MMA sucks, traditional martial arts suck more.
ByThe title covers a typical exchange between the MMA and traditional martial art crowds when they start arguing. Usually, the arguments are something like this:
- You need to know how to fight at all ranges, including the ground.
- MMA is “real” because there are minimal rules and traditional arts suck because they don’t fight for “real”.
- Traditional arts are better because they focus on fighting without rules and the techniques used are ultra-mega-instantly lethal.
- MMA doesn’t protect you against multiple opponents or weapons. In fact, MMA tactics get you killed in those situations.
Now at face value, all of these points are valid. There’s something to be said for each of them and to a degree, you can’t really fault the logic behind. There’s only one thing: they’re all totally missing the point. As in, missed it by a mile. More on that later.
It reminds me of the old arguments of judo vs wrestling or boxing about 50-60 years ago. Later on karate hit the scene and it was compared to those too. This happened with every “new” martial art or combat sport to hit the big time over the decades. Just page through a few MA rags of 20-30 years ago and read the articles. You’ll find it’s all there.
With the rise of the Internet, it got worse. I’m old enough to have been training in the arts before there were chat rooms and bulletin boards. If you are too, you know what I mean. If you’re not, here’s some perspective: It used to be a big ass argument about who would beat the other in a real fight: Bruce Lee or Chuck Norris. We all know what happened on film at the Colosseum but what if they’d have gone at it for real?
You got long winding arguments that Chuck had fought in and won dozens of tournaments where Bruce never competed in anything so he sucked. The kung fu lovers would counter that Chuck only fought within rules where as Bruce had plenty of street fighting experience where anything goes. These are just two of the arguments and there were many, many more.
But don’t they ring a bell? Compare them to the latest fad in martial arts land, MMA, and look at the type of arguments I listed in the first paragraph. It’s the same type of logic, over and over again. The inherent flaw in it is the lack of an overall picture regarding violence. I claim there are a few crucial elements missing in the logic chains. Here’s what I said elsewhere:
I train mostly in Chinese MAs. I have yet to find one that has anything resembling BJJ or any other ground fighting system. All that I’ve seen is moves to get the other guy off/away from you and get up. Shuai Jiao (Chinese wrestling) has almost no techniques where you go to the ground to throw somebody (I know of only one but there might be more). Everything else is just putting the guy down and not following him.
Sanda/Sanshou matches allow all sorts of striking and throwing but no ground work. You get a penalty if you aren’t on your feet in three seconds after a throw, even if you’re the one throwing. You also fight on a platform, forcing you to take your environment into account. If you get tossed of the stage twice, you lose the round. And even though there are mattresses around the stage, it can hurt big time to fall off. I’ve seen broken arms and guys flying into their coaches sitting a long way off as they were kicked off the stage.
All that to say this:
Maybe, just maybe there’s a reason why fighting arts in China don’t go to the ground… The way I learned it, if you fall on the ground, you die. No quarter was given nor expected. You got stomped to death, stabbed, speared, chopped up or run over by horses.
So your goal was not to fall and if you did, to get up as fast as you can. If you wanted to control somebody without hurting, you did the chin na (joint locks) every frikkin’ Chinese style forces you to learn.
The whole key to the previous paragraphs is context. Context is king when fighting is involved. I’ll explain in a bit, here’s some more.
Rules make the fight. Here’s the list of fouls in the UFC:
- Butting with the head.
- Eye gouging of any kind.
- Biting.
- Hair pulling.
- Fish hooking.
- Groin attacks of any kind.
- Putting a finger into any orifice or into any cut or laceration on an opponent.
- Small joint manipulation.
- Striking to the spine or the back of the head. (see Rabbit punch)
- Striking downward using the point of the elbow.
- Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea.
- Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh.
- Grabbing the clavicle.
- Kicking the head of a grounded opponent.
- Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent.
- Stomping a grounded opponent.
- Kicking to the kidney with the heel.
- Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck. (see piledriver)
- Throwing an opponent out of the ring or fenced area.
- Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent.
- Spitting at an opponent.
Funny thing how these are the exact same things many traditional Chinese arts will turn to first against a grappler. They won’t go for a sprawl and turn to a mount position simply because they don’t want to be on the ground. They’ll try to wrench the guy’s neck off as they rip his lips off and gouge out an eye. Easy to say then that traditional arts are crap in the Octagon. They weren’t made for it. Duh…
This is one aspect of context. Now let’s follow this line of thinking a bit further:
The UFC is not the only MMA game around. Take a look at Pride and you’ll see differences in the way they fight. The critical difference in rules is this:
- Pride allows kicking and kneeing the head of a downed opponent who is on his back. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules, which only allows kicks and knees to the head of a standing opponent.
