Why do people assume MMA fighters can't..?

[TheDragon5662]

Why do so many people assume that MMA fighters are only effective inside of the octagon, in a controlled environment? I've browsed through many questions over the last week or so, and have ready some things that appeared to be quite ridiculous to me. Some of the questions asked how an MMA fighter would do against a Navy SEAL in one on one combat, and everyone jumped to the conclusion that the SEAL would win outside of the octagon. My question is, why do you believe that? First of all, MMA fighters do NOT train in weapons training for their sport, so of course, if it's a fight involving knives, or other weapons, then the egde would go to the SEAL, but if it's just a one on one fight with both fighters being unarmed, then the MMA fighter (if he's a good one) would absolutely destroy any Navy SEAL who wasn't a professional MMA fighter. Why, you may ask? Because the MMA fighter eats, sleeps and breaths fighting for 6-8 hours every day. That is what they train to do. Fight. Do they do it init in an enclosed arena, with a referee, rounds, and rules? Of course they do. It's a sport. And if they did NOT have the rules, it would favor them in a fight even more. Once an MMA fighter puts you in a rear naked choke in a no rules environment, there won't be a referee to pull them off of their opponent. Their won't be a referee to stop them from snapping the arm off of their opponent. Their won't be a referee to stop them from leg locking their opponent to hell. Like I said, these men eat, sleep and breath fighting, and there is MUCH more to Navy SEAL training than just hand to hand combat. Infact, hand to hand combat is a very small aspect of the SEALS training regimine. SEALS need to be well versed in all aspects of survival, warfare, weaponry and operating machines. Hand to hand combat, while often being MMA, is generally a small aspect of their training.Now if a Navy SEAL and an MMA fighter were in the middle of a battlefield during wartime, the Navy SEAL would most likely out survive the MMA fighter any day. Why? Because it's what he's trained to do. Survive. Unless the MMA fighter comes from a strong military background, he isn't going to out survive the Navy SEAL in that kind of situation, however, in an UNARMED, one on one fight, the SEAL couldn't hold the jockstrap of the MMA fighter.You might say "Well, the Navy SEAL doesn't have to fight fair, and could go for groin strikes or eye gouges." Well, if you say that, you are correct, but the MMA fighter could very well do the same, and it isn't an easy task to just kick someone in the groin or poke them in the eyes if they are resisting and fighting back.Remember folks, we're talking about a one on one, organized fight, with both men UNARMED and agreeing to fight unarmed. In a one on one, unarmed fight, the MMA fighter would be victorious. There wouldn't be a referee to stop his onslaught. In a survival situation during wartime, the Navy SEAL would make the MMA fighter look foolish.Redsox, I respect your opinion, but what can the Navy SEAL do to the MMA fighter that he doesn't prepare for every day? Of course, we're not talking about pulling out a knife.Adding on to my comment above. What is the SEAL going to do to the MMA fighter that the fighter doesn't see every day? Choke them? The MMA fighter practices every type of choke in the book, about 100 times a day. They practice using it, and defending it, against some of the best fighters in the world. Is the SEAL going to out box an MMA fighter? Not unless the SEAL is a very good professional boxer. The point is, the only thing the SEAL can bring to the table, that the MMA fighter doesn't deal with, is groin strikes and eye rakes, which, like I said, is very difficult to pull off when you're target is fighting back.stslavik- What did I say in my question that you took so much offense to? You're the one getting worked up, so chill out a little. You told me to "Shut up and train"? Kind of a funny comment to make, considering the fact that you're acting as if you have no idea of what fighting is all about. Are you insisting that because an MMA fighter trains to "win a fight" rather than to "kill an opponent" means he doesn't have the character TO win a fight outside of the octagon? Do you know how many "underground" fights I've seen that involved only half skilled MMA fighters VS members of the military? I've seen about four, and these military members were also members of the MMA gym in which the fighter they challenged to a fight trained at.Thank you, Mike! People who assume that MMA fighters training isn't lethal obviously are clueless about MMA. MMA was around FAR before the UFC. Did you know the Spartans style of combat was Pankration fighting, which is much like todays MMA? Are you telling me that they weren't training to kill? Half of Jiu Jitsu submission holds could render a man disabled or dead.

[RedSoxBlackBelt]

I'll use your example of the Navy Seal vs. MMA Fighter. The Navy Seal is trained to kill and the MMA Fighter is trained to compete. Even though the MMA Fighter is now allowed to use deadly force and "illegal" blows, they are still considered a sports fighter.In conclusion, it really depends on the MMA fighter's prior training. If they've trained in full self-defense and are just limiting their selection of techniques for the octagon, then they are set. However, if they have only learned octagon techniques, they are screwed.

[Mike3507]

people in the military do very little hand to hand combat training, because if your in a battle and you have to use hand to hand it means you're f@#$ed to the asker, thank you so much for posting this you seem to be one of the few with good logicedit: "not trained in the lethal way" are you serious, half of the submissions could kill someone if you didnt let go, and of course MMA fighters have to worry about getting kicked in the groin it happens all the time, it it doesnt take a lot to kick someone in the balls instead of their thighand i will say it again people in the military dont receive the level of martial arts training that people believe they do

[cherrod8]

I know what you mean...it's like saying a Navy SEAL can out play a professional basketball player 1 on 1 court with rules...just because your specialy trained in certain aspects of survival and defense doesnt make them the toughtest guy in the world. Plus if you in a hand to hand situation on the battle field then your shit out of luck and highly unlikly to happen especially in this type of war.The point of alot of training in the military is to not end up in that situation in the first place. The only people who say things like that are people who are on the outside looking in..I highly doubt that any of them are proffesional MMA fighetrs or a NAVY SEAL or any other type of special forces. Come to think of it you cant say who will win until the fight is over...all it takes is one good punch in the sweet spot and your out, no matter WHO u are...so my opinion is you cant judge the out come of a 1 on 1 fight just because of the persons occupation.

