ReMA vs. MMA

[Kevin Holmes]

Thanks for the responses/correction in my misconceptions. I hope that one day there will be a full revival. Is there any other chapter besides Columbus in Ohio?

[Jaron Bernstein]

Thanks for the responses/correction in my misconceptions. I hope that one day there will be a full revival. Is there any other chapter besides Columbus in Ohio?

It might be a bit of a trip, but you are welcome to train with us. We have 2 special events (a 1.0 and a Meyer seminar) in early 2007 in addition to regular weekly practice.

Jaron
Columbus study group

[Gene Tausk]

Thanks for the responses/correction in my misconceptions. I hope that one day there will be a full revival. Is there any other chapter besides Columbus in Ohio?

It might be a bit of a trip, but you are welcome to train with us. We have 2 special events (a 1.0 and a Meyer seminar) in early 2007 in addition to regular weekly practice.

Jaron
Columbus study group

Allow me to put in my 2 cents for the Columbus study group. They are a great bunch of guys (except for that Jaron Bernstein person who is always looking to bust some heads.....typical cop ) and they have a GREAT training facility. Even if you can only make it once a month, I highly recommend it.

Ohio is not that big a state....take the time to head to Columbus once in a while and you will not be disappointed. (NOTE: I am not dissing the Buckeye state....I am from Columbus and scarlet and grey runs in my veins, but Ohio is an easily traversible state )

Good luck.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Allow me to put in my 2 cents for the Columbus study group. They are a great bunch of guys (except for that Jaron Bernstein person who is always looking to bust some heads.....typical cop

1942US Code Section 38 is not your friend. I only hit my training partners.

and they have a GREAT training facility. Even if you can only make it once a month, I highly recommend it.

www.rpac.osu.edu. Best facility I have ever seen.

Ohio is not that big a state....take the time to head to Columbus once in a while and you will not be disappointed. (NOTE: I am not dissing the Buckeye state....I am from Columbus and scarlet and grey runs in my veins, but Ohio is an easily traversible state

Kind of like the flat plains of Texas?

[Kevin Holmes]

Ok, I will definitely take it into consideration; however, I am not 18 yet. Unfortunately that has barred me from competing MMA seriously and has unfortunately barred me to the members of my school or others during small "competitions." If that is not a factor in this I would love to actually. What sort of price would I be looking at?

[Jaron Bernstein]

We have no fees. We require that to train with us you join ARMA. Our facility charges 10$ per day for non member guest passes (like going to a commercial gym) but we don't see any of that. We do a mix of I would say is around 1/3 swords, 1/3 grappling and maybe 1/3 dagger.

[Stewart Sackett]

Now, here is where the difference in intent shows up. the MMA guy teaches to go for an arm lock, from which there are a number of options , the most obvious and easiest of which is to lean back and pivot to stess the shoulder and IF (that is the difference right there) you really want to hurt them, you can kick your feet out and break the shoulder. A fairly simple and effective technique.
However, looking at it from a Renn. MA point of view, I don't have to achieve a lock to neutralize my opponent for a period of time to apply graduated pressure or switch to a better hold to force a submission or to decide whether to go further and break the shoulder. To me, everything after he grabs the wrist is a waste of time and energy. The arm is extended... strike the elbow and break it!

I think this is an interesting & important observation, although I’m not sure I entirely agree with your conclusions.

The fight books do certainly include bone breaking joint strikes but they also include breaking techniques like modern joint locks. If, as you say, “everything after he grabs the wrist is a waste of time” then why include the grappling techniques? I think the answer is can be found in the examination of MMA.

Several things are made clear by examining the early UFC bouts as well as MMA in general. Probably one of the most important lessons MMA teaches (along with an understanding of the phases of combat) is this: A fighter is most likely to be able to execute techniques against resistance if they’ve trained against resistance. So fighters who train “alive” & emphasize sparring will virtually always dominate fighters whose training is focused on solo drills & practice with compliant partners; no matter how potentially effective their techniques.

We fight how we train. This, in my opinion, is the root of the MMA fighters “difference in intent”. Even if the dynamic arm break were legal in MMA (& to my knowledge there’s no competition where it is), how could you train it? If you execute the technique with genuine intent your training partner would be crippled & if you didn’t you’d fail to learn the real timing & energy necessary to execute the technique (a problem common to many kata based Eastern martial arts).

I’m not saying that the dynamic arm break can’t work but I’m saying that it cannot be drilled safely with intent & against a resisting opponent. It would, therefore have to be integrated into a fighters repertoire through static drills & the development of an intellectual awareness of the technique rather than intensive physical practice. This can be done but, because it lacks the living interplay with a resisting opponent, it doesn’t serve to teach a beginning fighter the skill base necessary to develop their overall fighting ability.

