Nothing new to add, but seeing how I started the thread I'll chip in.
If you don't understand the ground game the GnP looks incredibly brutal and unsportsmanlike against the guy who already 'lost'. If you understand mma more however you know that the fight is not over even if one guy is on their back.
The exception to this might be the ground brawling of the early UFC days when you could have a wrestler with no subs take down a guy completely lost on the ground. Some of those (chin grinds to the face included) pummelings were painful to watch.
Last edited by nightowl; 1/23/2010 10:28pm at .
Funny how we have come full circle. The TMA nut shots, a primary defense against grappling *sarcasm*, is accepted while these same styles are cringing at GnP.
Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
Shhhh...you have to call it something pretty like "monkey stealing the peach", then it's ok. If only ground and pound could be called "Crane's golden rain" then I'm sure it would be a wushu form.
This has been quite the evolution of thread...so many points.
Alas, Jackie has offended my style.
The quick ascension of MMA is a testament to martial arts progress in the mainstream market, and seems inversely proportional to boxings descent at its own hands.
Partially replacing boxing's preeminence in popularity, MMA has prospered because it is a unique development allowing and now, requiring a multi-faceted array of talents. With its refinement it has captured the interest of many styles, increasing its marketability beyond its original accidental 'skinhead' demographic.
It has a rule set for sanction and safety, but other than that, if you cant finish someone its not over.
I know it can be brutal, but the broader spectrum of competition is very desirable and practical in this era.
Last I checked, Jackie Chun is not a fighter. He and Jet Li make some sweet movies, but its teh phony! Their training is beautiful, but not competitive.
Brave? So am I when it comes to jumping off cliffs on the snow and avoiding the (d3adly) trees after landing. But its just between my decision making, execution and the Good Lord as to whether it works out. WGAF? I do certainly respect him for his stunts.
In the cage an enemy combatant is looking to TAKE away your plan with bad intent. Different kind of bravery, time pressures and variable control in the cage than on teh set. **** a ring BTW.
Last I checked he also makes his living excelling at visually extravagant fight sequences, and has been portrayed killing how many? To how broad an audience. Kinda ironic. But its OK because It is fake.
I can understand why gentler people than I would find combat sports distasteful, but its because most don't like violence at all, which is normal, and MMA is violent. Those who like boxing or point, sub only competitions but not MMA apparently don't understand the authenticity in allowing a full variety of techniques. Or they dont want to see face smashing at its new levels.
The clock changes/saves fights enough, I would not want to diminish the ability for a fighter to adjust away from someone else's strengths and employ different strategies necessary to win. Or employ his own strengths to win, whatever area he excels at.
Its not about honor, this isnt a freeking kata recital, or a ritualistic traditional exercise in athletic posterity- it is a fight to submission via whatever!
He is certainly entitled to his opinion...and so am I that its ironic that purveyors of long winded, sensationalized fight scenes dont like "teh real deal" knowwhatI'msayin?
I love him too, JudOWNED, but I dont think he loves me.
Too much rant. must shut it now.
Good points. One more simple thing I've said before, but it bears repeating:
The reason it's not dishonorable to strike a downed opponent in MMA is that the downed opponent has NOT lost and is NOT helpless. If he thought he'd lost, or if he had decided that he was helpless, he could simply have ended the match by tapping or verbally submitting (or, speaking practically, simply by covering up and refusing to defend.) If he hasn't tapped, he wants the fight to continue. He's got some idea what he wants to do, even if his plan amounts to "weather the storm and hope for an opening to present itself."
People who think the top fighter is acting dishonorably don't understand what the bottom fighter is doing, plain and simple. He has the choice to tap and end it, and no one would think less of him (unlike a boxer or an offensive lineman who is hurt.)
I see why Jackie could feel as he does, but he's wrong.
Martial arts are most effective when they take into account standup, clinch, gnp, subskillz etc. Honor would be how someone uses said skillz in context...but in the context of a free-ranging sport fight, it's entirely appropriate to gnp, and is foolish not to do so.
It's not a shock that an actor, even a tough one like JC, wouldn't have the stomach for mma. He's close enough to 'the action' to imagine what it's like in there, sort of, but is still an actor..and not a fighter.
Grow some balls Jackie...all those guys WANT to be in there fighting. They weren't coerced, and it's not an island death game. It's a sport, and a rough one, at that. I would have thought being in the opera school, he'd recognize the difference between coerced, and voluntary. Or at least understand why the rule is there, and what it's done for MA in general. Ironic.
also, I don't think boxing is any less brutal than mma, in appearance or effect. Stephen Seagal, van damage, any poncy actor would **** at the thought of actual gnp, because if your training doesn't cover it, then you're fucked, more or less.
Show him a vid of Fedor, slapping an armbar on some fools.
Yes, think about how many fights we have watched and the guy getting Gnp'ed turned the tables? I've seen quite a few.
Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
I don't think Jackie Chan matters much in a martial arts argument. I personally find his corruption of young kids, making them think that that Kung Fu is real, assisting in the defrauding of thousands of people into paying for ineffective training, to be more dishonorable than anything found in the ring. But then, I don't really matter much in an argument about acting and Hollywood.
Do you have the right actor in mind? I dont think JC has ever killed anyone on screen.
Originally Posted by Nwp
Otherwise most of you guys have it right. The man does not understand the contestants are willing parties wanting to fight until they really canít not defend themselves anymore.
Good point, I don't know that I can recall Jackie "doin" anybody in on screen off the top of my head, so excuse the assumption.
Originally Posted by chainpunch
I might have installed Jet Li in my thoughts because I KNOW Jet has murderized some peoples!!
I will watch some movies and PM you back if you are WRONG!
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO