Traditional MA vs MMA

[newbie]

As is obviously implied by my username I am new to the MA world. I'm interested in beginning training in MA for a number of reasons: self-defense, confidence, fitness, structure/discipline, advancement, to challenge myself. I am not interested in competition or winning trophies.

My question is: what can a more traditional MA offer me over MMA training, and vice versa? What are the pros and cons of these two types of training methods?

Thanks

[Melanie]

Welcome er...newbie :)

Thats the idea...come in with a beaut of a question! Unfortunately I am not experienced enough to answer it - but you will find some very experienced martial artists on this list. Hope you find the answers you are looking for.

[Andrew Green]

Originally posted by newbie
As is obviously implied by my username I am new to the MA world. I'm interested in beginning training in MA for a number of reasons: self-defense, confidence, fitness, structure/discipline, advancement, to challenge myself. I am not interested in competition or winning trophies.

My question is: what can a more traditional MA offer me over MMA training, and vice versa? What are the pros and cons of these two types of training methods?

Thanks

That's not an easy question for a number of reasons.

Mixed martial arts is a sport, the practices are fairly standard. Since everyone competes imposters are don't last

Traditional MA's can be pretty much anything. There are good ones and bad ones, and since competitions aren't the goal as a beginner you won't be able to tell.


self-defense

Traditional will win in some cases, MMA in many. Reason being is a lot of the traditional arts are not functional.

MMA teaches fighting one person in very controlled circumstances. They like to go to the ground, something most people agree is a bad idea in a street fight. They don't deal with weapons, multiple opponents and leave out a great deal of things that are not practical for the ring, standing joint locks, or "come-along" techniques.

MMA is bound by rules, certain things are not allowed and not trained and therefore not trained against, often the groundfighting positioning sets itself up nicely for groin grabs/eye gouges/etc.

Tradtional arts are often so caught up with tradtion that they teach stuff that wouldn't even work in a low budget martial arts movie let alone the real world and pass it off as practical.

Most "traditional" schools ARE sport schools, and fight under far more restricive rules then MMA.

confidence

both will work, neither will work, one might other not... Depends on you, the instructor, etc.

fitness

School dependant, most MMA schools would do this heavy, some traditional schools do.

structure/discipline

Depends on what you mean, but most likely you'd want a traditional school.

advancement

Any good school will make you better as you go. Traditional schools will likely show it with a colored belt or sash, MMA a win lose record if you compete, some schools no paper trail at all...

to challenge myself

Either.

I'm not interested in competition or winning trophies.

Then not a sport school, which includes MMA - It is a sport.


MMA - easier to know what your getting into

Traditional - Covers almost everything. Olympic Tae Kwon Do schools have been known to call themself tradtional, thats rather different then a koryo jujitsu school...

Basically what it comes down to is MMA is a sport, it is however a sport with very few rules, but it is still designed to function under those rules (remember the one on one, no weapons, in a ring with a smooth floor, etc. type of rules that aren't written)

Traditional is just about everything, if you find a good one it will give you everything you want.... BUT there is a lot of really bad schools calling themself traditional. Even some of the good ones won't give you what you want.

look around, most schools will let you play for a few classes before you have to pay.

For the record I call what I teach "classical".

[Cooler]

Good points from Andrew what I would suggest as does Andrew and that is to go along to different schools and see what one feels right for you. Don't jump straight in, take your time in choosing as it could end up to be a life long comitment.

Good luck in your search.

Cooler

[newbie]

Thanks for the help everyone. The search continues.

Newbie

[CyCloNe]

Hows the search going?

I started studying what you might call 'traditional' Taekwondo over 12 years ago as it was the only martial arts school in the area (not to mention I had friends who trained there) and I stuck at it for over 8 years.

Towards the end of my tkd training I managed to see a martial arts seminar in Birmingham UK, it really opened my eyes to see what else was out there.

Unfortunately months later I managed to completely break my left ankle and its only been recently (out of the scene for almost 5 years now) that I have started looking again.

I had several Aikido lessons, trained for a while in Wing Chun and even tried to revisit my Taekwondo skills none of which suited me for what I was trying to achieve.

Last month however I found a local academy that was offering 'Kickboxing' lessons, I already had a small understanding of the art so I thought why the hell not.

