What is MMA?

Some thoughts-

The "on any given Sunday" quote: not entirely. A saying in MMA that I believe has been carried over from boxing is, "styles make fights". This is less about the root martial arts background of the fighters involved, but their actual habits and skills. Example: I predicted Chael Sonnen would lose to Anderson Silva via triangle choke when they first fought. Sonnen had great takedowns, but limited submission defense, while Silva's takedown defense isn't great, but he likes to use the triangle choke, and as one observer put it, "Chael Sonnen has had more triangles on him than Seseme Street". The habits these two fighters had led to the end result, although much later in the fight than I initially predicted. It wasn't a case of BJJ beating wrestling, it was a case of one guy using his BJJ training to beat a guy who relied on his wrestling training.

The idea that A can beat B, and B can beat C, so that means that A can beat C is derisively called "MMAth".

http://fireflychinese.kevinsullivansite.net/story.html

However, there are things about MMA that makes in less predictible than some other sports. The vast array of variables a fighter has to contend with means that some "underdogs" will be able to exploit an aspect of the fight that their opponent is lacking in. Example: Gabriel Gonzaga vs. Randy Couture. Gonzaga was bigger, stronger, and younger. He was thick-boned and had just knocked out the most feared striker in the Heavyweight division. He was also a BJJ world champion. Couture had never scored a knockout, though his rudimentary boxing was solid, and didn't have the grappling credentials Gonzaga had. On paper, it looked bad for Couture. So Couture ended up using his Greco-Roman-based clinch skills to push the bigger, younger guy up against the fence and wear him out before finally taking him to the ground and finishing him with strikes. He negated his opponent's variables by taking him to the one place he was stronger.

There are other variables involved as well. Cuts may stop a fight, and the smallish gloves used in MMA mean that it's both easier to transfer force in ones punches and hard to defend by covering up, so knockouts are more common. But given the known characteristics of the fighters involved, one may be able to accurately predict an outcome.

On MMA training: Though MMA is a young sport, with the Unified Rules I mentioned earlier only recently having been approved by most state athletic/boxing commissions, there have been established training methods for years, and they're only getting better. For the most part, gyms will have separate classes for the various disciplines, and the better ones will have individual instructors for them.

http://www.xtremecouturemma.com/ClassSchedule/Class_Schedule_Home.asp

http://www.mmagym.gr/old/mmagym/public_html/el/schedule.html

http://www.mmagym.gr/old/mmagym/public_html/el/schedule.html

The most important aspects are the "mix" in MMA. MMA is different than straight kickboxing, Judo, submission grappling, Muay Thai, and so on. Over the years, a number of tactics have evolved to combine aspects of the various elements. For example, an overhand punch is used to set up a takedown, combining elements of boxing and wrestling:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37F7FcwfNXc"]MMA OVERHAND STRIKE SETUP TO TAKE DOWN - YouTube[/ame]

Ultimately, just about every stand-alone system has to be modified for the MMA format. Gi grappling systems must adjust or abandon their techniques, strikers have to modify their stances to avoid being taken down, many wrestling set-ups have to be abandoned due to their vulnarability to strikes, and so on. Now, the fundamentals are just as important. Poor boxing, poor kicking, poor wrestling, and poor ground grappling will still cost you the match. But "advanced" stuff doesn't show up as much because of all the new variables that have been added. And, the techniques and strategy used vary not only from fighter to fighter, but sometimes from opponent to opponent. The top fighters are the ones who not only have solid fundamentals in several different areas of skill, but are able to blend them appropriately. Georges St-Pierre has gotten very good at slipping punches and moving right into the takedown; Matt Hughes was excellent at using his wrestling to get into a good position to lay in some ground strikes.

 

Wow…so much to say, I don’t know where to begin. Several posts mentioned Hapkido as compared to MMA, so I wanted to give my two cents. I am a 4th Dahn in Hapkido that teaches at my own club. I have also cross-trained in BJJ, Western boxing, Muay Thai, and other arts. I can tell you that Hapkido (as I know it) and MMA are two really, really different things.

