What do you think about MMA?

Page 4 of 7 [ 107 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

13 Feb 2012, 7:13 pm

'MMA' as in cage fighting, is just a discipline like the other disciplines. Its realness can be overstated. Grappling on gravel or concrete, uneven ground is a lot different.

Live ness is something different. Anything you do depends on the situation an environment you are.

Disciplines are good, you should try different ones, it all helps, but nothing is the 'real' thing until it happens.

People might say what is the point of boxing? but can actually teach you a lot. Just because it has rules doesn't mean you can't learn anything from it.

shrox
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,295
Location: OK let's go.

13 Feb 2012, 7:29 pm

0_equals_true wrote:

Physiologically we are not built for fighting, without tools. We were built for ambush hunting with tools and running around a bit. We are not individually specialized for hunting unarmed like tigers, which are solitary hunters, and a force to be reckoned with.

If you study martial art you would understand the dynamics involved, just how fragile and vulnerable we are in comparison.

It is fairly obvious what I am saying, is we lack an inherent self defense mechanism as good as other animals, like tigers, and on average not physiologically conditioned for unarmed combat.

I should also point out that top predators like polar bears, tigers and so on are amongst the most the most intelligent animals and they have excellent spacial awareness, better than ours in many respects, they need it for hunting with the full contact kill. That doesn't mean we aren't smart, we are very smart, we needed to be to avoid getting eaten, but also to find food.

The evidence of early human was they were actually majority scavengers, and occasional opportunist hunters. This was because it was far too dangerous to be out in the savanna during the day, with top predictor about, also a massive drain on our resources. We couldn't eat flesh as it was eaten, by predators, like lions, and scavenger like hyenas and vultures, and wasted away in the elements. Instead we broke open bones and skulls and ate bone marrow and brain matte (direct evidence of this exists). One of the possible explanations to the increase in our intellect was the challenging environment, but also the high protein diet due to necessity (marrow and brain matter).

And that is what we truly are.

anarkhos
Velociraptor

Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 429
Location: Oregon

13 Feb 2012, 7:42 pm

0_equals_true wrote:

We couldn't eat flesh as it was eaten, by predators, like lions, and scavenger like hyenas and vultures, and wasted away in the elements.

That must be news to the bushmen who killed and ate a giraffe RAW on cable TV.

You keep using the tiger analogy as if to say the only animals who are built for fighting are top predators. A polar bear will kick a tiger's ass, so I suppose that means a tiger isn't built for fighting.

noname_ever
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 500
Location: Indiana

14 Feb 2012, 10:16 am

Declension wrote:

I love MMA, because it's as close to real fighting as you can get (while still trying to preserve safety to some extent).

A lot of combat sports are constrained by quite artificial rules. So for example, if I watch a judo match, it might be extremely exciting to watch, but I'm not actually watching two people try their hardest to defeat each other. I'm watching two people playing an artificial game called "judo".

That was the entire reason for creating Judo. Take Juijitsu and make it safe enough to be used as a sport. You can still injure or possibly kill people in though.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,524
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

14 Feb 2012, 10:54 am

I think that's part of the tradeoff though. Building something for entertainment entails making it entertaining to watch and, for that value, a fight is preferred to last a few rounds to have a fair amount of drama and possible turnabout that happens over a span of time that the viewers can process. You end up with something based on real fighting but the tools have to be limited. If they weren't limited the fights would be way too short, people would go right in and collapse guard rather than the hang-back-and-play game, and as an end result the organisations and sponsors wouldn't be turning the same profits mainly because most people would find it too vanilla.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,524
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

18 Feb 2012, 4:21 pm

0_equals_true wrote:

Wing Chun deals with elbows pretty well, it is just as much about elbows an Muay Thai if not more so, and pretty similar. You were talking about breaking down the opponent guard. Not always necessary you can jam it into their body, the elbow is covered. If you are going to take down their guard, you can draw downwards, crossing and pinning. Elbow striking from that doesn't work although you can shoulder barge. The point is everything has a counter, you can go on like this ad infinity.

