The problems with MMA

**JohnnyS** · Posted On: 12/01/2005 11:55pm

Can you please state what your position is as succinctly as possible? I'm not sure what you're arguing.

***Cassius*** · Posted On: 12/01/2005 11:56pm

Originally Posted by eyebeams

No. I know it might be alien to the standard of practice on this board, but my posts are no to be interpreted as "I **** ON MMA," regardless of the words used. Novel, I know . . .

I certainly don't think you are saying this. I just happen to think you have some wrong impressions about MMA/grappling training

**eyebeams** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 12:05am

Originally Posted by garbanzobean

Yes, I sure have. A grappling tie-up works great. I'm a pretty big guy, so I've found that simply picking someone up and carrying them out of the room works fairly well also. Depending who you are dealing with, tying up the arms with underhooks works well, beyond using the techniques JohnnyS just mentioned for less friendly persons.

Isn't saying strength will out kind of a BS excuse? I don;t want tp pick somebody up after bringing them down. It's a waste of time. Except . . .

In some situations, getting the belligerent on the ground seems to work pretty well. This of course depends on the situation. Does the other person want to fight as well, or are they just trying to leave?

. . . that you're right. Sometimes a guy just needs time to be set in place for a bit. But not always. I might not want to accidentally hurt somebody (because they do something dumb while restrained) or I might not want to be hurt even a bit as an acceptable tradeoff for winning. I just want to get a guy to leave.

My concern here is that you seem to think that grapplers/MMAists only know to
clinch, takedown, submit/pin, etc. The point I'm trying to make is that none of these situations require specific training in martial arts to deal with them. If you have the know-how to control an opponent in the clinch, then you can probably figure out an expedient way of getting yourself and your belligerent accomplice out of the sticky situation.

They don't *require* it, but you don't need boxing to learn to hit either, do you? But the fact os you'd be an idiot not to use the best striking techs to inprove your skills. What you're saying is that subpar techniques will serve, and that's something that goes against the ethos of this site, if I'm not mistaken.

How would YOU handle your hypothetical situations?

Drunk buddy? What you might call Gokkyo with some extra pressure to the chest, then run him out of the area. If he still doesn't listed, it's time for an RNC or hammerlock. When I actually did this, though, gokkyo worked fine by itself.

Angry uncle? When I did it, it was a standing lock on the rotator cuff that spun him right around. Then I walked him to the other side of the car. I don't think he even knew how he got there in the first place.

Hell, maybe they wouldn't have worked in another situation, but they did work in these, and other such techniques have. That;s why I stand by them. I'm not making strong claims here. I jyst note that lots of people in the security and LEO fileds find this stuff useful, I've ound it useful, it fills a gap, and MMA doesn't really get into it in a big way, as far as I know.

**eyebeams** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 12:11am

Originally Posted by garbanzobean

That does not mean that MMA fighters do not know how to do them. There are lots of things that you don't see in MMA very often that most of the fighters can certainly try if they wanted to. The relative success rate of these attempts would be based on the skill of the opponent. If it is some drunk at a bar or your pissed off uncle, your chances are pretty fucking good.

If an MMA fighter was trying to restrain Zeus, God of Thunder, and get him out of a bar before he fries someone, he probably could not chicken wing him.

It depends. How many MMA gyms train them? Technically, everbody in the goddamn world knows how to do a hammerlock. There's no secret to it. How many gyms train entering and maintaining control? I don't know. Maybe Johnny's does and it's incredibly common, but I'd wonder why considering I've never see it used in a match.

**eyebeams** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 12:13am

Originally Posted by JohnnyS

Can you please state what your position is as succinctly as possible? I'm not sure what you're arguing.

About hitting or restraining? I'll answer tomorrow. I'm bagged and it's late up here. And I can feel the wife's eyes boring a hole through the back of my head . . .

**JohnnyS** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 12:17am

The punches you learn in an MMA gym will probably be exactly the same as you'd learn in a boxing gym. The things you won't learn are the things you'd use against another boxer *in a boxing match*. Bobbing from the waist instead of bending the knees is fine in boxing because you're not going to have someone grab the back of your head and drive a knee through your face, or do a snap-down, or do a guillotine choke. The same goes for other techniques/combinations etc that are specific to the sport of boxing.

***Cassius*** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 12:38am

Originally Posted by eyebeams

It depends. How many MMA gyms train them? Technically, everbody in the goddamn world knows how to do a hammerlock. There's no secret to it. How many gyms train entering and maintaining control? I don't know. Maybe Johnny's does and it's incredibly common, but I'd wonder why considering I've never see it used in a match.