Saying that most Hapkido techniques can be used in MMA competition is like saying that a the skills of a bicyclist can be used in a canoe race. Im all for sparring and competition in hapkido, but when it happens, it is going to show only a small portion of what is typically thought of as “Hapkido”, (like the Pro-Hapkido, and Korean style sparring a few posts ago).

From time to time I get some dude that calls me up and says that he wants to learn Hapkido to compete in MMA. I tell him that if he trains in Hapkido and tries to compete in MMA he’s probably gonna get his a__ kicked, and if that is what he wants to do he should go to an actual MMA gym, as I have nothing to teach him. If he wants to learn how to avoid a punch and lock up someone grabbing his lapel, them I'm his guy however. This is not because MMA is superior to Hapkido, and it is not because Hapkido techniques are too deadly, or are designed to break bones rather than submit. It is because Hapkido techniques (I’m talking about only the standing joint locks here) are designed to take advantage of what are essentially an attacker’s mistakes. One you know not to make these “mistakes”, it pretty much negates any advantage Hapkido has in fight. By “mistake” I mean grabbing an opponent in a standing position. In my opinion, the most high-probability Hapkido techniques are Clothing techniques (Eui Bok Soo), because evey single fight I’ve ever seen or been in when I was kid has one guy grabbing another’s clothing. When I spar with my students in my club, we never use the standing joint-lock techniques, because I know that if I grab someone’s clothes (uniform) like this, I’m going to get a wrist lock put on (unless I punch him in the face first). However, there are countless examples of people grabbing jackets and shirts in real life. Hapkido also contains wrist locks, punch defense locks, kick defense locks, and seizing escort techniques, but these are lower probability techniques in my opinion.Just reaching out and grabbing an toatlly uncomplaint person who is fully fighting back with a standing lock is an incredibly high level of skill that most people will never get to. They have to grab you first - then hapkido joint locks will work.

Also, usually these debates are framed as “These techniques are too deadly to practice” vs. “These techniques don’t work at all”. In my opinion BOTH sides are incorrect. The sad part is that 90% of everybody I have ever know that practices Hapkido just practices techniques in numbered sets against people who are just standing there grabbing you like a zombie. This is only basic, first-year stuff, but for many people it is all they know about Hapkido, including into the higher grades. You need to actually learn to use the techniques vs. someone who is resisting, and probably trying to punch you too. However, “sparring” as most people would think of it, is not a good place to do this (now, I am not for a minute saying that people should not spar, please don’t misunderstand). Instead you need non-compliant drills, like trying to push someone up against the wall, grab the lapel and punch, and so forth.

A good example of a non-compliant drill that uses these techniques (technically not Hapkido, but identical techniques)are Tomiki Aikido competitions where one guys tries to “stab” the other guy with a batton. Forget for a moment that actual knife attacks will not be straight-line thrusts, and this should give you an idea of a non-compliant drill for these types of techniques that shows TMA technique that actually works against non-compliant partners, but looks nothing like, and has no relevance whatsoever to any sort of one-on-one MMA-style competitive sparring.

I posted this clip a few posts back, but I wanted to include it on this post as well - please forgive the redundancy:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA0XACGbYck"]Tomiki Tournament - kotegaeshi - YouTube[/ame]

(Also, if you take a look at the "wrist-lock" technique, you will notice the guys wrist did not break)

EDIT: Anyway, I am not trying to make this a Hapkido thread, but it's just that I never see good explainantions about why MMA is different that TMA that use REAL TMA (the kind with non-compliant partners) as a comparison. Even when done well, TMA is still not the greatestd for MMA competition, IMO. Just because techniques will work against non-compliant partners does not mean that they will work in MMA.

 

Hahahahahah....in my first BJJ lesson I tapped because I couldn't get some guy off me when he had mount.
For shame.

 

For me it was being smothered in north south

 

And?
The same is pretty much true of all arts when they compete.
Demian Maia is about as good a BJJ fighter you'll get in MMA.
How much of that, literally world class BJJ, did he display against Nate Marquardt?
A big fat zero.
If your style includes any of the following:- kicking, punching, knees, elbows, joint locks (standing and prone), throws, takedowns, then you can (in theory) compete in MMA.
No format will ever really showcase the full gamut of techniques but there's enough there.
The old KSBO format was basically Karate + Judo and was a form of amateur MMA easily accessible to more trad types..
Hapkido is broadly TKD (which is basically Karate) with a bit of Aikido and Judo type stuff in there.
No excuse not to do MMA really.