Now, I try to give the old masters the benefit of the doubt & generally assume that they knew what they were doing. Given that, & given what I know & believe about how human beings learn most effectively, I have drawn certain conclusions: I would suspect that a great many of the more destructive techniques from the fight books were not trained, in the sense of being integrated into sparring or extensively drilled, but rather were simply introduced to experienced knights & soldiers as ideas which could then be applied (using the skill base developed in training) on the battlefield if an opportunity presented itself. Their presence in the fight books was a way for the old masters to share a few of their favorite “tricks” not as an example of the base skills of the fighting system.

You are, of course, free to disagree with me.

[Stewart Sackett]

As for the question of Ringen vs. MMA…I do have certain opinions.

I attended the Portland, OR NTP 1.0 with John Clements & I remember him describing sport fencing in relation to historical swordsmanship as the equivalent of boxing using only 2 fingers of 1 hand. He said if you ever meet anyone like that, by all means agree to box them…they can use their 2 fingers & you’ll use both hands. But whatever you do, don’t agree to box them using only 2 fingers yourself because they’re going to be really good at using 2 fingers.

I thought this offered a valid insight into the realities of training. The more a person specializes the more developed they will become in their area of specialty. The more varied a person studies, the less they will be able to devote themselves to the details of any one thing.

This is the essence of what makes mixed martial artists so dangerous. Although the fighter himself trains in everything he may conceivably have: a Boxing coach, a Muay Thai coach, a Wrestling coach, a Judo coach & a Brazilian Jujutsu coach; with each coach trained exclusively in a single fighting system & each system having had centuries to develop & refine itself.

While historical warriors were undoubtedly well rounded fighters, the sheer variety of threats they had to address in their training would seem to preclude the possibility of the sort of specialized skill development that has taken place over the course of hundreds of years developing skills in isolation. I would specifically guess that historical warriors did not develop their striking skills to the same level as modern boxers (not surprising given the ineffectual nature of a punch to plate armour) or ground fighting to a degree equal to either Judo or Brazilian Jujutsu (after all, the medieval battlefield is different from a wrestling matt in that cavalry rarely charge across the latter). I would, however, place good odds on a 15th century knight in the clinch against a Judo man or even a Greco-Roman wrestler.

As for an ARMA fighter competing in MMA:

I think the rules of MMA, the nature of the competition environment & the training of MMA fighters would make it very difficult to be effective using purely historical techniques. For the sake of survival I think it would be necessary for an ARMA fighter to adopt boxing style hands for defense (what I see in the fight books suggests a stance closer to what is used in freestyle wrestling…superior for grappling but vulnerable to strikes) & some Brazilian Jujutsu for the ground. Such a modified style couldn’t be considered to be historical in the strictest sense & so wouldn’t serve as reliable “proof” of Ringen’s effectiveness.

On the other hand, I don’t doubt that Ringen was historically effective & engaging in competition would serve to raise the experiential level of those ARMA members who participated. Improved fighting ability would undoubtedly be an asset to the process of reconstructing the historical arts even if not all of a fighters personal methods were historical in nature…just so long as the individual was clear about this & made a good faith attempt to remain within historical bounds during ARMA training.

[JeffGentry]

Stewart

This is the essence of what makes mixed martial artists so dangerous. Although the fighter himself trains in everything he may conceivably have: a Boxing coach, a Muay Thai coach, a Wrestling coach, a Judo coach & a Brazilian Jujutsu coach; with each coach trained exclusively in a single fighting system & each system having had centuries to develop & refine itself.

This is prety much what we in HeEMA/ReMA should be doing, Sword's, dagger, pole weapon's, unarmed, striking, In my mind these are the first MMA.

I think where most people fall down is in how they train as far as drilling and the intent in sparring a boxer doesn't go 100% trying to knock out his sparring partner, he sparr's at a certain level of intensity and his intent is to work on certain thing's his hook, jab, cross, footwork, I think the same can be said about any other art that train's for a combat sport, sparring is not about winning or losing it is a way to learn with resistance, and a partner who is trying to get one over on you so you learn to attack and protect yourself.

It is imperative we leave the ego at the door and when we train we train in the right way with the right mindset.


Just my 2 cent's.


Jeff

[Jason Erickson]

The point is moot. The better fighter wins the day, regardless of style. And some days Lady Luck smiles on a man that otherwise might have lost.

Train to be a better fighter and let others waste time on style vs style debates. Study the historical sources and the work of modern experts alike. Use what works, regardless of the source.

Learn to adapt to changing circumstances and unfamiliar rules. Understand how to change your tactics as a scrap unfolds. Be relentless.

Know how to fall, hard and often, without thinking about it. Be comfortable with training discomfort. Be uncomfortable with comfortable training. Explore your weaknesses until they become strengths.

