What is a 'MMA' or 'TMA' guy?

john kavanagh

the terms MMA and TMA pop up in various debates all the time but its been my experience that nearly everybody has their own definition of what they mean...which of course makes using the terms completely pointless.

so lets see if we can define these terms as best as possible, archive those definitions and then point new people to them if they use them. i think this would be a very worthwhile and interesting topic...

try to be as succinct as possible. no more than a couple of sentences on each one.

dlofnep

I think the common idea is as follows.

MMA = Guy who cross trains, usually in bjj, boxing, muay thai and wrestling.
TMA = Guy who trains with a more traditional approach to martial arts which includes katas, some asian sayins muttered to your sensei, ect..

Millionaire

I think as per use of the terms exclusive to the boards.ie IMHO and from my use of the words,

an MMA is someone who is training for the cage Pride, UFC , Vale Tudo etc etc
TMA is someo doing shotokan, TKD, pail lum kung fu,

Thinking of it about what I do myself, I do a Mixture of MA, Krav Maga, Combatives, RBSD practice, Muay Thai, and aiming to learn ground fighting, judo throws, joint locks,. I think when I learn and practice these new skills I have not got yet, I then will be farily rounded as an MA and able to handle myself in most ranges, as per self defence. (not aiming on getting into ring with Pride champs..lol..will just not yet!!!)

Dyr

Succinct version:

Maybe an easy definition for what people mean when they say TMA or MMA
is that MMA defines itself by what it does and TMA defines itself by what it is

Sorry, this bit isnt gonna be succinct

It seems to me both terms were invented by the MMA (oops) community to define what they are and what they are not.

I asked a friend years ago about this as i thought muay thai, wrestling, judo were really TMA's as they have long traditions in their parent cultures. His response was that they were not TMA's as they were not stuck at a point in history but instead they constantly develop, improve and innovate through competition/sparring. But then I had to question if these arts were not more "effective" back in their combative day's when there was less emphasis on safety to allow competion. Was the UFC more "effective" when there were very few rules and no time limit? Does it really make any difference? i dont know, and i dont know enough on the subject to hold an opinion.



Either way, these terms seem to be used as Straw men now.

john kavanagh

as expected these terms mean different things to different people. makes it pretty obvious that if someone is trying to talk to another person who has completely different definitions for the words they are using then its impossible to have a meaningful discussion

"an MMA is someone who is training for the cage Pride, UFC , Vale Tudo etc etc"

common misconception. its been my experience that less than 5% of 'MMA' students/athletes compete, so it cant be that.

"Either way, these terms seem to be used as Straw men now."

i dont think its that, i think its just like i said above everybody has their own (usually highly emotional) opinion what they mean. if no one can agree on what the definition actually is then everybody is talking about something completely different

Cabelo

Smee thinks outside the box...

MMA does what it says on the tin. People who may or may no actively persue several MAs but do make an effort to cross them and mix them up.

TMA, do one or more martial arts in a more traditionally seperated manor.

It's the basis I've always worked on.

john kavanagh

"... in a more traditionally seperated manor."

whats that mean?

columok

The difference between "MMA" and "TMA" could largely be down to what motivates training methods and the resultant effect on the training methods themselves.

MMA is considered in internet debates to be a state of training that places a priority on a proven yield from one's training. The training method is proven either in sparring within the class and for some its further proven in competition. Therefore 99% of stuff that is in your training must be justified and must be for a reason.

Most "MMA people" (BOO HISS!) dont actually aspire to be ultimate vale tudo cage champion warriors. They train for the laugh and might never compete at any level. Its fun for them and a realistic form of combat training.

TMA is considered in internet debates to be a state of training that places priorities (in various degrees) in set (sometimes ancient, sometimes not) notions about how people should train. These methods may have been passed down for millenia, centuries or decades. The argument tends to be that people have proven the training methods throughout the years and that it should remain.

Judo while you could argue is a TMA places 99% of the emphasis on its training onto maximum performance of the sport and doesnt focus so much on the 1% ritual. For the sake of internet arguments it could be considered a combat sport which if we're looking at the martial arts world as being comprised of the dichotomy of TMA and MMA places it in the MMA training method camp.