Main thing is you position yourself appropriately. Just like muay thai if you want to stop an elbow, you have to get something in the way, you can stop it before it is come out, but a good fighter is compact, and doesn't load short range strikes which make it obvious.

To reinforce that we were on the wooden dummy today, haven't done it in a while and we were adding some low line kicks after sectoring out from a bongsao and tonsao. The thing that I think Wing Chun delivers more crisply than anything is posture. You learn, especially with wooden dummy, to keep your center of gravity directly under you at all times, to sink into it even a few inches. When your exerting force you're shuffling or stepping, essentially bringing your self with the block or strike, rather than trying to send something out. Its amazing not only how much power can be transferred that way but that you can send that much without overcommitment or making yourself vulnerable by doing so; mainly by not leaning on long-range nearly as much as mid to close. This class is also one of those things that really woke me up to just how much a person's posture and angling has for impact both in effective blocking and striking. It might be just the new-school way of doing Wing Chun but it seems like it takes that mid-to-close boxing ethos and makes elbows, knees, passing, etc. every bit as tight and efficient.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

20 Feb 2012, 1:07 pm

Its not new. Dummy is supposed to be compact. Some just bash about, go through the motions, but it is not about that at all.

It is about development and application of energry/power using the body. One of the common mistakes, is having the arms swinging about all the place, trying hit positions, rather then focusing the overall point of training. Dummy is about directness, you are meant to be striking from short distances. Like you talked about strikes coming out, but more using your body.

I don't know where you are in your tanning, but one of the main things you will be developing through dummy is your Yui Ma (turning) power,. In dummy even more than average, the arms are barely thrown out on their own during a move, it is the body that delivers the power from the ground up. We call this the iron bar principle. You can think as if in that moment you arm is fixed with an iron bar from your elbow to your torso, so you have put you body into the strike, there just the extra inch power at the end.

If you are in you stance you have a lot of torsion to your disposal. It is not about over turning either, the angles are also fairly to very slight, but it is about what you can do with those angles.

It is important while doing the dummy to keep in mind the actual applications, and try that out with a training partner to understand why it is like that, again focusing on being compact and direct.

To fully appreciate dummy you need a minimum primer of chum kui I'd say, otherwise it is just a bunch of moves. Though dummy is still a great training aid for all levels.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,524
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

20 Feb 2012, 10:19 pm

0_equals_true wrote:

Its not new. Dummy is supposed to be compact. Some just bash about, go through the motions, but it is not about that at all.

Your right, its not new, but I suppose a bit rare in quality and starting to break back through to the surface after several decades of commercialization.

0_equals_true wrote:

It is about development and application of energry/power using the body. One of the common mistakes, is having the arms swinging about all the place, trying hit positions, rather then focusing the overall point of training. Dummy is about directness, you are meant to be striking from short distances. Like you talked about strikes coming out, but more using your body.

Yeah, the way we look at it there's really no wind-back, if you do anything big or wasted movement you did it wrong.

0_equals_true wrote:

I don't know where you are in your tanning, but one of the main things you will be developing through dummy is your Yui Ma (turning) power,. In dummy even more than average, the arms are barely thrown out on their own during a move, it is the body that delivers the power from the ground up. We call this the iron bar principle. You can think as if in that moment you arm is fixed with an iron bar from your elbow to your torso, so you have put you body into the strike, there just the extra inch power at the end.

Actually the iron bar thing reminds me a lot of how the Guan Sao and Quansao feel, its a bit like you're using your arms like well-built furniture legs; wedging your opponent, damaging what you block as you block while sending energy through. That's probably not the most coherent explanation to anyone else reading this but you might agree on the sensation. The same goes for Bil Sao attacks to the neck and how those deliver. Unless someone has Gung Fu background it doesn't seem very common for someone to essentially send a hand past their head to strike the neck with the forearm either.