Exercise. Be overprepared for the challenges you will face. Resolve health issues and injuries thoroughly rather than seeking mere pain relief. Rethink your training methods often, and question your assumptions. Be smart. Continuously sophisticate your training. If you are training the same way for the same goals in six months, you have fallen four months behind the competition.

Learn from everyone, regardless of their ability or experience. Do not seek to constantly improve against the same partner(s). Go out of your way to face unfamiliar and more skilled opponents in their field(s) of strength. Be humbled often.

[Jason Taylor]

Dave,

I'll admit a lack of patience to read all 12 pages, so I apologize if this has been covered.

I'd like to see someone try to stab me while they're stuck in my triangle choke as I control both of their arms. Would they grab their knife and stab me with only the use of their toes? Haha, I hope not!

I see your point here--however, I wouldn't be too cocky about your unarmed chances on the ground against a knife-wielding opponent with skill.

I think this might be getting off-topic a bit, so I apologize if so--I try to avoid thread drift. However, your example assumes you have already locked in the triangle choke before they draw their knife. If your opponent is carrying a fixed-blade or a fast draw folder, then I give him good odds to be able to use it. A Swiss Army knife, not so much. But a real honest-to-goodness fighting dagger would be easy to get to and employ in this situation (which is my attempt to bring things back to the topic, I suppose). And most BJJ sparring I've done ends up with one of us in the other's guard, because that's what MMA guys usually train for (at least in my experience). Get the guard where you're safe, then submit. No submission without position. Etc.

In someone's guard, however, I can virtually always get one hand free, just by struggling if nothing else--and if not, by standing, leaning back, etc. Once that one hand is free, the guy with the daggeer can easily use it--if not to the body, then to the legs. This is bad enough, IMO, to cripple and likely end the fight through blood loss.

My point is not to discredit MMA, because I've sparred with those guys, and they are very, very good at what they do. What they do is hit, kick, and grapple with remarkable effectiveness. Is MMA perfect? No, but nothing really is anyway. However, RMA comes from a different scenario, and it doesn't discredit it to say so. MMA has one purpose--one-on-one unarmed confrontations. The rules don't weaken it, though they don't necessarily make it stronger. RMA isn't just for the battlefield, but it does have a serious weapon element lacking in MMA schools. These weapons are often obsolete (though not knives or clubs/maces, which one can always improvise), but nonetheless, the focus is different. I'm sure you'd admit pure MMA guys would show limited effectiveness in a rapier duel against a pure rapier fencer, right?

This is not entirely directed at you, BTW, but at the forum in general, because I've seen a lot of different opinions I'm responding to.

BTW, I wouldn't say that military/battlefield combat arts don't use groundfightig because they were clueless about the guard, etc. That seems like assuming that the warriors of the past were naive and unsophisticated. They probably didn't focus on that because, in many cases, you wore armor, and getting back up was tough, and you were likely to get stabbed in the process (as has been noted).

Just my thoughts on the matter. I always figure that anybody who fights for a living probably is pretty savvy, and the guard position isn't really all that hard to see having been looked at and discarded as "too dangerous for our parameters," i.e., weapons and multiple opponents assumed.

Sorry for rambling.

Jason

[JeffGentry]

Dave,

I'll admit a lack of patience to read all 12 pages, so I apologize if this has been covered.

I'd like to see someone try to stab me while they're stuck in my triangle choke as I control both of their arms. Would they grab their knife and stab me with only the use of their toes? Haha, I hope not!

I see your point here--however, I wouldn't be too cocky about your unarmed chances on the ground against a knife-wielding opponent with skill.

I think this might be getting off-topic a bit, so I apologize if so--I try to avoid thread drift. However, your example assumes you have already locked in the triangle choke before they draw their knife. If your opponent is carrying a fixed-blade or a fast draw folder, then I give him good odds to be able to use it. A Swiss Army knife, not so much. But a real honest-to-goodness fighting dagger would be easy to get to and employ in this situation (which is my attempt to bring things back to the topic, I suppose). And most BJJ sparring I've done ends up with one of us in the other's guard, because that's what MMA guys usually train for (at least in my experience). Get the guard where you're safe, then submit. No submission without position. Etc.

In someone's guard, however, I can virtually always get one hand free, just by struggling if nothing else--and if not, by standing, leaning back, etc. Once that one hand is free, the guy with the daggeer can easily use it--if not to the body, then to the legs. This is bad enough, IMO, to cripple and likely end the fight through blood loss.