- Pride allows a fighter to stomp the head of a downed opponent. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules.
- Pride allows a fighter to Spike (piledriver) an opponent. This is considered a foul in the Unified Rules.
As soon as the stomping and soccer kicks start on a downed opponent, you see a totally different fight. The stompee gets into a defensive mode by turtling up or bringing his legs in front, tries to close the distance to grab the stomper’s legs and most of all, looks for an opening to get up. I’ve yet to see one of these situations turn into anything but a frantic attempt at not getting knocked out… I’d like to offer this as exhibit A in my thesis that traditional arts have it right about not wanting to go to the ground.
And there it is: change just a couple of rules and the tactics and techniques used change too. Allowing to strike a downed opponent has a huge impact on the fight game. It forces you to react differently when you hit the ground. Pretty much like in a real street fight…
Now before you MMA fans starts howling for my blood, here’s some more:
I love MMA and trained in shoot fighting for a while; I had a blast there and would have continued to this day if the teacher hadn’t moved. But MAs and combat sport styles (like MMA) are just tools. They work great within a certain context and not so in others. Of course there is overlap but as Randy said, the differences are just as important.
People should get over themselves and learn to live and let live. I don’t see any military men arguing that the techniques and tactics for arctic warfare are better/worse/easier/etc. than those employed in the desert or in an urban environment. They seem to instinctively grasp the idea that snowshoes are great to speed up a foot soldier on snowy terrain but not so hot for cruising the streets of Fallujah… I’ve yet to see an argument break out over this. But a lot of martial artists seem unable to follow that line of thinking and apply it to their respective fighting arts.
I believe that context (environment) overrules everything you might think about how a fight should go. One small difference in context can force a totally different set of techniques on you. I really, for the life of me, can’t understand why it’s so hard to accept that. But apparently the egos and political crap are more important for a lot of folks. To each his own I guess.
And that’s where it all comes together. Traditional arts come from a totally different time and context. China 500 years ago was not like Boise, Idaho in 2009. You can’t just transpose the arts from that era to today. It doesn’t work like that, life is different today. Back then the situation was not what we live in: you learned to take care of yourself or you died:
- There was no local PD like we have now. You couldn’t just call for a bunch of cops to come over and deal with the gang of looters/thieves/pillagers/bandits that came to town. Either you hid/ran and didn’t get caught or you fought.
- If you fought and lost, you probably died.
- If you fell down you probably got trampled by horses, speared, stabbed with a sword or stomped. And probably died.
- If the fight with one guy took too long, his buddies would help him out and you probably died.
- If you survived and were injured, chances were you ended up crippled or still died. Medicine then was not what it is now.
- In event of a natural disaster, you took charge or you died. There was no fire brigade, national guard or rescue team coming.
- There was no social security or health care like today. You got sick, injured, ran out of food; you probably died.
When you consider all these bullets (and the list is much longer but I won’t go into it now), think of how stupid it would be for a Chinese guy from that era to spend his time learning a submission fighting system. It wouldn’t make any sense at all. If you showed him those moves, he’d shake his head and think you’re a crazy gwailo…Simply because in that time and context, fighting on the ground was not what you wanted to do to survive. Survival was a daily concern for most folks in those times. They didn’t need adrenal based scenario training because every day life gave them plenty of that already.
The problem with the whole discussion of MMA vs. traditional arts is this: in many many contexts outside of the cage or octagon, you still don’t want to go to the ground:
- Any type of war or armed conflict involving hundreds/thousands of participants. A soldier never fights alone so going to the ground with one of them gets you killed by his buddies.
- Any fight where weapons are involved. Or could be involved because you never know upfront what the other guy brings to the dance. A slit throat while you’re going for an armbar is not a good thing.
- Any environment that puts you at risk when you go to the ground: rocky terrain, concrete, debris filled terrain, etc. You can hit your head when you slam into the floor, he can slam it into the concrete for you, grab a rock/bottle/whatever to mess you up, etc.
These are just a couple of criteria, the list is longer than that but I’m just trying to make a point here: it’s not MMA vs. TMAs. That’s like arguing if a hammer is better than a screwdriver. They’re both tools and have their limits/uses. You don’t hear carpenters arguing over which is better, right?
