PDA

View Full Version : How would Bruce Lee have fared in the UFC?


A_C_Slater
08-18-2005, 11:31 PM

Luzion
08-18-2005, 11:54 PM
Are you talking about if he was still alive today, or if he fought in the UFC at his physically most fit period of his life?

JoshuaD
08-18-2005, 11:55 PM
If the UFC is done by weight classes I think Bruce Lee would own his division.

Rev. Good Will
08-18-2005, 11:56 PM
BL in his prime would have pwned all. He was the one who first said fighters should crosstrain different styles

A_C_Slater
08-18-2005, 11:59 PM
In his prime and weight division of course.

I must note that Bruce Lee was able to do 100 push-ups on his index fingers

KaneKungFu123
08-19-2005, 12:00 AM
how much did he weigh? like 150lb?

[ QUOTE ]
In his prime and weight division of course.

I must note that Bruce Lee was able to do 100 push-ups on his index fingers

[/ QUOTE ]

Luzion
08-19-2005, 12:02 AM
[ QUOTE ]
In his prime and weight division of course.

I must note that Bruce Lee was able to do 100 push-ups on his index fingers

[/ QUOTE ]

In his prime and in his weight division he would dominate I believe... I dont think he would dominate at all if he fought todays top fighters in Pride and UFC now though. Martial Arts and ideas on training and fighting have gone a long way since he was around...He would be at a disadvantage if the fight got to the floor purely on his smaller size and weight. I sure wouldve loved to see him side kick someone out of the ring in Pride though... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Inthacup
08-19-2005, 12:05 AM
Are we talking old UFC or present-day UFC?

A_C_Slater
08-19-2005, 12:15 AM
present-day and he adapted by getting the requisite training (ground game work,) etc.

touchfaith
08-19-2005, 12:20 AM
He's only fighting one guy at a time right?

I'll take Bruce, in all weight classes. Easy money.

08-19-2005, 12:25 AM
Chuck Liddell would have knocked him out in first round. I doubt Bruce had a good chin. One punch and he's hurt at the very least.

08-19-2005, 12:27 AM
Wait a second, has anyone actually seen Bruce Lee in a real fight ? Not one that was staged in a movie ? If so, I'd like to see it.

KDawgCometh
08-19-2005, 12:34 AM
I think he would've been a slightly winning fighter in teh UFC or PRIDE at his weight class. He would've been in the 155 class and I don't think that he could withstand the kicks of Masato, the grappling of Genki Sudo or BJ Penn. If Bruce moved up to some of the higher weight classes I really can't see how he'd be more then a mid card fighter. Yes he was fast, but I can't see how a Kung-Fu stylist could handle being on their back and having their arm or ankle being bent badly in a submission. If he was to go all the way up to the heavyweight, he'd just be fodder. Try to imagine him being in a fight with CroCop, it wouldn't be pretty. CroCop has broken many an eye socket with one of his punches. Bob Sapp still has vision problems from their K-1 fight where he had his eye socket badly broken from just one punch

Luzion
08-19-2005, 12:45 AM
Uhhh... you do realize that Bruce Lee is considered a big influence on MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) right?

He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together. His side kicks came from Japanese fighting arts. His fight stance is a blend of western boxing and fencing. Close combat he used hand trapping from Wing Chung. In his book Tao of Jeet Kune Do, there is extensive diagrams of Jujitsu, Aikido/Aikijitsu, wrestling, etc... He was interested in all forms of fighting; not just striking...

Also its not like Bruce Lee couldnt hit hard. He could hit as hard as professional boxers, and videos of him side kicking people or that 300lb heavy bag would amaze you...

I agree he would still be at a disadvantage on the floor because of his weight and size though...

KDawgCometh
08-19-2005, 12:49 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Uhhh... you do realize that Bruce Lee is considered a big influence on MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) right?

He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together. His side kicks came from Japanese fighting arts. His fight stance is a blend of western boxing and fencing. Close combat he used hand trapping from Wing Chung. In his book Tao of Jeet Kune Do, there is extensive diagrams of Jujitsu, Aikido/Aikijitsu, wrestling, etc... He was interested in all forms of fighting; not just striking...

[/ QUOTE ]


I know that he was Antonio Inoki, Akira Maeda, Volk Han, and Masa Funaki also have been massive influences in modern MMA. I know that JeetKunDo has grappling movements in it, but outside of Maurice Smith and Mirko CroCop, no MMA fighter who was originally a striker has done well in MMA(Chuck Liddell has college wrestling experience, which is pretty high level of wrestling), and that is a fact that can't be refuted

Rev. Good Will
08-19-2005, 12:52 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Uhhh... you do realize that Bruce Lee is considered a big influence on MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) right?

He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together. His side kicks came from Japanese fighting arts. His fight stance is a blend of western boxing and fencing. Close combat he used hand trapping from Wing Chung. In his book Tao of Jeet Kune Do, there is extensive diagrams of Jujitsu, Aikido/Aikijitsu, wrestling, etc... He was interested in all forms of fighting; not just striking...

[/ QUOTE ]


I know that he was Antonio Inoki, Akira Maeda, Volk Han, and Masa Funaki also have been massive influences in modern MMA. I know that JeetKunDo has grappling movements in it, but outside of Maurice Smith and Mirko CroCop, no MMA fighter who was originally a striker has done well in MMA(Chuck Liddell has college wrestling experience, which is pretty high level of wrestling), and that is a fact that can't be refuted

[/ QUOTE ]

given BL philosophy on fighting, I don't see why he would train more in his weak areas before a fight. he was way ahead of his time with ideas he had.

KDawgCometh
08-19-2005, 12:56 AM
[ QUOTE ]
given BL philosophy on fighting, I don't see why he would train more in his weak areas before a fight. he was way ahead of his time with ideas he had.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is true, but there is one thing that he certianly wouldn't have been able to overcome, which was his size disadvantage. I really think that he would've only have been good in the 155 weight class, anything higher and he would have serious problems against larger competition and against olympic level wrestlers that have heavy hands when punching

Jeff W
08-19-2005, 01:12 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I know that JeetKunDo has grappling movements in it, but outside of Maurice Smith and Mirko CroCop, no MMA fighter who was originally a striker has done well in MMA(Chuck Liddell has college wrestling experience, which is pretty high level of wrestling), and that is a fact that can't be refuted

[/ QUOTE ]

Vanderlei Silva?

I bet a lot of strikers who would dominate in MMA enter into professional boxing instead. Grapplers have fewer professional options, so we see a pre-dominance of grapplers in MMA.

jokerthief
08-19-2005, 01:31 AM
If Bruce Lee would have fought with the style and training he had when he died, then he would have been owned. If he trained in modern jujitsu and striking techniques then maybe he would have stood a chance. It really depends if he could take a punch or not. You really don't see too many good fighters with his build though, I doubt he weighed over 140. The more I think about it I think he would have gotten his ass kicked no matter what.

Luzion
08-19-2005, 01:41 AM
Jokerthief, thats a hilarious avatar. What fight was it?

jokerthief
08-19-2005, 01:44 AM
I don't know. I just stumbled across the gif one day. My best guess is that it's an amatuer fight though. I mean, jumping up on the ropes too retarted for a pro fight.

Blarg
08-19-2005, 02:06 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Chuck Liddell would have knocked him out in first round. I doubt Bruce had a good chin. One punch and he's hurt at the very least.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lee's hands were the best part of his arsenal by far. His was not a body meant to take punishment, but if it's coming down to upright punching, Lee would have a huge advantage over most people.

Blarg
08-19-2005, 02:10 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I think he would've been a slightly winning fighter in teh UFC or PRIDE at his weight class. He would've been in the 155 class and I don't think that he could withstand the kicks of Masato, the grappling of Genki Sudo or BJ Penn. If Bruce moved up to some of the higher weight classes I really can't see how he'd be more then a mid card fighter. Yes he was fast, but I can't see how a Kung-Fu stylist could handle being on their back and having their arm or ankle being bent badly in a submission. If he was to go all the way up to the heavyweight, he'd just be fodder. Try to imagine him being in a fight with CroCop, it wouldn't be pretty. CroCop has broken many an eye socket with one of his punches. Bob Sapp still has vision problems from their K-1 fight where he had his eye socket badly broken from just one punch

[/ QUOTE ]

Bruce's punches were extremely hard, and he'd been training them hard for almost 20 years by the time he died. Bruce would hold his own against even an outstanding puncher. It's in the groundwork that he'd suffer, although he was cross-training long before most martial artists did.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 02:15 AM
If we just teleport him to today from his prime and throw him in the ring tomorrow at 155, he's getting torched by top fighters and a lot of shittier ones who are good wrestlers. If we give him a few years to train, who knows, but I imagine he'd be good at 155 or 140, whatever he'd fight at.

touchfaith
08-19-2005, 02:17 AM
I like how everone assumes Bruce is going to lay on the ground and wait for someone to come wrestle him.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 02:18 AM
He'd get taken down.