Its been a while since we've focused on sections of the wooden dummy, I *know* four of the eight sections but I say that loosly because it seems like the more I find out about any of this stuff the more I realize I don't know. That's part of what get addictive about learning. As for turning power though, not sure. We do have a striking class where we're hitting standing bags and we have some breaking kicks that seem to start from a pivot kind of like a scissor step but not fully over; I could see those being used though from the right or left of the dummy and last time we were on the dummy we did something similar in terms of positioning out as we went through to our Tan Sao and then delivered to the knee of the dummy.

0_equals_true wrote:

If you are in you stance you have a lot of torsion to your disposal. It is not about over turning either, the angles are also fairly to very slight, but it is about what you can do with those angles.

It seems like everything in Wing Chun is insanely precise, and my instructor was mentioning that for pretty much anyone the forms themselves (pre-dummy even) seem very simple but you can spend decades even trying to get them 'perfect' just because you can take the detail that far. Good news is that its a highly portable set of skills and it makes any other mid-range fighting you do better as you practice so payoff still comes sooner than decades later, regardless that's just saying I could have decades of fun with this and have my fighting age like wine even as I'm passing middle-age.

0_equals_true wrote:

It is important while doing the dummy to keep in mind the actual applications, and try that out with a training partner to understand why it is like that, again focusing on being compact and direct.

We're in luck there as well. My instructor won't let us learn a new section without also working through it on a partner and vice a verse. Also he'll switch positioning to where inside, outside, you have to be able to apply the concepts globally.

0_equals_true wrote:

To fully appreciate dummy you need a minimum primer of chum kui I'd say, otherwise it is just a bunch of moves. Though dummy is still a great training aid for all levels.

I know there are technically three forms we're supposed to do before we do the wooden dummy that I still need to learn before I pick the rest up. He's going to be starting us on that in private (me and another guy), I have about maybe a dozen steps of the first form and even at that I need to practice them a bit more. Additionally he has some excellent five animal Kuntao forms that are similarly non-floral. Seems like all of this stuff dovetails masterfully.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

Fern
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,340

20 Feb 2012, 11:45 pm

I think MMA is good. I think MMA works because it gets people out of their own style and into someone else's on a regular basis. The more martial artists learn from eachother the stronger they will become.

However, I disagree with people who say that UFC fights are "the most realistic." I have three reasons for this: 1. it's all one-on-one, 2. there are no weapons, 3. the ring is padded. These are three conditions seldom found in a street situation that other martial arts address better in my opinion. Now, if you asked me " Do you think MMA is the most realistic for fighting one man with no friends or weapons that decides to attack you on a clean smooth surface with no shoes?"... well then I'd have to say "Yes."

In the meantime, I like my karate just fine.

Icyclan
Sea Gull

Joined: 19 Jun 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 231

26 Feb 2012, 4:47 pm

Fern wrote:

1. I'm a shotokan brown belt under the JKA, and I've never been taught anything in karate that would be useful against multiple opponents attacking me at the same time. In fact, most of it is useless against just one person. 2. You'd be hard-pressed to beat a capable attacker without one if you practice karate or some other form of playfighting. If your opponent has a weapon, run; if you can't, swat it aside, go for a head punch. 3. A padded surface is a huge disadvantage for an MMA fighter vs a karateka/traditionalist as he will be much better versed in takedowns.

Fern wrote:

Now, if you asked me " Do you think MMA is the most realistic for fighting one man with no friends or weapons that decides to attack you on a clean smooth surface with no shoes?"... well then I'd have to say "Yes."

Yeah, once shoes and dirty surfaces come into the mix, you'd better know your kata and kihon.

MMA breeds toughness, pain resistance, and dealing with adrenalin all of which is absent in karate training. Not to mention someone is actually trying to punch your face in instead of standing in horse stance and punching air.

Fern wrote:

In the meantime, I like my karate just fine.

