# MMA VS Traditional Martial Arts - article from Fox Baguazhang



## Xue Sheng (May 5, 2015)

From the The Fox Bagua Zhang Blog



> Recently I've seen the topic of MMA vs. traditional martial arts (TMA) in forums, blogs and hundreds of different places on the internet. Generally, the MMA supporters claim that if traditional arts were effective, they would be dominating in the cage fights and that most TMA guys are trapped inside a world of fantasy combat. Adversely, the TMA supporters say that their techniques are too lethal to be used in a sports setting and therefore the people living inside of a combat fantasy are the people who choose cage fighting to express their art.





> So instead of trying to convince one side that the other is better, you should understand we are actually all on the same path.





> In my personal opinion both sides that would argue superiority need to have a slice or two of humble pie.


----------



## lklawson (May 5, 2015)

Recently?

Good Grief Charley Brown!  Where has he been, living under a rock?

I'll leave all the rest of the MMA vs TMS argument for a late 1990's time machine.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

Yeah but it still stresses alive and resisted training.


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

lklawson said:


> Recently?
> 
> Good Grief Charley Brown!  Where has he been, living under a rock?
> 
> ...



Should have seen the kickboxing muay Thai debate back in the 80,s


----------



## K-man (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but it still stresses alive and resisted training.


True but it doesn't say that it has to be tested in the ring. It actually talks about someone trying to hit you in the face, ie someone other than a compliant partner and no one has ever suggested otherwise.


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

And by the way there is a very good reason why I may loose a knife fight to a knife guy or a kicking match to a tkder.

And it is not the mats,or the ref,or that I am on or off the street.or even that I would have de-escalated the fight or avoided it in some other circumstance.

It is because I do not have the refined skills that those guys have. That is it. Plain and simple.


----------



## K-man (May 5, 2015)

I think the whole debate is summed up in one sentence.



> So no matter what type of contest we see, we are forced to accept the reality that is given to the contestants. Likewise, basketball players and football players can only be successful in their own environment. The argument that one style is better than the other lends to the ignorance of the speaker.


All styles have their strengths and all styles have their weaknesses. Hopefully, as the article also says, most of us are on the same journey.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but it still stresses alive and resisted training.





drop bear said:


> And by the way there is a very good reason why I may loose a knife fight to a knife guy or a kicking match to a tkder.
> 
> And it is not the mats,or the ref,or that I am on or off the street.or even that I would have de-escalated the fight or avoided it in some other circumstance.
> 
> It is because I do not have the refined skills that those guys have. That is it. Plain and simple.




Whoa there captain obvious, all you are doing is repeating what he already said in the article, you are just saying it in a more confrontational manor.

No one is attacking MMA or TMA it is an article saying both sides of this argument need to understand it is all martial arts.


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

K-man said:


> True but it doesn't say that it has to be tested in the ring. It actually talks about someone trying to hit you in the face, ie someone other than a compliant partner and no one has ever suggested otherwise.



The ring is kind of the definition of a non compliant person trying to hit you in the face.

I mean if you wanted to find the best test of objectives,in this case face hitting, then a ring will supply the best puncher with the most desire to punch you.


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

K-man said:


> I think the whole debate is summed up in one sentence.
> 
> 
> All styles have their strengths and all styles have their weaknesses. Hopefully, as the article also says, most of us are on the same journey.



The deck just doesn't stack like that.  I just don't see how we automatically come to that conclusion.

I could make up drop bear fu tomorrow and as a style it could be inherently good or inherently a disaster.

It is not going to somehow mystically fit in and be this even balance of strengths and weaknesses


----------



## lklawson (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Should have seen the kickboxing muay Thai debate back in the 80,s


I saw it.

My recollection is that it wasn't as heated and certainly not as long lasting as MMA vs TMA.

But, frankly, I'm shocked that the gent in question is just "recently" seeing the debate, that he somehow thinks he's got a unique perspective on the matter because he's done "both," or that he feels he can whip out a blogpost which settles the matter by saying "well, it's all good and we're all martial artists, right?  group hug!" as if that's never occurred to anyone before.

Maybe he was just desperate for content?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> Whoa there captain obvious, all you are doing is repeating what he already said in the article, you are just saying it in a more confrontational manor.
> 
> No one is attacking MMA or TMA it is an article saying both sides of this argument need to understand it is all martial arts.



I don't think he is here.

"The MMA fighter should always dominate the cage because it is the natural setting of his training. Yet if you give him a knife and ask him to go against a knife fighter, he will be eaten alive because he is no longer in his element. No style can beat a Taekwondo fighter if they are limited to the rules of Taekwondo and no one can beat a jujitsu fighter when they are limited to the rules of jujitsu."

He is saying there is a rules,setting advantage. I am saying they are fundamentally better. The setting is incidental.


----------



## K-man (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> The ring is kind of the definition of a non compliant person trying to hit you in the face.
> 
> I mean if you wanted to find the best test of objectives,in this case face hitting, then a ring will supply the best puncher with the most desire to punch you.


No, in the ring you will find a fighter trained for that environment. It is a different environment to that for which I train. I don't train to fight. I train to not fight. Predominantly I don't train to attack, I train to defend. You are penalised for that in the ring. There are other methods to test your training that are more appropriate than the ring for the training we do.

You said in the earlier post you wouldn't do well against the knife fighter. Well I hope my guys would. They train against random knife attack every training session. I just don't get this _us against them_ situation. You can't measure one against the other.

For example, say I have a fifty year old professional woman come to me to learn self defence. For a start she is going to expect to learn how to defend herself if threatened or attacked. She doesn't want to learn to fight someone in the ring. If she did I would send her to one of my mates who trains people to fight in the ring. Sure we will pressure test her but in a more appropriate way for the training she is receiving.


----------



## crazydiamond (May 5, 2015)

I don't understand specifically the debate many  "traditional" martial arts practice mixed forms - from striking, kicking, to grappling, weapons and more. Mine has everything.  Is this UFC cage fighting MMA vs all others martial arts?  Is it in the cage or on the street? What's being compared?


----------



## Drose427 (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> The ring is kind of the definition of a non compliant person trying to hit you in the face.
> 
> I mean if you wanted to find the best test of objectives,in this case face hitting, then a ring will supply the best puncher with the most desire to punch you.



Not really, the ring is just one way to go about that.

One thing I liked about Boxing was my weekly training(specifically Sparring) wasn't different than my bouts. Wasn't 100% everyday, but contact was still there.

While in TSD, full speed punches are common for SD, and we use solid contact in free sparring, the structure of the few tourneys we do go to are different.

I can get a non compliant hard to full contact training partner anywhere


----------



## Steve (May 5, 2015)

I'm looking forward to reading the article in more detail.  But, I read the guy's bio on his blog and laughed when he mentioned teaching English to pay the bills.  Get that kid an editor!


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

K-man said:


> No, in the ring you will find a fighter trained for that environment. It is a different environment to that for which I train. I don't train to fight. I train to not fight. Predominantly I don't train to attack, I train to defend. You are penalised for that in the ring. There are other methods to test your training that are more appropriate than the ring for the training we do.



Missed the maywether Pac man fight?


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> Not really, the ring is just one way to go about that.
> 
> One thing I liked about Boxing was my weekly training(specifically Sparring) wasn't different than my bouts. Wasn't 100% everyday, but contact was still there.
> 
> ...



They will be better strikers than competition guys?


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

K-man said:


> You said in the earlier post you wouldn't do well against the knife fighter. Well I hope my guys would. They train against random knife attack every training session. I just don't get this _us against them_ situation. You can't measure one against the other.



You could find out. You don't have to guess.


----------



## Drose427 (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> They will be better strikers than competition guys?



Not inherently

No real generalization can be made

Its like the guys that take Boxing for SD and never compete,

They could be better in the ring than the guys at the gym who are competing and have more talent, they're essentially working the same drills, sparring the same way, etc. but the setting and structure differ.

Whether its an official bout or not, its still hard contact and non compliant training,

The method is more important than the environment.

I wasn't entirely disagreeing with your point, but expanding on it.


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

K-man said:


> For example, say I have a fifty year old professional woman come to me to learn self defence. For a start she is going to expect to learn how to defend herself if threatened or attacked. She doesn't want to learn to fight someone in the ring. If she did I would send her to one of my mates who trains people to fight in the ring. Sure we will pressure test her but in a more appropriate way for the training she is receiving.



I have not been factoring in personal choice. You can do as much or as little as you want. But the results will vary because of it.

If I don't practice knife fighting I am unlikely to be good at it.


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> Not inherently
> 
> No real generalization can be made
> 
> ...



Where I am going with this is you can go 100% and be the best guy in the room. But the quality of your training partners will keep you at a certain level. 

Competition determines the best guy in the state or country. And in my experience they are generally better than your average sparring partner.


----------



## lklawson (May 5, 2015)

crazydiamond said:


> I don't understand specifically the debate many  "traditional" martial arts practice mixed forms - from striking, kicking, to grappling, weapons and more. Mine has everything.  Is this UFC cage fighting MMA vs all others martial arts?  Is it in the cage or on the street? What's being compared?


Yes.  MMA is not "mixed martial arts" in the way you seem to understand it, that of "mixing" one "traditional" (usually "asian") martial art with techniques from another TMA.  

MMA, "Mixed Martial Arts," is an umbrella term for fighting and training in the style for what you call "cage fighting" of which UFC is the most well known professional organization.  However, there are other organizations and amateur clubs teaching in the same general style for the same general purpose, i.e.: "cage fighting."

This particular debate has been going on since Gracie put on his first televised set of matches, generally known as UFC1, in 1993 and reached a fevered pitch in the late 90's to early few years following 2000.  

In other words, this particular debate has been going on for over two blasted decades!

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Drose427 (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Where I am going with this is you can go 100% and be the best guy in the room. But the quality of your training partners will keep you at a certain level.
> 
> Competition determines the best guy in the state or country. And in my experience they are generally better than your average sparring partner.



No, competition determine the best _competitors _ in the area in that given competition.

I.e. one of the gyms in my area now has an MMA program taught by a pro fighter, but he is constantly out struck by the kick boxing and boxing guys there. 

On the flip side, I don't compete in MMA or Kick boxing. But I train with these guys regularly and can outdo some of the guys doing fairly well at local events.

But at the I agree with sparring guys you're unfamiliar with, which seems to be the core of your point

My point was simply competition isn't the only way to get that,


----------



## Hanzou (May 5, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> From the The Fox Bagua Zhang Blog



If you think fighting involves silky pants and weapons from the 16th century, then yeah I would say you're trapped in a world of fantasy combat.

MMA added a dose of reality to the world of martial arts. We're all better off because of it.


----------



## Drose427 (May 5, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> If you think fighting involves silky pants and weapons from the 16th century, then yeah I would say you're trapped in a world of fantasy combat.
> 
> MMA added a dose of reality to the world of martial arts. We're all better off because of it.



The only thing MMA really showed was the importance of cross training. 

Even after the first couple, the Gracie's couldn't just grapple their way to victory and had to strike more.

Most of the fighters in early MMA were TMA guys in training in silky pants.

That only changed because people wanted to compete specifically for MMA, where things like weapons, SD, and forms don't translate as perfectly as a dedicated sport style


----------



## Hanzou (May 5, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> The only thing MMA really showed was the importance of cross training.
> 
> Even after the first couple, the Gracie's couldn't just grapple their way to victory and had to strike more.
> 
> ...



That's some interesting revisionist history you got going on there.

Here's the thing; If your style of choice doesn't work in a controlled environment, how is it supposed to work in an uncontrolled environment? What mitigating factor neuters your art in a cage, yet allows it to flourish on the street? The argument simply makes no sense whatsoever. What? You can't punch someone in the johnson in the ring, or bite a piece of skin off, but you can in the street, so that's how your ancient martial art from medieval Asia is practical for the modern world?

I was punching people in the junk and biting people in grade school. Is that what the end result of traditional martial arts entails? Fighting like a grade school child?


----------



## crazydiamond (May 5, 2015)

lklawson said:


> Yes.  MMA is not "mixed martial arts" in the way you seem to understand it, that of "mixing" one "traditional" (usually "asian") martial art with techniques from another TMA.
> 
> MMA, "Mixed Martial Arts," is an umbrella term for fighting and training in the style for what you call "cage fighting" of which UFC is the most well known professional organization.  However, there are other organizations and amateur clubs teaching in the same general style for the same general purpose, i.e.: "cage fighting."
> 
> ...


 

Ok I think.

But my MA (or MMA?) includes BJJ and MT training  - as does UFC training I believe. Maybe its a finer line..


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 5, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> If you think fighting involves silky pants and weapons from the 16th century, then yeah I would say you're trapped in a world of fantasy combat.
> 
> MMA added a dose of reality to the world of martial arts. We're all better off because of it.



Since he never even mentions anything as to what you just posted I can only assume you either didn't read it or didn't understand it or possibly skimmed it with a jaded eye and ran with it.....all I can say is you trying real hard to get a flame post started aren't you, but frankly your opinion on this matters little to me so please feel free to comment on this on the fox bagua page if you like....and have fun storming the castle


----------



## Drose427 (May 5, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> That's some interesting revisionist history you got going on there.
> 
> Here's the thing; If your style of choice doesn't work in a controlled environment, how is it supposed to work in an uncontrolled environment? What mitigating factor neuters your art in a cage, yet allows it to flourish on the street? The argument simply makes no sense whatsoever. What? You can't punch someone in the johnson in the ring, or bite a piece of skin off, but you can in the street, so that's how your ancient martial art from medieval Asia is practical for the modern world?
> 
> I was punching people in the junk and biting people in grade school. Is that what the end result of traditional martial arts entails? Fighting like a grade school child?



Its true history when you look at their MMA records.

Renzo started losing around pride 10

Royce (the most successful) had a lot of matches labeled as draws, but in many of his later matches looked like completely different fights than his earlier ones.

Royler(or Rorion, the lesser known ones confuse me) in one of his sakuraba matches was so outclassed he started but scooting instead of standing and fighting because he couldnt strike with sakuraba and couldnt get him down.

actually HERES the thing,

It has worked in controlled environments. In MMA and Kickboxing. The guys who did have fighting style pretty distinct from MT guys, if you cant tell the difference youre simply ignorant.

Actually, fighting like a child was pretty successful in the early UFCs.

Hackney crotch shotted

Even Royce pulled hair and what not now and again when even the almighty BJJ failed.


----------



## K-man (May 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Missed the maywether Pac man fight?


Yep. Not the slightest bit interested in it.


----------



## Hanzou (May 5, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> Its true history when you look at their MMA records.



Which wasn't your original point. 

You originally said that the only thing MMA showed us was the importance of cross-training. Actually that's false. What MMA showed was the difference between fantasy martial arts, and real martial arts. In early MMA, we saw several traditional martial artists get embarrassed when they entered the octagon, and we witnessed an unassuming guy from Brazil choke out a variety of larger opponents. Those two things changed the martial arts landscape forever. I don't know what the individual fight records of the Gracies has to do with any of that.



> actually HERES the thing,
> 
> It has worked in controlled environments. In MMA and Kickboxing. The guys who did have fighting style pretty distinct from MT guys, if you cant tell the difference youre simply ignorant.



So now we're going to say that kickboxing is a TMA now? 

Interesting.



> Actually, fighting like a child was pretty successful in the early UFCs.



That one clearly went over your head....


----------



## Drose427 (May 5, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Which wasn't your original point.
> 
> You originally said that the only thing MMA showed us was the importance of cross-training. Actually that's false. What MMA showed was the difference between fantasy martial arts, and real martial arts. In early MMA, we saw several traditional martial artists get embarrassed when they entered the octagon, and we witnessed an unassuming guy from Brazil choke out a variety of larger opponents. Those two things changed the martial arts landscape forever. I don't know what the individual fight records of the Gracies has to do with any of that.
> 
> ...



Yup fantasy martial arts.....funny considering Ninjutsu
karate(various styles)
TKD
Savate
kenpo
Shaolin

All performed well at some point against other non grappling styles. Only got choked up against a style they didn't train for.

If that isn't the definition of the need for cross training idk what is...but whatever you say.

And that's not what I said at all in regards to kick boxing, but since youve never got any the points or explanations of How to properly train in a style that does forms, I'm gonna assume you're either not reading posts or lack comprehension skills.


----------



## Hanzou (May 5, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> Yup fantasy martial arts.....funny considering Ninjutsu
> karate(various styles)
> TKD
> Savate
> ...



Which speaks volumes, since grappling and ground fighting are some of the oldest forms of martial arts in the world. They were simply neglected, and were neglected even by arts that contained them, such as Judo. MMA showed their value in a fighting context, and forced many TMAs to re-evaluate their curriculums and adopt ground fighting systems.



> And that's not what I said at all in regards to kick boxing, but since youve never got any the points or explanations of How to properly train in a style that does forms, I'm gonna assume you're either not reading posts or lack comprehension skills.



You were using kickboxing as an example of a TMA that worked in a controlled/ring environment. The problem is that kickboxing isn't a TMA, and my earlier question remains unanswered.


----------



## Drose427 (May 5, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Which speaks volumes, since grappling and ground fighting are some of the oldest forms of martial arts in the world. They were simply neglected, and were neglected even by arts that contained them, such as Judo. MMA showed their value in a fighting context, and forced many TMAs to re-evaluate their curriculums and adopt ground fighting systems.
> 
> 
> 
> You were using kickboxing as an example of a TMA that worked in a controlled/ring environment. The problem is that kickboxing isn't a TMA, and my earlier question remains unanswered.



What TMA changed or re-evaluated their curriculum based on a competition?

Armbars and Chokes were a part of Judo Prior to that I believe

There were Ground Bunkai in TSD/TKD/Karate before that 

Anyway, you just proved my point. It showed people the importance of Cross-Training and being well rounded

and no, I brought up Kickboxing as a competitive medium where Karate had flourished. 

If you read full posts instead of scanning and nitpicking, youd learn something


----------



## drop bear (May 5, 2015)

K-man said:


> Yep. Not the slightest bit interested in it.



Pity. I was thinking of that fight when I gave the two on one defence advice. If you wanted to say you are training to avoid confrontation and counter fight. That was one of the best counter fighters in the world vs one of the best aggressive boxers.

But so you know mayweather won that fight going backwards. He was not penalized for avoiding conflict.


----------



## VT_Vectis (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> If you think fighting involves silky pants and weapons from the 16th century, then yeah I would say you're trapped in a world of fantasy combat.
> 
> MMA added a dose of reality to the world of martial arts. We're all better off because of it.



I think you have your own little fantasy going on here, mate.
I have respect for mma and i think the fighters are formidable, but reality? No, mate. Standing in an arena with a ref and crowd is no nearer to reality than your example of tma.

The introduction of things like "Animal Day" by Geoff Thompson and others like him gave a dose of reality to Martial Arts, not mma. This interview shows what I mean;


----------



## drop bear (May 6, 2015)

VT_Vectis said:


> I think you have your own little fantasy going on here, mate.
> I have respect for mma and i think the fighters are formidable, but reality? No, mate. Standing in an arena with a ref and crowd is no nearer to reality than your example of tma.
> 
> The introduction of things like "Animal Day" by Geoff Thompson and others like him gave a dose of reality to Martial Arts, not mma. This interview shows what I mean;








Animal day is hardly that far removed from mma concept.


----------



## Hanzou (May 6, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> What TMA changed or re-evaluated their curriculum based on a competition?




















etc.



> Armbars and Chokes were a part of Judo Prior to that I believe



Sure, but ground fighting as a whole was neglected by Judo for decades in favor of throwing techniques. So much so that Judo black belts train in Bjj to round out their style.



> There were Ground Bunkai in TSD/TKD/Karate before that



Yet amazingly I've yet to see pictures of TSD, TKD, or Karate stylists grappling on the ground prior to the 1990s. And of course, Bjj predates TSD, TKD, and Japanese karate anyway,



> Anyway, you just proved my point. It showed people the importance of Cross-Training and being well rounded



After Bjj exponents dominated the first UFCs, certainly.



> and no, I brought up Kickboxing as a competitive medium where Karate had flourished.



So are you saying that Kickboxing is the same as karate? Kickboxing doesn't look like any kata I can remember.



drop bear said:


> Animal day is hardly that far removed from mma concept.



Yeah, that looks pretty much like unrefined MMA.


----------



## Tez3 (May 6, 2015)

crazydiamond said:


> as does* UFC training* I believe



That will be MMA training, the UFC is a business, a company which holds MMA fight nights for profit.  You have to train MMA elsewhere and hopefully have a good fight record to be under contract with them for fights and/or the television show TUF.


----------



## Chrisoro (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Here's the thing; If your style of choice doesn't work in a controlled environment, how is it supposed to work in an uncontrolled environment? What mitigating factor neuters your art in a cage, yet allows it to flourish on the street? The argument simply makes no sense whatsoever.



Actually, I think it's your oversimplification here that doesn't make sense. The fact that MMA is a very controlled, and highly artificial environment, also reduces the numbers of variables that it is correctly and sufficently assessing. Yes, early MMA proved clearly that most traditional martial artists won't do very well against expert grapplers with a certain gameplan, in a one-on-one, unarmed duel type of situation. However, generalizing from that to how they would perform in a more typical self defense situation or street encounter, against the kind of opponents that one are most likely to meet there, and with all the added variables and posibilities of that kind of situation, is shoddy methodology at best.

There have been lots of documented cases (on video) of pure boxers doing extremely well in street encounters against multiple opponents, but that same boxer would probably have been slaughtered in early MMA against for example Royce Gracie, simply because competing against a grappler without any knowledge of grappling himself, and with a complete lack of understanding or knowledge of the main strategy employed by the Gracies in vale tudo and early mma, would have made the boxer extremely vulnerable to it. One could then be tempted to say, as Rorion Gracie has done several times, that since the boxer is unable to defeat a single opponent in this situation, how could he even hope to defeat several opponents in a street fight?

Yet, we have seen time and again that boxing can be highly effective on the street, also against several opponents. What do one make of this? Simply that the Gracie callenge matches, and early MMA in general, isn't covering all the neccesary variables related to self defense and street fighting that one would need to assess in order to make good, generalized conclusions about what works and what doesn't in all other situations.

One of the variables that statements like yours (and Rorions) doesn't take into consideration, is that the kind of of opponent that one would generally meet at almost any level of MMA today, is someone who has extensive training for that exact kind of scenario and most likely a physical fitness level that far exeeds that of the general public at. In other words, a highly untypical individual.

This was even truer in the ninethies, when the Gracies dominated most other arts in early MMA. Almost every single opponent they met, were people who had no training in solving the kind of problem the Gracies presented in the cage, and the result was of course self given. The chance of meeting anyone on the street in 1993 with any kind of gameplan and skillset even coming close to resemble what the Gracies had, was at at the time close to zero. Yet, still BJJ affectionados point to these very fights as "evidence" that traditional martial arts is worthless on the street - that is, in a completely different situation with opponents that would most likely fight in a completely different way.

While the exlosion in the popularity of MMA over the last 20 years, (as a form of hobbyist training, as amateur and professional competition, and as a spectator sport), has definately raised the public awareness of grappling in general, and the kind of tactics and techniques employed in the cage specifically, the chance of meeting any kind of highly competent MMA practitioner or grappler on the street in a situation where you are forced to defend yourself unarmed against him, while admittedly higher now than in 1993, is still very slim.

