Mixed Martial Arts - The Unstoppable Historical Force

[Ultimatewingchun]

There has been more than a mere paradigm shift within martial arts over the last 15 years or so, imo. It's been a seismic shift, akin to the sinking of a 10 million year old continent and the emergence of a new one. Not just a new way of thinking about "scientific" fighting - but an entirely new way of approaching it.

And "traditional" martial arts will never be the same, including western style boxing and various western (and other cultural traditions) within wrestling.

And although it could be argued that today's mixed martial arts scene is simply a reincarnation of ancient Greek Pankration (which included literally everything, ie.- punching, kicking, knees, elbows, wrestling/grappling in the clinch and on the ground - including submission holds that were even more than occasionally fatal)...

the fact is that today's mixed martial arts are much more than that, since they now include strategies and moves from other arts not known to the Greeks of 2500 years ago, ie.- karate, Muay Thai, Japanese and Brazilian jiu jitsu, judo, sambo, etc. And of course it can easily be assumed that the punching techniques used in Greece well over two thousand years ago didn't even begin to approach the level of sophistication seen within today's western style boxing, as well as the footwork used within today's boxing.

But I predict that, given another 15-20 years or so, and the only "traditional" martial arts that will still be flourishing are those that are, in fact, no longer pure....in that major parts of the original curriculum have been thrown out, and what's left has been married in some way to other arts so as to take into account what those other arts can do to counter your once-pure "traditional" art...

ie.- Loyoto Machida's marriage of shotokan karate to a mixed martial art setting wherein he only uses karate techniques that won't put him in a position where he can be easily clinched or easily taken down by a shoot to the legs, (and ditto for Chuck Liddell's approach to mma-ing his boxing skills and techniques)...and ditto the same for Georges St. Pierre's modifications to his original kyokushin karate style (which hand techniques now look almost completely like boxing)...

and of course, GSP's ability as a wrestler/grappler has become so pronounced in recent years that it seems as though he purposely takes many people to the ground as his carrer has progressed (he didn't always fight that way)...because now it would seem as though he instinctively knows that the takedown will be a big advantage to him against any given fighter, in any given circumstance, and on any given day...

the true mark of a high level mixed martial arts fighter (he's comfortable fighting in any range: standup, clinch, ground - and he uses whichever strategy/tactics seem to fit best at the moment, regardless of what art it comes from).

NOW WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE WING CHUN?

Imo, without additions and subtractions to the art (regardless of what lineage, regardless of who your instructor was/is, and regardless of how much you think that you have learned wing chun "thoroughly" and "correctly")....

without significant additions and subtractions to wing chun that reflect the 3 ranges and a mixed martial art approach...

history will not be kind to "purist" wing chun traditions.

[Xiao3 Meng4]

Borg style wins again!

[bennyvt]

pankration was not mma. It was a style of fighting. Mma was born because bjj had no stand up techniques and most other styles had no ground game. Several styles have both so they should be ok? All ma has been improved or 'made up' by mixing or changing other styles. Do you really think one person just made each style up. Kung fu is improved yoga, karate is changed lung fu etc. Bjj was made when two guys learnt for six months form a guy that had changed the stratergy of jujitsu because the judo guys were smashing them so they lay on the ground so they couldn't be thrown.and kano had taken out bjj the ground work which he put back in. .

[Frost]

I think pure wing chun, just like any pure Chinese art, is a marketing myth created in the last century when actual hand to hand combat became less of a priority and preserving the art became paramount.

If you look at the history of any art when it was actually being used changes were always made to the art, the pole was added to wing chun, choy lee fut was created by blending several arts together, as was mantis. Lions roar etc.

Back when the arts had to work the practitioners and masters were very practical, they kept what worked and adapted as necessary to survive.

So to answer your question those that care about making their arts work in the 21st century will adapt and change and add what is needed just as their ancestors did (and just as you yourself have done, as Alan Orr’s people have) and those that are more interested in the art for arts sake will continue on the purified path, so not much will change there.

But what will change I feel and where the real revolution will be is with those coming into the martial arts to learn how to defend themselves. I Feel they will not blindly go to any old school and train the way their sifu says they should in the hope that one day they will be able to defend themselves like the masters of the past, but will critically evaluate what they see and compare it to street fights and yes to what they see in the UFC and then act accordingly.

I feel the consumer now is more switched on to what works and what to look out for, I know when I started martial arts about 20 years ago we had nothing to compare our instructors to and blindly took on faith their claims that fights do not go to the ground, that takedowns are easy to stop, that all the different moves in the forms can be used effectively and its your fault for not working them hard enough if you can’t pull them off etc.

Basically we had to take there word when they said what they did would help us defend ourselves, but this is not the case anymore and I feel this is the real historical change that we will see.

[sanjuro_ronin]

pankration was not mma. It was a style of fighting. Mma was born because bjj had no stand up techniques and most other styles had no ground game. Several styles have both so they should be ok? All ma has been improved or 'made up' by mixing or changing other styles. Do you really think one person just made each style up. Kung fu is improved yoga, karate is changed lung fu etc. Bjj was made when two guys learnt for six months form a guy that had changed the stratergy of jujitsu because the judo guys were smashing them so they lay on the ground so they couldn't be thrown.and kano had taken out bjj the ground work which he put back in. .

Wow....just wow...

[sanjuro_ronin]

"Pure" MA is a "creation" of the 20th century.
There was never a pure MA system, they all borrowed what they could use from each other, of they were smart.
Holding on to something that the creators of that very "something" would scoff at you for makes no sense.
MA, like everything else, must evolve FOR THE BETTER or they will fall by the way side.

