In the begining....

FiannaGym.com

In the begining (not really THE begining but 30 years ago) there were martial arts.

These martial arts jumped at the chance to kick everyones ass in the UFC and prove "their" style was best. Most of these "styles" failed and were beaten up. Of course the problem wasn't the style, it was the UFC. Of course it was.

Because these style were complaining that the UFC didnt allow biting and eye gouging "Challenge" fights appeared (little did the "other" style know that this had been done to death by the Gracies in LA and in Brazil) where you could eye gouge and bite. Here was the chance for the "other" styles to really prove they were best. As we all know they got beaten up really bad, many of the videos online show arms getting broken and rotator cuffs being torn. (I'm sure they wished they were in the UFC then with nice cuddley referee Big John to protect them).
But of course, it wasnt the "style" that was wrong, it was the challenges.

The next line of "Reasoning" came along... You see "Real" martial arts, not like those silly sport styles of MMA, BJJ, GR & FS Wrestling and MT, are for the street. So they have shoes, Knifes are involved, maybe a number of people, its a suprise attack etc.
So I suppose the next stage is for a group of MMA guys, armed with knives and boots to jump TMA guys. So what line of reasoning would emerge then?

This is a serious question? I fully understand that people build up walls of "coherence" to make their existing "knowledge" fit their wordl view. But how can non-MMA styles justify the reasoning that I have outlined above? This is not an attack on the sensitive styles / people just a serious question.

Peace

Cabelo

I couldn't disagree more... I don't think anyone has questioned the validity of MMA training (apart from the "watch you don't get knifed bucko" thread). I think the problem is that some MMA peeps get all worked up about those of us who practice TMAs.

Of course, there's a minority on both sides behaving exactly as you've described but I think the issue is way out of proportion. Remember, the internet lets a vocal minority look like everyone.


Also, TMA roxx0rs and MMA is for gays!

dlofnep

Some people have questioned it Cabelo. A few think it won't translate once the street is involved.

I think the problem is that someone who is tested in a resisted enviroment, someone who spars and knows his limits and ability is really not trying to bash some TMA guys, but more trying to scream out and try wake up people to reality that some of their styles are completely obsolete and will not work.

I think people need to know their limitations. I know mine - A reality check and self honesty with your own ability are the most important factors when it comes to combat.

FiannaGym.com

NOOOO!!!!
This thread isnt about justifying MMA, we all know MMA is the best. The thread is about "how can this line of reasoning be justified". Just that. Not is the line of reasoning rampant in general society. Is MMA good and valid.

It is simply, given this history, how can that line of reasoning be justified?

Peace

Dragan

It just human nature to try and save something you are emotionally invested in dude.

Many people put there faith of "themselves" into there art. "My discipline makes me who i am" kind of thing. As such, it can be hard for people to seperate the effectivness of the discipline from there own effectivness as a person (( exactly the same as people who's main concern and balance for life is there worklife, or social life, or how well there team is doing etc ))

Quite simply, for a lot of people who had been pouring 5,10,15 years of hard work and effort into a martial art, to have it blown away in front of a world audience would have been rough.

All of a sudden, it not's "wow, you must be hard, you do karate" it's "Man, i bet Royce could kick your ass all day".

As such, what you felt made you the person you were suffers a blow.

Imagine if, in ten years time, with all your dedication and practice and love of MMA, and the happiness you get from a good training session, and all the little sacrifices and troubles you go through try and get better at it....... just imagine is something "new" (( in brackets because if you think MMA is new your an idiot )) comes out and blows your art out of the water????

It can't be easy man, so you try and defend it whatever way you can, whether it makes sense or not.

dlofnep

Good post Dragan.

Naos

The new martial art will be that CosmoArt which Dlofnep posted about.. You'll see..

Good post Drag

dlofnep

Who better than aliens?

waterford mma

this isn't war though. . . the ninja would kill us in our sleep

dlofnep

Inside joke.

Roper

There's actually a psychological term for what Dragan is referring to. See, science is good and covers all the bases. When a persons attitude towards something is challenged by new evidence, they experience what's called cognitive dissonance. There are a few ways to react to this challenge but generally people either:
Accept and alter their attitude to refelect their new knowledge. This is what's regarded as psychologically healthy.
Come up with a new reason why this new knowledge isn't valid, often this solidifies their belief rather than shake it. This is common in cults. Quick example, a cult told that the world was going to end by their 'leader' were told it would happen on Friday, and that a spaceship would rescue them. So Friday comes, and goes. No end of world, no spaceship. The members begin to question. But then the leader says 'hurrah, we've saved the world because we were faithful'. Rather than suffer the discomfort of realising that all they had believed before was wrong, they accept this ropey explanation, and actually go on to believe more fervently. This by the way is a shortened version of a real study.
Try reading it again but for cult, substitute "kenpo" or "for the street" martial arts of choice, and for "end of world" read reality of combat, and for the "we've saved the world" bit, read "that's because it's for the street".

