Issue 039
July 2008
Dear FO, been in Afghanistan (Musa Qal Eh) for over a month now, our training equipment is extremely basic, sandbags with soil and bricks, ammo tins with soil and bricks, heavy bars from armoured vehicles to lift and press, water containers to carry over 200 meters to get filled, we have turned that task into a competition, fastest time back.
Fighters Only keeps us motivated and the Performance section gives us new ideas for how to use our limited equipment. Keep up the good work and the boys in Musa Qal Eh really appreciate all the hard work that goes into the mag.
William Smith, 5 Scots, Afghanistan
Good stuff William! We hope you and the lads keep enjoying Fighters Only, stay safe and train hard, fight easy!
Congrats on your win Machine. There is not at this moment a dictionary definition for MMA. The closest I can find and the one I like the best is as follows. “MMA is a blend of two or more styles that are united yet exist in no fixed proportion to each other”. The reason I bring this up is that everywhere I look I read letters and comments from ‘traditional’ martial artists who always have some negative comment to make about MMA. Why? All people are trying to do is get the best from every system they can and pack themselves with knowledge to allow themselves to become more complete fighters. The sooner people realise that there is no perfect system and that one style does not have it all the sooner we can all grow and use this shared knowledge to advance all martial arts. Like it or not MMA is here to stay. The stubborn single-minded attitude is the reason people turn their backs on traditional systems.
Gavin Hedges, via email
People still argue about that stuff? We thought the only MMA arguments left were whether Fedor could armbar a bear.
First and foremost I want to congratulate you all for a blinding mag, I never miss an issue and read it from front to back. I’m writing about the abuse that I have received from so called ‘hardcore’ MMA fans on the internet. I believe this abuse is because apparently “I’m a pussy because I don’t train or fight”, and just relax at home and watch MMA on the TV.
I, like most people, have been aware of MMA since the mid 90’s, but like the vast majority of fans only really started watching it seriously with the inception of The Ultimate Fighter. Just because my idea of fun isn’t to get in a cage and fight, the small minority of people that do actually train and fight (fair fucking play to them!) seem to think that I know nothing about MMA and am some kind of plastic supporter!
Not a day of my life goes past where I don’t watch MMA, go on one of several forums or troll the various MMA websites reading about the breaking news etc, so to call me a plastic supporter really, really grates on me! I will defend MMA to the hilt, but find this abuse annoying, cause if it wasn’t for people like me, ‘the casual fan’, MMA would still be a small time sport and not enjoying the exposure it has now! Once again top mag, keep up the good.work!
Michael Clark, via email
We’re with you Michael. Just because you don’t step in the cage doesn’t mean you can’t have an opinion.
I noticed in the April edition of Fighters Only, you had an article on wrestling versus MMA. In that article you had profiles of crossover fighters. In the segment for Ken Shamrock, you wrote that he “defeated Royce Gracie in the first ever UFC superfight.” That is very incorrect. In the superfight, the fight ended in a draw. Ken Shamrock himself likes to put that as a win on his resume because he feels if there were judges he would have won, but there weren’t, and he didn’t, so it was a draw. The first time they fought, of course, Gracie submitted Shamrock. Therefore, Shamrock never defeated Royce Gracie. Obviously, a MMA magazine should know this.
Joe, via email
You caught us bang to rights there Joe! We knew that, but we apologise for letting that error slip through the cracks.
