Judo and MMA

I found interesting article in judokaquaterly website about judo, mma.
http://judokaquarterly.com/2015/05/guilty-pleasures-judo-mma-and-ronda/

I found there very nice quotes:

In March, EJU president Sergey Soloveychick explained to the BBC why the EJU disapproved of the UFC: “MMA is not a sport, it is some kind of show…Sport should have some human values and sports should help society develop human values…It’s not good if your opponent is on his stomach and you sit on him and beat his head. It’s not good for the education of the young generation, so we don’t like to promote this kind of organization during our competition.”

Very nice conclusion:
If we are to follow the precepts of Kano who emphasized that judo is about personal cultivation leading one to become a better member of society (yes folks, that is the ultimate aim of “jitakyoei”) then we should look away. The “ground and pound” is not the height of civilization. It is far closer to the gladiator ring than the Olympic rings. It is barbarity and yet we still watch. In Rousey’s book she goes into a graphic explanation of how it feels to pop an opponent’s elbow socket. She glibly remarks, “Its like ripping the leg off a Thanksgiving turkey.” Her quote reminds me of something Mike Tyson once said: “I try to catch them right on the tip of his nose, because I try to punch the bone into the brain.” These are disturbing images, especially if we are to view either professional boxing or MMA as a sport. In light of this, the fact that Dana White, president of the UFC, cites Ronda Rousey as a role model for children in the foreword to her book is unsettling.
My sensei Yonezuka Yoshisada fought against boxers and wrestlers when he first came to the United States. He did it for money as he struggled to make ends meet while trying to establish his dojo in the early 1960’s. Despite this experience, he had this say about MMA, “All sports have some beauty in their own execution of technique; however I feel that today’s UFC and MMA fights are missing this kind of beauty.” (Martial Arts Masters Magazine, Summer 2010, p. 48)
Perhaps, as judoka, we should re-examine our relationship with our sport and what we hope to contribute towards it as well what we get out of it. Taking this into consideration, watching and supporting MMA or the UFC may run counter to our own personal development and that of judo. Watching someone continuing to perform an armbar beyond the point of no return should be upsetting and we should want to look away. If we don’t, or if we can’t, than maybe we have already lost that part of our humanity that Kano sought to develop through the practice of judo in the first place.

Problem is the people in MMA can't be told anything, they always know it all. I don’t hate MMA myself, well parts of it. Admittedly It did give the Martial Arts a kick in the ass in the 1990’s to show what worked and didn’t work. I just don’t like all the disrespect in the sport and the amount of the shitty attitudes I see in it, it has given the Martial Arts a black eye. It has its merits but in a sense Judo doesn’t "love" it back even if MMA loves Judo, so the points above that were written is correct.

Judo is very hard on the body and takes a lot longer to be good at than other martial arts I know. I had a 4th degree black belt in another system and this is easily the hardest thing I have done and my former system was tough. But I have seen better kickboxing/Jduo matches in the 1980’s then some of the competition in MMA, it’s horrible 80% of the time and all fights look the same. So many guys are into that it’s leveled the playing field. It’s also spawned a lot of YouTube martial artists commenting on all kinds of things in the martial arts that they don’t know shit about. Look at some comments everytime a video is posted about MMA by guys that think BJJ and Muai Thai are the only Martial Arts out there.

Once in awhile have MMA guys coming in thinking they will learn a couple Judo throws to mix into their list of techniques because our school has a couple guys that want to compete in MMA. It never works out for them because they are too selfish and don’t stay around long enough to learn it correctly, it takes time. Consequently they don't come to the Judo class once they realize they can't master a seionage in two classes. Case in point over the summer I was at a Judo school near the state capital and these guys are good Judoka. They had an MMA fighter come in thinking he was going to get something off on these guys, guess what it didn’t happen. He got his ass handed to him as the GI is the great neutralizer and he had no game. It seems people don’t come for Judo anymore, they all want to take parts of it for something else which never works out because they are never there long enough to learn it correctly. MMA has its place, some of the techniques are decent for the street. But like stated it still is a sport and has holes also. Sorry for the long rant but I understand why people feel as they do about MMA and it's a pet peeve of mine.

With regard to the mma, no good can come from kicking someone in the head as hard as possible.
I think televised mma is on the decline and that's a good thing.

