will problaby win against almost anyone.

However they may also get caught surpise when an untrained or differently trained fighter uses an illegal technique that they weren't expecting such as a elbow to spinal cord during a take down or knee to head during take down, both of which are illegal in MMA.  Also illegal in MMA, but might be used in the street are small joint manipulation, eye gauges, and "cheap" shots like biting, spitting, etc.

MMA people often down play or call "useless" traditional martial arts whose techniques are mostly illegal in MMA, but very effective in the street.  In my opinion it is MMA that is very disrectful to TMA.  Now granted there are alot of criticism from MMA is also based on some "cr*ppy" black belts from McDojo's that couldn't even swat a fly, but understand there are many more good traditional schools that teach real street and sport fighting techniques.

BTW I have trained both TMA and MMA, respect both if taught correctly are effective in the street.

JS my EDIT to you is that alot "Traditional" martial arts do practice against resisting apponents.  My Karate style, and off shoot of Kyokushin, sparred very hard against resisting apponents.  When I first sparred Muay Thai people, I did very well against them.

Answer 5

1) You cannot do the guard in a street fight without risking doing serious damage to the back of your head.  

2) Many grappling positions leave you vulnerable to being stomped by multiple attackers.

3) Ring fights do not allow eye gouging or elbows to the back/spine.  Say what?  Now I find out they are not allowing knees to the head.  Say what?  

4) No wrist locks.  

I could go on.

This whole MMA arrogance has saddened me because I have been really looking forward to training in MMA after I get a shodan in Judo.  Now I want nothing to do with a sport that seems to put people in dangerous matches prematurely and setting egos up to be serious destroyed should they encounter well-trained martial artists.

What I do like about grappling is that you get seriously winded and you feel the panicky emotions.  Put that in with striking and you got something solid that can also be practiced safely.

Answer 6

Why do Anti-TMA people believe the arts whom MMA descended from think TMA is useless?

Answer 7

actually "mma" is really taking two or more different martial arts and cherry picking what works for you and what doesn't.

yes, to get off my "grammar" horse now, the term MMA has unfortunately gone from meaning this, to naming those who train for a sportative event that doesn't marry itself to one style.

MMA training is going to be "about that" because it has to be.

however ALL MARTIAL ARTS TRAINING NEEDS TO BE ABOUT LEARNING TO PROPERLY APPLY YOUR TECHNIQUES.

so in short my answer to your original question, before I nitpicked you and claimed that you plagarized an article I read a few years ago that was humorous satire giving examples of how "the laws of physics are different in the ring than on the str33t" (oh wait, i didn't do that- and i did),

is pretty much for the same reason that theists tend to just deny arguments that contradict the bible- how they persecuted gallileo, how they challenge evolutionary theory now. (not with scientific thought, but with "I don't like this so it sucks" thought).

because you are going cow tipping and thier sacred cows are the target.

EDIT: truth of the matter is that it is all about training methodology- and I don't know them personally (on the board here) but from those who I do know who have said the same things, its because they don't want to be exposed because they have not been training properly.  also there is a grain of truth to what they say, but as they want to do is take that grain and turn it into a mountain of sand.  one thing which I believe most people who train that way do realize anyway- that while the rules are there for safety precautions- there are other applications that can be used outside and it is then easy to adjust and cover for those.

but training under a realistic ruleset that is maybe (90%) realistic, even for arguments sake lets say it was 50%- then I would rather do at least HALF of what I know and be able to do it well enough so that I could apply it 100% of the time and know it is effectve because I have trained it against a fully resisting opponent.

Another nitpick, MMA does not train in ALL ranges of combat as they don't allow weapons in the current MMA competitions- If I were a religious man I would say I pray for the day that they do.

I really don't have much to disagree with you so I can't do more than nitpick....

Answer 8

Amen

Answer 9

BJJ was started as a self defense art espicailly for smaller people, thats why in the original UFCs that had Royce fight larger opp. That way it could showcase how size wasnt important if you had good technique

Answer 10

As long as the person's old and rugged enough MMA should be fine. That's what trainers should recognize. You're right, any type of contact fighting is good as long as you can handle it.

Answer 11

Hey as for me i never said that MMA, or any of it's components were not very effective for self defense. Anything if trained properly is useful.