Also, self defense is not the same situation as street fighting, and definately not the same situation as sport fighting, which is something many MMA-affictionados tend to forget. While there are certainly aspects of each that is overlapping, it does not follow that one can freely generalize from one to another, as they do not deal with the same variables.

So while I'm not neccesarily claiming that traditional martial arts is the best way of training to defend oneself (as opposed to dueling) in most real world self defense situations, and against the most likely kind of aggresors, I do not agree with the notion that the performance of pure traditional martial artists in MMA competition is a good way of assessing all the neccasary variables one would need in order to make well founded general statements regarding these arts applicability in real world self defense situations.


----------



## Drose427 (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> etc.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Actually in another thread we showed you pictures of wados founder doing just that and the majority of people here for those styles said we've Been do in ground applications since before that. Especially since the grappling tends to be a common factor in Okinawan Karate...

And unlessbits a move specific to BJJ and you've been training since you have no idea if that school started training that way after uFC or not.

Plus, that's a school issue and not a style standard.

And no I'm not, you really should go back to school. My point was pretty clear


----------



## lklawson (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> If you think fighting involves silky pants and weapons from the 16th century, then yeah I would say you're trapped in a world of fantasy combat.


Um... What? Knives, sticks, weighted clubs, flails, and even short swords (ala machetes) are all pretty common in modern civilian "combat" even among civilized 1st world nations. And many of these still show up upon rare occasion in military encounters.

What "fantasy" world are YOU in that you haven't noticed this?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk (mobile)


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Sure, but ground fighting as a whole was neglected by Judo for decades in favor of throwing techniques. So much so that Judo black belts train in Bjj to round out their style.



Let me fix that for you:

Ground fighting as a whole was neglected by *some* Judo practitioners for decades in favor of throwing techniques. So much so that *some* Judo black belts train in Bjj to round out their style.

There have always been judo practitioners who are very, very good on the ground, even before BJJ became popular. Neil Adams comes to mind, but there are plenty of others.

The evolution of judo rules allowed many judoka to neglect newaza and just stall on the ground long enough to get a standup. Those same rules forced the judoka who wanted to use newaza to get really, really good at it so as to be able to impose a submission or pin against a stalling opponent.


----------



## Hanzou (May 6, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> Actually, I think it's your oversimplification here that doesn't make sense. The fact that MMA is a very controlled, and highly artificial environment, also reduces the numbers of variables that it is correctly and sufficently assessing. Yes, early MMA proved clearly that most traditional martial artists won't do very well against expert grapplers with a certain gameplan, in a one-on-one, unarmed duel type of situation. However, generalizing from that to how they would perform in a more typical self defense situation or street encounter, against the kind of opponents that one are most likely to meet there, is shoddy methodology at best.



Actually there is no generalization, because it comes down to fighting ability. If you can fight, you're more capable of defending yourself. I simply don't buy the notion that a martial artist who can't execute their techniques in a controlled environment is somehow a self defense dynamo in an uncontrolled environment. 



> There have been lots of documented cases (on video) of pure boxers doing extremely well in street encounters against multiple opponents, but that same boxer would probably have been slaughtered in early MMA against for example Royce Gracie, simply because competing against a grappler without any knowledge of grappling himself, and with a complete lack of understanding or knowledge of the main strategy employed by the Gracies in vale tudo and early mma, would have made the boxer extremely vulnerable to it. One could then be tempted to say, as Rorion Gracie has done several times, that since the boxer is unable to defeat a single opponent in this situation, how could he even hope to defeat several opponents in a street fight?



Which actually makes my point; Boxers are skilled *fighters*, and that allows them to defend themselves in street encounters against multiple opponents. Now clearly, if a boxer goes up against a skilled grappler, they're going to be in trouble. If a boxer is also a skilled grappler, than they have the advantage. In either case, we have "sport" stylists who are very capable of defending themselves because of their ability to fight in a controlled environment.



> Yet, we have seen time and again that boxing can be highly effective on the street, also against several opponents. What do one make of this? Simply that the Gracie callenge matches, and early MMA in general, isn't covering all the neccesary variables related to self defense and street fighting that one would need to assess in order to make good, generalized conclusions about what works and what doesn't in all other situations.
> 
> One of the variables that statements like yours (and Rorions) doesn't take into consideration, is that the kind of of opponent that one would generally meet at almost any level of MMA today, is someone who has extensive training for that exact kind of scenario and most likely a physical fitness level that far exeeds that of the general public at large, or in other words, a highly untypical individual.
> 
> This was even truer in the ninethies, when the Gracies dominated most other arts in early MMA. Almost every single opponent they met, were people who had no training in solving the kind of problem the Gracies presented in the cage, and the result was of course self given. The chance of meeting anyone on the street in 1993 with any kind of gameplan and skillset even coming close to resemble what the Gracies had, was at at the time close to zero. Yet, still BJJ affectionados point to these very fights as "evidence" that traditional martial arts is worthless on the street - that is, in a completely different situation with opponents that would most likely fight in a completely different way.



I find it interesting that you somehow think I'm proclaiming that Bjj is the ultimate MA or something. That isn't what I'm saying.



> While the exlosion in the popularity of MMA, both as training, competition or as a spectator sport, over the last 20 years, has definately raised the public awareness of grappling in general, and the kind of tactics and techniques employed in the cage specifically, the chance of meeting any kind of highly competent grappler on the street in a situation where you are forced to defend yourself unarmed against him, while admittedly higher now than in 1993, is still very slim.



With the popularity of wrestling and football in America, I wouldn't say very slim. Further, if we expand the spectrum to non-grappling pursuits like boxing, which is readily available in many urban areas around the country for free, your chances of running into a skilled fighter increases exponentially. And then we run into the situation I described earlier, which you've interpreted as some sort of love letter to the Gracie clan. No, what I'm saying is that if you have a kid doing karate, and he spars against a wrestler, and has no tools to stop that wrestler, then he has a deficiency in his toolkit that needs to be filled.

That by the way is what the Gracies argued throughout their challenges. They never proclaimed that Bjj was the greatest art ever. What they said plainly was that you need to compliment your stand-up training with Bjj or grappling.


----------



## Hanzou (May 6, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Let me fix that for you:
> 
> Ground fighting as a whole was neglected by *some* Judo practitioners for decades in favor of throwing techniques. So much so that *some* Judo black belts train in Bjj to round out their style.



Considering the amount of cross-training taking place, I would put the number quite a bit higher than "some".


----------



## Steve (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Considering the amount of cross-training taking place, I would put the number quite a bit higher than "some".


To be fair, a lot of BJJ guys cross train in Judo, as well.


----------



## Hanzou (May 6, 2015)

Steve said:


> To be fair, a lot of BJJ guys cross train in Judo, as well.



Absolutely! I'm one of them.  I was merely pointing out that newaza always had a secondary status in Judo, and that attitude goes back to the founder himself. The rise of Bjj brought newaza to the forefront.


----------



## Drose427 (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Absolutely! I'm one of them.  I was merely pointing out that newaza always had a secondary status in Judo, and that attitude goes back to the founder himself. The rise of Bjj brought newaza to the forefront.



While I will agree that Kodokan Judo wasnt as focused on Groundfighting as BJJ, I wouldnt say it ws neglected.

Mifune gave a big focus on Newaza, putting in a lot of emphasis on the 29 Official Groundfighting techs, long before the popularity of BJJ and cross training that would come years later






List of Kodokan judo techniques - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Hanzou (May 6, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> While I will agree that Kodokan Judo wasnt as focused on Groundfighting as BJJ, I wouldnt say it ws neglected.
> 
> Mifune gave a big focus on Newaza, putting in a lot of emphasis on the 29 Official Groundfighting techs, long before the popularity of BJJ and cross training that would come years later
> 
> ...



Certainly there are Judo players who bucked the trend and became strong groundfighters. However, none of that overrides Kano's personal distaste of newaza and his push towards more upright fighting. 

That push allowed Bjj to distinguish itself by focusing   on what Judo was ignoring.


----------



## VT_Vectis (May 6, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Animal day is hardly that far removed from mma concept.



Other than the one concept being for dealing with  an attack, both verbal and physical/psychological, making your art work for you while learning to cope with the effects of adrenaline when under pressure. The other being training for a contest with a referee, and an opponent you've studied.


----------



## VT_Vectis (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Certainly there are Judo players who bucked the trend and became strong groundfighters. However, none of that overrides Kano's personal distaste of newaza and his push towards more upright fighting.
> 
> That push allowed Bjj to distinguish itself by focusing   on what Judo was ignoring.



With regards to Kano's "distaste" for newaza; I may be wrong as I'm writing from memory, but I believe Kano himself in "Mind over Muscle", explained that a Judo-Ka who trained more newaza than standup would find himself on the ground more often and having to use it, therefore training stand up grappling more allows you keep your feet and negates the need of being quite so proficient on the ground. This was in response to some students overly focusing on newazza, though he did stress the need to train it. I think he also mentions the danger of being voluntarily on the floor in a fighting situation, though I may have misremembered that. Apologies if so.


----------



## Chrisoro (May 6, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Actually there is no generalization, because it comes down to fighting ability.



And my point is that fighting ability, while certainly important, is not all there is to self defense, nor is it a singular, one dimensional scale.

As I showed with the example of the boxer, fighting ability can take many forms in different situations and against different kinds of opponents. The reason I specifically chose the example of the boxer, is that boxing are known to produce great fighting ability(hell, it's still my own go-to standup form of fighting, even though it's more than six years since I last entered a boxing gym), but good, pure boxers still fail miserably against even mediocre grapplers in an MMA-setting. What do that tell you about the generalizability of that arena for assessing every other kind of fighting ability, or even more further distanced, self defense.  Or are we operating with different rules for boxers and other traditional martial artists?



> If you can fight, you're more capable of defending yourself.


Yes, well, at least if the self defense situation escalate into fighting. Yet, as I stated above, most skilled _pure_ boxers, which you clearly don't question the fighting ability of, have great trouble executing their techniques in the controlled environment of MMA, despite having great fighting ability. But somehow MMA is still the ultimate measure of any kind of fighting ability, and also of self defense?



> I simply don't buy the notion that a martial artist who can't execute their techniques in a controlled environment is somehow a self defense dynamo in an uncontrolled environment.


And that notion is put forth by whom, exactly? My point the whole time, is that the degree on which one can generalize from the results of testing a few variables in a controlled environment to the real world, depends on which variables are included in the controlled environment, and the degree of ecological validity. My point is not that MMA-fighters doesn't have great fighting ability, which they certainly do, or that most traditional martial artists are great fighters, which they are most likely not, but that MMA-fighting is a very non-typical environment, populated by non-typical individuals, which make it not very representative for the kind of environment most self defense situations occur in, nor the people most likely to be involved in it.

Most good systems that claim to teach self defence, includes instruction on awareness in order to avoid dangerous situations in the first place, including verbal tactics and the use of diversions. This is completely absent in MMA. Many systems also use various tactics of diversion in order to land the first strike(or what is usually called a sucker punch), something that is quite hard to accomplish in a setting where both opponents start in a fighting stance with their hands up. Also, many systems encourage the use of improvised weapons as a first choice, also something that is impossible to assess the validity of from pure MMA. Groin strikes is another tactic that is completely removed from MMA, but which I have seen used to great effect in real life, especially when combined with diversion tactics. And I have not even mentioned weapons or the environment used against you, or even multiple opponents, which boxers can handle quite well despite having trouble in an MMA-setting.

There is also other stages of lower intensity happening in many self defence situations that have not escalated into a full on fight, but which are past just words being exchanged. This stage usually involves various kinds of grabbing of arms and clothes, something many styles have quick and effective standing locks as a response to, again usually executed after various forms of diversion. This is also something that one cannot assess in an environment where this stage is completely removed, and where both people have grappling experience, and are in a highly alert fighting state of mind. Executing wrist locks is in my experience incredible difficult when just rolling against somewhat experienced grapplers, and if strikes are included, it is probably even harder to pull off. Yet, I have used various standing locks, including wrist locks, several times when I worked with high security psychiatric patients, in situations with high levels of aggression and tension. The reason they worked were simply that said patients were not expecting that kind of response from me when grabbing me, and that they were in a completely different mindset than what someone with grappling experience would be in a sparring or fighting situation. I don't believe I would have much chance of executing any kind of standing arm or wrist locks in a MMA-setting, but as I have used them in real life several times, I know they are not useless in all situations. But if one should judge all techniques strictly from their applicability in MMA, wrist locks would be some of the first to be thrown into the garbage.

There is also the important notion that the overall goal in a self defense situation is getting out of the situation with the least amount of injury to yourself, something many traditional martial arts have various strategies for. In an MMA-fight, this strategy is also removed completely from the equation, and if you are not trying to escape in a street encounter, what you are doing isn't self defense, but street fighting, something that increases your risk of injury significantly.

But still, MMA-fighting is assessing all that is important for self defense, or what?



> Which actually makes my point; Boxers are skilled *fighters*, and that allows them to defend themselves in street encounters against multiple opponents. Now clearly, if a boxer goes up against a skilled grappler, they're going to be in trouble. If a boxer is also a skilled grappler, than they have the advantage. In either case, we have "sport" stylists who are very capable of defending themselves because of their ability to fight in a controlled environment.



And as I pointed out above, even pure boxers, who we both agree are skilled fighters, generally have trouble in an MMA-setting. If MMA is the best way to assess general fighting and self defense ability in all situations, why do boxers have trouble? My answer is still that it is because MMA only tests a certain kind of fighting ability, in a certain artificial setting, and that you cannot generalize from this to every other kind of fighting and self defense situations.



> I find it interesting that you somehow think I'm proclaiming that Bjj is the ultimate MA or something. That isn't what I'm saying.



And I find it interesting that you think that I think that, as that is not what I have been saying either.



> With the popularity of wrestling and football in America, I wouldn't say very slim.
> Further, if we expand the spectrum to non-grappling pursuits like boxing, which is readily available in many urban areas around the country for free, your chances of running into a skilled fighter increases exponentially.



My impression after training martial arts for over 20 years, including boxing, kickboxing, judo and other kinds of grappling, is that skilled fighters are the kind of people that are least likely to start the kind of trouble out on the street that you in turn would need to defend yourself against. Or are we confusing self defense with fighting on the street again?



> And then we run into the situation I described earlier, which you've interpreted as some sort of love letter to the Gracie clan.



No, I did not. What is happening is that you keep throwing out strawmen.



> No, what I'm saying is that if you have a kid doing karate, and he spars against a wrestler, and has no tools to stop that wrestler, then he has a deficiency in his toolkit that needs to be filled.



Yes, and I have no problems with that statement. but my point is that the same would be true if the kid was training boxing only, which proves my point about the difficulty of generalizing from one aspect of fighting to another. And as I'm of the opinion that fighting and self defense is not the same thing, as they have very different objectives, I am also of the opinion that one cannot use a single type of fighting as the primary measure of effectiveness in self defense.



> That by the way is what the Gracies argued throughout their challenges. They never proclaimed that Bjj was the greatest art ever.



Actually, several of them have done exactly that, including Helio, Rorion and Royce.

On the back cover of Helio Gracie's book Gracie Jiu Jitsu: The master text, one can read about how the UFC *"established the undeniable superiority of one style - Gracie Jiu Jitsu."*

From the Gracie Academy Website:
"*1980- The Gracie ChallengeRorion invites anyone of any size or discipline to fight him to prove his superiority of Gracie Jiu-Jitsu over all other martial arts."*

And a bit further down, in reference to the UFC:

*"Royce’s victory, as had Helio’s victories before him, proved that Gracie Jiu-Jitsu was not only the most reliable system of self-defense, but also the only system that gives the average person a realistic chance against a larger, more athletic opponent."*



> What they said plainly was that you need to compliment your stand-up training with Bjj or grappling.



Yes, they said that too, and I have no beef with that statement. I have trained and competed in grappling since 2006 myself exactly for that reason and even trained with two of the Gracies in seminars, and I think BJJ is great. Period. My point is only that, while undeniably very important for the artificial setting of one-on-one, unarmed duels, grappling prowess may not be the single, most important factor for real life self defense. And since it was a lack of grappling ability and ignorance of the strategy employed by the Gracies and other grapplers that was the primary(but of course not the only) reason why many of the traditional martial artists in the Gracie challenge matches and early MMA did so horribly bad, using the results of these events as "proof" that TMA is useless for self defense, is in my opinion to stretch things quite a bit.


----------



## drop bear (May 7, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> That will be MMA training, the UFC is a business, a company which holds MMA fight nights for profit.  You have to train MMA elsewhere and hopefully have a good fight record to be under contract with them for fights and/or the television show TUF.



Ufc does do gyms now.






I find the concept a bit tragic though.


----------



## Drose427 (May 7, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ufc does do gyms now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What's worse is (as far as I know) anyone can open a franchise,

Dana's desire to make a buck, commercialize, and monopolize may actually hurt MMA here.

Its a dangerous path of Mcdojos and Mcinstrcutors opening "UFC" gyms, 

I could have no training outside a couple bar fights and youtube, but hey I'm rich so I could theoretically open a UFC gym, a name everyone knows, and give people low quality training.

But to be fair, I don't know the ins and outs of how Dana plans on franchising, he could be pretty controlling on everything or making actual fighters stop by gyms and check everything.

Its definitely a risky move


----------



## drop bear (May 7, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> What's worse is (as far as I know) anyone can open a franchise,
> 
> Dana's desire to make a buck, commercialize, and monopolize may actually hurt MMA here.
> 
> ...



There is one in Sydney. In the very unlikely event I am down that way I will pop in and have a look.


----------



## drop bear (May 7, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> Actually, I think it's your oversimplification here that doesn't make sense. The fact that MMA is a very controlled, and highly artificial environment, also reduces the numbers of variables that it is correctly and sufficently assessing. Yes, early MMA proved clearly that most traditional martial artists won't do very well against expert grapplers with a certain gameplan, in a one-on-one, unarmed duel type of situation. However, generalizing from that to how they would perform in a more typical self defense situation or street encounter, against the kind of opponents that one are most likely to meet there, and with all the added variables and posibilities of that kind of situation, is shoddy methodology at best.
> 
> There have been lots of documented cases (on video) of pure boxers doing extremely well in street encounters against multiple opponents, but that same boxer would probably have been slaughtered in early MMA against for example Royce Gracie, simply because competing against a grappler without any knowledge of grappling himself, and with a complete lack of understanding or knowledge of the main strategy employed by the Gracies in vale tudo and early mma, would have made the boxer extremely vulnerable to it. One could then be tempted to say, as Rorion Gracie has done several times, that since the boxer is unable to defeat a single opponent in this situation, how could he even hope to defeat several opponents in a street fight?
> 
> ...




Boxing does fine in the highly controlled arena of mma. Just mma has shown if you have no grapple and the other guy does he will you down and beat you up.

This is also demonstrated numerous times in self defence. So I am not sure what the disconnect is here.


----------



## Chrisoro (May 7, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Boxing does fine in the highly controlled arena of mma. Just mma has shown if you have no grapple and the other guy does he will you down and beat you up.
> 
> This is also demonstrated numerous times in self defence. So I am not sure what the disconnect is here.



My point was never that boxing didn't work in an mma setting, as I believe I never said any such thing. What I said was that that trying to get anywhere in MMA with boxing alone (that is, no crosstraining, just pure boxing) won't work very well in an environment like MMA, where everyone crosstrains. Do you disagree with me on that point?


----------



## drop bear (May 7, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Absolutely! I'm one of them.  I was merely pointing out that newaza always had a secondary status in Judo, and that attitude goes back to the founder himself. The rise of Bjj brought newaza to the forefront.



Yeah but now we are getting sub wrestling. Which becomes a different culture again.


----------



## drop bear (May 7, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> My point was never that boxing didn't work in an mma setting, as I believe I never said any such thing. What I said was that that trying to get anywhere in MMA with boxing alone (that is, no crosstraining, just pure boxing) won't work very well in an environment like MMA, where everyone crosstrains. Do you disagree with me on that point?



Yes cross training is the key to a good martial artist.


----------



## Chrisoro (May 8, 2015)

@drop bear
And my point still stands. If you judge a non-grappling martial art solely on how well it works _alone_ in an MMA setting, against skilled MMA-fighters, you will not get meaningfull results on its potential effectiveness in against more average opponents outside the controlled environment of MMA. Which is what I wanted to show with the boxing-example.


----------



## drop bear (May 8, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> @drop bear
> And my point still stands. If you judge a non-grappling martial art solely on how well it works _alone_ in an MMA setting, against skilled MMA-fighters, you will not get meaningfull results on its potential effectiveness in against more average opponents outside the controlled environment of MMA. Which is what I wanted to show with the boxing-example.



Yes you will. You will find out if your non grappling martial art will get you taken down and beat up. Outside the controlled environment.

If you want to work on the theory that nobody will take you down on the street. Then that is your risk. If you want to find out what is going to work and what isn't in a setting where you get to keep your wallet afterwards. Do mma.


----------



## drop bear (May 8, 2015)

Do people think you are not going to get double legged in a street fight?

It is not a secret move. It is not the domain of ufc fighters. Anybody can do it. Anybody can learn to defend against it.


----------



## senseidave2005 (May 10, 2015)

So it seems the discussion,  goes around and around, getting no where in particular.....if you ask yourselves a base question..."What are the key differences between the MMA fighter and how they prepare themselves for combat..and the way a TMA practitioner prepares for his or her confrontation...?" I might suggest the level of athleticism of the two people differs as one is prepring to fight for a set number of minutes and a set number of rounds, therefore a certain physical prowess is strived for so that one can achieve he task should knock out or submission not be achieved. I respect this physicality and athleticism,  for im not that fit.  There are few if any TMA practitioners,  that would, in my opinion want a confrontation to go , in my opinion, longer than 15-30 seconds, the mental approach is different. I dont want to confuse issues, but if I read right it has been established, that boxers train for boxing, kickboxers for kickboxing,  Judo for judo, each is optimized by louring the opponent into that realm where they are not comfortable. Those that wish to dominate across the art train in all viable arts.... each has its benefit for where it is required... accept that the ring has rules and the street does not.. self defense is not a gentlemans game.... A level of etiquette is desired in the ring....this can not be said for a life or death  scenario.   Argue amongst yourselves all you want.... they are two different animals.....


----------



## K-man (May 10, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> So it seems the discussion,  goes around and around, getting no where in particular.....if you ask yourselves a base question..."What are the key differences between the MMA fighter and how they prepare themselves for combat..and the way a TMA practitioner prepares for his or her confrontation...?" I might suggest the level of athleticism of the two people differs as one is prepring to fight for a set number of minutes and a set number of rounds, therefore a certain physical prowess is strived for so that one can achieve he task should knock out or submission not be achieved. I respect this physicality and athleticism,  for im not that fit.  There are few if any TMA practitioners,  that would, in my opinion want a confrontation to go , in my opinion, longer than 15-30 seconds, the mental approach is different. I dont want to confuse issues, but if I read right it has been established, that boxers train for boxing, kickboxers for kickboxing,  Judo for judo, each is optimized by louring the opponent into that realm where they are not comfortable. Those that wish to dominate across the art train in all viable arts.... each has its benefit for where it is required... accept that the ring has rules and the street does not.. self defense is not a gentlemans game.... A level of etiquette is desired in the ring....this can not be said for a life or death  scenario.   Argue amongst yourselves all you want.... they are two different animals.....


