Shaolin Monk Vs. MMA fighter.

[Scryers]

I Think Brazilian JuJitsu has been proven to be the most effective fighting style to date. There is no way a Kung Fu master could handle a BJJ master. Its just not possible. Humans cannot block punches and grab wrists like Steven Segal in Hard To Kill. Nor can you land a Budhist Palm on someone with a knife trying to rob you.

If you go back to the early spectacle days of the UFC, you can notice that all of these mystical fighting styles were debunked with Mui Thai and BJJ.

Bad thing about BJJ is that, you need to get your opponent to the ground. I think you're underestimating a Monk, you'd find it very difficult to bring a Monk to the ground before the BBJ master is knocked out/dead.

[Purlina]

If we start to include weapons.

I don't think MMA fighters usually use guns

[Altrec]

I Think Brazilian JuJitsu has been proven to be the most effective fighting style to date. There is no way a Kung Fu master could handle a BJJ master. Its just not possible. Humans cannot block punches and grab wrists like Steven Segal in Hard To Kill. Nor can you land a Budhist Palm on someone with a knife trying to rob you.

If you go back to the early spectacle days of the UFC, you can notice that all of these mystical fighting styles were debunked with Mui Thai and BJJ.

Brazilian JuJitsu has been proven the most effective in MMA because it is the most adaptable to the rules set forth by the MMA groups. Other martial arts have heavily abridged versions of their art so as not to cause permanent damage or death. In a straight up fight with no rules the monk will likely win.

[Kasmein]

I voted for the MMA fighter simply based on the fact that a Shaolin monk is probably not familiar with the rise of MMA and the UFC. Where as a trained mixed martial artist would be atleast somewhat familiar with kung-fu techniques.

As stated before MMA/UFC/Strikeforce/pride ext. Has really been a good test bed to prove that the fight considerably changes as soon as you are able to be taken down, and that fighters who are only good in one discipline of fighting get really exploited when a weakness is found in their fight "arsenal"

As a fighter you will stand much differently if you are able to just stand an strike similar to a karate match, I would think the monk would get taken down and pounded till his robe wasn't orange anymore.

MMA fighters don't get enough credit for their discipline these days. Ever try cutting weight? Its absolutely miserable.

[Stir]

This depends on weapons. Shaolin Monks with weapons would have an advantage.. Spear and blade techniques work miracles against most unarmed styles.
However, if there are no weapons involved, the Shaolin Monk would probably not even stand a chance. And I mean none. None whatsoever.
And the reason is this:
While Shaolin Monks spend a lot of time training their technique, and I think they also spar quite a lot, they do not actually fight. MMA fighters do spend lots and lots and lots of time actually fighting (or at least playing games that closely approximate fighting; much more closely than a sparring match does). Experience beats skill, and there's a lot of dirty fighting tricks you really only get to learn in actual fights.

Basically: Martial arts is all fine and dandy, but they won't save you in an actual fight.

[Scryers]

I want to see GSP vs monk
or jones vs monk

or better yet somebody as big as rampage jackson vs monk cause I don't care what kind of hit you can take a rampage jackson full hit will make you see darkness

When Monks take piece of steel to the head, I doubt a punch would do much. And, the MMA fighter would need to actually hit the Monk, which would be very had to begin with.

[Deleted]

First off: i think it only makes sence to assume it's two guys of similar age (let's say 30 - 35) and same weight class.

In an fight with weapons obviously the monk would win, as he's trained for it, and mma fighters are not.

In unarmed combat, it think it would depend on the rule-book:
In true free-fight, my money's on the monk. He's spent his entire life training on taking out opponents. Not beat them in a fight - take them out. I would imagine there are a fair deal of ways to take out an opponent much more efficiently than what we see in MMA, but that are prohibited by MMA rules. These techniques will be mastered by the monk who spent his life training to kill enemy ninjas that attack during the night, but not so much by MMA fighters who train to win MMA fights.
For very similar reasons, if an MMA-rulebook is applied, my money's on the MMA-fighter. They're just more complete. I highly doubt a shaolin monk has an answer to an american-style wrestler piledriving him, and he might even get out...striked? outstrikken? by a truely masterfull karate/thaibox champion - in an mma fight, that is.

[capitano666]

indiana-jones-raiders-gun.jpg

If we start to include weapons.

lol, martial art weapons of course ^_^"

MMA has none, Kung-Fu has plenty (actually I think the bare-handed part is the smaller one).

[Kasmein]

Bad thing about BJJ is that, you need to get your opponent to the ground. I think you're underestimating a Monk, you'd find it very difficult to bring a Monk to the ground before the BBJ master is knocked out/dead.

Not exactly, And I highly doubt a monk would have trained in take down defense.

Here is a flying armbar video, Not to mention countless chokes that are found in Jiu-Jitsu.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76bEAM5MjrQ

[Purlina]

It seems like too much depends on the rule set we allow...

Is the monk allowed to strike in a way that would disable / kill?

[Deleted]

or better yet somebody as big as rampage jackson vs monk cause I don't care what kind of hit you can take a rampage jackson full hit will make you see darkness

Rampage couldn't hit an elephant if it's stood 2yd in front of him. He'd wait untill the elephant moves away, then throw his swing. If i know something to be impossible, it is for Rampage to land a hit on a shaolin monk .