Maybe you should check out an MMA gym?

You're right in that MMA gyms generally do not explicitly say "here is a str33t application for this move." From my perspective, at least, what they do give you is the ability to successfully control a fully resisting opponent. This is much more important than coming up with a "fire escape route" for every single situation. That is what your brain is for.

***Cassius*** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 12:47am

Originally Posted by eyebeams

Isn't saying strength will out kind of a BS excuse? I don;t want tp pick somebody up after bringing them down. It's a waste of time. Except . . .

. . . that you're right. Sometimes a guy just needs time to be set in place for a bit. But not always. I might not want to accidentally hurt somebody (because they do something dumb while restrained) or I might not want to be hurt even a bit as an acceptable tradeoff for winning. I just want to get a guy to leave.

They don't *require* it, but you don't need boxing to learn to hit either, do you? But the fact os you'd be an idiot not to use the best striking techs to inprove your skills. What you're saying is that subpar techniques will serve, and that's something that goes against the ethos of this site, if I'm not mistaken.

Where Did I say I would take the person down and then pick him back up? I meant pick up as in pick straight up. As in enter a takedown but not complete it. This is just common sense. A fireman's carry is an example of this.

Second point: It is much easier to control someone on the ground than from standing up. If I have that option, and I decide it is safe to do so, I will use my bodyweight to hold the belligerent down every single time.

Third point: I meant that you do not need to learn how to grapple with someone that is being belligerent in a bar. This is a specific situation. MMA teaches you to control a resisting person. You would then use this ability along with your BRAIN to de-escalate the situation. If you can fully control your belligerent, it should not be hard to get him out of a room.

**SifuAbel** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 1:49am

Originally Posted by Philthy

Does anyone physically know KFDW? .

Does anybody know you?

**Locu5** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 4:34am

Last week, I had to use an armdrag to get to the back (standing) of a beligerent drunk (holiday spirit and all that). From there knee in the small of the back + RNC made it easier to talk to him. It was amazing that I resisted the urge to suplex him, stomp his face in, and take off my clothes to roll around in his blood. I must be training wrong.

**Ronin** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 6:26am

Originally Posted by JohnnyS

The thing is, you don't need to be a world-class boxer in MMA to out-punch a world-class boxer. You don't need to be a world-class wrestler in MMA to out-takedown a world-class wrestler. Look at Bustamante who was able to continually take down Olympic Silver Medalist, Matt Lindland, simply because of the addition of strikes.

More than half of any art is designed to beat anther exponent of that same art under the same rules. Change the rules, and those counters and counter-counters are irrelevant. It's not about being world-class at takedowns, or striking or groundfighting. It's about being world-class in putting those elements together.

I agree Johnny.
What I posted is what I would like to see, what I believe would be the apex of a MMA.

**dramaboy** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 10:24am

Originally Posted by Ronin

I think that the GnP is the wost thing to happen to MMA.

It will just lead to better guards.

Tomas

**Ronin** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 10:25am

Originally Posted by drummerboy

It will just lead to better guards.

Tomas

Or more iron face conditioning.

**eyebeams** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 5:49pm

Originally Posted by locu5

Last week, I had to use an armdrag to get to the back (standing) of a beligerent drunk (holiday spirit and all that). From there knee in the small of the back + RNC made it easier to talk to him. It was amazing that I resisted the urge to suplex him, stomp his face in, and take off my clothes to roll around in his blood. I must be training wrong.

\

In an equivalent argument, I saw a video of a guy winning an MMA fight with wing chun here on the site, so you should quit MMA and do wing chun, since it worked for this guy once, instead of learning how to do it better.

These arguments are familiar -- but they aren't usually used by MMA proponents. They're the kinds of arguments MMA proponents rightly **** on, from "I would just shoot him, ROFLMAO," to "even though these techniques are not usually taught or even seen, they exist, in t3h r3@l MMA."

**eyebeams** · Posted On: 12/02/2005 6:00pm

Originally Posted by JohnnyS

The punches you learn in an MMA gym will probably be exactly the same as you'd learn in a boxing gym. The things you won't learn are the things you'd use against another boxer *in a boxing match*. Bobbing from the waist instead of bending the knees is fine in boxing because you're not going to have someone grab the back of your head and drive a knee through your face, or do a snap-down, or do a guillotine choke. The same goes for other techniques/combinations etc that are specific to the sport of boxing.

So are you saying that MMAist aren't as good against the blitz because a boxer can react with things that would make an MMA eat a knee, takedown, etc? That seems plausible, I suppose. It's just surprising to me that this would happen given that MMA allows so many other ways to attack a blitzer by clinching or grabbing.