Since Ultimate Fighting (UFC) came to the forefront, isn't it time that we admit that all these so-called...

Question

"martial arts" (kung fu, karate, aikido, etc) have been exposed as the frauds they are? Any reasonably competent UFC fighter would completely "own" a purist karate "master" or a kung fu practitioner in a street fight, don't you think?

Oh, come on people. You gonna tell me that you know any purist kung fu or karate master that would take Chuck Liddell in a street fight?

Hey, "thepaladin." I understand your point about Bruce Lee, but he was what - 80 pounds soaking wet? And heavy bags don't move... or fight back.

OK... Y'all have beaten me into submission. lol... I guess the question was poorly worded. What I was getting at is - don't you think a skilled MMA (UFC) fighter would pretty much dominate a purist of any another art IF it came down to a one-on-one, no-weapons-allowed street brawl?

Quicksilver... Believe me, it gives me NO pleasure to ask this question. My own brother is a 6th degree black belt in Aikido, and has his own dojo. I've had some training in Karate, but not enough to be a significant force... My main thing is an overwhelming desire NOT to lose, and raw, brute force punching power.

Answer 1

Hmm, this question seems to come up a lot.
Look at the history, martial arts were practiced for a variety of reasons. The arts evolved as time went on. Kung Fu had its place and was very successful...History provides some possibly colorful stories of this. Aikido is more recent which has roots in Jujitsu/judo which of course is used in UFC. The founder was a bad man. He could and did use it. There is enough verified stories for his group to say he was legit. Karate has its own sport. Kung Fu saw its own art hurt by its own country. China tried to destroy its own art... history exists on that to. One thing that should remain clear here is that UFC trains people to fight in UFC. Put a UFC fighter in boxing and see how they do. Hmm, issues there for some folks. Put a UFC fighter (and vice versa) in a sports karate or TKD tournament and see what happens. Try this with Muy Thai both way... wow... do you see any issues with the sports? You train for the sport to succeed. Boxing, Muy Thai, and UFC train to hit solid, moving targets... this definately helps prepare a person a bit more for a street fight. Keep in mind that the UFC evolved as well. It was discovered and revamped that you just can't go in as a striker or a grappler... you need to be able to understand and counter both.
This is JUST like the arts of old... Folks trained on many arts, not just one. That way they had counters and such. Check out Yip Man if given a chance... interesting Wing Chun/Vting guy. Kung Fu and many others used to have a very rich challenge process which weeded out the bad teachers or fighters at the least. (I realize fully you can be a good teacher and a poor athlete).

Get a person who trains the art vs. a real live opponent that is trying to get at them... you have better results. There are also updated ars such as, Jing Quan Tao, used by some police forces in China... you don't get much more real than that.
And dude... your comment about heavy bags not moving... were you trying to take a quote from Bruce Lee? Bricks don't hit back?
Wow...
Those of you who don't understand history are prone to repeat its mistakes.
Anyway, thanks for the thoughts.

Answer 2

"Purist" martial arts are not frauds at all. UFC and it's sister organizations have proven that MMA is more effective than a single approach to a fight. However, the fighters in the UFC all began as purists in some form or another. Matt Hughes, among others, was a collegiate wrestler. Chuck Lidell began as a kickboxer, as did Anderson Silva. Royce Gracie fought and won, as a jiu-jitsu purist. All of these and many other fighters began as purists and evolved into mixed martial artists. To be effective in the UFC, each fighter must know a little bit about every style in order to compete, that includes fighting against a "purist."