[Beazy]

When Monks take piece of steel to the head, I doubt a punch would do much. And, the MMA fighter would need to actually hit the Monk, which would be very had to begin with.

Monks are humans BTW. A monk in a fight would not be any harder or easier to hit than your average trained MMA fighter.

[Scryers]

This depends on weapons. Shaolin Monks with weapons would have an advantage.. Spear and blade techniques work miracles against most unarmed styles.
However, if there are no weapons involved, the Shaolin Monk would probably not even stand a chance. And I mean none. None whatsoever.
And the reason is this:
While Shaolin Monks spend a lot of time training their technique, and I think they also spar quite a lot, they do not actually fight. MMA fighters do spend lots and lots and lots of time actually fighting (or at least playing games that closely approximate fighting; much more closely than a sparring match does). Experience beats skill, and there's a lot of dirty fighting tricks you really only get to learn in actual fights.

Basically: Martial arts is all fine and dandy, but they won't save you in an actual fight.

This isn't true. Masters fight each other, alot. You aren't allowed to film a serious spar tho, hence there being no videos. Once you've mastered Shaolin Kung Fu, the only way to get better is fighting against other masters.

[bloody251]

Fight starts around 4:50 I think.

[Deleted]

Ken Shamrock > Royce Gracie

Royce gracie yea... the one who fought one professional mma fight in his life...
The other Royce gracie won UFC 1, 2, and 4, and fought for 36 minutes vs Shamrock at UFC 5, apparently a fight without judges so no winner .

[Beazy]

It seems like too much depends on the rule set we allow...

Is the monk allowed to strike in a way that would disable / kill?

Do people really believe that the monks know a '5 finger exploding heart technique'? Thats TV stuff guys. Monks are holy artists. Not great deadly warriors. . . . .

[thedb]

People here have seen too many kung fu movies.
(Hey, me too, im a huge kung fu fan, im not hating).

Although it would really depend on the people representing their schools.
A modern MMA fighter will hands down beat a Shaolin Monk 7 times out of 10 at least.
Todays fighters are too well trained and have worked out what works and what doesnt, through experimentation.

Not many have seen truly no holds barred MMA, its brutal and not pretty to watch. An MMA fighter would have
more control over the fight, therefore setting up or placing opponents into situations where they can use deadly/nasty moves.

Once adrenaline takes over, fighting gets real and many of the Shaolin Monk's moves arent as effective.

Not taking anything away from the Shaolin Monk, they can be nasty, which is why they can win 3-4 out of ten,
a bad eye gouge or hit to the balls or any of their nasty moves and its over.

But really it all comes down to who has more experience controlling/placing an opponent into dangerous positions.
Its not even a comparison, an MMA fighter by FAR.

Oh i forgot to say, I WISH I could say the Shaolin Monk would win, but sadly thats not that case.
Also size does matter, specially the more skilled you are.

[Arisfarreach]

Weight means nothing, if anything, it would put the MMA fighter at a disadvantage. More weight would mean you're slower, sure strength helps, but it's useless if you can't even hit a guy, but even if the MMA fighter were able to hit the monk, I doubt that it would have much effect, considering Monks can break bits of metal over their bodies. I recently got back from China, and the teachers at a Shaolin monastery in Henan Province were incredible. I was invited to "spar" (wouldn't call it sparing, he was just demonstrating some defensive skills)with a Monk in training (Secular Disciple, I think), and every punch, kick, tackle I did, ended up with me on my ass, or in pain. This guy was only like 16-18, and was only about 60kg.

You are correct - "weight" means nothing... but SIZE does. He's not talking about some fat, out-of-shape 250 lb wrestler, but a trained, muscular fighter in tip-top shape. There's a reason most conventional fighting/boxing/wrestling system's have weight classes.

[Scryers]

Please read my first post guys.

"No arena, no weapons, no padding, no rules, think of it as a kinda "street" fight."

[davep]

if we're talking about just your average 20 year olds I'd have to side with the MMA fighter.. since basically all MMA fighting is anymore is street brawling.. I kinda lost interest in the UFC thing once they started letting in the mixed styles and what not..

---------- Post added 2012-02-28 at 05:03 PM ----------



Ken Shamrock > Royce Gracie

Ummm.... what? UFC is far from street brawling, now it's more of a hug and hold competition then any fighting at all. I have to agree that the UFC isn't as interesting anymore but not because of the reasons you mentioned. Also if Mixed Martial Arts didn't start "letting in mixed styles and what not.." then it would just be boxing and not Mixed Martial Arts.

Also if you were to put someone like Jose Aldo against a Shaolin Monk they Monk would lose. Jose Aldo is small and elusive and packs a huge punch/kick, sure it would probably take longer then the 25 minutes a championship fight would take but Jose Aldo would get the W. Shaolin Monks don't usually go for the kill so it would be a lot of avoidance techniques and Jose Aldo would just keep chopping the legs which would take a while to inflict pain since Monks are very resistant to that.