I think that now that most top MMA fighters are well rounded in the staples of MMA (Wrestling/BJJ/MT/Boxing) the athleticism of the fighters is coming to the forefront more and more. Now the idea of martial arts is that proper technique will overcome strength/athleticism.
Anybody think that a single martial art will ever be able to hold dominance in the UFC/MMA. Perhaps Kron Gracie with his Gracie JJ? Or maybe a Sambo specialist?
Thoughts?

how can a single martial art dominate MMA competition?

The closest thing in recent years is probably Machida Karate, but it's no secret that Lyoto Machida trained in JJ as well.

I don't think it's really appropriate to mention anything before UFC 10, since MMA at the time wasn't really MMA, other than the ruleset. Most fighters still had distinctive ties to a single martial art or style.

Interesting you talk about athleticism, because i believe the best fighters are nearly always top athletes.

Interesting you talk about athleticism, because i believe the best fighters are nearly always top athletes.

Exactly my point, I think atheleticism is taking over martial arts because the top guys all have the skills which are canceling each other out. It then becomes a 'whose the better athelete' fight.

My original point as poorly as I made it was that do we think that somebody will ever fight in MMA with martial arts skill so far beyond the rest of the competition that they will be able to overcome everyone else, like how Gracie's dominated the early UFC/Pride with BJJ. I think not but would love for it to happen.

The idea of the "single dominant MA" died out a long time ago when the Gracies left the UFC. For one brief shining moment (about 15 years ago) BJJ could claim being the best singular MA. While the Gracies were gone the Greco Roman/Collegiate wrestlers gave birth to "Ground and Pound" (but that is not a pure style) and that dominated for a time. Whereas BJJ emphasized technique over strength wrestling is a style that rewards brute strength more readily. As the MMA scene evolved the type of wrestling in MMA evolved with it. When Royce returned to the UFC to fight Matt Hughes Royce was BUTCHERED because he brought his 1996 BBJ into the 2003 MMA environment. MMA had evolved by leaps and bounds in his absence and Royce did not. Fast forward to the recent rise of Brock Lesnar. An NCAA wrestling champion with little else in the way of MMA training did pretty good considering his very brief career. With an excellent wrestling base you don't need much in the way of submission defense or escapes. A good striker with a little submission and takedown defense proved to be his undoing though. As long as a "peer review" process for the martial arts exists such as the UFC you will continue to see a constantly changing skill set as far as which MA's and how much of each are successful for any given individual. As it should be.

Exactly my point, I think atheleticism is taking over martial arts because the top guys all have the skills which are canceling each other out. It then becomes a 'whose the better athelete' fight.

I think you should be careful not to suggest that only skill and athleticism determine the winner.

Some fighters are exceptionally intelligent, like Rich Franklin and Georges Saint-Pierre (GSP maybe a bad example to use because he is also possibly one of the greatest athletes ever to compete in MMA) for example, and using clever tactics/gameplan they can literally win over a more powerful fighter using their intelligence (among their other considerable abilites).

Consider Pat Miletich.

For some reason the return key hates me. . . . This is why I don't post much.

MMA is really a sport now. Due to this, the best art will never prevail. Arts were either created to fit into specific rules, for self defense, for real world combat/war, or as a literal art/dance. Obviously, the arts created for war or to kill would be best without rules. So Sambo/BJJ would be incredibly superior to most other art forms. But this is due to the evolution such arts have made. The obvious advantages to well rounded styles with vital point targeting to kill are the best.

If you want to call Krav Maga an art (The Israeli special forces do not, nor do most practitioners) it would be one of the best as it is designed to target vital points to end a fight as quick as possible.

But that does not discredit other forms of Combat. Wing Chun gives those without great strength a huge advantage, as does Judo, as well as Akido. Each art almost plays a rock-paper-scissors with each other based upon what they do in various stages of body composition and various stages of combat.

If MMA had no rules, or Vale Tudo was on TV, the best could potentially win. But when you have a skill set with an advantage based upon the rules (UFC MMA gives the leg up to BJJ obviously) you get unfair results. Under such conditions a base training program such as a MMA specific school with cross art training becomes best suited to fit into the rules, and dominates. With aforementioned conditions, the best athlete with natural advantages prevails.

