Martial Arts/MMA Thread

Wutang said:
If self-defense is the main objective I think learning how to use a weapon would be a way more efficient use of your time as well as just more effective.
Click to expand...
The problem with that is weapons (especially guns) are illegal for the majority of people in many parts of the world.

Also guns are not so useful if you are too close to someone because they can hit you before you have a chance to grab your gun and pull the trigger. Knives are better for ultra close range.

Also there are certain places (nightclubs, shopping centres etc) where they do not allow people to enter with weapons.

Also there is the legal concept of excessive force. Oftentimes if you get in an altercation with an unarmed person and you use a weapon you can end up doing jail time for excessive force, etc.

Guns and other weapons are good but they also have their limitations. If you own a gun I would still recommend learning a martial art (or multiple) in addition. Different tools for different situations.
 
Australia Sucks said:
Also there are certain places (nightclubs, shopping centres etc) where they do not allow people to enter with weapons.
Click to expand...
To be fair prevention is better than defence. If someone wants to avoid pointless altercations which put their life at risk avoiding bars and nightclubs is a no-brainer. Why worry about how to defend yourself in an environment which you don't need to be in at all. What are you going to miss out on - loose women and damage to your eardrums and liver.
 
FrancisK said:
What happened?
Click to expand...
Nothing crazy. I just hit or hyperextended a finger during wrestling class and seemingly did some light tissue damage to it. Which is taking many months to recover from. I’m not 18 any more and I don’t want a minor injury to become something chronic because I ignored it.
 
OrthoSerb said:
To be fair prevention is better than defence. If someone wants to avoid pointless altercations which put their life at risk avoiding bars and nightclubs is a no-brainer. Why worry about how to defend yourself in an environment which you don't need to be in at all. What are you going to miss out on - loose women and damage to your eardrums and liver.
Click to expand...
I largely agree with what you are saying but I was just pointing out the limitations of weapons. They are good but they are not a solution to every problem/situation.
 
Australia Sucks said:
I largely agree with what you are saying but I was just pointing out the limitations of weapons. They are good but they are not a solution to every problem/situation.
Click to expand...
I agree, steering clear of unnecessary danger doesn't mean you don't have to be able to defend yourself from unavoidable danger.
 
Australia Sucks said:
Nothing crazy. I just hit or hyperextended a finger during wrestling class and seemingly did some light tissue damage to it. Which is taking many months to recover from. I’m not 18 any more and I don’t want a minor injury to become something chronic because I ignored it.
Click to expand...

Got it, yea wrestling you develop all kinds of weird injuries I don't think there was a single guy in high school or college on my team that didn't have a "how the hell did that even happen" small lingering forever injury. A finger nothing you can do but give it time, no point in doing anything outside the box for a finger. Maybe some tissue supporting supplements but everyone reacts differently to that stuff, strength and stabilize the tendons/tissue around it, things like that you already know of I'm sure.
 
UFC is a joke these days, neither a legit sporting competition nor an entertaining bloodsport other than a fight here and there. They are actually trying to gaslight their audience into thinking jokers like Paddy Pimblett are the world's most elite fighters. The guy's competent don't get me wrong, he's in decent shape and can throw punches, kicks and wrestle, but he is not at all a killer. The only decent fighters are the champs and maybe 1-2 contenders in each division, and they never fight!
 
Iakobos said:
UFC is a joke these days, neither a legit sporting competition nor an entertaining bloodsport other than a fight here and there. They are actually trying to gaslight their audience into thinking jokers like Paddy Pimblett are the world's most elite fighters. The guy's competent don't get me wrong, he's in decent shape and can throw punches, kicks and wrestle, but he is not at all a killer. The only decent fighters are the champs and maybe 1-2 contenders in each division, and they never fight!
Click to expand...
I don't watch much these days. What do you think of Karate Combat, I'm thinking it's better.
 
Iakobos said:
UFC is a joke these days, neither a legit sporting competition nor an entertaining bloodsport other than a fight here and there. They are actually trying to gaslight their audience into thinking jokers like Paddy Pimblett are the world's most elite fighters. The guy's competent don't get me wrong, he's in decent shape and can throw punches, kicks and wrestle, but he is not at all a killer. The only decent fighters are the champs and maybe 1-2 contenders in each division, and they never fight!
Click to expand...
Conor was definitely entertaining, but his and the UFC's increasing popularity led to an increased emphasis on personality rather than combat. It can't be denied however that they were entertainment-focused from pretty early on. In the mid-2000s they launched The Ultimate Fighter, a reality show in the style of Survivor. You could tell actual fighters like Nick Diaz and Joe Lauzon hated taking part but did it to further their careers. The "fighters" who enjoyed "going Hollywood" never really amounted to much. The setup was the guys basically all had to live together in a confined location like all the trashy reality shows from back then, and then there was a fight in the Octagon every episode. The show could be silly but it actually did work in getting people interested in MMA/UFC. In one of the earlier seasons, I remember Dana would walk in wearing a huge Christian cross necklace. How things change...
 
FrostBITE said:
Conor was definitely entertaining, but his and the UFC's increasing popularity led to an increased emphasis on personality rather than combat. It can't be denied however that they were entertainment-focused from pretty early on. In the mid-2000s they launched The Ultimate Fighter, a reality show in the style of Survivor. You could tell actual fighters like Nick Diaz and Joe Lauzon hated taking part but did it to further their careers. The "fighters" who enjoyed "going Hollywood" never really amounted to much. The setup was the guys basically all had to live together in a confined location like all the trashy reality shows from back then, and then there was a fight in the Octagon every episode. The show could be silly but it actually did work in getting people interested in MMA/UFC. In one of the earlier seasons, I remember Dana would walk in wearing a huge Christian cross necklace. How things change...
Click to expand...

The other ramification of Conor is that he became bigger than the UFC and the UFC hated losing control of him so now they only promote/push fighters who are company men (paddy/sean o'malley) and shaft the ones who don't play ball (Ngannou prime example). Combined with the low pay for a bodybreaking career means they won't attract any real talent so they just have to have their commentators hype up their compliant journeymen.
 
Combat sports always been built around big personalities. Boxing is the same way. Klitschko Brothers were dominating but not ever got into super stardom the same way people like Mike Tyson or Mayweather did. It's not just cause their styles isn't flashy because Mayweather doesn't have a flashy style either but they just didn't have that star power/personality since they are quiet unassuming guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top