SackUp
08-19-2005, 02:20 AM
Bruce would f'ing dominate.

He is so incredibly fast. It would never get to the ground. He would kick and punch the sh1t out of people. Do you realize how much speed kills?? No one would touch him.

Plus he also cross trained in many sports and definitely did submissions.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 02:22 AM
There are no strikers in MMA near good enough to prevent takedown attempts. NONE. There is only 1 who has no ground skill and is still elite, CroCop - but he has the best takedown defense in the sport (but even with his great striking he can't stop people from going for takedowns). Without specialized modern training, Lee would be almost certain to be taken down.

There are two problems with some of the arguments here - people think Lee is superhuman, and don't actually follow MMA.

applejuicekid
08-19-2005, 02:24 AM
[ QUOTE ]
outside of Maurice Smith and Mirko CroCop, no MMA fighter who was originally a striker has done well in MMA

[/ QUOTE ]

What about Hunt, Silva, Shogun, Ninja, Bas, Igor, Yvel, or Pulver?

There are many many more.

Blarg
08-19-2005, 02:30 AM
Wrestling and jiu-jitsu weren't invented with the start of t.v. MMA competitions. They were known about before, and beaten repeatedly and endlessly before, and like all styles, always will be beaten again, if the right man is there to do the job.

While a little skepticism is often a pretty healthy thing, virtually none was directed at Brazilian jiu-jitsu from the start of t.v. MMA competitions, and a little more is still overdue.

applejuicekid
08-19-2005, 02:32 AM
That is not true CroCop has been working on his ground game, and has improved greatly. Didn't you see him sub Barnett? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 02:39 AM
CroCop - Barnett was so dissapointing. I can't wait for Fedor to GnP his ass on the 28th.

applejuicekid
08-19-2005, 02:44 AM
Agreed, I was looking forward to the fight.

CroCop - Fedor will be awesome.

[ QUOTE ]
I can't wait for Fedor to GnP his ass on the 28th.

[/ QUOTE ]

This will not happen. He won't just lay in the guard like nog did. CroCop will tie it up and get the stand up. It will be close, but I got my money on Mirko.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 02:48 AM
We'll see. If it goes to decision, I really can't see Mirko winning - he needs a KO. Fedor's chin may not be great be he seems to have fantastic recovery, particularly against Fujita and Randelman. Mirko has also never been in the guard against a guy with good GnP skills (and the one time he got taken down by a guy with sub skills like Fedor's he was tapping 30 seconds later). If he does get taken down, he's gonna lose, IMO.

Mirko is clearly the only heavyweight in the world that could beat Fedor even 25% of the time, but I don't think his odds are much better than that.

applejuicekid
08-19-2005, 02:58 AM
I agree Mirko will prolly need a KO.

Sub skills like Fedor?

Do you mean the greatest heavyweight grappler in MMA history?

Fedor won't tap him. Regardless the 28th can't come soon enough.

HtotheNootch
08-19-2005, 02:59 AM
Franco Columbu in his prime would have been the most dangerous.

beernutz
08-19-2005, 03:06 AM
[ QUOTE ]
He's only fighting one guy at a time right?

I'll take Bruce, in all weight classes. Easy money.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 03:17 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I agree Mirko will prolly need a KO.

Sub skills like Fedor?

Do you mean the greatest heavyweight grappler in MMA history?

Fedor won't tap him. Regardless the 28th can't come soon enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe this is blasphemy, but in all around grappling, I take Fedor over Nog - because his wrestling is so bad. Nog is slightly better at subs, but they are equal in sub defense and Fedor is way better at ground control and getting position. If you throw in his GnP he has an even bigger edge on the ground.

Heck, Ricco Rodriguez subbed Nog pretty quickly in ADCC, an all-grappling event.

applejuicekid
08-19-2005, 03:26 AM
I disagree, but can see where you are coming from. Anyways, I meant to say subs. But c'mon he is not slightly better, he is much better at subs.

In an all-grappling event Nog isn't the greatest, but in MMA I can't think of anyone better at subs.

-Skeme-
08-19-2005, 07:10 AM
He'd get destroyed by today's competition.

jakethebake
08-19-2005, 07:50 AM
[ QUOTE ]
If the UFC is done by weight classes I think Bruce Lee would own his division.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea. The 112 lb and under would be all his.

jakethebake
08-19-2005, 07:51 AM
[ QUOTE ]
He was the one who first said fighters should crosstrain different styles

[/ QUOTE ]

This is ridiculously untrue.

jakethebake
08-19-2005, 07:52 AM
[ QUOTE ]
He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a total myth. It was actually done a lot long before Bruce Lee.

KDawgCometh
08-19-2005, 03:32 PM
vanderlei silva originally trained in Luta Livre which is a rival to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. It is no gi and focuses more on strikes then pure grappling, but luta livre also focuses on ground training too. No luta livre fighter is gonna be incometant on the ground. Silva then made chute box focus more on strikes then luta livre does, but being able to defend and get back up to a standing base is still very much part of the training

KDawgCometh
08-19-2005, 03:35 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
outside of Maurice Smith and Mirko CroCop, no MMA fighter who was originally a striker has done well in MMA

[/ QUOTE ]

What about Hunt, Silva, Shogun, Ninja, Bas, Igor, Yvel, or Pulver?

There are many many more.

[/ QUOTE ]


all had ground training, and for bas, significant ground training before becoming a top MMA fighter. Maurice had two years of training with the shamrocks before he knocked out Mark Coleman in that famous fight in UFC 14

The Truth
08-19-2005, 03:40 PM
Bruce lee would have gotten his face kicked in and its not close. He had little ground game, and his stand game wouldn't be enough to overcome what he lacked on the ground. Not to mention the good thai boxers and western boxers would smashs his face standing up.

1 argument for bruce lee... He was an amazing athlete, and a hard worker. If he was alive today, we could argue that he would have been a ju jitzu expert and worked on heavy mui thai game. Then he could have been among the top. However, using the style he used in his day, he stands no chance.

This is coming from my personal experience of 3 years background in NHB combat.

SomethingClever
08-19-2005, 04:14 PM
Don't forget. If Bruce were taken down and being held in submission, he would resort to anything to escape.

This includes biting (is that legal in UFC?)

I think he would kick the [censored] out of people near his weight, and have a tough time with the real beasts.

jakethebake
08-19-2005, 04:19 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I think he would kick the [censored] out of people near his weight...

[/ QUOTE ]

You realize that means mostly 12 year-old girls?

Piz0wn0reD!!!!!!
08-19-2005, 04:29 PM
assuming he worked on his ground game, he would pwn fools.

Luzion
08-19-2005, 05:11 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a total myth. It was actually done a lot long before Bruce Lee.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who?

mostsmooth
08-19-2005, 06:00 PM
[ QUOTE ]
In his prime and weight division of course.

I must note that Bruce Lee was able to do 100 push-ups on his index fingers

[/ QUOTE ]
i could do 100 on his index fingers too, big deal

A_C_Slater
08-19-2005, 06:03 PM
What?

Do you mean YOU can do 100 push ups on your index fingers?

If you can, I think it's a very big deal.

touchfaith
08-19-2005, 06:06 PM
This is getting pointless. We all know that Billy Ray Valentine and the Quart Of Blood technique would kick everyones ass anyway.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Once ya' have a man with no legs...you'll never go back baby

SL__72
08-19-2005, 06:14 PM
I'd be willing to bet I could lift the equivilant weight w/ my index fingers 100 times...

Blarg
08-19-2005, 06:14 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a total myth. It was actually done a lot long before Bruce Lee.

[/ QUOTE ]

In Lee's time, it happened occasionally but usually only at high levels. Until one had mastered one art, it was thought counter-productive to train in another.

What's more, it was thought an outright insult to one's teacher, a way of telling him that either his style or his way of teaching it weren't sufficient, so the student had to look elsewhere. This sort of thing could lead to the student being dismissed, never being taught the higher levels of the style, or to an outright challenge between teachers, because taking on another teacher's student was itself thought of as extremely disrespectful. And these were cultures in which losing face could end one's career and destroy one's social standing. People in America generally wouldn't understand that kind of thing then, and they probably would understand it even less now. But that's the way it was.