You shouldn't. In karate you stand wrong, block wrong, punch wrong and kick wrong. Karate is useless.

Icyclan
Sea Gull

Joined: 19 Jun 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 231

26 Feb 2012, 5:10 pm

0_equals_true wrote:

Icyclan your assessment of wing chun is not accurate. I don't know where you trained or to what so I can't comment on you. It is a difficult style to learn to a decent standard, but it provides useful skills that can be used in MMA. Even Calson Gracie said as much when held a joint lecture with Sam Kwok.

I have helped out at my club for some time we have trained boxers/muay thai/ other seasoned martial artist. Nearly everyone, with few exceptions has trouble coordinating the simultaneous control and attack, we have a strong emphasis on coordination training. The few that are natural it has nothing to do with their martial art experience. Everyone we have train their coordination has improved, and they are able to use their limbs at the same time rather than one after another. Also we promote training on both side, and training he weaker side, just as much. So it definitely has benefits to these people.

Simple fact if you just stand there you are going to get hit. it doesn't matter what style. The best way to not get hit is to move. Interception isn't usually enough in isolation.

Wing Chun deals with elbows pretty well, it is just as much about elbows an Muay Thai if not more so, and pretty similar. You were talking about breaking down the opponent guard. Not always necessary you can jam it into their body, the elbow is covered. If you are going to take down their guard, you can draw downwards, crossing and pinning. Elbow striking from that doesn't work although you can shoulder barge. The point is everything has a counter, you can go on like this ad infinity.

Main thing is you position yourself appropriately. Just like muay thai if you want to stop an elbow, you have to get something in the way, you can stop it before it is come out, but a good fighter is compact, and doesn't load short range strikes which make it obvious.

The only things you can do to fully stop an elbow strike at close range is get something the way immediately whilst getting out of range (if you can), OR to get under the elbow to lift clear. The is because getting something the way isn't enough, as the strike can still come round and hit you.

However the getting something in the way is still the most important part. it is the reaction that facilitates other reactions. The speed at which you can do this, will be the determining factor. You should practice getting your hand up accurately, from any position. Hands, by you side, in your pockets, out wide. Doesn't matter, you can't predict where your hands/arms are going to be. It need to the directs/shortest distance to get in front of the elbow.

I don't really want to get too much into all kinds of terminology, because it means little to most people. However I tend to use a fook and rising/rolling lan combination (you can't really generalize though). Fook can take a lot of punishment, is strong, it doesn't take hardly any space to get up, it doesn't hurt you. You still need to be fairly accurate, but you do get better at it with time. It is also very difficult for them to take your hand without them being elbowed.

Rising lan (if you are unable to get clear), can done instantly with practice. The important thing is you hold on their wrist while their elbow is being lifted, which stops that unraveling and hitting you. It is close to locking without locking a joint due how the arms a wrapped. Pinning is a whole other subject which is vast to go on about here. You should be stepping in a striking at the same time. this will lift their elbow higher, which is poor structure for them.

It will take practice for to be able to step in and rise fully, but that I not the point you are defending yourself against the strike. You are not going capitalize fully every time (I think that is where a lot WCers go wrong). The point is with practice you become a lot better at converting, or making new opportunities.

I think you are right about the lack of sparring experience some people have. Also faux traditionalists who stand there, with a low guard trying to look the part, that is really not a lot to with wing chun.

The fact of the matter anyone who says their style is for everyone either lying or delusional. Humans aren't actually built to fight. Would you like to take on a tiger? Their reactions are better than yours, their spacial awareness is beyond amazing, they are more powerful, and they have built in weapons. This is why we use tools, and train in martial arts. Because were are otherwise limited. but this comes at some cost, and is not perfect. With a lot metrologies it does rely on a high level of fitness, kind of beyond your average person. Injuries an nigles extremely common.

