I agree that many styles teach over the top responses and that strikes are hard to control. I'd be more inclined ti use chokes myself instead of strikes for that reason. BJJ does offer that level of control, but it also has it's fair share of overly technical, sport orientated techniques, so I guess the same applies- keep the simpler ones for the street and leave the rest for competition.

I also agree that training methods matter more than style. I don't think it matters which style you do at the end of the day, what matters is how you apply those techniques. I'll take your word for it that MMA guys have the ability to exhibit good control. I'm only going from my own experience so far. I'm not out to pointlessly criticize anyone else's training and if someone can prove me wrong or show me different, then fair enough. I'll stand corrected. It's just that the training sessions I've attended in MMA and the guys I know who do it, tend to back up what I've said. You put them in a self defense scenario and their first response is bang-bang-bang, regardless of the attack. But that's my experience. Your's is obviously different and I acknowledge that.

I'm also not advocating some kind of trad vs modern debate. That has nothing to do with it and as you pointed out is a bit ridiculous considering all the techniques come from the same place anyway (so to speak). My issues were simply with MMA and some of the attitudes and things that went along with it. I don't care how old it is or what perspective it's coming from. I evaluated it on it's own terms. Traditional is just a catch all term for most of the other styles.

I just posted something on my blog you might enjoy… I was discussing this topic on an email list when I read your and Nathan's post. everything put together made me write that long post.

Cheers,

Wim

The way MMA was promoted IN THE PAST was as a brutal bloodsport. Now it's promoted in much the same way any other physical contest is.
If you aren't training to fight effectively then you are not training in a martial art and would be better off doing gymnastics or ballet. Martial Arts are MARTIAL first and foremost. At the VERY LEAST you must be learning to fight effectively or it is not a Martial Art.
As for control, go compare Wing Chun self defense videos to Gracie JiuJitsu self defense videos. One advocates a response all out of proportion to the attack, I'll let you guess which one it is. Grappling based arts have INHERENTLY more control over the level of force applied than striking based arts do. If I am choking someone I can choose to let up a little and keep them restrained while not killing them. It's hard to punch someone lightly enough to keep them unconcious without injuring them you know. And your comments about MMA training show just how little experience you actually have with any of it. Each class I walk into I put my LIFE in the hands of my training partners. I am getting int a situation where someone will be choking me half unconcious, they will be bending my limbs into positions where they COULD break them. I have to trust them to have the control not to do so. And after 3 years of jiujitsu I have yet to be injured in training. MMA training gives you MORE control over the level of force you use in a situation. The reason for this is….

TRAINING METHODS. Style matters, physical attributes matter, but TRAINING METHODS matter more. Yes, some styles are inherently more effective than others. All else being equal someone training in Wing Chun for a year will get destroyed by someone training in Muy Thai for a year. It's been proven over and over again. The top ranks of WC can't compete with the top ranks of BJJ. Judo and Wrestling dominated Japanese Jiujitsu. Not because the TECHNIQUES are inherently better, but because the training methods are superior. It's a fact of life.

Also, the “Traditional Martial Art” vs “Mixed Martial Art” comparision is false. MMA is just a name for the RULE SET under which those athletes are competing. The arts they practice are in most cases as old or older than any TMA. Taekwondo is only 80ish years old, and TSD which it has its roots in is only a couple of hundred because it was lost during japanese occupation. BJJ is older than TKD and has its roots in Judo which is older still. Muy Thai is a few hundred years old and has its roots in Muy Boran which is even older. Boxing and Wrestling are both EVEN OLDER dating easily back to the greeks. Wrestling is in fact the oldest documented martial art.

And telling someone who is wrong,that they are wrong does not mean one has a superiority complex.

The techniques within MMA are fine for self defense, I never said they weren't. I just think practicioners are more inclined to go over the top given that they train offensively all the time. Not every situation is going to require a brute force response, which is what I see advocated within MMA, both in and out of the octagon. Where's the control? I'm not saying an individual won't have the sense to control themselves, but the training doesn't make it easy to do so, given that it's all about winning.

The video was very interesting. I totally agree with the concepts being across in it. I think this is were a lot styles-especially traditional ones-go wrong. The training needs to be more realistic if you're training for self defense. However, not everyone trains solely for self defense. Some people train purely for the art, and in that case, it doesn't really matter how you approach the training. Reality doesn't really come into it. It's just about mastering the technique.