In my opinion and experience, it’s the same with fighting arts. They’re tools and useful in some areas, not so much in others. Pick one you like and know where it works well while not ignoring the weaknesses. Feel free to disagree though, I’m OK with my own choices and you should be with yours. It’s your ass on the line when that crazy maniac swings a tire iron at your head, not mine. :-)
Just as a parting shot: A soldier on active duty in a not so nice part of the world, a guy who converts people from living to dead said this:
Anybody know of a weapon (other than the rifle) that is best used from the ground?
That one sentence sums up the whole point I tried to make here. I can think of no personal weapon that is specifically designed to work better from the ground than standing up. Let’s expand on that and look at all weapons throughout the history of mankind. I can’ t find any examples. So maybe, just maybe, there is a good reason why going to the ground in a violent conflict is not always a good thing…
Caveat: this is just my opinion and personal experience. I won’t get upset if you disagree with me. However, this blog is my house and so is the comments section. Feel free to share your thoughts and ideas there, you’re more than welcome. But rudeness or infantile arguing will not be tolerated. Life’s too short for that crap.
IMPORTANT:
I’ve received lots of negative comments on this post, which is fine. It’s OK to disagree. That said, please read the comment policy before you share your opinion here. Those are the rules, no discussion.
Also, read the other parts of this post and the post mentioned in Update 2. That’s where I give more background and also say good things about MMA while saying bad things about TMAs. If you don’t read them, it’ll show in your comment and I’ll just delete it without it ever showing up here. I don’t mind arguing but at the very least, we have to be on the same page. If you don’t read these other posts, then you can’t be on the same page. If you just don’t want to, then I don’t want to talk to you because all you’re interested in is saying “Neener, neener, you’re wrong and I’m right.” Life’s too short for that infantile crap.
So either argue like an adult or leave.
UPDATE: Here’s part two of “MMA sucks”.
UPDATE 2: For all the haters, check out “From the Octagon to the street” and the two follow ups on it before you start spouting your bile.
.
Loading ...
It was nice that you pointed out the rules in the current UFC. Those didn’t exist when it rolled out in 1993. You could kick a man when he was down, rabbit punch to the back of the head and punch to the throat. Go watch the old tapes and you’ll see all of that activity. And guess what, traditional martial artists still could not use their “too deadly” moves effectively. What the origional UFC did was expose the lack of training of TMA’s in ground work and surprisingly in standup as well. And not just ground work but how to finish a fight. TMA guys were breaking their hands on each others heads trying to finish a fight and couldn’t. Grappling is more effective at finishing fights , especially with choke holds.
Another counter to your point is that all the stuff you tma’s “can” do in a fight; groin kick, strike the eyes, strike the throat, we can do as well. I find it compeletly ridiculous that TMA’s expect grapplers to not throw punches with them and to not go for vital points. We can, and we will. One thing we’ll do as well is slam you into the concrete and after you realize your collar bone broke from the impact you get to be choked unconscious. Concrete is the perfect place to grapple. Once again tma’s assume a grappler is going to go for an armbar and get slammed on his head. Have you ever watched a high level grappling match? It’s about gaining dominant position. Not every grappler is going to pull guard, lay and pray for a submission. Most in fact are going to take you down and remain ontop of you. And if you’re unlucky enough to have this occur on the street, you get to eat knees ,elbows and fists for your trouble. All before the fight ending choke or arm lock, and there are many armlocks that don’t require me falling to my back.
Should a fight go to the ground every time? No. I don’t want to be on the ground in a club , bar or parking lot. But I have been and knowing how to grapple saved me from a world of hurt. Any thing can happen in a fight and one of those things is tripping on something and falling down. I was shocked, SHOCKED you had the gaul to repeat the “the street is covered in glass” myth. Sidewalks and parking lots are not littered with glass, syringes , and weapons for you to pickup at will. Its a myth TMA’s makeup to fool the public into thinking they know what they are talking about. Because TMA’s teach the deadly ancient art of (insert name here) and because it work in a battlefield 2000 years ago then it must be good for today. Wrong. The same analogy would be to say “hey guys, bow and arrows worked fine 2000 years ago. Let’s use them against tanks.” Absurd.
