UFC Open Concept vs. Traditional Closed Systems

neantmachine said:I’ll ask again—why does so many people hate on BJJ? Is there something about it that bugs you? I don't get what's so polarizing about it. People bring up Helio and how he failed... so what? UFC is just the natural evolution of combining different martial arts. It's about what works and what doesn't. BJJ is here to stay—whether you consider it part of Judo or something else isn't really the point. BJJ works, and if people can't handle that, well, that's their problem. Grappling is absolutely essential.

Give me names then—which people on this forum actually dislike BJJ? I've been around this place forever... but apparently, I'm clearly missing something.😕

ruggedfalcon2 said:sparring doesn't ruin a traditional art... honestly, I have no clue where you even got that idea.😕

I'm not saying sparring ruins things, it's just that an art gets watered down when everything boils down to nothing but sparring and you lose that chance to actually test your skills in a real-world scenario.

ruggedfalcon2 said:UFC isn't exactly the closest thing to what a real fight looks like in terms of street survival... it's really just the most complete version of a competitive sport we have, played under specific rules with a referee stepping in to help out.

What I was getting at is that within the limits of what's legal and socially acceptable today, UFC is about as close as you can get. If you want something that's actually sanctioned and won't land you in prison, this kind of sport is the peak. Sure, back in the day people could organize death matches without rules or refs, but in modern America, that's obviously impossible, so that's where the UFC fills the gap.

ruggedfalcon2 said:UFC doesn't follow Bruce Lee's system or his approach to fighting... and if it did, you'd see Jeet Kune Do masters dominating the UFC octagon.😉

If my memory serves me right:
1. Jeet Kune Do as a formal system is technically unfinished, but that doesn't mean its core principles can't be applied.
2. There's also the question of whether any true Jeet Kune Do master even exists today—or ever existed besides Bruce Lee, though he probably didn't even consider himself a master since he never got to finalize the whole system.

Eric Jackson43 said:I don't think it gets ruined by sparring. It gets ruined when everything boils down to nothing but sparring and you lose the ability to actually test your skills in a real situation.

My point was simply that UFC is about as close as we can get to actual fighting within legal and socially acceptable boundaries today. If you want something that mimics a real fight while remaining legal and socially acceptable, you end up with a sport like this. Sure, back in the day, people could organize real fights—no refs, no rules, even to the death—but in a modern legal framework, that's impossible. That’s where the UFC comes in.

not every fight ended in death 😁 and you don't have to prove reality by breaking someone's arm or killing them... there are three levels of sparring in martial arts, leading up to full contact... and why do you think illegal fights still exist today? 😉

Eric Jackson43 said:If I'm not mistaken:
1. Jeet Kune Do isn't a finished system, though that doesn't mean its principles can't be used.
2. The question is whether any true master of Jeet Kune Do exists today—and if one ever did, besides Bruce Lee (though he probably didn't even consider himself a master since he didn't have the chance to finish the system).

1. they aren't being applied in the UFC, regardless.
2. Of course masters existed—take Dan Inosanto or Glover Teixeira, for example—but again, you're confusing things... Jeet Kune Do is a skill, not a sport... and that's the fundamental reason why you don't see it in the ring.🙂

ruggedfalcon2 said:not every fight has to end in a funeral, 😁and you don't exactly need to snap someone's arm or kill them just to prove how reality works...

But the second you start limiting techniques, you're basically just imposing rules and turning it into a sport, which brings us back to the fact that modern UFC has pretty much proven itself as the gold standard for that kind of thing; sure, it’s got its flaws—like that sudden corner ambush you mentioned—but it makes up for it in so many other ways.

ruggedfalcon2 said:why on earth do you think illegal fights don't exist even today?😉

I'm pretty sure they're out there, I mean, if two neighbors get into a brawl on their front lawn, that's technically an illegal fight too, but the issue is that because they're underground, you can't really "scale" them, whereas when something like UFC goes mainstream, the quality actually climbs because more people bring their own expertise to the table, and honestly, I doubt we would have ever even heard of Fedor Emelianenko if the sport hadn't gone global.

ruggedfalcon2 said:but you're mixing things up again, Jeet Kune Do is a skill set, not a sport, and that's the whole reason you don't see it in a ring.🙂

UFC is a sport, yeah, but it's one that tries its hardest to blur that line between pure athletics and actual combat skill.