My point is not to discredit MMA, because I've sparred with those guys, and they are very, very good at what they do. What they do is hit, kick, and grapple with remarkable effectiveness. Is MMA perfect? No, but nothing really is anyway. However, RMA comes from a different scenario, and it doesn't discredit it to say so. MMA has one purpose--one-on-one unarmed confrontations. The rules don't weaken it, though they don't necessarily make it stronger. RMA isn't just for the battlefield, but it does have a serious weapon element lacking in MMA schools. These weapons are often obsolete (though not knives or clubs/maces, which one can always improvise), but nonetheless, the focus is different. I'm sure you'd admit pure MMA guys would show limited effectiveness in a rapier duel against a pure rapier fencer, right?

This is not entirely directed at you, BTW, but at the forum in general, because I've seen a lot of different opinions I'm responding to.

BTW, I wouldn't say that military/battlefield combat arts don't use groundfightig because they were clueless about the guard, etc. That seems like assuming that the warriors of the past were naive and unsophisticated. They probably didn't focus on that because, in many cases, you wore armor, and getting back up was tough, and you were likely to get stabbed in the process (as has been noted).

Just my thoughts on the matter. I always figure that anybody who fights for a living probably is pretty savvy, and the guard position isn't really all that hard to see having been looked at and discarded as "too dangerous for our parameters," i.e., weapons and multiple opponents assumed.

Sorry for rambling.

Jason

[Jaron Bernstein]

"I'm sure you'd admit pure MMA guys would show limited effectiveness in a rapier duel against a pure rapier fencer, right?"

Actually, I would disagree with that. Against a modern sport fencer who only knows sport fencing, if a good MMA fighter can just get past that point and into hand range, the sport fencer (however athletic otherwise) is toast. The rules (and subsequent training) of sport fencing almost assure that outcome.

Against someone who does historical fencing (which I like to think of as MMA with weapons added to the mix) it would more variable. If the MMA guy has no rapier skills, then foyning fence is scary to behold. So he gets skewered through the eye from 4' away. But If they do get past the point (something that is very feasible BTW) and into hand range then it comes down to who has better unarmed skills. The theoretical RMA curriculum has a full arsenal of unarmed material every bit as sophisticated as modern MMA (many of the techniques are identical even). However, our reconstruction of ringen (as in people who can use ringen in "live" sparring at the same skill level as top MMA guys use their art) lags behind our reconstruction of the armed aspect.

[Jason Taylor]

"I'm sure you'd admit pure MMA guys would show limited effectiveness in a rapier duel against a pure rapier fencer, right?"

Actually, I would disagree with that. Against a modern sport fencer who only knows sport fencing, if a good MMA fighter can just get past that point and into hand range, the sport fencer (however athletic otherwise) is toast. The rules (and subsequent training) of sport fencing almost assure that outcome.

Against someone who does historical fencing (which I like to think of as MMA with weapons added to the mix) it would more variable. If the MMA guy has no rapier skills, then foyning fence is scary to behold. So he gets skewered through the eye from 4' away. But If they do get past the point (something that is very feasible BTW) and into hand range then it comes down to who has better unarmed skills. The theoretical RMA curriculum has a full arsenal of unarmed material every bit as sophisticated as modern MMA (many of the techniques are identical even). However, our reconstruction of ringen (as in people who can use ringen in "live" sparring at the same skill level as top MMA guys use their art) lags behind our reconstruction of the armed aspect.

I think we mostly agree.

Actually, I was more referring to the focus in training, not so much what might happen in a real fight. If the MMA guy tries to use the rapier, fight on the rapier fencer's terms, he'll get annihilated. Yes, it's feasible to get past the blade using standard MMA tactics (though the parrying dagger might prove dicey, if it's there), but what I meant was if you try to play the other guy's game, you'll likely lose. Hence, RMA practitioners, even if we had a full reconstruction of the Ringen arts, would not *generally* do as well as MMA practitioners, because MMA spends *all* of its time training to fight in that scenario, while RMA practitioners have spent significant amounts of time training with weapons, which MMA doesn't put time into at all. Hence their focus on the ground-and-pound/grapple/clinch/strike scenarios is virtually total. So, year-for-year, you'll be better at those things if you study MMA, because that's all you train for. Meanwhile, we in RMA are studying other things as well.

It's kind of like studying boxing vs. studying Hung Gar Kung Fu. Both use a lot of punches, but year-for-year, the boxer will be a better *puncher*, because he hasn't trained for anything else, while the Hung Gar practitioner will be more well-rounded. If they fight on the boxer's terms, the Hung Gar guy will have a tough time. If they don't, and he can make the boxer play his games, then things might be different.

Also, I meant only to refer to historical fencers, not sport fencers. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Sport fencers are highly athletic, but without cross-training, they'd likely be in trouble--especially if they try to "flick" the rapier blade.

[Mike Cartier]

there was groundfighting before there was a BJJ guard.