Talk:Mixed martial arts

message: Study of Fighters Shows Brain Changes Are Seen Before Symptoms, New York Times, TIMOTHY PRATT, April 24, 2012.
“  .  .  The physical changes, detected by M.R.I. scans, are a reduction in size in the hippocampus and thalamus of the brains of fighters with more than six years in the ring. These parts of the brain deal with such functions as memory and alertness. While those who had fought for more than six years did not exhibit any declines in cognitive function, fighters with more than 12 years in the ring did. Thus, Dr. Bernick’s group concluded, the lag between detectability and physical symptoms probably occurs sometime during those six years.  .  ”
“  .  .  Like many doctors who study athletes’ brain injuries, Dr. Bernick has concluded that much of the research has focused too narrowly on infrequent, hard blows to the head rather than more constant lesser blows.  .  ” 
“  .  .  Dr. Bernick’s results rest on the Las Vegas center’s ability to gather a large sample of professional boxers and mixed-martial artists, to classify them according to the amount of time they have spent in the ring, and to cross-reference M.R.I. images of their brains and results from cognitive tests.  .  ”
I think just summarize this as straight down the middle as we can, neither overstated nor understating.  FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 17:21, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed a reference to a study with no citation. Please do not make baseless claims. 24.222.90.31 (talk) 10:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent study on cumulative lesser blows and brain safety. 

message: Is there any reason why TKD has been deleted from MMA article under common disciplines? It is as popular and practiced discipline in MMA as karate and judo and they both are still in this section.  Also that is strange that there is no Sambo included.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.110.90.203 (talk) 15:20, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Taekwondo was deleted from MMA article?

message: Does anyone think a section on Taekwondo should be done.
www.fightmagazine.com 
Dwanyewest (talk) 05:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely. TKD already was in a list, but got deleted. Your link is very good. And as of now, Pettis is a champ and has kept his style of kick-heavy fighting style. Anderson Silva clearly stated in his book that he used TKD kicks with muay thai knees and elbows right from the beginning of his career, and is 5th dan black belt. Mirko Filipovic too has a TKD base and many have noted that his kicking is quiet different (use of snap, use of instep, not spinning around if missing kick etc.) than traditional Muay Thai.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.84.98.87 (talk) 20:31, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taekwondo 

message: The "Early History" section includes the 1901 match between boxer Frank Slavin and wrestler Frank Gotch. From what I see in other sources, however, this was strictly a boxing match (no wrestling allowed), Gotch agreeing to fight in Slavin's discipline. So it should not be in this section as it was not no-holds-barred or mixed martial arts or one discipline vs another; it was just as boxing match. See, e.g., this reference: http://www.frankgotch.com/biography3.html
I leave it to someone else to delete as in my experience trying to change anything on Wikipedia is not worth the headache when someone inevitably disagrees, reverts, etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.16.106.232 (talk) 01:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early history - apparent error 

message: I’m a new user to Wikipedia and, overall, I’m very impressed with this particular page. The citations seem to be thorough, there is a lot of depth to the contributions, and the page is full of relevant pictures and links. However, one area that surprised me was that the page claims that Howard Rosenberg coined the term “mixed-martial arts” in an article he wrote in 1993. I had always believed the term was much older than that. When I read the article Rosenberg does use the term “mixed-martial arts” but does so in a way that suggests that the term is already in regular use in brazil, “Royce Gracie, whose family is synonymous with the sport in their native Brazil, where mixed-martial arts championships like this one are commonplace.” When I asked Google to find the origins of the term “mixed-martial arts” it is hardly conclusive. It is certainly possible that Rosenberg was the first to use the term, especially in print, but doesn’t the lack of verifiability of this particular statement suggest that the page should at least offer some of the other origins of the term as a possibility? Jerjj3 (talk) 19:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have come upon the same conclusion. i have made the text more accurate to reflect the sources cited. Bigbaby23 (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of the Term "Mixed Martial Arts" 

