# MMA vs TMA



## Mr. President

I am a very strong believer that it's not the art but the person using it. Still, whenever there's a video of Kung Fu/Aikido/Wing Chun etc on Youtube, it immediately becomes a comment war between those who like it and those who say that none of that stuff works and real fighters are only MMA fighters.

I was wondering if this forum's MMA fans share the same distaste/mistrust/skepticism about the combat effectiveness of more traditional arts in real life situations.


----------



## Flying Crane

Mr. President said:


> I am a very strong believer that it's not the art but the person using it. Still, whenever there's a video of Kung Fu/Aikido/Wing Chun etc on Youtube, it immediately becomes a comment war between those who like it and those who say that none of that stuff works and real fighters are only MMA fighters.
> 
> I was wondering if this forum's MMA fans share the same distaste/mistrust/skepticism about the combat effectiveness of more traditional arts in real life situations.



my distaste and skepticism centers more around using a Youtube example to formulate one's opinions on the large scale.


----------



## Mr. President

Flying Crane said:


> my distaste and skepticism centers more around using a Youtube example to formulate one's opinions on the large scale.



Now you're officially stalking me.


----------



## K-man

MMA is sport. MMA fighters, at competition level, are very well rounded fighters in the ring. If they were to be matched, in the ring, with a competition trained athlete from TKD, Karate, Judo or Jujitsu they will probably have enough skills to match that person in his area of expertise but should have an advantage when the situation is changed to one that is not the other persons area of expertise. 

But the OP is asking about MMA vs TMA.  There are many threads discussing TMAs and much debate as to what is 'traditional'. Without defining TMA it is hard to even consider the question, then are we going to look at weight differences and skill levels? But, I think what can be refuted is the idea that MMA fighters are the only 'real' fighters.

Youtube gives good coverage af actual professional fights but when it comes to amateur 'this vs that' I don't believe many give a true picture of either side's real potential.  This topic is very much like a dog chasing its tail.   

:asian:


----------



## Xue Sheng

Mr. President said:


> I am a very strong believer that it's not the art but the person using it. Still, whenever there's a video of Kung Fu/Aikido/Wing Chun etc on Youtube, it immediately becomes a comment war between those who like it and those who say that none of that stuff works and real fighters are only MMA fighters.
> 
> I was wondering if this forum's MMA fans share the same distaste/mistrust/skepticism about the combat effectiveness of more traditional arts in real life situations.



Oh for crying out loud not this again MMA vs TMA (BARF) this has been done to death and I don't usually say this but for crying out loud save us all the headache, particullarly the admins and USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION!!!!!

You want to know the difference, here it is. One trains to fight an opponent they will likely see again and the other trains to fight an opponent they hope to never see again...there you go...so endeth the lesson



Mr. President said:


> Now you're officially stalking me.



Oh..please....stop it.... what crane said was true....and you can't use YouTube as proof of anything

DO you actually train anything, are you actually considering training anything or are you just bemoaning the fact that the days of Kwai Chang Kane are long gone and never to return.... not that they were ever really here in the first place


----------



## Carol

I don't see what the big deal is.  If a person wants to train in MMA and not TMA, then that person should train in MMA and not TMA.

If a person can't train in something without bashing something else then IMO that person isn't training hard enough.


----------



## Flying Crane

Flying Crane said:


> my distaste and skepticism centers more around using a Youtube example to formulate one's opinions on the large scale.



you are wrong, sir.  I am actually trying to educate you, tho I'll admit that at times my methods can be a bit less than gentle.  If you are open to it, you might gain some worthwhile lessons from it.

if you are not open to it, well then you will just think I am stalking you.


----------



## StormShadow

This is hilarious... Thanks Guys!


----------



## KingDiesel

really if you break it down MMA fighters ARE TMAist look at the martial arts that make up MMA striking: boxing in the purest since is traditional muay thai is def a traditional martial arts and there are guys who have done TKD, Karate, Kung fu that mix these into there striking all TMAs
MMA Grappling: wrestling just like boxing in the purest since is tradtional BJJ is a traditional martial arts, Judo is a traditional martial arts 

so MMA fighters are TMAs in a since they just combine them to make up their fighting styles to make the sport we love called MMA,  so there is no mma vs tma a traditional muay thai practitioner can beat an mma guy and a mma guy could beat a traditional kung fu guy it all depends on who trains harder


----------



## Sukerkin

:lol:

I would quite happily take on any MMA fighter with my art ... no 'cage', no protective gear, none of that 'sports' cachet ... the only problem is they would be missing limbs or dead because that's where a martial art with history was born :lol:.  No tapping out when your arms are gone .

Honestly, all too many take this subject all too seriously, as if it really mattered.  It's a hobby for nearly all of us at the end of the day.  We get enjoyment and fulfilment from it but it's hardly likely to be the centre of our universe (or indeed put to practical use).


----------



## K-man

Sukerkin said:


> :lol:
> 
> I would quite happily take on any MMA fighter with my art ... no 'cage', no protective gear, none of that 'sports' cachet ... the only problem is they would be missing limbs or dead because that's where a martial art with history was born :lol:.  No tapping out when your arms are gone .
> 
> Honestly, all too many take this subject all too seriously, as if it really mattered.  It's a hobby for nearly all of us at the end of the day.  We get enjoyment and fulfilment from it but it's hardly likely to be the centre of our universe (or indeed put to practical use).


That's not playing fair *S**uk. *How many times have you been told swords can be dangerous?    :lfao:


----------



## jks9199

K-man said:


> That's not playing fair *S**uk. *How many times have you been told swords can be dangerous?    :lfao:



It's all fun & games till someone puts an eye out... or takes an arm off...  :angel::ultracool


----------



## chinto

hay now... now... no one said anything about swords and kama and such!!!  you could hurt some one with those things!! what the heck is he doing with that paddle??:lfao::lfao:

oooo you could hurt some one that way!!:erg:


----------



## Xue Sheng

Sukerkin said:


> :lol:
> 
> I would quite happily take on any MMA fighter with my art ... no 'cage', no protective gear, none of that 'sports' cachet ... the only problem is they would be missing limbs or dead because that's where a martial art with history was born :lol:. No tapping out when your arms are gone .
> 
> Honestly, all too many take this subject all too seriously, as if it really mattered. It's a hobby for nearly all of us at the end of the day. We get enjoyment and fulfilment from it but it's hardly likely to be the centre of our universe (or indeed put to practical use).



We can use weapons...no one told me we could use weapons.....:hmm: jian, dao or staff......ooooooh I know the Guandao


----------



## Drose427

KingDiesel said:


> really if you break it down MMA fighters ARE TMAist look at the martial arts that make up MMA striking: boxing in the purest since is traditional muay thai is def a traditional martial arts and there are guys who have done TKD, Karate, Kung fu that mix these into there striking all TMAs
> MMA Grappling: wrestling just like boxing in the purest since is tradtional BJJ is a traditional martial arts, Judo is a traditional martial arts
> 
> so MMA fighters are TMAs in a since they just combine them to make up their fighting styles to make the sport we love called MMA,  so there is no mma vs tma a traditional muay thai practitioner can beat an mma guy and a mma guy could beat a traditional kung fu guy it all depends on who trains harder



True, but then you could run into the argument that since they are training from a sport perspective, it loses some of the tradition the style has when trained for "original purposes" i.e. self defense, discipline, etc. Thats just my two cents on an argument that could arise. Personally, I don't consider all MMA fighters as "TMAists" because I base it off of the style they know. I consider Boxing and Wrestling sports, not quite Martial Arts. So in my opinion, I do not consider the guy who trains in western boxing and wrestling a Martial Artist, I simply consider them a fighter. But, there are few MMA fighters who haven't taken at least one traditional martial art, so that doesnt come up. In case youre wondering, I distinguish sport from Martial Art by the belief that you can do a martial art your entire life. My first tournament, there was an 86 year old man competing. He only did forms, but his form looked good. It was apparent that he was able to really keep up with training. A boxer, can't keep fighting till the day he die. I will admit that a flaw in my logic there is muay thai.
 I agree with your last statement. MMA is built up from traditional martial arts, so they do have their place there. An by no means is MMA better than any Traditional Martial Art, it all comes down to training. How hard, what you know, discipline, diversity, etc.

OP, I have friends that do MMA and they've never gave me crap for me studying Traditional Martial Arts instead, nor have they shown any distaste for it. Partially, cause they understand it's what started their sport, and partially cause they understand that we're training for different situations. I study TMA's for the self-defense, discipline, and growth I can achieve. They like contact sports and getting to beat someone up  What I've noticed is that the people that bash styles, either MMA or TMA, on youtube tend to be the people who sit at home and talk about how they can do MMA without ever having stepped foot in a gym or training hall.


----------



## Gnarlie

Sukerkin said:


> :lol:
> 
> I would quite happily take on any MMA fighter with my art ... no 'cage', no protective gear, none of that 'sports' cachet ... the only problem is they would be missing limbs or dead because that's where a martial art with history was born :lol:.  No tapping out when your arms are gone .
> 
> Honestly, all too many take this subject all too seriously, as if it really mattered.  It's a hobby for nearly all of us at the end of the day.  We get enjoyment and fulfilment from it but it's hardly likely to be the centre of our universe (or indeed put to practical use).



TMA in white vs MMA in black:


----------



## Kframe

As a mma person I don't have to many issues with tma. The issues I do have, stem from the fact that, of the few TMA I have briefly trained, the training was way to easy. I never broke a sweat at all. Which considering this was a very well respected shorin ryu karate place I was kinda surprised and let down.  Now I know I have posted in kata threads before I have learned much, about the nature of it, but the way some styles do kata is still odd to me.    The mma in me thinks that instead of going through a set pattern that may or may not actually teach you anything, why not spend that time with a partner repping the moves your art contains? How much better would the skill of karate practitioners be if they spent more time with a partner and trainer actually repping the moves.  But that is my issue with TMA. In a nutshell, I think they train to easy, and waste time not repping the actual moves. 

I just prefer to have a partner actually throw a real attack at me, for me to rep the move on. I prefer to get hit if I make a mistake. I need my training to feel real and effective. 

Tho ill tell you this, I hear from tma's I meet saying they hate the ego's in the mma gyms. Well I can say that ego's are infact horridly inflated in some mma gyms.  I also feel that some mma gyms spar to much, and spend not enough time working on perfecting technique.. 

So to prevent a hijack, I already know that kata is complex and ill likely never understand it because I don't train a art that does kata.


----------



## Kframe

Just forgot to add, this. THis last criticism goes with my trains to easy complaint. Of the 5 TMA schools in my town, 4 of them train under a hour from start to finish. With 2 of them having beginner and intermediate classes of ONLY 30 minutes from start to finish. The only place to have class's longer then a hour was the WTF TKD place.  How is 1 hour enough time to learn anything and get a good work out to prepare you to actually use the skills? WTF is the excuse for the very short class's???


----------



## James Kovacich

Kframe said:


> Just forgot to add, this. THis last criticism goes with my trains to easy complaint. Of the 5 TMA schools in my town, 4 of them train under a hour from start to finish. With 2 of them having beginner and intermediate classes of ONLY 30 minutes from start to finish. The only place to have class's longer then a hour was the WTF TKD place.  How is 1 hour enough time to learn anything and get a good work out to prepare you to actually use the skills? WTF is the excuse for the very short class's???



Are you sure they are TMA schools and not McDojo's?

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Kframe

ITs the only places in town that follow the TMA format.  The only other places are mma places, both of which are 2+ hour work outs.


----------



## rframe

Kframe said:


> As a mma person I don't have to many issues with tma. The issues I do have, stem from the fact that, of the few TMA I have briefly trained, the training was way to easy.... Now I know I have posted in kata threads before I have learned much, about the nature of it, but the way some styles do kata is still odd to me.    The mma in me thinks that instead of going through a set pattern that may or may not actually teach you anything, why not spend that time with a partner repping the moves your art contains?



I tend to fall in between on this.  I primarily train in a TMA (we definitely sweat) but I also like MMA and think the live and wider spectrum nature it exposes can bring a whole lot of "reality" to martial arts training.  When you are really getting punched, kicked, and taken to the ground... the stress level is much higher and you learn to think on your feet and control the adrenal response in a way that lighter and/or rehearsed sparring doesnt do... you also learn the importance of good basics and efficiency.  Quite a bit of TMA training is theoretical and light-medium cooperative contact, and that "may" lead to some stuff getting taught and carried on that is pretty much nonsense.

I also think kata is very valuable, however I think the way some TMA schools teach them without exposing students to realistic bunkai and related flow drills is a bad idea.  Students should have a good idea of the actual application of the kata they are practicing and have experience drilling some of the moves against others.  Then you can take this back to the kata practice and visualize the attack while also working to perfect some of the kihon form.

Many of the best MMA practitioners have long histories and respect for the traditional arts.  They need not be set against each other, but are actually great compliments.


----------



## Drose427

I agree that Katas, Hyung, forms, whatever you call them are important. But I also believe it's important that the students are taught what the moves are and the practical applications. When my Sah Bum Nim teaches a form, he explains what the move is. In advanced class, we will physically practice the applications from a self defense standpoint. I believe it's important to know and practice the application, if not,youre missing out on an important part of your forms.


----------



## James Kovacich

Kframe said:


> ITs the only places in town that follow the TMA format.  The only other places are mma places, both of which are 2+ hour work outs.



That does not answer the question. Maybe I should have worded it more clearly. A McDojo can be a TMA but there is a huge differance between a good TMA school and a McDojo. The schools you decsribed seem McDojoish to me. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Xue Sheng

I don't quite get this, and maybe it is my TCMA background

TCMA is a little time with your sifu and a lot of time training on your own so I don't understand the need for hours and hours training at a school. They give you the stuff to work on and then you need to go work on it..... and my Sanda sifu was no different... shows me some kicks, has me do them, and then go train kicks, do 100 a day, each leg, for a couple of weeks. GO back and show him and he says...no good, go train more....a week later he says good.... I'm shown more stuff.... I don't get the need to be at a school a lot in order to be effective....train right and train often...that is all.


----------



## chinto

Drose427 said:


> I agree that Katas, Hyung, forms, whatever you call them are important. But I also believe it's important that the students are taught what the moves are and the practical applications. When my Sah Bum Nim teaches a form, he explains what the move is. In advanced class, we will physically practice the applications from a self defense standpoint. I believe it's important to know and practice the application, if not,youre missing out on an important part of your forms.



in both styles of Shorin Ryu I study we do bunkai a lot!  and after about 5th kyu you are expected to find some of the not so obvious techniques for each movement. then demonstrate them.  this is not unusual in a good dojo from what I have found.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> As a mma person I don't have to many issues with tma. The issues I do have, stem from the fact that, of the few TMA I have briefly trained, the training was way to easy. I never broke a sweat at all. Which considering this was a very well respected shorin ryu karate place I was kinda surprised and let down.  Now I know I have posted in kata threads before I have learned much, about the nature of it, but the way some styles do kata is still odd to me.    The mma in me thinks that instead of going through a set pattern that may or may not actually teach you anything, why not spend that time with a partner repping the moves your art contains? How much better would the skill of karate practitioners be if they spent more time with a partner and trainer actually repping the moves.  But that is my issue with TMA. In a nutshell, I think they train to easy, and waste time not repping the actual moves.
> 
> I just prefer to have a partner actually throw a real attack at me, for me to rep the move on. I prefer to get hit if I make a mistake. I need my training to feel real and effective.
> 
> Tho ill tell you this, I hear from tma's I meet saying they hate the ego's in the mma gyms. Well I can say that ego's are infact horridly inflated in some mma gyms.  I also feel that some mma gyms spar to much, and spend not enough time working on perfecting technique..
> 
> So to prevent a hijack, I already know that kata is complex and ill likely never understand it because I don't train a art that does kata.


Well, our training used to be three hour sessions but we brought it back to two and a half hours a few years back. As to raising a sweat, I go to a gym for an hour, six days a week for that. (I also have two aikido sessions a week.). I encourage my guys to work on their fitness in their own time. We start off with a few limbering exercises then generally move into paired work, which is sensitivity based but with lots of locks holds and take downs. Sometimes we might use pads here as well. After maybe an hour of that we will move on to kata, which incidentally raises quite a sweat if performed correctly, followed by bunkai to that kata. Time constraints mean that we would only get through two or three kata in an hour, sometimes only one. Finally we move to training against weapons or own bunkai against random attacks. Sometimes.there might be some multiple attacker training.

Now, looking at your list of issues with TMAs, it is not easy, either physically or mentally, we do raise a sweat, most of our work is with a partner, our kata is taught as response to reality based attacks, and our sessions last at least two and a half hours. As to ego. I have not seen that as a problem anywhere I have trained, MMA or otherwise. I think all good training places leave egos at the door. 

As I said earlier, I don't have an issue with MMA vs TMA. Trained properly they are both good training, and the both can be used for competition if that is what people want.  :asian:


----------



## Aiki Lee

Kframe said:


> Just forgot to add, this. THis lastcriticism goes with my trains to easy complaint. Of the 5 TMA schools in mytown, 4 of them train under a hour from start to finish. With 2 of them havingbeginner and intermediate classes of ONLY 30 minutes from start to finish. Theonly place to have class's longer then a hour was the WTF TKD place. How is 1hour enough time to learn anything and get a good work out to prepare you toactually use the skills? WTF is the excuse for the very shortclass's???





James Kovacich said:


> Are you sure they are TMAschools and not McDojo's?
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


 
To be fair, Like Sukerkin said, most people practicemartial arts as a sort of hobby. In this day and age people are so busy thatsometimes they only have an hour to devote to training. I&#8217;ve seen a lot ofschools have these kind of time limits for each class, but they offer multipleclasses throughout the week. It would make progress slower, but that doesn&#8217;t makeit a McDojo.


----------



## K-man

Himura Kenshin said:


> To be fair, Like Sukerkin said, most people practicemartial arts as a sort of hobby. In this day and age people are so busy thatsometimes they only have an hour to devote to training. I&#8217;ve seen a lot ofschools have these kind of time limits for each class, but they offer multipleclasses throughout the week. It would make progress slower, but that doesn&#8217;t makeit a McDojo.


Good point. I have three students who can only train one night a week so two and a half hours gives them a fair amount of training anyway.     :asian:


----------



## aaradia

Xue Sheng said:


> I don't quite get this, and maybe it is my TCMA background
> 
> TCMA is a little time with your sifu and a lot of time training on your own so I don't understand the need for hours and hours training at a school. They give you the stuff to work on and then you need to go work on it..... and my Sanda sifu was no different... shows me some kicks, has me do them, and then go train kicks, do 100 a day, each leg, for a couple of weeks. GO back and show him and he says...no good, go train more....a week later he says good.... I'm shown more stuff.... I don't get the need to be at a school a lot in order to be effective....train right and train often...that is all.



Exactly how I see it. We have private lessons each week, where we are given our curriculum material and get it reviewed. And we have a large variety of various classes (sparring, bag workout, weapons, stick fighting, group, kicking, sash level, etc.). But we are expected to spend lots of time training on our own. Now my school is open long hours, so we can train on our own at the school. Or we can train elswhere. Training on our own at the school is nice because you can pull an instructor and ask for help if you get stuck. But training in a class is not going to be enough to become a skilled MAist. You have to put in your own practice time.


----------



## James Kovacich

Himura Kenshin said:


> To be fair, Like Sukerkin said, most people practicemartial arts as a sort of hobby. In this day and age people are so busy thatsometimes they only have an hour to devote to training. Ive seen a lot ofschools have these kind of time limits for each class, but they offer multipleclasses throughout the week. It would make progress slower, but that doesnt makeit a McDojo.



I didn't claim they were McDojos. Just that it seems McDojoish that the 5 TMA schools near him they all train under an hour with 2 of them 1/2 hour for beginners and intermediates. My point was they don't seem to be a good choice to represent TMA in a TMA vs MMA discussion.



Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Aiki Lee

James Kovacich said:


> I didn't claim they were McDojos. Just that it seems McDojoish that the 5 TMA schools near him they all train under an hour with 2 of them 1/2 hour for beginners and intermediates. My point was they don't seem to be a good choice to represent TMA in a TMA vs MMA discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2



Yes, but time alone isn't evident either of McDojoness.


----------



## James Kovacich

Himura Kenshin said:


> Yes, but time alone isn't evident either of McDojoness.



It wasn't my intention to imply it was. One of my Eskrima instructors teaches a 1 hr class during the weekdays and he makes it work. To me 1 hr is bare minimum, thats just me. But a 30 minute class...I don't think so. The beginners and intermediates need more. They are just extending the amount of time they can collect $ before the student quits. A one class done well can be done but to me it is the bare minimum.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Kframe

Ill say this about mma. There is no loyalty in it, not like in TMA arts.  People in mma tend to have no qualms about jumping from gym to gym, only focusing on them selvs.  It seams most have the dream of competing in the UFC and so while they may make friends in the gym, if they feel that they have soaked all they can from that gym they will move on to others..   Now I find it ironic that is my complaint even tho  I to have left my gym as well... Im still conflicted about it, but I noticed that a lot in mma have no loyalty...


----------



## James Kovacich

Kframe said:


> Ill say this about mma. There is no loyalty in it, not like in TMA arts.  People in mma tend to have no qualms about jumping from gym to gym, only focusing on them selvs.  It seams most have the dream of competing in the UFC and so while they may make friends in the gym, if they feel that they have soaked all they can from that gym they will move on to others..   Now I find it ironic that is my complaint even tho  I to have left my gym as well... Im still conflicted about it, but I noticed that a lot in mma have no loyalty...



That is true. But it is a fight sport and that's how they grow as martial artists and fighters. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Steve

Kframe said:


> Ill say this about mma. There is no loyalty in it, not like in TMA arts.  People in mma tend to have no qualms about jumping from gym to gym, only focusing on them selvs.  It seams most have the dream of competing in the UFC and so while they may make friends in the gym, if they feel that they have soaked all they can from that gym they will move on to others..   Now I find it ironic that is my complaint even tho  I to have left my gym as well... Im still conflicted about it, but I noticed that a lot in mma have no loyalty...





James Kovacich said:


> That is true. But it is a fight sport and that's how they grow as martial artists and fighters.
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


That is actually not true, even at the highest levels.  Some guys leave.  Some train at more than one gym, but even among the elite athletes, most are exceedingly loyal to their trainers.  I'd be willing to wager that there is less movement from gym to gym among MMA athletes than among martial artists in a "traditional" school.  Let's just take a gander through the CMA, WC or TKD sub forums to look at the many posts on lineage, school quality, national teams and conversations about the infighting, politics and issues.  

This is really ironic, in that you even acknowledge that you have left your gym, and while you give yourself a pass because you were "conflicted," you presume that every single MMA athlete feels on compunction.  

Give me a break guys.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Steve said:


> That is actually not true, even at the highest levels. Some guys leave. Some train at more than one gym, but even among the elite athletes, most are exceedingly loyal to their trainers. I'd be willing to wager that there is less movement from gym to gym among MMA athletes than among martial artists in a "traditional" school. Let's just take a gander through the CMA, WC or TKD sub forums to look at the many posts on lineage, school quality, national teams and conversations about the infighting, politics and issues.
> 
> This is really ironic, in that you even acknowledge that you have left your gym, and while you give yourself a pass because you were "conflicted," you presume that every single MMA athlete feels on compunction.
> 
> Give me a break guys.



Although I agree with what you are saying about MMA, there is a school near me and the people that go there are incredibly loyal to the trainer there. 

I feel I should add something don't confuse lineage, school quality, national teams and conversations about the infighting, politics and issues with jumping from school ot school, because it generally is not the same thing. It is silly, but it is not the same thing.

What you have done there is use the same prejudice against TMA that you are rightfully accusing others of doing about MMA schools. And what you are saying is simply not the case. Both MMA and TMA are pretty much on an even keel when it comes to that. The only real difference is the goal of their training. One trains to fight knowing they will fight and knowing it is possible that they will see the same exact guy agian and the other trains to fight hoping they never do fight but if they do they never see the same guy again. Same can be said for Sanda, Muay Thai, and Judo as compared to TMA too.

Bottom-line is I don't want to fight any of them and I highly respect all martial arts styles....

&#8230;well maybe not Brazilian jiu jitsu...but that is not so much for lack of loyalty, training or skill, they have all that&#8230; that bit is damn impressive actually...it is that darn inferiority complex they have spelling it jiu jitsu and trying to be like us incredibly awesome, manly, perpetually cool, and handsome old school Japanese Jiu Jitsu guys because that is how we use to spell it and they are just trying to be like us...its rather sad actually...but then who can blame them...we were incredibly awesome, manly, perpetually cool, and handsome :uhyeah:


----------



## James Kovacich

Steve said:


> That is actually not true, even at the highest levels.  Some guys leave.  Some train at more than one gym, but even among the elite athletes, most are exceedingly loyal to their trainers.  I'd be willing to wager that there is less movement from gym to gym among MMA athletes than among martial artists in a "traditional" school.  Let's just take a gander through the CMA, WC or TKD sub forums to look at the many posts on lineage, school quality, national teams and conversations about the infighting, politics and issues.
> 
> This is really ironic, in that you even acknowledge that you have left your gym, and while you give yourself a pass because you were "conflicted," you presume that every single MMA athlete feels on compunction.
> 
> Give me a break guys.



I see your point about the loyalty. But the fact is they do move on when it is time too. That's what fighters do. That's what I was agreeing with. And your right about others moving on too. When it's time to go, I go.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Kframe

I stand by my comment on loyalty. You may disagree, and have examples in your area, but my experiance has not been the same as yours.  Firstly You called me out for leaving and feeling conflicted. You wanna know why i left big shot, fine ill tell you.  I left becuase i am in it for a hobby and fitness and to learn some self defense.  I was not the lowest skilled but not any were near the top of our gym.  

We have had a number of other hobby guys come in and leave after only a short while. We had one guy, a TKD WTF black belt that stuck around. He made the near perfect sparring partner for me. He was different then me, i was a infighter, he was obviously a outfighter.  I learned much from him. I Was at the point in my striking training and flexibility that there was no more technical things for me to learn. Things like the blocks and the strikes, i had been shown and taught them all, as far as my flexibility would allow. The only things left were coaches more fancy kicks but they were not critical or even needed.  

I was at the point were the only way i could keep learning my striking skill set for this school was in sparring.  Now for months and months i had my tkd bb parnter, i learned much about closing the gap on a guy who loves to spam front kicks and other linear kicks to keep me at range. He got much needed practice on using his hands and defending himself  up close.   It was funny for me at the time. He had at least 4 years martial arts experiance on me, yet in sparring we were evenly matched.  

Then came the day, he had to leave. He got a new job out of state and had to leave immediately.  I dont blame him it nearly doubled his then current salary.  
This was a problem for me, seeing as everyone else there was a veteran fighter with 3+ years mma experiance on me, and they all were getting ready for a fight. 

I remember my last sparring match there, it was humiliating. It was the reason i quit.  It was a round robin sparring session. We had a couple of guys come that had trained there previously and had come back to train more after some time off. The session also included sparring with the assistant coach, and my final sparring session was with the head coach. I had in all maybe a hour of sparring that day..  

I steped up and it seamed as if all my training got tossed out the window. I just could not react fast enough. I felt like a rank newb all over again. I could not make any of my defenses work against any of them. I got hit way more then i was used to, as my defense was spot on previously. I was getting hit harder then i was used to, but i think i may have been going harder then i should have..   

It was like my defense skills all got tossed, nothing was working, and they could hit me at will. It was so humiliating, i am better then this, i told my self.  I felt like a mobile punching bag. I dont know why all my skills evaporated during that time, I have a feeling it was just the disparity of skill between me and them.  

I stayed over to train more with head coach that day, and he wanted to go 3 more rounds. So we did, and it was even worse then the last session.  I literally could not touch him, he was so fast. He didnt even have to effect a defense on me, he was so quick. I think i hit him one time, with a leg kick, but that was it..  When the session was over, he told me i was doing just fine. But i was nearly in tears, i was so upset. I didnt cry or anything but man i was close..  I felt like a failure, so totally a failure.... Like everything i did up till that point was a waste of time.      

