I've been on this board about six months, and I've seen many variations on the theme "It's not the style that's important, it's the fighter". I have an opinion to offer about that idea.
Baloney.
If it's not the style, then all you MMAers go out and train in sumo and ballet, then tell me how it's not the style.
Shortly after starting to read on this board, I paid five bucks for the UFC I tape. Amazing. I saw a guy barely six feet tall who weighed less than me walk through three opponents who were uniformly taller and stronger than he was. (Maybe Shamrock was the same height, but the guy looked like a bodybuilder and obviously knew how to take care of himself.) You will never convince me that Royce Gracie was simply physically superior to his opponents. Physical superiority, in that case, had NOTHING to do with the outcome. The fact is, when the rules allow for grappling and takedowns, Gracie JJ was simply vastly superior to the boxing/kickboxing styles.
OBJECTION 1: Who did he fight? A boxing nobody, a professional wrestler, and some kickboxer no one's ever heard of?
ANSWER 1: Admittedly, Art Jimmerson wasn't the great boxer he was made out to be, but he does know how to box, and he literally didn't lay a glove (the only one he had) on Gracie. Shamrock wrestled pro in Japan, meaning he had shootfight experience. The kickboxer -- well, he was a European champ, and that should count for something. Plus, he beat the snot out of his other opponents.
OBJECTION 2: It wasn't fair! These guys hadn't seen jiu-jitsu and weren't prepared for that kind of grappling.
ANSWER 2: That's the point -- their styles were deficient. If jiu-jitsu was so darned effective, which it was, why weren't their styles prepared to defend against it?
OBJECTION 3: If those guys had trained against BJJ, they woulda won.
ANSWER 3: How would they have trained against BJJ? Not by studying boxing or kickboxing, but by studying . . . BJJ.
OBJECTION 4: It was all a setup, just a big marketing ploy by the Gracies to "sell" their system.
ANSWER 4: Then why did they win the next one? And the next one? And the next one? Was it all a big, continuing conspiracy? Was the Trilateral Commission involved? Were the Illuminati watching?
OBJECTION 5: Well, that may have been true ten years ago, but TODAY it's not the BJJ guys that are winning.
ANSWER 5: From what I can tell, that's because the guys who are winning have now practiced BJJ, or at least practiced long and hard to learn how to defend it.
OBJECTION 6: It's all bull. If you REALLY want to be a good fighter, you can't just train in one style, no matter what it is.
ANSWER 6: I have a wife, four kids, and a job. In other words, a life. I am way too busy to bother training in six different martial arts just so I can walk around thinking I'm the baddest thing on two legs. I can afford a few hours a week to train, so I need to focus my efforts on the most efficient fighting system I can find to take. And for me, that system is...
judo. But I wish it were BJJ. I get too beaten up in judo, and the only people there my size and age are all black belts. So either I beat up the fifteen-year-old brown belts, or I get beaten up by the forty-year-old black belts.
But anyway, that's why I don't buy into the whole "style doesn't matter" argument. Love to hear other views, though.
Having written the above -- I don't believe your typical, six-month BJJ student is in any shape to take on a trained boxer. Sounds like a good way to get a concussion. Maybe I'm giving boxing too much credit, but it looks to me like those guys hit HARD and FAST.
This is meaningless in the modern MMA world. Everybody has to train in all areas to survive. Style vs style no longer exists.
"Having written the above -- I don't believe your typical, six-month BJJ student is in any shape to take on a trained boxer. Sounds like a good way to get a concussion."
I have seen a lot of high school wrestlers with 6 months experience that could,and I know a lof of guys with 6 months bjj experience that could.
Also Sakuraba didn't use BJJ on Royce,Ryan,Royler or Renzo,explain that one
Style vs Style still does exist. Even though pretty much every MMA fighter these days KNOWS standup and ground, it doesn't mean they are equally good at them both. Most fighters have their one real strength, be it boxing, muay thai, wrestling, BJJ, or in Yoshida's case, Judo. They just have to be good enough at the other styles in order to force their opponents to play their game.
Kondo is karate, he's one of the best.
I totally agree with you regarding BJJ being the most efficient system as far as ground grappling is concerned. They are the best at what they do.
Two points to consider. The inherent advantage the Gracie system had in early competition and the internationalization of sports.
The biggest advantage Royce Gracie had in his earlier fights was that the Gracie System studied the approach to fighting different styles of opponents for over 50 years by the time Royce got in the ring. What style mentioned in your post had ever seriously addressed that issue in their training? Most athletes train to beat athletes of their own discipline. The Gracie's trained to beat proponents of other systems. Royce, his brothers and other GJJ proponents had trained accordingly their entire lives, while their opponents might have had at the most 6 months to a year to prepare for the UFC.