Well, good luck to you if you come here with an arguement like that!  

Many of us have tried ... many of us have failed to convince our MMA cousins that TMAs have any value at all. So why will your arguement fail also? Well, for starters, it is logical and makes sense. I mean, if I was to argue with you about anything you wrote it might be your use of punctuation. Why would you use four dots when three will do? 

Apart from that I agree with you.


----------



## Steve (May 10, 2015)

We keep trying to explain why you're wrong, kman, but you're too atubborn to listen to people who know better.


----------



## senseidave2005 (May 10, 2015)

K-man said:


> Well, good luck to you if you come here with an arguement like that!
> 
> Many of us have tried ... many of us have failed to convince our MMA cousins that TMAs have any value at all. So why will your arguement fail also? Well, for starters, it is logical and makes sense. I mean, if I was to argue with you about anything you wrote it might be your use of punctuation. Why would you use four dots when three will do?
> 
> Apart from that I agree with you.


I do love my dramatic pause dots....lol...


----------



## K-man (May 10, 2015)

Steve said:


> We keep trying to explain why you're wrong, kman, but you're too atubborn to listen to people who know better.


Thanks mate but you know what they say about people who are too old to change. 

I think I've lost too many neurons face palming and hitting my head against the makiwara to even contemplate that I may be wrong.   As a result I feel I must continue my quixotic dream of using logic and example to convince people that martial arts, other than MMA, still have a place and have some value, however small that value is perceived by others.


----------



## drop bear (May 10, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> So it seems the discussion,  goes around and around, getting no where in particular.....if you ask yourselves a base question..."What are the key differences between the MMA fighter and how they prepare themselves for combat..and the way a TMA practitioner prepares for his or her confrontation...?" I might suggest the level of athleticism of the two people differs as one is prepring to fight for a set number of minutes and a set number of rounds, therefore a certain physical prowess is strived for so that one can achieve he task should knock out or submission not be achieved. I respect this physicality and athleticism,  for im not that fit.  There are few if any TMA practitioners,  that would, in my opinion want a confrontation to go , in my opinion, longer than 15-30 seconds, the mental approach is different. I dont want to confuse issues, but if I read right it has been established, that boxers train for boxing, kickboxers for kickboxing,  Judo for judo, each is optimized by louring the opponent into that realm where they are not comfortable. Those that wish to dominate across the art train in all viable arts.... each has its benefit for where it is required... accept that the ring has rules and the street does not.. self defense is not a gentlemans game.... A level of etiquette is desired in the ring....this can not be said for a life or death  scenario.   Argue amongst yourselves all you want.... they are two different animals.....



Why is it advantageous to be less fit in what could be a life or death fight? I mean at least in a competition you will get saved if it looks like you are about to get killed.

How do you train this loss of etiquette? Are you concerned that you will create people with serious emotional problems?


----------



## senseidave2005 (May 10, 2015)

The etiquette is with in us, the expectation of etiquette from an agressor is a fantasy. Twist it whatever way you want.
I stated I'm not as fit as a competition trained fighter..My tools work. Enough said.


----------



## Steve (May 10, 2015)

K-man said:


> Thanks mate but you know what they say about people who are too old to change.
> 
> I think I've lost too many neurons face palming and hitting my head against the makiwara to even contemplate that I may be wrong.   As a result I feel I must continue my quixotic dream of using logic and example to convince people that martial arts, other than MMA, still have a place and have some value, however small that value is perceived by others.


.  The point is, everyone has a different perspective.  It's not as cut and dry as you being right and other people are wrong.   One can disagree with you and also be reasonable.


----------



## drop bear (May 10, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> The etiquette is with in us, the expectation of etiquette from an agressor is a fantasy. Twist it whatever way you want.
> I stated I'm not as fit as a competition trained fighter..My tools work. Enough said.



Why would I expect etiquette from an aggressor?

I am confused about the fitness. Is lack of fitness a self defence thing? Why would that be the case?


----------



## drop bear (May 10, 2015)

Steve said:


> .  The point is, everyone has a different perspective.  It's not as cut and dry as you being right and other people are wrong.   One can disagree with you and also be reasonable.



It is the assumptions that confuse me.


----------



## senseidave2005 (May 10, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Why would I expect etiquette from an aggressor?
> 
> I am confused about the fitness. Is lack of fitness a self defence thing? Why would that be the case?



I think you should re-read my previous comments before you make any more comments...as your obviously reading what you want to rather than what's there.... 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear (May 10, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> I think you should re-read my previous comments before you make any more comments...as your obviously reading what you want to rather than what's there....
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



Sorry what point have I missed here?


----------



## K-man (May 10, 2015)

Steve said:


> .  The point is, everyone has a different perspective.  It's not as cut and dry as you being right and other people are wrong.   One can disagree with you and also be reasonable.


And I have never felt otherwise. It is only the unreasonable ones I have a problem with.


----------



## senseidave2005 (May 10, 2015)

K-man said:


> And I have never felt otherwise. It is only the unreasonable ones I have a problem with.


I can't imagine who that or those people could be![emoji23]
I've removed myself from the forums for several years and only comment now because of the ease of technology,  its now easier to read the ramblings of closed minded practitioners of all kinds of hienz 57 arts...so why not put in an educated word or two.


----------



## Steve (May 10, 2015)

Beware.  It's a fine line between educated and close minded.   Often the two go hand in hand.


----------



## Laplace_demon (May 11, 2015)

drop bear said:


> And by the way there is a very good reason why I may loose a knife fight to a knife guy or a kicking match to a tkder..




You would actually be able to finish off a knife attacker if you mastered TMA and TKD to the highest level. But then again, few people do.


----------



## Jenna (May 11, 2015)

MMA vs TMA???

To me the main difference between TMA and MMA is simply that this is 2015.. 

Come back in 50yrs then MMA will be subsumed under TMA and the argument will be not MMA vs TMA and but instead it will be "Which is best for my 'street work', ulnar-implanted bio-tazers or grafted retractable adamantium metatarsal blades?"

Hmm.. now that has got my attention.  I think I will start having that debate with my self.. Jx


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

Jenna said:


> MMA vs TMA???
> 
> To me the main difference between TMA and MMA is simply that this is 2015..
> 
> ...



There is even a debate that goes against wolverine claws?

Your dreamin.


----------



## Spinedoc (May 11, 2015)

Vibranium for the win!!!


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 11, 2015)

But what if the MMA guy was Bruce Banner and the Taiji guy was Superman?


----------



## Flying Crane (May 11, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I am confused about the fitness. Is lack of fitness a self defence thing? Why would that be the case?


Don't pretend you think that's what he said. That's stupid, you know it, and you know that's not what he's saying.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> But what if the MMA guy was Bruce Banner and the Taiji guy was Superman?


That's totally ridiculous.  Complete fantasy.   Hulk is marvel and superman is DC.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 11, 2015)

Steve said:


> That's totally ridiculous.  Complete fantasy.   Hulk is marvel and superman is DC.



DANG IT!!!! sorry

OK then, Banner is the MMA guy and Tony Stark Baguazhang guy


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> Don't pretend you think that's what he said. That's stupid, you know it, and you know that's not what he's saying.


While surely you're right that he wasn't asserting that lack of fitness is a self defense "thing," his actual point was confusing.  It seemed to be a slightly confusing cause and effect argument about fitness level, athleticism and MMA vs TMA, related to how they prepare.  The idea being that MMA guys intend to fight for three rounds, while TMA guys intend to fight no longer than 15-30 seconds.

He suggested that the mental approach is different.  I personally agree, but would suggest that preparing to fight for only 15 to 30 seconds just sounds like a terrible idea when the stakes could be as high as life or death.  Mental approach-wise, I do know that the approach in MMA is that the fight should never be harder than the training.  The saying is, "Train hard; fight easy."  And the mentality of gameness is that you will never give up.  You presume your opponent has every advantage over you, and so the only thing you can control is preparation.  Your opponent might have more technique, but he'll never outwork you.  That's a level of mental toughness that's going to be hard to beat. 

Whereas training with the idea that a fight should only last 15 to 30, if you do it right, sets you up to fail.  What do you do if the fight goes on for a minute?  5 minutes?  10?  Do you give up?  Mentally, if the fight for your life is protracted, and you have only trained to fight for 30 seconds, I'd say you may already have given up.

He also seems to conflate a high degree of fitness and athleticism to MMAists but seems to sell TMA guys short.  Personally, I've seen some kung fu guys who are just monsters (physically).

I think Drop Bear was being a little flippant, but he's reacting to a position that seems difficult to support.



senseidave2005 said:


> So it seems the discussion, goes around and around, getting no where in particular.....if you ask yourselves a base question..."What are the key differences between the MMA fighter and how they prepare themselves for combat..and the way a TMA practitioner prepares for his or her confrontation...?" I might suggest the level of athleticism of the two people differs as one is prepring to fight for a set number of minutes and a set number of rounds, therefore a certain physical prowess is strived for so that one can achieve he task should knock out or submission not be achieved. I respect this physicality and athleticism, for im not that fit. There are few if any TMA practitioners, that would, in my opinion want a confrontation to go , in my opinion, longer than 15-30 seconds, the mental approach is different. I dont want to confuse issues, but if I read right it has been established, that boxers train for boxing, kickboxers for kickboxing, Judo for judo, each is optimized by louring the opponent into that realm where they are not comfortable. Those that wish to dominate across the art train in all viable arts.... each has its benefit for where it is required... accept that the ring has rules and the street does not.. self defense is not a gentlemans game.... A level of etiquette is desired in the ring....this can not be said for a life or death scenario. Argue amongst yourselves all you want.... they are two different animals.....


----------



## Flying Crane (May 11, 2015)

Steve said:


> While surely you're right that he wasn't asserting that lack of fitness is a self defense "thing," his actual point was confusing.  It seemed to be a slightly confusing cause and effect argument about fitness level, athleticism and MMA vs TMA, related to how they prepare.  The idea being that MMA guys intend to fight for three rounds, while TMA guys intend to fight no longer than 15-30 seconds.
> 
> He suggested that the mental approach is different.  I personally agree, but would suggest that preparing to fight for only 15 to 30 seconds just sounds like a terrible idea when the stakes could be as high as life or death.  Mental approach-wise, I do know that the approach in MMA is that the fight should never be harder than the training.  The saying is, "Train hard; fight easy."  And the mentality of gameness is that you will never give up.
> 
> ...


I'd say he was simply drawing a contrast between someone training to be an elite level competitor and a lay person training for personal self defense and who is not getting into a ring for several rounds.  Obviously there is a huge difference there in conditioning levels (for the most part).  

Drop bear trying to turn that into an assertion of lack of conditioning as an asset, that was plain stupid, and he knew it when he did it.  That's the kind of deliberate nonsense spin that doesn't help any discussion.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> I'd say he was simply drawing a contrast between someone training to be an elite level competitor and a lay person training for personal self defense and who is not getting into a ring for several rounds.  Obviously there is a huge difference there in conditioning levels (for the most part).
> 
> Drop bear trying to turn that into an assertion of lack of conditioning as an asset, that was plain stupid, and he knew it when he did it.  That's the kind of deliberate nonsense spin that doesn't help any discussion.


I think you're making some presumptions about tma training and the average person training in Mma.   

I don't know about the elite vs lay person thing, but  being fit is not unique to elite level Mma fighters.  And can't we all agree that fitness is a good idea in general?

And the mentality of training is important, but at the very least this idea that training for a 30 second fight being a good thing is debatable.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> Don't pretend you think that's what he said. That's stupid, you know it, and you know that's not what he's saying.



That is what he said. If it is stupid I cant help that. If he meant something different then he can add to what he said.

Or don't just spout street sport dogma at me and expect me to swallow it when it makes no sense.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 11, 2015)

Steve said:


> I think you're making some presumptions about tma training and the average person training in Mma.
> 
> I don't know about the elite vs lay person thing, but  being fit is not unique to elite level Mma fighters.  And can't we all agree that fitness is a good idea in general?
> 
> ...


Of course fitness is a good idea.  Nobody ever said otherwise, except for drop bear's deliberate spin.  Sure the other poster could have expressed himself better but that's no excuse to feed the spin.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 11, 2015)

drop bear said:


> That is what he said. If it is stupid I cant help that. If he meant something different then he can add to what he said.
> 
> Or don't just spout street sport dogma at me and expect me to swallow it when it makes no sense.


Nope, that was deliberate spin, and you know it.


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> But what if the MMA guy was Bruce Banner and the Taiji guy was Superman?


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> Nope, that was deliberate spin, and you know it.



Correct he was using spin I logically pulled his idea apart. Because it isn't based on anything but The idea of tma vs mma or whatever he had in his head. Rather than any real solid preparation of what is supposed to be life or death self defence.

You cant just say stuff. It has to make sense.


----------



## Spinedoc (May 11, 2015)

It's a different mentality for many of us. This is the crux of the MMA v TMA debate. It's like watching a husband and wife argue without taking the time to understand each other. My head Iaido Sensei came back to teach a few weeks ago (he retired to Belize a while ago) and he talked for a while about aiki principles and how they work in Iaido. He talked a lot about having no fear. Fear hinders your ability to fight, it makes you tense, it makes you want to try and overpower someone, it can incite rage, anger, etc. The only way to really fight is to relax completely, to be confident, but not cocky, to simply relax and let go of everything. Mushin. No past, no future, zen concepts….


----------



## Chrisoro (May 11, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yes you will. You will find out if your non grappling martial art will get you taken down and beat up. Outside the controlled environment.



And you still don't get my point. I am not arguing against crosstraining, grappling or MMA. What I am arguing against is using a lone martial art or combat sport's effectiveness in an MMA-setting, without any crosstraining, as the sole measure of that martial art's potential as a good self defense system. And the consesus seems to be that pure boxing can be pretty effective for self defense, despite being inadequate on it's own in an MMA setting. 



> If you want to work on the theory that nobody will take you down on the street. Then that is your risk. If you want to find out what is going to work and what isn't in a setting where you get to keep your wallet afterwards. Do mma.



Okay. Are you throwing out deliberate strawmen, or are you simply not reading (or understanding) what I am saying? Please reread my earlier posts before responding to this one, as you are arguing against a point I never made.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> Of course fitness is a good idea.  Nobody ever said otherwise, except for drop bear's deliberate spin.  Sure the other poster could have expressed himself better but that's no excuse to feed the spin.


I think you're missing the forest for the trees, FC.


----------



## K-man (May 11, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> Okay. Are you throwing out deliberate strawmen, or are you simply not reading (or understanding) what I am saying? Please reread my earlier posts before responding to this one, as you are arguing against a point I never made.


I think on this one we all have agree that unless we are training MMA and actually testing in the ring against the top MMA fighters, our training is substandard, untested and will be, without doubt, totally useless on the street.

If you would like to post whatever training you do, I'm sure there will be those who can point out the glaring omissions and shortcomings in your training. Nothing, absolutely nothing compares with the training you get in MMA.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 11, 2015)

Steve said:


> I think you're missing the forest for the trees, FC.


I actually believe that is what you are doing.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 11, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> And you still don't get my point. I am not arguing against crosstraining, grappling or MMA. What I am arguing against is using a lone martial art or combat sport's effectiveness in an MMA-setting, without any crosstraining, as the sole measure of that martial art's potential as a good self defense system. And the consesus seems to be that pure boxing can be pretty effective for self defense, despite being inadequate on it's own in an MMA setting.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. Are you throwing out deliberate strawmen, or are you simply not reading (or understanding) what I am saying? Please reread my earlier posts before responding to this one, as you are arguing against a point I never made.


Drop bear is nothing but a spin doctor.  That's what makes the discussion pointless and derails so many threads.  He's not looking for an explanation or real information.  He is just looking for something he can spin.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

K-man said:


> I think on this one we all have agree that unless we are training MMA and actually testing in the ring against the top MMA fighters, our training is substandard, untested and will be, without doubt, totally useless on the street.
> 
> If you would like to post whatever training you do, I'm sure there will be those who can point out the glaring omissions and shortcomings in your training. Nothing, absolutely nothing compares with the training you get in MMA.


Talk about spin doctors.   FC, I thinking have another one on your hands.


----------



## K-man (May 11, 2015)

Steve said:


> Talk about spin doctors.   FC, I thinking have another one on your hands.


By which I presume you mean me. I post on this forum as honestly and accurately as I can. Almost all is challenged by people who have never trained with me, never seen me nor been taught by the people who have taught me. I have been training longer than most of these guys have been alive and it is me who is spinning things. You might notice to that none of the guys here who do have experience in the styles I train have ever questioned my training. Why do you think that might be?


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> And you still don't get my point. I am not arguing against crosstraining, grappling or MMA. What I am arguing against is using a lone martial art or combat sport's effectiveness in an MMA-setting, without any crosstraining, as the sole measure of that martial art's potential as a good self defense system. And the consesus seems to be that pure boxing can be pretty effective for self defense, despite being inadequate on it's own in an MMA setting.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. Are you throwing out deliberate strawmen, or are you simply not reading (or understanding) what I am saying? Please reread my earlier posts before responding to this one, as you are arguing against a point I never made.



Yes and no. You can find out where your strengths and weakness lie by testing yourself against other systems. It depends how far you want to take your training.

So if you have a stand up only style you may not necessarily have to cross train three different styles to compete in the ufc. You can test against other systems and modify techniques and tactics to compensate. 

It is not always about winning. Sometimes it is about finding your limitations.

I think it makes the individual styles more solid that way.

Now yes you could always cross train. And if you want to compete at a decent level you should or do a dedicated mma style. But there are levels that people feel happy with exploring.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

K-man said:


> By which I presume you mean me. I post on this forum as honestly and accurately as I can. Almost all is challenged by people who have never trained with me, never seen me nor been taught by the people who have taught me. I have been training longer than most of these guys have been alive and it is me who is spinning things. You might notice to that none of the guys here who do have experience in the styles I train have ever questioned my training. Why do you think that might be?


I don't any of that, and I'm not commenting in any way on your training.  But you were also intentionally mischaracterizing drop bears position in an effort to be funny.  That's exactly what FC was commenting on.  He called it spin.  And he rightly pointed out that it's not helpful.


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

K-man said:


> By which I presume you mean me. I post on this forum as honestly and accurately as I can. Almost all is challenged by people who have never trained with me, never seen me nor been taught by the people who have taught me. I have been training longer than most of these guys have been alive and it is me who is spinning things. You might notice to that none of the guys here who do have experience in the styles I train have ever questioned my training. Why do you think that might be?



Fundamental difference in training culture.


----------



## K-man (May 11, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Fundamental difference in training culture.


And I can accept and agree with that.


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

Steve said:


> I don't any of that, and I'm not commenting in any way on your training.  But you were also intentionally mischaracterizing drop bears position in an effort to be funny.  That's exactly what FC was commenting on.  He called it spin.  And he rightly pointed out that it's not helpful.



And of course not playing the game and having an internet sook about how some responses are a bit difficult. Seems a bit precious as well.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

What's a sook? Mis that an Australian thing?


----------



## drop bear (May 11, 2015)

Steve said:


> What's a sook? Mis that an Australian thing?



Yeah. Means Having a bit of a cry.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yeah. Means Having a bit of a cry.


Ha.  It's because I care too much.  It makes me emotional.


----------



## Steve (May 11, 2015)

K-man said:


> By which I presume you mean me. I post on this forum as honestly and accurately as I can. Almost all is challenged by people who have never trained with me, never seen me nor been taught by the people who have taught me. I have been training longer than most of these guys have been alive and it is me who is spinning things. You might notice to that none of the guys here who do have experience in the styles I train have ever questioned my training. Why do you think that might be?


To answer the question, my guess is because they agree with yiu.   It's a team dynamic thing.   You tend to agree with people who agree with you.  They're on your team,,saying things that make sense to you, and vice versa.    Doesn't make it right or wrong.   It's like the old saying, preaching to the choir.   

For what's it's worth, Hanzou has experience with shotokan and doesn't agree with you.


----------



## K-man (May 12, 2015)

Steve said:


> To answer the question, my guess is because they agree with yiu.   It's a team dynamic thing.   You tend to agree with people who agree with you.  They're on your team,,saying things that make sense to you, and vice versa.    Doesn't make it right or wrong.   It's like the old saying, preaching to the choir.
> 
> For what's it's worth, Hanzou has experience with shotokan and doesn't agree with you.


So if some one came on here who was Goju or Krav, or Aikido for that matter and was spouting BS, I would sit back and let them peddle rubbish? I don't think so. Yet you are happy to have someone with no knowledge or a beginners knowledge spout absolute crap about other styles. There are a lot of very experience practitioners on this forum and some that I would consider armchair heroes. Guess who I agree with?

Funny you should mention *Hanzou*. He learned basic Shotokan Karate as a junior, bags it as rubbish because he didn't learn anything useful, and that qualifies him to rubbish every other karate style. For what it's worth, Shotokan is not my favourite style for any number of reasons but it is probably the most popular style in the world and has many fantastic karateka and Shotokan is a great style. The fact that I train a different style of karate is my choice. If I wanted to actively compete I would train Goju Kai, Kyokushin or Shotokan. It depends on your interest. I switched to my Okinawan style to follow my interest in the application of the kata, or bunkai. In his early posts *Hanzou* was unaware there was even a difference between kata and bunkai. He constantly demonstrates he has no knowledge beyond the basic kihon. That is why I disagree with him when we are discussing more advanced concepts of bunkai, something that I have actively studied for years, even travelling overseas numerous times to train it with arguably the best exponent of it in the world. 

So if we look at what generates the most angst on this forum it is MMA guys bagging the rest of us from an outside perspective. If I started rubbishing everything I didn't like in MMA or started posting video of people rolling and insisting it wasn't realistic or it was just a demonstration, how far would I get? Guys who know their stuff would be on me like a ton of bricks. Yet when the roles are reversed we have nothing but criticism levelled at the TMAs.


----------



## drop bear (May 12, 2015)

K-man said:


> So if some one came on here who was Goju or Krav, or Aikido for that matter and was spouting BS, I would sit back and let them peddle rubbish? I don't think so. Yet you are happy to have someone with no knowledge or a beginners knowledge spout absolute crap about other styles. There are a lot of very experience practitioners on this forum and some that I would consider armchair heroes. Guess who I agree with?
> 
> Funny you should mention *Hanzou*. He learned basic Shotokan Karate as a junior, bags it as rubbish because he didn't learn anything useful, and that qualifies him to rubbish every other karate style. For what it's worth, Shotokan is not my favourite style for any number of reasons but it is probably the most popular style in the world and has many fantastic karateka and Shotokan is a great style. The fact that I train a different style of karate is my choice. If I wanted to actively compete I would train Goju Kai, Kyokushin or Shotokan. It depends on your interest. I switched to my Okinawan style to follow my interest in the application of the kata, or bunkai. In his early posts *Hanzou* was unaware there was even a difference between kata and bunkai. He constantly demonstrates he has no knowledge beyond the basic kihon. That is why I disagree with him when we are discussing more advanced concepts of bunkai, something that I have actively studied for years, even travelling overseas numerous times to train it with arguably the best exponent of it in the world.
> 
> So if we look at what generates the most angst on this forum it is MMA guys bagging the rest of us from an outside perspective. If I started rubbishing everything I didn't like in MMA or started posting video of people rolling and insisting it wasn't realistic or it was just a demonstration, how far would I get? Guys who know their stuff would be on me like a ton of bricks. Yet when the roles are reversed we have nothing but criticism levelled at the TMAs.



