Is Karate the ultimate martial art?

MattDellavedova · Post #1 » by **MattDellavedova** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:56 pm

If you had to fight in the UFC and you could only have one martial art background, would you pick karate? I think I would, for the discipline and the amazing strikes.

Cammo101 · Post #2 » by **Cammo101** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 6:27 pm

Wrestling is the obvious answer here. It's the best base to have because you control where the fight takes place.

cowboyronnie · Post #3 » by **cowboyronnie** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:35 pm

bare-chested, moonlight katas in heavy rain give me the edge.

Jasen777 · Post #4 » by **Jasen777** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:33 pm

Sambo, because that's basically cheating as it's already a combination of different arts.

Jasen777 · Post #5 » by **Jasen777** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:43 pm

Cammo101 wrote:Wrestling is the obvious answer here. It's the best base to have because you control where the fight takes place.

If mean something like free/folk/Greco (catch/submission is different)- I don't quite agree, if you only have that (going against a random much more complete MMA fighter), you could perhaps choose where the fight takes place - you can choose rather to be submitted or knocked out. So I'd rather take BJJ since it includes some takedown training with the ground fighting. Though it really doesn't matter since if you go up against a "complete" fighter with only BJJ you'll most likely get blasted like Vinny vs. Bader.

Most grappling arts are going to beat any striking art the large majority of the time, in an "only one art" scenario, IMO.

REDDzone · Post #6 » by **REDDzone** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:44 pm

MMA. Its actually its own thing now. On bottom, you have to hold your opponent's hands and look at the ref in an exasperated manner.

Jasen777 · Post #7 » by **Jasen777** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:48 pm

REDDzone wrote:MMA. Its actually its own thing now. On bottom, you have to hold your opponent's hands and look at the ref in an exasperated manner.

I practice the MMA variant where you hold your opponent against the cage for 15 minutes and get a split decision. Anyways, MMA is obviously the best art for MMA fighting.

Cammo101 · Post #8 » by **Cammo101** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:30 pm

Jasen777 wrote:
Cammo101 wrote:Wrestling is the obvious answer here. It's the best base to have because you control where the fight takes place.

If mean something like free/folk/Greco (catch/submission is different)- I don't quite agree, if you only have that (going against a random much more complete MMA fighter), you could perhaps choose where the fight takes place - you can choose rather to be submitted or knocked out. So I'd rather take BJJ since it includes some takedown training with the ground fighting. Though it really doesn't matter since if you go up against a "complete" fighter with only BJJ you'll most likely get blasted like Vinny vs. Bader.

Most grappling arts are going to beat any striking art the large majority of the time, in an "only one art" scenario, IMO.

Most wrestlers have a decent submission defense built in from wrestling. I guess if we are talking about UFC 1 style vs. style with no knowledge of anything else, then it's probably BJJ. But, if we are assuming these guys at least have some passing knowledge of the other martial arts, then I'll take wrestling.

REDDzone · Post #9 » by **REDDzone** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 3:31 pm

Cammo101 wrote:Most wrestlers have a decent submission defense built in from wrestling.

I wouldn't say decent. Maybe decent compared to random joes who have never traned in anything.

They certainly learn a lot faster than most too, just because they have a framework for "grappling" that they can more easily build upon. That said, that framework isn't always good, sometimes its better to have a clean slate so you don't start with bad habits.

REDDzone · Post #10 » by **REDDzone** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 6:08 pm

Now that I think about this, seems like judo would for sure be the correct answer. You control where the fight takes place, but you also know submissions if you take it to the ground.

So yea, judo.

SDM · Post #11 » by **SDM** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:22 pm

Is there some striking training in judo? I've noticed some more recent judo guys take to boxing rather quickly.

REDDzone · Post #12 » by **REDDzone** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:39 pm

SDM wrote:Is there some striking training in judo? I've noticed some more recent judo guys take to boxing rather quickly.

Technically yes. Here is my understanding: Three components of judo: standing (nagewaza), striking (atemiwaza), grappling (newaza). Although I've never seen striking practiced in judo, ever. Hell, it seems some schools don't even train the groundwork as much anymore. I've heard this is because of judo in the olympics and the rules there. You only have a few seconds to get a submission on the ground in that setting, which explains why Ronda is so scrambly and strikes so quickly after the throw.

Judo was founded on the principal that you shouldn't do anything that you can't practice at full force against a fully resisting opponent (hence training is focused on randori - sparring). So if there is ever a need to use it, you are fully prepared. Given that, its not surprising that striking would have been kind of left out, since you can't really be punching your training partners at full resistance and expect to still have training partners.

I'm not sure if it has technically been left in there as a tribute to judo's jujitsu roots, or if practicing striking was once more widespread.

Other martial arts that people think of when this question is asked (sambo, bjj, etc.) are derived from judo. And honestly I'm not aware of much (if anything) that exists in those sports that doesn't exist in judo. So unless you think the correct answer is a pure striking art, it seems hard to argue against judo.