One thing we really need to dig into is just how much the ring itself limits the fight, and whether the sheer dominance of UFC strikers actually makes up for all those massive gaps left by not training other disciplines properly.

Eric Jackson43 said:But then you're just limiting techniques—essentially introducing rules and turning it into a sport. And so far, the best version of that sport has been the UFC as we know it today. I agree that the UFC has its flaws (like that sudden 90-degree Attack you mentioned), but it makes up for them in other ways.

Man, look... my point is that you don't need to break someone's arm to dominate them... in actual fighting skills, leverage is never your primary weapon... that’s just plain stupid, striking is always the priority... do you seriously think people can only fight within a set of rules? Sparring is designed to be a simulation of reality... if you're outclassing someone during a session, why would you even need to snap their arm to make it "more realistic"? It feels like you've never actually done any real free sparring.😕

Eric Jackson43 said:I believe they exist—after all, when two neighbors get into a brawl, it's an illegal fight. The issue is that because they're illegal, you can't really "expand" them. But as something expands—especially an open concept like the UFC—it becomes higher quality because more people contribute their expertise. It's questionable whether someone like Fedor would have ever been discovered if the UFC hadn't gone global.

The UFC is a sport, sure, but it's one that pushes the boundary between sport and pure skill as much as possible.

Eric Jackson43, you aren't distinguishing between sport and skill, and that's where you're tripping up... the UFC doesn't bridge the gap between sport and skill at all... honestly, I find things like Muay Thai matches or Burmese boxing way more realistic than the UFC... you're making a logical error here... just because the UFC allows a massive amount of techniques doesn't mean it's inherently more realistic... a chef who knows how to cook fifty dishes isn't automatically a better chef than one who masters just three.😉

Eric Jackson43 said:One thing we should really dive into is how much the ring itself limits the fight—and whether UFC's dominance in that setting justifies the gaps left by neglecting other combat disciplines.

Why on earth would you claim UFC is somehow "superior" in the ring?? You can't just compare handball to basketball... it makes no sense. How can you even compare UFC to another discipline when the rules are fundamentally different? I don't follow you at all... fine, let's play by your logic: if UFC is so much more "superior" in a ring, why doesn't a top fighter just go out and challenge for a world boxing title? Why wouldn't they? Why?... There's your logic right there. Please, give me an answer. Once you grasp the difference between a specific sport and raw combat skill, it’ll be obvious they aren't comparable in that way. 😉

Kudos to you for such an excellent post! 👍 👍 👍

I can already see it—another one of those rare, actually constructive essays that everyone's just going to cherry-pick a single sentence from to start some pointless argument about something else entirely. 👎

ruggedfalcon2 Eric Jackson43 said:Look, I’m telling you, you don't win a fight by focusing on breaking someone's arm... in any real combat sport, leverage isn't your primary weapon, it's just extra fluff, and honestly, relying on it is just plain stupid when a solid strike is always the priority. You really think people are only going to scrap strictly by the rulebook and nothing else?

Some kind of Judas might actually agree with you, even if they spend their days practicing atemi, but honestly, that’s a whole other conversation.

ruggedfalcon2 Eric Jackson43 said:The way they design these sparring sessions feels like they're trying way too hard to pretend they're actually hitting something real. Honestly, if you've already completely outclassed someone in a drill, I don't see why you'd need to go out of your way to grab their arm just to make it feel "authentic"... it's kind of obvious you've never actually stepped foot in a real free-flow session. 😕

Actually, when I really sit back and think about it, there’s this one massive thing sparring offers that you just don't get in the UFC. It’s those "demonstration strikes"—you know, where you throw a shot but pull it at the last second just to show your partner exactly what you could have done to them. It’s basically a way to test out the lethal stuff like throat shots, eye gouges, or elbowing someone in the temple without actually sending them to the ER.

ruggedfalcon2 Eric Jackson43 said:Honestly, I feel like traditional combat sports—like Muay Thai matches or Burmese boxing—actually carry way more weight than the UFC does. You're kind of making a logical leap here; just because the UFC allows a massive variety of techniques doesn't mean it’s somehow more "real." It’s like saying a chef who can whip up fifty different dishes is automatically better than one who masters only three; quantity of skills doesn't always equal quality. 😉

I honestly think UFC is just more realistic because letting in all those different techniques covers way more of what actually happens when things go sideways on the street. If a Muay Thai fighter ends up out on the pavement, they’re going to get caught off guard by a takedown way faster than an MMA fighter would. An MMA guy is basically prepared for a wider range of attacks simply because the sport itself allows for them. It's like saying a chef needs a much bigger menu to survive in a real kitchen compared to just cooking in a controlled studio setting.