And yet when I mention your incorrect assumptions on self defence based on your lack of experience. You get angst with that as well.

I assumed the angst was internal.


----------



## K-man (May 12, 2015)

drop bear said:


> And yet when I mention your incorrect assumptions on self defence based on your lack of experience. You get angst with that as well.
> 
> I assumed the angst was internal.


OK, I'll bite. What are my incorrect assumptions on self defence and where is my lack of experience, seeing that I actually teach self defence, unlike yourself?


----------



## Steve (May 12, 2015)

K-man said:


> So if some one came on here who was Goju or Krav, or Aikido for that matter and was spouting BS, I would sit back and let them peddle rubbish? I don't think so. Yet you are happy to have someone with no knowledge or a beginners knowledge spout absolute crap about other styles. There are a lot of very experience practitioners on this forum and some that I would consider armchair heroes. Guess who I agree with?
> 
> Funny you should mention *Hanzou*. He learned basic Shotokan Karate as a junior, bags it as rubbish because he didn't learn anything useful, and that qualifies him to rubbish every other karate style. For what it's worth, Shotokan is not my favourite style for any number of reasons but it is probably the most popular style in the world and has many fantastic karateka and Shotokan is a great style. The fact that I train a different style of karate is my choice. If I wanted to actively compete I would train Goju Kai, Kyokushin or Shotokan. It depends on your interest. I switched to my Okinawan style to follow my interest in the application of the kata, or bunkai. In his early posts *Hanzou* was unaware there was even a difference between kata and bunkai. He constantly demonstrates he has no knowledge beyond the basic kihon. That is why I disagree with him when we are discussing more advanced concepts of bunkai, something that I have actively studied for years, even travelling overseas numerous times to train it with arguably the best exponent of it in the world.
> 
> So if we look at what generates the most angst on this forum it is MMA guys bagging the rest of us from an outside perspective. If I started rubbishing everything I didn't like in MMA or started posting video of people rolling and insisting it wasn't realistic or it was just a demonstration, how far would I get? Guys who know their stuff would be on me like a ton of bricks. Yet when the roles are reversed we have nothing but criticism levelled at the TMAs.


Well, now you're starting to qualify things.  Hanzou is simpy an example of someone who trains in a style you train in, who doesn't agree wtih you.  Not everyone agrees with you.  The people who agree with you... well, they agree with you.  And so you agree with them.  It makes sense.  But that doesn't mean your position is the only reasonable or correct one.  And it doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.  As I said, it's preaching to the choir combined with a healthy dose of confirmation bias. This isn't a good or bad thing. It's just a thing. We all do it. But it's a good idea to recognize it when you see it.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 12, 2015)

Hey Steve,

*Hanzou trained in Shotokan*.  That is a far cry from what K-man does.  Very different on many levels.  As explained earlier he also trained in it as a junior which is different than if an adult trained in it.  K-man is also *an expert* at what he does and one of our experts here at MartialTalk in Okinawan Karate, Aikido, Systema and Krav Maga.  Hard to compare an expert in his field of experience to someone's experience trained when they were a teenager? (though of course that does not invalidate Hanzou's opinion on Shotokan)

Hanzou is now a BJJ practitioner and that is great.  *BJJ is awesome and a cornerstone movement of what I do*.  It has been incorporated around the world because of it's effectiveness.   I enjoy Hanzou's view on BJJ and wish to hear a lot more of it.  Can he have an opinion on Karate absolutely and specifically on his experience with Shotokan.  Absolutely and it is good to hear it.  But Shotokan is not all karate.  There are distinct differences.  In other words you just can't lump everything together and say with total authority one opinion on all the systems of Karate is true.  You wouldn't even do that with BJJ because there are now differences between how some of the Gracie's are practicing and other BJJ exponents are practicing. (ie. combatives, street, sport, etc.)  Plus exponents who have taken it even a slightly different way like Eddie Bravo. (ie. no gi top but the gi pants used a lot)   Not everything can be summed up in distinct opinion.  There are shades of Grey.

I want to also add that I enjoy Drop Bear's views particularly on mma and his work in the field of bouncing/doorman.  He made a very succinct comment earlier in the thread out debates and recognized the old *Muay Thai vs. Kickboxing debate from the 80's*. (I remember that one well)  Before that it was either Kung Fu vs. Karate or Karate vs. Judo, etc., etc.  Twenty years from now it will be some thing else!  This cycle is never ending..... 

You already know I enjoy your view on BJJ and other things and that goes without saying!!! 
*
Now with the above being said* can we all get back to discussion on the topic and back to the original article!  What we liked or did not like?  What the author said that we disagreed with?  We do not all have to agree but we can all hear each other's opinions on that topic!


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 12, 2015)

Just a thought on having the conditioning for a long fight - that's also useful in a self-defense situation if you have to run away before or after a physical confrontation.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 12, 2015)

Absolutely Tony!!!  Conditioning and maximizing your attributes can only help in a physical confrontation!


----------



## drop bear (May 12, 2015)

K-man said:


> OK, I'll bite. What are my incorrect assumptions on self defence and where is my lack of experience, seeing that I actually teach self defence, unlike yourself?



There has been a few face palm moments. I actually fight people. So when you talk things like eye gouges for example. I have done them seen them and received them.

Anybody can teach self defence. That is not a credential on its own.


----------



## drop bear (May 12, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Just a thought on having the conditioning for a long fight - that's also useful in a self-defense situation if you have to run away before or after a physical confrontation.



 There is a lot of cross over if people accept that self defence doesn't follow a bunch of rules. So it may last longer that the prescribed ten seconds and it may not be to the death.

You have to be a bit flexible to have a viable SD tool kit. 

And strangely enough you have to be a bit flexible to have a sport tool kit as well. There is a lot of cross over if people actually look for it.


----------



## Chrisoro (May 12, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yes and no. You can find out where your strengths and weakness lie by testing yourself against other systems. It depends how far you want to take your training.
> 
> So if you have a stand up only style you may not necessarily have to cross train three different styles to compete in the ufc. You can test against other systems and modify techniques and tactics to compensate.
> 
> ...



Well, I don't disagree with anything you said above, but as it still has very little to do with what I was talking about, I'll have to conclude that we are we're not in the same conversation.


----------



## K-man (May 12, 2015)

drop bear said:


> There has been a few face palm moments. I actually fight people. So when you talk things like eye gouges for example. I have done them seen them and received them.
> 
> Anybody can teach self defence. That is not a credential on its own.


And in the past I have fought people too and more importantly, in self defence, not fought people. Of course none of that counts.


----------



## drop bear (May 12, 2015)

K-man said:


> And in the past I have fought people too and more importantly, in self defence, not fought people. Of course none of that counts.



I went to a karate class once.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 12, 2015)

You know guys I actually regret posting the fox bagua article and I will likely not post another from his site.... this is so far off anything in that post it is ridiculous, frankly I am tempted to post a tirade of profanity to get the mods to lock this thing...... thanks for completely missing the point and going straight for the ego pissing contest


----------



## drop bear (May 12, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> You know guys I actually regret posting the fox bagua article and I will likely not post another from his site.... this is so far off anything in that post it is ridiculous, frankly I am tempted to post a tirade of profanity to get the mods to lock this thing...... thanks for completely missing the point and going straight for the ego pissing contest



So then. What is the point you are trying to make?


----------



## K-man (May 12, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> You know guys I actually regret posting the fox bagua article and I will likely not post another from his site.... this is so far off anything in that post it is ridiculous, frankly I am tempted to post a tirade of profanity to get the mods to lock this thing...... thanks for completely missing the point and going straight for the ego pissing contest


Xue, I've just re-read the artlcle to refresh my memory and it is an excellent one. The author addresses all the issues as if he has been reading our MT posts.

For example where have we heard this before ...
_"Generally, the MMA supporters claim that if traditional arts were effective, they would be dominating in the cage fights and that most TMA guys are trapped inside a world of fantasy combat."_

or this ...
_"Historically, traditional arts had been used strictly for protection and many of the representatives of each lineage had to be sworn to secrecy to make sure that potential enemies would not gain advantage through the knowledge of their styles' techniques. Secrecy has been and still is a fundamental factor in terms of martial arts. Once you know what your opponent is capable of, you are able to form a strategy around his best movements. Without the element of surprise, many styles lose at least 60 percent of their effectiveness."_

and this ...
_"The true goal for the traditional fighter has always been survival not combat."_

It pains me when we can't get past the "mine is better than yours" mentality but at present on MT that is the situation. Why we can't just celebrate that we are all training martial arts is beyond my comprehension. As the author goes on ...
_"So instead of trying to convince one side that the other is better, you should understand we are actually all on the same path. MMA fighters wouldn't even exist without the traditional arts."_

*Xue*, don't despair, I know that many of us are experiencing the same frustration.


----------



## lklawson (May 13, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> accept that the ring has rules and the street does not.


Umm... Yes, actually, "the street" really does usually have "rules."  You just don't know what they are.  And they may be variable depending on which street and who's in it.

The "street fights" that don't have rules are called "drive by shootings" and we'll send flowers to your widow while she laments that martial arts training did nothing to save you.


----------



## lklawson (May 13, 2015)

K-man said:


> Xue, I've just re-read the artlcle to refresh my memory and it is an excellent one. The author addresses all the issues as if he has been reading our MT posts.
> 
> For example where have we heard this before ...
> _"Generally, the MMA supporters claim that if traditional arts were effective, they would be dominating in the cage fights and that most TMA guys are trapped inside a world of fantasy combat."_


I'm sorry, but, um... no.  This mindset which he is referring to is a decade out of date.  While there are still some who hold this, most "MMA supporters" don't start from that perspective any longer.  Heck, a great GREAT many of them don't give a fat fiddler's fart about "TMA" and would give you a blank stare if you uttered the letters in their presence.  Very many of them aren't highly interested in "Self Defense" or "Street Fighting" or whatever else that the author thinks they are.  They're there to compete in a manly smackdown and if they need to do some "Self Defense" they slap leather and haul out the hog-leg.



> or this ...
> _"Historically, traditional arts had been used strictly for protection_


"Strictly?"  Bullcrap.  If that were true, none of them would end with "Do" or have Zen-anything or Omoto-etc. or any other Philosophy in them.  There's plenty of evidence that many TMA's were intended to cover elements of exercise and general health.  Plainly speaking, the author's claim here is over-reaching and easily refuted.

_



			and many of the representatives of each lineage had to be sworn to secrecy to make sure that potential enemies would not gain advantage through the knowledge of their styles' techniques. Secrecy has been and still is a fundamental factor in terms of martial arts. Once you know what your opponent is capable of, you are able to form a strategy around his best movements. Without the element of surprise, many styles lose at least 60 percent of their effectiveness."
		
Click to expand...

_But the simple fact is that, in today's world of open-borders, open-concepts, and "open source," you simply cannot depend on secret techniques or secret training.  If you can manage to keep and hold a secret, then, you can have an edge, just as with (as some claim) the Italians had with their super-secret Punta Lugna (Lunge Thrust) for the Rapier, yet that cat got out of the bad pretty darn quick.  Once someone has seen it, today, *everyone* has seen it.  No chance of keeping it a secret.



> and this ...
> _"The true goal for the traditional fighter has always been survival not combat."_


Again, over-reach. There have been many martial arts which had a purely sporting basis, and many which had sporting basis which were extended to "combat."  Glima, 19th Century Boxing, and Back-Hold, for instance, are examples.  There were arts which were intended to promote espirit de corps for the fighting man, such as Hutton's Great Stick method, and arts which grew from non-lethal training systems for other arts, such as Singlestick and Gatka.  There are martial arts which grew to have strictly entertainment and performance roles, such as Tahtib.  There are a vast number of martial arts permutations which are not covered in the author's over-reaching and over-narrow pronouncement.



> It pains me when we can't get past the "mine is better than yours" mentality but at present on MT that is the situation. Why we can't just celebrate that we are all training martial arts is beyond my comprehension.


It pains me that the author has made so many false assumptions about the "other" side of his argument, and about martial arts in general.  It pains me that the author is recycling an argument that reached its zenith in the 90's as if it's somehow new and insightful.



> As the author goes on ...
> _"So instead of trying to convince one side that the other is better, you should understand we are actually all on the same path. MMA fighters wouldn't even exist without the traditional arts." _


And it's still another set of bull-crap statements.  We are *NOT* all on the same blasted path!  I don't study Bowie Knife for "survival" or for "combat."  I study it because it's *FUN* and because it's a part of my cultural heritage, and a martial arts part at that.  I fully expect to never be in a Bowie Knife duel, but I approach my training with as much historic validity and realism as I can safely muster.  How many kenjutsu exponents realistically expect to be in a sword duel?  If they do, then, yes, they're probably living in a fantasy world.  By the same token, if an outside observer seriously believes that they're living in a fantasy world because he thinks they really expect to in a sword duel, then it is he who is living in a fantasy world; one of foolish assumption.  So, no, we ain't all on the same durn path.  Further MMA may or may not exist without the traditional arts.  Men have always been wanting to test themselves against each other for fun, bragging rights, money, and access to sex.  "Sporting" events similar to MMA have existed in many other cultures which had no contact with Asian "TMA" (or even Asia), many of which predate anything we currently think of as TMA.  So while the modern UFC and derivatives could be said to be the progeny of TMA (JuJutsu -> Judo -> BJJ), the claim is still of limited merit.  Heck, at least three of the original UFC 1 competitors weren't using what we think of as TMA!

Seriously, this whole MMA vs TMA argument is so old that it's positively decrepit and the author has made so many mistaken base assumptions that it was inevitable that his conclusion would be tainted.

Now if he would have just wrote, "we all do different martial arts for different reasons; live and let live." then it'd be darn hard to argue with it.  But that makes a boring blog post.  The problem is, the topic is dated and his assumptions are poor so it's a boring blog post anyway.  FAIL.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 13, 2015)

drop bear said:


> So then. What is the point you are trying to make?



You have no idea how unsurprised I am at the fact you did not understand that


----------



## drop bear (May 14, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> You have no idea how unsurprised I am at the fact you did not understand that



Ok then. Here is my point. If you consider that mma and tma are basically trying to achieve the same thing then you have to consider that when we compare styles we are comparing apples and apples a lot more than people like to admit.

Which has been my personal experience in tma,rbsd and the sports styles I have done.

And so when "certain posters" (yes I can throw out the vague butt hurt as well) attempt to manufacture differences. Then they are just that. A manufactured difference.

So if you consider that a self defence guy does not need to be fit and conditioned. It is a manufactured difference.

When you consider that a martial artist does not want to win a mma fight any more than they want to survive a self defence. That is a manufactured difference.

And we have to be very careful when we make these distinctions.


----------



## Spinedoc (May 14, 2015)

Here's the point though Drop Bear, people take MA for various reasons. I was a decent street fighter and had military training. I don't "need" to train martial arts to learn how to fight. I've been in many fights (mostly because I was an angry, smartmouthed kid). I don't really care about that part of it now, which is why MMA/UFC have little appeal to me. I am more interested in developing myself as a person. I care more about having fun, sweating my butt off, and learning how to relax than I care about actually fighting. I don't want to ever fight again. My life is out of control busy most of the time, but for 1.5 hours 3 times a week, I can shut off the rest of the world and focus on me. I find the techniques in Aikido/Iaido fascinating and they allow me to work on focused relaxation, while keeping my mind occupied due to the complexity and nuance.. They blend nicely with many of the zen concepts I find so interesting. Note...none of this has ANYTHING to do with beating someone. It's about spiritual and personal development and growth for me.

I need to work on beating myself. I could care less about opponents or fighting.

YMMV.

Mike


----------



## drop bear (May 14, 2015)

Spinedoc said:


> Here's the point though Drop Bear, people take MA for various reasons. I was a decent street fighter and had military training. I don't "need" to train martial arts to learn how to fight. I've been in many fights (mostly because I was an angry, smartmouthed kid). I don't really care about that part of it now, which is why MMA/UFC have little appeal to me. I am more interested in developing myself as a person. I care more about having fun, sweating my butt off, and learning how to relax than I care about actually fighting. I don't want to ever fight again. My life is out of control busy most of the time, but for 1.5 hours 3 times a week, I can shut off the rest of the world and focus on me. I find the techniques in Aikido/Iaido fascinating and they allow me to work on focused relaxation, while keeping my mind occupied due to the complexity and nuance.. They blend nicely with many of the zen concepts I find so interesting. Note...none of this has ANYTHING to do with beating someone. It's about spiritual and personal development and growth for me.
> 
> I need to work on beating myself. I could care less about opponents or fighting.
> 
> ...



Ok. And again we manufacture a difference it is a good thing that one can do akido,iado for fun and personal development but not be able to train mma for those outcomes.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ok then. Here is my point. If you consider that mma and tma are basically trying to achieve the same thing then you have to consider that when we compare styles we are comparing apples and apples a lot more than people like to admit.
> 
> Which has been my personal experience in tma,rbsd and the sports styles I have done.
> 
> ...



so whoopy doopy you have rsbd and sport and tma.. big deal who cares you ain't all that special here on MT

Please I beg you...find a post where I am saying anything you are talking about... show me where I ever said MMA was different from, lessor than or greater than TMA.... . the fact you do not understand what the article, assuming you actually read it, is a whole other issue.... and for the record sparky I also have other training in my background I have no MMA back gourd I do have Japanese jujutsu, tkd, Sanshou, with a dash of JKD as well as TCMA as do many other here on MT...don't care about egos, butts or PC, care about martial arts, know what it use to be like know what some seem to want it to become and what it is becoming is all based on their fragile ego, money and the need to be the biggest baddest person around.

Interestingly enough I have had multiple conversations with "real" MMA people and they are all pretty nice people that are rather interested in what is best for them as it applies to winning and not a one of them has ever run down anther style.

Later junior


----------



## drop bear (May 14, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> so whoopy doopy you have rsbd and sport and tma.. big deal who cares you ain't all that special here on MT
> 
> Please I beg you...find a post where I am saying anything you are talking about... show me where I ever said MMA was different from, lessor than or greater than TMA.... . the fact you do not understand what the article, assuming you actually read it, is a whole other issue.... and for the record sparky I also have other training in my background I have no MMA back gourd I do have Japanese jujutsu, tkd, Sanshou, with a dash of JKD as well as TCMA as do many other here on MT...don't care about egos, butts or PC, care about martial arts, know what it use to be like know what some seem to want it to become and what it is becoming is all based on their fragile ego, money and the need to be the biggest baddest person around.
> 
> ...



I was explaining my point in relation to the article as you still will not explain yours.

You are correct I cant recall you taking a position relating to the actual topic itself. Focusing more on your feelings towards the direction the thread was heading and how some people upset you.

It is unfortunate as I don't think it especially advances the discussion.


----------



## Spinedoc (May 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ok. And again we manufacture a difference it is a good thing that one can do akido,iado for fun and personal development but not be able to train mma for those outcomes.




Not at all. I never said that at all. I have a friend who trains BJJ and does not, and will not compete. Has no interest in it. But I chose aikido because of the difficulty in learning it, and because it is NON competitive. I have absolutely ZERO desire to compete in martial arts.....Now, if you want to talk about golf???? I might be up for 50 bucks a hole.


----------



## drop bear (May 14, 2015)

Spinedoc said:


> Not at all. I never said that at all. I have a friend who trains BJJ and does not, and will not compete. Has no interest in it. But I chose aikido because of the difficulty in learning it, and because it is NON competitive. I have absolutely ZERO desire to compete in martial arts.....Now, if you want to talk about golf???? I might be up for 50 bucks a hole.



Lol. My golf sucks.

I accept an individual will train for their own personal reasons. And sometimes they are not even as clearly defined as yours.

But we certainly cant separate martial arts on a happiness scale.


----------



## lklawson (May 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ok then. Here is my point. If you consider that mma and tma are basically trying to achieve the same thing


Sez who?

Most MMA fighters I see these days aren't doing it so that they can win a "streetfight" against 20 Katana wielding Ninjas. They're doing it to compete, to test themselves against each other.  The ones who are concerned about "Self Defense" go get a gun and/or other weapons & training for them.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (May 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ok. And again we manufacture a difference


"Manufacture"?!?!?!  What the heck?  It's not "manufactured" anything.  It's a different reason.  Not everyone paints a picture hoping to be Picasso.  Some people just do it because they like to paint.  <sheesh>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (May 14, 2015)

Spinedoc said:


> But I chose aikido because of the difficulty in learning it, and because it is NON competitive.


Umm... Tomiki?

Peace favor you sword,
Kirk


----------



## Spinedoc (May 14, 2015)

Sure, but I don't train Tomiki......I'm straight Aikikai.....


----------



## drop bear (May 14, 2015)

lklawson said:


> Sez who?
> 
> Most MMA fighters I see these days aren't doing it so that they can win a "streetfight" against 20 Katana wielding Ninjas. They're doing it to compete, to test themselves against each other.  The ones who are concerned about "Self Defense" go get a gun and/or other weapons & training for them.
> 
> ...



Well I assume it is kind of the premis of the article.

So I think you will find mmaers who are training to compete,training for ninjas and training for fun.

And bare in mind ninjas can catch bullets so some people still need the hand to hand aspect of the self defence.


----------



## drop bear (May 14, 2015)

lklawson said:


> "Manufacture"?!?!?!  What the heck?  It's not "manufactured" anything.  It's a different reason.  Not everyone paints a picture hoping to be Picasso.  Some people just do it because they like to paint.  <sheesh>
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



When you attribute a style to a training mindset like what was done you are manufacturing a difference. I train mma for competition. You train krav for self defence. He trains akido for personal development.

And we are applying this idea that there is only one result you can a achieve depending on the martial art you do.

That is different to everybody making their own personal choice regarding what they want to get out of what they do.


----------



## K-man (May 14, 2015)

lklawson said:


> I'm sorry, but, um... no.  This mindset which he is referring to is a decade out of date.  While there are still some who hold this, most "MMA supporters" don't start from that perspective any longer.  Heck, a great GREAT many of them don't give a fat fiddler's fart about "TMA" and would give you a blank stare if you uttered the letters in their presence.  Very many of them aren't highly interested in "Self Defense" or "Street Fighting" or whatever else that the author thinks they are.  They're there to compete in a manly smackdown and if they need to do some "Self Defense" they slap leather and haul out the hog-leg.


OK. I can except that it is only some. That is also my experience although outside of martial art forums I haven't come across it at all.



lklawson said:


> "Strictly?"  Bullcrap.  If that were true, none of them would end with "Do" or have Zen-anything or Omoto-etc. or any other Philosophy in them.  There's plenty of evidence that many TMA's were intended to cover elements of exercise and general health.  Plainly speaking, the author's claim here is over-reaching and easily refuted.


I think this depends on the frame of reference. I may have read the blog wrong and haven't time just now to go back, but I thought it was from a an historical perspective well before '-do' became commonplace. I might have thought TMAs in the context of Asia, were not  usually for exercise or general health. I would have thought that was more a 20th century development.



lklawson said:


> But the simple fact is that, in today's world of open-borders, open-concepts, and "open source," you simply cannot depend on secret techniques or secret training.  If you can manage to keep and hold a secret, then, you can have an edge, just as with (as some claim) the Italians had with their super-secret Punta Lugna (Lunge Thrust) for the Rapier, yet that cat got out of the bad pretty darn quick.  Once someone has seen it, today, *everyone* has seen it.  No chance of keeping it a secret.