I am still conflicted because my coach would tell me to clean the sand out of my xxxxxx and to keep sparring.  So knowing that i let him down i feel like a failure. I feel i failed to man up and take the harder sparring and enjoy it.  I made the decision to leave because i felt i was no longer learning anything with regards to my striking.  

They no longer have any hobby guys at that gym, only competing fighters, one of which is close to breaking into the big leagues.  They were so fit, so amazingly confident, that is what i wanted so badly for my self. I left because i failed my self..  Up till recently i blamed it on taking a hard shot that rocked me, but i know that was just a excuse i made up to my self, to feel better. It did not work. 

During my time there i saw many come and go, some were hobby guys others were competing fighters. Only the core group stayed, which was a small one. The rest had no loyalty at all..


----------



## Aiki Lee

James Kovacich said:


> It wasn't my intention toimply it was. One of my Eskrima instructors teaches a 1 hr class during theweekdays and he makes it work. To me 1 hr is bare minimum, thats just me. But a30 minute class...I don't think so. The beginners and intermediates need more.They are just extending the amount of time they can collect $ before thestudent quits. A one class done well can be done but to me it is the bareminimum.
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


½ an hour seems short to me too. In order to get anywhereyou could only practice one or two things to get any kind of consistency perclass, but maybe that is what they do. Maybe they feel too much would overwhelmthe student.
Classes at my dojo run 45 minutes long. But we haveclasses 5 days a week plus an additional 2 hour aikido class on Fridays. So abrand new person who attends all the classes he or she can at that level couldattend all our fundamentals classes and aikido classes which ends up being 7hours of training per week, which is a lot for most people (not necessarily youor me though). Other classes focus on much needed other aspects of our art thatother students need to practice.




Kframe said:


> I remember my last sparring match there, it was humiliating. It was the reasoni quit. It was a round robin sparring session. We had a couple of guys comethat had trained there previously and had come back to train more after sometime off. The session also included sparring with the assistant coach, and myfinal sparring session was with the head coach. I had in all maybe a hour ofsparring that day..
> 
> I steped up and it seamed as if all my training got tossed out the window. Ijust could not react fast enough. I felt like a rank newb all over again. Icould not make any of my defenses work against any of them. I got hit way morethen i was used to, as my defense was spot on previously. I was getting hitharder then i was used to, but i think i may have been going harder then ishould have..
> 
> It was like my defense skills all got tossed, nothing was working, and theycould hit me at will. It was so humiliating, i am better then this, i told myself. I felt like a mobile punching bag. I dont know why all my skillsevaporated during that time, I have a feeling it was just the disparity ofskill between me and them.
> 
> I stayed over to train more with head coach that day, and he wanted to go 3more rounds. So we did, and it was even worse then the last session. Iliterally could not touch him, he was so fast. He didnt even have to effect adefense on me, he was so quick. I think i hit him one time, with a leg kick,but that was it.. When the session was over, he told me i was doing just fine.But i was nearly in tears, i was so upset. I didnt cry or anything but man iwas close.. I felt like a failure, so totally a failure.... Like everything idid up till that point was a waste of time.
> 
> I am still conflicted because my coach would tell me to clean the sand out ofmy xxxxxx and to keep sparring. So knowing that i let him down i feel like afailure. I feel i failed to man up and take the harder sparring and enjoy it. Imade the decision to leave because i felt i was no longer learning anythingwith regards to my striking.
> 
> They no longer have any hobby guys at that gym, only competing fighters, one ofwhich is close to breaking into the big leagues. They were so fit, so amazinglyconfident, that is what i wanted so badly for my self. I left because i failedmy self.. Up till recently i blamed it on taking a hard shot that rocked me,but i know that was just a excuse i made up to my self, to feel better. It didnot work.
> 
> During my time there i saw many come and go, some were hobby guys others werecompeting fighters. Only the core group stayed, which was a small one. The resthad no loyalty at all..


I had days like that back when I was trying to learnkarate and I kept losing at tournaments. My teacher at the time seemed to haveno interest in helping me actually improve. Luckily my current teacher seemsdedicated to our improvement.
But did you ever lay out your concerns to your coach?Sometimes we think we are doing something correctly and it turns out we aren&#8217;tand only when the issues are brought up specifically will an instructor fixthose issues.
Anyways, I hope things are going better for you now.


----------



## Cyriacus

"I made the decision to leave because i felt i was no longer learning anything with regards to my striking."

I feel the need to contradict you. You were learning lots, just not what you wanted to learn.




Kframe said:


> Ill say this about mma. There is no loyalty in it, not like in TMA arts. People in mma tend to have no qualms about jumping from gym to gym, only focusing on them selvs. It seams most have the dream of competing in the UFC and so while they may make friends in the gym, if they feel that they have soaked all they can from that gym they will move on to others.. Now I find it ironic that is my complaint even tho I to have left my gym as well... Im still conflicted about it, but I noticed that a lot in mma have no loyalty...



My opinion: If the place isnt giving me what i want/any more, i have no reason to be there any more. Yeah, its selfish. I just dont think thats a bad thing. -A TMA Guy


----------



## Steve

Kframe said:


> I stand by my comment on loyalty. You may disagree, and have examples in your area, but my experiance has not been the same as yours.  Firstly You called me out for leaving and feeling conflicted. You wanna know why i left big shot, fine ill tell you.  I left becuase i am in it for a hobby and fitness and to learn some self defense.  I was not the lowest skilled but not any were near the top of our gym.
> 
> We have had a number of other hobby guys come in and leave after only a short while. We had one guy, a TKD WTF black belt that stuck around. He made the near perfect sparring partner for me. He was different then me, i was a infighter, he was obviously a outfighter.  I learned much from him. I Was at the point in my striking training and flexibility that there was no more technical things for me to learn. Things like the blocks and the strikes, i had been shown and taught them all, as far as my flexibility would allow. The only things left were coaches more fancy kicks but they were not critical or even needed.
> 
> I was at the point were the only way i could keep learning my striking skill set for this school was in sparring.  Now for months and months i had my tkd bb parnter, i learned much about closing the gap on a guy who loves to spam front kicks and other linear kicks to keep me at range. He got much needed practice on using his hands and defending himself  up close.   It was funny for me at the time. He had at least 4 years martial arts experiance on me, yet in sparring we were evenly matched.
> 
> Then came the day, he had to leave. He got a new job out of state and had to leave immediately.  I dont blame him it nearly doubled his then current salary.
> This was a problem for me, seeing as everyone else there was a veteran fighter with 3+ years mma experiance on me, and they all were getting ready for a fight.
> 
> I remember my last sparring match there, it was humiliating. It was the reason i quit.  It was a round robin sparring session. We had a couple of guys come that had trained there previously and had come back to train more after some time off. The session also included sparring with the assistant coach, and my final sparring session was with the head coach. I had in all maybe a hour of sparring that day..
> 
> I steped up and it seamed as if all my training got tossed out the window. I just could not react fast enough. I felt like a rank newb all over again. I could not make any of my defenses work against any of them. I got hit way more then i was used to, as my defense was spot on previously. I was getting hit harder then i was used to, but i think i may have been going harder then i should have..
> 
> It was like my defense skills all got tossed, nothing was working, and they could hit me at will. It was so humiliating, i am better then this, i told my self.  I felt like a mobile punching bag. I dont know why all my skills evaporated during that time, I have a feeling it was just the disparity of skill between me and them.
> 
> I stayed over to train more with head coach that day, and he wanted to go 3 more rounds. So we did, and it was even worse then the last session.  I literally could not touch him, he was so fast. He didnt even have to effect a defense on me, he was so quick. I think i hit him one time, with a leg kick, but that was it..  When the session was over, he told me i was doing just fine. But i was nearly in tears, i was so upset. I didnt cry or anything but man i was close..  I felt like a failure, so totally a failure.... Like everything i did up till that point was a waste of time.
> 
> I am still conflicted because my coach would tell me to clean the sand out of my xxxxxx and to keep sparring.  So knowing that i let him down i feel like a failure. I feel i failed to man up and take the harder sparring and enjoy it.  I made the decision to leave because i felt i was no longer learning anything with regards to my striking.
> 
> They no longer have any hobby guys at that gym, only competing fighters, one of which is close to breaking into the big leagues.  They were so fit, so amazingly confident, that is what i wanted so badly for my self. I left because i failed my self..  Up till recently i blamed it on taking a hard shot that rocked me, but i know that was just a excuse i made up to my self, to feel better. It did not work.
> 
> During my time there i saw many come and go, some were hobby guys others were competing fighters. Only the core group stayed, which was a small one. The rest had no loyalty at all..


Whoa, back up.  Take a deep breath.  I called you out for making baseless presumptions about MMA athletes and TMA athletes.  We judge ourselves based upon our intent, but judge others based upon their actions.  In other words, you know you were conflicted but presume that MMA athletes are not because you have a bias.  

As for whether you were truly conflicted or not, believe me, I don't care at all.  Really.  I have no reason to doubt you, and don't honestly care to know the details.  

Regarding whether or not you will continue to have an unfounded and easily disproven bias against people who train in styles outside of your own, such as MMA, that's fine too.  They're your hangups and you're entitled to have them.  We all do. 

But if you're interested in looking objectively at the situation, read Xue Sheng's post.  People are people, and there is loyalty and disloyalty in any activity.  If you look at MMA athletes from the elite levels all the way down, you will quickly find that many people train with the same guys throughout their careers.  And those who do change camps don't do it lightly.  It's a big deal when an elite MMA athlete moves from one camp to another precisely because it doesn't happen all that often.

And at lower levels, I can tell you that the men and women training in gyms are usually fiercely loyal to their teams.  The nature of the training creates a strong bond.  

Point isn't that MMA is better or worse than TMA.  It's to point out that you're taking your own myopic beliefs and applying them to hundreds of thousands of martial artists throughout the world.  As though your own experiences (true or not) are representative of an entire style.


----------



## martial sparrer

we are forgetting that martial artists are martial artists period......martial artists have a very unique way of seeing the world and dealing with it.  the essence of being a martial artist is whats the most important thing for us to discover.  I hate it when threads get into being rude......all martial artists are on the same team!  enjoy and love!


----------



## Steve

martial sparrer said:


> we are forgetting that martial artists are martial artists period......martial artists have a very unique way of seeing the world and dealing with it.  the essence of being a martial artist is whats the most important thing for us to discover.  I hate it when threads get into being rude......all martial artists are on the same team!  enjoy and love!


If I'm the person being rude, I apologize.  Discourtesy wasn't my intention.


----------



## James Kovacich

Himura Kenshin said:


> ½ an hour seems short to me too. In order to get anywhereyou could only practice one or two things to get any kind of consistency perclass, but maybe that is what they do. Maybe they feel too much would overwhelmthe student.
> Classes at my dojo run 45 minutes long. But we haveclasses 5 days a week plus an additional 2 hour aikido class on Fridays. So abrand new person who attends all the classes he or she can at that level couldattend all our fundamentals classes and aikido classes which ends up being 7hours of training per week, which is a lot for most people (not necessarily youor me though). Other classes focus on much needed other aspects of our art thatother students need to practice.
> 
> 
> I had days like that back when I was trying to learnkarate and I kept losing at tournaments. My teacher at the time seemed to haveno interest in helping me actually improve. Luckily my current teacher seemsdedicated to our improvement.
> But did you ever lay out your concerns to your coach?Sometimes we think we are doing something correctly and it turns out we arentand only when the issues are brought up specifically will an instructor fixthose issues.
> Anyways, I hope things are going better for you now.



Thats something how my Eskrima does it too. Except his 1hr class is twice a week, with a 2 hr class on Saturday mornings and once a month on a Sunday a 3-4 hr class. By the way his 1 hr class is intensive. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## James Kovacich

Steve said:


> If I'm the person being rude, I apologize.  Discourtesy wasn't my intention.



I didn't read it that way. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## martial sparrer

I wasn't directing the rudeness comment to anyone in particular.....all martial artists either mma or tma dedicate their lives to this thing we are all trying to do....we are all trying this martial arts thing because we have faith in how absolutely positive for human beings it is.....that said....mma guys should truly read some of the great writers of martial arts....for gaining wisdom for the mind, strength of character etc.....we all know how important the mental side of martial arts is....


----------



## Kframe

Steve, I want to apologize. I did not mean to come unglued at you. Im sorry. I honestly did not know how hard my feelings were on this subject till I actually wrote how I felt down.. I am apparently very hurt and upset about leaving, and have been living in denial.  If what I witnessed was more of a outlier in mma attendance, I do not understand why so many people came and went. I would get to know someone new and then they would leave.. 

My question is, They have a guy, who is probably about 1-2 years of regional fights before we see him in the big time mma scene. He is a regional pro, basicly getting paid chump change, and currently is undefeated with all 1st round KO's. Barring any freak accidents, or stuff of that nature, if he actually does make it to the national scene, do you think he will stay at the tiny little local gym that he currently attends? I just find that hard to believe, at that level he will have training paid for by sponsors, and why would he stay in little old Ft.Wayne?


----------



## Cyriacus

Kframe said:


> Steve, I want to apologize. I did not mean to come unglued at you. Im sorry. I honestly did not know how hard my feelings were on this subject till I actually wrote how I felt down.. I am apparently very hurt and upset about leaving, and have been living in denial.  If what I witnessed was more of a outlier in mma attendance, I do not understand why so many people came and went. I would get to know someone new and then they would leave..
> 
> My question is, They have a guy, who is probably about 1-2 years of regional fights before we see him in the big time mma scene. He is a regional pro, basicly getting paid chump change, and currently is undefeated with all 1st round KO's. Barring any freak accidents, or stuff of that nature, if he actually does make it to the national scene, do you think he will stay at the tiny little local gym that he currently attends? I just find that hard to believe, at that level he will have training paid for by sponsors, and why would he stay in little old Ft.Wayne?



Quick question: Isnt the emphasis here on 'went'? They could have been leaving because the training was subpar. Without a point of reference, you couldnt know.

For your question, high up MMA fighters need training thats going to get them through what theyre going to do. Not many small places offer that. Would you have more faith in a small town sheriff, or an inner city tactical officer who used to be a small town sheriff, to get you out of a hostage situation (negotiation wise)?


----------



## Steve

Kframe said:


> Steve, I want to apologize. I did not mean to come unglued at you. Im sorry. I honestly did not know how hard my feelings were on this subject till I actually wrote how I felt down.. I am apparently very hurt and upset about leaving, and have been living in denial.  If what I witnessed was more of a outlier in mma attendance, I do not understand why so many people came and went. I would get to know someone new and then they would leave..
> 
> My question is, They have a guy, who is probably about 1-2 years of regional fights before we see him in the big time mma scene. He is a regional pro, basicly getting paid chump change, and currently is undefeated with all 1st round KO's. Barring any freak accidents, or stuff of that nature, if he actually does make it to the national scene, do you think he will stay at the tiny little local gym that he currently attends? I just find that hard to believe, at that level he will have training paid for by sponsors, and why would he stay in little old Ft.Wayne?



I took no offense.  If you're good, I'm good

Regarding the school, it could be the quality of the training it any number if things.  

As for the guy and his school, it really depends.  Some small schools have the tools to take a guy as far as he wants.  Some don't.   

It's really the same in any art.  If you're the biggest fish in the pond, you aren't growing as an athlete.

If I remember, I'll post a more complete response when I have a keyboard.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Xue Sheng

Oh man&#8230;this is absolutely pathetic&#8230;an MMA vs TMA thread and everyone is apologizing and friendly&#8230;.. for crying out loud people if RoninPimp where here he'd have something to say about this... oh wait...he can't be here anymore :uhyeah: Actually that is a good thing


Yup&#8230;.it is an old reference to a long gone not missed poster of many a TMA vs MMA knock down dragout


----------



## Kframe

Back to tma vs mma.. When it comes to tma as a striking system, I think it just takes a huge time investment. From what I have learned and my brief conversations with the local tma place that was not a mcdojo, you don't actually start learning the real ins and outs of the art till black belt and higher. Which can be a long time. Sure for a kid with there whole life ahead of them there is time to get to 3-4bb or higher and still have life left to learn a grappling art and compete with the possibility of UFC dreams. 

Im 31 right now. If I were to drop everything, based on the numbers I was given by the TKD instructor I talked to, it would take me 6-8 years to be a at a level of competency to actually use tkd in MMA as a striking system. That puts me at 39, then I have to not only keep my tkd training up, but then go train a grappling art. Which can take just as long if not longer to get competency in. Which puts me mid 40's. Which  is to late to do anything meaningful mma wise. By then my body will be on the decline..  

I don't know why, but the jist im getting from that tkd instructor is you don't actually start learning tma till you hit black belt. Then all the real application stuff starts..  It just feels as if it takes to long, why must it take 8 years to actually be proficient in your art?

This is kinda related but I think the sport side of TMA may be doing the rest of the art a disservice. It seams all the tma guys I have sparred were all sport guys. None of them seamed prepared for real hits, and follow up attacks and close pressure. I had this convo on Tradtalk and they pointed out that people in non diluted traditional arts don't spar or train like the sporter guys do.  I didn't know what they ment till I saw a video on the main admins blog showing sparring. I was surprised to see that it looks a lot like the kind of sparring I do. Minus throws and ground. Sure the contact was light but there was a huge focus on technique.   With a the focus of there training staying in the "melee range" as they call it. That range to far for clinch but to close for most kicks.. 

Forgot to say this. The only reason that mma striking as a system takes a short time to learn, is because it is not a deep system. Just a few techniques applied in a hundred different ways. Not really a complete system, there are holes, that I am attempting to fill. God I hate being old, time is my enemy now.. 

Its the sporter guys, running around thinking they can stand up to a mma guy, that is giving the tma a bad rap in some circles. Truthfully I wish both sides would stop hating and start cross training with open arms.  I have taken advice from a high ranking karateka that I email occasionaly and used the techniques he taught me in my mma sparring. Things like the middle and lower block, and the soto uke(inside body block for you tkd people,  tho I use my hammer fist not my forearm) to great effect when coupled with my boxing defenses. 

I found a good tma school, but at my age, and with my goals, I cant go train there, despite wanting to. I just don't have the time, as a tma requires full attention, and I have to learn and keep training my grappling as it is to important to my goals.


----------



## grumpywolfman

Xue Sheng said:


> Oh manthis is absolutely pathetican MMA vs TMA thread and everyone is apologizing and friendly.. for crying out loud people if RoninPimp where here he'd have something to say about this... oh wait...he can't be here anymore :uhyeah: Actually that is a good thing
> 
> 
> Yup.it is an old reference to a long gone not missed poster of many a TMA vs MMA knock down dragout



This interview (from YouTube) with Joe Rogan might help warm things up Xue 

[video=youtube_share;D9L5vr3HKdE]http://youtu.be/D9L5vr3HKdE[/video]


----------



## grumpywolfman

Mr. President said:


> I am a very strong believer that it's not the art but the person using it. Still, whenever there's a video of Kung Fu/Aikido/Wing Chun etc on Youtube, it immediately becomes a comment war between those who like it and those who say that none of that stuff works and real fighters are only MMA fighters.
> 
> I was wondering if this forum's MMA fans share the same distaste/mistrust/skepticism about the combat effectiveness of more traditional arts in real life situations.




In my opinion, MMA has brought attention to TMA to look beyond the limitations of a single system and the patterned responses associated within it.

"To fit in with an opponent one needs direct perception. There is no direct perception where there is resistance, a "this is the only way" attitude. The classical man is just a bundle of routine, ideas and tradition. When he acts, he is translating every living moment in terms of the old. If any style teaches you a method of fighting, then you might be able to fight according to the limit of that method, but that is not actually fighting. Truth is relationship with the opponent; constantly moving, living, never static." ~ Bruce Lee (_Tao of Jeet Kune Do_)


----------



## Chris Parker

I get where you're coming from, but, well, no. As has been mentioned in this thread, people are people, martial artists or not.



martial sparrer said:


> we are forgetting that martial artists are martial artists period......martial artists have a very unique way of seeing the world and dealing with it.  the essence of being a martial artist is whats the most important thing for us to discover.  I hate it when threads get into being rude......all martial artists are on the same team!  enjoy and love!



Actually, no, martial artists don't have a unique way of seeing the world and dealing with it. Some might, but they're going to be in the extreme minority. Nor is "the essence of being a martial artists" the most important thing for most practitioners of various styles. And when it comes to "all martial artists are on the same team"... uh, way off base there! Just look at the political arguments in the various forms... either system versus system, or even within a single system. Love? Okay... but what I do has little to do with that... It's more about just killing the other guy.



martial sparrer said:


> I wasn't directing the rudeness comment to anyone in particular.....all martial artists either mma or tma dedicate their lives to this thing we are all trying to do....we are all trying this martial arts thing because we have faith in how absolutely positive for human beings it is.....that said....mma guys should truly read some of the great writers of martial arts....for gaining wisdom for the mind, strength of character etc.....we all know how important the mental side of martial arts is....



And, again, this is a romantic ideal, but is very, very far from reality. Not all martial artists, nor MMA athletes, "dedicate their lives" to it... as said, it's a hobby for many, if not most. Each practitioner has their own reasons for training as well... the idea that everyone trains because of some "faith in how positive" it is is also incorrect... some will train because they want to know how to defend themselves, others because of an interest (historical), or a fascination with a culture, or just because it's fun... or because a friend does it, and they get caught up. The same goes for the idea of an emphasis on the mental side. 

What I'm saying is that it's rather dangerous, and unrealistic, to apply your personal interpretations and beliefs to all martial artists (if I'm blunt, at this point, you are still to actually start martial arts training properly... so I'd be incredibly hesitant to state anything about what it's like, or what's important in training and study), as it just doesn't work that way. I'm not wanting to discourage you, just give you an insight into the reality of what you're saying.

To the topic, what the argument is really about is training methodologies... we get the same thing with the arguments from people like Matt Thornton and his "aliveness" concept versus kata-based training. And, really, that comes down to the preference of the system and the practitioner themselves. But as to any distrust? Nah... but there is a huge amount of misunderstanding about the training methods used.


----------



## Cirdan

Xue Sheng said:


> Oh manthis is absolutely pathetican MMA vs TMA thread and everyone is apologizing and friendly.. for crying out loud people if RoninPimp where here he'd have something to say about this... oh wait...he can't be here anymore :uhyeah: Actually that is a good thing
> 
> 
> Yup.it is an old reference to a long gone not missed poster of many a TMA vs MMA knock down dragout



Things are not what they were Xue. In the old days, a thread this long on mma vs tma would result in at least a few bans, some nervous breakdowns, probably an investigation into a person`s past.. and a backyard duel or two to "settle things"


----------



## K-man

Cirdan said:


> Things are not what they were Xue. In the old days, a thread this long on mma vs tma would result in at least a few bans, some nervous breakdowns, probably an investigation into a person`s past.. and a backyard duel or two to "settle things"


Does this mean that we just a bunch of SNAGs?  :ultracool


----------



## Cirdan

K-man said:


> Does this mean that we just a bunch of SNAGs? :ultracool



We are... sausages?? (had to look in the aussie dictionary)

Anyway I think everyone has realized Viking Berzerker Artz are superior so no point in arguing any more. :viking1:


----------



## Chris Parker

Ha, no, I don't think that was the vernacular that K-Man was meaning... in the 90's, the term "SNAG" was used to mean a "sensitive new-age guy"... in other words, largely a wimp who was far more in touch with his feminine side than his masculine. It later turned into the whole metrosexual thing...


----------



## Xue Sheng

Cirdan said:


> Things are not what they were Xue. In the old days, a thread this long on mma vs tma would result in at least a few bans, some nervous breakdowns, probably an investigation into a person`s past.. and a backyard duel or two to "settle things"




And don't forget the name calling... oh and blood...lots and lots of blood


----------



## Aiki Lee

Xue Sheng said:


> Oh man&#8230;this isabsolutely pathetic&#8230;an MMA vs TMA thread and everyone is apologizing andfriendly&#8230;..


----------



## K-man

Himura Kenshin said:


>


I must confess. I find his argument compelling.


----------



## RTKDCMB

If you think about it many traditional martial arts are mixed martial arts in a way. Take Taekwondo for example - it is a mixture of Taekkyon and Shotokan Karate and a little bit of Hapkido, boxing and judo here and there. Many schools have instructors and students who started in other martial arts previously and have incorporated it into what they teach and learn. The line between TMA and MMA is a blurry one.


----------



## Cyriacus

RTKDCMB said:


> Take Taekwondo for example - it is a mixture of Taekkyon and Shotokan Karate and a little bit of Hapkido, boxing and judo here and there.



Hehe - You should go make a thread about that in the TKD forum


----------



## RTKDCMB

Cyriacus said:


> Hehe - You should go make a thread about that in the TKD forum



Good idea although I might start one like it in the general martial arts section to get a wider perspective of what other traditional martial arts are a mix of.


----------



## Kframe

I thought taekyon was extinct long before TKD came around? Thanks to our friends the Japanese.


----------



## Cyriacus

Kframe said:


> I thought taekyon was extinct long before TKD came around? Thanks to our friends the Japanese.



The first punch has been thrown! :cheers:
Now i can wait for the japanese martial arts people to talk about Shotokan and Judo 

Will we get a counterpuncher or a harder punch? Time will tell!
PS: I fully intend to commentate this if it develops.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Cyriacus said:


> The first punch has been thrown! :cheers:
> Now i can wait for the japanese martial arts people to talk about Shotokan and Judo
> 
> Will we get a counterpuncher or a harder punch? Time will tell!
> PS: I fully intend to commentate this if it develops.



Taekkyon doesn't have punches.


----------



## Cyriacus

RTKDCMB said:


> Taekkyon doesn't have punches.



Eheheh.... eheheh.
You should make a thread about that as well, while youre at it buddy


----------



## RTKDCMB

Kframe said:


> I thought taekyon was extinct long before TKD came around? Thanks to our friends the Japanese.



I think some practitioners kept it alive in secret.


----------



## Mon Mon

Many Martial arts traditionally a warrior in different cultures learned a number of different arts in Japan it was quite common for samurai to learn multiple arts each dealing with a specific weapon and empty hand techniques the best studied different arts and put them together to work for them.

So is the same in many martial arts  The most important aspect as a artist is your heart and mind. Yes if you don't throw a committed attack your wasting your time and your partners its stupid to do this in more advanced levels sure start out slow and stop when learning the forms but once you have a good grasp one should throw more realistic attacks in order to push them selves further.

How many people attend dojo's think like a warrior? Not all do. A lot of people don't know how to take a good hit and keep moving this is something that MMA excels in most people train in martial arts but then neglect their physical fitness and constantly put trash in their bodies this is a mistake. 

A good warrior is one who trains in an art they are passionate in puts their ego aside and seeks to learn things from other arts and incorporate it into themselves training as their life depends on it for it very well could.

The world of real martial arts is that of hard work dedication relaxation paying attention to your surroundings your senses your opponent and accepting you could still be killed because no matter how good you are this is a harsh reality of real martial arts. And its not for everyone if you don't live and train as a warrior don't think you can defend yourself.

I respect my MMA brothers who dedicate themselves to what they love and push themselves hard and if i want to know something about ground and pound i study with them to know better how to get off of the ground. I love my TMA brothers who train hard for the art they are passionate in. Many good warriors in both worlds. But anyone who argues about an art being superior to another or MMA being better than TMA or TMA being better than MMA is a foolish person who has a small mind and has not faced any real dangers they should shut up and go train  

Just my thoughts


----------



## Chris Parker

Mon Mon said:


> Many Martial arts traditionally a warrior in different cultures learned a number of different arts in Japan it was quite common for samurai to learn multiple arts each dealing with a specific weapon and empty hand techniques the best studied different arts and put them together to work for them.



Kinda besides the point, but... no. That's not actually accurate at all.


