mma fighter gets reality check

[QUOTE=JetLi’sFearless;752831]Like Ive been saying, size/strengh and pure agressiveness/how violent you are is what really determines who wins in the fight, its almost all mental, and the rest msotly how you physiclaly look like not what uve been trinaing in the gym tha tmost liekly will go out in the fight anywaya s you try to survive ratehr than win in such an encounter.[/QUOTE]

DUMB

The smartest fighter wins, not the most violent.

You obviously dont train!

Of course violence, aggression, etc., will help you in a fight, but technique, mat time and sparring are more important than anything.

As far at the article goes, it’s very pointless in an MMA vs. TMA debat.

[QUOTE=Mega-Foot;762183]That’s because they can’t afford any of the many newer video game systems that have come out since Killer Instinct hit the market.

They’re all still playing NEO GEO.[/QUOTE]

that was pretty **** funny.

[QUOTE=Royal Dragon;762195]if the first is true, then he could not have been blindsided. a blindsided punch is not acting in self defense.

Reply]
Not really, if someone is charging in on you and you blind side them unexpectedly (especially if they are sure they have you), you ARE defending yourself.

we fight and my biorhythm,hormone levels, or whatever is off, I have a bad day, you have a good day-I could zig when I should’ve zagged, your finger could graze my eyeball-it’s done. Over

Reply]
Ummm sorry, but no. MMA/BJJ and the gracies have already proven Eye Gouges don’t work, and are not effective techniques. This is especially so when one is a TCMA practitioner, but not as true when they are BJJ practiioners.

Clearly, this article only goes to show that striking arts are superior to ground fighting arts.

Reply]
I could also prove that one guy had really good striking skills, and the other had relly bad striking skills.

Wrestling, even at top-tier professional levels, does not train a man to face real-world violence.

Reply]
No, they don’t, HOWEVER competition fighters are better prepared for real violence than those who just train the corner dojo, or do nothing at all.

I’m willing to bet, 10:1, that the man O’Haire was fighting had some kind of traditional Chinese training.

Naww, O’hair is just a crappy striker that met a good striker.[/QUOTE]

Are you honestly unable to figure out the quote function?

The smartest fighter wins, not the most violent.

Ah, actually he had some good points.

The will to do violence can be a leading key to winning a fight. Being trained, clever or what you call smart can go out the window with a person who is psychologically at that place and has the experiance.

[QUOTE=Black Jack II;762697]Ah, actually he had some good points.

The will to do violence can be a leading key to winning a fight. Being trained, clever or what you call smart can go out the window with a person who is psychologically at that place and has the experiance.[/QUOTE]

He is saying that violence,aggression,strength,etc., are more important in a fight than technique.

I agree that a HUGE part of fighting is mental. IMO the most important part of figthing is learning to stay calm in any situation. You dont have to be “violent” as you put it, in order to win fights. You have to have the timing to pull off your technique. This comes with daily experience in training with resisting opponents.

You can’t be a technical fighter without experience fighting resisting opponents. So when I wright the word “technique,” from now on assume that I include experience in the application against resisting opponents a part of that.

One of my training partners recentely got into a fight at a local bar. Some guy threw two punches at him and missed. My friend then arm dragged him, took his back and put him unconcious with a standing rear naked choke in about 3 seconds.

This is a good example of the importance of “technique.”

[QUOTE=neilhytholt;753018]I don’t go to schools anymore. Not much point --[/QUOTE]

I don’t think you’ve ever gone to a school other than the obedience school you flunked out of.