MaeveD

My 2c.....

In the beginning...as in way back when

A guy somewhere did some cool stuff.... put it in a box called it a martial art and gave it a name... others did the same

After that some of the guys who trained with the first guys decided they could do it better, had a row, left the first guys, changed a few things, put it in a box, called it a martial art and gave it a name

Later still...mma...some guy trained with a few of the above, took a bit of everything from what he learned, changed a few things, put it in a box, called it a martial art and gave it a name. Aikido and Bjj are just two examples

Now, we have whats called 'MMA' it's starting to get put in a box , it will probably get it's own name and call itself a martial art

If I wanted to fight/compete, it's what I'd do... but I don't and also I like my ears and nose the way they are :rolleyes:

MaxBax

Roper wrote:

There's actually a psychological term for what Dragan is referring to. See, science is good and covers all the bases. When a persons attitude towards something is challenged by new evidence, they experience what's called cognitive dissonance. There are a few ways to react to this challenge but generally people either:
Accept and alter their attitude to refelect their new knowledge. This is what's regarded as psychologically healthy.
Come up with a new reason why this new knowledge isn't valid, often this solidifies their belief rather than shake it. This is common in cults. Quick example, a cult told that the world was going to end by their 'leader' were told it would happen on Friday, and that a spaceship would rescue them. So Friday comes, and goes. No end of world, no spaceship. The members begin to question. But then the leader says 'hurrah, we've saved the world because we were faithful'. Rather than suffer the discomfort of realising that all they had believed before was wrong, they accept this ropey explanation, and actually go on to believe more fervently. This by the way is a shortened version of a real study.
Try reading it again but for cult, substitute "kenpo" or "for the street" martial arts of choice, and for "end of world" read reality of combat, and for the "we've saved the world" bit, read "that's because it's for the street".

well explained.

FiannaGym.com

Thanks for the great replies guys.

Peace

Musashi

So I suppose the next stage is for a group of MMA guys, armed with knives and boots to jump TMA guys. So what line of reasoning would emerge then?

In all honesty if I get jumped by any group of lads with boot and knives (Stormfront anyone?) I'll react as I would to any group jumping me. I'll run all the hell away!

If my wife and little boy are with me I'll do my level best to kill every ****er there. I hope their knife skills are up to par as once I get one I won't "duel" it out, I'll just stab them to death. I'll even use olde worlde stabbing manuals to cut them in ways can't be stoped and bleeds out the fastest! The line of reasoning would be (I hope) that you don't ever get in knife fights and you NEVER **** with my family!

I guess the MMA lads feel their physical skills transfer across to weapons and knives. Have they ever killed an animal with a blade? That is closer to what is meant in FMA than "tapping out". Feeling blood spurt over your hands and ending a life is a whole other experience to Sports. I've ended animals lives with a rifle and at times, as a favour to less accurate hunters, with my knives. A clean kill is preffered but sometimes people miss. A knife will kill quickly and quietly, there can be no dispute of this fact. Killing also changes the killer in some fundamental way. I don't debate if it's a good or bad way, it just is.

I've seen video of the Gracies in some "challenge" matchs and it just looked scrappy. Against a knifer I doubt they'd have lived? I can see the skill etc. in unarmed fighting, but not everyone is unarmed? So they live in Brazil, were they homeless and hunted for extermination? I lived in Childers Estate Dungarvan, doesn't mean I was the same as the other lads came out of there.

I really believe "real" martial artists and fighters do all they can to avoid any fight, and if pushed do whatever it takes to end it. Not "win" it, just end it.

Game Theory is your friend!

Michael O Leary

Musashi,

Next time you are out on the beer will you bring me? I'd say you are a wild boy.

You certaintly live up to your namesake.

Regards,

Michael.

MaxBax

i wouldn't, i'd be scared he'd stab me.

Dave Joyce

Wow, great post Eric, some really excellant points there. We gotta meet up sometime, and we might even buy Mick O'Leary a point:D

FiannaGym.com

Success!!!!

