SpeedMerchant
(?)Community Member
- Report Post
- Posted: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:22:06 +0000
goingd
Well, to be honest I think it's a load of bull monkey. I'm not bashing anyone that is into MMA, but I think my reasons are fair: (btw, these don't cover all my reasons)
1. It's advertised and thought to be realistic fighting.
-Realistically, on the streets, we're not going to find ourselves in an octagon shaped cage (usually not in a cage of any kind really, and we're not going to conveniently be on a mat designed for grappling.
2. It's hardly "mixed martial arts" at all.
-Most MMA competitors focus on Jujutsu and Muay Thai (not all of em o'course). What bugs me is that the reason for that is it just gives a better, quicker flash to the audience. On top of that, what most MMA guys (/girls) seem to be doing is focusing on getting really good at 2 or 3 kinds of kicks and strikes. "Mixed martial arts" used to mean you have a broader horizon than that.
3. In later years - especially in the UFC - they've sacrificed more realistic rules for money.
-Back in the day, if one fighter nailed to other to the floor and had 'im in a good lock, he would be allowed to keep him there for as long as he wanted. Now, if it looks like it's going no where, the ref will come and break them apart. Gee, that's realistic too...
Anywho, that's why I dun't like MMA blaugh
1. It's advertised and thought to be realistic fighting.
-Realistically, on the streets, we're not going to find ourselves in an octagon shaped cage (usually not in a cage of any kind really, and we're not going to conveniently be on a mat designed for grappling.
2. It's hardly "mixed martial arts" at all.
-Most MMA competitors focus on Jujutsu and Muay Thai (not all of em o'course). What bugs me is that the reason for that is it just gives a better, quicker flash to the audience. On top of that, what most MMA guys (/girls) seem to be doing is focusing on getting really good at 2 or 3 kinds of kicks and strikes. "Mixed martial arts" used to mean you have a broader horizon than that.
3. In later years - especially in the UFC - they've sacrificed more realistic rules for money.
-Back in the day, if one fighter nailed to other to the floor and had 'im in a good lock, he would be allowed to keep him there for as long as he wanted. Now, if it looks like it's going no where, the ref will come and break them apart. Gee, that's realistic too...
Anywho, that's why I dun't like MMA blaugh
1. It IS realistic fighting, people get hit, people get hurt, arms get broke. I see very little arguement over it being "fake". We may not be on a mat designed for grappling in the real world, but that just makes it easier to hurt people with throws.
2. Thats because JuJitsu and Muay Thai are great martial arts. So is Boxing and Wrestling. I personally think Sambo, Judo, Catch Wrestling, and Shooto are great arts as well. I took JKD concepts for 1 year and learned more being hit and slammed than 5 years of forms at a Choy Lay Fut school.
3. I agree the older UFCs had a certain flair to them, but honestly it was nitwit 1 vs. nitwit 2 in most bouts. They would usually plod around the octogon until one knocked out the other poor sap with some basic streetfighting. Either that, or some karate guy would get bloodied and crawl on the floor until the ref stops the thing....