The internationalization of the MMA movement closed that 50 year gap in knowledge very quickly. While BJJ fighters continue to do well in MMA, most of them feel the necessity to incorporate training from other systems into their training. The overwhelming dominance experienced by the BJJ fighters in early MMA history is clearly the peak.
So in a way, both sides of the style vs fighter debate are partially right. There are certain styles that will provide a better base for MMA (BJJ being one of them), but in the end; it is really the fighter, his heart, athleticism and his ability to do a variety of things well that will make the difference between winning and losing.
As far as judo being the most efficient system outside of BJJ, I dunno about that. I love judo, but it takes so long to get good at it. The learning curve is so steep that I find it hard to believe anyone could learn judo well enough in the short amount of time (say 2 years) to use it efficiently in MMA contests.
judo guy: "The biggest advantage Royce Gracie had in his earlier fights was that the Gracie System studied the approach to fighting different styles of opponents for over 50 years by the time Royce got in the ring [...] Most athletes train to beat athletes of their own discipline. The Gracie's trained to beat proponents of other systems."
That's my point. If you're asking which style is most successful against other styles, the fact that boxers train only against other boxers doesn't help make them effective against other kinds of fighters. Ergo, BJJ (in this example) IS superior.
Besides, unless your MA is a sport like boxing (or BJJ!), you *shouldn't* be training to fight only others of your own style! "I can defend myself against you, as long as you've only studied Tiger Claw Kung Fu!" I don't think so.
judo guy: "As far as judo being the most efficient system outside of BJJ, I dunno about that."
I didn't say that; I merely said I was training in judo, as that's the best that's available to me. And I think it's darn effective, too, though as I said, it's pretty rough for an old guy. I doubt I'll ever make it past white belt. But my eleven-year-old is doing great, and so are my younger boys.
Hi Spoxbox,
You stated in your last post:
"I didn't say that; I merely said I was training in judo, as that's the best that's available to me"
Actually you said,
"I can afford a few hours a week to train, so I need to focus my efforts on the most efficient fighting system I can find to take. And for me, that system is...
judo. But I wish it were BJJ."
Given the many similarities between judo and BJJ, the lesser availability of judo in most regions vs other martial arts and your post, I came to the conclusion that you were making the statement that judo is the most efficient outside of BJJ. Sorry for the misinterpretation of your thoughts.
The title of the thread is "The fighter, not the style--NOT!". While I agree that the early history of MMA suggests style: my point is that you are using evidence established over 10 years ago, to support a hypothesis that doesn't apply in current reality. Seeing that the elite rank of MMA fighters today are no longer dominated by BJJ practicioners and the statistical evidence suggested by fight records shows that style is much less of a difference than it was 10 years ago.
"You will never convince me that Royce Gracie was simply physically superior to his opponents. Physical superiority, in that case, had NOTHING to do with the outcome."
No one said it's about physical superiority. Royce was a better fighter than those guys at that time, meaning he had the skills that made him better equipped to beat them and the physical means to put them to use.
It's not that BJJ is a "better" style per se than boxing or "shootfighting", any more than wrestling was proven "better" than BJJ when Sak plowed through the Gracies. Nor was muay thai proven "better" than wrestling when Silva hammered Sak in fight after fight.
The better FIGHTER is going to be the one who is able to impose his techniques on his opponent, whatever those may be. Crocop has shown that pure kickboxing is enough if you can keep the fight standing. Coleman has shown that pure wrestling can go a long way. Royce showed that BJJ can get you a long way. If you can impose your game on your opponent, then it really doesn't matter which style you practice.
Basically any style can be used to defeat any other. It's up to the fighter to put it to use. Bustamante schooled Matt Lindland with BJJ and subbed him (twice). Matt Lindland completely tooled BJJ guy Vitale and dominated him for three straight rounds before finishing him. BJJ beat wrestling, then wrestling beat BJJ. What conclusion has to be drawn from that, if not that it's the fighter that wins a fight, not the style?
Shit, there is a post on the forum "Jacare speaks the truth" where Jacare's statements simplify this entire issue. He is also very correct.
MartialArtsfan,
Kimura and Maeda did do some early MMA, but the point is they were individuals who did it. The judo world wasn't moving in that direction. In fact, Kimura was estranged from the Kodokan because of his efforts to make a professional judo league. The entire Gracie System was designed to teach all of its students, an efficient way to fight other styles. Its an apples and oranges comparision in my view. I don't know enough about Oyama to comment on him.