Answer 3

It has been said before and apperently bears repeating: MMA competitions are no more or less like a "real street fight" than any other kind of competition. In what I've seen, they seem to prefer ground fighters. Tae Kwon Do sparring matches prefer kickers. Boxing matches prefer punchers. You set the rules of your competition to match what you teach. I teach Kung Fu, so you shouldn't be suprised to learn that sparring in my school prefers strong punches and midlevel kicks, trips and traps. My brother practices a grappling art. We're pretty evenly matched when we spar at home. In a street fight, between a striker that never handled a grappler and a grappler who never handled a striker, who were otherwise equally skilled, the winner would be the one who landed a technique first. In todays environment, it's easier to find a striker who's never handled a grappler than a grappler that's never handled a striker, but the pendulum swings from on extreem to the other in different times and places. As a non-grappler, I had a wrestler that was bound and determined to "show me who was better" in our P.E. wrestling class. Finally he talked the teacher into letting us wrestle. He was on the varsity wrestling team, and I wasn't used to wrestling rules. Still, he didn't pin me, only won by one point. Which point was that? The two points I lost on a groin grab. In a street fight, where no one calls a stop due to a groin grab and where I'm actually aiming for it, who would have won? Actually, I honestly don't know (or care) becasue he would have been able to go for my groin and eyes as well. My point is more that we were evenly matched as far as a "real fight" goes rather than I'm better.

I think the religious devotion the UFC has generated has been way over done these days. The only "real fight" is a real fight. Anything else is going to have rules to be sure the star fighter doesn't get killed by a freak lucky blow.

Answer 4

As many others have touched base on, UFC is not real fighting. Most people don't even realize that part of trying out for the octagon includes how entertaining one is to watch! I (or anybody for that matter, I'm not trying to be "bad a$$), could sock somebody in the throat with all my might and the match would be over in seconds. Would you pay the cost of the PPV for that?

Again, UFC fighters may have difficulty using submission holds on multiple opponents.

Most UFC fighters have foundations in traditional martial arts.

Most UFC fighters have mixed their martial arts to become well-rounded faster than they would by taking a single complete system otherwise. They tend to attempt to master the basics of several systems; in other words, jacks of all trades, masters of none!

Never have I seen a UFC (or any other MMA) match with weapons of any sort.

So no, I don't this "all these so-called 'martial arts'" have been exposed as frauds. A reasonably competent UFC fighter wouldn't necessarily completely "own" a purist in a street fight.

Why do people in this forum insist on bragging "my dad can beat up your dad"? When it comes to martial arts, grow up, train hard, and hope you never have to use it to save your life. I'll take my 2 points and go...

Answer 5

UFC is sport fighting , while I'm sure many of the UFC fighters would be more then dangerous in a street fight , it doesn't mean the purists would lose . In sport fighting there are rules , there are none in a streetfight . In sport fighting the ring (octagon) has a padded "floor" ,streetfights don't take place on padded mats . In sport fighting you try to win , in a streetfight you try to stay alive . Going to the mat is not painful , falling on pavement is . Eye gouges , groin strikes , and breaking an opponents bones intentionally is against the rules in sport fighting , In a street fight these things are often essential to surviving . Referees can stop a fight at any time in the ring , on the street there is no referee .
I'm not saying that sport fighters can't handle themselves, I'm just saying that other methods have stood the test of time because they work .

Answer 6

remember that UFC has rules, and street fights dont. I dont like Traditional arts, but on the street when anything goes, who can say what a person will do. The experience of actual fighting in the ring will make the difference though, and just like playing Mortal combat will never help you in a fight, just learning the moves without actual sparring everyday will not help you. technique is nothing without application training.

so the UFC guys have more hands on experience I guess, so they would do better, but you forget that submission grappling is only good for 1 on 1, and a friend will stomp their heads in. so in the street sense, grappling is useless unless its 1 on 1.

this discussion could go on forever.

the thong with UFC is that it also contains rules, and the street doesnt, so they can be beaten on the street too. anyone can fight well in ruled events. no danger.
stop comparing one style vs another based on only the rules set for one. and the argument of the street fight throws everything away, and in my experience the most violent person wins, even if they are not as skilled.