Being accepted as a student wasn't an easy thing at all in those cultures and in those days. When one was accepted, one could spend a lifetime as an "outer door" student, never learning the things that really tied the system together and made it more than calisthenics. You did NOT want to mess around "behind the teacher's back" unless you were comfortable with losing that teacher for good. As well as having a reputation follow you from that point on that you were a bad, disloyal, or disrespectful student.

Once mastery was attained, which could never come but is commonly thought in Chinese culture to take at least ten years(of the kind of serious training very few Americans would put up with), training with other teachers or in other styles was looked at a lot more forgivingly -- by some, anyway. The martial arts world is a fickle, fickle place! But one would still ask one's teacher's permission, gain the full knowledge and permission of one's additional teacher, and choose carefully along acceptable social lines rather than just choosing freely what interested one most.

What Lee suggested doing was uncommon at the time, and pretty much unheard for beginners. It's one thing to broaden your horizons when you actually have a very strong foundation and years of skill and specific athletic training; it's completely different to do it starting from ground zero. Bruce in his later years was suggesting the complete abandonment of classical training, even for beginners.

Additionally, martial arts in the East have always been very much like a clan. These clans are by their nature competitive and insular, and deeply linked throughout the rest of society. Asking to cross-train in one style while learning another would be a lot like asking to be a priest and a rabbi at the same time.

Certainly it denied the completeness of any particular system, which was a pretty hardcore insult to people who had spent their whole lives in them and, at their best, strived to not scrape up any more rancor with each other than was necessary.

Yet this is what Bruce was doing, and what he taught others in his later years. Needless to say, in the clannish world of martial arts, he was by and large an unwelcome presence. The resentment toward him is still there more than 30 years after his death, even from people who weren't even born until after he died.

This was some serious business. Not every culture is like contemporary American culture.

mostsmooth
08-19-2005, 06:22 PM
[ QUOTE ]
What?

Do you mean YOU can do 100 push ups on your index fingers?

If you can, I think it's a very big deal.

[/ QUOTE ]
no, i can do 100 on his index fingers

Benal
08-19-2005, 06:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If Bruse Lee would have fought with the style and training he had when he died

[/ QUOTE ]

How did he die?

Blarg
08-19-2005, 06:43 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Bruce lee would have gotten his face kicked in and its not close. He had little ground game, and his stand game wouldn't be enough to overcome what he lacked on the ground. Not to mention the good thai boxers and western boxers would smashs his face standing up.

1 argument for bruce lee... He was an amazing athlete, and a hard worker. If he was alive today, we could argue that he would have been a ju jitzu expert and worked on heavy mui thai game. Then he could have been among the top. However, using the style he used in his day, he stands no chance.

This is coming from my personal experience of 3 years background in NHB combat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is equivalent to zero knowledge of what you are talking about.

Muay thai fighters have been beaten. Ask Benny Urquidez. They're good, and have my immense respect, but not superhuman.

Jiu-jitsu fighters have been beaten. That's how Karate, from Okinawa, somehow eventually became commonly thought of as a Japanese art. Gichin Funakoshi came over to Japan and took on all Japanese comers, and was so successful Karate dwarfed jiu-jitsu in Japan and spread elsewhere rapidly.

You have really no knowledge whatsoever of Lee's stand-up game; you really shouldn't have said a thing in that regard. Hands were Bruce's specialty and the main focus of his concentration. Saying he would be out-boxed by the calibre of boxers in today's cage matches is absurd. One of Bruce's first students was a 220 lb. undefeated golden gloves boxer, and Bruce cut through him like butter when practically still a child, at 18. That boxer later became one of Bruce's first assistant instructors, after having a George Foreman-like realization that the skills he had built his whole sense of self around were useless when confronted by a skinny little guy who in America had a stature more like a boy's than a man's. Bruce wasn't a forms guy; he sparred constantly, almost always against people much bigger than he was, and dominated. With his hands. He was classically trained in a very close-range hands-oriented style, and broadened his training methods from there.

Bruce's stand-up game was outstanding. American Kempo founder Ed Parker said he was "one in a billion." There aren't that many billions around.

His major weakness was in ground work. He simply hadn't trained in it to anywhere near the extent he trained his hands, or even his legs. Given time, he undoubtedly would have developed a good ground game. He was certainly pursuing it long before it became popular among strikers. Whether he would be exceptional at it is anyone's guess, but considering his exceptional athleticism and enormous drive, it's very unlikely he wouldn't have eventually gotten pretty good at it.

But believe it or not, all fights do not go to the ground, and the ground is not always the smartest place to take them.

Bruce didn't have the size to absorb blows easily. That doesn't mean he would lose in a stand-up fight. And it certainly doesn't mean he would be forced to the ground.

He wasn't superman, but his strengths were as real as his weaknesses, and far more remarkable.

Blarg
08-19-2005, 06:47 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If Bruse Lee would have fought with the style and training he had when he died

[/ QUOTE ]

How did he die?

[/ QUOTE ]

Allergic reaction to an aspirin substitute is one theory, hypersensitivity to pot is another. Traditional Chinese medicine has volunteered it was a tremendously imbalanced internal energy from an overly strenuous style(which does however tend to forget the difference between movie scenes and real life).

The Truth
08-19-2005, 06:56 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bruce lee would have gotten his face kicked in and its not close. He had little ground game, and his stand game wouldn't be enough to overcome what he lacked on the ground. Not to mention the good thai boxers and western boxers would smashs his face standing up.

1 argument for bruce lee... He was an amazing athlete, and a hard worker. If he was alive today, we could argue that he would have been a ju jitzu expert and worked on heavy mui thai game. Then he could have been among the top. However, using the style he used in his day, he stands no chance.

This is coming from my personal experience of 3 years background in NHB combat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is equivalent to zero knowledge of what you are talking about.

Muay thai fighters have been beaten. Ask Benny Urquidez. They're good, and have my immense respect, but not superhuman.

Jiu-jitsu fighters have been beaten. That's how Karate, from Okinawa, somehow eventually became commonly thought of as a Japanese art. Gichin Funakoshi came over to Japan and took on all Japanese comers, and was so successful Karate dwarfed jiu-jitsu in Japan and spread elsewhere rapidly.

You have really no knowledge whatsoever of Lee's stand-up game; you really shouldn't have said a thing in that regard. Hands were Bruce's specialty and the main focus of his concentration. Saying he would be out-boxed by the calibre of boxers in today's cage matches is absurd. One of Bruce's first students was a 220 lb. undefeated golden gloves boxer, and Bruce cut through him like butter when practically still a child, at 18. That boxer later became one of Bruce's first assistant instructors, after having a George Foreman-like realization that the skills he had built his whole sense of self around were useless when confronted by a skinny little guy who in America had a stature more like a boy's than a man's. Bruce wasn't a forms guy; he sparred constantly, almost always against people much bigger than he was, and dominated. With his hands. He was classically trained in a very close-range hands-oriented style, and broadened his training methods from there.

Bruce's stand-up game was outstanding. American Kempo founder Ed Parker said he was "one in a billion." There aren't that many billions around.

His weaknesses were in ground work. He simply hadn't trained in it to anywhere near the extent he trained his hands, or even his legs. Given time, he undoubtedly would have developed a good ground game. He was certainly pursuing it long before it became popular among strikers. Whether he would be exceptional at it is anyone's guess, but considering his exceptional athleticism and enormous drive, it's very unlikely he wouldn't have eventually gotten pretty good at it.

But believe it or not, all fights do not go to the ground, and the ground is not always the smartest place to take them.

Seriously, Bruce's weaknesses were primarily that he didn't have the size to absorb blows easily, and that his groundwork wasn't up to the level of his standing game. That doesn't mean he wouldn't have improved his ground game in time -- with his orientation and ego, doing so would have been pretty much a certainty -- his ego alone would have demanded it. That doesn't mean he would be forced to the ground in a fight. And it certainly doesn't mean he would lose in a standard stand-up fight.

He wasn't superman, but his strengths were as real as his weaknesses, and far more remarkable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not positive, but I think you said karate (I pray you were at least talking about Kempo Karate) was somehow better than ju jitzu for hand to hand combat, which is not only untrue, it is simply stupid.