Not all TMA schools are diametrically opposed to MMA schools in terms of training methods. But for the purposes of this argument I suppose its easier to speak in absolutes since Kavanagh did ask for...

try to be as succinct as possible. no more than a couple of sentences on each one.

In reality the terms MMA and TMA mean nothing. They're three letter acronyms created purely for internet arguments.

So after all that rubbish putting it succinctly

MMA: Performance based. Priority is to maximise skill development and maximise performance. Anything that is found not to be practical in a proven environment is discarded. Anything that is found to work is taken on board and tested further.

TMA: Main emphasis on maintaining tradition above all else. Often contain rituals and customs eminating from a foreign culture. Many esoteric training methods are used as they are said to develop character and other qualities. Many contain little or no competition and often contain little or no functional sparring.

Roper

Very succint Colum!

I don't have my own definitions per se. It's difficult to arrive at one particularly as I'm not 100% sure where I fit in. I'm not going to quote who said what here, but instead of coming up with my own I'm going to shoot others down .

MMA=cross training. No, disagree. If that were the case then someone who trains in Thai Chi and Shotokan is an MMAer? I don't think that fits with anyones idea.
TMA= rituals, hierarchy. Yeah, I think there's something in that. But how much makes TMA? One bow, one kiaia??
TMA= Little or no sparring/competition. Sport Karate contains a lot of both of these but I would consider most arts that make up this as being among the most traditional.
MMA= Cage fighters. Not in my experience. I think this misconception keeps people away from gyms.
MMA= Constantly developing, TMA= static. I agree with this but it fails to take into account grey areas within each definition.

Sooo, In my honest opinion, there is no good definition to be found, as the lines blur far too much, but here comes my pop at it anyway. I know I said I wouldn't but.

MMAer. A person who trains without thought of tradition, hierarchy or title, solely with the goal of defeating an actively resisting opponent in as "rule free" an environment as possible.

TMAer. A person who trains in an art which may come from a lineage of instructors/masters, who's goals may vary from self defence, to spiritual development, and anywhere in between.

How's about that for general?

Rev Hellfire

Actually I think its a case of ( if you excuse the paraphrasing ) “TMA are from Venus and MMA are from Mars.”.

From the perspective I get from the posters on the boards here:

MMA: At least put forward on these boards is a misnomer, I think the term mixed martial systems is more appropriate since the sole emphasis is on ‘Ultimate’/‘Proven’ combat techniques. From a TMA point of view it seems more like a subset of elements of Traditional Martial arts which would appeal to the ‘hardman’ element. I’m not saying this is the case, its just how it appears to me viewing from the sidelines.

TMA: To me a TMA aims to provide more than the mechanisms for fighting, but also a philosophy for living. The actual fighting element is not necessarily the most important element or even required, hence I believe the term Art is applicable; the practitioners are not martial fighters (as is the case with MMA) but rather martial artist’s. It seems to me from posts issued by the MMA practitioners that they miss this rather important point, been limited in their interest to the combat element.

As for the effectives of one form verses the other, I’m certainly not in a position to say. But it seems to me that most examples given seem to be for a 1 on 1, which in my limited experience of street fighting seems to rarely happen.

john kavanagh

very interesting

what is this element known as 'Art' that TMA supposedly has and MMA is lacking? you hear it put different ways by so many people - "yeah MMA is effective but its just a bunch of cocky 'hardmen' knockin 7 bells out of each other, there's no 'art' to it"

so what is this art?

dlofnep

john kavanagh wrote:

very interesting

what is this element known as 'Art' that TMA supposedly has and MMA is lacking? you hear it put different ways by so many people - "yeah MMA is effective but its just a bunch of cocky 'hardmen' knockin 7 bells out of each other, there's no 'art' to it"

so what is this art?

They draw pictures and appreciate beauty, obviously.

pma-ire

john kavanagh wrote:

very interesting

what is this element known as 'Art' that TMA supposedly has and MMA is lacking? you hear it put different ways by so many people - "yeah MMA is effective but its just a bunch of cocky 'hardmen' knockin 7 bells out of each other, there's no 'art' to it"

so what is this art?