No issue with tat at all. I took it again that it was a comment on the historical nature of the CMAs.



lklawson said:


> Again, over-reach. There have been many martial arts which had a purely sporting basis, and many which had sporting basis which were extended to "combat."  Glima, 19th Century Boxing, and Back-Hold, for instance, are examples.  There were arts which were intended to promote espirit de corps for the fighting man, such as Hutton's Great Stick method, and arts which grew from non-lethal training systems for other arts, such as Singlestick and Gatka.  There are martial arts which grew to have strictly entertainment and performance roles, such as Tahtib.  There are a vast number of martial arts permutations which are not covered in the author's over-reaching and over-narrow pronouncement.


Now we are way outside of the context of the article.



lklawson said:


> It pains me that the author has made so many false assumptions about the "other" side of his argument, and about martial arts in general.  It pains me that the author is recycling an argument that reached its zenith in the 90's as if it's somehow new and insightful.


Maybe. I didn't take 'martial arts in general' outside of what I thought the article was about.



lklawson said:


> And it's still another set of bull-crap statements.  We are *NOT* all on the same blasted path!  I don't study Bowie Knife for "survival" or for "combat."  I study it because it's *FUN* and because it's a part of my cultural heritage, and a martial arts part at that.  I fully expect to never be in a Bowie Knife duel, but I approach my training with as much historic validity and realism as I can safely muster.  How many kenjutsu exponents realistically expect to be in a sword duel?  If they do, then, yes, they're probably living in a fantasy world.  By the same token, if an outside observer seriously believes that they're living in a fantasy world because he thinks they really expect to in a sword duel, then it is he who is living in a fantasy world; one of foolish assumption.  So, no, we ain't all on the same durn path.  Further MMA may or may not exist without the traditional arts.  Men have always been wanting to test themselves against each other for fun, bragging rights, money, and access to sex.  "Sporting" events similar to MMA have existed in many other cultures which had no contact with Asian "TMA" (or even Asia), many of which predate anything we currently think of as TMA.  So while the modern UFC and derivatives could be said to be the progeny of TMA (JuJutsu -> Judo -> BJJ), the claim is still of limited merit.  Heck, at least three of the original UFC 1 competitors weren't using what we think of as TMA!


I don't think this is what the article was about at all.



lklawson said:


> Seriously, this whole MMA vs TMA argument is so old that it's positively decrepit and the author has made so many mistaken base assumptions that it was inevitable that his conclusion would be tainted.


I'll re read with different eyes.



lklawson said:


> Now if he would have just wrote, "we all do different martial arts for different reasons; live and let live." then it'd be darn hard to argue with it.  But that makes a boring blog post.  The problem is, the topic is dated and his assumptions are poor so it's a boring blog post anyway.  FAIL.


So I'm assuming you don't agree with what he has written.


----------



## lklawson (May 14, 2015)

drop bear said:


> When you attribute a style to a training mindset like what was done you are manufacturing a difference. I train mma for competition. You train krav for self defence. He trains akido for personal development.


I don't do Krav (I don't even "like" most Krav that I've seen because I don't think it usually provides the service it claims to - but that's a different discussion).  But I get your point and, for this one anyway, I generally agree.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (May 14, 2015)

K-man said:


> So I'm assuming you don't agree with what he has written.


Nope, not a bit.  Reading his blog was like being transported back 15 years to NNTP rec.martial-arts

No, I'm not joking even the least little bit.  His entire post could have been lifted directly from the pages of circa-2000 rma.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## senseidave2005 (May 22, 2015)

Steve said:


> While surely you're right that he wasn't asserting that lack of fitness is a self defense "thing," his actual point was confusing.  It seemed to be a slightly confusing cause and effect argument about fitness level, athleticism and MMA vs TMA, related to how they prepare.  The idea being that MMA guys intend to fight for three rounds, while TMA guys intend to fight no longer than 15-30 seconds.
> 
> He suggested that the mental approach is different.  I personally agree, but would suggest that preparing to fight for only 15 to 30 seconds just sounds like a terrible idea when the stakes could be as high as life or death.  Mental approach-wise, I do know that the approach in MMA is that the fight should never be harder than the training.  The saying is, "Train hard; fight easy."  And the mentality of gameness is that you will never give up.  You presume your opponent has every advantage over you, and so the only thing you can control is preparation.  Your opponent might have more technique, but he'll never outwork you.  That's a level of mental toughness that's going to be hard to beat.
> 
> ...


I would like to thank those who chose to read what was written. I would also agree to prepare for a 15-30 second fight would be ludicrous. To allow a fight for your life to continue that long would tell me that one should change strategy due to the fact that what your doing isn't working so change gears. I also stated that my oersonal fitness level was not to the level of a competitive fighter... when training for grading I have always encouraged the students to up their fame to the training over prepares them for the challenge. Otherwise they beat themselves.  That's All. I will crawl back under my rock now for a few more years.


----------



## drop bear (May 22, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> I would like to thank those who chose to read what was written. I would also agree to prepare for a 15-30 second fight would be ludicrous. To allow a fight for your life to continue that long would tell me that one should change strategy due to the fact that what your doing isn't working so change gears. I also stated that my oersonal fitness level was not to the level of a competitive fighter... when training for grading I have always encouraged the students to up their fame to the training over prepares them for the challenge. Otherwise they beat themselves.  That's All. I will crawl back under my rock now for a few more years.



I am interested to know what goes on in your head when a fight hits that 30 second mark. And you start to worry that it should be over by then.


----------



## Steve (May 22, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> I would like to thank those who chose to read what was written. I would also agree to prepare for a 15-30 second fight would be ludicrous. To allow a fight for your life to continue that long would tell me that one should change strategy due to the fact that what your doing isn't working so change gears. I also stated that my oersonal fitness level was not to the level of a competitive fighter... when training for grading I have always encouraged the students to up their fame to the training over prepares them for the challenge. Otherwise they beat themselves.  That's All. I will crawl back under my rock now for a few more years.


My intent wasn't to drive you away, and I'm really sorry if that's how it came across. 

What you've said above makes a lot more sense to me.  It's the difference between strategy and tactics.  The strategy/plan is to prepare for a fight that is as long as necessary.  Tactically, you would work in the moment to keep the fight as short as possible.  If that makes sense.


----------



## senseidave2005 (May 22, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I am interested to know what goes on in your head when a fight hits that 30 second mark. And you start to worry that it should be over by then.


Drop bear, you seem to be a rather interesting character, and I hope that your skills match your ability to cause irritation, you ask questions as if your only wish is to aggrivate people into saying "fine you win". I have trained a long time and feel confident that should I ever be in that situation again the last thing I will do is worry.. May you and yours go forth and multiply. For it is with great pleasure I can say I dont know you and shall with gods grace never have to meet you for you are a not so rare breed that I would prefer not to have in my life.


----------



## drop bear (May 23, 2015)

senseidave2005 said:


> Drop bear, you seem to be a rather interesting character, and I hope that your skills match your ability to cause irritation, you ask questions as if your only wish is to aggrivate people into saying "fine you win". I have trained a long time and feel confident that should I ever be in that situation again the last thing I will do is worry.. May you and yours go forth and multiply. For it is with great pleasure I can say I dont know you and shall with gods grace never have to meet you for you are a not so rare breed that I would prefer not to have in my life.



As an oyster needs aggravation to make a pearl. So do our pearls of wisdom need aggravation to ensure that they have merit.


----------



## drop bear (May 23, 2015)

Ok. Mabye trying to engage a persons mind is sometimes the wrong way to go. So to explain in the simplest terms why you are wrong.

A fight that lasts a few seconds is reliant on the person you are fighting being unable to defend your attacks. Or unable to wear your attacks. This mostly happens in the street because most people cant fight.

Now a person who you hit and collapses is a best case scenario. And I hope everyone who has to defend themselves fights that sort of person.

But.

Some people can fight and through no fault of your own you are going to have to take longer finishing them and will have a tougher time of it. 

So to prepare for a fight it is better to prepare for a long fight rather than a short one because it is better for a fight to be easier than you expect than harder.

When you see a ring fight and think that it goes on too long. This is more due to both fighters being kind of evenly matched in ability and weight. And less to do with some sort of rule set preventing people from getting finished quickly.

If you are fundamentally better than the guy you are fighting you can finish a fight quickly in 16 ounce gloves. 

So this street fight fast finish because you are using some sort technique superior to punching people is not real.


----------



## drop bear (May 23, 2015)

On top of this. It is incredibly risky to try to finish a fight early on a guy you have no idea about and where the penalty for loosing is so great.

Because to do this you have to engage in the sort of trade off that allows a quality fighter to trade back. When if you play a bit safe and a bit cautious you will still score hits that will finish a crap guy while not exposing yourself to the counters of a good one.


----------



## drop bear (May 23, 2015)

So the street fighting fast fight vs the boxing slow fight.

If you catch the guy you can still end them quick. There are not really 2 different scenarios here.

I am using boxing because they have the biggest gloves and the least distractions just to show it can get done fast with pretty much as much stacked up against you as you can.

So again we can find parallels to self defence training and sport training.


----------



## RTKDCMB (May 23, 2015)

drop bear said:


> So this street fight fast finish because you are using some sort technique superior to punching people is not real.


----------



## drop bear (May 23, 2015)

RTKDCMB said:


>



That is not superior to punching people.


----------



## RTKDCMB (May 23, 2015)

drop bear said:


> That is not superior to punching people.


Really? One strike in my video versus how many strikes in yours?


----------



## drop bear (May 23, 2015)

RTKDCMB said:


> Really? One strike in my video versus how many strikes in yours?



Yes really. One strike pretty much did the job there.


----------



## RTKDCMB (May 24, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yes really. One strike pretty much did the job there.


But it wasn't the first one he threw was it?


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 25, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Let me fix that for you:
> 
> Ground fighting as a whole was neglected by *some* Judo practitioners for decades in favor of throwing techniques. So much so that *some* Judo black belts train in Bjj to round out their style.


I
This is precisely the point that causes blog discussions, and the same to go on & on & on, over & over & over.  Instead of coming to a reasoned conclusion.
|
That is... confusing the *conventions* of how a particular martial art is practiced or presented popularly versus the actual *conceptual foundations *and *principle maxims* underpinning & defining that martial art.
|
I'm no expert in Judo but have observed exactly what you have said.  Whether this arose out of the original Judo curriculum as it was trained or came about later, I do not know.
|
Again, no real experience training BJJ, yet it is apparent from observing it's practice that the Gracies' put together a more seamless system of grappling compared to how Judo that I've experienced has been presented & practiced.
|
So are the 'holes' in Judo in the curriculum's structure, or in the popular convention on how it has come to be practiced?  I concur with Tony D. that convention of Judo training often has not  been representative of the potential, or of the complete principles in the art.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 25, 2015)

Chrisoro said:


> Actually, I think it's your oversimplification here that doesn't make sense. The fact that MMA is a very controlled, and highly artificial environment, also reduces the numbers of variables that it is correctly and sufficently assessing. Yes, early MMA proved clearly that most traditional martial artists won't do very well against expert grapplers with a certain gameplan, in a one-on-one, unarmed duel type of situation. However, generalizing from that to how they would perform in a more typical self defense situation or street encounter, against the kind of opponents that one are most likely to meet there, and with all the added variables and posibilities of that kind of situation, is shoddy methodology at best.


|
IMO, you've really thought through the subject and are much more familiar with MMA than I.  Yet, in terms of coming to reasoned conclusions, here's where I'll step in by isolating out just one block of your post.  I'll abstract out the particular sentence.
|
I can't see why anyone would not agree with your first sentence. Perfectly stated.  I took out the last sentence because I want to tie down the issue before I would move to the changed environment.  To get at the "truth."


Chrisoro said:


> Yes, early MMA proved clearly that most traditional martial artists won't do very well against expert grapplers with a certain gameplan, in a one-on-one, unarmed duel type of situation.


|
By my thinking, what the success of the Gracies proved in early MMA has to be qualified by the nature of the sample of "traditional" martial artists that the Gracie's faced.  Two questions: ONE,  were those martial artists that labeled themselves "traditional," had  they achieved the level of expertise in traditional martial arts that say an acknowledged expert here, K-MAN, has?  IOW, what was the efficacy of their traditional martial arts training?  OR--Were they just good kickboxers who took TMA lessons and got belts in a TMA style?  TWO, were the early UFC matches where the Gracies had all this stupendous success, entirely legitimate or was there a good dose of promotion?
|
In a sense, my second question (TWO) points to your first sentence where you describe the Octagon as an artificial environment.  I bring one aspect of that artificiality which then affects any conclusions drawn from MMA stats.
|
On question ONE,* the idea is to bring in Tony D's perspective in his Judo post*, and one that has been raised in other T.'s.  In terms of labeling early UFC fighters (or any MMA competitor claiming to be TMA based), how much, to what degree had their training been determined by largely following conventional training for competition in that style, as opposed to the training presented across the entire spectrum of that TMA style's curriculum?
|
If so-called TMA practitioners are neglecting a certain aspect of the curriculum as Tony D. described for Judo, then this calls into question the potency of Gracie BJJ, should Gracie BJJ actually go against those competently training the TMA curriculum (by Tony D., Judo) as it was proposed & designed by the originating Masters.  A quality of training issue....


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 25, 2015)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Hey Steve,
> 
> *Hanzou trained in Shotokan*.  That is a far cry from what K-man does.  Very different on many levels.  As explained earlier he also trained in it as a junior which is different than if an adult trained in it.  K-man is also *an expert* at what he does and one of our experts here at MartialTalk in Okinawan Karate, Aikido, Systema and Krav Maga.  Hard to compare an expert in his field of experience to someone's experience trained when they were a teenager? (though of course that does not invalidate Hanzou's opinion on Shotokan)
> 
> Hanzou is now a BJJ practitioner and that is great.  *BJJ is awesome and a cornerstone movement of what I do*.  It has been incorporated around the world because of it's effectiveness.   I enjoy Hanzou's view on BJJ and wish to hear a lot more of it.  Can he have an opinion on Karate absolutely and specifically on his experience with Shotokan.  Absolutely and it is good to hear it.  But Shotokan is not all karate.  There are distinct differences.  In other words you just can't lump everything together and say with total authority one opinion on all the systems of Karate is true.


|
Again, these discussions can propel a blog & T.' forever.  You're all better writers & conservationists than am I.  Yet how about a reasoned conclusion?
|
K-Man is an acknowledged expert in traditional karate.  He's highly experienced.  We all agree.  So on the general topic of traditional karate, who is more qualified to state an opinion?  K-Man or Hanzou.  Well, K_Man.  Your statement that K-Man's karate is different on many levels or details that Hanzou's Shotokan style is true.  The failing in coming to a reasoned conclusion focusing on differences,,,, is that just finding differences omits the consideration of the commonalities between Goju Ryu and Shotokan.  I feel certain base principles of the two styles are common to each.  Perhaps others don't.  But I would consider just saying Shotokan and Goju Ryu are more different than the same too general to qualify none other than a half truth.
|
You say BJJ is "awesome" and has been incorporated around the world because of it's effectiveness.  I would add that BJJ is awesome and incorporated around the world because of it's feasibility in training & practicality for application for a wider audience than compared to achieving the same level of effective expertise in Shotokan karate.  IOW, to become proficient in Shotokan karate to the level required to defeat the BJJ stylist, it requires greater study, time & dedication to training of a more intensive nature.  On that line of thinking, then it makes complete sense for most, particularly MMA competitors, to take up BJJ rather than Shotokan karate.
|
Coming to a reasoned conclusion, unfortunately the eclipses ongoing discussions of the same topics over & over.  So please continue.  I'm generally in K-Man's corner on this one....


----------



## Hanzou (May 26, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Again, these discussions can propel a blog & T.' forever.  You're all better writers & conservationists than am I.  Yet how about a reasoned conclusion?
> |
> K-Man is an acknowledged expert in traditional karate.  He's highly experienced.  We all agree.  So on the general topic of traditional karate, who is more qualified to state an opinion?  K-Man or Hanzou.  Well, K_Man.  Your statement that K-Man's karate is different on many levels or details that Hanzou's Shotokan style is true.  The failing in coming to a reasoned conclusion focusing on differences,,,, is that just finding differences omits the consideration of the commonalities between Goju Ryu and Shotokan.  I feel certain base principles of the two styles are common to each.  Perhaps others don't.  But I would consider just saying Shotokan and Goju Ryu are more different than the same too general to qualify none other than a half truth.
> ...



Since I've taken both disciplines for about an equal amount of time, I'll happily give my viewpoint on why I switched from Karate to Bjj, and stayed there.

My main issue with Shotokan is simple; Its a modern martial art trapped in a traditional mind set. That causes the entire system to be somewhat scatter-brained, and frankly saps away at its effectiveness as a martial system. One of Bjj's greatest strengths (and frankly its biggest advantage over Judo) is its ability to adapt and absorb other styles into its core. This never destroys Bjj as a system, it makes the overall system better. So if a Catch Wrestler comes into a Bjj school, and clowns the entire Bjj gym, the Bjj gym doesn't say that the Catch Wrestler was cheating, or doing something illegal, the Bjj gym would make the Catch Wrestler an instructor of some sort and have him teach the gym Catch Wrestling. 

When I started Bjj years ago, my school had a Judo and a wrestling instructor. So you could learn the fundamentals of Bjj, and then learn Judo or Wrestling depending on what your goals were. Bjj had its own takedowns, but learning Judo and Wrestling throws/takedowns simply made you better all around. I would have loved to have the option of taking Boxing or Muay Thai at my Shotokan school, but again due to its traditionalist trappings, that wasn't going to happen.

That openness to different approaches is what makes Bjj so effective. It isn't trapped by the confines of tradition, its free to evolve and adapt to rapid changes of the MA landscape. When karate looks to evolve it attempts to create new moves from its katas instead of looking at approaches from competing styles. That's like saying we already have all the answers, so there's no need to incorporate new methods or approaches. Its backwards religious dogma at its finest. 

Why not ditch the traditional kata, and remake them into kata more based around actually fighting similar to what Ashihara and Enshin karate did? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not utilize modern training methods found in boxing or other sports methods in order to improve the output and fighting ability of your students in less time? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not bring in full time instructors from other disciplines to teach your students alongside their karate training? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition.

That's the difference between Bjj and Shotokan. Its also the difference between MMA and TMAs in general.


----------



## Drose427 (May 26, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Since I've taken both disciplines for about an equal amount of time, I'll happily give my viewpoint on why I switched from Karate to Bjj, and stayed there.
> 
> My main issue with Shotokan is simple; Its a modern martial art trapped in a traditional mind set. That causes the entire system to be somewhat scatter-brained, and frankly saps away at its effectiveness as a martial system. One of Bjj's greatest strengths (and frankly its biggest advantage over Judo) is its ability to adapt and absorb other styles into its core. This never destroys Bjj as a system, it makes the overall system better. So if a Catch Wrestler comes into a Bjj school, and clowns the entire Bjj gym, the Bjj gym doesn't say that the Catch Wrestler was cheating, or doing something illegal, the Bjj gym would make the Catch Wrestler an instructor of some sort and have him teach the gym Catch Wrestling.
> 
> ...




The onoly thing I did in boxing that I havent seen at the Shotokan school I stop by every now and then, is boxing sparring XD

Footwork, bag work, combination drills, pad drills etc. Are all regularly a part of most TMA's and really always have been XD

You really need to stop using your short time in Shotokan as a means to judge all TMAs, its cringeworthy


----------



## Hanzou (May 26, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> The onoly thing I did in boxing that I havent seen at the Shotokan school I stop by every now and then, is boxing sparring XD
> 
> Footwork, bag work, combination drills, pad drills etc. Are all regularly a part of most TMA's and really always have been XD
> 
> You really need to stop using your short time in Shotokan as a means to judge all TMAs, its cringeworthy



That probably explains why so many of you look like kickboxers when you spar.


----------



## Drose427 (May 26, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> That probably explains why so many of you look like kickboxers when you spar.




L. O. L.

yup....

Not because Karate styles have been oding them long before Kickboxing.........

and that Karate sparring _led to the creation of Kickboxing
_
you're cute


----------



## crazydiamond (May 26, 2015)

It is interesting the article mentions Bruce Lee (the system I study under inosanto)  and Bruce having come from TMA of Wing Chun.  Arguably one could (and some do) take the approach that Bruce saw the limitations of TMA and formed a MMA approach to his "system with out a system". As a newbie - I train in various forms including boxing, MT, and BJJ as well as some Wing Chun.

I am aware that other forms of "TMA" also include striking, ground work and other forms of fighting - a mixed combat approach. To me these seem like MMA as well.

The discussion (debate ?) I seem to hear (again as a newbie) is not TMA vs MMA - but rather Cage MMA vs Street MMA.   Sparing is also involved in both, or is in mine - albeit not hard sparing.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Since I've taken both disciplines for about an equal amount of time, I'll happily give my viewpoint on why I switched from Karate to Bjj, and stayed there.


|
The Gracie's did a lot of things right.  Just as did Gichin Funakoshi.  So I applaud both moves.



Hanzou said:


> My main issue with Shotokan is simple; Its a modern martial art trapped in a traditional mind set. That causes the entire system to be somewhat scatter-brained, and frankly saps away at its effectiveness as a martial system.


|
Yep, in a general nutshell, I concur with your simple summary.  Shotokan has a number of problems and your overall depiction captures much of the flavor of those problems.  Personally, I'll reiterate, I don't like Shotokan and would never practice Shotokan myself.  However, for broader reasons, I think Shotokan fits with many in the masses and I would never hesitate to say Shotokan can really be effective if you dig into the principles behind it & of traditional karate (TMU).
|


Hanzou said:


> One of Bjj's greatest strengths (and frankly its biggest advantage over Judo) is its ability to adapt and absorb other styles into its core. This never destroys Bjj as a system, it makes the overall system better.


|
I'm not versed in the grappling area the way the MT experts & authorities here, so I have to speak from principle alone.  I think there is 2 ways to look @ cross training.  On the one end of the spectrum is to engage in cross training a lot and gain & incorporate the knowledge & benefits inherent in other MA styles.  At the other end of the spectrum is what I do.  That is go beyond conventions and common practice of your primary style and dig deeper into the origins & transitions of that style.  Such an approach, take Shotokan for instance, would address so many of the shortcomings or abandoned parts of the curriculum.  It would focus on concepts, such as the 8 key concepts of Tang Soo Do (a Shotokan deriviative style) which then drive and power the effectiveness of the Shotokan style (a bit of cross-training reference to TSD there).
|
In summary, cross training is not the panacea that so many make it.  I strongly recommend cross training to expand one's understanding of their primary choosen art & what it's potential is.  With reservations, such an approach would address a very large majority of the flaws & shortcomings in Shotokan AS PRACTICED COMMONLY, say certain of the 'modernization' of Shotokan that you speak of.  IMO.