message: This is a great page for MMA and overall does a decent job covering the majority of everything MMA. I am surprised that Aikido is not covered in the different disciplines. Its not as popular as Jiu-Jitsu, but it is still common among martial arts.  With the mention of Karate and Kung fu, Aikido should get some mention. The non attention could come from the fact that Aikido does not work as well in the UFC as well as some of the other disciplines. Most of the techniques for Aikido rely on using a gi and take downs are not something that is relevant in the art. Even though Aikido may not be the best fit for an MMA fighter it should still be relevant enough to get mentioned. Brettv123 (talk) 00:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have never seen or read about anyone using Aikido in MMA. I sit cageside for at least 20 fights a month and have done so for the past 8 years from local amateur matches up to Bellator, StrikeForce, UFC and have been in more gyms than I can remember. I say this as a student of Aikido since the 90s as well. Why would we mention it if it is not relevant?--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 02:10, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aikido 

message: The article does use academic studies regarding injuries in MMA. But I found a Sociological study. i will list it here. i don't have time right now to insert information from it to the article. it also has many quality citations to other academic works on the subject
‘As Real As It Gets!’ 
Producing hyperviolence in mixed martial arts http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/jomecjournal/5-june2014/Downey_MMA.pdf Bigbaby23 (talk) 15:59, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Academic studies on MMA 

message: There seems to be conflicting information. This article claims the UFC was the first official promotion of  "MMA" in america. Though according to CV Productions, Inc. article (a Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania-based mixed martial arts company), which is well cited, CV was sanctioning "MMA" fights already in 1979. Bigbaby23 (talk) 16:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a good secondary source, and updated the info in the article Bigbaby23 (talk) 17:07, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of MMA in America  

message: Eight years ago, I proposed eliminating the references to "sprawl and brawl" and other headers that now reside in the "Strategies" section.  These are slang terms.  They are rarely ever used by reputable sources to describe a fighter's approach, but the article suggests  these are commonly used.  In fact, these terms are almost never used any more as fighters evolve away from single-style  108.171.131.165 (talk) 20:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. 888Nadim (talk) 05:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Strategies" 

message: Hi, I am interested in floating the Table of Contents to the right. What this means is it will appear on the right under the first info.  box, and with text from the first section 'Men's competition/Early history' on its left hand side. The TOC will continue to be collapsible. The two pictures in this section will be left aligned, one above the other. The table of dates will continue to be located further down the page, although probably a paragraph or two lower and it might overlap into the 'Modern sport' section (for reasons of best positioning horizontally speaking). This solution will get rid of the huge white space (which I think most would agree is a problem) between the intro and the first section. I have tested it and it looks pretty good. If you have any suggestions, or are against the proposal, feel free to leave a message here. Thanks RickyBennison (talk) 13:49, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of Contents 

message: Hello,
I was thinking that perhaps the topic of MMA legality could be more fleshed out, or maybe even have it become its own page entirely. I believe that their is a lot more history and significance to the legality of the sport then is represented here and I think it is significant enough to possibly have its own page.
For example on the topic of Legality of competition in the US, the section makes no mention John McCain's campaign to ban the sport in 90's or of how many states the sport was initially banned in (I believe it was 36 states?) and I believe such details are important to the topic.
What do you all think?
Also i found many citation links on the topic that no longer work or lead to the wrong article.
*190
*191
*196
*241
*243
I also feel that Citations 205 and 206 are not appropriate references as 205 links to a google translate page and 206 links to a Youtube video of an mma fight.
Taiwan and Cambodia lack citations completely, while i believe India also needs a citation when talking about allegations made by fighters not getting insurance, medical care, and financial benefits.
Lastly Singapore and South Africa have been needing citations since 2016 and 2012 respectively.
Thank You Jk119 (talk) 02:08, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legality of MMA competition 

message: This is referring the the "Basic Strategies" section in the article
See the concerns that a previous user brought up (in this talk page with the same subject heading "Strategies").
I think that these terms are pretty outdated for modern day MMA. I would be in favor of completely removing or changing the content of this section
888Nadim (talk) 05:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its fine. They are sub-sections and not the main section title, so I think that makes the use of slang more acceptable. If you didn't use 'sprawl and brawl' what would you use? I think you would need a very strong argument to justify completely remove the section. RickyBennison (talk) 12:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Strategies"