----------



## Kframe

Chris Parker said:


> Kinda besides the point, but... no. That's not actually accurate at all.



Ok that kind of reply annoys me, and you do it frequently.  Its like the drive by media and just as infuriating.  You don't think it is accurate yet failed to provide any reasons why it is inaccurate.  It makes trying to have a dialog with you difficult, as it takes many posts to finally get you to say something that actually informs people.

Dosent change the fact that he is correct. Unarmed fighting is a separate skillset then armed fighting, hence it is 2 separate arts. Some martial systems teach both a weapon(s if their tradition dictates more then 1) and a unarmed system.  I believe it is 1 system with multiple arts contained in it. Things taught in sword class will not nessessarily transfer over to spear class and to unarmed class..


----------



## Chris Parker

The reason I didn't expand was that, well, it was incorrect. Obviously that implies that it wasn't "common for samurai to learn multiple arts each dealing with a specific weapon and empty hand techniques and put them together to work for them". Do we need more than that? Did we need me to list the way martial arts developed in Japan, how the samurai trained, under what circumstances they trained in different arts (because it wasn't for the reasons given, nor was that a truly advisable approach) and when (it was far from across the board, and we're dealing with 1,000 years of history here)? Did you need me to cover what a sogo bujutsu ryu-ha is, or why they work the way they do? Did you need me to describe the way they are designed, as your take on it is also similarly flawed? Absolutely what is taught in one area transfers over to others, that's kinda the point of them... really, you're out of your depth here.


----------



## Kframe

Prove it to me.

Edit to add, You still have not explained how techniques learned for weapon a, translate for weapon b. Say spear and sword. Different as night and day, movements for each are not similar. They are 2 separate arts.


----------



## Kframe

Honestly CP your right, I don't know enough and I don't want to argue.  I concede. My apologies..


----------



## Koshiki

I vote Boxer Briefs, best of both worlds...


----------



## Chris Parker

Kframe said:


> Prove it to me.



Ignoring for a moment that I can't prove a negative, there's a number of things to understand. First is that samurai were in the employ of various Lords (Daimyo). They were, therefore, only able to train in arts that were allowed by the lord themselves... in some cases, that would be very limited (most notably to what were called Otomo Ryu, or "house schools"). Additionally, in many cases (particularly during the more war-ridden times in Japanese history), many, if not most arts were what were called Sogo Bujutsu... these were "comprehensive schools", which taught a syllabus comprising of multiple disciplines, so there was no need to go around learning sword from one person, spear from another, and so on. There's a lot more (such as what the schools were, why different arts would be trained, if at all, and so on), but that's enough for now I feel.



Kframe said:


> Edit to add, You still have not explained how techniques learned for weapon a, translate for weapon b. Say spear and sword. Different as night and day, movements for each are not similar. They are 2 separate arts.



That brings us to the idea of Sogo Bujutsu. The way a Sogo Bujutsu school is set up is that there are certain underlying principles and concepts which are distinctive to that particular Ryu-ha. In other words, learning Katori Shinto Ryu, the Kenjutsu shares the same principles, concepts, and mechanical ideas (as much as possible) with the sojutsu, the naginatajutsu, the yawara (jujutsu), and so on and so forth. In fact, it's this very fact that it all matches itself that makes it work... taking X-Ryu kenjutsu and Y-Ryu Sojutsu and trying to put them together doesn't work at all... a warrior class who depended upon skills learnt for survival would never actually try it, as it'd be suicide.

From there, I'm going to highlight some details of each of your videos, as the simple selection given here shows a lack of experience, which is honestly part of what I meant when I said you were out of your depth here. I'm always open to being asked for clarification of anything I say, but arguing with me when you aren't aware of what you're talking about yourself is, well, not such a good idea.



Kframe said:


>



These guys have no actual training in Sojutsu, and barely any in most other things. The clip is filled with huge numbers of flaws, stemming from both a lack of experience as well as a lack of understanding, and incorrect assumptions based on compromised weapons being used. To read more about this clip (and these persons), see here: http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97845



Kframe said:


>



While this is a Bujinkan group, exactly where the Sojutsu comes from is a question... the most likely candidate is that this is an approach created by Takamatsu, based on Bojutsu (which is kinda backwards to most). There's only one system I've come across that looks similar to the Bujinkan's form, which is Saburi Ryu... a much later development.



Kframe said:


>



Again, this is a fake group. The Ogawa Ryu is a fraudulent "system" created in Brazil about 25 years ago by mimicking what they thought Koryu did, and missing some vital aspects.

In other words, none of these are good examples of Sojutsu, nor do any show a real contrast with any other weapon forms.

Say... here's a few clips that show sogo bujutsu, including a range of methods:





Kashima Shinryu - Kenjutsu





Kashima Shinryu Jutte and Jujutsu

Here, you can see the connection between the Jujutsu and the weapon arts.





Katori Shinto Ryu, showing connections between Kenjutsu and Naginatajutsu (and similar ideas are seen in their Sojutsu, for the record).


----------



## Kframe

Chris, I don't know if you caught it, but I reletented. Honestly I don't know the first thing about these art. What little I know comes from bad Youtube videos.


----------



## Chris Parker

I saw it. The last post was more to improve your knowledge than anything else. There was no malice (believe me, you'd have seen it if it was there, ha!).


----------



## Kframe

I have watched one of them. My ASD son wants the computer so ill watch the rest later. Thanks for posting them. That second to last one was Awesome to see.


----------



## Hanzou

Mr. President said:


> I am a very strong believer that it's not the art but the person using it. Still, whenever there's a video of Kung Fu/Aikido/Wing Chun etc on Youtube, it immediately becomes a comment war between those who like it and those who say that none of that stuff works and real fighters are only MMA fighters.
> 
> I was wondering if this forum's MMA fans share the same distaste/mistrust/skepticism about the combat effectiveness of more traditional arts in real life situations.



Well. think about the nemesis of TMA practitioners; Wrestlers and Boxers. During my Karate days, most of my peers considered beating a boxer or a wrestler to be the ultimate showcase of the effectiveness of our styles. That says something, because it immediately implies that our TMA is inherently inferior to boxing and wrestling, and frankly for the most part it was.

Not because of the art itself, but how we practiced it. A boxer is in the ring hitting an opponent, or outside the ring hitting a heavy bag or jumping rope. Meanwhile, we're in our dojo hitting empty air and doing katas. The boxer has 5 punches they perfect, and we have hundreds that we have to cycle through. Most boxers are lean, and in shape, while most of us were flabby and out of shape. So when it came time to spar against a boxer, the outcome wasn't surprising. Wrestling is no different.

I don't believe that TMAs are all that effective. Swinging a sword around or doing katas/forms isn't going to prepare you for that 250lb gorilla trying to bring pain down upon you. The martial sports are simply better. Why? Because the martial sports get you in better shape, are highly competitive, are highly combative, and cross train constantly. For example, Anderson Silva's domination in MMA made more people check out Muay Thai kickboxing. Rhonda Rousey's success has gotten people to check out Judo.

People who practice MMA have nothing against TMA styles, as long as they're proven. Judo and Muay Thai are as old as many Kung Fu styles, Aikido, and Bujinkan Ninjutsu. The problem is when the latter starts saying that they're too "deadly" for the ring, or forbid their students from cross-training, MMA folks start rolling their eyes. If you can't fight in the ring with rules and safety, you're not going to be able to fight in the street where there are no rules or safety. When your sensei or sifu doesn't want you training at the local BJJ gym, something's wrong.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Well. think about the nemesis of TMA practitioners; Wrestlers and Boxers. During my Karate days, most of my peers considered beating a boxer or a wrestler to be the ultimate showcase of the effectiveness of our styles. That says something, because it immediately implies that our TMA is inherently inferior to boxing and wrestling, and frankly for the most part it was.
> 
> Right from the start you are comparing you karate with boxing and wresting. That is sport karate and it is the sport environment. So I would suggest that if your 'TMA' was inferior to boxing and wrestling, you weren't taught properly to begin with.
> 
> Not because of the art itself, but how we practiced it. A boxer is in the ring hitting an opponent, or outside the ring hitting a heavy bag or jumping rope. Meanwhile, we're in our dojo hitting empty air and doing katas. The boxer has 5 punches they perfect, and we have hundreds that we have to cycle through. Most boxers are lean, and in shape, while most of us were flabby and out of shape. So when it came time to spar against a boxer, the outcome wasn't surprising. Wrestling is no different.
> 
> Again you are comparing apples with oranges. There are lots of boxers I know that just play around to keep a healthy level of fitness. They are no where near 'fighting fit' and the same applies to karateka. Unless we are training for competition we don't need to be at peak condition. I'm certainly not at peak condition and will never be again, but I'm certainly not flabby and out of shape.
> 
> I don't believe that TMAs are all that effective. Swinging a sword around or doing katas/forms isn't going to prepare you for that 250lb gorilla trying to bring pain down upon you. The martial sports are simply better. Why? Because the martial sports get you in better shape, are highly competitive, are highly combative, and cross train constantly. For example, Anderson Silva's domination in MMA made more people check out Muay Thai kickboxing. Rhonda Rousey's success has gotten people to check out Judo.
> 
> You really have an axe to grind don't you? I would suggest 'swinging a sword around' is really nothing to do with any form of street defence. It is practised out of interest and to preserve an art. The fact that you say kata won't help you just demonstrates that you have never used kata in the way it was intended. If you just learn kata to pass a grading without learning how to apply it you may as well learn finger painting.
> 
> Then you say 'the martial *sports* are better'. So once again you are taking about sport. No one would question that a very good MMA fighter would have an advantage over a good boxer, wrestler or sport karate practitioner. But that is a totally different discussion.
> 
> 
> People who practice MMA have nothing against TMA styles, as long as they're proven. Judo and Muay Thai are as old as many Kung Fu styles, Aikido, and Bujinkan Ninjutsu. The problem is when the latter starts saying that they're too "deadly" for the ring, or forbid their students from cross-training, MMA folks start rolling their eyes. If you can't fight in the ring with rules and safety, you're not going to be able to fight in the street where there are no rules or safety. When your sensei or sifu doesn't want you training at the local BJJ gym, something's wrong.
> 
> Judo is much more recent than Muay Thai. Judo is not the same as it was when Kano developed it and Aikido was developed at about the same time from Daito Ryu. On the other hand, Kung fu has been around for centuries as has been Ninjutsu.


Now, let's look at you proposition that the problem is when people claim their art is too deadly. Most martial arts like Kung fu and Karate were designed to protect the person against untrained assailants. These assailants may have been armed. The training provided through the kata includes many lethal techniques such as neck breaks, chokes strangles etc. if someone grabs me in a backstreet I might well stick my thumbs straight in his eyes. I don't think blinding someone is acceptable in the ring but if I am competing in the ring I have to accept that a lot of my training can't be used.

I'm not into sport karate and I don't teach it for the ring. I teach it to help ensure that if my students ever encounter a problem on the street, they will be able to walk away. 

This is not denigrating MMA. I believe they are the best rounded ring fighters about. It's just that MMA and properly trained TMA are totally different animals.
:asian:

BTW welcome to MT. Perhaps you could tell us a little about yourself on 'Meet & Greet'.  :wavey:


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> _Right from the start you are comparing you karate with boxing and wresting. That is sport karate and it is the sport environment. So I would suggest that if your 'TMA' was inferior to boxing and wrestling, you weren't taught properly to begin with._



Actually I was taught traditional Shotokan Karate. However, even if I was learning "sport Karate" wrestling and boxing are also sports, and in contest after contest, wrestlers and boxers tear traditional martial artists a new one over and over again. What are they doing that TMA exponents are not doing?



> _Again you are comparing apples with oranges. There are lots of boxers I know that just play around to keep a healthy level of fitness. They are no where near 'fighting fit' and the same applies to karateka. Unless we are training for competition we don't need to be at peak condition. I'm certainly not at peak condition and will never be again, but I'm certainly not flabby and out of shape._



Well that's what I'm saying. If you're training for competition at various intervals, you're going to be in some level of shape versus someone who never trains for competition. A person who competes every six months or so is still going to be in better physical condition than someone who never competes, or will never compete. An athlete is simply superior in terms of physical conditioning than a non-athlete. Boxing, Judo, and Wrestling facilitate this. TMA simply does not (for the most part).



> _You really have an axe to grind don't you? I would suggest 'swinging a sword around' is really nothing to do with any form of street defence. It is practised out of interest and to preserve an art. The fact that you say kata won't help you just demonstrates that you have never used kata in the way it was intended. If you just learn kata to pass a grading without learning how to apply it you may as well learn finger painting._



No, I don't have an axe to grind. I'm just pointing out things that I've noticed over the years. Let's be honest; In the vast majority of TMA schools, the kata is simply in place just to fatten the curriculum (and the wallet), and give owners something to grade their students. It is almost never broken down to its core techniques. Mainly because of time constraints, and mainly because its an out of date training tool. There's nothing wrong with preserving the traditional art. However in terms of fighting and self defense, such things are pretty useless. In terms of physical fitness and exercise, they are great though.
_



			Then you say 'the martial *sports* are better'. So once again you are taking about sport. No one would question that a very good MMA fighter would have an advantage over a good boxer, wrestler or sport karate practitioner. But that is a totally different discussion.
		
Click to expand...



_I'm also saying that a MMA fighter, Boxer, and Wrestler would have an advantage over a TMA practitioner as well.



> _Judo is much more recent than Muay Thai. Judo is not the same as it was when Kano developed it and Aikido was developed at about the same time from Daito Ryu. On the other hand, Kung fu has been around for centuries as has been Ninjutsu._


_


_It depends on the Kung Fu style. Choy Li Fut for example is only about 40 years older than Judo. Judo is about 40 years older than Aikido. I have personal issues with Ninjutsu's history as explained by Hatsumi. I would personally consider Ninjutsu as practiced today to be not much more than 50 years old.



> Now, let's look at you proposition that the problem is when people claim their art is too deadly. Most martial arts like Kung fu and Karate were designed to protect the person against untrained assailants. These assailants may have been armed. The training provided through the kata includes many lethal techniques such as neck breaks, chokes strangles etc. if someone grabs me in a backstreet I might well stick my thumbs straight in his eyes. I don't think blinding someone is acceptable in the ring but if I am competing in the ring I have to accept that a lot of my training can't be used.



Yes, but who is more capable of using chokes, strangles, and breaks in a tense situation against a resisting opponent? The person drilling a kata over and over, or a the Judoka or BJJ practitioner who practices these moves constantly over and over again in randori against a resisting opponent?



> This is not denigrating MMA. I believe they are the best rounded ring fighters about. It's just that MMA and properly trained TMA are totally different animals.



I have to disagree. MMA is TMA. MMA folks simply took TMAs and merged them together to create combat sports and self defense. Most TMAs are combinations of various styles, and most TMAs were tested in the "sport" arena throughout Asia and other places. This fear of testing your style in competition (with or without rules) is a fairly new phenomenon.



> BTW welcome to MT. Perhaps you could tell us a little about yourself on 'Meet & Greet'.  :wavey:



Thanks for the welcome. I will be sure to do just that.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Actually I was taught traditional Shotokan Karate. However, even if I was learning "sport Karate" wrestling and boxing are also sports, and in contest after contest, wrestlers and boxers tear traditional martial artists a new one over and over again. What are they doing that TMA exponents are not doing?
> 
> Mmm! I think we must be living on different planets. I don't regard Shotokan as 'traditional'. It was developed by Funakoshi from Shorin Ryu and Shorei Ryu. All the 'traditional' stuff was left out. It was developed to teach in schools and universities, not to kill people. Parents can get upset when that happens.
> 
> Shotokan is a great style of sport karate and can rightly be compared with other sports. For what it's worth, I consider Kyokushin and all other Japanese systems the same. That doesn't mean you can't add stuff back to make them more reality based but as normally taught they are 'sport'.
> 
> I could write a book on why sport based karateka lose out to boxers etc. (in fact I am writing a book  ) You only have to step back and watch the training to see so many bad principles, starting from the feet up.
> 
> Well that's what I'm saying. If you're training for competition at various intervals, you're going to be in some level of shape versus someone who never trains for competition. A person who competes every six months or so is still going to be in better physical condition than someone who never competes, or will never compete. An athlete is simply superior in terms of physical conditioning than a non-athlete. Boxing, Judo, and Wrestling facilitate this. TMA simply does not (for the most part).
> 
> Depends where you train. When I was training a sport based Japanese system back in the 80s my teachers were the Australian team. They were extremely fit. I thought they were fantastic. But again, I thought at the time what I was learning was a TMA. It took me many years to realise that so much more existed.
> 
> No, I don't have an axe to grind. I'm just pointing out things that I've noticed over the years. Let's be honest; In the vast majority of TMA schools, the kata is simply in place just to fatten the curriculum (and the wallet), and give owners something to grade their students. It is almost never broken down to its core techniques. Mainly because of time constraints, and mainly because its an out of date training tool. There's nothing wrong with preserving the traditional art. However in terms of fighting and self defense, such things are pretty useless. In terms of physical fitness and exercise, they are great though.
> 
> I'm not convinced you have ever seen a traditional school. Kata is 90% of a traditional school! but not the kihon kata you are talking about. That is basic kata. You move onto the advanced form of kata, then start to explore the applications. I could agree that it is almost never trained the way it was intended but to say it is an out of date training tool demonstrates your lack of understanding of the teaching style of the Japanese. Kihon kata is the 'shu' part of the learning. It is where you copy your teacher exactly. That is unfortunately where most karateka stop. They never go the next step to the 'ha' form and I have only seen a handful of people at the 'ri' level where you make the kata your own.
> 
> If you are unfamiliar with this concept of Shuhari there is a little here.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuhari
> 
> I'm also saying that a MMA fighter, Boxer, and Wrestler would have an advantage over a TMA practitioner as well.
> 
> Again we have the problem of terminology. Certainly an MMA fighter has the advantage over straight boxers, wrestlers or sport karateka, but a TMA practitioner is training for something totally different. They don't train to go in the ring.
> 
> [/I]It depends on the Kung Fu style. Choy Li Fut for example is only about 40 years older than Judo. Judo is about 40 years older than Aikido. I have personal issues with Ninjutsu's history as explained by Hatsumi. I would personally consider Ninjutsu as practiced today to be not much more than 50 years old.
> 
> Yes, but who is more capable of using chokes, strangles, and breaks in a tense situation against a resisting opponent? The person drilling a kata over and over, or a the Judoka or BJJ practitioner who practices these moves constantly over and over again in randori against a resisting opponent?
> 
> Your traditional martial artist does not practise these things by performing kata.  (Remember, kata as it is performed is the kihon.) We train them over and over against total resistance. We also train them with minimal resistance to teach the reversals. This type of training is not restricted to just one or two styles. If you were not taught all this at the karate school you attended, then is the fault of the school and the instructors, not the fault of the system. It's a bit like a car without an engine. It looks fantastic on the outside but it's never going to go anywhere.
> 
> I have to disagree. MMA is TMA. MMA folks simply took TMAs and merged them together to create combat sports and self defense. Most TMAs are combinations of various styles, and most TMAs were tested in the "sport" arena throughout Asia and other places. This fear of testing your style in competition (with or without rules) is a fairly new phenomenon.
> 
> MMA is much closer to traditional martial arts than you realise. Kano had strikes in judo before he took them out for sport. Ueshiba had atemi in aikido although only a small percentage of schools teach it. Karate had all the locks holds and throws before it went into the schools. Now if you want to learn those things in karate you need to find a traditional school, not the sport based ones.
> 
> Thanks for the welcome. I will be sure to do just that.


Cheers!
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> _I could write a book on why sport based karateka lose out to boxers etc. (in fact I am writing a book __ ) You only have to step back and watch the training to see so many bad principles, starting from the feet up._


_
_

Its not just sport karate that loses out to boxers and wrestlers. Its karate in general, along with many other traditional styles. Hence why those styles shy away from competition. Competition would expose their effectiveness in a fight.




> _I'm not convinced you have ever seen a traditional school. Kata is 90% of a traditional school! but not the kihon kata you are talking about. That is basic kata. You move onto the advanced form of kata, then start to explore the applications. I could agree that it is almost never trained the way it was intended but to say it is an out of date training tool demonstrates your lack of understanding of the teaching style of the Japanese. Kihon kata is the 'shu' part of the learning. It is where you copy your teacher exactly. That is unfortunately where most karateka stop. They never go the next step to the 'ha' form and I have only seen a handful of people at the 'ri' level where you make the kata your own._


_
_
Again, that is simply a waste of time. What's the point in wasting training time doing a kata when you can better hone your abilities in randori or via a heavy bag? Obviously I can see the purpose behind this if your goal is to preserve the martial art (for some reason), but in terms of fighting, there's just no purpose behind it. This is why boxers are better strikers than Karatekas or Kung Fu practitioners. They study 4-5 punches, and then learn how to apply power behind those 4-5 punches. You could argue that shadow boxing is a kata, but then again, you shadow box like you fight. You don't fight like the kata or form in any style of MA.



> _Again we have the problem of terminology. Certainly an MMA fighter has the advantage over straight boxers, wrestlers or sport karateka, but a TMA practitioner is training for something totally different. They don't train to go in the ring._


_
_

They don't train for fighting either. They were created to fight on a battlefield, but people haven't used them on the battlefield for centuries. That causes an art to dry up and slowly die.




> _Your traditional martial artist does not practise these things by performing kata. (Remember, kata as it is performed is the kihon.) We train them over and over against total resistance. We also train them with minimal resistance to teach the reversals. This type of training is not restricted to just one or two styles. If you were not taught all this at the karate school you attended, then is the fault of the school and the instructors, not the fault of the system. It's a bit like a car without an engine. It looks fantastic on the outside but it's never going to go anywhere._


_
_
Well that was a complete avoidance of the question. The fact that Judoka and Bjj practitioners can perform locks and throws in a competitive environment while traditional arts cannot proves my point. Regardless of the training method your TMA employs, the superior method of utilizing locks, throws, and submissions was created by the Kodokan over a century ago.




> _MMA is much closer to traditional martial arts than you realise. Kano had strikes in judo before he took them out for sport. Ueshiba had atemi in aikido although only a small percentage of schools teach it. Karate had all the locks holds and throws before it went into the schools. Now if you want to learn those things in karate you need to find a traditional school, not the sport based ones._


_
_
I think you're confusing mixed martial arts with modern martial arts. Aikido isn't a part of the standard MMA curriculum you see in many MMA schools. Mostly because its viewed as ineffective, despite it being a modern form of MA.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Its not just sport karate that loses out to boxers and wrestlers. Its karate in general, along with many other traditional styles. Hence why those styles shy away from competition. Competition would expose their effectiveness in a fight.
> 
> That is just your opinion. Traditional karate is not for completion. It is obvious that you don't understand the difference between the two. It you want to limit the discussion to sport karate I could mostly agree.
> 
> Again, that is simply a waste of time. What's the point in wasting training time doing a kata when you can better hone your abilities in randori or via a heavy bag? Obviously I can see the purpose behind this if your goal is to preserve the martial art (for some reason), but in terms of fighting, there's just no purpose behind it. This is why boxers are better strikers than Karatekas or Kung Fu practitioners. They study 4-5 punches, and then learn how to apply power behind those 4-5 punches. You could argue that shadow boxing is a kata, but then again, you shadow box like you fight. You don't fight like the kata or form in any style of MA.
> 
> Again obvious that you have never seen kata applied. Check out Iain Abernethy if you want to see a Shotokan practitioner using kata bunkai. Performing kata has very little to do with preserving. Each kata is actually a fighting system and believe me, the purpose of it is to dispose of your assailant quickly.
> 
> Many boxers are better strikers than karateka but not for the reason I suspect you believe. Punches in Kung fu are different again. Most karateka are not taught to punch properly, especially those involved in point sparring. Go to Okinawa and watch the karate guys there punching and tell one of them they are not punching properly.
> 
> They don't train for fighting either. They were created to fight on a battlefield, but people haven't used them on the battlefield for centuries. That causes an art to dry up and slowly die.
> 
> Totally incorrect. The Okinawan martial arts were for civilian self defence, the Chinese ones for the monks to defend themselves and the monasteries. Karate hasn't been in existence for centuries and apart from perhaps some limited use in the second Sino-Japanese war and WWII has not been used on a battlefield at all. For the Japanese karate as trained in the military was primarily for fitness.
> 
> Well that was a complete avoidance of the question. The fact that Judoka and Bjj practitioners can perform locks and throws in a competitive environment while traditional arts cannot proves my point. Regardless of the training method your TMA employs, the superior method of utilizing locks, throws, and submissions was created by the Kodokan over a century ago.
> 
> I didn't avoid the question. You ignored my answer!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but who is more capable of using chokes, strangles, and breaks in a tense situation against a resisting opponent? The person drilling a kata over and over, or a the Judoka or BJJ practitioner who practices these moves constantly over and over again in randori against a resisting opponent?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But, I'll try again. The person who can use the chokes etc is the person who trains them. We practise them over and over as well although obviously not as much as BJJ as they are specialist grapplers. You are fixated on 'drilling kata'. Did you read the reference to Shuhari? Going up and down the dojo drilling kata is not what kata is about. Kata is about standing in front of you opponent within grappling distance learning to use your kata.
> 
> I think you're confusing mixed martial arts with modern martial arts. Aikido isn't a part of the standard MMA curriculum you see in many MMA schools. Mostly because its viewed as ineffective, despite it being a modern form of MA.
Click to expand...

I'm not confusing MMA with anything. This thread is about MMA vs TMA and you are confusing TMA with modern martial arts. There are also many threads on the usefulness of Aikido. Suffice to say that the most effective martial artist I have ever seen is an Aikidoka, so I know it can be effective. Aikido is not part of MMA curriculum because most of what is in aikido is in BJJ and aikido has very little ground work, an essential part of competition. But the main points are TMAs are not designed to be tested in the ring with rules and TMAs are not the same as the sport based MAs that you normally see.
:asian:


----------



## Kframe

Part of the problem with karate is Funakoshi. His irresponsible actions with karate left it in the state its in today.  I would love to see what karate was like before his meddling. What it was trained like and how it would compare to karate today and which would win a fight to the death. 

Having said that, Ill mention my father. You see taekwondo is in even worse shape then karate. You have Koreans who learnt only part of a already water down and diluted system, going back home and trying to create there own thing. Removing whole components of kata and other training because they were never fully taught it and didn't understand it. So you have people who learned a diluted system, creating a even more diluted system. 

I mention all that to give you a idea of what happens when someone takes a watered down art like TKD and fully explores it like its sapposed to be.  Most of his young adult life he could not drive, so he hitched. Lots of people attempted to jump him back then. He won them all thanks to his study of TKD. Note I said his study.  He had some not mainstream political views back then and got assaulted many times due to that. Won them all, using solid basics, and GASP throws locks and takedowns. Which now adays is weird for a TKD person. Not for him, it was part and parcel of who he was. While he loved TKD kicking, and preferred it, all of his fights took place at close range and made him use the underutilized hand techs of TKD.  

That is what a properly studied TMA will do. Thing is, he had to devote many many hours outside of the Dojang, with his boxer/wrestler/weightlifter identical twin brother training and exploring the art. He learned more about TKD from his private training then he did in the actual Dojang... I attribute this to the system being a watered down diluted mess, modeled after a watered down diluted mess that is Karate.


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou honestly though you don't sound as if you know a lot about the history and actual usage of good karate.  Just because it dosent do well in mma does not mean it is inferior. Many many people use it to defend them selvs on the street. If someone uses karate on the street and lives to tell about it, then it was a smashing success.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> _That is just your opinion. Traditional karate is not for completion. It is obvious that you don't understand the difference between the two. It you want to limit the discussion to sport karate I could mostly agree._


You're correct, I don't. You're supposedly practicing how to fight, yet you refuse to fight. Bjj, Judo, Boxing, Muay Thai, and other arts are able to compete and be effective forms of martial arts and self defense. Muay Thai is traditional as hell, and they have no problem competing. Why can't traditional Karate? Are your techniques too deadly for the ring? Are traditional karate instructors unable to modify their art from competition to traditional? Other arts have no problem doing that. Why can't traditional karate, Jj, and other styles?