The gracie family had an open challenge to the world for many many years and remained undefeated until just the last 10 years.
Ground game is of extreme importance. You will NOT succeed as a NHB fighter without fairly strong ground game. This includes take downs and defence (wrestling or judo) and at least a competence in submission wrestling or ju jitzu.

As far as bruce lee's stand up game, his style was jeet kune do. How many jeet kune do fighters excel in modern NHB combat?

thats right.

As far as my experience in NHB, It has shown me how the greatest fighters in the world today train. Chuck Lidell, the guys out of the lions den (shamrock etc.), Bas Ruten out at beverly hills ju jitzu. Most of these major gyms share a similar training regimen.

This is because it works.

What does this consist off?

Ju jitzu, muy thai and western boxing. Include some wrestling take down techniques and some judo stuff.

I never said thai fighters were invencible, I said the style is important to train, it is a strong mix of western boxing with deadly knees and elbows. I personally strive to do well and muy thai, but I am much stronger in western boxing.

As far as stand up vs ground game. Watch Grace dominate the old UFC's before everybody starting picking up ground game. It was sick.

Blarg
08-19-2005, 08:08 PM
It's history, not theory. You're way too caught up in theory. If you don't even know the most elementary history of karate, then you are very ignorant when it comes to martial arts.

Holding NHB tournaments as the measure of anything but NHB tournaments is a big mistake.

The idea that you have any idea who the greatest fighters in the world are is a pretty wild one indeed.

Luzion
08-19-2005, 08:11 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not positive, but I think you said karate (I pray you were at least talking about Kempo Karate) was somehow better than ju jitzu for hand to hand combat, which is not only untrue, it is simply stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he is pointing out that the father of modern karate popularized Karate over Jujitsu in Japan.

[ QUOTE ]
The gracie family had an open challenge to the world for many many years and remained undefeated until just the last 10 years.
Ground game is of extreme importance. You will NOT succeed as a NHB fighter without fairly strong ground game. This includes take downs and defence (wrestling or judo) and at least a competence in submission wrestling or ju jitzu.

[/ QUOTE ]

You DO realize that Jujitsu is a general term. Brazilian Jujitsu is just ONE specific style of jujitsu, and is unique because it emphasizes ground game. I wouldnt be surprised if you didnt even know what traditional Jujitsu is like, since you spelled jujitsu incorrectly over and over.

You clearly showed your ignorance when you assumed brazilian jujitsu speaks for all styles of jujitsu.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as bruce lee's stand up game, his style was jeet kune do. How many jeet kune do fighters excel in modern NHB combat?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are pretty retarded. Jeet Kune Do is NOT a system. Its how Bruce Lee interpreted combat in general. For him, it combined western boxing, various kicking styles, wing chun close quarter trapping, and even ground work. He has plenty of examples in his book with notes and examples of western boxing techniques, jujitsu techniques, aikido takedowns, wrestling takedowns, muay thai kicks, savate kicks, etc etc etc. You could say its well rounded and adaptive. How can you even argue with that? You are pretty ignorant.


[ QUOTE ]
As far as my experience in NHB, It has shown me how the greatest fighters in the world today train. Chuck Lidell, the guys out of the lions den (shamrock etc.), Bas Ruten out at beverly hills ju jitzu. Most of these major gyms share a similar training regimen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you mean they place great emphasis on physical well being, quick movements, and well rounded ness in fighting styles/abilities? Do they take punching skills, kicking abilities, and grappling seriously? Are they always looking to improve themselves and find an edge in combat? Sounds like some revolutionary ideas Bruce Lee came up with 30-40 years ago! WOW!

[ QUOTE ]
Ju jitzu, muy thai and western boxing. Include some wrestling take down techniques and some judo stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhh.. I hope you DO know that Judo is simply a derivative of Jujitsu; its Jujitsu watered down... So why mention it twice? Because you simply dont even know what you are talking about.

[ QUOTE ]
I never said thai fighters were invencible, I said the style is important to train, it is a strong mix of western boxing with deadly knees and elbows. I personally strive to do well and muy thai, but I am much stronger in western boxing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bruce Lee gave props to Muay Thai.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 08:29 PM
[ QUOTE ]
It's history, not theory. You're way too caught up in theory. If you don't even know the most elementary history of karate, then you are very ignorant when it comes to martial arts.

Holding NHB tournaments as the measure of anything but NHB tournaments is a big mistake.

The idea that you have any idea who the greatest fighters in the world are is a pretty wild one indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm having an extremely hard time deciphering what points you are trying to make in this thread; hopefully you can clarify them for me.

What exactly do you mean by "Holding NHB tournaments as the measure of anything but NHB tournaments is a big mistake." What else would they measure? They are supposed to throw two guys in a ring and see who wins with a few things outlawed (what might be called sport fighting)- and that's what they do.

Also, are you suggesting that there are fighters who would be beating the top guys in Pride or the UFC, but simply don't care to?

You obviously have a lot to add here but for some reason your comments seem a bit too cryptic. Or I'm dumb.

jakethebake
08-19-2005, 08:31 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a total myth. It was actually done a lot long before Bruce Lee.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who?

[/ QUOTE ]

Many many fighters. They were doing this for hundre3ds of years. Go study some martial arts history, either Chinese or Japanese.

Luzion
08-19-2005, 08:35 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He was one of the first people to throw tradition out the window and incorporate many different fighting styles together.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a total myth. It was actually done a lot long before Bruce Lee.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who?

[/ QUOTE ]

Many many fighters. They were doing this for hundre3ds of years. Go study some martial arts history, either Chinese or Japanese.

[/ QUOTE ]

Blarg already answered your post very well already about insular martial schools/clans.

But I would like you to name some martial arts or some fighters if you could please. And make sure that they also "threw tradition out the window and incorporated many fighting styles together" like I said.

jakethebake
08-19-2005, 08:43 PM
Fine here's one.

Kanryo Higaonna - Chojun Miyagi's (Goju-Ryu founder) sensei.

But it wasn't at all uncommon for martial artists to study more than one style. It wasn't until the last century or so that it became pretty uncommon.

Luzion
08-19-2005, 08:58 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Fine here's one.

Kanryo Higaonna - Chojun Miyagi's (Goju-Ryu founder) sensei.

But it wasn't at all uncommon for martial artists to study more than one style. It wasn't until the last century or so that it became pretty uncommon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhh... so lets see. A Japanese man with previous karate training that traveled to China and learned kung fu there... and so he is someone that incorporated many different styles into one and was not held in the restraints of tradition? Thats your example?

I thought you were gonna give me an example of someone that actually incorporated MANY different unique styles that were together...

Nevermind...

Im guessing you would also consider Morihei Ueshiba, the founder of Aikido to be a "mixed martial artist" since he combined aikijitsu, jujitsu, and kenjitsu right? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

Blarg
08-19-2005, 09:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's history, not theory. You're way too caught up in theory. If you don't even know the most elementary history of karate, then you are very ignorant when it comes to martial arts.

Holding NHB tournaments as the measure of anything but NHB tournaments is a big mistake.

The idea that you have any idea who the greatest fighters in the world are is a pretty wild one indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm having an extremely hard time deciphering what points you are trying to make in this thread; hopefully you can clarify them for me.

What exactly do you mean by "Holding NHB tournaments as the measure of anything but NHB tournaments is a big mistake." What else would they measure? They are supposed to throw two guys in a ring and see who wins with a few things outlawed (what might be called sport fighting)- and that's what they do.

Also, are you suggesting that there are fighters who would be beating the top guys in Pride or the UFC, but simply don't care to?

You obviously have a lot to add here but for some reason your comments seem a bit too cryptic. Or I'm dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mean them to be cryptic, but considering how long so many of my posts are, don't want to cover even more things in the same post.

To address some of what you noted above, I'll start by pointing out the obvious -- not everyone wants to compete in tournament matches and not everyone lives in countries where getting access to them is easy. Being willing or able to sign up for a tournament is not the ultimate determiner of who the best fighter is.

Further, any rules drastically change the game, and sport fighting has quite a few of them. For instance, no finger or toe locks, no tearing, no elbows to the head, no groin shots; all of these are great techniques and many people train for them specifically over all other targets/techniques. It's not just that we don't really know how good people are who don't like those rules, but we don't even know how good the people are who DO like them -- how good in a fight without those rules against the very same opponent, that is. That doesn't take anything away from the skills and general athleticism of the people partaking; but even they're crippled by having a ring and rules, and playing at a sort of game.