As it turns out, it is more 'Freestyle Karate' than out and out Kickboxing (I assume they use this term as it seems to appeal to a wider audience) and I am certainly in my element now.

Its helping with fitness and weight control (lost almost 18 pounds since I started) and I can honestly say I am now looking forward to every lesson.

A bit long winded you might say, but in summary, the point remains, there is and never will be a single style that suits everyone (if there was, this forum would very un-interesting as well as probably owned by Microsoft :p ).

My advice?

Try as many as you can and if your looking for guidence, open seminars and demonstrations can often inspire.

[Sonshu]

Wish I had seen it earlier!

MMA

PRO's

Good strength & natural power builder
Confidence builder
Real world Self defence training
It works - good sparing work etc
Still developing
Takes good techniques from many styles

CON's

Lack of variety in techniques
Can make you aggressive
Can focus to much on ground work - not a good place to be in a real fight if you are unsure on the number of opponents
Little or No weapons training
Little progression
Often full of pumped up thugs
Still developing as a negative as well as positive

TRADITIONAL

PRO's

Lots of styles to chose from - pick a good one try many
Exposes you to weapons - some firearms depending on where you live this could be good or not so needy.
Good solid base
Many tried and tested techniques
Can be full of politics and other non relevant stuff
Most have good numbers so lots of people to play with
Chance to grade so you can bench mark your skill

CON's

Many lack credible sparing and can be sporty
Can be expensive with all the memberships etc
Some techniques can be too old worldy
Gradings can be a worry to some and some classes seperate new people off too much - only some

My free advise would be go to a traditional one to start with and when you have a good level of experience then start to cross train and slowly introduce this, better than going to a MMA class from the start and getting your tail kicked - people will be physicaly harder on you there as the sparing starts early and you might run into a punch or 2!

SONSHU

MMA TRADITIONAL

[jonestown9]

The other posts here seem to be on the ball, but theres one thing I'd like to add here...

Either MMA or traditional CAN offer good self-defense skills, but the key to learning skills that can be applied in a crunch is how they are practiced. IMO, applicable combative skills are refined very quickly through hard sparring (albiet w/ appropriate gear if you decide on a striking art). Hard sparring teaches two vital components of real-world applicability: 1. Not to be afraid of getting hit, 2. how to appy a technique on an unwilling partner.
Examples of MA's that often include hard-sparring is boxing, kick boxing, judo, BJJ, and some karate schools (others may, but this doesn't seem to be as prevalent).

regards, jones

[Sonshu]

Thats pretty much what I have said.

The sparing bit is important but points sparing where your power is limited in place for control is bad.

MMA - its obvious as this is a focal point for there training.
Traditional - A lot do good powerful levels of sparing.

Problem is with sparing is you can (I see it a lot) get into a pattern of just doing 3 hits, ok parter its now your turn for 3 hits and so on. It ends up like a dance.

This is why I am wary of the credibility of people who say they do a lot of hard sparing, my main focus it in a real situation - drop the guy with one technique - be it choke, break, punch or kick.

Sparing can be like a dance in many classes I have attended. Still if done right it is a critical tool. One that more styles need to do.

SONSHU

[Trent Tiemeyer]

I consider myself a Mixed Martial Artist, and I would just like to point out that MMA is merely the competitive side of my training, testing my technique under fire.

In training I still deal with multiple opponents, and weapons are utilized often.

The situation determines the strategy. If one on one, in an enclosed area, I have no problem at all going to the ground.

If at work a situation should arise, (I am a bouncer) I will NEVER go to the ground. Not so much for multiple attackers, but that floor is nasty.:)

[Thomas]

It is difficult to generalize all styles into MMA or MA, without looking at a few of the critical things you need to keep in mind. First of all, the art that you choose should fit your expectations. You will see many people "put down" various styles because they "don't work" or whatever. Remember that the style must fit the purpose. For example, a ballet dancer may spend years training to be a top level ballerina, buut may not win the local modern dance competition. Does this mean that Ballet is not a valid form of dance?
The other key thing to keep in mind is the instructor. A good instructor will train you to use the style. You may find the "ultimate martial arts style", but without a good instructor, you really won't learn it. This is another reason why it is sily to dismiss entire styles of martial arts because of one bad experience (for example, you see many posts describing how ineefective Taekwondo is because it"only teaches sparring"... maybe in some schools, but definately not in all.)
My advice is to try several styles and schools and find the instructor and atmosphere you can work best in. Don't dismiss other styles based on hearsay, experience it yourself.
If you find a great atmosphere and work hard to reach a level of competence, then you can branch out and add other disciplines as needed. If you want to add a ground fighting style to a primarily stand up fighting style, go ahead. It is ultimately YOUR responsibility to train for what you decide you need it for.