Because of the rule of law and the fact that even if you defend yourself you can still be charged with a crime, if you severely injure the other man. TMA arts are not useful in today’s society. Telling a judge you were justified in jamming your fingers into a man’s eyes because he picked a fight with you won’t work. As you pointed out, we don’t fight to kill we fight for other reasons today. Grappling and MMA are perfect for modern confrontations. Modern fights ( with rare exceptions) are one on one. If you watch videos of fights you’ll see that even the crowd watching will enforce this ethos on those who are fighting. A crowd will rise against someone who tries to but into a one on one fight. MMA is great for that. Grappling also lets you decide the level of force to use. Say its a drunk picking a fight with you. You can take him down and hold him till the cops arrive. You can choke him out and walk away, he wakes up and only suffers a sore neck later. Or you can snap his arm like a twig. It is all up to you. TMA’s primarily practice punching/kicking and know only a few wrist holds and throws (all practiced seldomly in a live situation). Suffice to say tma’s don’t know how to take it easy on someone.
What about a weapon? What about multiple attackers? The TMA fall back talking points. Here’s the truth. If an attacker has a knife you had better run. Period. If you try to take it away you will be stabbed. Don’t believe me. Tell a training partner to use a sharpie as a knife and tell him to stab you as you try to take it away.Tell your partner no matter what not to “let” you take it. You’ll see real quick how many times you get stabbed before you can even catch his arm. So, TMA’s fail against weapons too. Only thing you can do against a knife is run, or be the first to pull one out. Second we have the “grappling doesn’t work against multiple opponents” arguement. No, it doesn’t. And neither does any tma out there. There are FEW times if any that one person can take on and take out two to three people. That is fact. The only answer TMA’s have is that such and such art was “designed to fight against multiple opponents.” Bull. The only sure way to take out a gang of men intent to do you harm is with a weapon.
It was a nice blog, well written. But you made the same old and tired arguements that have been disproven dozens of times. I will agree its all about context. But let me leave you this to ponder. If you can’t beat mma guys and grapplers with the rules, what makes you think you can beat us when we don’t have to play by them either?
Benjamin,
It’s OK if you disagree with me, that’s perfectly fine. That said, I feel you’re picking and choosing parts of what I wrote when it suits your arguments. Please also read the other parts of this series, they’ll give you a bit more context on what I wrote.
Just a few things:
<<Grappling is more effective at finishing fights , especially with choke holds.<<
I think you're wrong. All the times Chuck Liddell or Wanderlei Silva knocked people out with punches and kicks was no less effective than grappling. If you check their fight records, you'll see they accumulated KOs with striking, not with grappling. And there are a lot more fighters who do the same thing. Some prefer grappling, some excel at striking, some can do it all. The one isn't better than the other.
<<Another counter to your point is that all the stuff you tma’s “can” do in a fight; groin kick, strike the eyes, strike the throat, we can do as well.<<
The point isn't if you can do these things, the point is if you make them an integral part of your training or not. If you train MMA for competition (which is what this post was about ) then you don’t train in that stuff because it isn’t allowed in the Octagon. What you will be ingraining in your training is all the techniques that are legal. You’ll train real hard so you can do them without thinking, at an instinctual level. That excludes training all those fouls at the same level: you can’t have those reactions kick in when you compete or you get tossed out. So those techniques won’t be ingrained. Well, if you don’t ingrain them, how will they come out correctly in a SD context. By magic? Or do you think you don’t need to train those things and can do them easily? IMHO, you need to train what you want to use so I think you’re stuck there.
<< One thing we’ll do as well is slam you into the concrete and after you realize your collar bone broke from the impact you get to be choked unconscious. Concrete is the perfect place to grapple. <<
An throws never get reversed right? It absolutely never happens in the UFC that a fighter doing a throw ends up at the bottom anyway? I think not. So the one breaking his collar bone on the concrete could very well be you…
<<It’s about gaining dominant position. Not every grappler is going to pull guard, lay and pray for a submission.<<
If that's what you think I wrote, you missed my point entirely.
<< I was shocked, SHOCKED you had the gaul to repeat the “the street is covered in glass” myth. Sidewalks and parking lots are not littered with glass, syringes , and weapons for you to pickup at will. Its a myth TMA’s makeup to fool the public into thinking they know what they are talking about. <<
Please re-read that part. I said no such thing, you're deliberately exaggerating. I listed a number of contexts where grappling is not the best solution, that's all. I did not say every street was littered with potential hazards. I said some are. I say so because I’ve fought in them and used what was on the floor to end fights or turn them to my favor. Friends and students of mine have done the same thing. So I know for a fact that you’re wrong if you say streets are always the sterile environment you claim them to be.