Quite honestly i do not se the same consideration from you. I continually see the attitude from you that if it doesn't work in the ring it wont work for self defense. That's kind of hypachritical  if you ask me.

The fact is all styles have weaknesses, or even a combination of styles can. take Muya Thai and BJJ. neither of these styles addresses weapons or more then one person in their style. yeah I know small chance that it will happen right? About the same chance that i will be attacked by a highly skilled Judo or BJJ person I would figure, yet you seem to think that is inevitable.

Have you ever seen a Muay thai or BJJ school that trains to defend on staairs or on a steep slope? Actually it just so happens my school does.

At my school we replace fighting in a ring with full speed and power randori for the attackers. generally we are not squared off with our attackers, but are in a relaxed nuetral stance. All we ever know is if there is going to be a grab or not. We do not know if it's going to be a punch or kick or whatever. If you do not defend yourself you get a painful lesson that helps you remember next time. We spar hard. but that is mainly for conditioning, because in our self defense nothing is off limits and sometimes full power techniques are hard to control against an opponent who is moving full speed also.

Another difference is goals. you seem to think it is necessary to completly subdue or knock out your attacker. I am more concerned with doing what I have to in order to get away and survive. i garuntee you when we are attacked in randori it is just as ahrd and fast as anything you see in the ring, and I have had craked ribs to prove it, as well as numerous bruises, cuts, etc.

I feel any of the styles you mention have more then adiquate self defense applications, but their way of training realisticly is not the only way, like you seem to think.

Edit- I actually don't think we have ever actually bothered to video tape a class. Anyway i truly feel that I have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else here. i will let muy knowledge in my answers speak for itself. At least i have answered questions about technique, unlike most of the I do BJJ and it is the best crowd, who only ever seem to be able to answer what is the best style questions, or who is going to fight who in the ufc, or to trash traditional arts. I have never seen you ask them for proof they train,  hmm could it be your anti traditional anything not MMA bias coming out?

Ah ok I see. you are misundertsanding or I didn't make myself clear enough. We do one on one attacks at full speed and power. We do multiple attackers at half speed and power roughly, mainly to familiarize ourselves with it. the only time it's done full speed and power is in testings, and yes you will see a lot of running and dodging in ours too lol. We are not insane you know. We also do not do weapons with multiple opponents usually, but when we do it is very controlled for obvious reason. If I said something that misrepresented this I am sorry. I was simply trying to point out that if we do randori at full speed and power one on one, isn't that the same as you fighting one on one? Again i am sorry if I misrepresented anything. I re read my answer and do not see anything that should make you jump to the multiple attackers full speed and with weapons, as I do not beleive I stated this anywhere. We do however do one on one attacks with weapons full speed. we just substitute whiffle bats(still hurt) and wooden knives.

BTW I see none of the traditional artists here slammimg any of the styles you mentioned in any way, or even hining that they would no be effective ofr self defense. i see far more posts where the BJJ, Mauy Thai and MMA pwoplw slam karate, tkd, kung fu then vise versa. Yes there are McDojo's, but you shouldn't judge a style by schools, you should take them on a one by one basis.

Answer 12

You question makes no sense. Why?

Pretty simple MMA is a sport with rules, if you take it out of the ring or cage it is not MMA. If someone fights in a street-fight they are not using MMA (like it is some kind of a style or something - ha ha, silly people) it is like if I tackle someone on the street I am not using Football!

MMA is also not the only NHB type combat sport, Shooto, Pancrase, Vale Tudo are all sports that use Multi-disciplined fighters but with different rules.

The point is BJJ (proper) is made for self defense and is different than sport BJJ (Carlson Gracie) which is made for competition.

Muay Thai was originally not built for competition either, neither was the heart of Judo which is also used in self defense (Russian Judo especially). None of these are mutually exclusive with MMA, not individually nor put together in one package. Putting the three self defense forms together for use pre dates MMA competitions by many years and as stated used in many other combat sports.

I cannot believe the lack of education to what MMA actually is and especially what it is not! "MMA training" is just a buzz word to get people in the door, it is nothing different (except for limiting potential moves because of competition rules) than the regular multi-disciplined Martial arts academy

Time for some definitions:

Cross training: Training in multi-disciplines of Martial Arts over time. Whether it is one and then base others off that (which is the best) or a little all at once (not recommended but saves time) this is not a new concept to martial arts and can be seen in other forms like in Gymnastics or Track and field.

Freestyle martial artist: Is a Martial Artists who uses a synthesis of various styles of martial arts such that the practitioner is free from only one style and able to use whatever is necessary to defeat the opponent. This is a personal ideology used to combat (as in the case of Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do) the static Kata forms that were/are so prevalent in the money hungry Neo-traditional Martial arts of today.

MMA: a specific competition that a Freestyle Martial Artist may enter, though not exclusively. Not a style!

And Bluto up there you said "actually 'mma' is really taking two or more different martial arts and cherry picking what works for you and what doesn't". MMA never meant that at all (maybe if you rewrite history) it was a term that described competition and that is all - see definitions above.

Interesting random selection of multiple attackers from Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trBATDKyj...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BB1UNSXl...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHG2Us4_J...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Caqtib-pK...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz4iy2-a4...

Cop vs two men

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-SuH4ie3...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7z5hpgbb...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEPgS8PNF...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PV9mZy0zo...

Short version of last video (press mute)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOWZFQ1SP...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvT19Fjyl...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4NJcv7q...

Answer 13

BIG EDIT:

Ok then here's what's up man.  As I've said a million times in the past Mixed Martial Arts aren't just for sport.  Us truest pratitioners were around long before any stupid UFC bullsh*t any way.  The truest MMA practitoners only became envolved in MMA because we were all looking for a better defense on the streets in the first place back in the 80's.  

and YES Mixed Martial Arts was for "street fighters" meaning people who needed a good self defense living in and around major metro areas for defense are the one's labeled "Street fighters" not just because we're all punks or bullies, but because living in and near big towns it's pretty easy to have trouble find you even walking down the street dude with out  you even insitigating anything at all.

Let's not forget that instructors from coast to coast that taught their own mix of serveral styles that they had learned through out their lives were also called Mixed Martial Arts back in the 80's and even California's "Street Karate" of the 1980's got a bad rap because it was a used in large part by L.A. street gangs against LAPD police officers.

So yes you're right on your views and no BJJ isn't the "God Like Art" that BJJ practitioners seem to think it is.  

MMA is truely for the street survivor type, but unfortunately Dana White has put a spin on it that makes us real MMA practitioners look like a bunch of rich kids with nothing better to do.  h**l they've even made movies that make MMA look stupid all for Dana's sake. We were here before Dana though man and we'll be around long after the "MMA T.V. Generation Trend" is dead.

Long live the man who studies to prepare for self-defense!!!

Oh and BTW before cage matches ever thought of seeing the light of day many MMA practitoners didn't even care about jujitsu and or ground work what-so-ever.  We were more focused on attacking the throat, clavicle ( collar bones ), nose, arm muscles, leg muscles, ears, couging eyes, etc. back in the 80's that is. Sport MMA can be taught, but "Street Defense MMA" will always be kept secret...No since in casting pearls before swine dude.  Do you think for a minute that this current T.V. generation deserves the techniques of Self-Defense MMA? .....ROTFL....that ain't never happening and it's not just me that thinks that way, all the old MMA schools from the 80's have all closed shop from coast to coast for a reason dude.  Trust me these kids today don't deserve the best....look at some of their questions in yahoo ansewrs for God Sake..."How can I beat this person up?" and "How to use this technique?" all so they can go out and bully other kids with.....s***w that no real self-defense instructor's going to give them the tiny details on how to do it.  Thank God.  The so-called MMA schools of today have nothing on the MMA schools of the 1980's man.  They're as different as day and night.  True Mixed Martial Arts practitioners sit back and laugh at these "Commercialized MMA" chumps of today bro.....a boxing stance....get the f*** outta here with that bullsh*t.  I teach sport MMA to fighters all the time, but I'll never let them grasp the truest meaning of MMA these little spoiled rotten thankless bast*rds.  Besides there's no sport for defending your self with the truest MMA techniques ( unknown by cage fighter wanna-be's ).  4 oz. grappling gloves and a boxer's stance .......ROTFL every day.

As far as the "killing machines" part of your question goes it's still all in T.V. man.  It's a powerful medium dude.  More powerful than we give it credit for being most of the time.  It's Dana White and Spike T.V., for example, that have made me Anti-MMA, or I should say, Anti-Commercialized MMA to be more specific.