The whole MMA scene is still such a mess, honestly—it feels like an unfinished project that might never actually get its act together, and let’s be real, the flaws are pretty hard to ignore.
Focusing solely on sport BJJ might work fine inside the cage, but it’s a losing game out in the real world. The thing is, UFC is constantly evolving, and those hyper-specialized fighters are slowly getting phased out by the well-rounded guys who actually know how to handle whatever situation they get thrown into.

Eric Jackson43 The user said:Some Judas might actually agree with you—even if they spend their time training atleti... but that's a whole different conversation.

Judo as a martial art would definitely hold its own—especially since those guys have some serious striking power... 😉 Eric Jackson43, I'm talking about skill sets, not the sport itself... 😉

Eric Jackson43 said:Actually, when I really think about it, there’s one crucial thing sparring offers that you just don't get in the UFC. It's the concept of "demonstration strikes"—those unfinished shots where you show your partner exactly what you could have landed without actually following through. It allows you to test out certain dangerous moves—things like throat strikes, eye gouges, or elbowing the head—in a way that's controlled... even if it's only partially effective at simulating the real danger.

That’s just another misconception, much like the idea of breaking limbs... strikes to the throat or eyes aren't primary offensive moves—they're just secondary options used in extreme circumstances. Anyone basing their entire fighting style on gouging an eye is just as much of a joke as someone hoping they can win a fight simply by using a lever... 😉

Eric Jackson43 The user said:I honestly think UFC is more realistic because by allowing a wider range of techniques, it covers way more scenarios you might actually face on the street. A Muay Thai fighter stepping out into traffic is going to be caught way more off guard if someone tries to take them down compared to a UFC fighter. An MMA athlete knows how to defend against a much broader variety of attacks specifically because the sport itself permits that diversity. It’s like saying a chef in a real kitchen needs a much bigger menu than one working in a specialized ring...

Listen, anyone who actually competes in any kind of sport is going to be absolutely blindsided by how people act on the road... I'm not really interested in ranking who gets more shocked than someone else. What I actually care about—and what I respect more—are the athletes who have enough discipline to keep that composure when things get crazy out there... 😉

ruggedfalcon2 said:why on earth do you think UFC is somehow "superior" when it comes to fighting in a ring?? you can't just lump handball and basketball together like that. how can you even compare UFC to some other sport when the rules are completely different... I don't get you. fine, let's play by your logic: if UFC is supposedly the ultimate thing, why doesn't some UFC fighter just go out and challenge for a world championship title in boxing? why wouldn't they? why?.. there's your logic right there, so please, give me an answer. once you actually grasp the difference between a structured sport and actual combat skills, you'll see they aren't even in the same conversation 😉

Maybe calling it "superior" is the wrong way to frame it in terms of sports ranking, but it’s definitely closer to a real fight since it covers way more ground than something like boxing. A Boxer stepping out onto the street is going to be facing a lot more holes in their game than a UFC practitioner. A Boxer only really learns how to defend against punches above the waist, so any situation involving anything else would leave them totally scrambling to improvise.

ruggedfalcon2 said:Look, a Judas from Judo definitely brings some serious skills to the table because they've got those strikes too, 😉 Eric Jackson43, and I'm talking pure skill here, not just what you see in a ring. 😉

Sure, they have striking—atemi, if my memory serves—but honestly, half the time it probably makes more sense to just go straight for the takedown.

ruggedfalcon2 said:That’s just another misconception, kind of like the whole breaking hands thing... hitting the throat or the eyes isn't the core of an attack, those are just desperate moves for extreme situations... anyone basing their entire fight strategy on poking eyes is just as much of a joke as someone hoping to win by using a lever. 😉

