Specialized styles or all encompassing system?

[BKR]

I enjoy watching MMA above all other fighting sports. No specialized style artists can do well today without intense cross training. However, the top competitors still seem to come from high level, more specialized backgrounds. I thought by now top competitors would all grow up with mma. This is what makes me think there is an inherent advantage to a specialized system.

I don't think so. MMA has no grass-roots feeder system. Think about how many kids in this country wrestle from an early age up until collegiate and veterens ?
http://content.themat.com/forms/Weights.pdf

One could consider the various ammy MMA events/system to be a feeder, but, not really. If kids MMA exists, it's tiny, and what parent is going to put their 6 year old into MMA training ?

The key is having athletes be able to start at a young age in a sport (in this case in the USA that would be wrestling, boxing, BJJ, Judo, and maybe karate or TKD in order of importance and relevance. Of those, the grappling arts are much safer for kids to do (no head punching), when properly taught to specific age/skill groups.

Specialized training is not really the best route to develop athletes anyway. General athleticism (agility, balance, coordination, speed) is what you want. MMA could provide that, but again, the image of MMA is not something most parents would want for their kids. So it's not going to get into the school system anytime soon.

MMA is getting more popular, and some kids are into it. But it's not available to them, so they do BJJ, boxing, wrestling, to a lesser degree judo (much in my experience).

It's the same in developing any sport, the base is what is most important. MMA is the top of the triangle, in a sense, with the grass roots sports (feeders) being mostly wrestling/boxing/BJJ on (I would guess) a numbers basis, with some Judo and even lesser TKD and karate thrown into the mix.

[Devil]

I don't think so. MMA has no grass-roots feeder system. Think about how many kids in this country wrestle from an early age up until collegiate and veterens ?
http://content.themat.com/forms/Weights.pdf

One could consider the various ammy MMA events/system to be a feeder, but, not really. If kids MMA exists, it's tiny, and what parent is going to put their 6 year old into MMA training ?

The key is having athletes be able to start at a young age in a sport (in this case in the USA that would be wrestling, boxing, BJJ, Judo, and maybe karate or TKD in order of importance and relevance. Of those, the grappling arts are much safer for kids to do (no head punching), when properly taught to specific age/skill groups.

Specialized training is not really the best route to develop athletes anyway. General athleticism (agility, balance, coordination, speed) is what you want. MMA could provide that, but again, the image of MMA is not something most parents would want for their kids. So it's not going to get into the school system anytime soon.

MMA is getting more popular, and some kids are into it. But it's not available to them, so they do BJJ, boxing, wrestling, to a lesser degree judo (much in my experience).

It's the same in developing any sport, the base is what is most important. MMA is the top of the triangle, in a sense, with the grass roots sports (feeders) being mostly wrestling/boxing/BJJ on (I would guess) a numbers basis, with some Judo and even lesser TKD and karate thrown into the mix.

I mostly agree with all of that. I would just add that most people aren't going to throw their kids into a cage to fight but that doesn't mean their training can't be structured specifically to prepare them for MMA.

[W. Rabbit]

You don't like The Secret? Well then never mind that invite to join my book club I emailed you.

I don't like people who throw around statistics and probability and pseudoscience, and tie it to their imaginations instead of coin tosses, reality etc.

Journalists can have pretty wild imaginations even when discussing facts. Gladwell is not an expert on "expertise", and definitely not on math, for all the writing he's done on the matter.

Mathematicians like Silver tend to be more grounded about things like causation, even if they're relatively nutty otherwise.

Authors like Byrne are definitely far worse. Her essential premise is that expertise is not work, it's willed into being by manipulating time and space. That might sense to a lot of people because, quite frankly, they're ignorant, but math and science tell us otherwise.

Oh, how many rich folks there would be, if the Gambler's Fallacy could actually be willed away...I'd be at the casino today, folks.

[1point2]

If we're talking about producing elite fighters then sport science has a pretty good idea of the broad strokes. BKR has already laid out the basics. You put a large proportion of the population through a wide variety of sports as children, encouraging multiple sports throughout the year so they practice learning new skills and train in a lot of different ways. (In a way, this is temporary or rotating specialization, at the scale of seasons.) Some sports are better for kids to do throughout the year or generally more than others by dint of the fact that those sports are more general and more physical, e.g. gymnastics or a wide variety of track and field events. At a certain age that varies sport-to-sport but that ranges generally from puberty up to the end of adolescence, encourage kids to specialize in their chosen sport and start training in a systematic fashion involving sport practice alongside strength and conditioning.

I can't imagine MMA would be any different, except that you want to avoid head trauma. Broad skill-based sports like MMA lend themselves to periodized specialization, spiraling from one aspect of the sport to the next, ratcheting their general skill level and athleticism upwards even while skills on the back burner languish slightly. Personally I think this would best be served by a vibrant culture of MMA-looking adolescents competing in a wide variety of specialties (wrestling, Kyokushin, san da, boxing, judo...). For instance, see Benson Henderson challenging himself with ADCC this past weekend.