(UFC MMA gives the leg up to BJJ obviously)

Why do you say this? Do you say this based on more wins for BJJ practitioners, or do you have some other unusual justification for this claim?

I would say that 1 on 1 fighting gives an inherent advantage to grapplers in the form of gravity. The accepted rules of MMA actually hurt grappling more than a no-rules environment, due to the stand-up rule and limited time per round.

CNagy - this is my feeling also. Therefore how can someone claim a BJJ advantage in MMA?

I think you should be careful not to suggest that only skill and athleticism determine the winner.

Some fighters are exceptionally intelligent, like Rich Franklin and Georges Saint-Pierre (GSP maybe a bad example to use because he is also possibly one of the greatest athletes ever to compete in MMA) for example, and using clever tactics/gameplan they can literally win over a more powerful fighter using their intelligence (among their other considerable abilites).

Consider Pat Miletich.

Colin,
You're right their are many factors that take place for a win. Tactics/gameplan/athleticism/experience/skill but what do you think of my question. Do you think MA's will ever dominant the UFC again?

Most fighters do mma conditioning, boxing, muay thai(or krotty), and wrestling/grappling. The style vs. style days are long gone...and will almost certainly not return.

Nowadays, it's ring/cage mastery, gameplan, conditioning, cardio, and individual techniques, and how they are applied.

What someone trained in before undertaking mma rules, has less to do with their success (in my shoddy opinion), as how they integrate the things they didn't study initially, into their arsenal, and how they respond under extreme pressure.

I do think that gracie bjj, proved you can't ignore some kind of submission grappling, if you want to be at or near the top. Royce vs. Kimo, or in other styles Shamrock vs. Pat Smith, though very early in the evolution, sent notice to everyone. Train your sub grappling, or you're fucked.

In my opinion, specific martial arts styles have reached their potential. Is someone going to develop a style unlike anything we've ever seen before? Not likely. So it all comes down to the vehicle for the martial art--the human. If we see a "single style" fighter dominate in the future, it will be because he has all of those other attributes and chooses to focus on one particular style when fighting.

That said, I don't think we'll see many if any elite level fighters with single style training. Does learning to sprawl muddy the style waters? Depends on how strict you are with the idea of single style.

In my opinion, specific martial arts styles have reached their potential. Is someone going to develop a style unlike anything we've ever seen before? Not likely. So it all comes down to the vehicle for the martial art--the human. If we see a "single style" fighter dominate in the future, it will be because he has all of those other attributes and chooses to focus on one particular style when fighting.

That said, I don't think we'll see many if any elite level fighters with single style training. Does learning to sprawl muddy the style waters? Depends on how strict you are with the term "single style".

Right. The most likely candidate for such a style will be when future wing chun generations 'rediscover' old scrolls that list full stylesheets for striking and grappling techniques we see in Modern MMA.

Instead of style-versus-style, it might be interesting to go ruleset-versus-ruleset.

One present-day MMA competitor versus a Vale Tudo fighter, for instance.

Of course, for ruleset-versus-ruleset, you'd need to come up with a ruleset.

I would say that 1 on 1 fighting gives an inherent advantage to grapplers in the form of gravity. The accepted rules of MMA actually hurt grappling more than a no-rules environment, due to the stand-up rule and limited time per round.
This. Can you imagine how much more effective Randy would be if he could lean on people without worrying about being split up?

Though I would like to point out that the limited time period actually works to the advantage of many grapplers. I think the time limit benefits those who don't have absurd amounts of gas in the tank more than anything else. If you took out the time then the matches would probably become endurance wars. It'd be Royce vs Sakuraba 1 all over again. I'm still not sure why Royce vs Sakuraba 2 wasn't ruled as a NC given that Royce was pumped up on roids at the time...

Also, I'm surprised no one has brought up Big Country given the title of this thread. The kung fu master isn't exactly known for his stunning physique even if he is absurdly fast for a fat man.