[Sonshu]

I like what you have put in here lots of valid points.

It is true that TKD has a very poor name amongst people who train in other arts. I have been to 3 different schools and tried out at them all - the art is not for me. I will not go into the reasons for this and TKD is not the only style I am cautious of but I am not about to state the style.

It is very much a SCHOOL that is good as oppossed to the style. My expectation is if someone tells me that what THEY teach will save me on the street. I hope there are a few signs it is good enough to do so.

Now the Ballet analagy is a bad one - Because a ballet dancer can dance, weather he wins a hig level dancing contest is irrelevent, however he should win against a person who has had only 2 dance lessons every time!

However a martial art should be about self defence. Even Judo (an excepted sport - that I have a lot of respect for) it can be used to devestating effect on the street. With ANY style you should be able to win most times against jo public, not all - but most!

Sadly this is NOT the case with a large number of Schools, trouble is many schools do not know the harsh reality of what being attacked is like!

SONSHU

[Thomas]

I like the points you make as well, and I would state that in my opinion, each martial art fulfills a specific purpose, not necessarily limited to self-defence. A person may choose to study martial arts for self defence, or for another reason. Some people study for competition, e.g. Wushu forms/weapons, Taekwondo Tournament style, MMA for things like UFC for the purpose of sport. This doesn't denigrate a style if that is the reason it is studied for. If we were to examine the term "martial art", there is a lot of evidence to show that many of them were originally designed for soldiers to use in battle, and many were not designed for the common "joe" to use on the street. (Again, this depends on the style... c.f. kendo (noble samurai) vs. okinawan weapons/open hand techniques (to fight the oppressing samurai)).
My point in essence is to choose a school which wil train you well. I would choose a school based on the instructor before I would choose a school based on a style. It is ironic in my case because I prefer reaslistic, practical street applications for my martial arts training, and yet I train in a Taekwondo school that has heavy emphasis on tournament sparring. How do I deal with this? My master likes to teach skills for all purposes and schedules classes on hand techniques, self defence, ground grappling, etc. in addition to our TKD curriculum (I also love forms).

[Sonshu]

I like what you have put and all - still I have to say I have never been to a TKD school that has convinced me in the style or the school.

This is not a grips as I am sure there are strong Martial Artists out there but I have given it 3 good tries over 12 years with 3 very different schools in different parts of the country.

It does seem to me as a sport style like Judo, I.e if you can get the first shot it your on a +.

What is your take on the style, Mark Davies has also had some good posts on it as well.

SONSHU

[Thomas]

My take on TKD? I really like it, but personally feel that it really depends on the instructor and school you find yourself in.
For example, I started at a TKD school that concentrated on Olympic style sparring. However, to make the style appeal to the various students coming in, many who wanted self defence, there was also a focus on practical self defence. We did forms, self defence (mainly taken from ICHF Hapkido techniques), hand drills, Olympic style sparring, Street fight style sparring, and so on. I loved this approach and there was a lot of blending of other styles into the classes. The "pure" Taekwondo classes were also good.... developing speed, power and flexibility, especially with kicks.

I also studied Taekwondo for 2 years (at 3 different schools) in Korea and concentrated on Olympic style sparring. These classes were good, but fairly light on self defence and such. Many of the instructors taught for tournaments. They also assumed that if you mastered the forms, you would be catching up on neglected hand techniques and self defence. I enjoyed the classes and developed even more speed, power and accuracy.

Upon my return to the states, I returned to my first Taekwondo school and was happy to see that the master was still teaching in the same way and had chartered on to the ICHF. Now we do even more self defence and realistic situations and spend more time on hand techniques, ground grappling, and so on. I love my school because it is fairly easy for students to work any area they choose, while at the same time having the opportunity to earn rank in Taekwondo or Hapkido.

This is why I usually argue that every style is good and that each martial artist should find a style they are comfortable in and work extra on areas they think they need improvement in. I attend a great TKD school and would say that the students are as good as the students from any other school or style (compared to equivilent ranks of course).