<< The same analogy would be to say “hey guys, bow and arrows worked fine 2000 years ago. Let’s use them against tanks.” Absurd. <<
The absurdity is you taking something I didn't write, put the words in my mouth and then claim I'm absurd. I repeat, please read the entire series.
<< Modern fights ( with rare exceptions) are one on one. If you watch videos of fights you’ll see that even the crowd watching will enforce this ethos on those who are fighting. <<
I humbly submit you have only seen fights in one social circle of society. In many, many places, the crowd joins in the fun as soon as the fighters hit the floor or if the wrong one is winning. Case in point.
One of my best friends (a very good grappler) was ground and pounding the crap out of the guy who jumped him. Last he remembered, he was beating the crap out of the guy from a mount position. And then he wakes up in an ambulance. Turns out the guy’s buddy kicked a field goal with my friend’s head while he had his back to him.
These are not isolated incidents, I can list many, many more.
<<TMA’s primarily practice punching/kicking and know only a few wrist holds and throws (all practiced seldomly in a live situation). Suffice to say tma’s don’t know how to take it easy on someone. <<
You seem to have a very limited knowledge of what TMAs actually do if this is what you think.
<<Here’s the truth. If an attacker has a knife you had better run. Period. If you try to take it away you will be stabbed.<<
The only problem is that those who use knives for actual killing/maiming attacks won't show you the knife before they strike. You won't get a chance to run if it's a committed attack meant to take you out. IOW, chances are good you won't know a knife is involved until it's being used upon you.
And nobody but you mentioned taking away the knife…
<< There are FEW times if any that one person can take on and take out two to three people. That is fact. The only answer TMA’s have is that such and such art was “designed to fight against multiple opponents.” Bull. The only sure way to take out a gang of men intent to do you harm is with a weapon. <<
Your assumption is that you have to "take out" multiple opponents. Nobody but you is claiming that. The goal is not to fight them but to get away from them, which is vastly different.
<<But you made the same old and tired arguements that have been disproven dozens of times. I will agree its all about context. <<
I'd say the same thing about you. You twist my words out of context, put others I didn't write into my mouth and cherry-pick arguments. I don't agree with that.
Here's the thing: you can't say you agree with me that it's all about context and then disagree when I point out how the context applies. That just doesn't make any sense.
<If you can’t beat mma guys and grapplers with the rules, what makes you think you can beat us when we don’t have to play by them either?<
First, you seem to think I'm claiming TMA practitioners can never be beaten. I never wrote that. Second, I train with MMA fighters all the time. They come to my school for additional training in their stand-up game as well as stand-up grappling. It's always a lot of fun and the respect is mutual.
Third: In case you missed it, here's what I wrote:
Fourth, you seem to assume I don’t train in grappling, ground fighting or MMA. All of that is wrong.
As I said, please read the follow up articles for more information. I think you’re missing the bigger picture. Also, you might get something out of this interview with Mark Mireles, who teaches MMA at Big John McCarthy’s gym. You don’t have to believe me, that’s fine. But if you think an MMA specialist and decorated LEO is full of it when he says MMA isn’t the same as SD or the street, then I guess nothing can convince you otherwise and further argument is futile.
All this said, I do appreciate you taking the time to write your comment. I don’t agree with you, but that’s not a problem. You write from your perspective, I write from mine. We both live in different places and societies, dealing with different problems. I’m comfortable with my training and I’m guessing you are with yours. In the end, that’s all that counts and let’s hope and pray neither of us ever has to face the grim reaper again.
