The idea of challenging seems pretty outdated to me. I notice that a lot of TMA dont do it anymore. However, theres always MMA guys challenging people. TMA guys or other MMA guys. Put your money where your mouth is seems to be the general attitude.

Is it because of the training differences between MMA and TMA? Many TMA accept there curriculum as the one way, on the other hand MMA guys are constantly challenging and replacing what they learn. Is it the lack of a tradtional dojo setting? The lack of a "Master"?

I also noticed mant of the TMA guys will decline this challenge and MMA guys will say when and where? Is such eagerness to fight a necessity in our training?

Part of it comes from a healthy "does it work?" attitude that is part and parcel of the MMA ethos. As long as it is not done disrespectfully, I see no problem with it. JKD is (should be ) very much a realization of this attitude.

I agree. however, this is often considered disrespectful, especially by the TMA guys.

Well, lets hear these reasons. Thats what im trying to understand. Is it solely due to the training differences or the differences in how that information is exchanged? Is it because of the philosophies and etiquette and tradtionalism or the lack thereof?

These days many of the practitioners of MMA are guys in their 20's to 30's who have an athletic and competitive background. This was the demographic of TMA practitioners 20, 30, even 40 years ago in the US. When young men out to prove themselves change their art of choice then those behaviors follow.

Is it really so simple? Just a style change away?

Chen

I think that is a flawed question--as it frames things poorly.

I see no evidence that it "the way things are" at all.

Plus I see no evidence that MMA are willing to accpet "challenges" in general--some certainly do--but certainly not "all" or even "most."

Heck, I bet you can't prove "many."

Its a sure bet the "pro's" WON'T--Chuck Liddel would just laugh at me if I "challanged" him.
He has waaaaayyyy to much to lose if he accedently breaks his hand on my face or slips in my blood and hurts his knee.

Plus, there is, as I see it, a huge difference in outlook being expressed here.

I don't train to get "challanged" to go mano-a-mano with some idiot who stumbles into my practice and wants to "go."

I train to defend myself vs a violent attack.
When I can't get away and can't get my gun out or can't get to a weapon useable object.

If its not worth putting a person in the hospital over--killing someone over then it simply is not worth "really" fighting about.

Opinions will vary, but that is my view.

Besides anything less than "really" fghting is going to come down to the rules.
And whomever trains under those rules will have a HUGE advantage.

Can you imagine me pulling a knife during a MMA match??

Hey, under some peoples "rules" the use of weapons is a "given."

To paraphrase a guy I know "I have a good, job, a pretty wife, couple of kids, way too much to risk getting seriously hurt in some stupid match."

So when you ask "why don't TMA accept challanges??" a MUCH BETTER question is:

"Why should we?"