Wing Chun sounds really nice in theory. Then again, most martial arts do, and most of them are garbage. Wing Chun falls under that category. Every Wing Chun guy I've seen fight (under any rules) looked like he had no clue as to what a real fight was. A picture says more than a thousand words, and a video says even more yet; this is what a fight between two legit Wing Chun masters looks like:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdF1nIAfpk[/youtube]

What a joke. I guess 'grandmaster' Cheung wished he'd learned some BJJ to defend against the deadly schoolyard-headlock takedown which Wing Chun apparently doesn't train for. The attacker, Boztepe, later made a name for himself by challenging several Gracie family members. Or rather, he made a name for backing out each time.

About the guard thing, we were talking about the guard as a position used in the ground game, not guard as in an action where you put your hands up to block.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,524
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

26 Feb 2012, 6:18 pm

The one thing we can say in this, regardless of a person's attributes and regardless of what kind of beefcake factor they have from taking punches or how many minutes they can jump rope for, which ever side is taking strikes has a rapidly diminishing skill level. This is where attributes and technical know-how essentially come up against an equalizer.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

Fern
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,340

05 Mar 2012, 2:25 am

Icyclan wrote:

Ah, I see. I don't really know why you want to argue, as I already said that I like MMA as training alone. Also, since there are several very successful UFC fighters that are both MMA and JKA, they are clearly both beneficial for that purpose. So what I am about say now is really just to clarify a few things. Please know that my opinions on this matter do not reflect those of any other individual or organization mentioned here or otherwise. I am simply stating my own personal view.

1. Well if we're going to boast about ranks, I'm a 2 dan in JKA. That's too bad that you've never trained fighting multiple opponents. In my dojo we do those sorts of drills starting from the beginner level. I guess dojos are different depending on where you go.

2. Interesting. I take it you speak from experience? Have you ever been attacked by someone in real life? I have. Karate saved my life. To add to that, I am a small female and my attackers were neither of those things. But, you know, different things work for different people. Maybe karate just wasn't the martial art for you. That's fine too. You have to do what works for your body, and learn to accept that the paths others choose can be different, yet still valid. (And between you and me, playfighting karate drives me crazy too)

3. In my dojo we do train takedowns, just without mats. Instead we use hard wood floors, carpet, concrete or grass. However, if you meant to type "groundwork" then yes, I'd say without a doubt that MMA fighters are much better at that. That, in particular is what makes MMA so effective against one person: there are a wide selection of ranges in which to fight. However, most groundwork is only realistic if you are fighting one person. The second guy can just walk up and kick you in the head if your arms are twisted around the other guy. That's just my personal observation: If you work harder to stay on your feet, it makes fighting multiple people easier. As I said, we train with multiple attackers sometimes so this is something I have just noticed.

I agree that JKA tournaments leave much to be desired in terms of realism, but really, anything that turns a fight for your life into entertainment will have that effect. That is why I praised MMA and mock UFC. The same is true for karate: training = more realistic, tournaments = not realistic.

Icyclan wrote:

Fern wrote:

In the meantime, I like my karate just fine.

You shouldn't. In karate you stand wrong, block wrong, punch wrong and kick wrong. Karate is useless.

Well WOW. I just don't even know what to say to that. I've already tried to discuss in a civil fashion what I personally find to be the strengths and weaknesses of both martial arts. I would never consider saying anything so disrespectful about ANY other martial art.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,524
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

05 Mar 2012, 8:29 am

It seems like integration really cleans up a lot of the caveats that come from styles being diluted by trademarking and family name, ornamental use, etc. etc.. There's also a very big difference between how US and other western practitioners relate to the material, teach and use it vs. how its taught in Asia.

I mean, I have to say this again - MMA in the UFC sense is great for conditioning, if you're learning Jiu Jitsu you're getting good ground game if you have a good instructor, if you're doing Muay Thai with it then you're getting good striking. To practice all of those things BUT also include things like Judo, Karate, Wing Chun, Kali/Escrima, Arnis (all of which have empty hand translations for everything), Panantukan, Silat, etc. you're not selling yourself short - especially true if you're learning from an instructor who's a natural at integrating these things.and who has been in countless fights and knows what works vs. what doesn't.