I have always believed in the saying that “there are no superior martial arts, just superior martial artists.” The fact that you say with so much certainty that MMA is superior to TMA is just plain biased and well, ignorant. When I say ignorant I don’t mean stupid, but simply a lack of understanding of what a REAL martial art is all about. The problem is that all these MMA guys base their opinion on what a TMA is on the McDojo they see down the road. All martial arts share universal strategies and tactics. That’s a word you don’t hear anymore… strategy. And this is one thing that’s missing not only in most TMAs, but MMA as well. You don’t know what you don’t know. When I watch a UFC fight to me it resembles a boxing match in the beginning where both guys “peck” at each other. Then there will be a few leg kicks. And, almost 99% of the time one of the two initiates a take down of some sort, usually accomplished by a tackle. This is not strategy. Strategy includes evasiveness first and foremost. Ever heard of body change? Or a strategy of one? In other words, not playing a game of cat and mouse but getting the job done in one move. Yes, this is a real strategy and it’s sound and logical. This is ultimately the problem with most martial arts nowadays is there is no understanding of body positioning and strategy to quickly gain control of an encounter. and you say that TMA are useless in today’s society? As if MMA somehow reinvented the wheel. These old strategies worked 400 hundred years ago and they still work today, IF you have an understanding of what was being taught back then. Kata training is not even practiced in MMA! This is the core of any martial art. Only those who do not understand what kata is or how to apply look at it and see it as useless. It would be comparable to tossing out the bible and saying, “I don’t need this, I can do it better on my own.” Or “I don’t really understand the use for it, so it’s no good to me.” This is incorrect thinking. And the one rule of self-protection outside of a training environment is you do what you have to do to survive. Yes, sticking your thumb in another man’s eye is not always necessary, but if that’s what it takes then so be it. The seriousness of the situation merits what kind of measures are to be taken. To wrap this all up it comes down to this. TMA that employ the strategies of old are very dangerous when being applied by the right person. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have received competent instruction. If only it were so easy to just drive down the road and sign up for lessons and wha-bam you’re a killing machine. I don’t see a real martial art’s place in MMA for this reason, because of the way the training is done. It would not only violate every rule out there, but the fights wouldn’t last long either, and someone would come out seriously injured. And if you HAVE to go to the ground that’s because you can’t fight well on your feet. Not saying ground fighting is all bad, but realistically it’s not the ideal place you want to be. So much info in the information age but where is the truth at?
Personally I find this whole distinction between MMA and TMA a bit artificial, in the end there are no MA’s, there’s only techniques. And as far as grappling goes, there’s nothing more traditional than that.
I have a brown belt in judo (TMA), however when I watch BJJ video’s I rarely see something (beside leg bars) that I haven’t seen before during ne-waza training. In fact people seem to forget that BJJ is derived from an old judo style called Kosen Judo which in its turn is derived from Japanese jujutsu which in its turn is derived from old samurai arts and so on. Wrestling and Boxing even go back to the ancient Greek, you can’t get any more traditional than that.
I agree that context is everything, and since context changes all the time so do martial arts. MMA is just that, an attempt to adapt very old Western and Eastern arts to a modern sports-oriented context, and as such it definitely has its value but it is not the alpha and omega of martial arts either. The best art is the one you like most.
As far as self-defense goes, neither MMA nor TMA can guarantee your survival, these situations are violent and chaotic and the outcome is always impredicable. The best strategy, no matter which art you do, is always 1. avoidance (run away, talk your way out of it) and 2. if you have no other choise than to fight, stick to what you do best and try to stay alive.
Great article, interesting comment by Benjamin, and competent counter by Wim! Your style of writing is funny and informative and your command of English is really good if it is a second language. Nice one!
I see it as the more styles you learn the better you are off.i love Transitional martial arts,but i also train in mma.the problem with mma guys they think they are on top of the food chain and that’s not true, trust me i see it all the times these guys are hot headed.i will never want to go to the ground in a street fight.Ignorance and underestimate your opponent in the streets will get you kill.i miss the good old days when we all learn what martial art was really about respect, kindness
Really like the O.P. I don’t like fighting but happen to live in a place that’s had a 600 year old sectarian war going on. There are people who will kill you just because of the faith you are born in to, that simple.That’s where my martial arts start. I’m not interested in the trivial, ego based nonsense of fighting but what happens when someone seriously wants to take your life.
My 3 main arts, in order of when I started training in them, are Ving Tsun and FMA, muay Thai as well as training in judo as a kid.
One day, while out running, I got attacked by 4 guys (partly my own fault for adhering to a routine) who were armed with common weapons, a claw hammer and a bashed up baseball bat. I got hit across the nose with the bat as I ran but luckily, I had good training. My training worked (actually, I only used FMA) and I’m here typing this post. If I used MMA, I’d be dead now. MMA people go on about most fights ending on the ground. Well, those stats don’t take in trained fighters (I’ve seen boxers lay out multiple opponents in my bouncer days) and MAs today are not willing to put in the time to take things slowly and develop attributes, such as good balance.
As Columbo might say. just another thing, the guard. Now, look at the guard, remove the groin box. See a problem?