Hacker News Reader

Comment by gist | Hacker News Reader

> It took a couple of decades here in the US for people to realize that TMAs are mostly nonsense.

How are they mostly nonsense? A typical case might be use in an unavoidable situation where some kind of defense is needed. Most people would probably want some kind of 'training' to be able to call on. That is if you can't walk away or avoid which would be the first choice. [1]

Most people are probably not training thinking they are going to fight a determined adversary in a real battle. Saying it is 'mostly nonsense' is the same as saying locks are of no value.

[1] That said I do think that training people for a night or a few lessons 'women learn how to defend yourself if attacked!' is for sure going to cause more harm than good very generally.

View on HN

They are mostly nonsense because they're not actually effective, and they've been proven ineffective in empirical tests- mixed fights with little to no rulesets. If you attempted to use Kung Fu to defend yourself against an 'unavoidable situation', you'd very likely lose. Testing in realistic situations- the point of the Deadspin article- is that MMA & its constituent martial arts (Muay Thai, boxing etc.) are what's actually effective. (Did you read the article?)

It's like comparing the 'four humours' vs. modern medicine

Progressive martial arts evolved out of traditional martial arts. A lot of it has to do with the practitioner himself. The progressive arts like MMA and Jui-Jitsu emphasize the combative aspect of the arts. Tai-Chi for the most part is nowadays mostly practiced for therapeutic benefits BUT I would argue that there are Tai Chi practitioners worth their weight in gold. The question is, what are you training for? If the Tai chi guy isnt sparring and moving around with other guys intensely, big surprise, theyre going to suck in a fight but that does not take away from the legitimacy and depth of the art. Tai chi still has blocks, kicks, strikes, ground grappling counters, standing grappling counters, etc. Do you think the masters of long ago didnt realize an opponent could take someone to the ground? All the components of MMA are inherent in the traditional arts. The question is why are you training? What are you training for? Are you testing your techniques against different kinda of opponents? Do you even care about fighting? Are you using your art to evolve beyond the fight? Does your martial art enrich you or take away from your wholeness? What is karate? What is Tai chi? What is aikido? How does it serve you?

The arts are so deep.

You are mixing 'value' with fighting effectiveness. Value to people for fitness, focus or whatever else is separate and not what is being talked about now. This guy is a political target because he demonstrates that TMA don't work in normal fights.

The other part of your comment about TMA thoroughly integrating large parts of MMA is not true in a large sense, though if someone took a class with lots of full contact striking and submission grappling it would be at least somewhat effective regardless of what it is called.

> because he demonstrates that TMA don't work in normal fights

Does not prove that at all. This particular person is obviously exceptional at what he is able to do. It's a big stretch to imply from his skill that 'TMA don't work in normal fights'.

What's a 'normal' fight anyway? A 'normal' fight is not in the basement of a gym where someone separates you and you bow and so on. For that matter a 'normal' fight is not an MMA fight. It is in an everyday situation maybe in a bar maybe by accident on the street. In that case there is a different set of rules and defense strategies.

One other thing. Everyone in discussing this is ignoring what a traditional fighter (or even this person) might do in a 'real' and uncontrolled situation in order to win if they had to and if their life depended on it. Maybe they would poke an eye out maybe they would break a leg or arm. Who knows.

First, this guy has said that he is not exceptional at MMA. If you watch his fights you see that they aren't competitive. It is clear he isn't being pushed, a few strikes and the other guy gives up, usually without having been able to throw anything that looks like a dangerous punch.

MMA is as close as we get to being able to see real fights over and over. There has been vale tudo in Japan but these fights and fighters were so rare they only gave a glimpse into the patterns that would emerge.

The argument over 'street fights' and 'different rules' has been around for a long time, but the fact is that when MMA fighters end up fighting 'on the street' or in a bar, they win. Being in a different setting doesn't change the enormous skill gap in fighting. Anything the other guy can do the trained person can do too. It doesn't somehow swing things in the other direction. Do you really think some untrained person is going to suddenly be able to eyepoke better than someone who has been boxing for years? Do you think an untrained person is going to be able to break the arm of someone who has taken years of jiu jitsu and practices keeping their arms safe for many hours every week?

>Does not prove that at all. This particular person is obviously exceptional at what he is able to do. It's a big stretch to imply from his skill that 'TMA don't work in normal fights'.

It's not this "particular person", it has been proven time and again, even in studies

> ineffective in empirical tests

My guess (per my other comment below) is that there are not any empirical tests for real life situations. Which person does better in a street fight or trying to defend themselves from an attacker (potentially using deadly force) when there is life at stake and no rules. And no person to separate the two fighters (like there were in the video or there are in MMA).

Early proto-MMA events in the US & Brazil literally had no rules (Google 'vale tudo'), and included groin strikes & eye gouges (Google 'Keith Hackney Joe Son'). They were actually underground fighting events, some held in illegal clubs, warehouses, basements- and, they were won by BJJ & Muay Thai guys- the constituent martial arts that make up what we call MMA today. You can actually find Vale Tudo fights on Youtube to see for yourself! Early UFC events also literally had no rules as well- and they were won by, first BJJ and then wrestling. TMA guys didn't fare so well even in the complete absence of rules.

Police & military units the world over study MMA or the individual martial arts that make up MMA (BJJ, wrestling, boxing etc.)- not Kung Fu. Jocko Willink, a highly decorated 20 year Navy SEAL commander, is also a BJJ blackbelt and has specifically said that he used jiu-jitsu to subdue militants in close quarter combat, and that TMAs don't work. On the Joe Rogan podcast he talked about fighting other SEALs in the 90s who were into TMAs and beating them with jiu-jitsu..... Wouldn't an actual Navy SEAL with combat experience know more about what works in a 'real life situation'?