[stslavik]

I'm sorry, you need to phrase your question in the form of a question...So, is the question then "Why ... assume... MMA... only effective... in a controlled environment"?Frankly because you fight the way you train. When you don't have to worry about groin strikes you take other liberties without considering the consequence of what would be done outside that environment. Yes, conceivably the MMA fighter could go for those strikes, but why would he? He's not trained to fight that way. He's also not trained at the level of "lethal" the way that a SEAL would be. When you train to be lethal, you can always back down. When you train backed down from it, you can't necessarily escalate appropriately. The SEAL would naturally move to that level and not think twice about it.These X vs. Y questions are inane anyhow. Fights aren't a matter of who has the better style, or who has the better circumstances. It comes down to split-second decisions and chance. Minimizing the way odds turn against you is really the only advantage one fighter ever has over another.Why not stop worrying what people think of your martial art of choice? You want to find out the answers as to who's better and when? Shut up and train!

[brianb1848]

dude, you spent way too much time getting riled up over a very stupid questionand most leopard seals would beat a mma fighter via murder. so in conclusion you fail

[MC2815]

Ok I am not about to read your whole question i already know what your complaining about.This IS how it would happen...INSIDE the octagon, MOST PROFESSIONAL mma fighters will beat, MOST seals. Why, because of course that is what they do for a living.Now OUTSIDE the octagon, it would greatly depend on the situation, is this a fight to the death? Is this a fight which both fighters know what each others qualifications are and are both ready to fight? If this was to the death and the situation was that of say, an instigated bar fight. The close quarters of the bar and lack of preparation for the mma fighter would make it extremely improbably for the fighter to through good solid punches and kicks and get a clean takedown. The seal is trained to kill and has a killer instinct and is ready to use his skills anywhere anytime. So in that event the MOST seals would beat MOST PROFESSIONAL mma fighters.I stress professional because most amateur mma fighters do not have the conditioning of the technical skill to stand a chance against a sealMIKE-Sorry buddy but not "half" the techniques of jujitsu are lethal. Only the chokes could potentially be lethal, the rest are just perminatly damaging. AND NONE are quick death techniques practiced in brazialian jujitsuEDIT: Well i can see that we have the same 3 morons neging everyone that doesnt ride a mma fighters nuts

[RearNakedJoke7330]

Here's the bottom line; the only way you can get good at something is to practice it. The more time you spend practicing it, the better you get. MMA fighters spend a crapload of time practicing 1 on 1 unarmed combat. Consequently, the high-level fighters are pretty damned good at it. In order to hold your own against somebody like that (barring flukes) is to practice just as much. None of our military personel practice that much, during their time serving. They spend their training time far more efficiently, training skills that are actually relevant to modern warfar. I'd find it very disconcerting if our soldiers were training hand to hand as much as MMA fighters, because if that were the case, they'd get massacred against an enemy force that actually spent time practicing armed combat. The whole eye gouge and groin shot argument is so stupid, I always feel silly addressing it. Eye-gouges, groin kicks, etc are techniques -- just like jabs, takedowns, and armbars. Theoretically, anybody could perform any of the above techniques if they have some basic know-how. So why isn't everybody as good at punching as a pro-boxer, as good at shooting as an Olympic wrestler, or as good at flying submissions as Genki Sudo? Because actually pulling these moves off on a fully resisting opponent is the tricky part. You need the skills, the timing, and the accuracy to deliver your shots. That's what time spent training will give you.So if you spar with a boxer and he outclasses you to the point where you can barely land a solid punch, why would you suddenly be able to land a thumb in his eye, were the rules to disappear? Well here's the inside scoop, for those who don't know; you can't. You're kidding yourself. It's not going to happen.If you can't get a clean kick through against a Thai boxer or Kyokushin Karateka, what in god's name makes you think that you could kick him in the groin?If you can't aim well enough to shoot somebody in the body, what makes you think that you could score a headshot? People are sickeningly delusional. I actually prefer the BJJ nutjobs who think that striking doesn't matter over morons who think that they could hang with Anderson Silva by groin kicks and eye rakes. Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that attacks to the eye or groin aren't viable. They are. However, those attacks CANNOT compensate for an opponent's greatly superior skill. Such techniques are most relevant when the skill-level of two fighters is relatively equal. I honestly think that people say these silly things just cause its MMA. If you asked them "do you think that your sensei/sifu would lose to an opponent with only a 16th of his experience, if the other guy could use dirty tactics and your instructor could not?" Well, the answers would be different, I'm sure.EDIT:It doesn't matter if you train sport or if you train traditional, if you can put power into your shots and land them, you can strike. If your techniques are effective and you can pull them off against resistance, your skills are functional. That's the end of that.The only difference between a sport fighter and a 'reality-based' fighter of equal skill is their fighting mentality. And if they are of equal skill, that will likely play a part in determining their winner. If the sport fighter's skill outclass that of his opponent's, the mentality will matter much less.Do you think that a 14 year old who is intent on killing will overcome a full grown man who's intent on merely defeating?

[TheSilentCobra]

I think that people who think that don't have clue, it suits their ego to think that way, but true warriors respect and know better so does the MMA fighter and you. i am a martial artist and never would underestimate a MMA fighter. Many persons have underestimated my fighting ability in the past and have learned the truth the hard way. Anyone who picks a fight with a MMA fighter outside the ring will learn what you stated in the last part of your question was true.

[mytank4]

mma is sport and navy seals do same workouts and hand to hand combat but hey are not geared toward sports there are techniques that exploit certain areas that mma fighter dont cover