I gotta agree. I thought the fellow was serious at first, but I started to turn at "If you're lucky..."
A thumb in the eye can be a valid strategy, but the reason MMA is so successful is because they train in techniques that can be practiced over and over with consistent results. Are most MMA techniques "safer" than the "too deadly" techniques? Sure! Could the "too deadly" techniques work? Some of them, and only if you could train them consistently (or have a good base to work on, which most proponents of these techniques DON'T.) Go ahead and try sparring with eye gouges, stomp kicks to the knee, elbows to the throat, biting the calf, etc. and see how fast you run out of training partners.
I personally think that as CMA evolved, the people behind its development who actually FOUGHT realized this, and that's why no CMA style "really" features these techniques prominently (unless you count Wing Chun's Biu Gee) That's why you're taught punches and kicks instead of eye gouges and throat strikes and groin kicks (oh my!!) Even forms, which when done in the air, have no potential to hurt anyone don't emphasize these techniques when compared to the basic punches and kicks.
Practicing the basics however, will give you a good base upon which to add things like groin kicks, stomps to the knee, etc. Hence why even in the street, a good grappler is to be respected. In the ring, he/she would make you tap out. In the street you could have an arm broken.
"Prepare your mind..." "For a mind explosion!"
-The Human Giant, Illusionators
Yes. My current focus is on BJJ and submission grappling. I also fight twice a year in the Dog Brothers stickfighting gatherings. I have had nine MMA matches, although I haven’t competed in that venue for a couple of years now. I competed in freestyle and folkstyle wrestling many years ago, as well as boxing and Muay Thai.Originally Posted by bodhitree
Everything needs to be worked live. However, that wouldn’t quite be a fair test considering I have 20+ years of both grappling and striking experience. A better test would be to have those same wrestlers attempt to take down the pure strikers who would be learning the "anti-grappling" strategies.Originally Posted by bodhitree
See above.Originally Posted by bodhitree
Last edited by Knifefighter; 09-07-2006 at 07:20 PM.
Where did you train BJJ? Who was your instructor? Where do you train MMA? Who is your coach? How long have you trained each?Originally Posted by franco1688
Yeah, that could be educational. Maybe one of the things we can work on is me slapping an arm bar on you and you biting me. We can see if I let it go or if I can snap your arm a couple of times first.Originally Posted by franco1688
I would trully be impressed if you could snap my arm. I trained bjj with a student of carlos gracie that is located in my area for six months but I quit when I realized that none of the students nor the teacher could beat me utilizing bjj. I train mma with steve whitehurst. We can definitley set up a "training session" in the near future if you'd like. I would just feel bad making you wonder why you've spent the last twenty years of your life studying theories.
It's a funny world you seem to live in...........
A grappler who claims he will not get hit by a skilled striker because he learned 'dodging' and 'blocking' in some three-hour seminar scam (or even by 'working on' striking a few hours a week with other grapplers!) would be a fool. A grappler hoping to deal with a striker in his range would have to go ahead and learn striking. This would mean doing it the long way and the hard way; going to a boxing gym and getting serious, going to a Muay Thai place and training hard. NOT grasping at some foolish notion that he can learn half of the equation and hope to deal with someone who has learned all of it.
And the other side of this observation would be............? C'mon, you can do it! C'mon!