Answer 7

Well , according the Ultimate Fighting rules, and if a karate "purist" was in there, he probably would have a tough time. If a dude would try to fake me out and go for my waist to take me down, he is getting a knee right in the head, and I don't care how many UFC episodes you watch. Many karate,taekwondo or other martial arts train because they love it and it is a way of life. They simply don't bother with the Ultimate fighting. I hate watching it and they are doing hold after hold and rolling around. A fight lasting 10 minutes that should have been over in 2, is not fun for me to watch. Really you shouldn't call them a fraud when the UFC was formed from Jiujitsu, judo, wrestling and karate at first. Peace out.

Answer 8

the traditional martial arts are not frauds. i have practiced karate and judo for many many years, and i also practice BJJ and muay thai for several years as well now and they each have their own purpose. in todays world, traditional karate or judo (etc) have a place in the fighting world (karo parisyan for example) and many fighters have all started out learning karate or TKD or other traditional styles. however, you have to keep in mind that the traditional styles are made for self defense and were used many years ago effectively. cage fighting is for sport and has rules in it that make it different from a street fight. each one has their own place. besides, look at bruce lee, one of the first true MMA pioneers. without kung fu, where would he have jumped off to start to create jeet kune do?

Answer 9

Let's get one thing straight here! What you see in the Octagon does not compare to an actual streetfight. Real fights have no rules, no gloves, no ring, no ref, and no rounds. The martial arts such as karate, kung-fu, and Tae Kwon Do in their purist forms were made for war. Translation: They were made to kill people!! They were never intended to be used as entertainment sports. So you really can judge the effectiveness of the pure arts by what you see in the Octagon. A wing chun master would kill the average mixed martial arts. In a real fight do you really think Bruce Lee would have a problem with Chuck Leddell when he could kick holes in heavy bags? UFC is for your viewing pleasure. Treat it as such!

Answer 10

No, I don't to be honest. (and I can tell that you've had NO Martial Arts experience to begin with due to the nature of your question.) because it's the individual fighter's ability to use what they've learned and NOT the discipline itself because EVERY discipline no matter what it is or where it comes from has it's strengths AND it's weaknesses.

these other disciplines aren't "frauds" because they've been around for hundreds of years, or at least for several decades (and proven in their own way many times) than the UFC itself because the the UFC, PRIDE, IFL have only taken the concept of Martial Arts as a sport to the next level.

The basis of the UFC (and Mixed Martial Arts in general) in the first place was to allow ANYONE with a Martial Arts background to fight and put their OWN skills and NOT the validity of the DISCIPLINE they've learned to the test.

Any one that has studied MORE than ONE discipline can be considered a "Mixed Martial Artist".

The preferrence of disciplines that most of the fighters use are Muay Thai and Jujitsu; when in fact, they FIRST learned one of the CLASSIC or TRADITIONAL disciplines to begin with.

Case in point: Anderson Silva, he has a Tae Kwon Do background in his training befor he joined the UFC but TRANSITIONED into Muay Thai fighting and Jujitsu later, so it made it easier for him to study a discipline that is a bare bones and informal discipline such as Muay Thai (which the techniques from that discipline were distilled down to basic techniques from the Taiwanese discipline of Krabi Krabong.)

And Matt Hughes has a Greco Roman Wrestling background from High school and college, absolutely NOTHING to do with Martial Arts.

So he was already comfortable on the mats before he learned how to use techniques like Rear Naked Choke, Triangle Choke or Kamora to fight in the UFC, because those techniques are NOT allowed to be used to beat your opponent in Greco-Roman Wrestling.

and besides that he beat Royce Gracie, does that mean that Gracie Jujitsu (or Jujitsu in general) is "fraudulent" or sucks?

NO it does not.

On top of that (and this is why your question has little validity to it) you're making a comparison to people who fight IN A CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT THAT HAS RULES (for a living no less) on a regular basis that have knowledge of MORE than ONE discipline (in the case of UFC fighters, it's a combination of a "Standing game" discipline and a "Ground Game" discipline) against someone who's only studied ONE discipline and pitting them in a "streetfight". In a street fight ANYTHING goes, so you do what you have to and survive the encounter.

again it's the individual's use of what they've learned and not the discipline they've learned that will determine the outcome of a fight.