> _Again obvious that you have never seen kata applied. Check out Iain Abernethy if you want to see a Shotokan practitioner using kata bunkai. Performing kata has very little to do with preserving. Each kata is actually a fighting system and believe me, the purpose of it is to dispose of your assailant quickly._


Again correct, because traditional karatekas don't compete. So there's no way for anyone to actually gauge the effectiveness of anything they're doing. There's no way for anyone to actually see if Iain Abernethy can actually apply any of that pretty bunkai on an opponent trying to cave his face in. That's the problem. Unfortunately for students of such styles, its also the perfect scam.
_



			Many boxers are better strikers than karateka but not for the reason I suspect you believe. Punches in Kung fu are different again. Most karateka are not taught to punch properly, especially those involved in point sparring. Go to Okinawa and watch the karate guys there punching and tell one of them they are not punching properly.
		
Click to expand...

_
If there were Okinawan Karatekas willing to openly challenge boxers and others to fight them, I wouldn't need to fly to Okinawa to do any of that. The evidence would be evident. Just like I don't need to fly to Brazil to know that Bjj is a legit art. Practitioners or that style went around and fought all comers, earning the respect that style has today. Furthermore, I shouldn't need to fly to the source, why aren't there any Okinawan stylists setting up challenges? It would be a great way to promote the art, and prove its legitimacy. Who wouldn't want to see a traditional karateka go up against a semi-pro boxer?

But of course, you guys don't compete.....
_



			Totally incorrect. The Okinawan martial arts were for civilian self defence, the Chinese ones for the monks to defend themselves and the monasteries. Karate hasn't been in existence for centuries and apart from perhaps some limited use in the second Sino-Japanese war and WWII has not been used on a battlefield at all. For the Japanese karate as trained in the military was primarily for fitness.
		
Click to expand...

_
I was talking about TMAs in general. Not just Karate and Kung Fu.


_



			I didn't avoid the question. You ignored my answer!
		
Click to expand...

_


> _
> Yes, but who is more capable of using chokes, strangles, and breaks in a tense situation against a resisting opponent? The person drilling a kata over and over, or a the Judoka or BJJ practitioner who practices these moves constantly over and over again in randori against a resisting opponent?
> 
> _
> _But, I'll try again. The person who can use the chokes etc is the person who trains them. We practise them over and over as well although obviously not as much as BJJ as they are specialist grapplers. You are fixated on 'drilling kata'. Did you read the reference to Shuhari? Going up and down the dojo drilling kata is not what kata is about. Kata is about standing in front of you opponent within grappling distance learning to use your kata._


And I'm telling you that you're not going to be able to apply those moves in a self defense situation because you're not training it in an alive fashion. You're doing set drills. Granted, they're sped up set drills, but they're drills nonetheless. Drills utilized for specific attacks that require specific counters for them to be effective. This is why Kano completely abandoned them when he founded Judo. Kano discovered a superior method in randori, and that superiority has been proven over and over again.



> I'm not confusing MMA with anything. This thread is about MMA vs TMA and you are confusing TMA with modern martial arts. There are also many threads on the usefulness of Aikido. Suffice to say that the most effective martial artist I have ever seen is an Aikidoka, so I know it can be effective. Aikido is not part of MMA curriculum because most of what is in aikido is in BJJ and aikido has very little ground work, an essential part of competition. But the main points are TMAs are not designed to be tested in the ring with rules and TMAs are not the same as the sport based MAs that you normally see.



Muay Thai and Boxing has little groundwork, yet they are the standard curriculum for most MMA practitioners. The excuse that TMAs aren't designed to be tested in the ring is exactly that. Again, no one doubts that boxers, wrestlers, judoka, Bjjers, and other martial athletes can defend themselves. So clearly, sport competition doesn't harm the effectiveness of the art. So what's the problem? Refusing to compete or participate in MMA fights casts a shadow of doubt over everything that TMA practitioners claim.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Hanzou honestly though you don't sound as if you know a lot about the history and actual usage of good karate.  Just because it dosent do well in mma does not mean it is inferior. Many many people use it to defend them selvs on the street. If someone uses karate on the street and lives to tell about it, then it was a smashing success.



The fact that it doesn't do well in a controlled fighting environment makes its proficiency in an uncontrolled fighting environment highly suspect. Its like saying a race car driver shouldn't be expected to be able to drive on a residential street because there's more rules in place than on a race track.

I don't know how many people have used karate to defend themselves. Maybe quite a few have. However, if a loved one was asking my opinion on a martial art to take to defend themselves, Karate wouldn't be one of the arts I would recommend to them.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> The fact that it doesn't do well in a controlled fighting environment makes its proficiency in an uncontrolled fighting environment highly suspect. Its like saying a race car driver shouldn't be expected to be able to drive on a residential street because there's more rules place than on a race track.
> 
> I don't know how many people have used karate to defend themselves. Maybe quite a few have. However, if a loved one was asking my opinion on a martial art to take to defend themselves, Karate wouldn't be one of the arts I would recommend to them.


That's the exact opposite of reality.  By putting rules on fighting your severely limit Karate's usefulness.  Karate wasn't designed for the ring and wasn't designed for rules.  
I'm not referring to BS to deadly for the ring stuff I'm talking about basic target areas of Karate are off limits in the ring.  The eyes, groin, throat, small joints like fingers and toes.  
You keep saying Karate cant compete.  There are several full contact karate tournaments all over the world  
There are karate fighters all over the world in all lvls of professional fights from the UFC on down. 

 There is no perfect system out there that's what MMA is people trained is several different arts.  There is no one art that can dominate alone. No one style alone can "compete" in MMA.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> If there were Okinawan Karatekas willing to openly challenge boxers and others to fight them, I wouldn't need to fly to Okinawa to do any of that. The evidence would be evident. Just like I don't need to fly to Brazil to know that Bjj is a legit art. Practitioners or that style went around and fought all comers, earning the respect that style has today. Furthermore, I shouldn't need to fly to the source, why aren't there any Okinawan stylists setting up challenges? It would be a great way to promote the art, and prove its legitimacy. Who wouldn't want to see a traditional karateka go up against a semi-pro boxer?
> 
> But of course, you guys don't compete.....



Looks like competition to me


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> That's the exact opposite of reality.  By putting rules on fighting your severely limit Karate's usefulness.  Karate wasn't designed for the ring and wasn't designed for rules.
> I'm not referring to BS to deadly for the ring stuff I'm talking about basic target areas of Karate are off limits in the ring.  The eyes, groin, throat, small joints like fingers and toes.



And in a self defense situation, you oftentimes cannot blind a person, or crush their windpipe. For example in my case, I work with troubled young adults who need restrained. One punched a co-worker in the face, and I had to apply a Judo pin (after I "gently" took them to the ground) to insure the safety of myself, my co-worker, and the student. A couple of years ago, a good friend of mine became insanely drunk, and flipped out on another friend of mine. I had to apply a body lock on him to keep him under control. These are just two examples of me utilizing perfectly valid "ring" techniques in a self defense situation. How are those rules severely limiting the usefulness of my art? Is Karate and other TMAs somehow different than Judo/Bjj?

For all the rules in competitive Judo, Boxing, BJJ, or wrestling, no one is crazy enough to apply such rules in a self defense situation. Further, no one doubts that any of those "sports" are perfectly viable methods of self defense. 



> You keep saying Karate cant compete. There are several full contact karate tournaments all over the world
> There are karate fighters all over the world in all lvls of professional fights from the UFC on down.



I never said there wasn't. I'm talking about the traditional martial arts styles that refuse to compete. The ones that you stated would be severely limited because of rules.



> There is no perfect system out there that's what MMA is people trained is several different arts.  There is no one art that can dominate alone. No one style alone can "compete" in MMA.



I definitely agree. I'm simply pointing out that the only way we can objectively test a style's effectiveness is in the competitive arena. Anecdotal evidence about some awesome traditionalist is simply not enough. If a boxing gym opens up and puts out sub-par fighters, its not going to be open very long. If a Bjj school opens up and other Bjj practitioners go to that school and find out its a joke, its not going to be open very long. However, there's numerous examples of TMA scammers and phonies being open for decades.



ballen0351 said:


> Looks like competition to me



Kyokushin is Japanese, and it isn't traditional. My mother is older than that style of Karate. 

However, thank you for proving my point. Competition and sport has not dilluted Kyokushin whatsoever. It is a devastating form of Karate, highly respected in MMA circles, and it continues to evolve because of its competitive nature.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> You're correct, I don't. You're supposedly practicing how to fight, yet you refuse to fight. Bjj, Judo, Boxing, Muay Thai, and other arts are able to compete and be effective forms of martial arts and self defense. Muay Thai is traditional as hell, and they have no problem competing. Why can't traditional Karate? Are your techniques too deadly for the ring? Are traditional karate instructors unable to modify their art from competition to traditional? Other arts have no problem doing that. Why can't traditional karate, Jj, and other styles?
> 
> OK, I'll try one last time. Would you agree Iaido is a modern martial art? How do you think an MMA fighter in the ring would compete? OK we take away the sword and all of a sudden, surprise, surprise, the MMA fighter has the advantage. Traditional karate was never designed as sport and although some styles have adapted their practice, traditional karate has not. I don't want to modify my training for sport. I train for RBSD.
> 
> Again correct, because traditional karatekas don't compete. So there's no way for anyone to actually gauge the effectiveness of anything they're doing. There's no way for anyone to actually see if Iain Abernethy can actually apply any of that pretty bunkai on an opponent trying to cave his face in. That's the problem. Unfortunately for students of such styles, its also the perfect scam.
> 
> You are 100% right.Iain Abernathy has absolutely nothing he could show you and all the rest of us are scamming our students.
> 
> If there were Okinawan Karatekas willing to openly challenge boxers and others to fight them, I wouldn't need to fly to Okinawa to do any of that. The evidence would be evident. Just like I don't need to fly to Brazil to know that Bjj is a legit art. Practitioners or that style went around and fought all comers, earning the respect that style has today. Furthermore, I shouldn't need to fly to the source, why aren't there any Okinawan stylists setting up challenges? It would be a great way to promote the art, and prove its legitimacy. Who wouldn't want to see a traditional karateka go up against a semi-pro boxer?
> 
> But of course, you guys don't compete.....
> 
> Okinawan karateka have no need to prove anything. Why would they want to challenge boxers or others?
> 
> I was talking about TMAs in general. Not just Karate and Kung Fu.
> 
> Like what?
> 
> And I'm telling you that you're not going to be able to apply those moves in a self defense situation because you're not training it in an alive fashion. You're doing set drills. Granted, they're sped up set drills, but they're drills nonetheless. Drills utilized for specific attacks that require specific counters for them to be effective. This is why Kano completely abandoned them when he founded Judo. Kano discovered a superior method in randori, and that superiority has been proven over and over again.
> 
> We don't use any 'drills', set or otherwise. It is principle based training utilising randori. When my partner passes out unexpectedly, that is live enough for me.
> 
> Muay Thai and Boxing has little groundwork, yet they are the standard curriculum for most MMA practitioners. The excuse that TMAs aren't designed to be tested in the ring is exactly that. Again, no one doubts that boxers, wrestlers, judoka, Bjjers, and other martial athletes can defend themselves. So clearly, sport competition doesn't harm the effectiveness of the art. So what's the problem? Refusing to compete or participate in MMA fights casts a shadow of doubt over everything that TMA practitioners claim.
> 
> Total garbage. There have been dozens of karateka compete in MMA. I'll just give you one hundred for now!
> http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f61/30-successful-karate-fighters-mma-1040386/
> You might have heard of some of them ...
> 
> Lyoto Machida (Shotokan), Bas Rutten (Kyokushin), Chuck Liddell (Kempo), George St-Pierre (Kyokushin), Sam Greco (Seidokaikan), Neil Grove (Goju Ryu), etc.


I'm over it. You have a position and although it is flawed you are sticking to it. You list your main art as Japanese MA which probably means you haven't trained much at all. Certainly you have no idea of TMAs.
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> _OK, I'll try one last time. Would you agree Iaido is a modern martial art? How do you think an MMA fighter in the ring would compete? OK we take away the sword and all of a sudden, surprise, surprise, the MMA fighter has the advantage. Traditional karate was never designed as sport and although some styles have adapted their practice, traditional karate has not. I don't want to modify my training for sport. I train for RBSD. _


_
_

Terrible analogy. Karate and Judo for example are both empty handed fighting systems developed for self defense. Iado isn't, because its highly unlikely you're going to be walking around with a sword. Further Iado is more of a spiritual pursuit (moving Zen) than a form of self defense.



> _You are 100% right.Iain Abernathy has absolutely nothing he could show you and all the rest of us are scamming our students. _


_
_
I've simply seen better training methods than what I saw out of Abernathy. I'm not saying he isn't a competent martial artist, because he certainly is. I just don't buy into the notion that those methods are effective means of performing grappling and holds. Every experience I've had (usually against Karatekas and classical Jj practicioners), their locking and grappling abilities are ineffective, and severely lacking in technique and power. Most locks they attempt are pretty easily reversed and countered. I'm not saying this to be mean, I'm simply discussing my experience. Perhaps you could recommend some classical MA schools that I should visit to see the "real" stuff?



> _Okinawan karateka have no need to prove anything. Why would they want to challenge boxers or others?_


_
_
To prove that their traditional style can compete with more modern methods.

_



			Total garbage. There have been dozens of karateka compete in MMA. I'll just give you one hundred for now!
		
Click to expand...

_


> _http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f61/30-successful-karate-fighters-mma-1040386/
> You might have heard of some of them ...
> _
> _Lyoto Machida (Shotokan), Bas Rutten (Kyokushin), Chuck Liddell (Kempo), George St-Pierre (Kyokushin), Sam Greco (Seidokaikan), Neil Grove (Goju Ryu), etc._


_
_
All of those Karate styles listed above are modern or sport Karate styles. Seidokan was founded in the 80s. Goju Ryu was founded in 1930. Where's the traditional "real" karate you were talking about earlier?

What happened to this?



> _Mmm! I think we must be living on different planets. I don't regard Shotokan as 'traditional'. It was developed by Funakoshi from Shorin Ryu and Shorei Ryu. All the 'traditional' stuff was left out. It was developed to teach in schools and universities, not to kill people. Parents can get upset when that happens. _
> 
> _Shotokan is a great style of sport karate and can rightly be compared with other sports. For what it's worth, I consider Kyokushin and all other Japanese systems the same. That doesn't mean you can't add stuff back to make them more reality based but as normally taught they are 'sport'. _
> 
> _I could write a book on why sport based karateka lose out to boxers etc. (in fact I am writing a book __ ) You only have to step back and watch the training to see so many bad principles, starting from the feet up._


_
_



> I'm over it. You have a position and although it is flawed you are sticking to it. You list your main art as Japanese MA which probably means you haven't trained much at all. Certainly you have no idea of TMAs.



LoL! No, my background is simply in the Japanese martial arts. I've been doing martial arts for most of my life. But yes, since Shotokan isn't considered a traditional art, I haven't trained in a traditional MA style. Mostly because I could never verify whether it was real or some scam. Also all the squabbles about lineage and "purity" was annoying and childish. I moved over to Judo/Bjj and boxing. Much quieter, and quite a bit more effective.


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou you keep mentioning  traditional Japanese Jujutsu, yet you don't ever mention any specific style. What do you know of traditional Jujutsu? Did you actually train in a old koryu art or something later?   I think that maybe some of the people with more experience in them should come and educate you on such matters. 

I know that Kirk Lawson can relate that most Classical European arts didn't compete much.  From my understanding  from reading online, is that when they did, it a lot of times was more of a battlefield simulation. Fights were not stopped until first blood. They would have one squad of guys line up and go fight another squad of guys.  Often time severe injuries and even death were the norm. That is not sportive competition, that's something else. Our military does something similar, just with simunition and with out all the injury and death.. 

You need to stop spreading hatred man.  I hate to tell you this, but mma need to start becoming friends with TMA and real quick like.  The progressives are coming for mma and boxing and oddly football. You think that when they get done removing all the contact and fun from foot ball that they will stop there? NO they will go on to either out right ban mma, or enact such rules that make doing certain things in a match illegal. Thusly screwing and ruining mma for the perceivable future.  They have been after boxing for most of this century.  

If being allowed to train in ANY martial art, is to survive in  a form were people actually get good training from it, then all styles need to ban together. This infighting must stop, it does not help the overall cuase of martial arts. A house divided will not stand. Hang together or hang alone..  If mma keeps alienating tma, what makes you think that the tma will do anything when the ban hammer starts coming down on mma? What makes you think they will actively protest and campaign against such things. The answer is they wont and only mma and the rampant ego and macho douche baggery that is filling it.  I have trained mma, it has helped me immensely. I left it due to the egos, and bad sparring encounters oh and the fact that mma gyms in my area are not stable and don't last very long. 

MMA is attracting not good people(Miguel Falco im looking at you.).  Whats funny is you hold mma up on a pedestal and yet, when push came to shove, Falco fought like a  untrained brawler. Showing no semblance of skill or expertise. MMA needs to stop attracting Douche bags and start holding people to a higher moral and behavioral standard. 

All martial arts styles need to work with each other in open comradeship, not hatred and derision. We all need to support each other.  Tma/mma need to work together to keep the martial arts viable and untainted by the foolishness of progressive lawmakers who wish to control the populous and remove things that they perceive as unneeded and unfit for consumption.  

Here is a good idea. Why don't you and your mma friends, make arrangements for a cross training day with a local karate place?  Don't be a dojo stormer, but go in and have a cross training day, and see if you both cant learn something. Maybe you can help them use there defenses  in a more alive sense. Maybe they can show you humility and some good techniques you can try in sparring. Oh and when I say there defenses, I ment the defenses they train. Don't try to force MT/boxing on them. They need to use what they already do.. 

I think it would be great fun or everyone.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> And in a self defense situation, you oftentimes cannot blind a person, or crush their windpipe. For example in my case, I work with troubled young adults who need restrained. One punched a co-worker in the face, and I had to apply a Judo pin (after I "gently" took them to the ground) to insure the safety of myself, my co-worker, and the student. A couple of years ago, a good friend of mine became insanely drunk, and flipped out on another friend of mine. I had to apply a body lock on him to keep him under control. These are just two examples of me utilizing perfectly valid "ring" techniques in a self defense situation. How are those rules severely limiting the usefulness of my art? Is Karate and other TMAs somehow different than Judo/Bjj?


Needing to restrain a kid, or a drunk friend isnt really Self defense.  Ive been a cop for almost 15 years if I go grab a guy to arrest him and he struggles and I take him down thats not defending myself. 


> For all the rules in competitive Judo, Boxing, BJJ, or wrestling, no one is crazy enough to apply such rules in a self defense situation. Further, no one doubts that any of those "sports" are perfectly viable methods of self defense.


I dont think anyone said they were not good methods of self defense.


> I never said there wasn't. I'm talking about the traditional martial arts styles that refuse to compete. The ones that you stated would be severely limited because of rules.


Like what?  what Traditional styles are you specifically talking about?  I was speaking of Karate in general not specific styles.  So if you want to talk specifics then which styles are you saying dont compete



> I definitely agree. I'm simply pointing out that the only way we can objectively test a style's effectiveness is in the competitive arena. Anecdotal evidence about some awesome traditionalist is simply not enough. If a boxing gym opens up and puts out sub-par fighters, its not going to be open very long. If a Bjj school opens up and other Bjj practitioners go to that school and find out its a joke, its not going to be open very long. However, there's numerous examples of TMA scammers and phonies being open for decades.


Give it time my friend you will start seeing some sub par MMA and BJJ schools as it gets more and more popular.  Your already starting to see BJJ DVD sets coming out on the market.  Martial Arts are cyclical One style gets hot and schools pop up eveyrwhere and get diluted with poor teachers cashing in,  Then the next big thing pops up next.  Kung Fu in the 70's TKD in the 80s, Krav in the 90s  BJJ in the 2000's.  Thats not a knockon any of thoes styles there is and will always be really good teachers in all of them but as they get popular sub par schools pop up.  I saw a TKD school the other day thats now offering BJJ classes.  There is not one thing on their website to describe the BJJ teachers credentials.  


> Kyokushin is Japanese, and it isn't traditional. My mother is older than that style of Karate.


Again so what traditional style are you talking about?  Most Okinawan Karate thats commercially taught today like Goju Ryu or Isshin Ryu isn't 100's of years old.  Most of these styles are only one or two generations away from their founders 


> However, thank you for proving my point. Competition and sport has not dilluted Kyokushin whatsoever. It is a devastating form of Karate, highly respected in MMA circles, and it continues to evolve because of its competitive nature.


Is it?  I hear lots of criticism about them since they dont punch to the face. So again there is no "perfect" art.  I guess I dont know which traditional art you say dont compete


----------



## jks9199

ballen0351 said:


> Needing to restrain a kid, or a drunk friend isnt really Self defense.  Ive been a cop for almost 15 years if I go grab a guy to arrest him and he struggles and I take him down thats not defending myself.


If you're doing it right -- it's more often OFFENSE than defense!  There's no requirement for a cop to wait for the punch to be thrown to stop it, or let the guy get a few steps lead before taking him down... 

A general note on the "they don't compete so they don't know what's going to work...":

I think that there's a way for almost any art to compete, if they so choose.  You should be able to use your art with sufficient control that you don't automatically kill anyone who stands in front of you.  The proof of this is simple: do you have training partners at the end of the class, or are you surrounded by a pile of corpses and crippled former playmates?

But... training for competition may be counter to the goals of your training, so you may choose not to do so.  Some people simply like the flow and beauty of the movement, and the health benefits.  Others are training for real world encounters, and don't want to do what amounts to practicing to miss, or re-engage repeatedly.   The "my art is too deadly to compete with" is crap; "my goals aren't consistent with training for competition" is a very different statement.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Hanzou you keep mentioning  traditional Japanese Jujutsu, yet you don't ever mention any specific style. What do you know of traditional Jujutsu? Did you actually train in a old koryu art or something later?   I think that maybe some of the people with more experience in them should come and educate you on such matters.



I know of tradtional Jujutsu. The people I've rolled with claimed they knew and were studying traditional Japanese Jujutsu. One of the problems that you see in MA in general (but mainly in the TMAs) are issues of lineage and authenticity. Bujinkan is notorious for such issues. Some don't even consider it a true style of actual style. However, if you talk with a Bujinkan practitioner, they'll say they're a legit style. Who am I to argue?

This is why I'm speaking largely in general terms. The issues I'm talking about isn't limited to one TMA style, its a problem I've seen in several of them. Now a usual explanation for this is that I've never been to a "real" school of TMA, or that their style is too "deadly" for competition. I find such arguments tiresome. The fact of the matter is that over a century ago, the founder of Judo created a better method for training throws and locks. This method has been proven to be more effective in numerous exhibitions, demonstrations, competitions, etc.

Its like boxers versus martial arts. Boxers simply have a superior method of hand strikes and footwork to a lot of martial art styles. If we're training for fighting or self defense, why waste time learning an archiac method when the superior method is readily available and pretty easy to incorporate?

As JKD said below, people train for different reasons. I acknowledge and respect that. However, you should understand what your style is, and what it is not.



> You need to stop spreading hatred man.  I hate to tell you this, but mma need to start becoming friends with TMA and real quick like.  The progressives are coming for mma and boxing and oddly football. You think that when they get done removing all the contact and fun from foot ball that they will stop there? NO they will go on to either out right ban mma, or enact such rules that make doing certain things in a match illegal. Thusly screwing and ruining mma for the perceivable future.  They have been after boxing for most of this century.



I'm not spreading hatred. I'm simply sharing my experiences, that's all. I simply don't believe that the traditional way is the best way. I don't believe that the old masters had some magic formula that made them superior to modern masters of fighting arts. I simply don't buy into the deification of old masters, and the cult-like belief system that springs up around them and their exploits. Its not healthy, and it leads to numerous problems that continue to resonate throughout the MA community.

As for MMA getting banned, or adding rules, so what? I practice Judo and Bjj, and we learn the self defense concepts that have little to do with competition. However, if someone is competing, they're intelligent enough to know what they can do and can't do during the event. For example, we learn leg locks during practice, but we don't do leg locks when its time to compete. 

Simple.

This is why I scratch my head when someone says that their art isn't designed for competition, because you should be able to self modify your "deadly art" for any arena, including a sporting one. Muay Thai was/is a highly brutal martial art, and its modified into a sport. However, I've run into plenty of competing MT practitioners who are perfectly capable of performing the non-competing aspects. Its as simple as them elbowing you in the temple instead of the cheek. 



> MMA is attracting not good people(Miguel Falco im looking at you.).  Whats funny is you hold mma up on a pedestal and yet, when push came to shove, Falco fought like a  untrained brawler. Showing no semblance of skill or expertise. MMA needs to stop attracting Douche bags and start holding people to a higher moral and behavioral standard.



Are you trying to say that TMAs don't attract douche bags and jerks? We both know that's far from the truth.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Needing to restrain a kid, or a drunk friend isnt really Self defense.  Ive been a cop for almost 15 years if I go grab a guy to arrest him and he struggles and I take him down thats not defending myself.



Oh it was definitely self defense. If I wasn't trained, both situations would have escalated, and caused bodily harm to myself and other people. Isn't that why cops restrain people before things get out of hand?



> I dont think anyone said they were not good methods of self defense.



You said that rules limit an art's usefulness. Yet for some reason, Bjj, Judo, Wrestling, and boxing are full of rules, and they are also good methods of self defense.



> Like what?  what Traditional styles are you specifically talking about?  I was speaking of Karate in general not specific styles.  So if you want to talk specifics then which styles are you saying dont compete



You didn't read the conversation? We were talking about old school Karate styles like Shuri-te.



> Give it time my friend you will start seeing some sub par MMA and BJJ schools as it gets more and more popular.  Your already starting to see BJJ DVD sets coming out on the market.  Martial Arts are cyclical One style gets hot and schools pop up eveyrwhere and get diluted with poor teachers cashing in,  Then the next big thing pops up next.  Kung Fu in the 70's TKD in the 80s, Krav in the 90s  BJJ in the 2000's.  Thats not a knockon any of thoes styles there is and will always be really good teachers in all of them but as they get popular sub par schools pop up.  I saw a TKD school the other day thats now offering BJJ classes.  There is not one thing on their website to describe the BJJ teachers credentials.



Of course the difference is that such Bjj exponents will want to test their abilities against other Bjj schools, or to compete. That's how we expose frauds on this side of the aisle, and that's the benefit of competition. A person practicing Bjj isn't going to not want to test their abilities against other people. That's just not how the art's culture is. So they'll go around, try out their Bjj on a variety of other people, and if they see that as a brown or purple belt that they're getting subbed by white belts, they'll quickly realize that their training is a joke, and hopefully switch over.

As for the TKD school offering Bjj, maybe they have an instructor in there that is competent in Bjj and is mixing the styles together? Nothing wrong with that, and long as you're legit. If you're not legit, you will be exposed soon enough.



> Is it?  I hear lots of criticism about them since they dont punch to the face. So again there is no "perfect" art.  I guess I dont know which traditional art you say dont compete



I never said there was a perfect art. I'm simply saying that people respect arts that back up what they claim. You won't see too many people ripping on Kyokushin, because they know that those guys fight hard and beat the tar out of each other.  You won't hear a Kyokushin practitioner talk about their art being "too deadly" for a competition. They'll just ask when and where you want to throw down.

That kind of martial spirit isn't for everyone. Some people prefer to perform sword katas and sip tea. There's nothing wrong with that.