The goal of this thread was to find out what the next "line of reasoning" would be for the beaten TMA guys. WHat would they say to support their preconcieved "Knowledge". How would the "cognitive dissonance" patch this up.

And we have a conclusion....
First, TMA will beat MMA. That failed so...
Second, TMA will beat MMA in the street enviroenemnt.
And when that failed like everything else...
Third, TMA will beat MMA when TMA guys are armed with knives.

Thanks for all the great post everyone.

Peace

MaxBax

angry sarcastic internet boy strikes again.

kenpo_dave

FiannaGym.com wrote:

Success!!!!

And we have a conclusion....
First, TMA will beat MMA. That failed so...
Second, TMA will beat MMA in the street enviroenemnt.
And when that failed like everything else...
Third, TMA will beat MMA when TMA guys are armed with knives.

This is completely wrong. It wasnt TMA failed to beat MMA, it was only the people who participated who failed to use their skills effectively, NOTHING MORE. Also, once a fight is pre arranged and in a ring, no matter what the rules are if any, its as far from a "street environment" as any competition. All these challenges and competitions proved about TMA styles, if anything, is that they were not developed to fight against fighting athletes.

Musashi

FiannaGym.com wrote:

TMA will beat MMA when TMA guys are armed with knives.

Do you have a new handle Pearse or is this another guy from Fianna Gym?
Either way if this was taken from my reply it's mistaken. I doubt I'll ever be attacked by MMA or TMA guys as they are in general level headed and decents lads that I enjoy training with, and sometimes going on the beer with What I did say was that if attacked by a group I would run away, unless I couldn't. In that case I would try my best to inflict as much damage as possible on my attackers. My TMA or even the little MMA training I've done has not been weapon oriented.

The practicalities of weapons I learned from a young age through hunting and helping out in a local farm based abattoir. I know how to cut meat, which I reckon puts me ahead of a lot of knife based stylists (not a dig at anyone lads).

The fact remains that I have killed animals with knives, and at one time with a two pound "lump" hammer with a bit of bolt welded to its face, like an old style "Poll Axe"? Killing things is both harder and easier than you might imagine, the mechanics of it are pretty simple. Once you've done it a few times any mental hangups pretty much go away, at a guess guys who've stabbed others in the prison system have similar experience and fewer qualms about repeating the act on subsequent victims?

we might even buy Mick O'Leary a point

I'd love to catch up with you Dave, and Mick if he's about I'll drink with pretty much anybody If Mick wants advice on points I could steer him right, Spyderco for a start!

MaxBax wrote:

i wouldn't, i'd be scared he'd stab me.

I've never stabbed a person, doubt you'd be the first mate. "What doesn't kill you................." come away on the beer and we can talk about it?

Despite what Mick may think or how my posts may come across, I am a quiet guy that avoids trouble. I've seen the hassles and court cases of other family members and know that's not the way I want to live my life. I also rarely go out these days, I prefer quiet and a good movie any day. I will of course make an exception if any of you lads are down around this end of the country for a visit I still want to see Dlofnep on a Boards Beers I hear the dancing is deadly!

Cabelo

Musashi wrote:

I hear the dancing is deadly!

Hey, I'm not always one for the drinking but I'm always up for a few hideous stab wounds and I'm a lovely dancer

blondie83

Heres a style v style thread for your entertainment:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49432&page=1&pp=15

I actually quite enjoyed reading it!

MaxBax

i read the first page, i couldn't go any longer.

i think this forum has proved that TMA and MMA are arbitrary defunct terms.
it's training methods over terminology.
it's all about the end goal.

secondly, ppl doing the majority of MAs would be sh1t in a pride rules fight. so if your doing these MAs to get good at fighting, you're wasting your time.

Musashi

MaxBax wrote:

ppl doing the majority of MAs would be sh1t in a pride fight.

Including All the Irish MMA Lads who post here?

MaxBax

edited. thanks musashi.

FiannaGym.com

kenpo_dave wrote:

This is completely wrong. It wasnt TMA failed to beat MMA, it was only the people who participated who failed to use their skills effectively, NOTHING MORE.

Hi Dave, could you explain how come in of all the videos and fights I've watched over the years maybe 2% of "TMA" participants could use their "skills" effectively?

kenpo_dave wrote:

Also, once a fight is pre arranged and in a ring, no matter what the rules are if any, its as far from a "street environment" as any competition. All these challenges and competitions proved about TMA styles, if anything, is that they were not developed to fight against fighting athletes.