Today I recived link to french interview with famous japanese judoka Shozo Fujii (four time World champion). He speaks about MMA too. Little bit diferent view.

http://www.alljudo.net/actualite-judo-2692-shozo-fujii-----le-judo--c-est-la-vie-ou-la-mort.html

Original french text:
Les nouvelles règles, et notamment l'interdiction des saisies aux jambes, sont-elles de votre point de vue une bonne chose ?
Kata-guruma, kuchiki-daoshi, morote-gari... toutes ces techniques sont inscrites dans le Gokyo. Elles n'ont pas été inventées par hasard et elles ne sont pas des sous-techniques, elles sont aussi pures que les autres. Les enlever, c'est n'importe quoi. Une personne connaissant l'histoire du judo, n'aurait jamais eu l'idée de supprimer kata-guruma. Notre rôle c'est de conserver notre patrimoine, pas de le détruire. Si l'on se place dans la vision de Jigoro Kano qui a puisé les techniques de judo dans les différentes techniques de jujitsu, les seuls éléments qui peuvent être retirés sont ceux qui présentent une menace pour la sécurité des combattants, c'est tout.

Cela permet tout de même de rendre le judo plus agréable à regarder ?
Le judo est un sport de combat, l'esthétique n'est pas prioritaire. Dès lors que l'on peut saisir le tissu c'est du judo et ce n'est pas de la lutte. Si dans la tenue du judoka il y a un pantalon, c'est pour qu'on puisse le saisir. Si on ne peut plus le saisir, il faut enlever le pantalon, il ne sert à rien. Dans ma carrière j'ai fait des combats contre des lutteurs, je me suis adapté et j'ai gagné grâce au judo.

Que pensez-vous du MMA ?
Le MMA a une grande force par rapport au judo, c'est l'esprit du combat, l'esprit martial. Le MMA cultive cet esprit, alors que nous nous sommes en train de l'abandonner. Si le MMA parvient à garantir la sécurité de ses combattants et s'il se dote d'une philosophie alors le judo sera en grand danger. Nous avons une histoire, une culture, une tradition de combat que nous ne devons pas lâcher, mais c'est malheureusement ce qui est en train de se passer.

Google translation to english:
The new rules, including a ban on foreclosures legs, are they from your point of view a good thing?
Kata guruma, kuchiki-Daoshi, morote gari ... all these techniques are listed in the Gokyo. They have not been invented by accident and they are not sub-techniques, they are as pure as the others. Remove them is anything. A person familiar with the history of judo, would never have had the idea of ​​removing kata guruma. Our role is to preserve our heritage, not destroy it. If we place ourselves in the vision of Jigoro Kano who drew judo techniques in the various techniques of jujitsu, the only elements that can be removed are those that pose a threat to the safety of fighters, that's all.

This still allows to make judo more enjoyable to watch?
Judo is a martial art, aesthetics is not a priority. Once we can grasp tissue is judo, and this is not the fight. While in the holding of judoka there pants is for us to grasp it. If we can not enter, remove the pants, it is useless. In my career I made fighting against wrestlers, I adapted and I gained through judo.

What do you think of MMA?
MMA has great strength compared to judo, is the spirit of the fight, the martial spirit. MMA cultivates this spirit, as we are now abandoned. If MMA is able to ensure the security of its fighters and if he adopts a philosophy while judo will be in great danger. We have a history, a culture, a tradition that battle we must not let go, but it is unfortunately what is happening.

Agree 100%. The problem is mma does not provide for the safety of its competitors. On the contrary, it seems to encourage extreme violence amongst its fighters.
Judo, hard fought, still allows for, and actually demands, mutual benefit and welfare. Respect your opponent, try your very best to defeat him, but don't try to seriously maim or injure him..

I agree that if Ronda Rousey said that (seriously) she is not being a good role model . However to judge all of MMA by the attitudes of individuals is not fair - lets see how it develops. I'm sure some MMA people are honorable just as we know some Judoka can be idiots. I agree though. on the whole there seems to be a culture of machismo in mma which is not good - but that may change as it matures. I dont think most tennis players think they are making a contribution to society either - I think Judo (and other martial arts)  is quite special in that regard. Judo was informed by an ancient culture - lets hope some of it rubs off on MMA via Judo practioners participating in it. I think alientaing young Judoka (or old!) who want to give it a go is counter productive.

The key questions to be asked are; "Is MMA entertainment?" and "Are people getting hurt in MMA?"

We can debate about the first. My view is that MMA currently is more about the entertainment than about anything else.

or me the more problematic question is the second one. To it I must answer in affirmative. If you get repeatedly hit in the head you sustain permanent damage. That is the reason they have headgear in amateur boxing and have banned professional boxing in many countries. The world is not back and whit but grey. MMA is not sports as it does not care about the security of the fighters.