"I think simply to practice gung fu forms and karate katas is not a good way. Moreover, it wastes time and does not match the actual (fighting) situation. Some people are tall, some are short, aome are stout, some are slim. There ar various kinds of people. If all of them learn the same boxxing (i.e. martial art) form, then who does it fit?"~ Bruce Lee


----------



## K-man

ballen0351 said:


> I guess I dont know which traditional art you say dont compete


And your not likely to find out, from a t***l.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Oh it was definitely self defense. If I wasn't trained, both situations would have escalated, and caused styles harm to myself and other people. Isn't that why cops restrain people before things get out of hand?


That's not self defense.  Hugging a kid on the ground isn't self defense.  Me restraining someone isn't self defense.  Its far from it.  Its use of force issues and using the least amount of force I can to get the reaction I want.  Self defense is well defending yourself or others. That's someone actively trying to harm you.  Some drunk friend acting like a jerk hardly qualifies in my book.  


> You said that rules limit an art's usefulness. Yet for some reason, Bjj, Judo, Wrestling, and boxing are full of rules, and they are also good methods of self defense.


Perhaps you misread what I wrote.  I said the rules limit Karate in the cage.  For competiition each one of them are great as long as you follow the rules set for each style meaning put a BJJ guy in a boxing match he will get killed.  Put a boxer in a grappling tourny he will get crushed.  For example we train a specific Bunkai from a Kara how to defend a single leg takedown. That involves boxing the ears.  That's illegal in the ring so your limiting that styles effectiveness in the ring.  Its not that it's "too deadly". Its just against the rules.


> You didn't read the conversation? We were talking about old school Karate styles like Shuri-te.


They evolved into styles like Goju Isshin Ryu ect so to say they don't work would mean all styles created from them don't work.


> Of course the difference is that such Bjj exponents will want to test their abilities against other Bjj schools, or to compete. That's how we expose frauds on this side of the aisle, and that's the benefit of competition. A person practicing Bjj isn't going to not want to test their abilities against other people. That's just not how the art's culture is. So they'll go around, try out their Bjj on a variety of other people, and if they see that as a brown or purple belt that they're getting subbed by white belts, they'll quickly realize that their training is a joke, and hopefully switch over.


You think?  So everyone that trains in BJJ competes?  If there are 10 BJJ mcdojos in your area and you all suck how do you know?  


> As for the TKD school offering Bjj, maybe they have an instructor in there that is competent in Bjj and is mixing the styles together? Nothing wrong with that, and long as you're legit. If you're not legit, you will be exposed soon enough.


I wouldnt have used it as an example if it was legit



> I never said there was a perfect art. I'm simply saying that people respect arts that back up what they claim. You won't see too many people ripping on Kyokushin, because they know that those guys fight hard and beat the tar out of each other.  You won't hear a Kyokushin practitioner talk about their art being "too deadly" for a competition. They'll just ask when and where you want to throw down.
> 
> That kind of martial spirit isn't for everyone. Some people prefer to perform sword katas and sip tea. There's nothing wrong with that.


Ive never heard any legit Martial artist say they are too deadly.  I hear it alot from people talking down Karate.  Something being against the rules doesnt =too deadly


----------



## Koshiki

If I may politely add my interpretation of the "TMA" not-for-competition side.

I believe what is being said is (or should) not that a traditional stylist cannot redirect targeting of strikes. Of course elbows can be re-targeted from temples to jaws, and back again. I doubt there are many traditional martial artists who practice temple, groin, and eye strikes, but not jaw, rib, and thigh strikes.

Here's the thing, though. If a MMArtist trains primarily low kicks to the thighs, shins, areas which hurt like crap and reduce the opponent's ability, then they are going to be exceptionally skilled at these things. For the SD focused TMArtist, perhaps he doesn't train kicks to the thigh, he trains stomp kicks against the joint of the knee, and stomp kicks to the foot, techniques which end a fight swiftly by enabling you to walk away from the crippled adversary. I'm a bit blurry on the MMA rules, but as I recall, neither of these is allowed, yes? So the TMArtist's primary training is not allowed, and he must try to use MMA style kicks, which he does not train for. Yes, he can re-target a bit, but a stomp kick to the thigh is much less practical than one which hyper-extends the knee backwards, and so his low kicks become generally ineffective. In the ring.

Another example, the MMArtist practices arm bars, which are an excellent way to subdue and control an aggressor. The TMArtist probably spends more time on arm breaks, not bars. The kind where you don't gain complete control of the arm, you just violently hyper-extend the elbow. You can't do this kind of technique in a controlled, subduing manner, it just doesn't work. It's a snap-crunch, ouch, not a hold, press, control. Completely different technique. But the TMArtist cannot do these in the sport arena, so here again, his primary training is rendered useless. He can try to use the elbow snaps as arm bars and controls, but that's not what they are, not how they were designed, and they won't really work.

The MMArtist may train large joint manipulations, of the arm, of the knee, which are great for grappling and controlling an opponent. The TMArtist might instead train small joint manipulations, which inflict huge deals of pain, and are also great for controlling, but which are very likely to cause destructive long term injury, and so are banned from competition. Again, he could try to re-work his small joint manipulation into large joint, but he will be at a disadvantage. The MMArtist trains large joint primarily, and can use all his training. The TMArtist may train small joint primarily, but he cannot use this training.

-------------------

We know that there are techniques which can wear down or subdue your opponent, such as leg strikes, body shots, many grappling techniques, and that there techniques which will end a fight immediately, knee/arm breaks, forceful throat strikes, spine/neck/base of skull strikes, stomp kick to the groin while your opponent is splay legged on his back, ready to guard against any incoming mount, knowing his groin is safe from attack.

The techniques which it has been generally decided to wear down or subdue an opponent are allowed in MMA. Those which it has been generally decided will end immediately and/or cripple an opponent are NOT allowed in MMA. Those are the rules for MMA set down by MMA practitioners and organizers, and followed by MMArtists. They decided, for example, that a strike to the base of the skull, or an eye-gouge, or a groin kick, or a small joint manipulation is too dangerous to be used safely in a contact sport. That's right, MMA as a whole, has disavowed these techniques because they are too efficient at destroying the human body.

If we want to train MMA and include full force arm breaks, wrist twists, neck and throat strikes, foot and knee stomps, and all the rest, the sport will not be long lived, because it's practitioners will just be too hurt. It's simple. You bar an arm, your elbow feels funky for a bit. You know the place, it feels like a little half-dollar of twingy painfulness right in the inside pit. No fun. But if you allow breaking the elbow instead? Well, you'll be out of the action for a bit longer! If you want to practice the techniques which can end a fight right away, you just can't do them full force. You'll have to accept a gentler level of sparring. You just will, or you'll run out of training partners.

Which is why, when TMArtists spar and use these techniques, they can't go full force either. So, yes, you are absolutely right, when a TMArtist spars and drops an elbow down onto the cervical cortex, he does it gently, so as not to kill or cripple his friend. Point of note, most good TMArtists likely train harder contact to, in a more sport-like way, removing the more dangerous techniques, just like the MMArtist does.

Remember, it's not that there are one or two techniques that the TMArtist trains occassionally that he cannot use in the ring. It's the bulk of his training; it's the low kicks, it's the normal targeting, it's the joint locks, it's most everything. Imagine if you walked into a sport fight, and were told, "no head shots, no low kicks, no going to the ground, no elbows, and no clinching," and you then had to fight a whole bunch of opponents who hard, who train a lot, and who train nothing but what fits into THAT rule set. Suddenly, nearly all of your technique are illegal. Sure, you can choose new targets, you can use the little bit that is left of your style, but do you really think your style will hold up? Of course not, because you aren't allowed to DO your style.

I suppose that the TMArtist could jump in the ring anyway, and say, "fine, I'll just forget my style and try to do yours." Maybe he'd get lucky and not come off too badly. He'd probably lose pretty fast. Alternatively, perhaps a mid-ground could be reached, the MMArtists gets to do his safer techniques full-force, and the TMArtist can do his own techniques, but has to do them gently enough to avoid causing damage. I think it's safe to say that the MMArtist will quickly win THAT match as well.

Lastly, the TMArtist can, as you say, "self modify his 'deadly' art for the arena." To do this, he really has to drop all the nasty fight-ending techniques and pick up all the wearing-down and subduing techniques. If he successfully modify's his art for the arena, he will not be doing his art, he will be doing MMA with a background of something else. And he will likely not be as good at doing MMA as someone who primarily trains MMA.

Let's recall, one last time, why most of the techniques in many TMAs are illegal in MMA. It's because they do too much damage, because they end fights too quickly, and because they can easily cause long term or permanent destruction.

Put otherwise, TMAs teach mainly techniques that end fights as quickly as possible, generally causing serious injury. That's not what MMA is about. MMA is about wearing down, subduing, or KOing your opponent. MMA rulesets take out the techniques which are about doing large amounts of damage quickly.

In other words, the MMA ruleset says, "some techniques are too dangerous to be used in a sporting competition. These techniques are too deadly to be used in the ring."


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou nice way to side step the current precarious political situation regarding contact sports.   Sure you mma guys can simply learn the new rules, but that will not make the sport the same as it was. Arts like bjj might be spared most of the problems, but what if they ban the RNC or Knee bars or neck cranks? Stuff like that gets banned and youll see that stuff being dropped from the syllabus quickly. They are training for sport after all, they don't train anything they cant  use in the ring/mat. I know because up until recently I trained in mma.  So don't try to pass off your ignorance to me.  You have already proven you know nothing of what you speak of. 

Ill make it simple for you. The more rules they add to bjj or mma the more techniques will be take out or diluted. Period end of story.   You wouldn't be happy with the state of cage fighting if the progressive guberment decides to double the rules. No head striking of any kind(concussions) no neck cranks or RNC, no knee bars, ect ect. That's the kinda crazy crap there trying to force on football right now. ( no more kick offs, no sacking, the eventual elimination of all tackling, not kidding on that) 

Do you really think that the sport will still be the crucible of combat sports it is now, after all the BS they will subject it to?  You cant honestly believe the sport would survive such mediocrity. 

There is no reason for people like you to come in here and troll the tma community. TMA even the watered down ones, have proven them selvs on the street in self defense. That is the only thing that matters to those people. That does not change the fact that the mma community needs to partner up with the tma community and both advocate for all martial arts. Your doing the martial arts and mma a disservice with your comments and attitudes.


----------



## Koshiki

And just to clarify, I *like* MMA. I find BJJ very impressive, as is Muay Thai. I just moved to a new area, and I can't wait to go check out the MMA gym in the neighboring town. Hopefully they do a free open mat. Very exciting. But it's different. If I play MMA, if have to play MMA, I can't play the way I normally do.


----------



## ballen0351

Perfect example I was rolling with a friend of mine.  He caught me in a heel hook.  Before I tapped I was able to grab his big toe and twisted it.  Small joint manipulation.  I'm pretty sure that's illegal but he screamed and let go of me.v I didn't do it that hard but it worked. We work on finger locks ect in my karate class.  I laugh and tease him  all the time that a no belt in bjj tapped him he's a purple belt.  To be fair he could have destroyed me if he wanted but he wasn't going hard at all but its still Funny.  Just a silly example of something I have trained that can't be used in the ring.


----------



## Hanzou

Zack Cart said:


> We know that there are techniques which can wear down or subdue your opponent, such as leg strikes, body shots, many grappling techniques, and that there techniques which will end a fight immediately, knee/arm breaks, forceful throat strikes, spine/neck/base of skull strikes, stomp kick to the groin while your opponent is splay legged on his back, ready to guard against any incoming mount, knowing his groin is safe from attack.
> 
> The techniques which it has been generally decided to wear down or subdue an opponent are allowed in MMA. Those which it has been generally decided will end immediately and/or cripple an opponent are NOT allowed in MMA. Those are the rules for MMA set down by MMA practitioners and organizers, and followed by MMArtists. They decided, for example, that a strike to the base of the skull, or an eye-gouge, or a groin kick, or a small joint manipulation is too dangerous to be used safely in a contact sport. That's right, MMA as a whole, has disavowed these techniques because they are too efficient at destroying the human body.
> 
> If we want to train MMA and include full force arm breaks, wrist twists, neck and throat strikes, foot and knee stomps, and all the rest, the sport will not be long lived, because it's practitioners will just be too hurt. It's simple. You bar an arm, your elbow feels funky for a bit. You know the place, it feels like a little half-dollar of twingy painfulness right in the inside pit. No fun. But if you allow breaking the elbow instead? Well, you'll be out of the action for a bit longer! If you want to practice the techniques which can end a fight right away, you just can't do them full force. You'll have to accept a gentler level of sparring. You just will, or you'll run out of training partners.
> 
> Which is why, when TMArtists spar and use these techniques, they can't go full force either. So, yes, you are absolutely right, when a TMArtist spars and drops an elbow down onto the cervical cortex, he does it gently, so as not to kill or cripple his friend. Point of note, most good TMArtists likely train harder contact to, in a more sport-like way, removing the more dangerous techniques, just like the MMArtist does.
> 
> Remember, it's not that there are one or two techniques that the TMArtist trains occassionally that he cannot use in the ring. It's the bulk of his training; it's the low kicks, it's the normal targeting, it's the joint locks, it's most everything. Imagine if you walked into a sport fight, and were told, "no head shots, no low kicks, no going to the ground, no elbows, and no clinching," and you then had to fight a whole bunch of opponents who hard, who train a lot, and who train nothing but what fits into THAT rule set. Suddenly, nearly all of your technique are illegal. Sure, you can choose new targets, you can use the little bit that is left of your style, but do you really think your style will hold up? Of course not, because you aren't allowed to DO your style.
> 
> I suppose that the TMArtist could jump in the ring anyway, and say, "fine, I'll just forget my style and try to do yours." Maybe he'd get lucky and not come off too badly. He'd probably lose pretty fast. Alternatively, perhaps a mid-ground could be reached, the MMArtists gets to do his safer techniques full-force, and the TMArtist can do his own techniques, but has to do them gently enough to avoid causing damage. I think it's safe to say that the MMArtist will quickly win THAT match as well.
> 
> Lastly, the TMArtist can, as you say, "self modify his 'deadly' art for the arena." To do this, he really has to drop all the nasty fight-ending techniques and pick up all the wearing-down and subduing techniques. If he successfully modify's his art for the arena, he will not be doing his art, he will be doing MMA with a background of something else. And he will likely not be as good at doing MMA as someone who primarily trains MMA.
> 
> Let's recall, one last time, why most of the techniques in many TMAs are illegal in MMA. It's because they do too much damage, because they end fights too quickly, and because they can easily cause long term or permanent destruction.
> 
> Put otherwise, TMAs teach mainly techniques that end fights as quickly as possible, generally causing serious injury. That's not what MMA is about. MMA is about wearing down, subduing, or KOing your opponent. MMA rulesets take out the techniques which are about doing large amounts of damage quickly.
> 
> In other words, the MMA ruleset says, "some techniques are too dangerous to be used in a sporting competition. These techniques are too deadly to be used in the ring."




Let me just point out that wrist locks are permitted and utilized in competitive Bjj;

http://thejiujitsulab.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/the-wristlock/

And yes, we do train them in the gym. At least where I train.

Also there's been numerous cases of competitors breaking arms in Judo and Bjj competition. One such incident took place at the Olympics;






Many schools of Judo and Bjj actively train in leg locks and breaks as well.

Further, you can kill someone with a choke hold. 

If we were to bet which is more likely to happen; the traditional martial artist using some death blow to kill and assailant, or a Judoka/BJJ choking someone to death, my money is on the latter every time.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Hanzou nice way to side step the current precarious political situation regarding contact sports.   Sure you mma guys can simply learn the new rules, but that will not make the sport the same as it was. Arts like bjj might be spared most of the problems, but what if they ban the RNC or Knee bars or neck cranks? Stuff like that gets banned and youll see that stuff being dropped from the syllabus quickly. They are training for sport after all, they don't train anything they cant  use in the ring/mat. I know because up until recently I trained in mma.  So don't try to pass off your ignorance to me.  You have already proven you know nothing of what you speak of.



Just to clarify again, not every MMA school trains for the ring. Many MMA schools also train for self-defense purposes. Further, just because you're learning a sport, doesn't mean that the only thing you're going to be taught is the ring stuff. My school encourages competition, but we also get taught stuff that we can't use in the "ring".



> Ill make it simple for you. The more rules they add to bjj or mma the more techniques will be take out or diluted. Period end of story.   You wouldn't be happy with the state of cage fighting if the progressive guberment decides to double the rules. No head striking of any kind(concussions) no neck cranks or RNC, no knee bars, ect ect. That's the kinda crazy crap there trying to force on football right now. ( no more kick offs, no sacking, the eventual elimination of all tackling, not kidding on that)
> 
> Do you really think that the sport will still be the crucible of combat sports it is now, after all the BS they will subject it to?  You cant honestly believe the sport would survive such mediocrity.



I suppose we'd have to wait and see. No point in arguing a hypothetical.



> There is no reason for people like you to come in here and troll the tma community. TMA even the watered down ones, have proven them selvs on the street in self defense. That is the only thing that matters to those people. That does not change the fact that the mma community needs to partner up with the tma community and both advocate for all martial arts. Your doing the martial arts and mma a disservice with your comments and attitudes.



I'm sorry. I thought this was the MMA section.


----------



## K-man

> The following acts constitute fouls in a contest or exhibition of mixed martial arts and may result in penalties, at the discretion of thereferee, if committed:
> 
> 
> 1.   Butting with the head.              Actively trained in TMA
> 2.   Eye gouging of any kind            Actively trained in TMA
> 3.    Biting.                   ,,                Actively simulated in TMA
> 4.    Spitting at an opponent.           Actively simulated in TMA
> 5.     Hair pulling.                             Actively trained in TMA
> 6.     Fish hooking.                            Actively trained in TMA
> 7.     Groin attacks of any kind.          Actively trained in TMA
> 8.     *Putting a finger into any orifice*(or any cut or laceration) of an opponent.         Actively trained in TMA
> 9.     *Small* joint manipulation.                                        Actively trained in TMA
> 10.   Striking downward using the point of the elbow.         Actively trained in TMA
> 11.   Striking to the spine or the back of the head.              Actively trained in TMA
> 12.   Kicking to the kidney with a heel.                               Actively trained in TMA
> 13.   Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea.           Actively trained in TMA
> 14.    Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh.                        Actively trained in TMA
> 15.    Grabbing the clavicle.                                                 Actively trained in TMA
> 16.    Kicking the head of a grounded opponent.                    Actively trained in TMA
> 17.    Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent.                   Actively trained in TMA
> 18.    Stomping a grounded opponent.                                  Actively trained in TMA
> 19.     Holding the fence.
> 20.     Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent.               Actively trained in TMA
> 21.     Using abusive language in fenced ring/fighting area.      Valid option in TMA
> 22.     Engaging in any *unsportsmanlike conduct* that causes injury to an opponent.            This is TMA
> 23.     Attacking an opponent on or during the break.                 No breaks in TMA
> 24.     Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee
> 25.     Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the round
> 26.     Timidity, including, without limitation, *avoiding contact with an opponent*, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury.                                       An option for TMA
> 27.      Throwing opponent out of ring/fighting area.               Throwing opponent anywhere is an option for TMA
> 28.      Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee
> 29.      Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck.                  Available to TMA
> 30.      Interference by the corner


So, out of 30 rules for MMA, if we discard the 6 or so rules that are purely for a sporting contest that leaves 24 major options from my training that I can not utilise. At least eleven of these are in kata, and about sixteen in bunkai. That means that I am regularly training sixteen banned moves to achieve an instinctive response.  Why on earth would I want to train to suppress what has taken me 30 odd years to develop.

And, I have no desire to test my skills on anyone given a choice.
:asian:


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Actually I was taught traditional Shotokan Karate. However, even if I was learning "sport Karate" wrestling and boxing are also sports, and in contest after contest, wrestlers and boxers tear traditional martial artists a new one over and over again. What are they doing that TMA exponents are not doing?



They are doing what you have referred to several times, training for the ring. That is the main purpose of such sports whereas TMA people don't have to ever think about actually competing if they don't want to. The average kick boxer in my town has a better level of fitness and more sparring experience than your typical TMAist. More times than not if both participants put on gloves and had some friendly competition, the kick boxer would win IMO. This absolutely does not mean that these sports are better for fighting than TMA. The people training in fighting sports are much more inclined to achieve a high level of fitness because that helps them to achieve their goal of competing. A TMAist doesn't need to think about that; they might be happy enough knowing that they can perform a few swift techniques that more times than not will protect themselves against unskilled attackers. If a TMAist is going to be involved in competition then by all means they SHOULD be training at such an intensity as to prepare themselves for that, but the TMA styles are generally quite complicated that there is usually so much to cover in class that we're left with little time to focus on developing fitness - this is something that the practitioner needs to do in their own time. Add to that the massive disadvantage I face the second I put on a pair of gloves because I cannot use a whole arsenal of techniques based on or setup by grabbing and trapping, which is a huge part of one of the styles I train in, and we're beginning to compare apples to oranges. Obviously all the throat strikes and joint destruction that I've trained to instinctively respond with over the past couple of years cannot be used either in the ring; the end result is a kick boxer fighting a TMA practitioner who is forced into fighting like a kick boxer...



> Let's be honest; In the vast majority of TMA schools, the kata is simply in place just to fatten the curriculum (and the wallet)



You've obviously not trained in a TMA for long because the Katas and form are supposed to be encyclopaedias of the techniques contained within the style; the represent the essence of the style and are designed in a way to help ingrain the key aspects of the system into muscle memory and responsiveness.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> So, out of 30 rules for MMA, if we discard the 6 or so rules that are purely for a sporting contest that leaves 24 major options from my training that I can not utilise. At least eleven of these are in kata, and about sixteen in bunkai. That means that I am regularly training sixteen banned moves to achieve an instinctive response.  Why on earth would I want to train to suppress what has taken me 30 odd years to develop.
> 
> And, I have no desire to test my skills on anyone given a choice.
> :asian:



How does one "actively train" to gouge out someone's eyes or stick their fingers into someone's orifice? 

Also are you guys actually simulating spitting on each other during practice? No offence, but that's pretty disturbing (and disgusting).

In all seriousness, do you honestly believe a MMA practitioner wouldn't have the intelligence to modify their style for a self defense situation? It really doesn't take much brain power to bite someone, poke them in the eye, spit on someone, or pull their hair. I see kids do that to each other all the time.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> They are doing what you have referred to several times, training for the ring. That is the main purpose of such sports whereas TMA people don't have to ever think about actually competing if they don't want to. The average kick boxer in my town has a better level of fitness and more sparring experience than your typical TMAist. More times than not if both participants put on gloves and had some friendly competition, the kick boxer would win IMO. This absolutely does not mean that these sports are better for fighting than TMA. The people training in fighting sports are much more inclined to achieve a high level of fitness because that helps them to achieve their goal of competing. A TMAist doesn't need to think about that; they might be happy enough knowing that they can perform a few swift techniques that more times than not will protect themselves against unskilled attackers. If a TMAist is going to be involved in competition then by all means they SHOULD be training at such an intensity as to prepare themselves for that, but the TMA styles are generally quite complicated that there is usually so much to cover in class that we're left with little time to focus on developing fitness - this is something that the practitioner needs to do in their own time. Add to that the massive disadvantage I face the second I put on a pair of gloves because I cannot use a whole arsenal of techniques based on or setup by grabbing and trapping, which is a huge part of one of the styles I train in, and we're beginning to compare apples to oranges. Obviously all the throat strikes and joint destruction that I've trained to instinctively respond with over the past couple of years cannot be used either in the ring; the end result is a kick boxer fighting a TMA practitioner who is forced into fighting like a kick boxer...



I have yet to meet a boxer or kickboxer who would be unwilling to spar with open-fingered gloves.

http://www.amazon.com/Striker-Finger-Training-Boxing-Gloves/dp/B0045TJG2A

I've seen plenty of people pulling off joint manipulations, grabs, and other grappling wearing these. 



> You've obviously not trained in a TMA for long because the Katas and form are supposed to be encyclopaedias of the techniques contained within the style; the represent the essence of the style and are designed in a way to help ingrain the key aspects of the system into muscle memory and responsiveness.



You're welcome to believe that. I don't. I view them as simply a waste of time that can be better spent doing more alive training. You're spending 20 minutes of class time learning a kata, I'm spending 20 minutes of class time learning how to get my 250lb partner into a choke hold or an armbar. We simply have to agree to disagree.


----------



## Chris Parker

Nah... let's agree you need an education.

There's a lot I'd love to go through, but in essence, you've completely and utterly misunderstood everything you're trying to talk about. It's all been covered before, so I'll leave it to you to search it out...


----------



## K-man

Chris Parker said:


> Nah... let's agree you need an education.
> 
> There's a lot I'd love to go through, but in essence, you've completely and utterly misunderstood everything you're trying to talk about. It's all been covered before, so I'll leave it to you to search it out...


Can you tell me the classic symptoms of trolling please Chris?


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> I have yet to meet a boxer or kickboxer who would be unwilling to spar with open-fingered gloves.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Striker-Finger-Training-Boxing-Gloves/dp/B0045TJG2A
> 
> I've seen plenty of people pulling off joint manipulations, grabs, and other grappling wearing these.



Really?

Ok, show me some evidence - support your claims. Show me some examples of two competent fighters who are wearing non-restrictive gloves and where one of the fighters is TMA and the other a competition based style, and, where the TMA techniques are clearly useless against their opponent. 




Hanzou said:


> You're welcome to believe that. I don't. I view them as simply a waste of time that can be better spent doing more alive training. You're spending 20 minutes of class time learning a kata, I'm spending 20 minutes of class time learning how to get my 250lb partner into a choke hold or an armbar. We simply have to agree to disagree.



Your opinion on something should never exceed the knowledge you have on the subject. You think I learn the movements of a set, practice by myself and that's it..? 

Practice to learn the basic technique > practice the application with a training partner > practice generating power through the technique with a some sort of resistance (heavy bag, pads..etc).

Rinse and repeat; replacing "learn" with "improve".


----------



## K-man

Dinkydoo said:


> Really?
> 
> Ok, show me some evidence - support your claims. Show me some examples of two competent fighters who are wearing non-restrictive gloves and where one of the fighters is TMA and the other a competition based style, and, where the TMA techniques are clearly useless against their opponent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your opinion on something should never exceed the knowledge you have on the subject. You think I learn the movements of a set, practice by myself and that's it..?
> 
> Practice to learn the basic technique > practice the application with a training partner > practice generating power through the technique with a some sort of resistance (heavy bag, pads..etc).
> 
> Rinse and repeat; replacing "learn" with "improve".


Mate! Don't get sucked in!
:trollsign:


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> How does one "actively train" to gouge out someone's eyes or stick their fingers into someone's orifice?
> 
> Also are you guys actually simulating spitting on each other during practice? No offence, but that's pretty disturbing (and disgusting).
> 
> In all seriousness, do you honestly believe a MMA practitioner wouldn't have the intelligence to modify their style for a self defense situation? It really doesn't take much brain power to bite someone, poke them in the eye, spit on someone, or pull their hair. I see kids do that to each other all the time.


Actually sport BJJ guys can be at a sever disadvantage in a real fight.  Actual example of a Bjj brown belt from one of the better schools in the area.  A school that has trained fighters that have made it into the UFC.  Got into a  bar fight down town where I work not BJJ guys fault some jerk started it.  The BJJ giy Had the guy all tied up the guy tapped.  The Bjj guy was so set in his training as soon as the guy tapped let go.  You revert to your training.  As soon as he let go the guy nailedthe BJJ guy in the face broke his nose.  I talked to the BJJ guy after he said he knew not to let go when the guy tapped but it was just instinct.  So just training for comps can be a downfall.  Now you claim your school teaches other stuff beyond the ring that's great.  So does my Judo class.  But a lot of top sport BJJ schools around here dont.  The train to win at comps.  As you said to build up a rep as a good school.  So you see on their web site all the pretty trophies and medals.  There is noting wrong with that.