[Sonshu]

It does come down to school more than style.

I am suprised that other TKD people don't do more to enhance the rep of the style and raise the issues of the more sporty style clubs where you spend hours breaking boards with a back flip kick!

I know if I was at a Taijitsu school (when I did it) I would have dont my best to gain the respect and bring in students from lesser more crap schools.

SONSHU

[Freeform]

I know this is a little bit of a tangent, but does anybody feel that MMA schools don't stress discipline (and I don't mean the physical type here) and respect between students?

Is this the case in peoples experience?

Does it matter?

Col

[pgm316]

MMA = Mixed Martial Arts?

Are they always sport related?

I thought it meant clubs which have incorporated more than one style into their training?

[Sonshu]

However I feel the disipline side is less importants.

At the end of the day I would not teach someone who I thought was a pratt, and gonna miss use what I show. There is a level of respect between MMA people and everyone wants to learn from someone who has somthing to show.

My point being - disipline is a dangerious thing, do you mean they bow to all dan grades individually at the start of a session then now. Also do they shout yes sensei all the time then no again. As this was good in the 80's and 90's etc. It is stuff like this that lowers the number of new people coming into arts. Hence styles like Vale Tudo, Krav Maga, Sombo etc have started getting better followings.

SONSHU

[Swoop]

I haven't read all the replies to this thread so sorry if someone else has mentioned this already.

It seems like a lot of people are confusing mma with ufc. The reason why mma dominates almost entirly in limited rules competition is because it works better then traditional martial arts in that specific situation, but that doesn't mean mma is limited to just competition training.

mma can be anything you want it to be, you choose what martial arts you want to train and what you want to gain from it competition, effective street fighter, and thus you have mma.

At the end of the day mma stems from traditional martial arts so there is no saying which one is better, just who trains smarter.

[Andy Murray]

Yay......a sane person!

Well said Swoop!

[Sonshu]

The question is if it stems from it why does the traditional stuff not work so well?

It raises the question as there are only so many ways of striking. The rules are not majorly stacked to the MMA favor.

Still all the best people are MMA fighters as the one style they did was not complete!

Answer that ?

SONSHU

[pgm316]

All the best fighters are MMA, train damn hard and many hours per week thus can fit more styles in, and fight as a professional career. ;)

Theres more to being a complete fighter than just the styles you choose.

[Andy Murray]

So to be an MMA person, how many TMA's do you need to do to qualify as such?

Is it about the specific arts, or the approach to training?

[Swoop]

It's all about how you train. Some things obviously will never work, like acrobatic stuff, and some things will. If I come across something new I'll incorporate it into my sparring and see if it works for me. There's a lot of information out there and the smart person looks into everything instead of blindly following a few martial arts.

A lot of mma guys I know stick to just bjj and muay thai. I spank most of them because I know those fighting styles but I also bring in some wing chun, wrestling, mantis etc.

[Andy Murray]

Swoop, I think I love you! ;)

[Swoop]

I love you too Andy. Lets go to vegas and get married

[Andy Murray]

:D

Sounds too good to be true! :love:

[Trent Tiemeyer]

It warms the large empty space where my heart should be to see you two lovebirds gettin' along so well.

[STASH]

The school that I'm going to ICS (www.integralcombat.ca) is a MMA school. However we dont really focus on the competitive side of martial arts.

"Our regular INTEGRAL COMBAT classes combine concepts, training methods and techniques from all these systems into a single, fluid system. This is not simply a collection of techniques but a complete self defense system. Here we learn to flow effortlessly (thats a lie...it is NOT effortless) through the various fighting ranges; from long weapons range to kicking and punching range, through to close-quarter (trapping) range, next to grappling range, and finally into takedowns and groundwork. Practical application of modern street weapons is covered (broken furniture, knives, sticks, baseball bats, clubs), both from the defensive as well as offensive position...In all classes, emphasis is placed upon developing the necessary attributes to pull off any technique in realistic situations. We believe no martial artist should train without developing their own personal ability to perform effectively in real-life circumstances."

MMA is not for all people. I've noticed that more aggresive people (myself included) that want to take up some kind of fighting art tend to lean towards MMA simply because it's quick and easy to get into. We dont have katas or anything like that. Just warm up, bagwork, drills and pressure testing. It all depends what you're willing to put into your training and what you want to get out of it.