[Devil]

If we're talking about producing elite fighters then sport science has a pretty good idea of the broad strokes. BKR has already laid out the basics. You put a large proportion of the population through a wide variety of sports as children, encouraging multiple sports throughout the year so they practice learning new skills and train in a lot of different ways. (In a way, this is temporary or rotating specialization, at the scale of seasons.) Some sports are better for kids to do throughout the year or generally more than others by dint of the fact that those sports are more general and more physical, e.g. gymnastics or a wide variety of track and field events. At a certain age that varies sport-to-sport but that ranges generally from puberty up to the end of adolescence, encourage kids to specialize in their chosen sport and start training in a systematic fashion involving sport practice alongside strength and conditioning.

I can't imagine MMA would be any different, except that you want to avoid head trauma. Broad skill-based sports like MMA lend themselves to periodized specialization, spiraling from one aspect of the sport to the next, ratcheting their general skill level and athleticism upwards even while skills on the back burner languish slightly. Personally I think this would best be served by a vibrant culture of MMA-looking adolescents competing in a wide variety of specialties (wrestling, Kyokushin, san da, boxing, judo...). For instance, see Benson Henderson challenging himself with ADCC this past weekend.

Exactly. Well put.

[Raycetpfl]

Sounds like you don't love yourself enough to have nice things to me. ;-)

[NeilG]

I have no idea what point you're trying to make. We're talking about MMA and neither of those guys are fighters. What are you getting at?

I guess I'm just arguing against your dumb analogy. You originally wrote:

When I look around at the martial arts world I don't see one single system that can produce the Peyton Manning of fighting. I think the best way to achieve that level of expertise is to specialize AND generalize and to approach both with equal focus.

Kendo and judo and other systems can and do produce their Peyton Mannings. If you meant is there a system that produces an elite athlete that now competes in MMA, well not yet. But the Manning analogy doesn't hold up because he didn't switch to another related sport either. Manning couldn't even be competitive at a different position within his own sport, never mind cross over and play rugby or Australian rules.

[Devil]

I guess I'm just arguing against your dumb analogy. You originally wrote:



Kendo and judo and other systems can and do produce their Peyton Mannings. If you meant is there a system that produces an elite athlete that now competes in MMA, well not yet. But the Manning analogy doesn't hold up because he didn't switch to another related sport either. Manning couldn't even be competitive at a different position within his own sport, never mind cross over and play rugby or Australian rules.

Read the thread and stop being so thick. I already clarified what I meant with the analogy.

[mike321]

I don't think so. MMA has no grass-roots feeder system. Think about how many kids in this country wrestle from an early age up until collegiate and veterens ?
http://content.themat.com/forms/Weights.pdf

One could consider the various ammy MMA events/system to be a feeder, but, not really. If kids MMA exists, it's tiny, and what parent is going to put their 6 year old into MMA training ?

The key is having athletes be able to start at a young age in a sport (in this case in the USA that would be wrestling, boxing, BJJ, Judo, and maybe karate or TKD in order of importance and relevance. Of those, the grappling arts are much safer for kids to do (no head punching), when properly taught to specific age/skill groups.

Specialized training is not really the best route to develop athletes anyway. General athleticism (agility, balance, coordination, speed) is what you want. MMA could provide that, but again, the image of MMA is not something most parents would want for their kids. So it's not going to get into the school system anytime soon.

MMA is getting more popular, and some kids are into it. But it's not available to them, so they do BJJ, boxing, wrestling, to a lesser degree judo (much in my experience).

It's the same in developing any sport, the base is what is most important. MMA is the top of the triangle, in a sense, with the grass roots sports (feeders) being mostly wrestling/boxing/BJJ on (I would guess) a numbers basis, with some Judo and even lesser TKD and karate thrown into the mix.

This is an excellent point that I had not thought about. So now we need to wait for kids MMA and another 20 years before we can see the pinnacle of MMA!

[BKR]

Specialists (mediocre at other skills)=*Damian Maia ,Travis Lutter, *mark Coleman, *Richardo Arona, *mark Kerr, *Chael Sonnen,* Jake Shields, big nog,Jeremy Horn,matt Hughes ,*Paul harris, robbie lawler, Anderson Silva , Tito Ortiz,Jacare,Anthony Johson, tim sylvia,Dos Santos ,Shogun, *Ronda (beginning career)* Matt Serra,*Brock Lesnar,*Andre Arlovski,*mark hunt,*Vinny Magahles,Wand,

Double majors(very good at two)- The 209, Liddell, pettis, little nog, Rashad Evans, Cain,*Dan Henderson, *Randy Couture,* Matt Lindland,* CroCop, *Romero , Daniel Cormier