Hanzou said:


> So if a Catch Wrestler comes into a Bjj school, and clowns the entire Bjj gym, the Bjj gym doesn't say that the Catch Wrestler was cheating, or doing something illegal, the Bjj gym would make the Catch Wrestler an instructor of some sort and have him teach the gym Catch Wrestling.


|
The danger, however, in this approach, is that you lose or dilute or corrupt the essence of the art, say  Judo, so that you end up with something that is not longer providing the strengths of traditional Judo art as intended by Jigoro Kano.  Change = / = Innovation.  Change for the better = innovation.  Which character of change is the Catch Wrestler promoting???  $64 dollar question.
|


Hanzou said:


> When I started Bjj years ago, my school had a Judo and a wrestling instructor. So you could learn the fundamentals of Bjj, and then learn Judo or Wrestling depending on what your goals were. Bjj had its own takedowns, but learning Judo and Wrestling throws/takedowns simply made you better all around. I would have loved to have the option of taking Boxing or Muay Thai at my Shotokan school, but again due to its traditionalist trappings, that wasn't going to happen.


|
Again, see my reply above.  And of course your suggested approach may match your personal attributes.  To me personally, the value of the presence of the other arts is the reality testing of me, as a Judo practitioner.  Let me paint a K-Man-like word picture.
|
I'm of average physique.  Against the brute who just flattened Rolles Gracie @ KSW31 in May 2015, just a few days ago, I would be pressed to physically stop the opponent's (Mariusz Pudzianowski) forward momentum.  I might get run over like a truck hit me.  By a main PRINCIPLE of Judo, YIELDING TO FORCE rather than opposing force, i know have an intelligent strategy to apply.  I am not just going to be able to manhandle such a brute like wrestling trains me to do.  He's too big, heavy & strong.  So the question to me is that Judo provides the best grappling strategy in such a case, now how to I implement that technically under Judo principles?  K-man lectured me on this very same principle when he advocated Goju Ryu karate--here a perfect application.
|
So in other words, If I do Judo really well, If I study, train, and absorb the lessons of Jigoro Kano to a high level of competence, what does Catch Wrestling do for me that really makes a difference?  Pudzianowski can rag-doll me; doesn't work the other way around.  This is the ultimate practical lesson of TMA, IMO.



Hanzou said:


> That openness to different approaches is what makes Bjj so effective.


|
I think the value was captured when the Gracie's designed BJJ.  I personally think that's when the openess addressed some of the shortfall in thinking in say Judo, how it became to practiced sport-wise.[/quote]


Hanzou said:


> It isn't trapped by the confines of tradition, its free to evolve and adapt to rapid changes of the MA landscape. When karate looks to evolve it attempts to create new moves from its katas instead of looking at approaches from competing styles. That's like saying we already have all the answers, so there's no need to incorporate new methods or approaches. Its backwards religious dogma at its finest.


|
Let me say we could fall into a semantics pit here.  I would not say the failure is in tradition.  Looking at it from your perspective, I would be less absolute and say the complete failure is not in tradition.  So you see how I succeed is embrace the totality of the issue, not fall prey to the existence of fault.  _*The real failure comes in the misinterpretation of tradition.*_  That is how I would frame the global issue. This opens up a complicated & difficult proposition.  For traditional karate, is the modern Shotokan interpretation accurate or is Okinawan Goju ryu better or is the Korean Tang Soo Do an improvement over say Shotokan?  As problematic as this is, to get at the truth, one must face the global issue in this way.  IMHO.
|
This is why I personally abhor Shotokan, yet i can intellectually easily embrace, even recommend it.


Hanzou said:


> Why not ditch the traditional kata, and remake them into kata more based around actually fighting similar to what Ashihara and Enshin karate did?


|
That is an excellent point.  Yet I have even less interest in doing what you say than in practicing Shotokan.  At the same time, I can recommend to others what you advocate.
|
This takes thinking and I guess by now it's plain I'm a strong thinker.  The issue here to me is do we "fix" Shotokan by making it more Ian Abernathy-ized, or do we embrace what traditional Shotokan (and it's maxim's & concepts & principles) has to offer.  The latter, IMO, is the best answer.  It's not the only answer.  the evolved styles you described are also an answer.  IMO, Principles eclipse technical sophistication, when it comes to TMA.   Not so much for athletics of Muay Thai, boxing, wrestling practice, etc.


Hanzou said:


> Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not utilize modern training methods found in boxing or other sports methods in order to improve the output and fighting ability of your students in less time? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not bring in full time instructors from other disciplines to teach your students alongside their karate training? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition.


The correct answer is not as you've stated, "...because of tradition;" it's because of _*what tradition provides when trained true to the fundamental principles behind and encapsulated in those traditions.*_
|
Of course this is a massive undertaking compared to the type of athletic training that say a proponent of same such as Matt Thorton advocates.  Does Matt Thorton's approach work.  Of course it does.  Much of his athletic-speak is appealing; IMO doesn't help at all.  On balance though, Matt Thorton, IMO, is a traditional athletic trainer with new-stylized marketing packaging.  His training works because athletics work.  TMA is a very large step up from athletics.  There-in lies all the discussion and disagreement, as we see here @ MT.  We TMA's  are making a very larger, VERY LARGE step up from athletics.
[/quote]That's the difference between Bjj and Shotokan. Its also the difference between MMA and TMAs in general.[/QUOTE]
|
NO. People, IMO, are presented with a watershed choice when engaging in martial arts.  ONE is the Matt Thorton approach--ATHLETICS.  And one good quality of Matt is that he makes no bones about his approach.
|
TWO, is the TMA approach, and I use Gichin Funakosi the father of Shotokan as my example.  Shotokan is a great learning TMA because it goes into specfics in the curriculum.  For concept, my research of Tang Soo Do, provides a better spelling out of Canons, and certain principles.  A little CROSS-REFERENCING , if you will.  I think it was Hwang Kee, the founder.  Or one could pick one or more of the Okinawan Masters of traditional karate.  Or one could pick Ip Man or the Shaolin monks.  The knowledge of the human potential captured in the teachings of these TMA originators is glacial, massive compared to the sport-based, physical athletic methods or styles.
|
There's a link to the general terminology of Tang Soo Do in the Korean arts section of MT.  That terminology, IMO describes in overall (and vague) terms, EXACTLY, the difference between TMA & MMA.
|
And incidentally, I got called for my disfavor of Greg Jackson, the MMA coach--perhaps the most successful.  I also took a look at Ray Longo who is highly credentialed as  well as and very highly regarded (I think he trains Chris Weidman).  _Longo is impressive_.  Certainly they deserve recognition for their success, particularly in business. But as Chris Parker would say, I believe I'm right when I hold what they do is over-rated compared to the reputation given TMA in the MMA arena.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Why not ditch the traditional kata, and remake them into kata more based around actually fighting similar to what Ashihara and Enshin karate did? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not utilize modern training methods found in boxing or other sports methods in order to improve the output and fighting ability of your students in less time? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not bring in full time instructors from other disciplines to teach your students alongside their karate training? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition.
> 
> That's the difference between Bjj and Shotokan. Its also the difference between MMA and TMAs in general.


|
The global answer as to why not ditch kata is addressed by understanding what kata is.  In a descriptive sense, kata practice is precisely in form, what separates TMA from MMA.  Only TMA has kata, hyung, poomse, forms, etc.).  Of course the problem then lies with defining what kata is.  MT experts here are all over the map, and every where else too.
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MY TMA COACH ANSWER:
|
If you are going to train boxing, wrestling, sports, Matt Thorton athletics, you absolutely don't need kata.
|
If you are going to train TMA, you SHOULD do kata, but the practice or emphasis on kata is not necessary to become a successful TMA practitioner.
|
If you are going to train TMA, and you want the opportunity to tap into the full potential of TMA, then you absolutely must train kata.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Kata training provides the potential to take you to the highest level of martial capability.  Shotokan karate is big on kata.  As big as the Okinawan karates styles? NO.
|
Yet the lesson gained from training Shotokan kata to their potential benefit is world's above the potential that Greg Jackson Ray Longo, Fredie Roach can provide.  That is what I am saying.  The Taikyoku kata, the FIRST CAUSE, it's not the super-simpleton down block that leaves your face wide open that matters, it's the perfectly controlled placement of that down block in a strong & tactically advantageous way in potentially guarding the body from low attack) powered by highly developed mental discipline that drives & control the whole body strength together in a coordinated & unified way into that down block as need be, with the whole body aligned behind it and utterly prepared for the next move (advance, reposition-step & punch / counter punch with a straight punch utilizing the same exact precisely mentally controlled process at all times directing the body in a strong & tactically intelligent way, completely synchronized).
|
How's that for a run-on sentence?
|
The chambered hand opposite the down block (1st 2  Taikyoku kata) is completely prepared to engage the same dynamic and place same into the strike (for training purposes) as I've described above.  The purpose of the cambering (multipurpose is to DEVELOP, then engage the mind & body unity, aiding & supplementing the down block dynamic, yet simultaneously positioning the hand & arm & entire body for the next technique preparing & facilitating continuous action (step & straight punch).
|
Looking at Shotokan this way.... pretty damn good martial arts.....
|
When you are facing me as an opponent, you are not facing some cut & paste-a bunch of techniques guy-regurgitating some gambit done in shadowboxing (or tricky bunaki routine) ....  You are looking at a mentally disciplined fighter who can put varying degrees of whole body power into intelligent technique or tactics that can change & adapt in the blink of an eye.  This is TMA.  Shotokan trained true to principle can give you this....  Certain Other TMA styles probably do it better... they're harder to master....
|
EDIT: GOOD LUCK
.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

Would I say Gichin Funakoshi who created a popular karate style for the masses, a style the I personally don't like, DUMB?  No, I would NOT call the man who stressed the Taikyoku kata dumb.  It's quite the opposite.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

RELATION TO UFC 187: WEIDMAN - BELFORT.
|
Two quick lessons (all breathe a sigh of relief):
|
1. Belfort started out doing well in the striking, succumbed to what?  GNP.  As a striker or MMA fighter, you never want be caught in GNP.  No better lesson than the Gracie's gave us.
|
2. The MMA striking exhibition by both wasn't anything near the precision TMA exercise I described above.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

STEPHEN THOMPSON VS. ROBERT WHITTAKER / UFC 170.
|
Here's what I like to see from TMA fighters in MMA.  Now "WONDERBOY" IS definately a sport-karate fighter, IMO.  Yet how much of his TMA base is in what we see/




|
One interesting fact here is that Whittaker is reported to have a black-belt in karate.  There's no traditional karate in Whittaker, that I see.  Whittaker depends on reactions, the sport MA model.  Whittaker, what I see, is not a mentally disciplined fighter.  Wide swings that go swoosh.
|
To what extent Thompson is an athlete (certainly is), a sport karate fighter (relies on reactions, programmed gambits--YES), has a mentally disciplined TMA base (I would say by observing him, he employs KIME).
|
The main difference between Whittaker and Thompson, IM), is Whittaker doesn't exhibit KIME; Thompson's form while extended, exaggerated & certainly departure from ideal traditional form, is very similar to IPPON KUMITE, and his engaging, intent  & targeting is plain, suggesting the presence of KIME.
|
The difference between MMA conventionally & TMA traditionally is the degree of presence or execution of KIME in competition.  Reaction vs. Focus, to decide.
|
KIME=an explicitly huge cornerstone of the karate we love to hate, Shotokan.
|
EDIT: not to be an MMA blog junkie, but I can feel that straight punch crashing into Whittaker's face through the computer////


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> L. O. L.
> 
> yup....
> 
> ...



Which is the point made about evolving. Kickboxing is absorbing new concepts. For karate to flourish it needs to as well.


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> STEPHEN THOMPSON VS. ROBERT WHITTAKER / UFC 170.
> |
> Here's what I like to see from TMA fighters in MMA.  Now "WONDERBOY" IS definately a sport-karate fighter, IMO.  Yet how much of his TMA base is in what we see/
> 
> ...



The issue you have is you set This standard of the traditional karate guy. And then wonder why people are using a different method to be successful at fighting.

If your traditional karate method is not represented then it probably doesn't work as dominantly as you believe.

Especially when you have highly trained exponents of the art engaged in that competition.

And swooshing punches are better than tappy tap stuff in a full contact fight.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

AND NO, I DON'T NEED A CORNER MAN....


----------



## Drose427 (May 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> The issue you have is you set This standard of the traditional karate guy. And then wonder why people are using a different method to be successful at fighting.
> 
> If your traditional karate method is not represented then it probably doesn't work as dominantly as you believe.
> 
> ...




This problem here, is various styles of karate HAVE been represented very well in MMA and Kickboxing for many many years not.

Heck at UFC 187, Rogan went on and on about how Uriah Hall was fighting "Karate Style" as opposed to the more common MT/ Boxing Style.

And Kickboxing doesnt really need to be explained


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> This problem here, is various styles of karate HAVE been represented very well in MMA and Kickboxing for many many years not.
> 
> Heck at UFC 187, Rogan went on and on about how Uriah Hall was fighting "Karate Style" as opposed to the more common MT/ Boxing Style.
> 
> And Kickboxing doesnt really need to be explained



I think you will find that karate with focus on solid basics,alive training,sparring,conditioning and so on is different to shoto noobs karate which is mental clarity and some sort of supernatural ability derived from kata.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> The issue you have is you set This standard of the traditional karate guy. And then wonder why people are using a different method to be successful at fighting.


|
Traditional karate is hard to do.  So people do something easier.  Traditional karate is hard to do correctly.  So People doing it do it incorrectly, and then like HAnZou, claim it doesn't work.



drop bear said:


> If your traditional karate method is not represented then it probably doesn't work as dominantly as you believe.


|
You mean I have demonstrated it where I train, but not @ Ray Longo's/////
/
Longo's personal demo's on YT are very impressive.  Only way to beat him is to out-KIME him.....



drop bear said:


> Especially when you have highly trained exponents of the art engaged in that competition.


|
On the contrary,  the best TMA's in my area, who actually most train kung fu, spend all their time & effort training for benefit and to develop skill, not getting their head pounded in for 5 rounds like Machida did against Weidman, and then saying I need to evolve.  don't me wrong, I love Machida.  It's a personal choice on how to expend one's time & energy.



drop bear said:


> And swooshing punches are better than tappy tap stuff in a full contact fight.


I must have worn K_MAN out, 'cause we getting a little 'fluffy' here.
|
I'll put it this way.  Can the vast majority of those engaged or interesting in MMA take a break from the heavy bag and a hiatus from the Dana White TUF house in Vegas to crack a Shotokan curriculum text Gichin Funakoshi wise?  My view, NO & Double NO. And the Robert Whittaker experience against WONDERBOY's karate base is the outcome....  That is precisely the issue.....
'------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Incidentally, WONDERBOY 'S next fight is against Jake Ellenberger in JULY?  Hope Wonderboy does his training better than the athletics of his open workout against Matt Brown, who gave Wonderboy a BAD beatdown....


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I think you will find that karate with focus on solid basics,alive training,sparring,conditioning and so on is different to shoto noobs karate which is mental clarity and some sort of supernatural ability derived from kata.


|
Come on now,  there's MT guys heaping all kinds of praise on kata, excuse me poomse over at the Recent TKD T on the Woman TKD Poomse Champion.....
|
And you have MT guys all over the mental clarity concept, so how does one get it?  Don't concede to "shotonoob....."  I know, I burs-ted the Gracie BJJ over Striker bubble, now the video  of Rolles getting "rolled" doesn't work....


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> AND NO, I DON'T NEED A CORNER MAN....




Because you are not a professional fighter.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

Anyway, I gave a ton of material to chew on.  Fussing away only solidifies my point about insufficient mental discipline....
\
Some of the Matt Thorton "speak" is really entertaining if that's where you guys are headed.  Like there is no such thing as an 'advanced technique.'  Or real martial arts are 'functional.'  He's got great buzzwords he throws out there.  Haven't listed to recall.
|
Taikyoku kata, UGH, for babies--YEAH.  I'm @ Twin Peaks now, give me my cold beer.  I deserve cold beer.  Don't ask me what I'm thinking, just pay attention to me pretty girl in front of the guys.  Pretty please, cold beer.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Because you are not a professional fighter.


|
All I need is cold beer, SEE ABOVE...
|
EDIT: Well the 2nd degree black-belt instructor who was working with me came over after I defeated the senior-belt kickboxer in the opening seconds of "round 1,"  Her corner woman input was "WOW."


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Because you are not a professional fighter.


|
Additional response: It's RollesGracie who needs a corner man, er a different corner man? Go help him out.  At Twin Peaks, over a cold beer, pretty please....


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Come on now,  there's MT guys heaping all kinds of praise on kata, excuse me poomse over at the Recent TKD T on the Woman TKD Poomse Champion.....
> |
> And you have MT guys all over the mental clarity concept, so how does one get it?  Don't concede to "shotonoob....."  I know, I burs-ted the Gracie BJJ over Striker bubble, now the video  of Rolles getting "rolled" doesn't work....



There are MT guys still heaping praise on downward elbows for a double leg defence.

I have no issue with kata. I have an issue with the creationist theory of kata.

"god created kata perfect and we as lesser humans do not understand its true potential. Due to the slow decline of martial arts ability from master to student. So if the kata does not work it is the fault of the martial artist"

I prefer the Dawin model. "some guy created kata and he probably did not have all the answers when he did so. So as martial arts evolves through being subjected to adversity and diversity. The kata will eventually be found wanting. And will need to be trained in context."

I even have no issue with mental clarity. I just think you raise a simple process of achieving hard tasks diligently to some sort of cult mysticism. 

And there is very little evidence of the shotonoob method working.


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> All I need is cold beer, SEE ABOVE...
> |
> EDIT: Well the 2nd degree black-belt instructor who was working with me came over after I defeated the senior-belt kickboxer in the opening seconds of "round 1,"  Her corner woman input was "WOW."



Wow indeed.

I have no gauge on the quality of this kickboxer you defeated. What is his professional fight record.


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Additional response: It's RollesGracie who needs a corner man, er a different corner man? Go help him out.  At Twin Peaks, over a cold beer, pretty please....



Every professional fighter I know needs a corner man. Except you. And you don't fight. See the difference?

Now I don't fight either but I am not saying I do or do not need one. I would take the advice of those who do fight. And they say I need one.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> There are MT guys still heaping praise on downward elbows for a double leg defence.
> 
> I have no issue with kata. I have an issue with the creationist theory of kata.
> 
> "god created kata perfect and we as lesser humans do not understand its true potential. Due to the slow decline of martial arts ability from master to student. So if the kata does not work it is the fault of the martial artist"


.
|
You should bring Matt Thorton's buzzwords to really add "punch."  Hey if kata doesn't work, we can always blame Gichin Funakoshi.  Over a cold beer, pretty girl bring me one RIGHT AWAY....  I really got to get those Matt Thorton buzzwords down.  Would be great resource for you.....



drop bear said:


> I prefer the Dawin model. "some guy created kata and he probably did not have all the answers when he did so. So as martial arts evolves through being subjected to adversity and diversity. The kata will eventually be found wanting. And will need to be trained in context."


|
GESSE, I definitely thought bringing the teachings of Funakoshi in was too much to ask.  You've  trumped me by going to DARWIN.  I surrender.  I know some of you are professional writers and expert bloggers but can I switch tables?  The TWin Peaks waitress over there has an inviting look about her.  Mine thinks I'm a dork.


drop bear said:


> I even have no issue with mental clarity. I just think you raise a simple process of achieving hard tasks diligently to some sort of cult mysticism


|
Thanks [Matt Thorton].  Martial arts is a simple process.  I need a buzzword to go with my cold beer.



drop bear said:


> And there is very little evidence of the shotonoob method working.


\
I would direct you to the TKD woman champion poomse T.  ON way to Twin Peaks, of course.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Every professional fighter I know needs a corner man. Except you. And you don't fight. See the difference?


Yeah, unfortunately over the internet it's rhetoric.


drop bear said:


> Now I don't fight either but I am not saying I do or do not need one. I would take the advice of those who do fight. And they say I need one.


You'd go with convention.  Hopefully that would benefit.  Rolles Gracie failed to make it minute or so through Round 1.  Hello corner man-- from unconscious land.
|
Anyway, you can argue.  Be nice to see what others have to compare about the Rolles Gracie lost vid, except now it's not functioning.....
|
I'm going to be forced to go to Twin Peaks myself.  Would you be my cornerman there with the waitress ladies I mean?.  My karate dissertation is going to fall flat for sure.  Matt Thorton would kick my butt @ Twin Peaks, for sure.
|
EDIT: Enjoyed the banter.  CHOW.


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> Yeah, unfortunately over the internet it's rhetoric.
> You'd go with convention.  Hopefully that would benefit.  Rolles Gracie failed to make it minute or so through Round 1.  Hello corner man-- from unconscious land.
> |
> Anyway, you can argue.  Be nice to see what others have to compare about the Rolles Gracie lost vid, except now it's not functioning.....
> ...



Ok. Who fights at an elite level without corner men?

Once you have figured that out. We might be able to work out if you need one or not. Going off the experience of someone who has actually done it.

But convention would be the sensible course as neither of us are speaking from experience.


----------



## K-man (May 26, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> My main issue with Shotokan is simple; Its a modern martial art trapped in a traditional mind set. That causes the entire system to be somewhat scatter-brained, and frankly saps away at its effectiveness as a martial system.


Perhaps your main problem is that you were too young to understand when you started Shotokan and later you did not _*want*_ to understand, as is the still the case.

I would also suspect that; _"That causes the entire system to be somewhat scatter-brained, and frankly saps away at its effectiveness as a martial system"_, could be interpreted as style bashing.



Hanzou said:


> I would have loved to have the option of taking Boxing or Muay Thai at my Shotokan school, but again due to its traditionalist trappings, that wasn't going to happen.


So what prevented you from cross training? Why would you expect a Shotokan school to start teaching other arts? Most people go to a Shotokan school to learn Shotokan karate. Did it ever occur to you that it was you, not the Shotokan karate, that was lacking?



Hanzou said:


> That openness to different approaches is what makes Bjj so effective. It isn't trapped by the confines of tradition, its free to evolve and adapt to rapid changes of the MA landscape. When karate looks to evolve it attempts to create new moves from its katas instead of looking at approaches from competing styles. That's like saying we already have all the answers, so there's no need to incorporate new methods or approaches. Its backwards religious dogma at its finest.


Again you are demonstrating you total ignorance of kata. There is no changing of the kata, there is no creating new moves in a kata, but of course you know that and in another post you admitted to understanding, but here you are peddling more rubbish that is patently untrue because what you say suits your agenda. The kata is the kata. If you don't want to do learn kata, that's fine, just stop making up nonsense to try to paint kata in a poor light.

Karate may or may not need to incorporate new methods depending on the style and what it teaches, but either way it wouldn't be the kata that changes. It would be the curriculum.



Hanzou said:


> Why not ditch the traditional kata, and remake them into kata more based around actually fighting similar to what Ashihara and Enshin karate did? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not utilize modern training methods found in boxing or other sports methods in order to improve the output and fighting ability of your students in less time? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition. Why not bring in full time instructors from other disciplines to teach your students alongside their karate training? Oh yeah that's right, because of tradition.
> 
> That's the difference between Bjj and Shotokan. Its also the difference between MMA and TMAs in general.


Did it ever occur to you that people study kata because they want to learn kata? Who has the knowledge to remake the kata? You? I wouldn't be able to and I have worked on kata and it's application intensively, for many years. But the bunkai of kata is based on actual fighting and anyone is free to develop the bunkai to suit their individual style of fighting. I would suggest you are in no position to address the differences between MMA and TMAs because you have no understanding of TMAs and have no interest in developing an understanding of TMAs.