What a tournament shows is who the best guy is when it comes to tournaments. Change the rules a bit, and suddenly who's at the top changes. People stay away from certain tournaments so they can fight within a style they're comfortable with. It's the nature of anything artificial.

Where people go really over the top I think is figuring that whatever style is dominant in UFC speaks for the whole history of combat and lays down the final word on it. What you have in NHB tourneys is first of all the outcome of a sporting event participated in by very few people, and second a short history of surprise.

Surprise! Dealing with new techniques commonly confounds everyone, no matter what style you're from. I think it's hilarious that each time someone finds weaknesses in another guy it's taken as establishing the dominance of his style over another, and the endpoint of history. What we really know is that they determine is the superiority of one particular MAN, at one particular point in time, under one particular set of rules. That circumstance may never be repeated, particularly as more people cross-train and learn each other's styles. The last thing it is is definitive on either the preeminence of one style or the incompetence of another.

I'll link below a good article from the Dog Brothers' Marc Denny. These are the guys who beat each other up with sticks. Note: the core of their training comes from Dan Inosanto, Bruce Lee's assistant instructor and the main inheritor of whatever could be thought of as his style at the time. He came over to Bruce when he was already a 3rd or 4th degree black belt, as I recall. Kali has some things strongly similar to both Wing Chun and Jeet Kune Do, Bruce's styles.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 09:39 PM
Good post, and thanks for responding.

But I really think you are underestimating the value of MMA fights as a science experiment - before many of these styles had never met, and MMA has given us a lot of info about what works and what doesn't - although, again, it isn't a fight to the death, it's sport fighting.

IMO, MMA has been EXTREMELY important in the evolution of martial arts and fighting, as it has forced people to learn different styles to survive and for the first time provided easy to analyze evidence about what is and isn't effective. And it hasn't been friendly to a lot of styles.

Blarg
08-19-2005, 09:39 PM
Here's the Dogbrothers' link to the article by Marc Denny.

This guy was a UFC judge and has been studying a variety of arts for many years. And also a seriously put up or shut up dude -- with sticks, yet. Many parts of this draft for an article are very illustrative of the relationship of martial arts and real fighting to tournament fighting, and how much being exposed to something new can rule the day -- but only for a while; nor does novelty give anything like a final answer to which styles are better or worse. Far from it.

http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=3954&osCsid=6a37ebcfa0b33de6d36b07 9228552897#3954

Blarg
08-19-2005, 09:43 PM
And here's the article itself:

[ QUOTE ]
ali Tudo 5.1

ONE

Those motivated principally by young male ritual fighting will always be a large percentage of the martial arts world. A very large percentage of them will cease to train as they achieve whatever competitive level that they will and face the prospect of decline.

In contrast, Dog Brothers Martial Arts (DBMA) has as its mission “To Walk as a Warrior for All Your Days”. In our vision, The Path of the Warrior is a path Of Life, and it is For Life. As such, it must embrace all facets of Aggression -- not only young male ritual hierarchical fighting.

As such DBMA seeks to prepare for the un-ruled and unruly world wherein 360 awareness and unequal and unexpected situations are the criteria. This means that tools, tactics and techniques (“the Three Ts”) that exceed the inherent limitations of hierarchical fighting will be used—which of course presents the perennial question of how to prepare the Three Ts. The hierarchical competitor knows his Three Ts because he uses them on a resisting opponent, but “secret techniques” and “too deadly techniques” tend to be an untested techniques—at least as far as the individual being taught them is concerned!

So, what are we who seek to prepare ourselves for the full panoply of Aggression to do? Is there a way to test these skills in the Cage? Indeed, do we have something to offer today’s MMA competitor?

I believe that we can accept the challenge to bring a modified version of Kali Silat to the Cage that will enable us to test ourselves and our “Three Ts” in a way that allows us to deepen our non-sportive fighting skills. And I believe that today’s MMA competitor, even though he lacks substantial portions of our skill sets, can incorporate some of what we do to his substantial benefit.

TWO

Most of us are familiar with many stories of embarrassing and/or sad endings for those who felt that their approach to fighting was “too deadly” for martial sport. Some of these were seen in the early days of the BJJ triggered UFC revolution. In the context and crucible of the octagonal cage the theories, techniques, training and performance of many martial arts systems and styles were found lacking.

This has led however to the UFC and similar events such as Pride being considered by many as THE legitimate laboratory for what works in unarmed combat. People of this persuasion tend to respect only combat sports systems such as BJJ, Muay Thai, Boxing, Sombo, Greco-Roman, and Wrestling-- the blend of which we may call “Generic Mixed Martial Arts”.

Those who claim their technique is “too deadly” for this form of fighting are seen as self-deluded fools who, unwilling to train hard with resisting training partners and hostile opponents, are probably afraid to put themselves to the test— often with good reason. As I once heard one person of this school of thought say, “If someone tries plucking my eyeball out I’ll neck crank his butt into a wheel chair.” One can often hear something to the effect of “I can do that biting, eye plucking stuff too, and my delivery system (i.e. my physical animal and its skills) are superior to yours.”

THREE

Let’s take a look at this thought process a bit further.

From the beginning of the UFC there have been rules-- and the list has expanded considerably since then, so it is clear there are some techniques that are “too much”. The following list may not be complete, but if I remember correctly from when I was a judge at UFC 10, the original rules prohibited biting, gouging, eye attacks, small joint locks (toes, fingers) and fishhooks. Since then the list has expanded, and depending on the event typically the prohibited techniques will be some or all of the following: groin strikes, head butts, elbows, elbows to the head, kicks to a man on the ground, kicks to the head of a man on the ground, kicks to the legs of a man on the ground, knees, knees to the head of a man on the ground, strikes to the spine, etc and so forth.

Why is it that these techniques are “too much”? Although it may seem intuitively obvious (analogous to Supreme Court Justice Potter’s infamous definition of pornography “I know it when I see it.”) upon reflection, is this really an sufficient criterion? Not really. I think we can be more precise than this.

Aggression has different purposes. A large percentage of those in martial arts are young males looking to compete in ritual hierarchical contests. No surprise here-- in the continuum of a human male’s life-- that is what young males tend to do. (Females compete too, but in general their behavior in this regard is different.)

Social groups are hierarchical groups—contrast “the anonymous horde” of a school of minnows. Social groups (e.g. a pack of wolves) consist of animals that band together for mutual benefit. To the extent that hierarchical contests damage the loser, the pack/tribe/etc becomes weakened—thus it makes perfect sense that hierarchical contests have rules and limitations.

FOUR

So where does this leave those of us who have purposes outside of and beyond hierarchical competition—what we in Dog Brothers Martial Arts call “To Walk as a Warrior for all your days”? We seek to defend our land, women and children—not to engage in fair fights. Thus, precisely what is “too much” for cage fighting is exactly what interests us!

We need to think about this with clarity because again and again we have seen many who say their techniques are “too deadly” fail when confronted with a young well-trained cage fighter who, unlike the “too deadly” practitioner, has experienced using his techniques in the adrenal state upon a resisting opponent.

FIVE

Before moving on in this discussion, we also need to note that this point can be overstated. We need to remember that we have seen reflexes honed in the adrenal state of combat sport, disastrously manifest in the adrenal state outside of the ritual space. This is sometimes forgotten.

These disastrous manifestations may appear in unorganized (as versus ritual) male hierarchical fights: open guard makes much more sense when one is wearing a cup on the mat or in the cage than in the parking lot outside the night club where someone can vigorously step on your genitals. Releasing a triangle choke can get your femoral artery or genitals bitten. A takedown to side control for ground-and-pound may mean that your attacker can hold on to you long enough for his friends to arrive.

Cage reflexes can also manifest in matters of judgment. For example there is the recent case of a kickboxing champion in CA whose car was sideswiped in front of his gym by a hit-and-run driver. Understandably angry at the misdeed and confident in his superiority, he ran out of his gym while in his MT shorts and chased down the fleeing car and caught up with it at a red light at the corner-- whereupon he was promptly shot and killed by the driver-- who was a thief who had stolen the car.

Yet with all that said, it seems to me that we have still danced around the underlying question presented.

In my humble opinion we of the Kali Silat persuasion need to have a facet to our Art that accepts that challenge of the cage while doing so in a way that furthers our purposes as warriors on a lifelong path as well as generating success in young male hierarchical fights. If the “delivery platform” we test and hone in the crucible of the cage is consistent with the idioms of movement, the tactics, the tools and the training for weaponry, then we are ahead of the game in a subtle and powerful way when it comes to “walking as a warrior for all our days.”