 

I'm honestly not trying to poke the bear here but I don't think your statement about HKD is entirely accurate. I've taken both TKD and HKD simultaneously and I can tell you the difference is rather profound - at least from my experience anyway.

We learn a LOT of things TKD doesnt and vice versa. From the general mentality of the art down to the techniques, the differences are rather broad.

 

I disagree. I think to compete in MMA, one one would need a solid grouldfighting & grappling background similar to BJJ/Submission wrestling/Judo. Hapkido has this stuff, but it is just basically a few moves, not enogh to hold one's own while rolling. I have my guys cross-train with a BJJ coach for that stuff. Also many Hapkido kicks are aimed at the knee and would usually only work with shoes on. Hapkido has shin kicks, but they are different than the Muay Thai style kicks needed for MMA. TKD style hapkido kicks have been integrated into many HKD schools, but these are designed for Olymipc style sparring, not venues where leg kicks are allowed.

...also, as Mikey said, Hapkido isn't really anything like TKD mixed with Aikido...but nevermind

(aso - what's KSBO?)

 

Needed?
You don't need ANY kicks for MMA. Randy Couture and BJ Penn hardly ever throw kicks. Nick Diaz rarely throws a kick.
You see that's a misconception. You bring to MMA what you want to bring.
If you can make it work there's lots of stuff you don't NEED.

It's a bit like it. Broadly enough like it to get the point across.

Oh and KSBO = Knockdown Sport Budo. It was an early MMA format in the UK that was easily accessible to more trad minded folks.

 

So...I'm not sure what point you are making...no one who has been successful in MMA has ever used anything remotely similar to (what most people would consider) be Hapkido techniques at all. Conversely, I know corrections and police officers who have used hapkido effectivly in an actual fights. I think in order to used Hapkido techniques, you need a little surprise. When you square off and fight, it's advantage gets negated.

Think about it, if you were fighting someone and you grabbed their lapel to punch them, (let's say), you would just pull your hand away when you felt them trying to lock you, or try to beat them to it by punching them first. Normal people in actual fights do not realize when a lock is comming, so I think that is why hapkido has worked in the actual situations I have mentioned. Of course, boxing, Muay thai, and BJJ will work in any situation, surprise or not - which is why they are used in MMA, and are equally good in actual fights.

Also many hapkido striking techniques are disigned to be thrown from a natural, non-telegraphic stance (essentially, sucker punching someone who is standing there talking smack to you when you think a fight is unavoidable). Again, this advantage would be negated in MMA.

Maybe you missed my point. I was trying to make the point that Boxing, Muay Thai, BJJ work equally well in the ring or the street, but Hapkido only works in actual fight where the other person is not fully expecting it.

 

That "MMA doesn't allow me to do lots of techniques I've learnt in my art" isn't a valid reason not to compete in it.
Obviously no one has to compete if they don't want to but it'll be because they don't want to rather than MMA being to restrictive for some arts.

Do you not think that makes Hapkido appear a bit lacking?
I mean...you'll never get a boxer say that they can only hit people that aren't expecting it. Boxing is ALL about hitting someone that's expecting it.
One good definition of "skill" to me is applying something even though the other person knows you're going to do it. That's why timing and sensitivity come into it.
Everyone knows Ronda Rousey is gonna armbar them. And yet she still does. THAT is skill.
Rickson Gracie used to start with a person on his back and tell them he was going to armbar their right arm. And then did it.

I'm all for sucker punching would-be attackers. But I'd also like some well rounded skills to back that up if he's still standing after that.

 

While I appreciate your candidness, and I think that in order to achieve success at MMA a submission grappling format needs to be utilized, I'd like to think that components of Hapkido could at least supplement an already-existing base of "MMA basics". For example, the wrist locks Hapkido is known for could show up during grip fighting in the clinch:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tcbgcujukY"]Erik Paulson - Wrist Locks & How to Strip A Wrist Grip - YouTube[/ame]

One could also isolate an arm and use wrist locks to compound the pressure. They're nice "add-ons" to the omoplata, jujigatame (cross arm bar), and the various bent arm locks.