[Frost]

Wow....just wow...

I thought about comentating on that post too... but then i thought no i don't want to cause a train wreck on what could be a good thread

[Vajramusti]

"Mixed Martial Arts - The Unstoppable Historical Force" VP
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a MMA forum in KFO-- why not preach to the choir there?

joy chaudhuri

[Knifefighter]

"Pure" MA is a "creation" of the 20th century.
There was never a pure MA system, they all borrowed what they could use from each other, of they were smart.
Holding on to something that the creators of that very "something" would scoff at you for makes no sense.
MA, like everything else, must evolve FOR THE BETTER or they will fall by the way side.

Pretty much every field has had this conflict. The purists vs. the mixers. It will probably always be an ongoing debate.

[Yung Apprentice]

I think pure wing chun, just like any pure Chinese art, is a marketing myth created in the last century when actual hand to hand combat became less of a priority and preserving the art became paramount.

If you look at the history of any art when it was actually being used changes were always made to the art, the pole was added to wing chun, choy lee fut was created by blending several arts together, as was mantis. Lions roar etc.

Back when the arts had to work the practitioners and masters were very practical, they kept what worked and adapted as necessary to survive.

So to answer your question those that care about making their arts work in the 21st century will adapt and change and add what is needed just as their ancestors did (and just as you yourself have done, as Alan Orr’s people have) and those that are more interested in the art for arts sake will continue on the purified path, so not much will change there.

But what will change I feel and where the real revolution will be is with those coming into the martial arts to learn how to defend themselves. I Feel they will not blindly go to any old school and train the way their sifu says they should in the hope that one day they will be able to defend themselves like the masters of the past, but will critically evaluate what they see and compare it to street fights and yes to what they see in the UFC and then act accordingly.

I feel the consumer now is more switched on to what works and what to look out for, I know when I started martial arts about 20 years ago we had nothing to compare our instructors to and blindly took on faith their claims that fights do not go to the ground, that takedowns are easy to stop, that all the different moves in the forms can be used effectively and its your fault for not working them hard enough if you can’t pull them off etc.

Basically we had to take there word when they said what they did would help us defend ourselves, but this is not the case anymore and I feel this is the real historical change that we will see.

Awesome post!

[Iron_Eagle_76]

I feel the consumer now is more switched on to what works and what to look out for, I know when I started martial arts about 20 years ago we had nothing to compare our instructors to and blindly took on faith their claims that fights do not go to the ground, that takedowns are easy to stop, that all the different moves in the forms can be used effectively and its your fault for not working them hard enough if you can’t pull them off etc.

I think this point above all else is what the advantage of the popularization of MMA has done for ingnorant people of martial arts in general. When some fat a*ss claims he can subdue someone with his deadly chain punching, even the greenest of noobs can call bull sh*t. Nothing pi**ses me off more that some fat slob with ten stripes on his belt who gets worshipped by stupid people who have no clue, (nor does he) about real fighting.

[sanjuro_ronin]

MMA has given MA a venue to test their MA with minimal to no-rules, one wonders why some haven't embraced it and "taken it up on its offer" ?
One wonders what some have to hide?

[bennyvt]

sorry what was incorrect in what i wrote. The bjj story was off a rickson gracie book.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Are you serious about that, benny? Who wrote the book in question?

[Ultimatewingchun]

...because as happy as I am about the direction the posts on this thread have taken so far (with two notable exceptions)...I was eventually planning to try and take the thread in a wing chun and mma direction. Something along these lines:

A discussion about what principles, strategies, and techniques from wing chun are most likely to make a successful transition into today and tommorrow's mma scene - and why? And likewise, what prins/strats/techs are most likely to be discarded over the course of time - because they clearly won't work in the 21ft century martial art (fight) setting.

ARE YOU READING THIS, MR. MODERATOR?

So you might wind up with a thread on the mma forum that discusses wing chun a great deal - but it won't appear on the wing chun forum!?
Did a certain dinosaur post earlier in the thread have something to do with that, perhaps?
.................................

But anyway, here's my opening gambit on what, imo, from wing chun will make the grade as time goes on...and what will ultimately be discarded (by those wing chun schools 15-20 years from now that are still flourishing - as opposed to those that will clearly be on the fringe of martial art relevancy).

SLT...chain punching in certain limited situations....the low front kick with the heel as the striking surface...a few parts of chum kiu, bil jee, and wooden dummy - perhaps no more than about 30% of what is presently in use...pak as a block/parry...pak da in certain limited circumstances as a simultaneous defense/offense...ditto that with lop da...use of bong, garn, bil, bil/lop, gum, lan as defensive and in some cases offensive jamming and structure/breaking and unbalancing moves...the centerline principle (although I can see some variations of this that simply are not in play within 90+% of the wing chun schools at the present time)...the TWC blindside strategy (with lots of attacking bong/lop...bong/lop/gum da...and lots of attacking pak/chuen (underneath bil) - all done from the parallel (matched leads) position (ie.- matched leads)...

but all that said...

these things may not come into play at all in any given fight/match...since this is mainly short range standup striking prins/strats/techs we're talking about...and perhaps over time we'll see some marriage of some of the above moves with boxing techniques...some kickboxing techniques...maybe even some Muay Thai techniques.

And then there's chi sao, and all chi sao/kiu sao related drills....which amoungst other things, I believe will be used in a much-less-than-what-goes-on-now fashion, ie.- certain chi sao moves will literally dissappear...and what will remain will be heavily integrated with wrestling/grappling/fighting/pummeling in the clinch.

Thoughts?