Swiss Army Knives of DOOM!- *Machida,GSP, Rich Franklin, Forrest Griffin, *Werdum, *Ronda Rousey (now),*Bj Penn, *Fedor, Jose Aldo, *Dos Anjos ,*Chris weidman,*MegaReem,BigFoot, Jon Jones,Rory Mcdonald, Jonny hendricks,

*=proven to be world class in at least a single art

Being a specialist doesn't mean you aren't a good fighter. Jake Shields is pretty easily the 3rd greatest w.w. of all time and he got touched up by a bully on bully beat down during the striking round.
Also one thing to think about is the people that are Swiss army knives of doom have a strong base in a single art for the most part. I don't think there is a wrong answer except for, "grappling is a myth . I will just spin kick someone with my rex-kwon-do that trys that queer grappling on me." There's no exact formula but I think the best idea is to drag someone out of their comfort zone and into yours and you can be the victor consistently.

People with a strong base in a single art (and I mean, very strong ,as in elite athlete level) are by definition superior athletes. Ronda Rousey would be a great example. So if they have a good base in a combat sport, then that adds positively to their chance of success. If it's an elite level athlete with good grappling and submission skills (2 out of 3 for MMA), then chance of success goes up accordingly.

[BKR]

It's not random. It's from a paper written by Malcom gladwell in 1993 called outliers. It may be bullshit. Lots of people are saying it is now days,but it's not random.
The point stands no matter what the number of hours. Let's say it's 3000 for you and 5,000 for me to become advanced in a given art. How much time do I have to give ? It's my opinion it's better to be of an expert level in one thing opposed to being novice-intermediate at everything.
Honestly 10,000 hours was his "anyone" becomes an expert number. If you have aptitude it might only take 10 hours.

In Judo, if a young athlete is well prepared (as in strong ABCS,motivation, good technical base) then elite track would start about 14 or 15, depending on gender and individual stage of development. After that, it's about 10 years more of elite level training to get to world/Olympic level and physical prime (around 25-28 years old, plus or minus a couple of years.)

That's from my latest coach training. So 10 years on top of something like 4-5 years of Judo before that, as a kid. Could be more if they start at 6 or 7 years old.

And the percentage that can do that is tiny. So I'm not sure 10,000 hours applies to "everybody".

[NeilG]

In Judo, if a young athlete is well prepared (as in strong ABCS,motivation, good technical base) then elite track would start about 14 or 15, depending on gender and individual stage of development. After that, it's about 10 years more of elite level training to get to world/Olympic level and physical prime (around 25-28 years old, plus or minus a couple of years.)

http://www.judocanada.org/long-term-...lopment-model/

[BKR]

I mostly agree with all of that. I would just add that most people aren't going to throw their kids into a cage to fight but that doesn't mean their training can't be structured specifically to prepare them for MMA.

Sure,I was thinking along similar lines. However, like I noted before, the primary issue with developing athletes is not necessarily sports-specific training, although that shifts with age and experience. The primary issue is developing their fundamental, or core physical attributes. Those do not vary across sports by much at all. As they get older, more specialized training happens. Unless you are in Japan, LOL, and have phenom like the kendo guy NeilG wrote about. Same thing can happen in Judo (Yamashita, for example), in Japan, because of the level of opportunity for excellent training.

[BKR]

If we're talking about producing elite fighters then sport science has a pretty good idea of the broad strokes. BKR has already laid out the basics. You put a large proportion of the population through a wide variety of sports as children, encouraging multiple sports throughout the year so they practice learning new skills and train in a lot of different ways. (In a way, this is temporary or rotating specialization, at the scale of seasons.) Some sports are better for kids to do throughout the year or generally more than others by dint of the fact that those sports are more general and more physical, e.g. gymnastics or a wide variety of track and field events. At a certain age that varies sport-to-sport but that ranges generally from puberty up to the end of adolescence, encourage kids to specialize in their chosen sport and start training in a systematic fashion involving sport practice alongside strength and conditioning.

I can't imagine MMA would be any different, except that you want to avoid head trauma. Broad skill-based sports like MMA lend themselves to periodized specialization, spiraling from one aspect of the sport to the next, ratcheting their general skill level and athleticism upwards even while skills on the back burner languish slightly. Personally I think this would best be served by a vibrant culture of MMA-looking adolescents competing in a wide variety of specialties (wrestling, Kyokushin, san da, boxing, judo...). For instance, see Benson Henderson challenging himself with ADCC this past weekend.

First paragraph would be the old Soviet Union style system in a nutshell, right ?

I agree about avoiding head trauma. That's an issue in grappling as well, especially Judo. Training has to be adjusted according to age and experience.

I would think striking would come last, although some boxing goes down pretty young (golden gloves). In any case, the general development of physical attributes is what counts. Otherwise, elite level performance will not follow.

[BKR]

This is an excellent point that I had not thought about. So now we need to wait for kids MMA and another 20 years before we can see the pinnacle of MMA!

You didn't get it. Or you are being sarcastic. If so, Bazinga !