Nice post by Spoxjox
MartialArtsFan, I have no idea why you are so fascinated with traditional martial arts. I took Tae Kwon Do for 6 years. I have a room full of trophies I won from point fighting. I used to think I was a tough guy because of this.
Then I got a wake up call when I got my ass handed to me when I decided to try boxing at my city's boxing club. Boxing is a far better stand-up martial art. At that point in time I would have also been creamed by any wrestler or BJJ guy because TKD trains very little grappling, and all of it is in-effecitve in real-life. Traditional martial arts are basically worthless in any kind of a realistic fight.
Everyone who has any kind of success in MMA cross-trains in multiple styles. CroCop didn't learn how to sprawl from kickboxing. He trains wrestling and BJJ as well as kickboxing. Even Yoshida has been training in kickboxing even though he still isn't very good at it.
judo guy: "You stated in your last post: [...] Actually you said, "[...] the most efficient fighting system I CAN FIND to take [...]" Sorry for the misinterpretation of your thoughts.
No, I'm sorry for stating it so unclearly. What I meant is, I can't find BJJ locally that I can take, so I "settle" for judo. Not to say that judo is "inferior" to BJJ, just that if all things were equal, BJJ would be my first choice.
As to your, Orcus', and others' comments: If we're talking about pro MMA fighting (which is what this forum is about, after all), then I must agree, style is secondary to the fighter. But I've noticed that many participants here are amateur practitioners. At that level, the average Joe in the street who takes his four hours a week of MA training and lives his life, I believe my comments to be completely valid, and my "proof" (such as it was) to be reasonable. If I'm talking to my brother about the "best" or "most effective" MA style to take for self defense and such, I'm not going to say, "It's all the same, just train hard." I think it's not all the same. That's where I'm coming from.
what we now call mma is just specific ma applying itsown principles. gjj did the same thing picking its opponents from a field of relative amteurs. if anyone does not think that research was not done on each fighter from the early UFCs, you are stupid. the problem is THEY were not prepared to deal with the consequences of the aftermath. meaning, wow, people don't want to learn bjj? they want to beat us? all of a sudden wrestlers and kick/boxers started to learn the game. then certain rules have to be modified. i personally support the no time limit, but i think royce/shamrock II would have turned out much different.
stevarino, I think the Gracies truly believed their style was superior. They wouldn't have invited Ken Shamrock otherwise. Shamrock was a Champion in Pancrase which wasn't all that far off from the UFC.
The sport evolved from there with people learning BJJ...and cross-training in multiple styles and becoming better fighters
MAF, if you are talking about old school TMAs and not McDojo TMAs....nobody trains TMAs like they did thousands of years ago.
Somebody who comes from a TMA school today is not going to learn the skills they need to be effective in a street fight or a MMA match
If you could somehow train under Mass Oyama today...I'm sure you could defend yourself in a street fight....but you still wouldn't be able to win at MMA
***The kickboxer -- well, he was a European champ*** No, kickboxer was former world champion from USA. European was European champion in Kyokushin karate and world champion in Savate. Both Shamrock and Gordeau has experience in some kinde od MMA maches.
pasted form my thread yesterday:
"Jacare was at our gym in Plano today for a seminar (no-gi) and it was a great success, not to mention a hell of a workout! Jacare has taught the best seminars I have attended, this being my second of his, and I felt like I came away with even more new info this time. Not to mention he spoke to us at the break about the evolution of MMA and BJJ's place in it.
He explained how comparing one style to another is silly, and how no one can claim their style is better than anothers'. Each style, whether it be striking or grappling, he explained, gives you the tools to win any fight. But to win every fight, you must know every type of combat training, to be well-rounded.
He also asked, "have you noticed if someone has a strong guard game, every time they train they pull guard immediately. Why, if you are at the top of that facet of the game, do you continue to work that primarily? You must focus and train on what you don't know, whether it be striking or grappling. BJJ, Muay Thai, independently, none of them are the answer." (paraphrased).
Interesting how our teachers who have roots deep in the early generations BJJ are the quickest to evolve, while many on these forums with far less knowledge of their primary fighting base argue endlessly on the comparisons between styles.
An excellent seminar as always, and a friendly, passionate person who enjoys life. Jacare will be teaching a gi seminar in Irving at Mohler's Jiu-Jitsu tomorrow. If you can go, please attend."
"Yeah sure. All you 6 month ju jitsu guys are going to go tearing through everyone. LOL."
That's an awfully negative statement on a thread filled with valid, postive arguements. If I wrote,
"Yeah, sure. All you 6 month insert style here guys are going to go tearing through everyone. LOL."
6 months in any training ain't gonna allow you to tear through EVERYONE. But most effective styles will give you a good base to have a chance to tear through SOMEONE. Why make this negative?