[Cain]

Actually Swoop is rite, most MMA fighters do their thing go to fights and sparring, learn BJJ and muay thai win a few fights and say TMA are crap when the only reason they have is they have either never trained them or experienced them for a few hours or watched a Jackie Chan movie for 2 hours :woo:

End of rant :D

Hey Stash, long time no see :D

|Cain|

[Sonshu]

I like elements of both and neither I feel is better.

MMA works better in the ring and is very effective in the street. However gound work is common in MMA and although I love doing it I will (if I can avoid it) never go to the ground in a fight.

Never know how many mates of his are there.

TMA has a lot of excellent techniques and most of them work better if you take the initiative in a fight, they can end the fight at the start.

Both are excellent just depends on the MMA or TMA and more so the school.

SONSHU

[pgm316]

To generalise, MMA fighters are better all rounders while TMA are better in certain areas. Traditional arts usually focus on certain principles, without going into detail you know how a good MT or Judo fighter would be difficult to beat, even though they are both far from all round fighters!

Do MMA’ists loose this focus in their strategy? I’m sure not in many cases, but there are dangers of cross training which have been pointed out in other threads.

And on the other hand, how many of use should be classed as TMA or MMA‘ists? Most of use that get beyond beginner stage have trained to a fair level in a few styles.

[Thomas]

This question is more aimed at Sonshu and other MMA people. I am currious about how evaluation is done in the system you train in and how rank is regarded/worn/earned/etc. I know from the "kata" thread that Sonshu is not fond of katas and prefers very practical use of time. How does the instructor go about evaluating and awarding rank. (Can or do you earn rank in your MMA style?) Are there level-specific tasks/drills/movements that are required?

[stump]

<<<most MMA fighters do their thing go to fights and sparring, learn BJJ and muay thai win a few fights and say TMA are crap when the only reason they have is they have either never trained them or experienced them for a few hours or watched a Jackie Chan movie for 2 hours>>>

Gotta disagree with you there Cain, the majority of MMA people i know have a fair amount of TMA experience......though not all I do appreciate. Many of these specially the pioneers of MMA have come from traditional arts and progressed. So when they criticise they have a good idea of what they're talking about, after all MMA (whether they like it or not) is the child of Trad MAs.

Recently people can start in MMA without a traditional background as more and more clubs open, but I think at present and for a long time to come the main body of new MMA students will come from local dojos/dojangs etc

[Trent Tiemeyer]

As far as formal ranking in mma oriented schools, there is none. You can either fight or you can not, the proof is in the pudding. Like boxing, or wrestling. BJJ has a defined ranking system, however.

[Thomas]

I think you also see a lot of students who cross-train. Many of the people I train with are ranked in Taekwondo because that is the only available full-time local dojang with an awesome master (we are quite rural).
We train TKD as our main style and follow promotion curriculum for WTF and/or ITF (we are pretty open-minded). Therefore we do all of the forms, point sparring, and so on. However, we follow the idea that some people join the school for other reasons, like self defence or what have you. Therefore, we cross train in other disiplines, like ground fighting, joint locks, and so on.
Recently, our master was certified to promote in ICHF Hapkido and he does that now according to their curriculum. For other disciplines like weapons, ground fighting, grappling, escrima, and so on... we don't offer ranking but do conduct classes, seminars and use class time to practice them.
So, accordingly, I don't consider myself a "Mixed Martial Artist" because I am fiercely attached to my own styles (Hapkido and Taekwondo), but do cross train to make up for areas where I may be weak.

[Freeform]

Just warm up, bagwork, drills and pressure testing.

Hey STASH, you forgot the techniques (unless you meant drills as technical training)! ;) Good to see you back, we'll have to get one of our patented 'heated' debates going! :D

To round off my post, I agree with Swoop! Can I come to Vegas too........... ;)

[Swoop]

Everyone is invited to vegas. Let me know where to send the invites.

[STASH]

Originally posted by Freeform


Hey STASH, you forgot the techniques (unless you meant drills as technical training)! ;) Good to see you back, we'll have to get one of our patented 'heated' debates going! :D

To round off my post, I agree with Swoop! Can I come to Vegas too........... ;)

Good to hear from you again Freeform. Yes...drills include techniques, lol.