Did it ever occur to you that people might want to learn karate for reasons other than fighting? Even then, why would anyone learning Shotokan want to do your sort of fighting? Surely if they wanted to do that they would join an MMA gym. Why would older people be at all interested in what you do? It has nothing at all to do with tradition. We are happy with what we do and are constantly pissed off by your constant put downs and disparaging remarks.


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

K-man said:


> Perhaps your main problem is that you were too young to understand when you started Shotokan and later you did not _*want*_ to understand, as is the still the case.
> 
> I would also suspect that; _"That causes the entire system to be somewhat scatter-brained, and frankly saps away at its effectiveness as a martial system"_, could be interpreted as style bashing.



You don't even do Shotokan, so why do you care what I have to say about it?




> So what prevented you from cross training?



My instructor discouraged it, and my parents wouldn't have been able to afford me taking multiple MAs.



> Why would you expect a Shotokan school to start teaching other arts? Most people go to a Shotokan school to learn Shotokan karate. Did it ever occur to you that it was you, not the Shotokan karate, that was lacking?



Of course, for quite some time in fact. However once I started taking Judo classes, I realized I was being shortchanged by Shotokan, and that other arts simply had better methodologies.




> Again you are demonstrating you total ignorance of kata. There is no changing of the kata, there is no creating new moves in a kata, but of course you know that and in another post you admitted to understanding, but here you are peddling more rubbish that is patently untrue because what you say suits your agenda. The kata is the kata. If you don't want to do learn kata, that's fine, just stop making up nonsense to try to paint kata in a poor light.
> 
> Karate may or may not need to incorporate new methods depending on the style and what it teaches, but either way it wouldn't be the kata that changes. It would be the curriculum.



The creators of Ashihara and Enshin karate changed or deleted Shotokan and Goju kata from their systems. That's what I'm talking about,?and frankly they should be applauded for it.




> Did it ever occur to you that people study kata because they want to learn kata? Who has the knowledge to remake the kata? You? I wouldn't be able to and I have worked on kata and it's application intensively, for many years. But the bunkai of kata is based on actual fighting and anyone is free to develop the bunkai to suit their individual style of fighting. I would suggest you are in no position to address the differences between MMA and TMAs because you have no understanding of TMAs and have no interest in developing an understanding of TMAs.



See above.



> I Did it ever occur to you that people might want to learn karate for reasons other than fighting? Even then, why would anyone learning Shotokan want to do your sort of fighting? Surely if they wanted to do that they would join an MMA gym. Why would older people be at all interested in what you do? It has nothing at all to do with tradition. We are happy with what we do and are constantly pissed off by your constant put downs and disparaging remarks.



Then be happy. I was simply giving my thoughts of the differences between Shotokan and Bjj. If you're offended by my viewpoint or opinion on my personal experiences, I would recommend you get a thicker skin.


----------



## Sub Zero (May 27, 2015)

drop bear said:


> The ring is kind of the definition of a non compliant person trying to hit you in the face.
> 
> I mean if you wanted to find the best test of objectives,in this case face hitting, then a ring will supply the best puncher with the most desire to punch you.


----------



## K-man (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> You don't even do Shotokan, so why do you care what I have to say about it?


I care because you equated all karate with Shotokan. I care because a lot of good people train Shotokan and Shotokan is not the problem. You are the problem. I suspect you probably had a good instructor, but with your attitude it is no wonder you learned very little in the short time you trained it.



Hanzou said:


> My instructor discouraged it, and my parents wouldn't have been able to afford me taking multiple MAs.


And you listened to your instructor? Cool, that must have been a first. FWIW, I have never heard of a decent instructor discouraging cross training, unless of course the student was struggling with the base style. Yep, that makes sense.



Hanzou said:


> Of course, for quite some time in fact. However once I started taking Judo classes, I realized I was being shortchanged by Shotokan, and that other arts simply had better methodologies.


No. You weren't being shortchanged at all. You never learned what was available. The fact that you weren't suited to Shotokan is one thing. Dissing on Shotokan because you didn't understand it reflects on you. Everything is someone else's fault.



Hanzou said:


> The creators of Ashihara and Enshin karate changed or deleted Shotokan and Goju kata from their systems. That's what I'm talking about,?and frankly they should be applauded for it.


Um, no! If my understanding is correct, both these styles derived from Kyokushin. Nothing to do with Goju or Shotokan.



Hanzou said:


> See above.


I did. You were wrong.




Hanzou said:


> Then be happy. I was simply giving my thoughts of the differences between Shotokan and Bjj. If you're offended by my viewpoint or opinion on my personal experiences, I would recommend you get a thicker skin.


I am not only offended by your viewpoint. I am constantly offended by your attitude. You have no respect for the practitioners of other styles and you are happy to misrepresent the facts to back your position. Nothing to do with thin skin.


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

K-man said:


> I care because you equated all karate with Shotokan. I care because a lot of good people train Shotokan and Shotokan is not the problem. You are the problem. I suspect you probably had a good instructor, but with your attitude it is no wonder you learned very little in the short time you trained it.



Meh, the instructor was okay. The art itself was far too limited in scope.



> And you listened to your instructor? Cool, that must have been a first. FWIW, I have never heard of a decent instructor discouraging cross training, unless of course the student was struggling with the base style. Yep, that makes sense.



Actually the instructor discouraged cross-training because he was afraid that his students would realize the weaknesses inherent in the style and go elsewhere. After my incident with the boxer, I was offered free classes to stay, since he needed instructors around my age range. I left anyway. There was no point in staying with a style that simply wasn't up to snuff.



> No. You weren't being shortchanged at all. You never learned what was available. The fact that you weren't suited to Shotokan is one thing. Dissing on Shotokan because you didn't understand it reflects on you. Everything is someone else's fault.



I find this line of thinking fascinating coming from someone who also practices Aikido and Krav Maga on top of his cherished Goju Ryu training. Ironically, the only difference between me and you is that you decided to continue practicing karate, and I chose to leave.



> Um, no! If my understanding is correct, both these styles derived from Kyokushin. Nothing to do with Goju or Shotokan.



Um, Kyokushin contains Shotokan and Goju katas.

Thanks.



> I am not only offended by your viewpoint. I am constantly offended by your attitude. You have no respect for the practitioners of other styles and you are happy to misrepresent the facts to back your position. Nothing to do with thin skin.



On the contrary, I have a great deal of respect for practitioners of many styles. I even have respect for a several karate styles and their practitioners.


----------



## lklawson (May 27, 2015)

drop bear said:


> That is not superior to punching people.


Both of them are the same blasted thing.   Boxers have known about, and used, the strike to the vagus nerve since before Sir Thomas Parkyns wrote about it in 1713.  This knowledge survived well into the 20th Century in boxing circles.  I came across a "boxing for self defense" newpaper article from the '30s which described it.

Peace favor your sword, 
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (May 27, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> IMO, you've really thought through the subject and are much more familiar with MMA than I.  Yet, in terms of coming to reasoned conclusions, here's where I'll step in by isolating out just one block of your post.  I'll abstract out the particular sentence.
> |
> I can't see why anyone would not agree with your first sentence. Perfectly stated.  I took out the last sentence because I want to tie down the issue before I would move to the changed environment.  To get at the "truth."
> ...


No one remembers Yukio Tani?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> One of Bjj's greatest strengths (and frankly its biggest advantage over Judo) is its ability to adapt and absorb other styles into its core. This never destroys Bjj as a system, it makes the overall system better. So if a Catch Wrestler comes into a Bjj school, and clowns the entire Bjj gym, the Bjj gym doesn't say that the Catch Wrestler was cheating, or doing something illegal, the Bjj gym would make the Catch Wrestler an instructor of some sort and have him teach the gym Catch Wrestling.


I lament the lack of basic history of Judo.  Tani and Uyenishi mixed it up with CaCC Wrestlers all the time.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 27, 2015)

lklawson said:


> No one remembers Yukio Tani?
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



Yukio Tani


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

lklawson said:


> I lament the lack of basic history of Judo.  Tani and Uyenishi mixed it up with CaCC Wrestlers all the time.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



I'm talking about modern Judo, not Judo at the turn of the 20th century.


----------



## K-man (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Meh, the instructor was okay. The art itself was far too limited in scope.


So you are admitting either it wasn't being taught to its full potential or you didn't understand it. If you were honest you might say that Shotokan didn't suit what you wanted to do. Why bag the style?



Hanzou said:


> Actually the instructor discouraged cross-training because he was afraid that his students would realize the weaknesses inherent in the style and go elsewhere. After my incident with the boxer, I was offered free classes to stay, since he needed instructors around my age range. I left anyway. There was no point in staying with a style that simply wasn't up to snuff.


In that case I would suggest that that would indicate an instructor who was insecure in his own knowledge or ability. I would encourage my students to cross train. That way they can understand that what they are learning is a great system and they can tweak it to make it better for them. If they have a specific interest in ground fighting, I would have no problem with them cross training BJJ.

Unfortunately we all have students at some time who just aren't capable of learning.



Hanzou said:


> I find this line of thinking fascinating coming from someone who also practices Aikido and Krav Maga on top of his cherished Goju Ryu training. Ironically, the only difference between me and you is that you decided to continue practicing karate, and I chose to leave.



Your choice to leave, your loss. What I found in Aikido was almost all in Goju, just I didn't know it. At the time I started Aikido I was still training the Japanese style. We were never taught the 'soft' part. Once I started the Okinawan Goju it was all there. I also studied Systema at that time, again because of the soft aspect. Basically the same principles are there and they have some very good strategies for fighting multiple attackers. You can apply those same principles to your karate.

As to Krav. I fell into Krav almost by accident, through some of my training partners, when the opportunity arose. Funny though, there is pretty much nothing in basic Krav that I don't teach to my karate guys. There are a limited number of ways to bend and break the human body. You can dress that up in different clothes but underneath much is the same.



Hanzou said:


> Um, Kyokushin contains Shotokan and Goju katas.
> 
> Thanks.


Your welcome. 

The Kyokushin guys study Kyokushin kata. Sure they were kata leaned by Oyama and taken from Goju and Shotokan but that is the end of it. If someone starts up a freestyle karate school without kata, that is their choice. In the instance you quoted those guys just wanted a full contact fighting style and didn't feel the need for kata, just like you. That doesn't invalidate kata.



Hanzou said:


> On the contrary, I have a great deal of respect for practitioners of many styles. I even have respect for a several karate styles and their practitioners.


Obviously very few, if any of them, are here on MT.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 27, 2015)

lklawson said:


> I lament the lack of basic history of Judo.  Tani and Uyenishi mixed it up with CaCC Wrestlers all the time.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


|
Thanks for bringing in specific examples re Judo....


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 27, 2015)

Quote from Article:
|
_*"The MMA Fighter should always dominate in the cage because that is the natural setting of his training."*_
|
I disagree.  Let me say the article was very well written & articulate.
|
The weakness lies in making an observation that environment impacts the participant, then concluding that the fighting environment is dominant  factor.  An of course then we have all kinds of environments.
|
My proposition is that within certain bounds, the training of the individual is the dominant factor.  I may go to Medical School to be a doctor, OR to Law School to become an attorney.  The functional environments for arguments sake are quite different, yet the mind is actively engaged in the performance of each.
|
The author to me, takes the side of  a Matt Thorton.  That you train to actual resistance.  So the environment of that resistance, the environment of actual contest defines your skill.  The fact that physical activity is involved, the assumption & conclusion are made that martial arts is largely a physical process.
\
My maxim is that you train to principle which then enables you to fight.  I myself never saw all the disconnect between preparing to fight in the dojo and preparing to fight in MMA.  The real overall training variable is the intensity of training to prepare for more difficult opponents.  Which is implicit in traditional karate training anyway.
|
Sure there are rules specific to MMA.  The global answer is that I use the same fundamental skills to punch my opponent in the head, whether I'm targeting the front of the head (allowed in MMA) or in the back of the head (not allowed in MMA).
|
The confusion clears when we treat fighting as a mental discipline, not a sport.  Traditional karate, TMA is a mental discipline where the conscious decisions rule over the inherent reactions or programmed techniques of sport training.  Reflexes & instincts are there, but one is not acting on instinct alone, and which are always subordinate & under guidance of the conscious mind.
|
The issue is well illustrated by those who propose that Kyokuhsin karate which does allow hand strikes to the opponent's  face, is at a disadvantage when practiced in MMA.  The similar--Matt Thorton-like conclusion is drawn that the Kyokushin fighter moving to MMA will have trouble effectively punching to the face, and will not likely be able to handle the MMA fighter who routinely punch to the face under the MMA rule set.
|
I pose the answer this way:  For the KYO competitor who practices sport (reactions) which omits facing punching, the above assertion will hold.
|
For the KYO practitioner who practices mental discipline, the mind simply redirects the hand strikes to the body only, to include the other target above the torso, the face.
|
Traditional karate is a mental discipline, not a set of really good knee-jerk reactions.


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

K-man said:


> So you are admitting either it wasn't being taught to its full potential or you didn't understand it. If you were honest you might say that Shotokan didn't suit what you wanted to do. Why bag the style?



Who's bagging the style? Just because it was limiting for me doesn't mean that it would be limiting for other people. I'm sure some people out there feel that Bjj is a limited style, that opinion doesn't bother me at all.

Like I said, you need to grow a thicker skin.




> In that case I would suggest that that would indicate an instructor who was insecure in his own knowledge or ability. I would encourage my students to cross train. That way they can understand that what they are learning is a great system and they can tweak it to make it better for them. If they have a specific interest in ground fighting, I would have no problem with them cross training BJJ.
> 
> Unfortunately we all have students at some time who just aren't capable of learning.



Or simply become disillusioned with a style, and decide that its time to move on?





> Your choice to leave, your loss.



In the years since leaving Shotokan, I've ran across my share of karate practitioners. I'm quite pleased with my decision, and if I could do it over again, I would have just began with Bjj or Judo when I was a kid. The grappling arts are simply a better fit for me for a variety of reasons. The lack of katas, specific stances, board breaking, and 10 year old black belts being big parts of it.



> The Kyokushin guys study Kyokushin kata. Sure they were kata leaned by Oyama and taken from Goju and Shotokan but that is the end of it. If someone starts up a freestyle karate school without kata, that is their choice. In the instance you quoted those guys just wanted a full contact fighting style and didn't feel the need for kata, just like you. That doesn't invalidate kata.



Where did I say it invalidated kata? I was simply pointing out to you that there were Japanese masters who changed and altered kata to their liking, proving that its not some sacred cow that can't be changed.



> Obviously very few, if any of them, are here on MT.



Actually there's quite a few here on MT. You shouldn't immediately take a critical viewpoint on various MAs as disrespect. Like I said, grow a thicker skin.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 27, 2015)

HERE'S THE KYOKUSHIN VERSION OF THAT TAIKYOKU KATA SOME LOVE TO HATE:




|
EDIT: couldn't get the KYO YT version to work.  Put up a Shotokan-derived version.
||
TO ALL WHO DON'T GET WHY HERE'S WHY I DON'T NEED A CORNERMAN:
1. The Kyokushin karate curriculum contains basic level kata that physically demonstrates punches to the face or head.  So we have kihon & kata in Kyo that train punching technique specifically to the head.
2. I go to KYO kumite in the morning where I can not punch to the head.  So I will my body to punch to the body.
3. I go to MMA in the afternoon.  I will my body to punch to both the body & the head.
|
4. MATT THORTON CAMP: Oh, the Matt thorton resistance camp cries.  But in Kyokushin sparring you can't punch to head so your body, your thinking will not be used to doing head punches.  When MMA sparring in the afternoon.
5. SHOTONOOB: No problem to make the adjustment.  Replace "will" with KIME.  I'm not just thinking about throwing a punch, I'm mentally KIME'ing a punch.  I can KIME a punch [technique] low (the low block in Taikyoku kata), I can KIME a punch middle (the front middle punch in Taikyou kata), or I can KIME punch high (the front high punch in Taikyoku kata).
\
Under traditional karate, the physical form of the move is not the driver.  Repetition of physical moves over & over is not the driver, Mental discipline is the driver and the physical technique the vector.
|
So in kihon KYO done to traditional karate standards (TMU) we KIME low when it makes sense to physically make a low technique. we KIM middle when a middle technique is called for, and we KIME high in MMA when a high technique works or is called for.  The process of KIME in actual fighting is the universal driver, not re actively do layups because basketball allows them....
|
That's my thesis of where TMA is on the "circle," compared to sport-based fighting we see conventionally in MMA....


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 27, 2015)

When I engaged in traditional martial arts, I came to see the carryover from Shotokan, the Taikyoku kata, to Kyokushin, the Pinan Kata Sono Ni kata, Korean karate such as TAng Soo Do-- Hyung Ee bu hyung example above, the common, classical development of mental discipline, KIME, et al. across the traditional karate arts...
|
For K-Man, the same dynamic would be first found in the Pinan Nidan kata of certain Okinawan karate systems.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 27, 2015)

The Article's Author Calls for Resistance Training to Prove TMA.
|
The Author Calls for the reality testing of someone trying to punch you in the face.  Again, the Matt Thorton idea, in a nutshell.  The Author says, _*"Perhaps your movements are perfect but you have no concept of timing or strategy."*_
|
I'm all for reality testing.  What I am really for is mental discipline.
|
What the author should have said is," the TMA practitioner (or Matt thorton MMA practitioner) who is acting out physically, repeating physical moves he has been shown and recreating a physical exercise, will have no concept of timing or strategy.  IOW, NO KIME.  The active mind is all concentrated at-- I took a step the way I was shown.  This is the very beginning phase of TMA.  We are just memorizing physical steps.  In sports, we hone that memorization to an extremely high level so layups become reactive, 2nd nature.
|
In TMA, we're starting the same but going somewhere else.  We are going to KIME.  K_MAN, brought up the Shotokan (Okinawan) term "mushin."  Where's mushin taught in basketball? Where's mushin in Matt's alive free-contact sparring?  It might be around somewhere.  In traditional karate we are striving through practice of the traditional exercises, mental development as the main capability.  Mental development that then melds, yet controls & direct the physical actions at will, in a precise and targeted specific manner.
|
In Hyung Ee Bu above.  Rolles Gracie reaches for my leg for a single leg TD.  I step and throw off his cadence in the attack.  I low block and knock or impede his reaching arm.  Rolles stunned at the decisiveness of my action backs up an regroups for a body grab.  I step in a punch him in the face as his arms extend to my torso for the TD.  THE REAL PROCESS IS NOT IN THE SIMULATED MOVES, IT'S INTERNAL, THE DEVELOPING MIND CONTROLLING PRECISELY THE BODY'S STRENGTH & MOVEMENT IN A DELIBERATE WAY.
|
The reason TMA's have no concept of strategy of timing or strategy is because the mind is lazy.  Rather than develop the mental abilities, acquire the mental qualifies spelled out in the Shotokan karate manual or  in the Tang Soo do manual, they want to learn a move, then bust-a-move on their opponent.  The latter is Matt Thorton style, not TMA.
|
If you claim to be a TMA and the bolded quote above fits you.... Don't throw a punch without a corner-man....saying how to do it or how to change it.  To me, the FIRST CAUSE kata tell me to KIME low when needed, under the aegis of Zanshin.  Under the implementation of KIME.  Under the unbrella of Mushin.
|
This stuff is not simple to comprehend, train and even harder to enact.  This, however is what TMA is doing.  When done competently, the martial skill level eclipse conventional MMA many fold.
|
KATA CRITICS: over & out....


----------



## drop bear (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Who's bagging the style? Just because it was limiting for me doesn't mean that it would be limiting for other people. I'm sure some people out there feel that Bjj is a limited style, that opinion doesn't bother me at all.
> 
> Like I said, you need to grow a thicker skin.
> 
> ...



Ironically the kata no kata thing is now being reflected in grappling with gi and no gi. With the argument that you don't fight in one so why train in one? As well as some commentary about bjj being a bit precious.

Personally I am not fussed and will do either.


----------



## Steve (May 27, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ironically the kata no kata thing is now being reflected in grappling with gi and no gi. With the argument that you don't fight in one so why train in one? As well as some commentary about bjj being a bit precious.
> 
> Personally I am not fussed and will do either.


lol.  You're making that up, unless these people are suggesting it's typical to fight in board shorts and a cup.  

Regarding Bjj being precious... Well, that might be a little true,


----------



## drop bear (May 27, 2015)

Steve said:


> lol.  You're making that up, unless these people are suggesting it's typical to fight in board shorts and a cup.
> 
> Regarding Bjj being precious... Well, that might be a little true,



Because we now have variations on themes like sub wrestling and no gi competitions. There becomes this divide to what you can use gi and no gi.  Then you have this divide between what you can use punching and no punching.

And the argument is you can use no gi in a gi but cant use gi in no gi as easily.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 27, 2015)

drop bear said:


> And the argument is you can use no gi in a gi but cant use gi in no gi as easily.


If you start from no gi, it's easy to move into gi. The other way around may not be true. Of course you can consider:

- gi as winter time ski slope combat skill.
- no gi as summer time sand beach combat skill.


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ironically the kata no kata thing is now being reflected in grappling with gi and no gi. With the argument that you don't fight in one so why train in one? As well as some commentary about bjj being a bit precious.
> 
> Personally I am not fussed and will do either.



I don't see the similarities honestly. Both gi and nogi have pretty straightforward and clear applications. Hard to say the same about kata.


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you start from no gi, it's easy to move into gi. The other way around may not be true. Of course you can consider:
> 
> - gi as winter time ski slope combat skill.
> - no gi as summer time sand beach combat skill.



I don't agree. Guys who go from nogi to gi have a bit of a rougher time dealing with the extra handles that gis provide. I went from gi to nogi, and had little issue. Nogi guys get caught in collar chokes constantly for example.


----------



## Steve (May 27, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Because we now have variations on themes like sub wrestling and no gi competitions. There becomes this divide to what you can use gi and no gi.  Then you have this divide between what you can use punching and no punching.
> 
> And the argument is you can use no gi in a gi but cant use gi in no gi as easily.


That's actually not true though.   No Gi you can do a lot of things due to the lack of friction.  Guys with no Gi experience get very frustrated when they put in a jacket.  

I get your point.  I just think it's funny.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> I don't agree. Guys who go from nogi to gi have a bit of a rougher time dealing with the extra handles that gis provide. I went from gi to nogi, and had little issue. Nogi guys get caught in collar chokes constantly for example.


There are a set of special skills (such as "how to break monster grips") that will be needed in Gi and there is no argument on that.

If all your throws depend heavily on "sleeve hold" and "lapel hold", when your opponent has T-shirt on, you will have hard time to make your throws work.







On the other hand, this throw will work in both gi and no gi.


----------



## Dirty Dog (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> I don't see the similarities honestly. Both gi and nogi have pretty straightforward and clear applications. Hard to say the same about kata.



Not really. I find the applications in kata straightforward and clear.
It's probably a mistake to assume that others have the same comprehension problems that you do.


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> There are a set of special skills (such as "how to break monster grips") that will be needed in Gi and there is no argument on that.
> 
> If all your throws depend heavily on "sleeve hold" and "lapel hold", when your opponent has T-shirt on, you will have hard time to make your throws work. Also without Gi, it's hard to pull and some pulling set up will be hard to apply.