In Dog Brothers Martial Arts we call our sub-system for this “Kali Tudo ™”.

SIX

The meaning of the name is a pun/rhyme on the Brazilian Portuguese term “Vale Tudo” which is usually translated as “Anything goes.” If we look at the Latin roots of the Vale Tudo we may recognize that the English words of common ancestry are “Valid Total”.

In the Portuguese pronunciation of “Vale” the “e” is pronounced like “e” in “hey” whereas the in the American pronunciation it is pronounced like the “ee” in “seek”.
In the American pronunciation of “Kali”, the “i” is also pronounced like the “ee” in “seek”. Thus the rhyme is created between the American pronunciation of Vale Tudo and our sub-system “Kali Tudo ™”.

Kali Tudo does not seek to replace what is in the cage right now. The fighters of today are outstanding and what they do is not to be dismissed lightly. I would note in passing though that much more than is commonly appreciated, much of what is in the cage right now has strong southeast Asian influence. Muay Thai is but a ring sport branch from the tree of the Thai military weaponry system of Krabi Krabong which comes to us in DBMA through the teachings of Guro Inosanto and Ajarn Arlan “Salty Dog” Sanford.

The contribution of the Filipino Art of Panantukan to boxing is quite substantial. Indeed some believe that the shift from the palm up structure of the John L. Sullivan era to the palm down and evasive head movements of the modern era date to the interaction of the US soldiers and the Filipino people in the aftermath of our suppression of the Filipino independence movement after the Spanish-American War of 1898. This is a matter for another day. Those interested may peruse the many points of view in

http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=206&start=0

SEVEN

The principal systems upon which we draw are Inosanto Blend Kali and other FMA systems, Inosanto Maphilindo Silat and other Silats, Krabi Krabong, Burmese Bando, and Machado Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. We also draw upon what we see currently happening in the cage.

Those familiar with this list of influences will note that with the exception of the Machado BJJ, all fall within the concept of the Majapahit Empire as described by Grand Tuhon Leo Gaje of Pekiti Tirsia and Guro Inosanto.

What are the distinctive features of our approach?

1) Even as we seek success in the Cage, we seek to minimize the installation of behaviors unsuitable for 360 degrees. We seek to maximize skills, tactics, tools and techniques suitable for the 360 degrees of the street.
2) Following the Kali principal of zoning away from the rear hand, we pay particular attention to fighting in striking range to unmatched lead. (This can apply to clinch range as well.) Thus in order to be able to fight both right lead and left lead fighters, we pay considerable attention to bilateralism. This serves us well in 360 degree situations as well due to the battlefield tactical options thus enabled.
3) This matter of bilateralism enables, indeed calls for, triangular footwork. When a fighter’s skill set is indifferent to which side is forward he may freely shift between the two and this more than doubles the number of triangles possible (Triangles that maintain right lead, triangles that maintain left lead, and triangles that change leads) In our system these skills are developed during our approach to Siniwali (double stick) training.
4) Striking skills ARE based upon our approach to weaponry—both siniwali and knife. Punching is only one of several striking modalities. Trapping most certainly is part of the mix. At the simplest level this means at two (and occasionally three) hits per shift of body weight in contrast to the one hit per shift of body weight of boxing. Furthermore, the nature of these strikes makes them more usable during clinch and ground game—often to surprisingly instantaneous results.
5) The integration of these strikes with bilateral triangular footwork, developed during our approach to weaponry, yields an approach quite different to what is currently seen. Indeed, it can often look quite freaky. It is applied in principally in four ways ways. In addition to the already mentioned clinch and ground ranges, this approach has considerable merit in maintaining a fight in striking range. In the cage this can force an opponent to overextend himself in his efforts to close the distance. In the street, the art and science of keeping someone from entangling you can be a matter of life and death. The remaining category is in aggressive attacks that are both triangular and crashing at the same time. .
6) It is precisely the present absence of triangular striking crash combinations in cagefighting today that explains the current difficulties in applying Kali Silat in the closer ranges. Conversely, its presence enables it. Kali Silat works.
7) Young male hierarchical competition is a secondary motivation—although in my humble opinion we have plenty to offer a young MMA fighter, even one without Kali Silat skills. That said, our principal motivation is to install real time, real world skills in the adrenal state that will prepare us to “Walk as a Warrior for all our Days”. Our subsystem of Kali Tudo ™ is but a step in that process.


EIGHT

Kali Silat does require some training methods distinct from those of generic MMA. Currently many people deride this training as “dead patterns”. This can be, and often is, true when the training stops at this point in the process.

But just how does one train a Silat takedown that calls for ripping the medial miniscus of the knee safely upon a resisting opponent?

IMHO part of the answer lays in what Guro Inosanto calls "cooperative quarter lever" technical training wherein the correct leverage is identified but applied only a little bit in order to facilitate the development of the understanding of the application AND DANGERS of Kali Silat. Part of the answer lies in BJJ/submission type training. And part of the answer lies in working with training partners who have done both quarter lever training BJJ/submission type training.

In other words, both need to have an understanding of the risks/consequences of Silat techniques, a sense of what uncooperative people feel like, AND the ability to roll and/or strike at partial intensity without accelerating-- as the Machado Brothers say, “leaving one’s ego at the door.”

Not only is this type of training highly effective in installing these dangerous skills for real time application, it also is relatively safe and quite fun.
The same process described here for learning and training Silat leverage also applies to Kali Silat striking.

This conception of training methodology is essential to manifest Kali Silat in the cage.

NINE

Why have we not seen Kali and Silat in cagefighting/NHB/MMA?

My answer is that we have not seen it yet, but we will—very soon. I will go further and predict that it will change the fighting-- as have other systems that have come before it.

When I was a flag carrying fighter for the Dog Brothers twice a year at time and place certain I was available to all comers and put my ideas to the test. I did this until I was 48 years old. I am now 52 and am past the age when I can plausibly step into the Cage.

Still I test myself and these ideas in sparring at Rico Chiapparelli’s R1 Gym, a world class MMA facility. I thank the fine fighters there for matching my diminished level of physicality so that I may continue to play and research. In addition to Rico, I thank Frank Trigg and Vladymir Matyushenko for their help.

The three men I have worked most in our “Kali Tudo” are Chris Gizzi, DBMA Lakan Guro “Dog” Jeff Brown, and DBMA Guro Benjamin “Lonely Dog” Rittiner. Although in my opinion Chris (who you see in the photos in this article) has the physical gifts and the understanding of this material to take it all the way, Chris has decided to stay with his roots in football (he was a standout linebacker for the Green Bay Packers) and now trains pro football players and other elite athletes as well as mere mortals.

Jeff, in addition to being a Lakan Guro in DBMA is also highly ranked in Silat under Herman Suwanda (with considerable training in Indonesia) and in Silat and Kali under Guro Inosanto, in Bando under GM Gyi, and others. He competes in Bando kickboxing and BJJ. I think Jeff expresses Kali Tudo very well

So too does DBMA Guro Lonely Dog. Rico has graciously complemented him on his quality participation in hard sparring at R1 using this material.

These three men can be seen with me in our double disc DVD of “Kali Tudo ™” which principally covers the portion of the subsystem dedicated to triangular crashing striking combinations.

TEN

Allow me to flesh out my prediction that Kali Silat will alter the course of Cagefighting.

My thinking in this regard began with my experience in Dog Brothers Real Contact Stickfighting when I started BJJ with the Machado Brothers in the summer of 1990 and others in our tribe began shortly thereafter. At that time (Pre UFC) most of the martial arts world was blissfully unaware of the realities of grappling in the context of fighting, particularly so in the mostly FMA world of “Dog Brothers Real Contact Stickfighting”. )

In most of the Filipino Arts in America the received wisdom was, and is, that in the presence of the skilled use of weapons (either impact or cutting) grappling was pretty much a non-issue. Yet in the context of our fighting, we found otherwise. It is true that in many of our fights grappling range was created due to the increased survivability of head shots due to the fencing masks we use, but in my considered opinion we developed many fighters capable of consistently closing to grappling without taking any shots to the head and in the naivete of that era even moderate blue belt level skills produced results that were nearly magical. This is not surprising. Our opponents at that time were unfamiliar with the structure and its dynamics that we were using—just as I believe will happen as we begin to apply Kali Silat in the cage.

This is not a rare dynamic. We have seen this pattern of new and unfamiliar structures changing the fighting repeatedly in the UFC too.