The rest of your post of course you don't train by actually gouging out an eye or ripping off an ear.  When I train as a cop I don't punch people in the face in defensive tactics but I darn sure know how to do it.  I don't shoot people in training but I know I can do it in real life.  When I was in the USMC I never stuck anyone with a bayonet but I trained how to do it.  There are just some things you can't do in training.  Even Randori is only simulated training.  Your not actually trying to hurt anyone.  Rolling on the mats is simulated your not hurting your partners.  

You have your mind made up and that's fine.  If you truly believe that no TMA has ever competed, that TMA is useless for self defense despite decades and decades of proof then so be it.  Its no skin off my nose.  Everyone has an opinion and you know what they say about opinions............

I just think you should open your mind a little everything isn't so black and white esp when it comes to real live fight for your life.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Actually sport BJJ guys can be at a sever disadvantage in a real fight. Actual example of a Bjj brown belt from one of the better schools in the area. A school that has trained fighters that have made it into the UFC. Got into a bar fight down town where I work not BJJ guys fault some jerk started it. The BJJ giy Had the guy all tied up the guy tapped. The Bjj guy was so set in his training as soon as the guy tapped let go. You revert to your training. As soon as he let go the guy nailedthe BJJ guy in the face broke his nose. I talked to the BJJ guy after he said he knew not to let go when the guy tapped but it was just instinct. So just training for comps can be a downfall. Now you claim your school teaches other stuff beyond the ring that's great. So does my Judo class. But a lot of top sport BJJ schools around here dont. The train to win at comps. As you said to build up a rep as a good school. So you see on their web site all the pretty trophies and medals. There is noting wrong with that.



Sounds like your friend showed the guy mercy and let him go. Its unfortunate that it was repaid with more violence. And yes, we are trained to be merciful, which is why when someone taps, we do let them go, because our goal isn't to destroy our adversary and end a life. Our goal is to redeem our adversary and preserve life. Nothing is gained by snapping a person's arm if they are no longer a threat. Nothing is to be gained by choking someone until they die just because they're drunk and acting crazy.

Ripping someone's hair out, biting someone in the neck, spiting in someone's face, blinding them with your fingers, and smashing their windpipe simply sounds barbaric compared to locking and arm, pinning a body, applying a wrist lock, or putting a ruffian to sleep.

That's budo.



> You have your mind made up and that's fine. If you truly believe that no TMA has ever competed, that TMA is useless for self defense despite decades and decades of proof then so be it. Its no skin off my nose. Everyone has an opinion and you know what they say about opinions............
> 
> I just think you should open your mind a little everything isn't so black and white esp when it comes to real live fight for your life.




That's a pretty gross misinterpretation of what I stated. I never said any of that.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Really?
> 
> Ok, show me some evidence - support your claims. Show me some examples of two competent fighters who are wearing non-restrictive gloves and where one of the fighters is TMA and the other a competition based style, and, where the TMA techniques are clearly useless against their opponent.



That would be a waste of time, because "competence" is a matter of opinion. If I showed a video of a Wing Chun practicioner getting man-handled by some random grappler, you could just say that the Wing Chun guy wasn't doing "real" Wing Chun, or whatever. Why bother?



> Your opinion on something should never exceed the knowledge you have on the subject. You think I learn the movements of a set, practice by myself and that's it..?
> 
> Practice to learn the basic technique > practice the application with a training partner > practice generating power through the technique with a some sort of resistance (heavy bag, pads..etc).
> 
> Rinse and repeat; replacing "learn" with "improve".



I'm glad that you feel that you need to spend such long periods of time practising pre-arranged movements. I don't feel that way, and I've personally never seen anything positive (fighting-wise) arise from its practice. It certainly is a wonderful excercise, and in some cases they are extraordinarily lovely to watch.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> That would be a waste of time, because "competence" is a matter of opinion. If I showed a video of a Wing Chun practicioner getting man-handled by some random grappler, you could just say that the Wing Chun guy wasn't doing "real" Wing Chun, or whatever. Why bother?



Not really, I enjoy watching good fighters from any background. It's usually quite obvious when there's a major skill mismatch in these fights anyway so I don't think it would be a pointless exercise. The burden for proof is on you by stating such strong claims.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> How does one "actively train" to gouge out someone's eyes or stick their fingers into someone's orifice?


Several ways.  Goggles or other face protection.  Oranges on the eye.  Personally, my preference is simply SLOWLY.  You can practice a lot of things if you're moving slowly, and seldom have trouble speeding up in the moment.


> Also are you guys actually simulating spitting on each other during practice? No offence, but that's pretty disturbing (and disgusting).


For styles where it's a technique -- yep, they do it.  And at targets, too.  Personally, not a tactic I would be likely to use; usually not enough saliva in the heat of the moment to be able to do something meaningful.  And, yeah, in scenario training... it's done.


> In all seriousness, do you honestly believe a MMA practitioner wouldn't have the intelligence to modify their style for a self defense situation? It really doesn't take much brain power to bite someone, poke them in the eye, spit on someone, or pull their hair. I see kids do that to each other all the time.



Here's the deal.  Neither is better.  Each has it's own strength -- but you won't be likely to do something under andrenal stress unless you've practiced it beforehand, unless it's a very primal response.  And sport oriented training, whether MMA or traditional karate competition, has a very high likelihood of ingraining some bad habits that may or may not be shed under pressure.  A personal example:  One of the first times I had to hit someone professionally as a cop, I delivered a beautiful series of punches, with wonderful control.  Pushed the assailant back into a wall, he couldn't do anything...  But I wasn't hurting him.  Fortunately -- it was a role player in a training scenario.  And I learned the lesson.  Want a worse one?  There was a cop who really got into gun disarms.  He practiced them time & time again, and got incredibly good at them.  One day, he's minding his own business, and a guy goes to stick him up.  Oh, boy!  I finally get to use my disarm, he thinks.  And does. Then, just like he'd done thousands of time in practice, he handed the gun back to the guy who pointed it at him.  OH ****!  Fortunately, he repeated the disarm on the shocked robber, and kept the gun the second time.  The point?  You'll fight the way you practice.

I'm not saying that every person who trains in MMA will play by ring rules on the street -- but there are elements of MMA training that are not ideal for the street.  And there are elements of TMA that aren't, either.  But the "TMA sucks/MMA rules" or "MMA sucks/TMA rules" approach is just wrong.  Hell, mixed or multiple martial arts training has been around from the start of martial arts here in the US!  Even longer, look up bartitsu.  Funakoshi talks about traveling to train with different teachers at different points in Okinawa before he went to Japan.


----------



## ballen0351

[QUote hanzou;1599962]Sounds like your friend showed the guy mercy and let him go. Its unfortunate that it was repaid with more violence. And yes, we are trained to be merciful, which is why when someone taps, we do let them go, because our goal isn't to destroy our adversary and mend a life. Our goal is to redeem our adversary and preserve life. Nothing is gained by snapping a person's arm if they are no longer a threat. Nothing is to be gained by choking someone until they die just because they're drunk and acting crazy. [/quote]
Not my friend just a guy that got his butt kicked in a bar fight.  I mentioned I was a cop I responded to a fight call.  He wasn't showing mercy he was reacting to his training in sport arts someone taps you let go that does not translate well to real life.  


> Ripping someone's hair out, biting someone in the neck, spiting in someone's face, blinding them with your fingers, and smashing their windpipe simply sounds barbaric compared to locking and arm, pinning a body, applying a wrist lock, or putting a ruffian to sleep.
> 
> That's budo.


Barbaric maybe but sonif fighting for you life against someone that is trying ti kill you.  Nobody said every bar fight needs to end with a crushes windpipe.  There are plenty of techniques availabe in Karate that includw arm bars wrist locks choke holds.  Bjj isnt the only style that has these grappling moves.  Like I said I train Judo as wellnas Karate ans we have bunkai in karate that have foot sweeps and other throws just like in judo.  


> That's a pretty gross misinterpretation of what I stated. I never said any of that.



No thats pretty much how it reads.  Tma sucks and people that train tma are afraid to go into the ring.


----------



## K-man

If you truly believe that no TMA has ever competed, *that TMA is useless for self defense* despite decades and decades of proof then so be it. (ballen)

That's a pretty gross misinterpretation of what I stated. *I never said any of that. *(Hanzou)

Let' examine the evidence.



> I don't believe that TMAs are all that effective.





> If you can't fight in the ring with rules and safety, you're not going to be able to fight in the street where there are no rules or safety.





> wrestlers and boxers tear traditional martial artists a new one over and over again.





> Its not just sport karate that loses out to boxers and wrestlers. Its karate in general, along with many other traditional styles. Hence why those styles shy away from competition. Competition would expose their effectiveness in a fight.


I think he meant *in*effectiveness.



> The fact that it (_TMA karate_) doesn't do well in a controlled fighting environment makes its proficiency in an uncontrolled fighting environment highly suspect.





> However, if a loved one was asking my opinion on a martial art to take to defend themselves, Karate wouldn't be one of the arts I would recommend to them.





> Every experience I've had (usually against Karatekas and classical Jj practicioners), their locking and grappling abilities are ineffective, and severely lacking in technique and power. Most locks they attempt are pretty easily reversed and countered. I'm not saying this to be mean, I'm simply discussing my experience.



So, yes, technically you never actually used the word _useless_ but I feel the sentiment you expressed would not be considered 'gross misrepresentation'. Probably more akin to style bashing really and that is against forum rules.

*



			1.10.2 No Art bashing
		
Click to expand...

*


> "No one art is "the best", no one "style" is the best.
> All have their strengths and weaknesses. Do your
> research and find what best fits your ability and need."



Let's look at the experience.



> LoL! No, *my background is simply in the Japanese martial arts*. I've been doing martial arts for most of my life. But yes, since Shotokan isn't considered a traditional art, *I haven't trained in a traditional MA style*. Mostly because I could never verify whether it was real or some scam. Also all the squabbles about lineage and "purity" was annoying and childish. I moved over to Judo/Bjj and boxing. Much quieter, and quite a bit more effective.



Let's look at the only style of ineffective traditional karate cited.



> You didn't read the conversation? We were talking about old school Karate styles like Shuri-te.



Shuri-te was the style of martial art taught around Shuri in Okinawa one hundred years ago and is not really a current style of Karate in the sense that its practitioners went on the develop other more popular styles like Shito-ryu, Shorin-Ryu, Shudokan, Shorinji-Ryu, and Motobu-Ryu. Shotokan was developed from Shito-ryu and Shorin-Ryu. Sure there are some schools in Okinawa that claim to teach Shuri-te and they have been 'discovered' by Westerners in more recent times but to cite Shuri-te as the example of traditional karate ... really!


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> Ripping someone's hair out, biting someone in the neck, spiting in someone's face, blinding them with your fingers, and smashing their windpipe simply sounds barbaric compared to locking and arm, pinning a body, applying a wrist lock, or putting a ruffian to ...



Sorry but that's the reality of violence. Unless you have a scriptwriter in your back pocket and a stunt team  -- violence isn't pretty or nice.   It's brutal and rather uncivilized. 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4


----------



## Hanzou

jks9199 said:


> Sorry but that's the reality of violence. Unless you have a scriptwriter in your back pocket and a stunt them  -- violence isn't pretty or nice.   It's brutal and rather uncivilized.



Not always. Again, you don't need to destroy your opponent if it isn't necessary. And there's very few situations where it is necessary to kill or maim an opponent.

Frankly, you don't need MA training to bite someone or pull their hair. Like I said before, I've seen children do the exact same thing. We actually had a third grader once bite a teacher in her neck during school, drawing blood and causing a great deal of pain.


----------



## Kframe

Honestly why are we debating a obvious troll?  Many people far more skilled then me have laid out quite eloquently why his views are wrong. He is a example of the "just bleed" type of mma fan. Just bleed fans are hated on sherdog as well as they don't appreciate technical fights were there is little blood and straight out wars. 

Honestly he is the type of attitude that drove me away from mma. Im getting tired of egos and bad attitudes like he is displaying here.


----------



## Koshiki

Hanzou said:


> Let me just point out that wrist locks are permitted and utilized in competitive Bjj;



Let me just point out that BJJ and MMA are two entirely different sports, even though the latter may be heavily influenced by the latter. Taekwondo was heavily influenced by Karate. Not at all the same thing. While wrist locks may ALSO be allowed in MMA, it's pretty hard to execute one with those gloves on. Yes, I own open-finger MMA-style gloves, yes, it makes a big difference. It becomes even harder when you are forbidden from, "holding the opponents gloves." If you can do wristlocks without holding my gloves, I commend your skill.



Hanzou said:


> And yes, we do train them in the gym. At least where I train.



Good. I'm glad you recognize how useful they can be.



Hanzou said:


> Also there's been numerous cases of competitors breaking arms in Judo and Bjj competition. One such incident took place at the Olympics;
> ...
> Many schools of Judo and Bjj actively train in leg locks and breaks as well.



Which again, is not MMA. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in amateur/gym level MMA, you're not supposed to throw against a joint or try to break an arm, yes? For example, if I began studying MMA at a gym, was grappling around, took control of an arm and smashed my forearm full force against the joint of the elbow, the instructor probably wouldn't give me a gold star, right?

And in Judo and BJJ, I'm pretty sure that arm breaks in competition are thought of as "horrific accidents," not "glorious and beautiful victories," no?



Hanzou said:


> Just to clarify again, not every MMA school trains for the ring. Many MMA schools also train for self-defense purposes. Further, just because you're learning a sport, doesn't mean that the only thing you're going to be taught is the ring stuff. My school encourages competition, but we also get taught stuff that we can't use in the "ring".



Good. That makes for a well rounded martial sport/art. I'm glad you are acknowledging that there are techniques which just CANNOT be used in a full force competition. Martial Sports focus, mainly, on those that can be used in competition, Traditional Arts focus in large part on those that can't. MMA and TMA have a different balance, each more suitable for it's primary focus.



Hanzou said:


> I'm sorry. I thought this was the MMA section.



It is. Head on over to ANY of the TMA sections, and you aren't likely to find a thread where the TMA guys repeatedly bash MMA and say that it is non-functional and that the MMA guys are afraid to test their skills outside of the ring on the street. To say that would be silly. If there is such a thread, I'm perfectly willing to say those TMArtists are being immature and showing their ignorance of MMA.



Hanzou said:


> That would be a waste of time, because "competence" is a matter of opinion. If I showed a video of a Wing Chun practicioner getting man-handled by some random grappler, you could just say that the Wing Chun guy wasn't doing "real" Wing Chun, or whatever. Why bother?



There's a compilation video on Youtube of about an hour of Win Chun guys getting "man-handled" by a variety of different styles. There's also a compilation of guys from a variety of different style getting drilled by Win Chun guys. To be fair, when most stylists put on gloves, win chun, tai shing, karate, taekwondo, mma, whatever, when they put on gloves and try to have a forceful competition, it all starts to look pretty similar, lots of punches, some swinging leg kicks, and some rudimentary grappling. Everyone starts trying to do MMA, and if you don't train MMA, you're going to suck at it. 

When the Tai Shing guys try to put on Karate sport gear, the karate stylists tag-tag-tag you're-it them into oblivion. But, when the karate guys try to fight under the Tai Shing rules, they get tied up, tangled, find themselves in a range where they can't function, elbowed to the head, and generally confused and defeated.

When someone says, "you're style is "bad" because it can't perform in the ring," what they are really saying, is, "when you try to do my style, which you don't train, with my rules, playing my game, I win." How many of us can claim to beat someone in their own style? Of course an MMA practitioner is better at MMA than a Win Chun practitioner. And of course the Win Chun guy is better at Win Chun. And neither of them is any good at savatte, I can almost guarantee you.



Hanzou said:


> Frankly, you don't need MA training to bite someone or pull their hair. Like I said before, I've seen children do the exact same thing.



There's a difference between pulling hair just because it's there, and using the hair to control the head, and thus the body. Learning to use the hair as an effective gripping point DOES require quite a bit more practice than just grabbing on and yanking to cause pain, like a child might do. Children can also hit, kick, and wrestle, but I doubt you would claim that, because they can do all of that, it is pointless to learn to hit, kick, and grapple, would you?



Kframe said:


> Honestly why are we debating a obvious troll?



Well, because, well... it's fun?

More seriously, because the good sir Hanzou is not the only one reading or following this thread, so for those who might stumble across it in their interwebz searching, I like to think that false claims will be continuously and decisively exposed, rather than allowed to sit there misinforming the masses. For example, as I write this, there are 5 non members reading the thread. If it was just a reasonably articulate dismissal of TMA, that's five people right there who might be mislead.

And also, because it it kind of entertaining...


----------



## RTKDCMB

Since I've got a spare 2 cents.

Ignorance and arrogance go hand in hand.



Hanzou said:


> Well. think about the nemesis of TMA  practitioners; Wrestlers and Boxers. During my Karate days, most of my  peers considered beating a boxer or a wrestler to be the ultimate  showcase of the effectiveness of our styles. That says something,  because it immediately implies that our TMA is inherently inferior to  boxing and wrestling, and frankly for the most part it was.



That doesn't sound like you were at a particularly effective school.



Hanzou said:


> When your sensei or sifu doesn't want you training at the local BJJ gym, something's wrong.



Or maybe they do not want their students to learn any combat cuddling and just want them to learn their style.




Hanzou said:


> Actually I was taught traditional Shotokan Karate. However, even if I  was learning "sport Karate" wrestling and boxing are also sports, and in  contest after contest, wrestlers and boxers tear traditional martial  artists a new one over and over again. What are they doing that TMA  exponents are not doing?



As I recall, in the early days of the UFC, when there were no rules, pure boxers did not do particularly well. There were many TMA  exponents who won many of their fights (Gerad Gordeu, Keith Hackney, Patrick Smith etc)





Hanzou said:


> Well that's what I'm saying. If you're training for competition at  various intervals, you're going to be in some level of shape versus  someone who never trains for competition. A person who competes every  six months or so is still going to be in better physical condition than  someone who never competes, or will never compete. An athlete is simply  superior in terms of physical conditioning than a non-athlete. Boxing,  Judo, and Wrestling facilitate this. TMA simply does not (for the most  part).



Since most street fight last only a few seconds you don't need to be an extreme athlete to able to defend yourself.




Hanzou said:


> Let's be honest; In the vast majority of TMA  schools, the kata is simply in place just to fatten the curriculum (and  the wallet), and give owners something to grade their students. It is  almost never broken down to its core techniques. Mainly because of time  constraints, and mainly because its an out of date training tool.  There's nothing wrong with preserving the traditional art. However in  terms of fighting and self defense, such things are pretty useless. In  terms of physical fitness and exercise, they are great though.



The primary purpose of patterns is to learn and practice basic technique, to train your body for the rigors of blocking, kicking and striking to produce maximum speed and power, which is directly useful for self defence. The patterns are broken down to their core techniques during the pattern because you concentrate on each individual technique at the time you do them by checking and correcting the technique.



Hanzou said:


> They were created to fight on a battlefield, but people haven't used them on the battlefield for centuries.



The armed forces of Korea are taught Taekwondo and other Korean TMA, The head of my school was a lead instructor of Korean Marines he taught his TMA to the 'Demon Hunter Marines' who were one of the most feared military units of the Korean war - last century I believe.



Hanzou said:


> Its not just sport karate that loses out to boxers and wrestlers. Its  karate in general, along with many other traditional styles. Hence why  those styles shy away from competition. Competition would expose their  effectiveness in a fight.



Competitions and challenge matches are not a very accurate way of determining the effectiveness of a martial art or a practitioner because there will be rules and agreed upon conditions and each person involved will know that the other person is not tying to seriously injure or kill them. If someone really wants to know how effective a TMA practitioner who does not compete truly is then just go up to one and attack him in the street and see what happens. Unfortunately no one can do that without exposing himself as a criminal and a douche.



Hanzou said:


> The fact that Judoka and Bjj practitioners can perform locks and throws  in a competitive environment while traditional arts cannot proves my  point.



As someone who does martial arts solely for self defence, there are only 2 reasons I would usually use a lock or a throw, 1. to incapacitate my attacker by either throwing him to the ground and finishing him off with a strike or breaking/dislocating a joint. 2. releasing myself from a hold and then either running away or finishing him off with a strike or breaking/dislocating a joint.



Hanzou said:


> I'm talking about the traditional martial arts styles that refuse to compete.



Using a self defence oriented TMA to compete in a competition with rules is like declawing a cat and expecting it to be able to still climb trees and scratch the furniture as well as the other cats. It always amuses me when a competition/sport martial art complains that these TMA's are do not compete because they are "too deadly" usually only mention that this is because of "eye gouges" and "groin strikes" and then oppose a set of rules to limit the use of certain techniques for the "safety of the fighters". These arts, mine included, do not compete because they are designed for self defence and not sports or games to be played. There are a host of techniques that would be too dangerous to use as they were intended, for a competition because they are designed to end a confrontation quickly and efficiently, we are not concerned with our opponent's need to train and fight another day and earn a living we just want to get away without being injured or killed. Techniques such as a knifehand strike to the clavicle/side of the neck/base of the skull, side kick to the side of the knee to break the leg, double palm slap to the ears, elbow to the back of the head, middle knuckle strike to the kidneys etc, etc ,etc.

Now I need to get another 2 cents.


----------



## Hanzou

Zack Cart said:


> Let me just point out that BJJ and MMA are two entirely different sports, even though the latter may be heavily influenced by the latter. Taekwondo was heavily influenced by Karate. Not at all the same thing. While wrist locks may ALSO be allowed in MMA, it's pretty hard to execute one with those gloves on. Yes, I own open-finger MMA-style gloves, yes, it makes a big difference. It becomes even harder when you are forbidden from, "holding the opponents gloves." If you can do wristlocks without holding my gloves, I commend your skill.



Bjj is part of the standard MMA curriculum. 

I've seen quite a few MMA fighters grapple just fine with open fingered gloves. Rhonda Rousey for example does an amazing job at performing standard Judo throws and arm locks with open fingered gloves.



> Which again, is not MMA. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in amateur/gym level MMA, you're not supposed to throw against a joint or try to break an arm, yes? For example, if I began studying MMA at a gym, was grappling around, took control of an arm and smashed my forearm full force against the joint of the elbow, the instructor probably wouldn't give me a gold star, right?
> 
> And in Judo and BJJ, I'm pretty sure that arm breaks in competition are thought of as "horrific accidents," not "glorious and beautiful victories," no?



I do believe the point was the Bjj and Judo locks/throws can break limbs if fully executed without regard for the safety of the opponent. The fact that such throws and locks are the staple of Bjj/Judo training, it makes those practitioners very potent in a self defense situation.  



> Good. That makes for a well rounded martial sport/art. I'm glad you are acknowledging that there are techniques which just CANNOT be used in a full force competition. Martial Sports focus, mainly, on those that can be used in competition, Traditional Arts focus in large part on those that can't. MMA and TMA have a different balance, each more suitable for it's primary focus.



The difference being of course how each one trains. MMAs tend to be more modern and alive. TMAs tend to utilize old training methods and patterned movements. Its like comparing an AK-47 to a musket.



> It is. Head on over to ANY of the TMA sections, and you aren't likely to find a thread where the TMA guys repeatedly bash MMA and say that it is non-functional and that the MMA guys are afraid to test their skills outside of the ring on the street. To say that would be silly. If there is such a thread, I'm perfectly willing to say those TMArtists are being immature and showing their ignorance of MMA.



I apologize if you think I'm "bashing" TMAs. I'm simply pointing out their flaws, and the problems that I have witnessed from their practitioners. Nothing more, nothing less.



> When someone says, "you're style is "bad" because it can't perform in the ring," what they are really saying, is, "when you try to do my style, which you don't train, with my rules, playing my game, I win." How many of us can claim to beat someone in their own style? Of course an MMA practitioner is better at MMA than a Win Chun practitioner. And of course the Win Chun guy is better at Win Chun. And neither of them is any good at savatte, I can almost guarantee you.



Gene Labelle did just fine against a boxer in a fight. He was able to modify Judo to work in a boxing ring against a boxing opponent. The Gracies openly challenged anyone to a contest regardless of style. _Huo Yuanjia _fought wrestlers and boxers with traditional Kung Fu. Seriously, the idea that your art is at a disadvantage because of rules is a pretty silly excuse.


----------



## K-man

I think this discussion has come full circle. 

MMA is sport. MMA fighters, at competition level, are very well rounded fighters in the ring. If they were to be matched, in the ring, with a competition trained athlete from TKD, Karate, Judo or Jujitsu they will probably have enough skills to match that person in his area of expertise but should have an advantage when the situation is changed to one that is not the other persons area of expertise. 


But the OP is asking about MMA vs TMA. There are many threads discussing TMAs and much debate as to what is 'traditional'. Without defining TMA it is hard to even consider the question, then are we going to look at weight differences and skill levels? But, I think what can be refuted is the idea that MMA fighters are the only 'real' fighters.


Youtube gives good coverage af actual professional fights but when it comes to amateur 'this vs that' I don't believe many give a true picture of either side's real potential. This topic is very much like a dog chasing its tail. 
:asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Gene Labelle did just fine against a boxer in a fight. He was able to modify Judo to work in a boxing ring against a boxing opponent. The Gracies openly challenged anyone to a contest regardless of style. _Huo Yuanjia _fought wrestlers and boxers with traditional Kung Fu. Seriously, the idea that your art is at a disadvantage because of rules is a pretty silly excuse.



Yet the Gracies refused to let Gene Labelle go through with their challenge.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> The fact that such throws and locks are the staple of Bjj/Judo training, it makes those practitioners very potent in a self defense situation.



That is your opinion, nothing more. Being able to fight in the ring doesn't automatically make you good at fighting in the street and vice versa, this has been covered by several users. 



> The difference being of course how each one trains. MMAs tend to be more modern and alive. TMAs tend to utilize old training methods and patterned movements. Its like comparing an AK-47 to a musket.



How patronising can you get. Please cite your experience in full of TMAs that qualifies you to make such judgements - and being an MMA fanboy doesn't count. 



> I apologize if you think I'm "bashing" TMAs. I'm simply pointing out their flaws, and the problems that I have witnessed from their practitioners. Nothing more, nothing less.



Examples. What have you witnessed and from which style? 



> Gene Labelle did just fine against a boxer in a fight. He was able to modify Judo to work in a boxing ring against a boxing opponent. The Gracies openly challenged anyone to a contest regardless of style. _Huo Yuanjia _fought wrestlers and boxers with traditional Kung Fu. Seriously, the idea that your art is at a disadvantage because of rules is a pretty silly excuse.



So is it the practitioners or the styles that are inferior to MMA?


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Yet the Gracies refused to let Gene Labelle go through with their challenge.



Not that that is relevant to my point, but that isn't what happened:




> Another episode that could be included with the Gracie Challenge occurred when the Gracies challenged "Judo" Gene LeBell. The Gracies wanted to match Rickson Gracie with the American grappling master/professional wrestler/stuntman. Gene LeBell, who was almost 60 at the time, replied that Rickson was much younger than him and that he would instead grapple with Hélio Gracie who was closer in age to him. When confronted with this reply, the Gracies accepted the challenge on the condition that Gene LeBell drop down to the 140 pound weight class of the 80-year old Hélio Gracie. At that point, Gene LeBell allegedly backed out of both the original challenge and his own counterchallenge because he was around 200 pounds and could never make it down to 140 pounds.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gracie_Challenge


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> That is your opinion, nothing more. Being able to fight in the ring doesn't automatically make you good at fighting in the street and vice versa, this has been covered by several users.



Being able to fight in the ring at least shows that you're able to fight. Does anyone doubt that Mike Tyson or Mohammed Ali in their prime could beat the crap out of 95% of people? Anyone think that Rhonda Rousey or Georges St. Pierre couldn't defend themselves better than the vast majority of the human population?

Here's a video of an incident where a bjj competitor used pretty basic techniques to subdue a crazy drunk in a restaurant;





 
Again, does it strike anyone as odd that TMAs use boxers, wrestlers, and increasingly BJJ stylists as their imaginary opponents in practice? I see it all the time; This is how you take down a wrestler! This is what you need to do if you're facing a guy with great striking like a boxer! Use these techniques to stop a bjj guy from getting you in an armbar! 