I think there is a lot of art in MMA fighting! It still takes skill and class to subdue and defeat a person hell bent on tapping or KO'ing you.

Rev Hellfire

Firstly when I say that using the term Art when referening to MMA (as presented here) I don’t indeed to take away from MMA in anyway.

Possibly a way to look at it is to compare Arts vs Science, MMA seems to me to be concerned more with the mechanics of combat( i.e. science ) were as TMA also deals with issues which are not as quantifiable such kai, personnel/ spiritual wellbeing, etc in addition to combat element (where present). For an artist the mechanical effectives of the technique may not always be that important, but with MMA practitioners it is.

dudara

dlofnep wrote:

They draw pictures and appreciate beauty, obviously.

Very apt picture

To me..

TMA: Training in a single discipline, with a dose of tradition/ritual (for lack of better words) thrown in. Motivation can be for self-defense, but also enjoys the regime that TMAs tend to impose. (Me, I'm guilty of that, I like working my way up through the belts).

MMA: Mixing up various styles, with the express intent of learning a street-style of fighting. Somehow rejects the ritualistic side of TMAs.

columok

dudara,

TMA: Training in a single discipline, with a dose of tradition/ritual (for lack of better words) thrown in. Motivation can be for self-defense, but also enjoys the regime that TMAs tend to impose. (Me, I'm guilty of that, I like working my way up through the belts).

The single discipline bit isnt true. Many TMA people cross train in other TMAs

MMA: Mixing up various styles, with the express intent of learning a street-style of fighting. Somehow rejects the ritualistic side of TMAs.

MMA uses the sport methodology rather than the "street" methodology actually. Agree with the rejecting ritual bit.

Roper

This is a good debate, but I don't think we're any closer to discovering the real meaning of these terms!

Maybe the real benefit of this debate is to clear up some misconceptions both sides, if there are sides, have of each other.

Example:
MMA has no Art to it. MMA is all about streetfighting. TMA is all about ritual.

On another note, just as an aside. I was training in an MMA gym about two weeks ago, and after rolling with a guy (and tapping I might add), he bowed to me.. well, I didn't know what to do... so I just sort of nod bowed as I was walking away. Turns out he was a judo bb. But I felt a bit sh1t about it, y'know, the guy had bowed to me so why not bow back eh? Then I thought, man, it's a long way I've come since I used to bow to any one or thing that I trained with!

pearsquasher

I'm always scratching my head when i hear phrases like "ritual thrown in", "having to bow to sensei", "uneccessary tradtions" when referring to a TMA. I do what i would consider to be a non-sports TMA from Japan and have trained over there with Japanese instructors and in tradtional dojos and all this militaristic kow-towing people think of DOESN'T EXIST! :rolleyes:

You no more bow in a japanese dojo than you would do at a japanese resteraunt or swimming pool. It's part of their culture and so are things like not been loud and boisterous amongts your seniors, which may lead some people to think a dojo is overly austere or something - its actually just politeness in a place taht your going to learn something .

If you were unfortunate to have a TMA teacher here in Europe that shouts orders, demands bowing and all those things complaied about, then thats the teachers own misconception of what he's learned form his teacher and nothing else. Believe me, there are no unneccesary rituals in a good Japanese TMA. I've never felt any creepy cultish religious overtones in the art i study. I reckon its a case of gross misinterpretation of the first few Westeners to bring back TMAs in the early 20th century and its snowballed ever since not helped by cliches and stereotypes in the popular media.

Seriously, its complete and utter BS. I've been to another trad Japanese art in Dublin where there was this sense of false ritual and it was utterly not like that in Japan. If its happening, then its a con.

Actual dicpline and auterity is something that emerges form the natural student/teacher learning process and it seems its just been packaged and marketed in the usual consumer-society way in the West (and in japan too, in some case) due to a lack of understading and depth to the art. I;'ve seen incompetant teachers replace their lack of knowledge with ritual filler. A teacher with depth of knowledge doesn't do this at all folks.