I just wanted to point out one thing...with the whole ultimate fighting craze everyone seems to thing that ALL MMA schools train their students for the ring. This is not necessarily true, there are a lot of schools out there that avoid competing and teach for self defence.

[Andrew Green]

I would say that MMA is really two things, which don't always come together.

It is a sport, now a sanctioned one that is growing pretty well.

But it is also a training method. Perhaps it would be easier if everyone defined what they meant by MMA. For me it is a training method, sparring in all ranges with limited rules and using that as the test of what works and what doesn't.

This doesn't mean following the same rules as the ring sport version. I don't have a ring, don't have timed rounds, don't always go one on one and even stick weapons in there once and a while.

As far as I am concerned that is the best "top level" training method. If you don't do that you are missing something, but whether you call it MMA or not is irrelevant. That training method can be used under a sign saying "Kung-fu", "karate", "Jujitsu", or even... "STAVIT!" and it is still the same training method, one which many people refer to as MMA.

Now Yoda has to step in and quote Krishnamurti...

[Thomas]

Originally posted by 1ONEfighting
As far as formal ranking in mma oriented schools, there is none. You can either fight or you can not, the proof is in the pudding. Like boxing, or wrestling. BJJ has a defined ranking system, however.

Not to be negative, I am curious about how students are evlauated and ranked in MMA, but how are new students treated?
What about students who can't fight? Are they kicked out?
Is the instructor just the toughest guy there... what happens when he gets beaten?
If you were a mixed martial artist, do you attend various seminars or do you have a coherant curriculum that you learn from. My experience in Taekwondo and Hapkido is that the ranking system does provide a fairly good idea of what to teach students at each level.
In an MMA class, how do you divid the students up for instruction so that the more proficient students don't get bored and the less proficient don't get overwhelmed?

[Thomas]

I think this will be my last attempt to find find out about evaluation and ranking in MMA on this thread. Can anyone who regularly trains in MMA please tell me how ranking and evaluation works in your system? (see previous replies for clarification).

[STASH]

At ICS you get handed a new belt when the instructors feel you've earned it, there are no test periods or anything like that so there's no pressure. An instructor might be watching how you handle certain situations and when he feels you're ready, he'll raise your rank.

There are no kids in any of the classes so you wont see any 11 year old blackbelts running around breaking boards with 540 kicks of doom (and later getting their asses kicked on the streets because they think it'll actually work in real life).

[pgm316]

Sounds good Stash, what is ICS?

[Sonshu]

Exactly what SONSHU is mate!

You get it when you have earnt it and can do it second nature.
Also when you can explaine the elements of it and REALLY understand it.

No gradings - its on continual performance.

SONSHU

[STASH]

Originally posted by pgm316
Sounds good Stash, what is ICS?

Integral Combat Systems...check it out:

www.integralcombat.ca

[Kwan Jang]

-Thomas asked about ranking and progression in mixed martial arts systems. While some people doing MMA are just throwing together certain things from different systems, many others have organized it well. Even Thomas, who from his post and profile combines tkd and hapkido could be said to be practicing MMA. Even though both systems are Korean, one is primarily a striking system w/ a sport emphasis while the other is a combat system that (while well-rounded) has a strong grappling component(if not a strong ground-fighting one). In our system, we teach Tae Kwon Do, Jujitsu(both Braz. & Small Circle), Muay Thai, Arnis/ Escrima, and American Kenpo. For 2nd dan and above, NHB and submission grappling is a part of the cirriculum as well. We break down our cirriculum into 5 segments(stripes) at each belt for beginners and 6 for brown belt and above. We mainly focus on tkd and muay thai at beginner levels(not competetive) and integrate the other systems in as students advance. With a strong base, students can connect the dots pretty easily. Kids are brought into some of the more hardcore work more gradually than adults obviously and only taken as far as they can handle(which is ususally a lot further than most would believe) mentally, physically and emotionally. We do teach trad. forms and basics, but probably have less training time and emphasis than many trad. schools. IMO-too many MMA programs throw the baby out w/ the bathwater. You can have a well-rounded, effective program that provides effective self-defense and still push the athletic envelope for those who choose to. So many of our kids can do 540's, 720's, flashkicks,ect., but they do that as a fun bonus and we make sure that all our students have grown in their ability to effectively defend themselves.