> How patronising can you get. Please cite your experience in full of TMAs that qualifies you to make such judgements - and being an MMA fanboy doesn't count.



If you're a martial artist, you're going to run into a variety of TMA schools. I'd rather not name any names, because I don't want to be accused of style bashing.




> Examples. What have you witnessed and from which style?



Run back through my posts. I've listed plenty of examples.



> So is it the practitioners or the styles that are inferior to MMA?



It can be both. It can be the style that uses antiquated training methods, and it can be the practitioners who believe in crazy nonsense instead of a proven method.

Here's an extreme example;






These people actually believed that this guy could hit them with chi energy. When he fought in a competition, he was exposed to be the fraud he was.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Being able to fight in the ring at least shows that you're able to fight. Does anyone doubt that Mike Tyson or Mohammed Ali in their prime could beat the crap out of 95% of people? Anyone think that Rhonda Rousey or Georges St. Pierre couldn't defend themselves better than the vast majority of the human population?


seriously?  Tyson and Ali could defeat 95% of everyone including other trained fighters thats a silly example.


> Here's a video of an incident where a bjj competitor used pretty basic techniques to subdue a crazy drunk in a restaurant;


Has anyone said you cant use BJJ as self defense?  



> Again, does it strike anyone as odd that TMAs use boxers, wrestlers, and increasingly BJJ stylists as their imaginary opponents in practice? I see it all the time; This is how you take down a wrestler! This is what you need to do if you're facing a guy with great striking like a boxer! Use these techniques to stop a bjj guy from getting you in an armbar!


thats smart since Bjj is the soup of the day.  As fast as schools are popping up and as many affliction shirts I see walking around there is a chance the person your fighting has seen the UFC on tv or tried a free BJJ class.



> If you're a martial artist, you're going to run into a variety of TMA schools. I'd rather not name any names, because I don't want to be accused of style bashing.


So none?



> Run back through my posts. I've listed plenty of examples.
> 
> 
> 
> It can be both. It can be the style that uses antiquated training methods, and it can be the practitioners who believe in crazy nonsense instead of a proven method.
> 
> Here's an extreme example;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These people actually believed that this guy could hit them with chi energy. When he fought in a competition, he was exposed to be the fraud he was.


I dont think many think this is even a real martial art and its def not a traditional Martial art


----------



## Kframe

That Kiai video disturbs me on a deep level.  I can see him paying a few people in class to act and take part in the fraud, but holy smokes. Looking at the beginning, he had ALOT of people coming at him. Unless he is rich, I don't see how he has enough money to pay that many actors.  Its almost like a cult in that place. That is frightening.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Being able to fight in the ring at least shows that you're able to fight. Does anyone doubt that Mike Tyson or Mohammed Ali in their prime could beat the crap out of 95% of people? Anyone think that Rhonda Rousey or Georges St. Pierre couldn't defend themselves better than the vast majority of the human population?.



Fight....... with a set of rules. The guys you've mentioned were the best in their field, of course they could defend themselves, but you can't apply that logic to everyone who has ever put on a pair of gloves and sparred at a martial arts club. You're doing a hell of a lot of generalising on this thread based on nothing more than your own prejudices and bias. 



Hanzou said:


> Here's a video of an incident where a bjj competitor used pretty basic techniques to subdue a crazy drunk in a restaurant;



That's nice. I know that BJJ can be used for competitive fighting and self defence, so can Wing Chun....

Vs Karate






Vs TKD






Vs Muay Thai






This doesn't mean that Wing Chun is more superior than each of these styles, rather that, if trained properly then one can use Wing Chun to fight and defend themselves.




Hanzou said:


> Again, does it strike anyone as odd that TMAs use boxers, wrestlers, and increasingly BJJ stylists as their imaginary opponents in practice? I see it all the time; This is how you take down a wrestler! This is what you need to do if you're facing a guy with great striking like a boxer! Use these techniques to stop a bjj guy from getting you in an armbar!



Which TMAists use boxers and wrestlers as their imaginary opponents? What style have you seen this from? Why would this be a bad thing? 




Hanzou said:


> If you're a martial artist, you're going to run into a variety of TMA schools. I'd rather not name any names, because I don't want to be accused of style bashing.
> 
> 
> Run back through my posts. I've listed plenty of examples.



You've stated that you had a little experience in sport Karate. How does that qualify you to pass judgement on every TMA? You have continuously said on this thread that TMA's do X and Y and that is why they are inferior to sport arts; surely you can't have formed that opinion from training in one style of TMA...




Hanzou said:


> It can be both. It can be the style that uses antiquated training methods, and it can be the practitioners who believe in crazy nonsense instead of a proven method.
> 
> Here's an extreme example;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These people actually believed that this guy could hit them with chi energy. When he fought in a competition, he was exposed to be the fraud he was.



He is a fraud and any credible Martial Artist would recognise that.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Not that that is relevant to my point, but that isn't what happened:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gracie_Challenge



That was a purely face saving exersize, they gave Gene Labelle a seemingly impossible task of losing that much weight so that they could back out without appearing weak. They prided themselves on proving that a smaller man could easily beat a larger opponent using BJJ yet still imposed that condition. They also backed away from a challenge by Benny the Jet Urquidez.



Hanzou said:


> Being able to fight in the ring at least shows  that you're able to fight. Does anyone doubt that Mike Tyson or Mohammed  Ali in their prime could beat the crap out of 95% of people? Anyone  think that Rhonda Rousey or Georges St. Pierre couldn't defend  themselves better than the vast majority of the human population?



The vast majority of the population do not do martial arts and the vast majority of the ones that do are not at a high level.




Hanzou said:


> Again, does it strike anyone as odd that TMAs use boxers, wrestlers, and  increasingly BJJ stylists as their imaginary opponents in practice? I  see it all the time; This is how you take down a wrestler! This is what  you need to do if you're facing a guy with great striking like a boxer!  Use these techniques to stop a bjj guy from getting you in an armbar!



I hate to break it too ya (not really) but BJJ uses that tactic all the time, "this is what you do against a striker", 'BJJ versus (insert style here)'. In my school we do not use boxers, wrestlers, and  BJJ stylists as imaginary opponents in practice, we use imaginary opponents (it's called visualization) who attack with kicks, strikes, throws, takedowns etc. If there is an attack that is used more commonly when a new style becomes prominent, such as double leg takedowns etc. We train against individuals not styles.

The Kiai master is a nut job, no one takes him seriously.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Dinkydoo said:


> Vs Muay Thai
> 
> http://youtu.be/OtpLNp24UUM



The mirror lost.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Fight....... with a set of rules. The guys you've mentioned were the best in their field, of course they could defend themselves, but you can't apply that logic to everyone who has ever put on a pair of gloves and sparred at a martial arts club. You're doing a hell of a lot of generalising on this thread based on nothing more than your own prejudices and bias.



Sparring at a martial arts club is quite a bit different than sparring in a full contact competition. In the latter, both parties are trying to win. Its the closest thing to a street fight without actually being in a street fight. Its also the only way you can truly test your abilities against a fully resisting opponent.




> That's nice. I know that BJJ can be used for competitive fighting and self defence, so can Wing Chun....
> 
> 
> This doesn't mean that Wing Chun is more superior than each of these styles, rather that, if trained properly then one can use Wing Chun to fight and defend themselves.



I think you missed my point. My video was showing a "sport style" being used in a self defense situation against a drunken person. It wasn't two martial artists squaring off against each other in a dojo.

However, I anxiously await the day when Wing Chun appears in MMA tournaments. I mean why wouldn't it? The hand movements and low kicks would fit MMA like a glove.

There's a good reason you'll never see it though. 



> Which TMAists use boxers and wrestlers as their imaginary opponents? What style have you seen this from? Why would this be a bad thing?



Where did I say this was a bad thing? I'm just pointing out that most of us agree that if we're going to be fighting someone on the street, they're more than likely going to be some derivative of boxer, wrestler, or MMAer. Martial Athletes are viewed as dangerous opponents.



> You've stated that you had a little experience in sport Karate. How does that qualify you to pass judgement on every TMA? You have continuously said on this thread that TMA's do X and Y and that is why they are inferior to sport arts; surely you can't have formed that opinion from training in one style of TMA...



Let's just say that I've been around the block a few times. Being trained in martial arts has allowed me to experience many different styles of martial arts. I am thankful for that, because it has allowed me to cut through the BS of a lot of claims and fantasies. Again, if my children were seeking a Martial Art for self defense, a TMA wouldn't be on the radar. 



> He is a fraud and any credible Martial Artist would recognise that.



Of course, but his students were not credible martial artists when he swindled them. Fortunately he accepted a public challenge, and was exposed for the fraud he was.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> That was a purely face saving exersize, they gave Gene Labelle a seemingly impossible task of losing that much weight so that they could back out without appearing weak. They prided themselves on proving that a smaller man could easily beat a larger opponent using BJJ yet still imposed that condition. They also backed away from a challenge by Benny the Jet Urquidez.



I suppose. Again, that wasn't really my point. My point was to show that there are a variety of martial artists who have no problem proving the validity of their styles. Its sort of a tradition in the martial arts, and its pretty bizarre how TMAs in this day in age shy away from it because their art is "too dangerous".



> I hate to break it too ya (not really) but BJJ uses that tactic all the time, "this is what you do against a striker", 'BJJ versus (insert style here)'. In my school we do not use boxers, wrestlers, and  BJJ stylists as imaginary opponents in practice, we use imaginary opponents (it's called visualization) who attack with kicks, strikes, throws, takedowns etc. If there is an attack that is used more commonly when a new style becomes prominent, such as double leg takedowns etc. We train against individuals not styles.



Of course Bjj uses that tactic. If you can take down a boxer, then you can probably take down the average brawler. If you can survive a wrestler's headlock, you could probably survive a brawler's headlock. The benefit of modern arts like Bjj is that you attract people from a variety of styles who willingly incorporate their background into the art. So we have former wrestlers at my school, who are more than happy to show us how a wrestler would put you in a headlock, or how a wrestler would defend against a takedown. Arts like Bjj rapidly incorporate these abilities into the art, and it becomes stronger because of it. For example, Judo and Bjj took the double legged takedown from wrestling. Why? Because it works.



> The Kiai master is a nut job, no one takes him seriously.



Do you feel the same about this guy?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Sparring at a martial arts club is quite a bit different than sparring in a full contact competition. In the latter, both parties are trying to win.



Granted, however sparring in a full contact competition is quite a bit different than fighting for your life and well being in the street, in the latter, the one attacking you is not trying to win, he is trying to injure you and put you out of action.



Hanzou said:


> Its the closest thing to a street fight without actually being in a street fight.



In some respects, yes, but in others it is way off.



Hanzou said:


> Its also the only way you can truly test your abilities against a fully resisting opponent.



Unless they are trying to do you serious physical harm, they are not "fully" resisting. The only way you can truly test this is in actually doing it in a real situation (the proof is in the pudding, not in making the pudding). They are fighting with a limited rule set that does not apply in the street, there is a referee who will be there to intervene when you get into too much trouble, there are targets that they are not allowed to attack and attacks they are not allowed to do so they are not trained to defend against them as much so they can only test SOME of their abilities.



Hanzou said:


> Where did I say this was a bad thing? I'm just pointing out that most of us agree that if we're going to be fighting someone on the street, they're more than likely going to be some derivative of boxer, wrestler, or MMAer. Martial Athletes are viewed as dangerous opponents.



No it would more than likely be an untrained thug, they are far more common.



Hanzou said:


> Let's just say that I've been around the block a few times.



Many of us have been around a different block.



Hanzou said:


> Again, if my children were seeking a Martial Art for self defense, a TMA wouldn't be on the radar.



That is your personal choice, based on your ideas and experiences. If I had children and they wanted to learn self defence I would not consider a sport for them I would look towards the TMA I am in because I know of it's benefits are for self defence.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Sparring at a martial arts club is quite a bit different than sparring in a full contact competition. In the latter, both parties are trying to win. Its the closest thing to a street fight without actually being in a street fight. Its also the only way you can truly test your abilities against a fully resisting opponent.



What RTKDCMB said.



Hanzou said:


> I think you missed my point. My video was showing a "sport style" being used in a self defense situation against a drunken person. It wasn't two martial artists squaring off against each other in a dojo.



I'm not quite sure why you felt the need to show me that, I realise that sport arts can be useful for self defence.

The point in the Wing Chun videos was to show you that your opinion of TMAs being rubbish when it comes to fighting is wrong. It might be based on a bad experience that you have had but you've allowed that experience to close your mind. You're walking around with your eyes closed protecting your prejudicial ideals. 



Hanzou said:


> However, I anxiously await the day when Wing Chun appears in MMA tournaments. I mean why wouldn't it? The hand movements and low kicks would fit MMA like a glove.
> 
> There's a good reason you'll never see it though.



Why do you think that is?



Hanzou said:


> Let's just say that I've been around the block a few times. Being trained in martial arts has allowed me to experience many different styles of martial arts. I am thankful for that, because it has allowed me to cut through the BS of a lot of claims and fantasies. Again, if my children were seeking a Martial Art for self defense, a TMA wouldn't be on the radar.



For someone who's been around the block a few times you seem to know very little about TMAs other than they use Set Forms as a training tool.

One big thing that you've not even touched upon in this thread is sensitivity. If you know enough about TMAs to disregard them all as useless then you'll understand why some Kung Fu practitioners, say Wing Chun or Nothern Mantis, might find it difficult to use gloves in a fight - clue: its not simply about being able to grip your opponents wrist. Now on the street against an unskilled opponent you could probably get away with some well timed blocks and quick chain and hammer fist counters once your attacker has opened up, but against a skilled MAist (like an MMA guy) I definitely would not want to have my main weapons severely restricted by wearing gloves.



> Of course, but his students were not credible martial artists when he swindled them. Fortunately he accepted a public challenge, and was exposed for the fraud he was.



If you're suggesting that this is representative of TMAs in general then your more blinkered than I thought.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Granted, however sparring in a full contact competition is quite a bit different than fighting for your life and well being in the street, in the latter, the one attacking you is not trying to win, he is trying to injure you and put you out of action.



No argument there. My point is that competition is closer to a street fight situation than sparring in a dojo. In the dojo you're there to learn, not to "win". In a competition, your mindset is different. You have the adrenaline dump, and you have an opponent is trying to defeat you. Nothing can fully prepare you for a street encounter, but competition comes closer to it than sparring in the dojo.




> In some respects, yes, but in others it is way off.



Of course. However, its important to keep in mind that in a competition, you're going against someone who is equally trained. I thought I sucked as a blue belt in Bjj, because I was getting creamed by other blue belts and upper belts. It wasnt until I got into a situation against someone who had no grappling training did I realize how skilled I had become. Suddenly that choke that never worked against my peers was easy to apply.



> Unless they are trying to do you serious physical harm, they are not "fully" resisting. The only way you can truly test this is in actually doing it in a real situation (the proof is in the pudding, not in making the pudding). They are fighting with a limited rule set that does not apply in the street, there is a referee who will be there to intervene when you get into too much trouble, there are targets that they are not allowed to attack and attacks they are not allowed to do so they are not trained to defend against them as much so they can only test SOME of their abilities.



I would say that if someone is trying to knock you out with fists, feet, knees, and elbows, they are trying to do serious physical harm to you. Watch an MMA bout where people are kneed to the face WITHOUT headgear. Its utterly horrendous to watch. Franklin vs Silva 2, or Tate vs Zingano are prime example. You can cause severe head and body damage with knees and elbows.



> No it would more than likely be an untrained thug, they are far more common.



And untrained thugs usually go for a punch, or try to grapple you to the ground to perform a ground and pound.

Here's a vid that I thought was very interesting;

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81782173/

Though I respect this guys striking skills, if he had some grappling, he could taken this guy to the ground and subdued him, instead going into an all out brawl. Like the restaurant situation I posted above. Much more controlled, and much better for both parties involved.



> That is your personal choice, based on your ideas and experiences. If I had children and they wanted to learn self defence I would not consider a sport for them I would look towards the TMA I am in because I know of it's benefits are for self defence.



I certainly respect that decision. Everyone has different experiences. :asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I suppose. Again, that wasn't really my point. My point was to show that there are a variety of martial artists who have no problem proving the validity of their styles. Its sort of a tradition in the martial arts, and its pretty bizarre how TMAs in this day in age shy away from it because their art is "too dangerous".



That is because most TMA's are not as insecure and do not feel the need to constantly prove anything with meaningless contests. Competition styles are competitive by nature and self defence styles are defensive, agreeing to fight someone is not self defence. I refer you to the post I made about challenge matches (#128).



Hanzou said:


> . For example, Judo and Bjj took the double legged takedown from wrestling. Why? Because it works.



It works in a sporting environment (for example, when they know they will not get hit in the back of the head/neck) but not a very smart thing to do in a self defence situation.There are too many things that can go wrong when you drop your head that low and restrict your field of vision, Any takedown that also puts you on the ground as well as your opponent limits your ability to flee or defend against other potential attackers.



Hanzou said:


> Do you feel the same about this guy?



It's a bit hard to evaluate someone on the basis of one 2 minute video. He at least does not make outrageous claims. His technique did not appear to be very good and his choice was IMO overly complicated, you obviously picked the first not so good video you could find.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> I'm not quite sure why you felt the need to show me that, I realise that sport arts can be useful for self defence.



I showed you that to showcase how someone who is well versed in "sport bjj" can apply "sport MA" in a self defense situation. Compare that vid to this one;

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81782173/

Which one seems more in control? Which one seemed more skillful? Which one has the better resolution?

There was numerous times where the second fight could have ended with just a swift take down and an applied body lock or even a choke. Instead, we had two guys brawling it out, with no clear victor, and anger being generated from both sides. Meanwhile in the first video, the aggressor is clearly defeated and humbled. He comes in an apologizes for what he has done, and he marvels at Ryan Hall's abilities. Ryan subdued him with 2 basic bjj techniques.



> The point in the Wing Chun videos was to show you that your opinion of TMAs being rubbish when it comes to fighting is wrong. It might be based on a bad experience that you have had but you've allowed that experience to close your mind. You're walking around with your eyes closed protecting your prejudicial ideals.



Well I don't know the background of those fighters. There are claims on youtube that the MT fighter is actually a student at that WC school. So I simply don't know. I am glad to see traditional martial artists test their abilities. I think that is an excellent way to add legitimacy to their styles and claims. Their forerunners did it, so can they.



> Why do you think that is?



In my experience, hand trapping is pretty ineffective against a trained striker. This is also why I am skeptical about Aikido. Their trapping and wristlocks look phenomenal in practice, but I've never witnessed an Aikidoka reliably trap a boxer's punches. Let's face it; if it worked, we'd see it all over MMA. What fighter wouldn't use such awesome abilities to counter a punch?



> For someone who's been around the block a few times you seem to know very little about TMAs other than they use Set Forms as a training tool.
> 
> One big thing that you've not even touched upon in this thread is sensitivity. If you know enough about TMAs to disregard them all as useless then you'll understand why some Kung Fu practitioners, say Wing Chun or Nothern Mantis, might find it difficult to use gloves in a fight - clue: its not simply about being able to grip your opponents wrist. Now on the street against an unskilled opponent you could probably get away with some well timed blocks and quick chain and hammer fist counters once your attacker has opened up, but against a skilled MAist (like an MMA guy) I definitely would not want to have my main weapons severely restricted by wearing gloves.



So basically if you practice Wing Chun or Praying Mantis, you better hope you don't get attacked when its cold outside?



> If you're suggesting that this is representative of TMAs in general then your more blinkered than I thought.



Its definitely a common thread in the TMAs I've been around. Granted, your TMA may not be like that, but I've run across many that are.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> That is because most TMA's are not as insecure and do not feel the need to constantly prove anything with meaningless contests. Competition styles are competitive by nature and self defence styles are defensive, agreeing to fight someone is not self defence. I refer you to the post I made about challenge matches (#128).



So you believe that the old TMA masters who openly challenged other arts or masters were insecure? 



> It works in a sporting environment (for example, when they know they will not get hit in the back of the head/neck) but not a very smart thing to do in a self defence situation.There are too many things that can go wrong when you drop your head that low and restrict your field of vision, Any takedown that also puts you on the ground as well as your opponent limits your ability to flee or defend against other potential attackers.



You mean like that restaurant vid where the guy did a double leg take down (while seated and the other guy was standing up in his face) to subdue a drunk?

If you missed it, here it is again at the 1:20 mark;






Notice his positioning at the end of the take down. He is now on top of the opponent, in complete control of his entire body. He can get up at any point.



> It's a bit hard to evaluate someone on the basis of one 2 minute video. He at least does not make outrageous claims. His technique did not appear to be very good and his choice was IMO overly complicated, you obviously picked the first not so good video you could find.



Its not hard at all if you know what to look for. For starters, choreographed crap like that is ineffective, and insane to teach to people. When two people are assaulting you, there's no way in hell you're going to remember any of that. Also the idea that two assailants are going to attack you from a pre-arranged position is ridiculous.

Teaching people stuff like that and claiming that it will keep them alive is both dangerous and foolish.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I would say that if someone is trying to knock you out with fists, feet, knees, and elbows, they are trying to do serious physical harm to you. Watch an MMA bout where people are kneed to the face WITHOUT headgear. Its utterly horrendous to watch. Franklin vs Silva 2, or Tate vs Zingano are prime example. You can cause severe head and body damage with knees and elbows.



Of course you can do some serious damage with knees and elbows. Are the people in MMA bouts trying to stomp on your head when you are down?, Are they hitting you in the face with a glass? Are they still kicking and hitting you when you are unconscious? Are they ganging up on you or attacking you with a knife? If the answer is no to any of these then they are not trying to do serious physical harm to you. I am sure if you ask any MMA fighter before a match if they really intend to put their opponent in the hospital or put them out of action for a few months they would not honestly say they are.



Hanzou said:


> And untrained thugs usually go for a punch, or try to grapple you to the ground to perform a ground and pound.



Standard things to teach the defence of in your average TMA.




Hanzou said:


> Here's a vid that I thought was very interesting;
> 
> http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81782173/
> 
> Though I respect this guys striking skills, if he had some grappling, he could taken this guy to the ground and subdued him, instead going into an all out brawl. Like the restaurant situation I posted above. Much more controlled, and much better for both parties involved.



I have seen that video before, it was a 30 second fight that lasted about 29 seconds too long because the security guard was not able to put him down efficiently.

Here's how it should be done;






Much more effective I think. And he was a Karate guy.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Of course you can do some serious damage with knees and elbows. Are the people in MMA bouts trying to stomp on your head when you are down?, Are they hitting you in the face with a glass? Are they still kicking and hitting you when you are unconscious? Are they ganging up on you or attacking you with a knife? If the answer is no to any of these then they are not trying to do serious physical harm to you. I am sure if you ask any MMA fighter before a match if they really intend to put their opponent in the hospital or put them out of action for a few months they would not honestly say they are.



Again, the argument was never that competitions are just like street fights. The argument you made is that people aren't trying to do serious physical damage to someone, which is false.

Lots of MMA fighters go to the hospital after their matches. That fits under my definition of someone doing serious physical damage to someone else.




> Standard things to teach the defence of in your average TMA.



And its pretty tough to squeeze in when you have to do katas and forms with Okinawan or Chinese farm equipment.  



> I have seen that video before, it was a 30 second fight that lasted about 29 seconds too long because the security guard was not able to put him down efficiently.
> 
> Here's how it should be done;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Much more effective I think. And he was a Karate guy.



Looks more like a lucky punch. Even the karate guy looks surprised that that chump went down so quickly. Reminds me of when Rashad Evans knocked out Chuck Liddell. You hit that right spot at the right time, and everyone goes down. The thing is though that hitting that right spot doesn't happen often.


----------



## ballen0351

That security guard never intended to subdue that guy.  He wanted to fight him not detain him.  That's why he never even attempted to restrain him.  Security guard squared off first and challenged the other guy to a fight.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> I showed you that to showcase how someone who is well versed in "sport bjj" can apply "sport MA" in a self defense situation. Compare that vid to this one;
> 
> http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81782173/
> 
> Which one seems more in control? Which one seemed more skillful? Which one has the better resolution?
> 
> There was numerous times where the second fight could have ended with just a swift take down and an applied body lock or even a choke. Instead, we had two guys brawling it out, with no clear victor, and anger being generated from both sides. Meanwhile in the first video, the aggressor is clearly defeated and humbled. He comes in an apologizes for what he has done, and he marvels at Ryan Hall's abilities. Ryan subdued him with 2 basic bjj techniques.



I agree that the first went a lot better, and was controlled. The police officer in the second clip fought like a boxer though so I guess that BJJ is better than boxing and Muay Thai for self defence. 



> Well I don't know the background of those fighters. There are claims on youtube that the MT fighter is actually a student at that WC school. So I simply don't know. I am glad to see traditional martial artists test their abilities. I think that is an excellent way to add legitimacy to their styles and claims. Their forerunners did it, so can they.



So you've changed your mind then. TMA can be useful in a fight....



> In my experience, hand trapping is pretty ineffective against a trained striker. This is also why I am skeptical about Aikido. Their trapping and wristlocks look phenomenal in practice, but I've never witnessed an Aikidoka reliably trap a boxer's punches. Let's face it; if it worked, we'd see it all over MMA. What fighter wouldn't use such awesome abilities to counter a punch?



You're right about one thing, trying trap a quick front hand strike isn't wise. Outside of the ring I'm not so sure that front hand striking is as prevalent; any scuffles I was involved in as a teenager usually started with a big right hook and continued in a similar manner. I like front hand striking for a number of reasons but I wouldn't really expect an untrained person to use them. 

Wing Chun was developed for self defence remember, not the ring. 



> So basically if you practice Wing Chun or Praying Mantis, you better hope you don't get attacked when its cold outside?



I would definitely have to alter my fighting approach against a trained opponent if I was wearing gloves, which is the point. 

Its obvious you don't understand (which is fine) and you don't have much (or any) experience in a traditional Kung Fu system, but that means you aren't in a position to pass judgment on and develop an informed opinion about the art I practice - or most Kung Fu styles - never mind each and every TMA.

Emphasis mine. 



> Its definitely a common thread in the TMAs I've been around. Granted, your TMA may not be like that, but I've run across many that are.



Energy cultivation and what can seem like peculiar power generation (to someone who doesn't practice the art) is present within a lot of TMAs, but that is very different from claiming to have magical chi - which doesn't exist (although my girlfriend might say differently  ). The first time I saw Taiji Mantis I thought "What the hell is that, how are they generating any force." because they use different body mechanics than the Mantis and other style I've trained in. 

I hate the charlatans too; I've recently been involved in a YouTube disagreement with a Kung Fu 'teacher' teaching a new 'freestyle' form of Kung Fu in the UK who have basically stolen sets from Lau Gar (whose origin is a bit dodgy anyway) and decided to teach them in a "Tai Chi" style - which to him is slow and wavey movements. It looks ridiculous and it angers me that people are #1 paying to learn this and #2 might actually think that they can defend themselves with this sort of nonsense.

So we're maybe more similar than I'd like to think


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> So you believe that the old TMA masters who openly challenged other arts or masters were insecure?



Bit before my time, I don't know exactly what their motivations are, in any rate I was referring to those who like to post videos on YouTube.



Hanzou said:


> You mean like that restaurant vid where the guy did a double leg take down (while seated and the other guy was standing up in his face) to subdue a drunk?
> 
> If you missed it, here it is again at the 1:20 mark;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notice his positioning at the end of the take down. He is now on top of the opponent, in complete control of his entire body. He can get up at any point.



I did not say it could not work, I just said it is not smart. What if the drunk had a friend with a beer bottle?



Hanzou said:


> Its not hard at all if you know what to look for. For starters, choreographed crap like that is ineffective, and insane to teach to people. When two people are assaulting you, there's no way in hell you're going to remember any of that. Also the idea that two assailants are going to attack you from a pre-arranged position is ridiculous.
> 
> Teaching people stuff like that and claiming that it will keep them alive is both dangerous and foolish.



