The Re-Evolution of Mixed Martial Arts

I think two reasons grappling has become less effective are the fact that there are rounds and that they stand the fighters up for the sake of the spectators. Grapplers tend to be patient and wait for positions to open up rather than forcing things and wasting their energy. This doesn't work under the current UFC rules as much and makes it appear that the oppenent under attack is defending well.

I think it is worth considering the fact that the bottom grappler in the guard position can't strike the kidneys with his heels. This takes a tool away. There are other rules which change the game in a similar way.

I've been wrestling and grappling for about 6 years now, and while I'm no expert, and I can tell you that in a match "feeling" is more important to me than technique. Now part of that feeling is doing or defending against techniques, but it is mostly a feeling of my opponents body and position relative to mine. Of course, arm position and seeing locks and possible moves is important, and very technical. Give that, I must agree that becoming a "good" striker is easier than becoming a "good" grappler. As mentioned, grappling is incredibly technical but it is very much an experience based art. Feeling you opponents weight, center of gravity and movement, flowing and blending it to your advantage is incredibly difficult and a skill I am no where near mastering. I simply don't believe that boxing or striking is that technical or difficult to learn.

I am NOT putting down boxing or striking; I believe there is no "one art", and that wisdom comes from all things. And a strike can change a fight in a heartbeat.

There's another issue related to exertion, fatigue, and damage. In this case, one need not be a 'world class' puncher, only marginally better than ones opponent, assuming one also isn't terrible at grappling.

Let's say fighter A is a great grappler, and B a great puncher. Everyone saw how using Gracie-type techniques worked most of the time. Once A gets inside B, they're on the ground, and it's over. So unless the first flurry of punches B has to fight through include a knockout, advantage to the grappler.

Now consider what happens when A and B have similar skills, i.e. both are good at striking and grappling. A is a marginally better boxer, B a slightly better grappler, and they are in similar physical condition.

When B takes A to the mat, B's only advantage is if it ends in a KO or submission. While grappling from the top, B is expending at least as much, if not more, energy as A. If A is close enough to B's skill to defend from being caught in a submission or ground-and-pound situation, he just has to bide some time.

Once the fighters are stood up, or A escapes, or the round ends, B will actually (remember we're assuming similar condition levels) generally be in worse shape for expending energy on his attack than A did for defending against it.

On the other hand, every time A lands an extra combo, it wears down B more than it costs A to throw the strikes.

Over the course of a distance fight, between two similarly matched fighters, the trend will be for the grappler to get worn down sooner than the puncher, and the puncher to get a KO, or at least decisively win the later rounds.

As a note. I do believe that it is harder to become a good strike fighter, and it's the speed factor. A slower grappler, wrestler, etc., can be taken down by a faster opponent, and still work defensively, working for reverses or even pins from the bottom. The counters don't all require you to be faster or even more powerful than your opponent.

A strike fighter that is slower and/or less powerful than his opponent is a pretty much a punching bag. I'm not saying there's no skill involved, just that past a certain level of technique, there's no counter for speed.

I just don't think the gap between striking skills (assuming conditioning and grappling skills are also close) needs to be large for the better puncher to have an advantage.

That has certainly been my experience. I got into jiu jitsu and freestyle wrestling a couple years ago, after 6 years of boxing and Muay Thai. The way I've come to look at it, striking (especially punching and head movement) is a relatively narrow skill set that takes years to master and even then will remain beyond many athletes. Grappling, on the other hand, is amazingly technical-- as you say, knowledge-based. The skill set for grappling is something like a million things you have to know, but the techniques tend to be more easily learned and less virtuosic-- mostly a matter of things like which arm to underhook, exactly where to put your hands at what time, how your hips have to move to be in position, etc.

What seems to be emerging as ideal is a combination of boxing and grappling, with the knees and elbows of Muay Thai but not too many of the kicks-- I can tell you from personal experience it's a bad idea to be standing on one leg in front of a guy who wants to put you on your back. The footwork of boxing is perfect for setting up angles of attack, as well as transitioning to single- and double-leg takedowns in the middle of a combination. You can probably expect to see more and more champions using this formula.

I wouldn't say that just anybody can become a "world class" grappler, but I would say that a pudgy guy who can't walk without tripping over his own feet could in time become a very effective grappler, while his prospects in any striking art would be much more limited.

As a person who trains very actively in both striking and grappling, I can say without a doubt, it takes a significant amount of time more, to become a ground expert than a striker. Sparring is more important with striking to build timing and precision, however a person off the street with good training could become an excellent striker in 2 years. (3 days a week, 2hrs a day (2 days drills/timing 1 day sparring).

A person off the street, training 3 days a week 2hrs a day, would take about 5-8 years to become an excellent ground specialist. For example, on average it takes about 7-10 years to earn your Black Back in BJJ. (average) I know a person who trained 5 days a week 4 hours a day for 3 years and earned his purple, then trained for another years 4 days a week, and got his brown, it took him another year after that of serious time investment to get his black. He was considered, a fast black belt.

In striking there is really a very very shallow pool of 'techniques' you use, Jab, Straight, L-R Hook, L-R Uppercut, Overhand L-R, Inside L-R , R-L Knee, L-Low, mid high Kick, R-Low ,Mid, High kick. Thats about it , when it comes to competitive fighting. (maybe a spin kick or two) So less than 30 things you need to learn (technique) wise, in Ground fighting (JiuJitsu) there is easily thousands of things to learn, that are just methods. Both require you to learn the timing and application of the techniques.

I do agree however, that the sport has come full circle, like all things that go to a polar extreme. There was a time where Ground was all that mattered, people learnt to stuff it, and now you need to know what to do after. Which is great, cause thats what Mixed Martial arts is about.

If you can't out strike them, take to the ground, if you can't submit them, grind them, if you cant grind them, clinch them, if you cant clinch them, strike them.....

(if you can't do any of those, your in for a bad night).