Just because nobody has used anything like it YET doesn't mean it can't be used. Jean Silva incorporates Capoeira, John Makdesi uses a lot of Taekwondo, Machida's success is well known, Masakazu Imanari uses a lot of wild leglock entries, etc.

My own personal experience is that the wraps and gloves make the flexing (goose-neck) wrist locks more difficult, but the twisting ones aren't affected nearly as much.

Can't speak for the kicks as my knowledge of what is specifically "Hapkido" is limited to Youtube videos and a two-hour seminar, but I've seen just about every kick used in MMA at some point. Yes, the round kick with the shin is more common and arguably more utilitarian, but kicks with the instep, sole of the foot, heel, etc. have also been used.

I'm just saying, until someone tries it, it's too soon to be written off.

 

lets look at another "TMA" like judo - it has a wel rounded alive training method and syllabus that works on both people who are expecting and not expecting the attack.
but it also has techniques that are for those not expecting (taught at higher levels) like atemi (foot stomps, elbows, knees, headbutts), wristlocks and kata based in seiza.

 

I think the two statements about Sonnen's submission defence and Silva's wrestling are greatly exaggerated.

Now Sonnen does have a lot of losses by submission however you've got to ask are they relevant. A lot of them are a long time ago and are barely worth bringing up. The Babalu one for example, not only is he a fantastic grappler with a BJJ black belt and I think he was a national level wrestler but he also cut to 205 and in that fight Sonnen was about 197. As well as that Sonnen was able to defend against a leglock earlier in the fight. This is the same Babalu who then submitted Mike van Arsdale in his next fight then went to fight Chuck lidell for the title.

He also has losses against top grapplers such as Paulo Fihlo and Demain Maia. Paulo was ranked ahead of Silva prior to his first Sonnen fight. Maia has a ton of accolades in grappling many thought he was the best 'Jiu-jitsu' guy at 185. I don't think that's a negative thing for Sonnen, those guys are just that good.

If we flip the coin and ask who recently has Sonnen not been submitted guy we could form a list of: Dan Miller, Yushin Okami, Nate Marquadt, Brian Stann, and Micheal Bisping. Dan and Nate are both BJJ black belts, both had Chael in a tight Guillotine, and neither could submit him. Stann submitted a black belt and he didn't submit Sonnen. Okami and Bisping looked to scramble so perhaps not the best evidence, although it could be speculated that they weren't confident that their submission skills would defeat Sonnen.

Although Joe Rogan isn't infallible I think when he said 'Vs Chael Sonnen you don't have to just be good off your back you've got to be a murderer' he was correct. (Note: that's just paraphrasing so what he said might have been slightly different)

I think I'm going to stop rambling now about Sonnen's ground skills now but I could really go on about other factors such as his mental state, how his style is very energy sapping and therefore tire's him out, and some statistics such as him gaining mount in 3 of his previous fights in a row. I think I've made my point though.

Silva has some good wrestling too, (he's a judo black belt?) he took Chael down twice in the first fight, and used a single leg defense called the switch which led to the TKO of Marquadt. He's been taken down by an Olympian in Dan Henderson , and I don't think anyone would hold that against him. Okami couldn't take him down, and Maia had nothing for Silva in their fight.

Then there's both Chael fights, in the first fight Chael had 3 takedowns, Silva had 2. 3-2 takedowns isn't bad vs the 2002 wrestler of the year (for the US). In the second fight Chael only managed 1 takedown, they Chael drove Anderson around and switched directions was fantastic I doubt many people in the UFC could have stopped that. In the Second Anderson wisely chose to not charge Chael ( a mistake Marquadt paid for) seemed to bait him into the clinch against the cage and in general fought well untill Chael made a big mistake that Silva capitalised on.

Styles making fights is absolutely correct. And that's why people thought Chael was the answer to Anderson. On the other hand isn't Anderson a poor stylistic match up for Sonnen?
Sonnen isn't the best finisher, In a title fight he needs to survive 25 mins and win 3 rounds. Silva can win in less than a minute if you make a serious mistake. Look at the first fight Sonnen won round 2,4, and nearly 5 because Silva made a mistake. In both fights Sonnen made 2 major mistakes and lost because of both of them.