OK people love danger. Some people love violence. There is money to be made to show danger and violence. There is more money to be made if you tweak a bit and publicize fights imlying the fighters hate each other. There is even more money to be made if you fake a little ....

Now here's some MMA many of us can get behind ...

All we need now is a little mud.

What the hell, I'll jump in.  Take this as a view from a non-judoka, non-MMA bloke who has puddled in jujutsu (and a bit of judo in my time).  I don't go out of my way to watch MMA but I have championed sport jujutsu - light contact MMA, I guess - for a couple of decades.

98%+ of jujutsu is people performing highly choreographed techniques on a compliant uke.  Their instructors tell me they cannot compete in light-contact competition because their techniques are too deadly.  MMA has shown us that most of jujutsu's deadly techniques don't work in a chaotic, adrenaline-filled environment.  It also shows us that to be able to fight, one must practice fighting a lot.  It is not enough to simply walk through 'moves'; one must try to apply them in fighting.  This has been a reality check for many martial arts and the multitudes who do not like their cotton-wool world challenged deflect that reality and, instead, point to the barbarity and lack of sportsmanship on display in the octagon.  

If your job is to teach people to fight in the name of self defence, then you are failing them if you do not acknowledge the brutality, violence and lack of respect that is part of fighting.

MMA is also an activity that is divorced from religion, philosophy, Olympic ideals and the like.  It is simply about becoming the winning fighter.  Measuring it with Kano's ideals or the etiquette of cricket is unreasonable.  The fighters are superbly fit, very skilled, very experienced and have enormous fighting spirit.  And they play by their rules.  Moreover, beating another person is invariably about cracking their resolve and fighters through the centuries have ever tried to get inside their opponents' head by what ever means.  Intimidation and insults have always been a part of fighting.

Finally, MMA fighters enter the octagon willingly. Rules are in place to protect them from some attacks and a referee is there to protect a fighter who becomes hurt.  However, that probably factors little in the minds of the fighters; they accept the challenge of a person in front of them, the possibility of damage, and misery of defeat.  All that is the price of the victor's glory.

As I prefaced, I am not a MMA fan.  I don't like the brutality.  I like to think I prepare my pupils for brutality but that sits on a continuum of reasonable responses in self defence.  I respect MMA athletes' warrior spirit and I appreciate that they are battle-testing many techniques and tactics in their environment.  I am also aware that their environment is not a 100% fit with the environment my club works for.  Why, for example, does UFC ban groin kicks but allow head kicks?  Is head damage somehow less of an issue than testicular damage?  We allow controlled groin strikes (amongst other 'illegal' stuff) and that completely changes how we fight.  Consider how effective the front clinch, pulling guard or cross-mounting is with groin strikes. Attacking the groin might seem barbaric to a MMA fighter but it is part of the reality of my club's self defence focus.

So, MMA is a sport with its own techniques, tactics, rules and culture.  I think it is best to take it for what it is and learn what we need to from it.

DougNZ wrote:Why, for example, does UFC ban groin kicks but allow head kicks?  Is head damage somehow less of an issue than testicular damage?  We allow controlled groin strikes (amongst other 'illegal' stuff) and that completely changes how we fight.  Consider how effective the front clinch, pulling guard or cross-mounting is with groin strikes. Attacking the groin might seem barbaric to a MMA fighter but it is part of the reality of my club's self defence focus.

Should we pay homage to the Old Judo Forum and all post long, rambling arguments about how we "knew a guy who was a cop for forty-eleven years and HE said that groin strikes were ineffective in a real fight."

Groin strikes?  Heck ... BITING. Ear rips.  What do people think ryogan tsuki is all about ... homage to Leonard Nimoy?

Hmmm ... we could move on to the the 16 foot rule ... or is it 21 feet.

Yeah, let's see how many posts we can generate on the subject of a REAL FIGHT ...






... or not.

BillC wrote:
Yeah, let's see how many posts we can generate on the subject of a REAL FIGHT ...

Umm, not my point at all, Bill. More an emphasis that MMA fights within rules, though the rules they chose to promote a fighter's safety are not necessarily consistent. Also, that MMA has been helpful for testing a bunch of techniques, though the environment they are tested in is not a 100% fit for many other arts / sports.