I'm also sure that there are many fine people who train in MMA, but the fact of the matter is, the way MMA has promoted itself in the media over the years hasn't really done much to convince people that it is a thugs game. All you ever see is big guys pounding the life out of one another for the sake of money and glory. That image needs to change if people are to see a different side to MMA.

Thanks for your comments.

And internalize the concepts. MMA is about training methods, but thuggish behavior. Many many many MMA fighters hold Bachelors or Masters degrees, many are respected professionals in their field outside of the octagon. My instructor is a police detective as well as BJJ black belt who competes in MMA. Many of the students at our school are police officers, nurses, college students, etc… I am an IT Consultant.

Your wrongheaded views about both who competes in MMA and what is effective for self defense are decades out of date.

I also agree that you should definitely pick a system that reflects your goals, though going by this logic I can't see why anyone would choose MMA for self defense. That just tells me your are goals centered around glory hunting, not learning to defend yourself. Either that or you are being duped by the mountains of advertising on MMA everywhere.

If you want to train for self defense then you train for self defense alone. I personally like the art aspects of martial arts as well so I train for both. I also think that you don't really have to know a whole lot of techniques to be good at defending yourself. The less the better actually. Simple is always best. The rest is just art.

I don't know what your experience of traditional martial arts are but they are not all the same. I practice Jujitsu, a traditional art, and it is far from useless when it comes to self defense. The majority of the locking and throwing techniques used in MMA are taken from Jujitsu so it can't be that useless. That's what I find ironic about the whole trad/modern argument. All of the techniques used in so-called modern martial arts are derived solely from the traditional arts. Modern MAs just apply them in a slightly different way. The whole cross-training thing is not new. Bruce Lee was cross-training before any one had ever coined the term. Likewise, my club has been applying the same cross-training principles for over twenty years now. MMA has just turned it into a sport

As for katas, they are far from being meaningless. They bring there own benefits to practitioners, benefits that go beyond self defense and pure combat. This is were the art comes into the equation, the thing that lifts trad martial arts above pure sport. And I'm not being elitist or pretentious by saying that. If people want to practice sport then go ahead, each to their own, but you can't criticize people for wanting to go deeper and probe other elements besides self defense or fighting. Art is art, combat is combat. As long as you make the distinction in your own head and don't confuse the two while training you'll be fine.

Krav Maga I have an interest in. It seems to provide a pretty effective form of self defense, but again those techniques are not new to me nor probably to anyone else who has practiced Jujitsu or any form of reality based self defense. They are just shuffled around and applied in a different way. But I do like it and out of all the other systems it would probably be the one I would most like to check out properly if I ever moved on from Jujitsu.

Thanks for your comments.

The thing is, most of those arts are either designed for a different purpose, or were designed in a different time period. Brazilian Jujutsu, for instance, is geared towards sport and therefore has some rules against things like eye gouging, biting, ripping off ears crushing windpipes, etc. Kendo, on the other hand, or even open hand traditional martial arts like Wing Chun, tend to be designed around principles that are no longer around, i.e., most people have a sword, strikes are targeted to certain areas because on the battlefield folk have armor on, etc.

I think that both an MMA fighter and a traditional martial artist though would have a distinct upper hand in a 'street' confrontation over someone who has never done any training, but if the overall question is which is better for self-defense, I'd say neither. In those cases, (actually in every 'this art vs. that art' occasions in my opinion) it really comes down to which person is more skilled, not the art they chose. I don't think MMA should be advertised as the ultimate self-defense system any more than boxing or taekwondo should. Not because they can't be effective in a self-defense situation, but because they are traditionally not suited to that particular purpose.

The question I have is, if your goal is self-defense and self-defense alone, why not choose a military art like Krav Maga or MCMAP? (Don't know if you can actually learn that without joining the Marines, but you get the idea.) I'm not saying those arts are inherently better than any other, but doesn't it make the most sense to pick something that reflects your goals?

whether they know the best way to apply those techniques in the street is the question. some do some dont. but then the martial arts that claim to be effective for street defence but continue using flawed techniques, meaningless katas and no realistic training are far worse offenders.
decent fitness and a good knowledge of boxing and thai boxing alongside a good head and the ability to make rational choices are probably the most useful things someone can have for self defence
a good article on this is http://www.rossboxing.com/thegym/thegym3.htm

what do you think of krav maga? it trains for realistic situations using only techniques that are proven to be effective (and while teaches it because you may get dragged down it recognizes going to the ground is an absolute no no in self defence) and teaches to reply with appropriate force and to ways in which to avoid violence.