Roper

Yes pearsquasher, I think many European instructors misinterpret this and it becomes their image of what it should be like.

That said, if you're European, why not behave that way according to your culture. Asian culture has long been venerated for it's politeness etc. But I would have my own complaints about this re: homogenisation, lack of focus on the individual etc. I believe European society has these in abundance, and it's positive. Of course both cultures have their plusses and minuses, but why transplant another over here?

pearsquasher

Like i said, over-ritualising of martial arts training, as far as i've seen, is largely a Western thing. Why do it? Novelty, lack of understaning, power-mongering, orient-philia, pseudo-militarism etc.

As for homogenisasion and lack of focus on the individual. I honestly didn't see any more of this in Japan than i do in Europe.

Clive

Judo has katas - anyone who's ever been to a muay thai event (Armageddon is on in November if you haven't) will know the huge amount of ritual there - people training in Brazilian Top Team are constantly bowing and "oss"ing to each other - many people who train for semi-contact kickboxing use padwork, shadowboxing, sparring etc. and the results are all that's important.

Just some things to think about.

Tim_Murphy

I think the term TMA is too vague and generalised to have any real meaning. Many MAs are termed TMA yet they are all very different.
TKD is often put down as a TMA by people here and elsewhere who really don't know that much about it. Some of the hardest training MA athletes I've every met are TKD competitors, who use training methods which are pretty similiar to people training for MMA, they just use a different ruleset.

dlofnep

Tbh, regardless of what we debate here - It's still going to go on. TMA will still be visualised as Karate Kid bowing to Mr. Miagi while MMA as Wanderlei Silva stomping Yuki Kondo's face into the mat. Nothing we say here will change that. It's been like that for years online in all communities that involves participation from MMA guys.

Roper

Yes, but at least by debating it we might arrive at a better understanding.

And what's with people coming on here and posting about 'other online communities' and their discussions! Just because someone's spoken about it before doesn't make it any less valid to speak about it now!

dent

dlofnep wrote:

Tbh, regardless of what we debate here - It's still going to go on. TMA will still be visualised as Karate Kid bowing to Mr. Miagi while MMA as Wanderlei Silva stomping Yuki Kondo's face into the mat. Nothing we say here will change that. It's been like that for years online in all communities that involves participation from MMA guys.

Well as John said maybe we can come up with at least some guide lines that we can point people who post on this board to.

To be honest I dislike both terms. Martial Art's are so varied I find it hard to separate them into only two categories.

I mean if you train in Thai Boxing and BJJ why not say that?

dudara

columok wrote:

The single discipline bit isnt true. Many TMA people cross train in other TMAs

True, I suppose i said this more to emphasise the fact that TMAs study one skill at a time rather than mixing them up

MMA uses the sport methodology rather than the "street" methodology actually.

See, the problem I have with that statement is that from my experience of TKD, we train for a sport, as in sparring TKD. It's not really street fighting (far from it), which is somehow what I see MMA being

john kavanagh

"...but I don't think we're any closer to discovering the real meaning of these terms!"

and this was the point of the thread. for people to see the ridiculousness of labelling somebody a TMA guy or MMA when neither of those terms mean anything that more than 2 people can agree on!

Roper

john kavanagh wrote:

"...but I don't think we're any closer to discovering the real meaning of these terms!"

and this was the point of the thread. for people to see the ridiculousness of labelling somebody a TMA guy or MMA when neither of those terms mean anything that more than 2 people can agree on!

You've duped us all!

john kavanagh

BWA AH AH AH AH *evil laugh*

Cabelo

Hang on... we most certainly do offer resistance. Sorry to burst the bubble kids but capoeira isn't the dancefest we capoeirista sometimes make it out to be. We often get involved in heavy and violent rodas. It's how the game is played. If the rythmn of the game dictates then tear the heads off one another... it's pretty much accepted.

That's why I talk about Malicia so much. I remember my first match against someone from outside my club; a massive brazillian guy fully a foot taller than me at 6' 6". I kicked upwards as he came down and managed to brush along his cheek with the sole of my foot as he dodged backwards. He immediately stood up clutching his eye and pointing to it.