[Kwan Jang]

-This point occurred to me right after I finished the last post. If you live in Korea, you basically have a choice between tae kwon do, tang soo do/subak do, yudo, or if you have access to them hapkido, hwarang do and kuksoolwon. If you live in Japan, you have primarily access to judo, jujitsu, aikido or karate-do. In China, modern wu shu. America is known as a melting pot where both in culture and ideas and in our case martial arts systems are all accessable to us. Europe has a lot of the same advantages. Cultural and racial rivalries of the past(particularly in Asia) that have limited the growth and evolution of the arts does not have to be carrid on. Through seminars, networking, cross-training and even videos, advanced martial artists with a strong foundation and base now have more access to knowledge than any other time in history. The potential for growth is amazing and unprecedented. MMA is (when done right) about evolution, not revolution IMO. However, I DO feel it's VITAL to have a solid base and that originates from the trad. arts and that should not be trivialized or overlooked.

[Thomas]

Nice response. Everything you wrote clicks with the style that I follow. We stay focused on one (or two) main styles that we follow the curriculum and testing guidelines (and hold rank in), but also add and work on areas we think we need to improve. Although it may be semantics, I refer to myself as a Taekwondo blackbelt (or hapkido blackbelt) who cross-trains, not as a "mixed martial artist."
I was grateful to get a nice response finally. It seems that many of the MMAers on the board usually provide really good answers to questions, but it was really difficult to get an answer on testing and evaluation. I am still curious to how MMA stylists' instructors become instructors. Are they just the best fighters? What hapens when they get beaten? Is there a cohesive curriculum like Kwan Jang discussed in most MMA styles? How do you know what skills to fucus on when you have a whole class of students?

With no intentions of insulting anyone (honestly), in this thread of Traditional martial arts vs. mixed martial arts, there was a lot of flak directed at the traditional martial arts as being ineffective or outdated, but I wonder if mixed martial artists who just train in an open style, learning only 'practical techniques" and spending their time fighting are really "martial artists", or are they just "fighters" (or in a negative sense "street fighters").

By stripping away the overall system and making just as "effective as possible", you strip away the essence of the style and tradition. The forms, techniques, discipline, bowing, ranks, and "silly" drills are intended to keep students under a master's eyes until it can be determined that they are worthy of the responsibility of control over deadly force. With that safety system removed, you may have superior fighters on the streets who may not have the requisite responsibility and maturity to be trusted with them. (Again, this is not intended to insult anyone, but rather to clarify what a MMA is)

[Kwan Jang]

-My instructors were some of the pioneers of both cross training in the USA. We began from a very solid traditional base and over the last 25 years have evolved into a MMA system. As one of their first black belts, I've watched than process come about. It was based on always expanding and growing. KJN Ernie (Reyes, Sr.) has always come to learn like a perpetual white belt, rather than a grandmaster, world champ, or Black Belt Hall of Fame Instructor and movie star and choreographer(even though he is those things). It's about putting aside your ego and willing to learn and grow. I believe this spirit is basically what drives any advanced MA out of their comfort zones and has given birth to MMA. However, when you start something good(BTW-Iam NOT sugesting that we are the only ones to pioneer this; there have been too many leaders in this to mention) a lot of people who jump on the bandwagon later will leave out some critical points. Many begin a school w/o a strong enough base in ANY system and use MMA as an excuse for not "wasting time" with all "that character stuff". Though there are a lot of good people out there, you have many who just slop many things together, but do very little of it well and are playing ego games IMO. I doubt that many of this type will stand the test of time. As far as your points on the parts of trad. MA that build character; I agree w/ TKD Grandmaster Jhoon Rhee when he says that MA w/o philosophy is merely(scientific) street fighting. People train in MA for all sorts of different reasons, but I feel that the character-building and personal growth aspects are what will prove to be the most value to society as a whole.(BTW- for all you hardcore MMA who are snickering out there, keep in mind that both Tito Ortiz and Frank Shamrock have both come to train w/ us and Shamrock has done so regularly for years). Some people are looking more for personal growth, some for artistic expression, Some love to scrap and be the toughest thing on two legs. Some just want a different and all-around work out. IMO none of these people are really wrong in their goals provided it's not hurting anyone else in the achievement of these goals. If you are a quality instructor/ educator, I feel it's our job to help them achieve what they set out for and to teach them the value of the others and a reasonable amount of competence in them as well. MMA can give you an even broader range and spectrum to help achieve this.