So does that mean the foundation of sparring is basically just whatever moves are legal in the UFC? Because if that's the case, then why would a session like that even be considered sparring if it's not UFC, and wouldn't the guy who wins in the UFC just win that type of sparring anyway?

ruggedfalcon2 said:Listen, anyone who plays a sport is going to get a massive reality check when they end up on a street corner... I'm not really interested in ranking who gets more surprised or less, I just respect the athletes who don't let themselves get caught off guard in a real fight. 😉

It might actually be useful to put together a list of everything traditional martial arts cover that the UFC lacks, so we can really dig into where those fighters fall short. 😉

Eric Jackson43 said:He’s got the strikes down—atemi, if I remember correctly—but honestly, there are plenty of moments where going straight for the takedown just makes more sense.

Does that mean the foundation of sparring should be based on strikes that are also legal in the UFC? If so, why would two people spar that way instead of just doing MMA? And wouldn't the guy who wins in the UFC likely win that type of sparring too?

It might be worth putting together a list of everything traditional martial arts possess that the UFC lacks... then we can try to pinpoint where UFC fighters actually fall short.😉

-No, not at all.
-The UFC is a sport, which means it operates under specific sporting regulations...
-You can't really compare a pure martial art to a sport in the same breath... when it comes to self-defense, the traditional skill set is king... but for entertainment and competition in a cage, I think the UFC delivers exactly what the fans want right now.🙂

ruggedfalcon2 said:-nah, definitely not.

Look, this is basically its own whole debate at this point, and honestly, you probably know way more about this than I ever will. 😉

ruggedfalcon2 said:-UFC is a sport, so it’s bound by the rules of the game.

But if we're talking about sparring being built on the same strikes allowed in the UFC, then those sporting rules don't really change the dynamic. They don't offer a fighter any extra sense of security they wouldn't already have in a heavy sparring session. Basically, if an athlete is actually better under UFC conditions, they should be just as effective during training.

ruggedfalcon2 said:-you can't compare a sport to pure skill in the same context... when it comes to self-defense, skill is king... but for entertainment or sport in the cage, I think UFC currently delivers exactly what the fans want.🙂

Sure, that's true, but I don't buy the idea that having a crowd changes anything once the cage door closes. It's not like Fedor or Mirkov suddenly switch up their entire fighting style just because there are sponsors in the front row. In the cage, it's still just about taking someone down. Yeah, sure, the rules limit things to protect the fighters, but isn't that the exact same reason we have rules in a high-level sparring session? And yeah, there's a ref, but he's only there to step in when it's over. If anything, that's a perk for the pro—instead of having to worry about knowing when enough is enough like you do in training, a UFC fighter can let the ref handle the stoppage and just focus on dismantling the guy in front of them.

The rounds are definitely another "sporting" constraint, but does that really shift the reality of the fight that much?

Eric Jackson43 said:But if you view sparring as the foundation—where you take the same hits allowed in the UFC—then those sporting rules don't really act as a hindrance. They don't offer a UFC fighter any sense of security they wouldn't already have in that kind of sparring. Essentially, if an MMA fighter is superior under UFC conditions, they should naturally be better during sparring too.

True enough, but I don't buy the idea that having a crowd changes anything once you're inside the cage. It’s not like Fedor or Mirkov suddenly change their fighting style just because sponsors are watching. In the cage, it's still about one thing: overcoming your opponent. Sure, the rules limit things slightly to protect the fighters, but isn't that the exact same goal behind sparring rules? And yeah, there's a referee, but his job is just to step in and stop the fight. If anything, that's a bonus... in sparring, a practitioner has to know when to call it themselves, whereas an MMA fighter can leave that responsibility to the ref and focus entirely on neutralizing the opponent.

It's true that the UFC uses rounds as another "sporting" constraint, but does that really change the fundamental reality of the situation?

