I believe the mordern version is more effective... being a reletively new sport it is still evolving......but when it comes to the players like in any sport ...the old players who had no publicity very less money....they played only for he love of the game ......new players cant match that passion.

My main point in raising this subject is to show that the original idea of finding the ultimate truth in combat has been left & obscured as MMA has morphed into a sport..... { MMA gloves & hand wraps don't protect the one struck, but rather the striker's hands, which would more often than not be injured on his adversary's hard headbones.} {Try using your advanced butterfly guard strategy when the other guy can employ groin strikes, eye scrapes etc. etc. etc.}  " Not that I don't in fact love the sport; I am in FACT the biggest Fan/Nut Job on the face of the earth!

I like the both versions of the UFC , but I can't remember which one of the Gracie's said it "The new UFC doesn't real prove who is the Ultimate Fighter". What I would like to see the UFC have a tournament with the top 8 fighters overall not by weight class, but say top 8 pound for pound. Then who ever would win the tournament would be the UFC Open Division Champion. Also they being the UFC should create a Super -Heavyweight Division. Plus Here's one for Dana White or who ever runs any MMA promotion world wide if  any champion doesnot make weight or goes over before the weight in and comes in say 10 pounds over and gets the 2hour to lose the extra weight then comes back and still doesn't make weight , strip them of the title and depending on the division and what PPV it is have one of the other fights in that division depending on who the fighters are let them fight for the title and the man or woman who was the champion give them a title shot. So here's a message for the Dragon "Shine Up the UFC World Light-Heavyweight Title Belt for Anderson Silva because he's coming to get it."

Accurate? YES
Useful? of-course
MMA is a sport like no other,  when you engage in the sport you follow the rules and play with  it. Rules are made for the protection of the player, this is the basic idea why rules are made in a sport. But remember that their can never be a perfect set of rules in a sport that's why every year officials that govern a particular sport do their share in upgrading the rules of the sport for the better development and safety of the player.
MMA players will always have the same spirit and decipline,as to what the real figther (real combat fighter ) have. What seperates this two are the rules they follow.

I understand what you are saying , but I believe the rules are to guide the direction of the fights so that they appeal to the casual ( un-schooled) fans. This is by far the biggest demographic & the ones who only watch to see the dramatic knock-outs. This state of affairs sends the fight down un-natural paths. After enough time has passed what you have is something that has little to no practical value.....like trying to use western fencing as a basis for personal self defense.

in some elements yes, in some elements not at all
because this sport is new its constantly evolving but it evolves in much the same manner all adaption occurs, towards whatever wins given the environment, so certain tactics like a lot of the jiu jitsu, big head kicks among other things would not work as well if guys were just brawling and biting and stomping and kneeing
at the same time the combination of fighting arts has made the fighters 100x more skilled and well rounded then fighters in the early days so i would still give it to them in a street fight any day of the week
like someone up their said also, training puts them in a whole new world above the old days also
but some moves in this game, like pulling guard, working off the back are a little more difficult on concrete or when the guy can bite you and claw your eyes out, generally for street fights you wanna stay on the feet which that being said, everyone in mma today HAS to have a standup game or you ll get beaten period. so yes more effective for sure

Yah ryt, UN-SCHOOLED.