Take, for example, stats on throws in MMA and compare them to stats on throws at world-level judo. Seoi nage ranks much higher in judo than MMA. Having slid down a bare, sweaty arm and looked up helplessly at a fighter standing over me, I understand why. Ko soto gake ranks highly in MMA but not in judo. Why? Ko soto gake works well from a tight front clinch (which is used to reduce strikes landing) but judoka rarely work in such a position from such a distance. As I said, environment and context.

DougNZ wrote:

BillC wrote:
Yeah, let's see how many posts we can generate on the subject of a REAL FIGHT ...

Umm, not my point at all, Bill ... etc.

Sorry, I think your sarcasm detector is not working today, or maybe your memories of some of the more ... interesting ... discussions on the old Forum have faded. Either way, a few hard ukemi might knock the connectors back into place

Cheers.

Bill

Gus wrote:I agree that if Ronda Rousey said that (seriously) she is not being a good role model . However to judge all of MMA by the attitudes of individuals is not fair - lets see how it develops. I'm sure some MMA people are honorable just as we know some Judoka can be idiots. I agree though. on the whole there seems to be a culture of machismo in mma which is not good - but that may change as it matures. I dont think most tennis players think they are making a contribution to society either - I think Judo (and other martial arts)  is quite special in that regard. Judo was informed by an ancient culture - lets hope some of it rubs off on MMA via Judo practioners participating in it. I think alientaing young Judoka (or old!) who want to give it a go is counter productive.

It's too late there is too much bad blood and bad attitudes. It's already out of control.

finarashi wrote:The key questions to be asked are; "Is MMA entertainment?" and "Are people getting hurt in MMA?"

We can debate about the first. My view is that MMA currently is more about the entertainment than about anything else.

or me the more problematic question is  the second one. To it I must answer in affirmative. If you get repeatedly hit in the head you sustain permanent damage. That is the reason they have headgear in amateur boxing and have banned professional boxing in many countries.  The world is not back and whit but grey. MMA is not sports as it does not care about the security of the fighters.

OK people love danger. Some people love violence. There is money to be made to show danger and violence. There is more money to be made if you tweak a bit and publicize fights imlying the fighters hate each other. There is even more money to be made if you fake a little ....

MMA is entertainment to the same extent that ALL professional sports are entertainment. They will probably never eliminate fighting in NHL Hockey because the organization believes that on the one hand, fans would not tolerate the kind of harsh penalties that would actually serve as a deterrent (ie. disqualify a whole team and end a game early) and on the other hand recognize that a significant proportion of their market actually enjoys and endorses the violence. Likewise MMA organizations like UFC and others will do whatever they think will put the most butts in seats, generate the most Pay-per-view and ad revenue and sell the most merchandise. UFC started as a commercial venture to help launch the Gracies in the USA and continued because other investors saw an ongoing opportunity to make money.

I was bemused to hear Teddy Riner state that he would not participate in MMA because it ha no moral code. First off, why would it need one? Does cycling have a moral code? Not much of one if the rampant doping is any indication. Does football (AKA soccer) have a moral code? Again not much of one if FILA corruption and ridiculous diving for penalties are any indication. It's easy for Teddy to "rise above" MMA's darker aspects, floating as he is on top of millions of euros worth of endorsement deals. Judo is a huge ongoing cash cow for him so long as he's winning and he's not going to jeopardise his long-term marketability in the French sport-media world with what would inevitably be a short-lived term in MMA that probably wouldn't generate the same money as one Adidas contract.
http://en.mediamass.net/people/teddy-riner/highest-paid.html
One has to suspect Teddy of being a wee bit disingenuous when he decries the UFC.
Ronda Rousey on the other hand was reduced to tending bar (not that there's anything wrong with that) after she called a halt to her Olympic run. Funny how one's "morals" sometimes seem to run with, rather than against the financial math.

As for danger, stoppages in UFC are often faster than in pro-boxing. There's no 8-count. If you can't defend at any moment, you're out. Having watched on and off since the 1990's, I think the sport (yes it's a sport) has evolved a lot and is much safer than it's blood-soaked marketing would imply. That said, it does seem to attract an unsavory element, and I do regret that.

My favorites as a fan have always been the gentlemen of MMA. The Randy Coutures and George Saint-Pierres of this world. But like in "Rasslin" what is good is a 'face' without a 'heel' to contrast him with. At the end of the day, economics will drive where this sport goes, for good or for ill. The saving grace is profits are not completely mutually-exclusive of safety and good sportsmanship.