I don't understand how 'person to separate the two fighters' makes it less realistic- they're there to prevent someone who's been KOed from suffering any more unnecessary strikes

jiu jitsu is a traditional martial art.. so is muay thai.

If you go back through history, fighting hasnt changed much. There are ancient roman statues showing techniques used today.

As fighters get too injured, arts start to specialize in one area, and often times become stylized to emphasize the art.

Kung fu was eviscerated in the 1920s when fighting in the lei tai was banned. Before that time fights were often times to the death.

Even MMA is watered down from its origin. Rule sets change to emphasize one kind of fight over another. For example bare knuckle favors grappling because you cant punch as hard without breaking your hand. Gloves favor strikers which are more fun to watch.

kung fu includes sanda and sashou which fight as a combat sport.

I've heard this from people other than yourself but are there any write ups or documentation of the "early days" of MMA/UFC?

They are mostly nonsense for any real fighting because they aren't full contact and aren't practiced with a resisting opponent. Traditional martial arts don't accomplish the things you listed. We now know from MMA that the martial arts 'styles' that work boil down to complete striking and grappling with submissions. There aren't any Tai Chi or shoalin Kung Fu masters out there winning MMA fights, which is all this guy set out to prove.

"submissions" won't exist in that dark alley at 3am... It's run away, die, kill, etc. I don't think you got the correct message from the article (as outlined above: it was about exposing fraudulent "masters" and the incentivization of such fraudulent masters via the CCP.) A 200 pound person trained in TMA who also may have experience in XYZ context (read: actual something or other, MMA, or otherwise.) will probably do as well as the same weight and experience person with an MMA background. Complacency can also easily occur via an MMA background in confusing a streetfight for a match or sparring, as above. Aka: there are varying dynamic levels, from mere formal demonstrations of "moves", to people trying them out on each other in real-time but with less than harmful intentions, to competitive yet still structure brawling (you don't break the guys neck to end an MMA match) to shouting drunk with occasional jabs or scuffles on a street corner in some prolonged stupid social interaction, to something escalating ultra-rapidly in an unarmed state, to armed combat resulting in an unexpected close-range hand-to-hand encounter (both of the latter perhaps ending in the death of one or another combatent)

try not to simplistically and chauvinistically reduce it to "TMA sux, MMA rox" which is silly to say.

> try not to simplistically and chauvinistically reduce it to "TMA sux, MMA rox" which is silly to say.

Show me where I said that.

> "submissions" won't exist in that dark alley at 3am... It's run away, die, kill, etc

If it wasn't already obvious from the rest of your message it's obvious from this that you have no MMA experience and are guessing at everything. In a dark alley against a single person the best possible outcome would be to get on top with their belly down and use a blood choke which puts them out. That would be a submission, because in the gym you would stop when they tap.

Everything else you said is so nonsensical I can't follow it enough to respond to it.

>How are they mostly nonsense?

"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.". In TMAs you pretty much never ever get punched in the face, all the way to a black belt and smug feeling of superiority. At the Kickboxing gym I attended it was pretty regular to get a new face with high tma rank/belt stop his first sparring after discovering is shock and horror that people actually will hit you and it hurts.

> it was pretty regular to get a new face with high tma rank/belt stop his first sparring after discovering is shock

Per my other comment if the person doing the martial arts were in a real life situation perhaps they would take a different approach or tactic. Sparring in a gym is not real life and doesn't measure what happens in a situation where someone might rely on TMA training and why they take it (in other words to defend themselves and not to spar)

I did WTF for over a year before kickboxing. My best friend, a red belt, decided to do a perfect bakkat makki(1) during a confrontation with some drunk idiots in front of a 24/7 mart. Turns out blocking an empty glass bottle with your bare arm is not the best idea ever, as evidenced by stitches on forearm and forehead. What martial arts did for him was false sense of “Don’t worry… I’ve got this”, and enough confidence to get hurt.

WTF taught me splits and fancy useless head kicks like naeryo and dolyo chagi (roundhouse kick). Kickboxing taught me the second you try that on the street someone is going to grab your leg, put you on the ground and let his friends curb stomp your face to the asphalt. Taekwondo wasnt the worst offender, non contact Karate was close to the peak of bullshido.

(1) something you spend pretty much half of every training drilling in useless forms fighting air, air never fights back.

I agree with everything you are saying. But reminds me of the early days of anti lock braking and in particular all sorts of now more common electronic driving controls. In particular 'can't defy the law of physics'. A car spinning out will not stop spinning just because you have those breaks it's already in motion.

In the case of your friend he did something stupid and got into a situation that he was not prepared for (I had to look up bakkat makki). He didn't recognize the bottle as being dangerous which in retrospect unless you think movies are real is kind of obvious. I was cut on my hand by accident years ago in a work situation by an art knife (by an employee). Same situation and it wasn't a fight. Agree with the kickboxing and I would even say as someone who had a bag as a kid and did karate kicks with it the power that you actually had seemed foolish in thinking you could disable someone with that. Maybe an old lady or a child. Otherwise so much time for someone to react.

> In TMAs you pretty much never ever get punched in the face, all the way to a black belt and smug feeling of superiority.

In my karate class, around the time I got my brown belt, we did an exercise where we'd kinda put a punch out and lean into a partner's face with our fists. Thankfully I had an older brother and I got punched in the face plenty as a kid... so rather than a smug feeling of superiority... I came away with the understanding that I was getting great exercise, flexibility, breath and balance training along with some easy-mode sparring practice. And to be fair my instructor was very clear about that too; he knew the limitations of our training and didn't want to see his kids getting chewed up in a street fight

Reply on news.ycombinator.com