As for if someone's coming at you with a knife and you don't have one - yes, get out of there. If you can find something like a bottle, a wrench, etc. and can attack the weapon and you have training in things like knife and palm stick, your odds may be better than theirs depending on how much training you've had and how realistic your senses are on what you're up against. However if you're cornered and they have a weapon, I'm sorry, punch to the face is terrible advice. You need to get that hand past you and use your other hand to grab both sides of their trachea up around the jaw area, squeeze, and push in - *assertively*. If they bicycle backward you step on a foot or kick their base out.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

Icyclan
Sea Gull

Joined: 19 Jun 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 231

06 Mar 2012, 1:18 pm

Fern wrote:

Ah, I see. I don't really know why you want to argue, as I already said that I like MMA as training alone. Also, since there are several very successful UFC fighters that are both MMA and JKA

I can only think of Lyoto Machida, and even that would be a stretch.

Fern wrote:

1. Well if we're going to boast about ranks, I'm a 2 dan in JKA.

I wasn't boasting at all, holding a rank in Shotokan doesn't mean much to me. I just mentioned it to indicate that I know what I'm talking about when it comes to karate, having invested several years in it.

Fern wrote:

2. Interesting. I take it you speak from experience? Have you ever been attacked by someone in real life?

Back when I only knew karate I was attacked and pushed to the ground and punched until bystanders broke up the fight. I was a bouncer for a short while (not a job at all for an aspie) and BJJ/MMA served me very well during that time. About the knife defense, I was never attacked with a weapon myself, but that's what the head bouncer who I worked with told me. He had been a bouncer for almost two decades so I'll take his word for it.

Icyclan wrote:

Fern wrote:

In the meantime, I like my karate just fine.

You shouldn't. In karate you stand wrong, block wrong, punch wrong and kick wrong. Karate is useless.

Fern wrote:

I did not mean to come across as disrespectful, even though I realized that is how it would be perceived. I wanted to conclude my post with the first word that came to mind after thinking back and summarizing my karate training. 'Useless' just happened to be that word.

I considered writing 'nearly useless', because I once defended myself succesfully with a front kick I had learned in Shotokan class. I'm sure many people have similar experiences. However, how many Shotokan people have lost fights due to attempting one of the many useless techniques? Fights that they otherwise may have won. Some techniques in Shotokan make you a worse fighter, as they may get you hurt. As an example, uraken is just one technique that comes to mind. I have tried several times to land it during MMA training, and it's next to impossible. Hitting someone at the exact moment that you whip your fist sideways is just too hard against someone who is moving around. If you don't land it perfectly, it loses all its power and you're left wide open.

I'm not small nor a female, so I can't speak for you. Maybe if slugging at your attacker isn't an option then the self-defence drills in Shotokan have some merit for you, I don't know. What I do know is that, having spent considerable time in both Shotokan and BJJ/MMA, the latter is the better option for anyone looking for self-defence; big, small, male or female.

Icyclan
Sea Gull

Joined: 19 Jun 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 231

06 Mar 2012, 1:32 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

However if you're cornered and they have a weapon, I'm sorry, punch to the face is terrible advice. You need to get that hand past you and use your other hand to grab both sides of their trachea up around the jaw area, squeeze, and push in - *assertively*. If they bicycle backward you step on a foot or kick their base out.

As I said in the post above this one, that's what I have been taught by someone who had been working as a bouncer for nearly twenty years at that time. I trust the word of someone who's actually encountered armed attackers over the word of some paper tiger grandmaster who's good at marketing himself but has never been in an actual fight.

Page 4 of 7 [ 107 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Jump to:

What do you think about MMA? Post Reply New Topic

What do you think about MMA?