 

No those are not the points that I am making at all. I am making the points that:

1. The situations that allow Hapkido techniques to work are not going to happen in a sport fight. This is different than saying that techniques are too deadly, or something like that. I good analogy would be someone saying that they are going to use police defensive tactics, or Tony blauers spear system in MMA.

2. Yes, I am making the point that Hapido is would be lacking in an MMA fight. If your defintion of superiority is that an art should be equally effective in the ring or street, then Hapkido is clearly lacking

3. I do not believe MMA is restrictive to some arts, rather I beleive some arts are superior in MMA.

4. Yes, I agree that you should have skills other than just sucker punching someone. That is why I have a boxing coach.

5. Also, by unexpecting, I don't mean "totally" unexpecting it. just not squaring off in stance to fight

 

Woah Woah Woah.

Don't disrespect Nick 'Kid CroCop' Diaz with that statement

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT8BFStgZl0"]Nick Diaz - Karate Kicking - YouTube[/ame]

 

After reading 8 pages of thisd stuff with so many people trying to explain to someone why they are incorrect about something they have a strongly held view of but no direct experience in and getting frustrated because he doesn’t have the same refence points as them…I kind of understand how the wing chun lads must feel when everyone picks on their training methods lol and feel sorry for them….and that’s something I never thought id say! :hat:

 

Woah. That just shows. I had him pegged as boxing/jits man. I was wrong there.

 

As a Hapkido guy, I would weigh in on the side that Hapkido really shouldn't be used for MMA. As I see it, MMA is a fairly specific training style/philosophy that encourages the development of skills in order to win matches under MMA rules in a ring/cage. Hapkido is a broader style/philosophy that tries to equip ordinary people with the skills to escape and survive self defense scenarios that may spring up every day.

As such, I find Hapkido much more general in nature than MMA - in other words, to take a Hapkido person and prepare them for the ring/cage, you would need to focus on fitness (specifically conditioning to fit with the fight rounds), training on the rules, and focus on techniques for standup, clinch, and ground (the most common areas in a MMA fight).

It's not that we don't these things in Hapkido, but we don't do them at the level that is needed for the cage, partly because we spend a lot of our training time on things like "level of force", de-escalation, breakfalls, weapons, and so on. The other notion is that we can (in Hapkido) spend more time on other things because we are betting on the notion that if (or when) we need to use our skills to escape and survive, it won't be against a highly trained/conditioned athlete who is proficient in all ranges of fighting and has pressure tested his skills in the cage. We just need to deal with the surprise and situation and get ourselves (and loved ones) out of there while doing the least amount of (legal) damage.

That said, I think over the past several years, MMA has become pretty close to a "style" as competitors/coaches have really worked out "things that win matches" and look at individual arts that focus a lot of full contact sparring (Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling, BJJ, Sambo) and how to integrate them for use under the MMA ruleset. This develops very proficient fighters in the basic ranges (standup, clinch, and grappling). I don't think you'll find too many (successful) MMA schools that don't train in similar ways.

Now, that doesn't detract from Hapkido. I think Hapkido is a great self defense system for people of all ages and backgrounds. If you want to fight MMA, train in MMA. Now imagine going from MMA, with the hard core sparring and pressure testing to a self defense system like Hapkido and incorporating those additional skill sets onto the empty hand fighting of MMA - that'd be awesome.

 

Out of interest what type of de-escalation training do you do?

 

Now here's where we differ.
I see MMA as coming from a fairly broad (rather than specific) approach to gaining combat skill that, while having its most obvious outlet in MMA matches, is applicable much wider than that. It's a continuation of Kano's break from trad jujutsu and the Gracie's expansion of that.
Matt Thornton's I-method of coaching (although it's rarely called that) is pretty standard for coaching MMA, BJJ, Boxing, Thai etc and can actually be used to drill and coach most martial arts skills, including self defence orientated ones.
The Straight blast gym has the STAB method of knife defence and various LEO initiatives that are coached that way for example.
Iain Abernethy teaches with no competitive outlet at all and yet, aside from learning a kata at the start, teaches in a very MMA way and embraces competence in all phases or ranges of combat.