-No, because I'm telling you again: competitive combat is governed by rules, but the street has none. An MMA fighter doesn't train for the most common types of street attacks... I listed a few examples in another thread. An MMA fighter trains for the bell ringing, for circling the cage, for keeping a high guard... you don't deal with any of that on the street.😉
-The point is that one is a sport and the other is self-defense. Sport and self-defense share almost nothing in common. Sparring in martial arts isn't a game, whereas a sporting competition definitely is.
-Rounds aren't even a limiting factor... think harder about the core difference between actual skill and a organized sport.

ruggedfalcon2 said:-nah, because like I said, combat sports have rules and the street doesn't. A UFC fighter isn't training for those common street attacks. I listed some examples in another thread... a UFC fighter trains to fight in a cage when the bell rings, staying high with their guard and circling the octagon and all that. You don't get that on the street.😉

Plus, they’re always hyper-focused on one opponent and don't have to worry about someone jumping them from behind, which is a huge reality check. They know exactly when the fight starts, too. There's truth in that, and it's one of those gaps in UFC I've brought up before. The real question is whether the technical level of 1-on-1 fighting makes up for that gap, and if a fighter can actually improvise enough to cover their lack of street awareness with pure skill.

ruggedfalcon2 said:while competitive sports are just a game...

In the case of UFC, not really. I doubt these guys see it as some game, and I certainly don't think they take it any less seriously than people doing TMA sparring.

Eric Jackson43 said:He can focus entirely on one opponent without constantly worrying about someone coming at him from behind. He knows exactly when the engagement starts—there’s an inherent truth to that. It's one of those gaps in UFC I've brought up before. The real question is whether UFC justifies that gap by making up for it with superior one-on-one execution. Can a fighter improvise enough to compensate for that specific deficiency through pure individual skill?

In the case of UFC, not really. I don't think these fighters view it as a game, nor do they take it half as seriously as practitioners do during TMA sparring.

At the end of the day, sport is just a game... I've gone into more detail on my blog regarding the human drive for competition, so check that out if you want the full breakdown... basically, as long as there are rules and a third party present to ensure everything stays fair, it's a game. Once you reach a point where you no longer need a referee to step in and protect the participants, then we're looking at something else entirely—something that isn't a sport or entertainment anymore. 😉

ruggedfalcon2 said:It’s nothing more than just a game... I’ve actually written about this primal human urge on my blog if you want to dive deeper... basically, as long as there are rules in place and a third party watching over everything to make sure things stay fair, it’s just a game. Once you don't need that outside help or protection from a ref, then we aren't talking about a game or a sport anymore 😉

Fair enough 😉 I guess we just see things differently. Personally, I look at the rules, the cage, and the ref as necessary boundaries that let fighters go all out without constantly worrying about accidentally killing their opponent, since the officials handle the safety stuff. It lets them focus entirely on winning without having to pull punches to avoid permanent damage. You see it in TMA practitioners during sparring—they can't really let loose because the injuries would be too brutal, so they always have to maintain this unnatural level of self-control that wouldn't even exist in a real fight. Of course, the downside of UFC being a regulated sport is that it limits the technique pool by cutting out stuff like street fighting or weapon defense.
I haven't spent enough time in the trenches to know if losing those specific techniques is a bigger hit than the payoff of being able to fight without holding back. But honestly, even if we call the UFC a sport, that line is pretty blurry, and I doubt anyone would ever dismiss it as "ineffective" for a real situation just because of a few technical gaps.

Eric Jackson43 said:Alright 😉 so we just have different perspectives here. I see the rules, the ring, and the referee as necessary constraints—they allow fighters to go 100% into the fight without worrying about their opponent's safety, since the officials handle that responsibility. It lets a fighter focus entirely on defeating the other person without having to hold back from causing excessive injury. Practitioners of TMA can hardly afford that level of intensity during sparring because injuries would be too severe... they always have to maintain an extra dose of self-control that isn't really natural for a real fight. Unfortunately, UFC fighting also comes with downsides, like limiting the technique repertoire or cutting out moves related to other combat aspects (like fighting in tight spaces, weapon combat, etc.).
I don't have enough experience to say whether losing those techniques is a bigger loss than the gain of being able to fight fully without restraint. But, to wrap things up, even though UFC is formally a sport, that line isn't clearly drawn—and despite some "holes," it wouldn't be dismissed as ineffective for the street just because it's strictly for the ring.

-Self-control is actually vital if you're fighting on the street 😉
-Everything can be useful for the street... basic athleticism especially 😉 however, so-called TMA is specialized for "survival" on the street, whereas UFC is designed for the entertainment of sports competition under specific rules controlled by a ref in a ring... and that's pretty much it. 🙂

I get it. There’s definitely some truth to that.