SDM · Post #13 » by **SDM** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:45 pm

REDDzone wrote:
Other martial arts that people think of when this question is asked (sambo, bjj, etc.) are derived from judo. And honestly I'm not aware of much (if anything) that exists in those sports that doesn't exist in judo. So unless you think the correct answer is a pure striking art, it seems hard to argue against judo.

That's a good point. Judo guys who train in striking tend to have more power than BJJ guys, more akin to wrestlers when they make that conversion.

There's more sub emphasis in judo than freestyle wrestling, so you've convinced me. Mark another one for judo.

Jasen777 · Post #14 » by **Jasen777** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:56 pm

Cammo101 wrote:I guess if we are talking about UFC 1 style vs. style with no knowledge of anything else, then it's probably BJJ. But, if we are assuming these guys at least have some passing knowledge of the other martial arts, then I'll take wrestling.

I think wrestling is probably the best base for MMA. What I got from the OP was that it was you get one art (like UFC 1 style) but you're going to fight in the modern UFC, which of course means you're going to lose no matter what you pick. Actually in that scenario, a striking art may be best since an early lucky strike is probably the only route to victory.

Jasen777 · Post #15 » by **Jasen777** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:05 pm

REDDzone wrote:Other martial arts that people think of when this question is asked (sambo, bjj, etc.) are derived from judo. And honestly I'm not aware of much (if anything) that exists in those sports that doesn't exist in judo. So unless you think the correct answer is a pure striking art, it seems hard to argue against judo.

I don't think Judo gets credit for arts that are derived from it but include things that aren't commonly seen in Judo anymore. Like the fully implemented striking and greater ground time allowed in combat sambo (though as I've said that may be cheating a bit since combat sambo is perhaps closer to MMA with a jacket and some protective gear on than a proper "single art").

REDDzone · Post #16 » by **REDDzone** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:34 pm

Jasen777 wrote:
REDDzone wrote:Other martial arts that people think of when this question is asked (sambo, bjj, etc.) are derived from judo. And honestly I'm not aware of much (if anything) that exists in those sports that doesn't exist in judo. So unless you think the correct answer is a pure striking art, it seems hard to argue against judo.

I don't think Judo gets credit for arts that are derived from it but include things that aren't commonly seen in Judo anymore. Like the fully implemented striking and greater ground time allowed in combat sambo (though as I've said that may be cheating a bit since combat sambo is perhaps closer to MMA with a jacket and some protective gear on than a proper "single art").

I think its really really hard for you to make that argument when, IIRC, the founder of sambo literally had a black belt in judo under the founder of judo himself. I mean if it were exactly the same it would just be called judo right?

Jasen777 · Post #17 » by **Jasen777** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:53 pm

REDDzone wrote:I think its really really hard for you to make that argument when, IIRC, the founder of sambo literally had a black belt in judo under the founder of judo himself. I mean if it were exactly the same it would just be called judo right?

That's like saying America can't be the best country because we came from England, so England has to be the best. (An analogy, I'm not making any claims of country superiority).

I'd rather go into a MMA fight with this training (just two random examples but I think it gets the idea across):

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDLc1rERu4M[/youtube]

Than this:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8ZUhCVPFm4[/youtube]

cowboyronnie · Post #18 » by **cowboyronnie** » Thu Jun 18, 2015 1:56 am

headbutts and knees to the head on the ground in that sambo vid. headbutts!

REDDzone · Post #19 » by **REDDzone** » Thu Jun 18, 2015 1:57 am

Jasen777 wrote:That's like saying America can't be the best country because we came from England, so England has to be the best. (An analogy, I'm not making any claims of country superiority).

No, you are changing the argument now. I don't have any issue if you say you prefer sambo, fine. I'm arguing against your claim that judo doesn't get any credit for sambo when judo was literally the origin of sambo.

And yea I could easily cherry pick videos of bad*ss judokas hitting throws, it doesn't mean much. Guys like Lombard are based on judo, Mousasi's grappling is almost exclusively judo. IIRC there was actually a judoka who entered and beat Fedor (who trained judo as well) in sambo competition a few years back. We could exchange anecdotes all day long.

Jasen777 · Post #20 » by **Jasen777** » Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:13 am

Jasen777 wrote:No, you are changing the argument now. I don't have any issue if you say you prefer sambo, fine. I'm arguing against your claim that judo doesn't get any credit for sambo when judo was literally the origin of sambo.

It can have credit for producing it, but judo and sambo are now different things (thought there is overlap). If there's something different in sambo than isn't commonly in judo, then you can't use that thing to argue for Judo being better for some purpose. That's what I was getting at.

REDDzone wrote:And yea I could easily cherry pick videos of bad*ss judokas hitting throws, it doesn't mean much. Guys like Lombard are based on judo, Mousasi's grappling is almost exclusively judo. IIRC there was actually a judoka who entered and beat Fedor in sambo competition a few years back. We could exchange anecdotes all day long.

My point is that combat sambo is a more mma complete art than modern judo and so would be better as a single art base for MMA.