In the beginning, those who entered the event prepared only by training and fighting focused on various forms of striking tested by ritual hierarchical contests with rules designed to isolate striking tended to do quite poorly. They were unfamiliar with the structures of grappling and their dynamics.

Naturally in response to these experiences people did not stand still! Most everyone learned the basics of BJJ—and sought weak links in its structures to exploit with the strong links of other structures.

For example some people looked to shootfighting and Sambo for their leg locks to counter BJJ’s guard game and it was the turn of some BJJ fighters to be surprised as their knees, ankles, and feet were locked.

Another example would be that in the beginning of the BJJ revolution against non-grappling strikers, BJJ fighters could create almost any sort of tangled mess to drag the fight to the ground and then win it there. But then wrestlers such as Greco-Roman man Randy Couture came on the scene—and the BJJ people lacked the skills to bring such men down. Often the result was that either or both looked to use Muay Thai type skills in the clinch—even though fighters trained exclusively in Muay Thai had not fared well previously.

Although those trained solely in BJJ often could not bring down the wrestlers, the wrestlers often could bring down the BJJ fighters into highly unfavorable positions for a “ground and pound” game that made good use of the grapplers’ good base and balance.

Trained by boxing trainer Eddie Stanky, Vitor Belfort brought in sport boxing to excellent effect. Even though most of his early wins were with boxing hands, I think it fair to say that his foundational skills in BJJ Vale Tudo and the attendant understanding of range gave him an understanding of how to use boxing in the context of cagefighting.

Yet then we saw Randy Couture’s “dirty boxing” (something the Filipino art of Panantukan has taken to a very high level) neutralize Belfort’s sport boxing.

In short, in the Cage we have seen new structures and dynamics come in with dominating results again and again. In a similar manner we have seen again and again that over time there will be responses that neutralize and/or counter these structures and dynamics. Advantage is transitory. Indeed as I write, the current UFC Champ Chuck Liddell won his belt with boxing strikes over superb grappler and great champion Randy Couture. How the wheel has turned from the early UFC!

ELEVEN

Closing on a more personal note, recently I showed a rough edit of our Kali Tudo DVDs to Top Dog for his thoughts on it. One of the things he said to me was “This almost feels like you are letting out a secret.”

I do confess to sharing his feeling in this regard.

So why do I do it?

I must confess what provoked me into starting my journey into KT was a bit like the plot line of many a Chop Socky movie: “You can’t say that about our teacher!” The attacks by some on his teachings concerning sticks—“dead patterns!” they said, I felt were well answered by the performance of the Dog Brothers—no teacher has produced more, either directly or through his students such as me.

“But what of the FMA claim that the unarmed motions are just like armed motions?” these people persisted.

This question I acknowledged did not have the answer (YET!) that the weaponry question did.

As I thought about it, it certainly made no sense to ask someone to use the weaponry motions while unarmed if they couldn’t use the weaponry motions when armed! Thus, it seemed to me that I was, despite my modest physical gifts, due to my training in the Art and my 140 or so Dog Brothers stickfights, in a position to step forward to respond to this challenge.

And so I have. It is the Dog Brother way, the Tao of the Dog if you will, to search for Truth.

The Adventure continues, , , ,

Woof,
Marc “Crafty Dog” Denny

[/ QUOTE ]

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 09:53 PM
Interesting article. MMA is, of course, very young and still evolving, as the article points out. But it has still taught us a lot already, and it would be a huge mistake to ignore that.

I'd also just like to point out that he lists a lot of stuff as illegal that actually isn't in Pride and/or UFC. It is in some smaller organizations.

PorscheNGuns
08-19-2005, 09:59 PM
It is the continued evolution of fighting styles that has been happening since the Japos were bludgeoning each other over land rights a thousand years ago. As for the fighting styles that involve things outside of UFC et al rules and regulations, those fighting styles have and will continue to devolve into simple showmanship along with swords and nunchuks unless you dont mind a fair amount of jailtime

-Matt

Blarg
08-19-2005, 10:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Good post, and thanks for responding.

But I really think you are underestimating the value of MMA fights as a science experiment - before many of these styles had never met, and MMA has given us a lot of info about what works and what doesn't - although, again, it isn't a fight to the death, it's sport fighting.

IMO, MMA has been EXTREMELY important in the evolution of martial arts and fighting, as it has forced people to learn different styles to survive and for the first time provided easy to analyze evidence about what is and isn't effective. And it hasn't been friendly to a lot of styles.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but think the revelations that fighting is conducted at more than one range and that you need to be well-rounded are more mind-blowing to the general public and people pretty low on the martial ladder than they are to the real masters or experienced people, or just people with good ole common sense.

The general public is so ignorant and easily swayed that the notion that grapplers could prevail against strikers hit many of them like a ton of bricks. In self-adoring America, if it's not American, it's generally thought of as worthless or pretty close. American boxing, for many, was and is THE fighting art.

UFC may have blown the inexperienced person's mind, but American wrestlers and judoka have been kicking strikers' asses, and each other's asses, for generations, and vice-versa, too. There's nothing new under the sun.

If you can keep the fight in your preferred range, you've got a big advantage. A lot of that will depend on who adapts better to dealing with someone else's new style, you or the other guy -- flexibility and adaptability. A lot will come down to who's the better athlete. I'd say the style comes a distant fourth to those other factors.

For a lot of UFC watchers, it seems that style is everything, a matter of belief, and almost magical.

hoyaboy1
08-19-2005, 10:22 PM
Clearly, at this point in time all-around skill means more than style. That wasn't completely true 8-10 years ago.

But I think we generally agree.

Blarg
08-19-2005, 10:33 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting article. MMA is, of course, very young and still evolving, as the article points out. But it has still taught us a lot already, and it would be a huge mistake to ignore that.

I'd also just like to point out that he lists a lot of stuff as illegal that actually isn't in Pride and/or UFC. It is in some smaller organizations.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, it's not to be ignored, but it's far from the last word on anything either. If it makes people more open-minded, great. Especially we Americans, who tend to combine great prejudice with great ignorance almost as a point of pride.

PorscheNGuns
08-19-2005, 10:56 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Especially we Americans, who tend to combine great prejudice with great ignorance almost as a point of pride.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to reign in on your self-loathing America bashing but every culture does this, some much moreso than America (like the Japanese for instance)

-Matt

Blarg
08-20-2005, 12:04 AM
Whatever dude.

jakethebake
08-20-2005, 12:12 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Uhh... so lets see. A Japanese man with previous karate training that traveled to China and learned kung fu there... and so he is someone that incorporated many different styles into one and was not held in the restraints of tradition? Thats your example?

[/ QUOTE ]

Learn more about Goju. It's much more than that. It incorporates both hard and soft styles of kung fu and karate. there is iron shirt technique. there is wing chun sticky hands training. there is grappling. and yes, the hard karate aspect as well.

This was my example, but it's not unique. Look at the samurai. They all trained under several teachers. They had separate teachers for iado, kenjutsu, jiu-jitsu, archery, etc. It was not unusual for martial artists to travel and train in various styles under a number of teachers in either japan or china.

edit: i'm not debating whether lee was a great martial artist. i believe he was. just that aspect wasn't new to him.

Luzion
08-20-2005, 12:32 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Learn more about Goju. It's much more than that. It incorporates both hard and soft styles of kung fu and karate. there is iron shirt technique. there is wing chun sticky hands training. there is grappling. and yes, the hard karate aspect as well.

This was my example, but it's not unique. Look at the samurai. They all trained under several teachers. They had separate teachers for iado, kenjutsu, jiu-jitsu, archery, etc. It was not unusual for martial artists to travel and train in various styles under a number of teachers in either japan or china.

edit: i'm not debating whether lee was a great martial artist. i believe he was. just that aspect wasn't new to him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im glad you responded so well. I have to admit you have great points and are right. But I wouldnt go so far as to say samurai learned different martial style since kenjutsu + iaido were considered one and the same, and jujitsu supplemented these... it was basic training really for any samurai.

I dont know much about Goju-Ryu Karate. But what you said reminded me that yes, there are a bunch of martial arts that took a little from a bunch of others. Choy Lay Futt is a good example, a fairly recent kung fu style that combined a bunch of Shaolin styles.

What I really meant with Bruce Lee was that he was on of the first to compile a bunch of international styles together. He didnt restrict himself to just learn about "oriental" styles, but was interested in fencing, western boxing and what not...