As soon as I moved towards him he lunged forward for a cabecada (a technical headbut at chest height; in this case, towards my face). As I negativad (a very nice word for momentum cancelling by dipping low onto a bent knee) under his cabecada he launched an arcing sweep that just thrashed me into the ground... and this was all in a friendly game. Aferward he helped me up... another part of Malicia is that you should always suspect nasty play from someone offering help, but he recognised that I was too tired for it, so he helped me up and only feinted the trip part.

Capoeira is more serious than people give it credit for. This is the last time I'll be pointing stuff out like this though, I've grown more used to just letting people say what they will.

Dyr

Nah, educate us on this strange and misunderstood art, i remember someone telling me that capoeira was big with the boys in the barrios and they were fond of playing with blades between their toes :eek: is that true?

Roper

Nah, you're thinking about yer wan with rings on her fingers and bells on her toes. Bad ass she was.

I think capoeira is tremendous looking, but I've yet to see anyone being hit with it. I'd be interested to see its effectiveness.

pearsquasher

Lets look at the word "tradition" as used in TMA. As anyone with a bit of cultural savvy knows, if you're going to study something that origionated from another country, its sort of prudent to perhaps realise that other countries have different wasy of viewing things and if you take a look at this, then certain ideas in the subject may become clearer. It doesn't mean somehow mimicing the culture in lifestyle or indeed in aspects of training in the dojo - like excessive bowing to fellow students/instructors, but just switching the brain to a different filter, when appropriate, with a view to understanding.

Heres an example of a different filter. If you went to see a famous castle in Europe and was told that it was say 1000 years old, you'd expect to find a crumbling ruin, overgrown battlements and you'd have to imagine what it was like in its day with no roof missing and all the tapestries and other furnishings intact.

Now if you went to see a 1000 year old castle in Japan, you'd find a building with new wooden beams, re-furnished fittings and all the paper-screen doors intact. You'd say to yourself... hey, this is new... looks like it was built 20 years ago. You see, it possibly got rebuilt every 50 years. When new technology came along, it was incorporated if it matched the aestectics and fucntionality of it. The Japanese would still say the building was 1000 years old even if every single physiocal piece of it was installed the previous year. The castle would be called "tradtional castle of the xyz period" as that was the time it was conceived.

Tradtional Japanese Martial Arts are a little like that. They can be old alright, but because they are transmitted through human lineages they evolve or die out. Doesn't necessarily mean a tradtional art is somehow frozen in time. That seems to be the biggest misconception here and probably largely due to the various martial art booms that have occured over the years with lots of poeple rushing around to open up clubs in arts they sort of didn't understand. And like i said before, this means that much filler is used to build up the club and make it seem "martial arty".... over ritualisation, too much emphasis on circuit-training, excessive bowing, military-style teaching.

Some tradtional martial arts have evolved into sports, some into spiritual diciplines, some into sort of living museums of skills and some as living combatitive systems of knowledge used the world over by police and security forces. All of them could be called tradtional to some degree though, even if they incorporate new technologies (tasers/kevlar armour for example)...because its the evolving root of them that remains the core. Throw some of these singular lines of tradtions together, usually without any interest in the cultural roots of them and you got mixed martial arts. I imagine that this is done for most police forces who a generally not interested in in-depth study of a single system but want to pick and choose.

Roper

Excellent post Pearsquasher. I disagree in some ways, but I think you had crux of the matter down when you said:
[/quote]ler is used to build up the club and make it seem "martial arty".... over ritualisation, too much emphasis on circuit-training, excessive bowing, military-style teaching. [/quote]

That reflects a lot of my experience. People talking about buddhism etc.

soma

Cabelo, I dont know how you managed it dude, but you seem to have some sort of "TMA get out of jail free card" on this board!

God help a kenpo/TKD/karate etc player on this board who posts something like "They did X, So I did <foreign-word>, then <foreign-word>, then he did <foreign-word>. They'd be ravaged!!

loz

soma wrote:

Cabelo, I dont know how you managed it dude, but you seem to have some sort of "TMA get out of jail free card" on this board!