Who do they train to fight against? I like to train against fighting atheletes because I think they are the best fighters in the world, if I can beat them I'm happy I can beat anyone. On the other hand, with the rise and rise of MMA, do these TMA guys not think, "well we'llla lways be able to beat a good portion of those who may attack us" and then rethink that and do MMA?

Peace

dlofnep

kenpo_dave wrote:

This is completely wrong. It wasnt TMA failed to beat MMA, it was only the people who participated who failed to use their skills effectively, NOTHING MORE. Also, once a fight is pre arranged and in a ring, no matter what the rules are if any, its as far from a "street environment" as any competition. All these challenges and competitions proved about TMA styles, if anything, is that they were not developed to fight against fighting athletes.

Dave, it was because the styles were not practical. That is why they lost. There skills didn't give them enough to deal with anyone with a grappling ability. As far as trying the "because it's prearranged its no good for the street" is absurd. If you can't compete effectively in a prearranged enviroment, what makes you think you can fight in a street fight or defend yourself in a street fight?

kenpo_dave

Hi Dave, could you explain how come in of all the videos and fights I've watched over the years maybe 2% of "TMA" participants could use their "skills" effectively?

Who do they train to fight against? I like to train against fighting atheletes because I think they are the best fighters in the world, if I can beat them I'm happy I can beat anyone. On the other hand, with the rise and rise of MMA, do these TMA guys not think, "well we'llla lways be able to beat a good portion of those who may attack us" and then rethink that and do MMA?

Were these videos and fights all sparring and training, or were some of them actual video recordings of people being attacked? Its well known by many on here that the sparring done by alot of 'TMA' styles is crap and actually doesnt resemble the self defense part of the style at all. The self defense part is usually developed to fight thugs and scumbags, who dont have any "formal" training, most likely cant even punch properly and will be screwed once they hit the ground (whether by grappling, throws/takedowns). My original point was that you cant say "TMA failed to beat MMA" based on how a few people did in a competition/challenge. Im guessing that it was mainly the grappling that got the 'TMA' guys. If so, would it not make sense for the 'TMA' guys to just add grappling to their style by getting grappling instructors to teach at their schools, and to change the sparring that they do to full contact. Of course this is more or less moving towards MMA, but with a different stand up style and the keeping of the traditional training. But well all agree anyway that a mix of styles is the way to go

Personally, I love the hard training. Even in Kenpo a few years ago, 3 of us agreed that when training with eachother wed go harder than when training with others. We used to go during the summer to one of the fields in UCD to get some extra training in and on the nice "soft" grass we did loads of takedowns and throws and even rolled a bit.

MaxBax

Personally, I love the hard training. Even in Kenpo a few years ago, 3 of us agreed that when training with eachother wed go harder than when training with others. We used to go during the summer to one of the fields in UCD to get some extra training in and on the nice "soft" grass we did loads of takedowns and throws and even rolled a bit.
kenpo_dave is online now

sounds romantic.

kenpo_dave

dlofnep wrote:

Dave, it was because the styles were not practical. That is why they lost. There skills didn't give them enough to deal with anyone with a grappling ability. As far as trying the "because it's prearranged its no good for the street" is absurd. If you can't compete effectively in a prearranged enviroment, what makes you think you can fight in a street fight or defend yourself in a street fight?

Sorry, I didnt mean to say it was down to the fights being pre arranged. I only said that because Pearse had said "Second, TMA will beat MMA in the street enviroenemnt. And when that failed like everything else".
As others on here that are a hell of alot more experienced than I have pointed out there is a big difference between the mentality of ring fighting and that of self defense. They have already brought it up so Ill leave that debate to them.

Regards

Dave.

kenpo_dave

MaxBax wrote:

sounds romantic.

Quiet you!!!:p

MaxBax

i love a good roll in the long grass over the summer too.

judomick

maybe the mentality is different? the fact remains the delivery system remains exactly the same, and when it comes to delivery systems alive arts wipe the dojo/ concrete floor with dead arts

kenpo_dave

judomick wrote:

maybe the mentality is different? the fact remains the delivery system remains exactly the same, and when it comes to delivery systems alive arts wipe the dojo/ concrete floor with dead arts

Definately, however, not all systems that most consider "dead" are actually so. And in the case of purely self defense systems, it only matters if an average thug can "wipe the dojo/ concrete floor".

Regards

Dave.

judomick

average self defence systems that have no alive training means when the participant gets into a fight with a thug it means that its a thug versus someone with a false security

kenpo_dave

judomick wrote:

average self defence systems that have no alive training means when the participant gets into a fight with a thug it means that its a thug versus someone with a false security

I agree completely.