Blarg
08-20-2005, 12:50 AM
Bruce didn't favor the insistence styles be learned sequentially, either. He wasn't in favor of a "ten-year-plan," and in that was quite different from his colleagues, often even to this day.

Learning completely different subjects from different teachers was quite a different thing, too. It can't be compared to, say, learning Hung Gar or Choy Li Fut at the same time you were learning Wing Chun. That sort of thing didn't wash.

The Truth
08-20-2005, 05:58 AM
[ QUOTE ]
It's history, not theory. You're way too caught up in theory. If you don't even know the most elementary history of karate, then you are very ignorant when it comes to martial arts.

Holding NHB tournaments as the measure of anything but NHB tournaments is a big mistake.

The idea that you have any idea who the greatest fighters in the world are is a pretty wild one indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol dude, we are talking about theory here not history. He is asking how would Bruce Lee have fared in the UFC. The ufc is a NHB tournament and thus measures NHB skill.

We can talk about history if you want, but it is off topic. I do have an elementary knowlege of Karate (I respect the Shaolin monks), and I think Karate as style of fighting is a silly idea. I don't bow before I step on the mat. I don't bother wearing a Gi. Karate is not fighting. It is not relevant to this discussion.

The Truth
08-20-2005, 06:16 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not positive, but I think you said karate (I pray you were at least talking about Kempo Karate) was somehow better than ju jitzu for hand to hand combat, which is not only untrue, it is simply stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he is pointing out that the father of modern karate popularized Karate over Jujitsu in Japan.

[ QUOTE ]
The gracie family had an open challenge to the world for many many years and remained undefeated until just the last 10 years.
Ground game is of extreme importance. You will NOT succeed as a NHB fighter without fairly strong ground game. This includes take downs and defence (wrestling or judo) and at least a competence in submission wrestling or ju jitzu.

[/ QUOTE ]

You DO realize that Jujitsu is a general term. Brazilian Jujitsu is just ONE specific style of jujitsu, and is unique because it emphasizes ground game. I wouldnt be surprised if you didnt even know what traditional Jujitsu is like, since you spelled jujitsu incorrectly over and over.

You clearly showed your ignorance when you assumed brazilian jujitsu speaks for all styles of jujitsu.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as bruce lee's stand up game, his style was jeet kune do. How many jeet kune do fighters excel in modern NHB combat?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are pretty retarded. Jeet Kune Do is NOT a system. Its how Bruce Lee interpreted combat in general. For him, it combined western boxing, various kicking styles, wing chun close quarter trapping, and even ground work. He has plenty of examples in his book with notes and examples of western boxing techniques, jujitsu techniques, aikido takedowns, wrestling takedowns, muay thai kicks, savate kicks, etc etc etc. You could say its well rounded and adaptive. How can you even argue with that? You are pretty ignorant.


[ QUOTE ]
As far as my experience in NHB, It has shown me how the greatest fighters in the world today train. Chuck Lidell, the guys out of the lions den (shamrock etc.), Bas Ruten out at beverly hills ju jitzu. Most of these major gyms share a similar training regimen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you mean they place great emphasis on physical well being, quick movements, and well rounded ness in fighting styles/abilities? Do they take punching skills, kicking abilities, and grappling seriously? Are they always looking to improve themselves and find an edge in combat? Sounds like some revolutionary ideas Bruce Lee came up with 30-40 years ago! WOW!

[ QUOTE ]
Ju jitzu, muy thai and western boxing. Include some wrestling take down techniques and some judo stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhh.. I hope you DO know that Judo is simply a derivative of Jujitsu; its Jujitsu watered down... So why mention it twice? Because you simply dont even know what you are talking about.

[ QUOTE ]
I never said thai fighters were invencible, I said the style is important to train, it is a strong mix of western boxing with deadly knees and elbows. I personally strive to do well and muy thai, but I am much stronger in western boxing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bruce Lee gave props to Muay Thai.

[/ QUOTE ]

As for the first part, I said I wasn't sure if thats what he was saying /images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

In modern NHB combat, the word jujitsu is synonymous with BJJ. Mention jujitsu to Chuck Lidell and he will assume BJJ.
For example, "Chris has tight jitz game." This means he is well trained in BJJ.

BJJ and Judo are two completely different things in modern combat. They may have the same historical roots, but they aren't the same thing.

The Truth
08-20-2005, 06:28 AM
I also want to note that I am not taking anything away from Bruce Lee. I think he is an awesome figure, and I respect his abilities as a fighter. "Essence of Jeet Kune Do" is a highly recommended read. I am just saying that if you took him out of his prime, without giving him the chance to catch up with modern NHB fighters, and sent him into the ring, he wouldn't survive.

If he were to have a year to train in the most effective methods of fighting, then he could compete without question.

I am not a martial artist; I am a fighter. A large percentage of modern NHB fighters feel the same way.


Bruce Lee helped further martial arts and fighting in general in the late 60's. The game has continued to progress since then. At his phyiscal prime, Bruce Lee did not have as much knowledge about what works and what doesn't work as modern fighters do.

I'm not real sure where the argument is, because without further training, Bruce Lee (during his prime) couldn't compete at the highest level with professional fighters of today, and its not close.


Edit to add: I realize that Bruce felt the most important thinga bout jeet kune do was the process. It was not a product, but a process. However, today Jeet Kune Do is taught at many places as an art or style. While incorrect by Bruce's mentality, I feel that this art or style they teach is refelective of the methods Bruce used when engaged in combat during his prime.

bernie
08-20-2005, 11:31 AM
Didn't Bruce also have to fight a master from overseas from his old 'style'? Much to what you are alluding to with people not liking deviation, he had to have a showdown at his training place where they fought head to head.

I always found that story kinda cool.

It woulda been a great match to watch.

b

jakethebake
08-20-2005, 12:44 PM
[ QUOTE ]
since kenjutsu + iaido were considered one and the same

[/ QUOTE ]

This is sort of true, but not exaclty. They are sometimes used interchangeably. And they're used togehter, but they're not identical. I guess Iado is a part of kenjutsu in a way, but there are teachers that specialize.

Blarg
08-20-2005, 05:16 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's history, not theory. You're way too caught up in theory. If you don't even know the most elementary history of karate, then you are very ignorant when it comes to martial arts.

Holding NHB tournaments as the measure of anything but NHB tournaments is a big mistake.

The idea that you have any idea who the greatest fighters in the world are is a pretty wild one indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol dude, we are talking about theory here not history. He is asking how would Bruce Lee have fared in the UFC. The ufc is a NHB tournament and thus measures NHB skill.

We can talk about history if you want, but it is off topic. I do have an elementary knowlege of Karate (I respect the Shaolin monks), and I think Karate as style of fighting is a silly idea. I don't bow before I step on the mat. I don't bother wearing a Gi. Karate is not fighting. It is not relevant to this discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you drunk? The history specifically being discussed was that of karate. Don't play stupid games.

Everyone else seemed to notice but you, but perhaps because they weren't playing games, talking out of their ass about things they didn't know, or trying to cover their tracks.

Dude ... for shame. Truly.

Blarg
08-20-2005, 05:22 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Didn't Bruce also have to fight a master from overseas from his old 'style'? Much to what you are alluding to with people not liking deviation, he had to have a showdown at his training place where they fought head to head.

I always found that story kinda cool.

It woulda been a great match to watch.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the fight people talk about a lot, but he had a number of fights in America, and had so many fights in Hong Kong that his parents kicked him out of the hemisphere.

The guy he fought that people talk about was Wong Jack Man, but he was from a different style. Now that he's dead, there's a lot of revisionist "explanations" of that fight, some pretty funny, such as Wong's claim that he held back, because his kicks were "too deadly."

arod15
08-20-2005, 05:28 PM
Bruce can shoot lightning ive seen it in a video game no way you can beat a man who can shoot lightning

Luzion
08-20-2005, 05:41 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
since kenjutsu + iaido were considered one and the same

[/ QUOTE ]

This is sort of true, but not exaclty. They are sometimes used interchangeably. And they're used togehter, but they're not identical. I guess Iado is a part of kenjutsu in a way, but there are teachers that specialize.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure it was. Back in the beginning, there wasnt any difference between killing someone by drawing your sword out, or by having your sword already out; either way you are killing him with your sword skills. In fact, even if you choose to differentiate, it wasnt even called iaido/iaijutsu I believe...

In Kenshin they called it Battou-Jutsu /images/graemlins/grin.gif