Are there actually any successful high-level MMA competitors that are members on this forum? Just curious.
MMA is a sport, not a methodology. When someone says they “train in MMA”, that can mean a whole lot of different things. My neighbor owns a cross-fit gym and says she “trains in kickboxing” and often touts her ability to defend herself. What she actually does is very similar to Tae-bo with a little bit of nontechnical pad work thrown in. I met a cop awhile back who told me he trains in BJJ and invited me to stop by the school and I did. They devoted very little time to working from a standing position due to the “dangers and the liability involved” and gave absolutely no consideration to strike defense since they didn’t allow it. The instructor was actually a successful MMA fighter in the 1990’s and legitimate Rickson Gracie black belt, yet this is what he was teaching his students(including several LEO’s) who probably think they have a high level of self-defense preparedness.
When someone makes a distinction between sport and self-defense, it doesn’t become a this or that proposition, but that is often the perception. Pointing out potential limitations of someone who trains only according to a sport-based model doesn’t mean they are advocating for dismissing it entirely and resorting to relying solely on theoretical eye pokes and groin kicks.
My focus is self-defense although I do draw heavily from various combat sports since they offer testing and trial against fully resisting, uncooperative opponents and specific elements have been developed to a very high degree in the various combat sports, but understand that consideration of the different context will often require changes and you may decide it’s prudent to only draw upon certain specific elements.
Two professional MMA fighters meeting in the cage have symmetric goals and mindset. They both want to win the match according to the designated rules and won’t devote training time to things that won’t help them meet that goal. Sport methodology is often unrealistic due to it taking the asymmetrical goal of practical self-defense into the symmetrical goal of winning a match between two consenting competitors engaged in a contest that has a prearranged format of which they know all the rules and whom they are fighting. The start, tempo and conclusion are very artificial and don’t really have much in common with most violent assaults. That doesn’t mean a pro-fighter will be ill-prepared, just that that he himself could be much better prepared(judged against himself) for a much broader range of possible scenarios. Plus, an armed citizen with a good understanding of the various aspects of self-defense will see and have different and better options available to them(getting into integrated skills) compared to an MMA who isn’t and is effectively limited.
If kicks and stomps on a downed opponent are prohibited in the rules, then it doesn’t make much sense for an MMA fighter to become very adept at dumping or creating separation and positioning on a downed opponent to set up kicking or stomping them from a standing position, but we know that’s very effective from the Pride years, not to mention the countless street altercations we see caught on video. Having those skills gives you greater options for finishing a fight while staying mobile, which is generally a good thing while out and about. That’s why “if we don’t see it in the cage, it doesn’t work” is so shortsighted. In terms of the much ridiculed eye gouge, it’s just another option/tool you can (generally have to)use in conjunction with other techniques, but still a very good one in many circumstances. And they seem pretty effective to me based on the MMA guys that I’ve seen utilizing them by slightly modifying and piggybacking on what they already do despite “not being to train them” directly.
All self-defense training involves a high degree of theory and that is true no matter how pressure-tested you
believe your methods are or how realistic you may think your particular simulations may be, although I do think you can make reasonable conclusions if you take that into account, which many seem like they do not.
Originally Posted by Mister X
