We must remember that the Octagon is still a sports scenario. In their undiluted forms, martial arts such as kung fu, Karate (the original styles from Okinawa), Thai Boxing (original Muay Boran format), etc. were battle ground tested. In modern times many of these arts have been watered down (just like salsa, perhaps), where their combat essence has been lost somewhat.
Any major style of kung fu can be classified as MMA, because it will have striking and grappling elements and in some cases even ground fighting. However, few schools teach kung fu in complete manner. The fact is that the genuine article is difficult to find. Another complication arises from the fact that in modern times, some of the traditional kung fu practices are deemed "boring". And finally, even if one is lucky enough to find a genuine master, that does not mean that he will teach you the more occult methodologies.
Definitely in a sports tournament setting.
Probably true in a sports setting. However, I would not want to bet too much money on either fighter if a fight kicked off in a bar or the street where the "rules" are different.
This is an old debate in martial arts. The old argument was (instead of which is better "on 1" or "on 2") which martial art would
kick butt in a one on one match up. I.e. if you took a Sumo wrestler and put him up against a boxer, who would win? The Ultimate Fighting Championships did exactly that in as much of a "no" rules fashion as was possible ("there were rules against
biting, eye gouging, fish hooking" but just everything else was allowed). We all know the result of that and Kung Fu did
not fare well. In fact, grapplers in general did MUCH better than strikers.
People say things like, well my art KF or whatever has in it's compete form elements of grappling. Then we come up against
the other problem. That problem is that you have to train your art full on in order to be able to use it. In Judo, they do
randori, i.e. the wrestle around and with all the effort in the world they try to throw the other guy. I have a lot of respect for Judo because
of that, as opposed to say Akido where they "cooperate" with each other in order to do the throw. Some Judo techniques
have worked out quite well in MMA. In BJJ, it is the same, we
roll around on the ground and with all the effort in the world we try to break each others arm or choke each other out. We tap
in order to keep from getting hurt.
The striking arts have a lot of problems with doing this (logically enough). Boxers do very well in fights since they put on
headgear and they try to knock each other blocks off. Mu Thai seemingly has a lexicon of just a few very efficient moves
that make a lot of sense. When you kick, you don't try to hit people with your foot, you use you shin and you kick low (as Yuca says). You use your elbows and your knees in close to hurt people and they train this virtually full on. Mu Thai guys
are scary.
Supposedly some forms of Karate are full on. But let's face it, the vast majority of the Oriental MAs are pretty useless. People trying Flying head kicks of the Taekwondo variety just get dismantled when they go up against a real martial art.
I'll just say, if your martial art is so effective, then why hasn't someone incorporated into the Octagon, or the ring (Pride uses
a ring), or Vale Tudo contests in Brazil (where there are even fewer rules)? ...... the usual (ridiculous) answer one gets is that
"my art is so dangerous that the highest practitioners would never unleash it for sport or monetary gain". OK. Well, I'm sorry that's just BS.