And see, this is kind of funny because takedowns/throws in Bjj tend to be Nogi, unlike Judo throws that usually grip the lapel and sleeve.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> And see, this is kind of funny because takedowns/throws in Bjj tend to be Nogi, unlike Judo throws that usually grip the lapel and sleeve.


Do BJJ "pull guard" and "jump guard" both require "double lapel hold"? How will a BJJ guy execute his "leg lift (Uchi Mata)" throw?

In no gi, the "leg lift" sleeve hold and lapel hold can be replaced by arm wrap and under hook.


----------



## Hanzou (May 27, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Do BJJ "pull guard" and "jump guard" both require "double lapel hold"?



Good question. I don't tend to pull guard, mainly because I'm too big to be jumping on people, and I personally don't like to start from guard position. You'd have to ask someone who does it. I know it can be done in nogi because it's done in competition all the time.




> In no gi, the "leg lift" sleeve hold and lapel hold can be replaced by arm wrap and under hook.



Yep, that's how it's done.


----------



## drop bear (May 27, 2015)

Steve said:


> That's actually not true though.   No Gi you can do a lot of things due to the lack of friction.  Guys with no Gi experience get very frustrated when they put in a jacket.
> 
> I get your point.  I just think it's funny.
> 
> ...



Yes but you are taking advantages away when you take the gi away. And have to contend with less handles and more slipperiness.

And the game changes. Now whether you are going to fight a guy in gi type clothing or in less suitable clothing becomes the issue.


----------



## drop bear (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> And see, this is kind of funny because takedowns/throws in Bjj tend to be Nogi, unlike Judo throws that usually grip the lapel and sleeve.



There is some judo that works and some that needs to be modified. Wrestling works pretty much regardless.


----------



## drop bear (May 27, 2015)

Just a quick random vid and that top guys have an opinion on this gi no gi business.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 27, 2015)

*I have found* that people who primarily train no gi are very, very frustrated when they first start
training in a gi.  Where as people who predominantly train in a gi transition easily to no gi.


----------



## K-man (May 27, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Who's bagging the style? Just because it was limiting for me doesn't mean that it would be limiting for other people. I'm sure some people out there feel that Bjj is a limited style, that opinion doesn't bother me at all.


If that was all you have ever said, we wouldn't be having this conversation. In all my time at MT nobody has bagged other styles as you have done. I have not seen anyone bag BJJ as a style, ever.



Hanzou said:


> Like I said, you need to grow a thicker skin.


And I think you should stick to the facts and stop twisting the truth.



Hanzou said:


> Or simply become disillusioned with a style, and decide that its time to move on?


Again, if you had done that we wouldn't be here. It was your dummy spit on Shotokan that started it. I became disillusioned with Japanese Goju in a manner of speaking but I don't dump on it. It was an excellent grounding, but when I saw the Okinawan style I had to change.



Hanzou said:


> In the years since leaving Shotokan, I've ran across my share of karate practitioners. I'm quite pleased with my decision, and if I could do it over again, I would have just began with Bjj or Judo when I was a kid. The grappling arts are simply a better fit for me for a variety of reasons. The lack of katas, specific stances, board breaking, and 10 year old black belts being big parts of it.


Lol! We don't have junior black belts and I am against giving out black belts who can't live up to their rank. I don't even teach juniors. I have no issue with someone moving on and I have no issue if someone says I would have been better doing something different. Hindsight has 20/20 vision. I would have started with Okinawan Goju knowing what I know now but it wasn't available to me at that time. I don't for a moment regret the training I did.



Hanzou said:


> Where did I say it invalidated kata? I was simply pointing out to you that there were Japanese masters who changed and altered kata to their liking, proving that its not some sacred cow that can't be changed.


So why throw out kata if it is a valid form of training? Yes, may have been Japanese masters who changed kata and there were many others who didn't. Were the changes cosmetic or was there a change of the applications? Perhaps you would like to post a reference to these changes so we could look into it more deeply.



Hanzou said:


> Actually there's quite a few here on MT. You shouldn't immediately take a critical viewpoint on various MAs as disrespect. Like I said, grow a thicker skin.


Like I said, stop bagging other styles and other people. There are light years between 'a critical viewpoint' and your comments.


----------



## elder999 (May 28, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> And see, this is kind of funny because takedowns/throws in Bjj tend to be Nogi, unlike Judo throws that usually grip the lapel and sleeve.


Almost all judo throws have alternate grips for no gi....though not all schools teach them.....I particularly like _tai otoshi_ with a throat grip....you like Ronda Rousey's no-gi workout. Do you actually think she _invented_ that?
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





I mean, do you really think there's _anything_ she knows from judo that Gene LeBell, and Gokor, and Garo Parisyan didn't already know?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 28, 2015)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Where as people who predominantly train in a gi transition easily to no gi.


Have to disagree with you on this. When you switch from gi to no gi, you will lose the ability to use:

- "pulling" to set up pushing,
- monster grips to disable your opponent's movement.
- stiff arms to hold your opponent away.
- ...

IMO, not to be able to pull can be the major concern in no gi. Of course you can pull your opponent's:

- neck,
- wrist,
- elbow,
- shoulder,
- ...

Since it's different pulling from the lapel pulling, you may need to train those new pulling from ground zero if you have not done that before.

The Judo foot sweep is a good example. It may require to use pushing to set up pulling.


----------



## drop bear (May 28, 2015)

K-man said:


> So why throw out kata if it is a valid form of training? Yes, may have been Japanese masters who changed kata and there were many others who didn't. Were the changes cosmetic or was there a change of the applications? Perhaps you would like to post a reference to these changes so we could look into it more deeply.



You are going to have to cope with the idea that not everybody likes kata as well though.

There are going to be different levels of commitment to different sorts of training. 

Otherwise everybody is going to be style bashing every time they have an opinion.

It is exactly like the gi no gi thing. Yet nobody is dummy spitting over it.


----------



## Buka (May 28, 2015)

An MMAist, a TMAist and a McDojoite walk into a organic biker bar owned by a bisexual boxer and his Republican wife. A religious arguement blares over the speakers as the patrons, gathered around lap tops and tablets opened to Martial Talk, argue in sign language with one hand while snapping their fingers to the tune of West Side Story with the other.

A man stands and asks, "Am I the meanest, am I the prettiest, am I the baddest mofo low down around this town?"

Fortunately, nobody gives a F, someone yells "Last Call" and the joke ends. Might be a good idea for this thread.


----------



## K-man (May 28, 2015)

drop bear said:


> You are going to have to cope with the idea that not everybody likes kata as well though.
> 
> There are going to be different levels of commitment to different sorts of training.
> 
> ...


I don't have an issue with people not liking kata. I don't have an issue with people who don't wish to learn kata. I am the first to agree that you don't need kata to fight. I have an issue when someone with no understanding of kata goes out of his way continuously to dump on it. That goes way beyond opinion. 

I could have the opinion that ABC style doesn't have enough ground game. I could have yet he opinion that XYZ style wouldn't stand up in the ring. That's perfectly ok. What is not ok is when I call ABC style a total waste of time or XYZ style is useless and they should throw out their kata and instead do some proper training. There is a vast difference about discussing the strengths and weaknesses of a style in a respectful manner and the type of rhetoric we have had to put up with for the past 12 months. That type of disrespectful posting belongs on forums like Bullshido where anything goes. 

As to being anything like Gi/no Gi ... nothing like that at all. That is just opinion of two different ways of grappling. No one is dumping on one way or the other.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 28, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Have to disagree with you on this. When you switch from gi to no gi, you will lose the ability to use:
> 
> - "pulling" to set up pushing,
> - monster grips to disable your opponent's movement.
> ...



*Your welcome to think that and it may be true for you personally* but most exponents of BJJ will agree that it is an easy transition to no gi.   While someone who is just starting training in the gi from a grappling background will have a harder time.  I had this conversation with a BJJ instructor just the other day and we both agreed.  Personally, I have grappled with many collegiate level wrestlers through the years and always enjoyed it when they started using the gi.  It slowed them down and I was able to attack in ways they could not defend.  They were very frustrated on average.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 28, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Almost all judo throws have alternate grips for no gi....though not all schools teach them.....I particularly like _tai otoshi_ with a throat grip....you like Ronda Rousey's no-gi workout. Do you actually think she _invented_ that?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've never seen tai otoshi with a throat grip and I'm having a hard time visualizing it. Do you have any video clips?


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 28, 2015)

Admittedly this was a long time ago (Enter the Dragon was a brand new movie), and I was just a kid, but I can't remember any throws, that I learned in Japanese Jujutsu, that grabbed the Gi. The arm, the person the legs but never the Gi all by itself.


----------



## drop bear (May 28, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> Admittedly this was a long time ago (Enter the Dragon was a brand new movie), and I was just a kid, but I can't remember any throws, that I learned in Japanese Jujutsu, that grabbed the Gi. The arm, the person the legs but never the Gi all by itself.



I did jj as a kid. There were definitely gi only throws.


----------



## elder999 (May 28, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I've never seen tai otoshi with a throat grip and I'm having a hard time visualizing it. Do you have any video clips?



*No. *No video. I usually don't even talk about it, or show it to lots of people.....

Imagine it this way, though:instead of from the _kumi kata_ position, _tori_ is responding to a strike or weapon attack-the weapon arm is intercepted by stepping in and capturing with one hand, while the opposite hand forcefully strikes/seizes the throat-_tori_ has almost stepped into a front stance, and simply turns into _tai otoshi._.....naturally, we don't get to practice this one too much-though we do practice it, from time to time....I think in _Ch'ang Shih Tai Chi Chuan_ it's called _monkey seizes peach_, but that's all I'm gonna say about it here, Tony....



drop bear said:


> I did jj as a kid. There were definitely gi only throws.



Or, there were throws that you only _practiced_ gripping the _gi_, in order to practice safely, and didn't ever try to imagine how you'd do them to someone in a T-shirt, or no shirt at all......??


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 28, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I did jj as a kid. There were definitely gi only throws.



I don't doubt that, but I don't remember any, but then things were different in MA over 40 years ago, we didn't have a mat either, just a hard carpeted floor, Although it would not surprise me if there were Gi grab throws, I just don't remember them


----------



## lklawson (May 28, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> I'm talking about modern Judo, not Judo at the turn of the 20th century.


You mean the Judo that people, still alive and training, complain has been too sportified by inclusion in the Olympics who then, after complaining about the Olympics, continue thence to teach Judo as they were taught, in direct line back to turn of the century?  That Judo?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## elder999 (May 28, 2015)

lklawson said:


> You mean the Judo that people, still alive and training, complain has been too sportified by inclusion in the Olympics who then, after complaining about the Olympics, continue thence to teach Judo as they were taught, in direct line back to turn of the century?  That Judo?
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



*QFT*, and because I can't "like," *and* "agree, *and* "funny," at the same time.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 28, 2015)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> but most exponents of BJJ will agree that it is an easy transition to no gi.  ..., I have grappled with many collegiate level wrestlers through the years and always enjoyed it when they started using the gi.  It slowed them down and I was able to attack in ways they could not defend.  They were very frustrated on average.



The gi and no gi may not make much different in the ground game. it makes a big difference in the stand up game. Since a BJJ guy still have to play the stand up game before he can play the ground game, the gi and no gi will affect him as well.

The reason that you can "slow down" your wrestler opponent's attack is because the gi. When you have your hand on your opponent's upper collar lapel, it's very difficult for him to drop down and applies "single leg" on you. When he shoots at your leg, a push on your upper collar lapel grip can stop his forward movement. Since your opponent has to deal with your "grip" before he can apply technique on you, you can "slow him down". In no gi, you can't do this.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 28, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I've never seen tai otoshi with a throat grip and I'm having a hard time visualizing it. Do you have any video clips?


The throat grip is used for "pushing". Since the "leg block (tai otoshi)" will need pulling, it won't work well. Since the "leg block (tai otoshi)" and "front cut (Osoto Gari)" are very similar. One use pulling and one use pushing. May be it's used in the "front cut (Osoto Gari)" instead. The "throat grip" can be used as "side way neck pushing" as well. That may integrate better with the "leg block (tai otoshi)" body rotation.

Here is the "leg block (tai otoshi)".






and here is the "front cut (Osoto Gari)".


----------



## elder999 (May 28, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The "throat grip" can be used as "side way neck pushing" as well. That may integrate better with the "leg block (tai otoshi)" body rotation.



Mmm, yeah,. That'd be tai otoshi gripping the throat, wouldn't it?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 28, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Mmm, yeah,. That'd be tai otoshi gripping the throat, wouldn't it?


Since the "throat grip" has to change into "side neck palm push", whether it should still be called as "throat grip" or not can be questionable. I like the "throat grip" very much. It's an excellent contact point for no gi. Not sure it's commonly used in Judo though.

In the following clip, if he spins to his left instead of goes forward, it will be "leg block (tai otoshi)" with "throat grip" (or "side neck palm push").


----------



## elder999 (May 28, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I like the "throat grip" very much. It's an excellent contact point for no gi. Not sure it's commonly used in Judo though.



Not "used" in judo at all..............
..............but some people _teach_ it.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 28, 2015)

elder999 said:


> Not "used" in judo at all..............
> ..............but some people _teach_ it.


Do you do why it's not used in Judo?


----------



## elder999 (May 28, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Do you do why it's not used in Judo?


Most people don't train with it....it might, as you said, wind up as a push against the side of the neck during randori-I'm sure I can find tai otoshi being performed in contest this way, somehwere- but a blatant throat grab might easily be interpreted as trying to intentionally injure the opponent, and result in _shido_...or even disqualification....


----------



## Hanzou (May 29, 2015)

lklawson said:


> You mean the Judo that people, still alive and training, complain has been too sportified by inclusion in the Olympics who then, after complaining about the Olympics, continue thence to teach Judo as they were taught, in direct line back to turn of the century?  That Judo?
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



Well that's kind of my point; There's a struggle going on in Judo right now where you have one side trying to keep the art alive, and the other side completely neutering it in favor of the sport because the Olympic committee is such a powerful force within Judo.

Again, that's why Bjj has the advantage over Judo, and why its set to eclipse Judo in a couple of years. People are tired of being chastised for doing double leg takedowns, or leg locks in the dojo, and would rather migrate over to a Bjj school where they can learn what they want to learn without an overbearing body breathing down their necks. My Judo instructor teaches at my Bjj gym for that very reason.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 29, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Well that's kind of my point; There's a struggle going on in Judo right now where you have one side trying to keep the art alive, and the other side completely neutering it in favor of the sport because the Olympic committee is such a powerful force within Judo.
> 
> Again, that's why Bjj has the advantage over Judo, and why its set to eclipse Judo in a couple of years. People are tired of being chastised for doing double leg takedowns, or leg locks in the dojo, and would rather migrate over to a Bjj school where they can learn what they want to learn without an overbearing body breathing down their necks. My Judo instructor teaches at my Bjj gym for that very reason.


On the other hand, you have a large segment of the BJJ community  (possibly a majority) neglecting takedowns, leglocks, and striking defense because they are training primarily in accordance with IBJJF competition rules. I don't think we're in a great position to throw stones regarding the influence of the sport on the martial art.


----------



## Hanzou (May 29, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> On the other hand, you have a large segment of the BJJ community  (possibly a majority) neglecting takedowns, leglocks, and striking defense because they are training primarily in accordance with IBJJF competition rules. I don't think we're in a great position to throw stones regarding the influence of the sport on the martial art.



Well takedowns and leglocks are all legal in Bjj competition, so I don't know why people wouldn't be training them. It's quite a different situation than in Judo where people are being trained to not even grab pants anymore because its a foul.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 29, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Well takedowns and leglocks are all legal in Bjj competition, so I don't know why people wouldn't be training them. It's quite a different situation than in Judo where people are being trained to not even grab pants anymore because its a foul.


Takedowns are legal, but they only score 2 points and guard pulling isn't penalized. Practicing takedowns can be exhausting and painful, so since it's not necessary for success in the sport many BJJ players don't bother.

As far as leg locks go, the rule against leg reaping takes away the most dominant control position for leg locking. The rule against twisting leg locks takes away the most powerful lower body submissions. Toe holds, knee bars, and calf slicers are only allowed at higher belt levels. As a result of all this, many BJJ players neglect leg locks in general and the most effective leg lock positions in particular.

As far as striking defense goes, I've seen plenty of folks in the BJJ discussions over at reddit (r/bjj) who seem convinced that is irrelevant unless you are training for MMA.

Doing sport competition doesn't mean you _have_ to neglect the martial aspects of the art, but there's no denying that many people do.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 29, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Well takedowns and leglocks are all legal in Bjj competition, so I don't know why people wouldn't be training them. It's quite a different situation than in Judo where people are being trained to not even grab pants anymore because its a foul.


The "grab pants" is also illegal in Shuai Chiao (Chinese wrestling) for the following reasons:

- If your opponent is a girl, you may tear her pants apart or pull her pants off  in the public.
- If you dig fingers into your opponent's fresh, you will leave a big bruise mark after that.
- If you can grab the leg, why grab the pants?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 29, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> As far as striking defense goes, I've seen plenty of folks in the BJJ discussions over at reddit (r/bjj) who seem convinced that is irrelevant unless you are training for MMA.


I believe the "striking defense" should be treated as the highest priority in any grapplers training. It makes no sense that your opponent can knock you down before you can take him down. If a grappling instructor sends his guys to boxing gym and test whether a boxer can knock down a grappler (before he gets taken down), or a grappler can take down a boxer (before he  gets knock down). If you test this 15 rounds daily, after a year, you will develop good experience. Of course it may be better to test this against MT guys when kicking is also involved.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 29, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I believe the "striking defense" should be treated as the highest priority in any grapplers training. It makes no sense that your opponent can knock you down before you can take him down. If a grappling instructor sends his guys to boxing gym and test whether a boxer can knock down a grappler (before he gets taken down), or a grappler can take down a boxer (before he  gets knock down). If you test this 15 rounds daily, after a year, you will develop good experience. Of course it may be better to test this against MT guys when kicking is also involved.


|
This is whole point of traditional karate.  The opponent is stopped dead in his tracks.
|
K=MAN's karate style is particularly apropos because his style specializes in the bunkai for close quarter fighting and integrated grappling maneuvers within such.  Furthermore, should K_MAN get a hold of you, he explained to me that his bunkai is designed to force a predetermined response which would necessarily crimp the versatility ingrained in BJJ techniques, should he succeed.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 29, 2015)

ON THE OTHER HAND.
|
On the other hand, a striker never wants to go to GNP.  Hesitating or equivocating against a skilled grappler is asking to lose in nasty fashion via such.
|
Simple statement, hug import....


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 29, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> ...Doing sport competition doesn't mean you _have_ to neglect the martial aspects of the art, but there's no denying that many people do.


|
How one decides to train the art, doesn't define the art.  The art defines the art.  Now into the cycle, an inescapable one for the serious practitioner, of defining _exactly_ the art.
|
Will keep your T going indefinately....


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 29, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> On the other hand, you have a large segment of the BJJ community  (possibly a majority) neglecting takedowns, leglocks, and striking defense because they are training primarily in accordance with IBJJF competition rules. I don't think we're in a great position to throw stones regarding the influence of the sport on the martial art.


|
Again, perfectly put.  Martial arts in application are first for self defense.  If practitioners wish to move away from self defense to other emphasis, that's  their call.  Then at some point, their stylized approach can not be used to gauge the efficacy of the system as a martial art.
|
Quite frankly, this is the big reason Machida's karate-based MMA style has come up short against top-ranked UFC competitors, IMO.  Precisely the same for Wonderboy Thompson loss against the "immortal" Matt Brown.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 29, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Which is the point made about evolving. Kickboxing is absorbing new concepts.


|
Well again, we know we can perpetuate the blog., T's, etc.  Maybe kickboxing HAS to absorb new concepts because of poor quality of the practice (just a mentioned for Judo, etc.), and because of it's rudimentary skill set.


drop bear said:


> For karate to flourish it needs to as well.


|
Again, a popular notion among the sport fighting / MMA work.  Or those that approach karate as a year-long program of physically centered training.
|
K-MAN's example, he dug deeper into the traditional karate style, supplemented with cross-training in separate TMAs.  This poses the question of: In TMA, is the evolution in the practitioner's developmen?.  OR, is the evolution as Matt Thorton proposes: mixing physical stuff from different martial art styles & practicing physical moves repetitively relying on active sparring and resisting opponents?
|
EDIT: One of Matt Thorton's early credentialed martial arts was BJJ. That doesn't surprise me.


----------



## Hanzou (May 29, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Takedowns are legal, but they only score 2 points and guard pulling isn't penalized. Practicing takedowns can be exhausting and painful, so since it's not necessary for success in the sport many BJJ players don't bother.



I would also argue that the more hunched over stance found in Bjj makes the more upright throws found in Judo nagewaza more difficult to pull off, which is why you don't see them often in competition. It's also why Judo banned (or restricted) the "wrestler" stance in competition.



> As far as leg locks go, the rule against leg reaping takes away the most dominant control position for leg locking. The rule against twisting leg locks takes away the most powerful lower body submissions. Toe holds, knee bars, and calf slicers are only allowed at higher belt levels. As a result of all this, many BJJ players neglect leg locks in general and the most effective leg lock positions in particular.
> 
> As far as striking defense goes, I've seen plenty of folks in the BJJ discussions over at reddit (r/bjj) who seem convinced that is irrelevant unless you are training for MMA.
> 
> Doing sport competition doesn't mean you _have_ to neglect the martial aspects of the art, but there's no denying that many people do.



While leglocks have their restrictions, they're not banned entirely like they are in Judo. That means they're still widely practiced in Bjj, even if in a restricted fashion at the sport schools.

Good luck finding a Judo school that teaches leg locks, much less wrist locks.

I mean don't get me wrong, I think sport Bjj can be a detrimental force, but sport Bjj has not done nearly the amount of damage to Bjj that sport Judo has done to Judo. Not even close.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 29, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The gi and no gi may not make much different in the ground game. it makes a big difference in the stand up game. Since a BJJ guy still have to play the stand up game before he can play the ground game, the gi and no gi will affect him as well.
> 
> The reason that you can "slow down" your wrestler opponent's attack is because the gi. When you have your hand on your opponent's upper collar lapel, it's very difficult for him to drop down and applies "single leg" on you. When he shoots at your leg, a push on your upper collar lapel grip can stop his forward movement. Since your opponent has to deal with your "grip" before he can apply technique on you, you can "slow him down". In no gi, you can't do this.



Yes and no, almost all classic BJJ takedowns do not utilize lapel holds to initiate a takedown, throw like what you will see in Judo.  This is simply because they were utilized in no-holds barred or Vale Tudo where the opponent would not have a gi.  So a BJJ practitioner can easily apply their throws and takedowns with or without a gi.  Though I will concede that if both people are in a gi handholds can come into play during the takedown process.  Still for a BJJ practitioner it is easier to go from gi to no-gi.  Same body movement just less to worry about! (ie. chokes, etc)  Which again just reinforces the point that it is easier to go from gi to no-gi!


----------



## lklawson (Jun 3, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Well that's kind of my point; There's a struggle going on in Judo right now where you have one side trying to keep the art alive, and the other side completely neutering it in favor of the sport because the Olympic committee is such a powerful force within Judo.


Right now?  It's been going on since Judo's inclusion as a Competition Sport in the Olympics.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------