Very well reasoned.... I would say however, that the artists are better while the art has been made less real. I have no qualms about seeing effective striking, in fact I love it, but I love truth more, & the introduction of wraps & gloves have forever taken the reality out of what was once called NHB. If your striking would not work in the real world because one would suffer fight ending injuries in the execution of these techniques; I feel like they shouldn't be used. I'm speaking strictly from a martial arts POV not a sports one when saying this. I in no way let these judgments interfere with my enjoyment of MMA. I only log for the truth to be understood by the new crop of "MMA Fans" which have been so recently summoned from the Burlesque show of "Pro Wrestling" & the wider world of general sports enthusiasts. In 1993 &94 we saw what actually worked when two men entered into combat with only those tools they were born with. We also saw what didn't. It's taken years of regulation,political pressure & marketing agency tinkering to get the outcomes gerrymandered around to the point where run of the mill brawlers with low levels of skill & less finesse are as likely to, or  even more likely to win the bouts they fight as people who have spent years honing the techniques they practices. All I'm saying is people should have a clear understanding of what the necessities of sport do to reality in martial arts.    The Judo of the late 19th century Kodokan had 97% of the techniques found today in BJJ, but stopped emphasizing them in order to promote it's self as an Olympic Sport. This is only one example that could be given, but hopefully it will serve to illuminate the point I'm trying to get across. This whole thread came about from haring that endless tag line " as real as it gets" for the 1,000,000th time & thinking...... "nah, not so much." I Know nothing can be done to change any of it, but please pardon my whimsy in imagining what might have been another way.

although i mostly agree with you on your points
I disagree with your point that it puts one of the mill brawlers at an advantage over legit martial artists
if anything i would say it's the other way around if brawlers cant smack the back of the head, stomp, soccer kick, knees on the ground etc.
and many of the things that worked in 1993 and 4 wouldnt work today not because of new regulations but because people have found counters to certain moves from other martial arts in other martial arts...kind of confusing for example you rarely see typical collegiate wrestling double or single leg shots, why? because you go to one knee while doing it and keep your head up which opens you up to some subs and knees to the head or say you use muay thai clinch and its super effective early on because your really good at muay thai and no one can get out of it or beat you in it, but then say you get some guy who knows judo who knows a counter that will put you flat on your back from that position

the slow culmination of these various martial arts is what made stuff more effective today, modern day fighters know counters and reversals, escapes etc. against tons of moves from every martial art

royce gracie was so effective because people didn't know what was coming and didnt know any counters, reversals or escapes to beat him

if anything these new rules make it much harder for brawlers because with those gloves and wraps they cant just come out swinging and hope to land one of those huge bare knuckle bombs or anything like that

Compared to 93 the realism has disappeared it has become more tame definitely, However Given it is a sport, it must have rules and regulations,  I like what they have done with it overall, I do believe the rounds should be longer or no rounds at all however. Other than that I would say that the rules are fair and with in reason for safety and worldly conduct code, which prevents dirty fighters the ability to ruin what quite could possibly be a great fight otherwise.

I have been trained for actual combat, to include CQC and hand-to-hand, yes the modern MMA fighters are MUCH better athletes than the early UFC competitors, better trained, better paid, more suited to the sport's current format.  But in terms of showcasing who would win in a "street fight" situation the sport has stepped away from that kind of realism.  Is it a better TV event with more attractive TV personalities and top-flight athletes again yes, but the no-holds-barred angle of the eary days came closer to similating real-life combat. 

Napalm sticks to kids! Napalm has no friends!

?????   How very Zen of you!  Or as Mr. Spock would say; " does this this statement have some significance?

Take the best Early UFC fighter with no rule restrictions at all and put him against GSP, Silva, or Machida that have to abide by all the rules and see who wins. The early fighter would be absolutely dominated. Just ask Royce Gracie how that worked out, if he can still remember it after he got his brain beat to a pulp by Hughes. The only way someone on the street could beat a legitimate UFC fighter would be if they brought weapons. I wouldn't go up against a UFC Champ if I could use a damn knife.

the pancrase champions were pretty good in the 90s along with the early chute fighters who many still fight in UFC
i dunno about shamrock, id wanna see bas rutten in his prime in their, hybrid wrestling guys are also still around and succesful
but its the combination of these early groups that has made mma into more modern orgs and finally what it is today and each generation of fighters is better and better
although actually i still think they would be beaten, the game has just evolved so much, there would be so many holes in their game because they wouldnt be prepared or know what to look for against many fighters styles and techniques

/Ponders Randy C. 15 years ago?

cool I remember seeing him in a couple fights but I wasn't into it like I have been the past 4 or 5 years tbh:)