God help a kenpo/TKD/karate etc player on this board who posts something like "They did X, So I did <foreign-word>, then <foreign-word>, then he did <foreign-word>. They'd be ravaged!!

Maybe its that Cabelo can make statements but then show his face to discuss at meet ups - think thats the difference between him and the other TMA guys...

Tim_Murphy

capoeira is a TMA??

columok

Maybe its that Cabelo can make statements but then show his face to discuss at meet ups - think thats the difference between him and the other TMA guys...

Exactly. The man has balls. And he tried to teach me a "negativa". Not so much. Some would say I'm too clumsy and unwieldy for capoeira...

dlofnep

Tim_Murphy wrote:

capoeira is a TMA??

Not a traditional asian martial art.. I'd say definitely traditional Brazilian.. Doesn't it go back to when their were black slaves in brazil?

john kavanagh

what is it to be ' traditional Brazilian', is BJJ 'modern' brasilian or is it something more...??

dlofnep

john kavanagh wrote:

what is it to be ' traditional Brazilian', is BJJ 'modern' brasilian or is it something more...??

I'm not saying BJJ isn't a traditional art - I haven't really thought about it tbh. However I would say capoeira is a traditional art.. it has history, stories, culture, traditions kept through time etc.. that in my opinion would warrant it as a traditional martial art, no?

john kavanagh

"I haven't really thought about it tbh"

lol, thats kinda the point of this thread. people throw around terms that have absolutely no meaning

" it has history, stories, culture, traditions kept through time etc."

as does BJJ, wrestling, thai etc so are they all TMAs now

dlofnep

myanmar wrote:

How can BJJ be a MMA? Surely the mixed part is the important thing? Maybe it's mixed in terms of the Brasilian and the Japanaese.

Nobody said it was a MMA.

Perhaps BJJ in brasil is different to BJJ in Europe? I get the impression that almost all of the people that do BJJ in ireland also do some other MA, either TKD or karate being their background, or boxing,kb or thai. Is it the smae in Brasil?

Well, alot of the people who study BJJ outside brazil are interested in MMA. Partially because they discovered BJJ by watching MMA.

loz

I think capoeira is tremendous looking, but I've yet to see anyone being hit with it. I'd be interested to see its effectiveness.

http://www.spiritonin.com/capoeirafighter/

Tim_Murphy

Having said that, it's not old enough for me to consider it a Trad MA. My experience of BJJ is that it doesn't envolve a lot of culture. Take TKD for example, has a lot of Korean culture in it's make up, same with judo and karate.

TKD has only been around since the 50's and it's considered a trad MA. AFAIK BJJ has been around a good bit longer than that. As for korean culture, well TKD has a lot of bowing at people and at flags and a lot of calling people sir but I don't think there is that much authentic Korean culture involved.

However I would say capoeira is a traditional art.. it has history, stories, culture, traditions kept through time etc

I can't think of any art that doesn't.

Tim_Murphy

That stuff u said about tkd stuff sounds awfully north korean.

dlofnep

Tim_Murphy wrote:

I can't think of any art that doesn't.

Well there we go then, case closed.

loz

I can't think of any art that doesn't.

Ninjitsu ?

loz

myanmar wrote:

Ninjitsu has a huge amount of history etc. does it not? Going back to the japanese middle ages to the class system, samurai or peasant. peasant's could not bear arms. so they came up with a may of using farming equipment to be weapons. if you look at the weapons they train in you can see for yourself. i'm sure someone will fill you in about the details.

I dont know - hence the (?) - i alway imagined fictional charactors - the MA started by nutters

dlofnep

Oh man, even the name of ninjitsu sounds traditional. People need cooler names for arts, like SAFTA!

columok

Though i hear the history of ninjitsu and more specifically the bujinkan has been called into question as being ever so slightly interlaced with fiction.

I think its on e-budo.com (Bambi would correct me on this one) that theres been uproars about Bujinkan claims to history.