You look at videos like that (that one was a bad example) and just think of it in terms of choreography, that's because you do not understand that it is just a different method of training that involves breaking down the defence into simpler motions under controlled conditions (fixing variables) which, after some training, you can modify to suit the situation. Its like learning the ideal gas law (PV = nRT), you first learn the simplified version, which is a broad definition, and then learn to take into acount such things like the mass and volume of individual gas molecules which can be applied to real gasses.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Again, the argument was never that competitions are just like street fights. The argument you made is that people aren't trying to do serious physical damage to someone, which is false.
> 
> Lots of MMA fighters go to the hospital after their matches. That fits under my definition of someone doing serious physical damage to someone else.



I guess we have different definitions of serious damage. A friend of mine was once attacked by 2 men, they smashed down his door beat him up, kicked him in the groin several times, threw him off the 2nd floor balcony and then went down to him and repeatedly stomped on his groin, that's trying to do serious harm.




Hanzou said:


> And its pretty tough to squeeze in when you have to do katas and forms with Okinawan or Chinese farm equipment.



I have never used any type of farm implement.



Hanzou said:


> Looks more like a lucky punch. Even the karate guy looks surprised that that chump went down so quickly.



It looked more like a knife hand strike to me, 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 he knew exactly what he was doing, he threw his hands up in the air because he was reacting to having to actually use his Karate whist filming a self defence video (irony).


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> That security guard never intended to subdue that guy.  He wanted to fight him not detain him.  That's why he never even attempted to restrain him.  Security guard squared off first and challenged the other guy to a fight.



If the security guard had made that his intention, the fight would have went a lot smoother for him, and would have ended a lot faster.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> I agree that the first went a lot better, and was controlled. The police officer in the second clip fought like a boxer though so I guess that BJJ is better than boxing and Muay Thai for self defence.



Yes, for a variety of reasons. However, it IS dependent on the situation. If I'm fighting multiple opponents, I'd use something more akin to boxing and muay thai to stay on my feet and move around as much as possible. If I happen to get taken down, I'll use bjj to get back on my feet as quickly as possible. If I'm fighting some oversized wrestler roid freak, I'm using bjj. Overall though, the most humane and civilized way to dispatch someone is via bjj (or Judo). Putting someone to sleep or pinning them on the ground is better than gouging out their eyes, biting their neck, breaking their windpipe, ripping off their nuts, etc. Its also safer and more reliable.

Boxing is mobile, and its quick strikes is pretty solid if you got a lot of guys coming at you. I wouldn't do kicks, because there's a chance that you could be taken down.

Example;









> So you've changed your mind then. TMA can be useful in a fight....



Sure, if properly trained, and removed of antiquated methods. One thing I dislike about TMAs is their insistence that their way is the best way because its "old". If I was instructing a TMA, I would teach all of my students how to box and how to wrestle. I would teach them how to jab, boxing footwork, MT clinch and knees, guillotine chokes, and how to do a single leg and double leg takedown. Why? Because they work, and they're likely to encounter that sort of thing in a fight. Why learn 25 hand strikes when you really only need 4? IMO, its a waste of time. But then again, I view nothing as sacred.



> You're right about one thing, trying trap a quick front hand strike isn't wise. Outside of the ring I'm not so sure that front hand striking is as prevalent; any scuffles I was involved in as a teenager usually started with a big right hook and continued in a similar manner. I like front hand striking for a number of reasons but I wouldn't really expect an untrained person to use them.
> 
> Wing Chun was developed for self defence remember, not the ring.



Boxing was developed for the ring, and its a great self defense tool. Personally, I think its the top stand-up MA, because its simple, scientific, mobile, and teaches you how to generate power with very little movement. You're starting to see a resurgence of boxing in MMA as the ground game is becoming neutralized due to so many people learning how to defend themselves from take downs. 

In the end, I don't think it really matters where and why something was developed. All that matters is if it works or not. If I had the opportunity to learn Wing Chun or Boxing, I'd choose Boxing every time.





> Its obvious you don't understand (which is fine) and you don't have much (or any) experience in a traditional Kung Fu system, but that means you aren't in a position to pass judgment on and develop an informed opinion about the art I practice - or most Kung Fu styles - never mind each and every TMA.



Okay, but I do have experience in a Kung Fu system that claimed to be traditional.

Unfortunately, my experiences color my opinions. Its just the way it is. When I first walked into a bjj school, I wanted to test those guys out and see what they were made of. A white belt stomped me into the ground. A purple belt made me his girlfriend for several minutes. I didn't even want to see what the instructor was going to do to me. That's when I joined bjj. 



> Energy cultivation and what can seem like peculiar power generation (to someone who doesn't practice the art) is present within a lot of TMAs, but that is very different from claiming to have magical chi - which doesn't exist (although my girlfriend might say differently  ). The first time I saw Taiji Mantis I thought "What the hell is that, how are they generating any force." because they use different body mechanics than the Mantis and other style I've trained in.
> 
> I hate the charlatans too; I've recently been involved in a YouTube disagreement with a Kung Fu 'teacher' teaching a new 'freestyle' form of Kung Fu in the UK who have basically stolen sets from Lau Gar (whose origin is a bit dodgy anyway) and decided to teach them in a "Tai Chi" style - which to him is slow and wavey movements. It looks ridiculous and it angers me that people are #1 paying to learn this and #2 might actually think that they can defend themselves with this sort of nonsense.
> 
> So we're maybe more similar than I'd like to think



I would say that Kung Fu has that issue more than any other branch of TMA. Its just too easy to spew out BS with Kung Fu and claim legitimacy. You can string along a student for years by saying that you're holding off the "secret knowledge" while you toss them into a purgatory of forms and drills. One of the things I like about Bjj is that everything is out in the open, and its pretty easy to tell who is spewing the ********. Mainly because of the competition circuit. If your school is pumping out bad students, its known almost instantly, because your guys are getting tapped out.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> Sparring at a martial arts club is quite a bit different than sparring in a full contact competition. In the latter, both parties are trying to win. Its the closest thing to a street fight without actually being in a street fight. Its also the only way you can truly test your abilities against a fully resisting opponent.



No, it's not the closest thing to a street fight.  In fact, in a lot of ways, it's NOTHING like a street fight.  Maybe it bears resemblance to a "friendly bar fight."  But that's it.  This is the mistake you're locked on -- that violence and fighting are the same.  Nor is it the "only way you can truly test your abilities..."  Properly planned and set up scenario training is MUCH closer to reality.  

Sparring and competitive matches have useful elements for preparing for real fighting, but so do many other things.  Truthfully, you want to become a great street fighter, the process is simple, and you don't need a dojo or gym.  Just a good lawyer, and a better doc, because the best way to become the best monster you can be is to go out there, and get in fights.  If you survive, you'll become a great street fighter.  Of course, you may find yourself honing your skills in the Gray Bar Hotel, too...


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Bit before my time, I don't know exactly what their motivations are, in any rate I was referring to those who like to post videos on YouTube.



Their motivation was to spread their art, and show their art's validity. When Jigaro Kano opened up his first Judo school, he would get challenges from other Juijitsu schools constantly. That's just how things were done back in the day.



> I did not say it could not work, I just said it is not smart. What if the drunk had a friend with a beer bottle?



Then you wouldn't do that particular move. You would assess the situation and make adjustments. In that situation shown in the vid, it was very smart, because it restrained the drunk.



> You look at videos like that (that one was a bad example) and just think of it in terms of choreography, that's because you do not understand that it is just a different method of training that involves breaking down the defence into simpler motions under controlled conditions (fixing variables) which, after some training, you can modify to suit the situation. Its like learning the ideal gas law (PV = nRT), you first learn the simplified version, which is a broad definition, and then learn to take into acount such things like the mass and volume of individual gas molecules which can be applied to real gasses.



I'm sorry, but I simply disagree. Pre-arranged crap like that is a bad way to teach someone how to defend themselves. Even at full speed, that set up looked sloppy and pathetic. Even worse, having the targets at pre-determined starting points is even worse. Its far better to teach general mechanics of a move, and how to apply them in different situations. For example,the standard Judo/Bjj armbar can be applied from a variety of angles and situations. I can throw someone down and apply it. I can apply it from my back. I can apply it if I'm top of someone. I can apply it if I'm on their back. I could even apply it in a flying arm bar if I was that flexible (and that crazy). Since I can do that one movement in so many ways, it makes it easy for my mind to remember the technique. Rhonda Rousey is a prime example of this phenomenon, because she defeats ALL of her opponents with the arm bar,


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> I guess we have different definitions of serious damage. A friend of mine was once attacked by 2 men, they smashed down his door beat him up, kicked him in the groin several times, threw him off the 2nd floor balcony and then went down to him and repeatedly stomped on his groin, that's trying to do serious harm.



That's an example of someone trying to kill someone else. Not every street fight involves someone trying to kill the other person. Some people just want to beat the crap out of you.

In any case, any situation where you need immediate medical attention, I would define as serious physical damage. I consider [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Georgia, sans-serif]Joe Theisman's football injury to be serious physical damage. Or that poor kid who went up for a layup and landed wrong on his leg and shattered his leg.[/FONT]



> I have never used any type of farm implement.



Sais, Nunchuks, and Kamas are originally all farm tools.



> It looked more like a knife hand strike to me,  he knew exactly what he was doing, he threw his hands up in the air because he was reacting to having to actually use his Karate whist filming a self defence video (irony).



I'm sure he knows how to throw a knife hand. My issue is with the result. He got the guy at exactly the right angle, at exactly the right time, hence the knockout blow. We both know that such a result is pretty rare, because if it wasn't, EVERYONE would be learning knife hands to instantly knock out people. That said, that gentleman did a good thing, and he should be applauded for knocking that scumbag to the ground.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> If the security guard had made that his intention, the fight would have went a lot smoother for him, and would have ended a lot faster.



How do you know how smooth the fight would have been?  Your an expert on the fighting style of the Memphis Area Metro Transit Authority ?  do you know anything about the guy to be able to make a statement on how the fight would go or how smooth it would be?  The video shows him square up to fight and the other guy said in the clip he told him he wanted to fight.  Never once did he even attempt to detain the suspect.  Police 101 is to get people on the ground to get then cuffed.  He never made a single attempt.


----------



## Koshiki

Hanzou said:


> In any case, any situation where you need immediate medical attention, I would define as serious physical damage. I consider Joe Theisman's football injury to be serious physical damage.
> 
> ...
> 
> Sais, Nunchuks, and Kamas are originally all farm tools.



MMA has been widely publicized, by media and by MMA reps, as being LESS dangerous than many other rough sports, like hockey, football... A super-quick internet search should make that pretty clear. Also, as I recall from being reprimanded, elbow/knee strikes to the head are generally only allowed in pro MMA, yes? So, it's not like the average MMA joe is going around getting kneed in the face every Saturday open mat? Maybe it's different in Maine, but...

Also, since you seem to know enough of all TMAs to dismiss them as a group, here's a brief history lesson. 

1. Sai are ancient, and have only EVER been recorded as being used as weapons, originating in India, I believe. As i recall, they were most likely the Old-School Indian equivalent of a cops night stick.

2. Nunchuku, (Not "nunchucks/numchucks" unless it's ninja turtles, or something, please!) Were not Okinawan farm tools, but rather more of a whip utilized by the Okinawan Nobility to beat the daylights out of the peasantry. They're also not really traditional. Bruce Lee came along and suddenly people made up a whole bunch of flashy Nunchaku tournament forms.

3. Kama. Finally. HERE, you have hit upon the farm implement. Kudos.

4, 5, 6. Tonfa, Bo, and Stick, other common martial arts weapons, are ALSO, not derived from farm implements... The wide variety of Chinese weapons are not generally farm implements either, although I'm not discounting the possibility, there are a LOOOT of weapons in "kung fu." 



Hanzou said:


> Then you wouldn't do that particular move. You would assess the situation and make adjustments. In that situation shown in the vid, it was very smart, because it restrained the drunk.
> 
> Since I can do that one movement in so many ways, it makes it easy for my mind to remember the technique. Rhonda Rousey is a prime example of this phenomenon, because she defeats ALL of her opponents with the arm bar,



The person who can, in the split second of the moment, scan the entire room and determine that NONE of the people are friendly enough with the aggressor to come to their aid with the proverbial beer bottle, choose which technique to perform, and then perform it with good results is, I might suppose, of such preternatural skill and ability to be above the need for learning ANY fighting style. That sort of awareness, speed, and dexterity should be more than enough to keep you safe, you super-ninja, you.

Also, as Mr. Hanzou has mentioned time and again, in the heat of the moment, you don't have time to decide which technique to perform, which is why learning so many is just silly. You have to drill one or two so that they come without thinking, all else is wasted time. Apparently. I would assume that applies to this situation too, yes? So, If I won't be able to react with a decision to palm strike rather than punch, perhaps the average MMA fellow wouldn't be able to react with the decision to grapple or stand? Not my views, just asking about the ones I've seen stated...



Hanzou said:


> Yes, for a variety of reasons. However, it IS dependent on the situation. If I'm fighting multiple opponents, I'd use something more akin to boxing and muay thai to stay on my feet and move around as much as possible. If I happen to get taken down, I'll use bjj to get back on my feet as quickly as possible. If I'm fighting some oversized wrestler roid freak, I'm using bjj.
> 
> I have a coworker who recently informed me that he wants to learn Shotokan and Systema, so that he can use the power of Shotokan until he begins to tire, and then switch to Systema to use the force of the dead weight of his body until he gets his stamina back. In the course of the fight, that is. Not relation, just random association I thought I would share.
> 
> Boxing is mobile, and its quick strikes is pretty solid if you got a lot of guys coming at you. I wouldn't do kicks, because there's a chance that you could be taken down.
> 
> There's also a chance that being trained to hit skulls with padded gloves is likely to get your hand smunched on a skull, when the gloves come off. A broken hand/wrist can be pretty hampering in a "real street fight", so I hear. It might not be common, but it's common enough to be a worry. Probably shouldn't punch OR kick then I suppose. Although, with a good ground game, it'sounds like that's the place to be in a fight, so maybe kicks are a good way to get taken down, and thus take it to the ground? It's also not that common to be taken down while stomp-kicking a knee, perhaps, thinks I...
> 
> Sure, if properly trained, and removed of antiquated methods.
> 
> Which is exactly how most of us like our TMAs, I do believe. I'm assuming this conversation is "well-trained MMA vs well-trained TMA," not "well-trained MMA vs after-school program TMA with free ice-cream," isn't it? Does that mean we're all in agreement? TMAs generally work well if the practitioner learns and trains well, and not otherwise, exactly as does MMA?
> 
> One thing I dislike about TMAs is their insistence that their way is the best way because its "old".
> 
> I would dislike that too, if I had ever met a TMA school that thought that way. I haven't yet though, so I still like TMAs, in general.
> 
> If I was instructing a TMA, I would teach all of my students how to box and how to wrestle. I would teach them how to jab, boxing footwork, MT clinch and knees, guillotine chokes, and how to do a single leg and double leg takedown.
> 
> Pretty sure the average TMA has some sort of jab, a hook, a cross, and an uppercut. Pretty sure the average TMA does NOT fight out of a stationary traditional stance. No one (I hope!) has ever advocated that... My school actively drills no strikes/contact, pure footwork "sparring." All you do is move your stance effectively, based on the other person's. Can you name a TMA that doesn't have a choke or two in it's repertoire? Unlikely. You keep mentioning that we train to defend against all these techniques, and we do! To defend against them, you first have to learn to use them, however... The Muay Thai clinch is not some close kept secret methodology, I think the average TMA school probably plays around with various ways to pull your opponent in tight and keep them there, albeit probably doing something a little more efficient than trading side-knees to the body. As far as single/double leg takedowns... TMAs do love their takedowns, but they tend to avoid the ones that get you a nice bunch of dropping elbows to the cerebral cortex because, in a self-defense art, those are, ya know, permitted...
> 
> Why? Because they work, and they're likely to encounter that sort of thing in a fight. Why learn 25 hand strikes when you really only need 4? IMO, its a waste of time. But then again, I view nothing as sacred.
> 
> Because, without knuckle padding, four punches doesn't really cut it for those of us who want to protect our bodies AND our hands. A punch to the skull can be a pretty bad idea. Have you ever sparred with the full-contact that you love MMA for, and done it WITHOUT gloves? I bet you either started pulling your head shots, or developed some pretty painful wrists pretty quickly. Throat might be a good target for a strike, but it's hard to get a fist in under the chin... Nose/mouth is a great target, but it will almost certainly open your knuckles. The stretched, thin skin of the knuckles splits easily, and the stretching causes it to pull/suck whatever is on the knuckle back into the cut when the hand is opened. Probably a good time to get your blood tested, it would suck to win the fight and contract HIV or VHF...
> 
> If I had the opportunity to learn Wing Chun or Boxing, I'd choose Boxing every time.
> 
> I've taken boxing, but, as I had already become reasonably familiar with the movements in TMA, I found it frustrating to repeatedly do something that worked, and be told that it was not allowed. Yes, the boxing was fun. Yes, it was good striking training. Yes, it would make some decent self-defense training on it's own. But it's not the be all and end all. Neither is Win Chun, but I probably got a good deal more practical striking defense out of a one-hour class on arm contact and sensitivity with some Win Chun guys about five years ago, than I did out of 5-6 months of boxing. They're both great to train, I am sure.
> 
> Okay, but I do have experience in a Kung Fu system that claimed to be traditional.
> 
> There are probably over a hundred "Kung Fu" systems out there. Was this Tai Shing? Shaolin Fist? Win Chun? Baguazhang? They are all incredibly different. Even supposing you were at a good traditional school, unlikely if they just taught generic "kung fu," and you managed to learn and understand everything, it doesn't mean you experienced anything of the other many many martial arts out there known as "kung fu."
> 
> Unfortunately, my experiences color my opinions. Its just the way it is. When I first walked into a bjj school, I wanted to test those guys out and see what they were made of. A white belt stomped me into the ground. A purple belt made me his girlfriend for several minutes. I didn't even want to see what the instructor was going to do to me. That's when I joined bjj.
> 
> My experience with the average martial arts schools is that those who have been training in it, even for a few months, can usually outperform those who have not trained at all, when sparring in the context of the style...
> 
> I would say that Kung Fu has that issue more than any other branch of TMA. Its just too easy to spew out BS with Kung Fu and claim legitimacy.



...So, you're arguing that, because some people know from nothing and call it "kung fu," (Which means nothing, again!), that the actual variety of martial arts which really ARE kung fu are also bad? I bet I can find you a couch potato who watches the UFC and claims he is a MMA fighter, but knows nothing. That doesn't change the fact that MMA is a highly effective and very demanding sport.



Hanzou said:


> Of course Bjj uses that tactic. If you can take down a boxer, then you can probably take down the average brawler. If you can survive a wrestler's headlock, you could probably survive a brawler's headlock. The benefit of modern arts like Bjj is that you attract people from a variety of styles who willingly incorporate their background into the art. So we have former wrestlers at my school, who are more than happy to show us how a wrestler would put you in a headlock, or how a wrestler would defend against a takedown.
> 
> Weren't you just criticizing TMAs because they have studied, learned and taught defenses against wrestling techniques and boxing strikes? How is TMA doing this different from BJJ? (Incidentally, isn't BJJ around a century old? Getting dangerously close to being "traditional", that...)
> 
> Arts like Bjj rapidly incorporate these abilities into the art, and it becomes stronger because of it. For example, Judo and Bjj took the double legged takedown from wrestling. Why? Because it works.
> 
> It works great. It also fuses your motion with that of the opponent, removes your ability to see their arms, and exposes the base of the cranium and cerebral cortex to some VERY powerful (banned in MMA for that reason) dropping elbows. Which can kill or paralyze you. Which again, is why a sport martial art disavows their use. Dead and maimed competitors are not exactly a selling point...
> 
> Do you feel the same about this guy?



Yes that was terrible. He had poor balance, poor technique, poor control, and mimed smashing his knuckles of the sturdiest bone in the human body... Was that Shaloin Kempo Karate? Not exactly a traditional art; it's what, half as old as BJJ? Not sure how that's relevant. Especially since Kajunkenbo and SKK are often cited as some of the primary attempts at Mixed Martial Arts.



Dinkydoo said:


> He is a fraud and any credible Martial Artist would recognise that.



He is a fraud, has nothing to do with Traditional Martial Arts, and any half-conscious, sensible PERSON would recognize that! Really, bringing something like that into the conversation is about as relevant as saying, "Hey, scuba-divers can be around sharks, which are dangerous, and THEY don't practice Traditional Martial Arts!" The no-touch super-power thing is a Martial Arts movie convention. I challenge anyone to find the traditional style of martial arts that teaches you to take down opponents with magic wavey-no-youchy hands.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> How do you know how smooth the fight would have been?  Your an expert on the fighting style of the Memphis Area Metro Transit Authority ?  do you know anything about the guy to be able to make a statement on how the fight would go or how smooth it would be?  The video shows him square up to fight and the other guy said in the clip he told him he wanted to fight.  Never once did he even attempt to detain the suspect.  Police 101 is to get people on the ground to get then cuffed.  He never made a single attempt.




They clinched at least three times. Had the cop been trained in grappling, he could have taken him to the ground and ended the fight swiftly and decisively. Instead you have a messy brawl that goes on far too long.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> They clinched at least three times. Had the cop been trained in grappling, he could have taken him to the ground and ended the fight swiftly and decisively. Instead you have a messy brawl that goes on far too long.



That was the point.  But I forgot your the expert on all things combat so you must be right.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> They clinched at least three times. Had the cop been trained in grappling, he could have taken him to the ground and ended the fight swiftly and decisively. Instead you have a messy brawl that goes on far too long.



It ain't always so easy, no matter how well trained or how skilled you are...  Trust the experience of those who have been there and have the T-shirt...

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4


----------



## Hanzou

jks9199 said:


> It ain't always so easy, no matter how well trained or how skilled you are...  Trust the experience of those who have been there and have the T-shirt...
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4



Its easy if you're trained to do it. It's even more easy when you have multiple oppurtunities to do it.


----------



## Hanzou

Zack Cart said:


> MMA has been widely publicized, by media and by MMA reps, as being LESS dangerous than many other rough sports, like hockey, football... A super-quick internet search should make that pretty clear. Also, as I recall from being reprimanded, elbow/knee strikes to the head are generally only allowed in pro MMA, yes? So, it's not like the average MMA joe is going around getting kneed in the face every Saturday open mat? Maybe it's different in Maine, but...



The argument was that people who compete aren't trying to do serious bodily harm o one another. I believe that someone trying to pound you in the face and potentially send you to the hospital is trying to do serious bodily harm to you.

MMA tends to be less dangerous than Hockey and Football because a MMA match doesn't last as long as a football or hockey game. Getting consistently blasted by huge linebackers for the better part of two hours tends to wear your body down.




> The person who can, in the split second of the moment, scan the entire room and determine that NONE of the people are friendly enough with the aggressor to come to their aid with the proverbial beer bottle, choose which technique to perform, and then perform it with good results is, I might suppose, of such preternatural skill and ability to be above the need for learning ANY fighting style. That sort of awareness, speed, and dexterity should be more than enough to keep you safe, you super-ninja, you.



Im curious how you got all of that out of me simply pointing out that one of modern martial art's greatest advantages is its repetition of comparatively few techniques. I've even provided two videos of guys performing MMA and doing pretty basic skills to control a situation.



> Also, as Mr. Hanzou has mentioned time and again, in the heat of the moment, you don't have time to decide which technique to perform, which is why learning so many is just silly. You have to drill one or two so that they come without thinking, all else is wasted time. Apparently. I would assume that applies to this situation too, yes? So, If I won't be able to react with a decision to palm strike rather than punch, perhaps the average MMA fellow wouldn't be able to react with the decision to grapple or stand? Not my views, just asking about the ones I've seen stated...



No, the MMA fellow has the benefit of randori. So they've simulated full resistance grappling in the dojo, and reinforced that full resistance grappling in a competition environment. The advantage that grappling arts have over striking arts is that I can go full blast with a Judo throw or Bjj takedown in the dojo because my partner (should) know how to fall without injuring themselves. So I don't need to pull back when I do a one-armed shoulder throw, a guillotine choke, or a rear takedown during randori. Additionally, my partner is giving me full resistance, because his goal is to do the same thing to me. on the ground, we're both going full blast to try to gain the dominant position, just like we would in an actual fight.

So if I end up in a clinch in a self defense situation, I can throw my untrained opponent with relative ease, and he won't be falling properly, and he will more than likely be landing on concrete. If I get bjj black belt in a choke, I'm probably going to get the untrained brawler in a choke as well. It's even better when you train without a gi.

This was the genius of Jigaro Kano, the founder of Judo. 




> Because, without knuckle padding, four punches doesn't really cut it for those of us who want to protect our bodies AND our hands. A punch to the skull can be a pretty bad idea. Have you ever sparred with the full-contact that you love MMA for, and done it WITHOUT gloves? I bet you either started pulling your head shots, or developed some pretty painful wrists pretty quickly. Throat might be a good target for a strike, but it's hard to get a fist in under the chin... Nose/mouth is a great target, but it will almost certainly open your knuckles. The stretched, thin skin of the knuckles splits easily, and the stretching causes it to pull/suck whatever is on the knuckle back into the cut when the hand is opened. Probably a good time to get your blood tested, it would suck to win the fight and contract HIV or VHF...



You could always carry a pair of gloves in your back pocket, just in case something crazy pops off.



> There are probably over a hundred "Kung Fu" systems out there. Was this Tai Shing? Shaolin Fist? Win Chun? Baguazhang? They are all incredibly different. Even supposing you were at a good traditional school, unlikely if they just taught generic "kung fu," and you managed to learn and understand everything, it doesn't mean you experienced anything of the other many many martial arts out there known as "kung fu."



Again, I'd rather not name styles. I don't want to be accused of style bashing.




> ...So, you're arguing that, because some people know from nothing and call it "kung fu," (Which means nothing, again!), that the actual variety of martial arts which really ARE kung fu are also bad? I bet I can find you a couch potato who watches the UFC and claims he is a MMA fighter, but knows nothing. That doesn't change the fact that MMA is a highly effective and very demanding sport.



The difference being that that couch potato couldn't open up an MMA school and be taken seriously. The culture is different. In MMA, your instructor is tested by his students constantly. If you open up an MMA school, you better know how to grapple, box, and whatever else, because people will be rolling through to test you. In the TMAs, that couch potato could open up a school and perform some pretty movements, and few will question him, much less challenge him. It's simply a different culture. I call my bjj instructor by his first name for example, while in Karate it was sensei, or master.



> Yes that was terrible. He had poor balance, poor technique, poor control, and mimed smashing his knuckles of the sturdiest bone in the human body... Was that Shaloin Kempo Karate? Not exactly a traditional art; it's what, half as old as BJJ? Not sure how that's relevant. Especially since Kajunkenbo and SKK are often cited as some of the primary attempts at Mixed Martial Arts.



The uninitiated won't be able to tell the difference between kenpo a, kenpo b, or kenpo c. To this day, I don't understand the entire story of the kenpo lineage, and I don't really care. If you tell me you know Kenpo Karate, I'm going to assume you know Kenpo Karate. The internal squabbles over what is true Kenpo or Kung Fu, and what isn't is fairly childish stuff.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Then you wouldn't do that particular move. You would assess the situation and make adjustments. In that situation shown in the vid, it was very smart, because it restrained the drunk.



Ah but friends of drunks can be sneaky, they can wait until both guys are on the ground and then pick up a beer bottle and hit him over the head, then it would be too late to make any adjustments. If he had just knocked him out with a knife hand strike to the neck (like Jay Lee did) then he could have dealt with any other attackers without being so vulnerable.




Hanzou said:


> I'm sorry, but I simply disagree. Pre-arranged crap like that is a bad way to teach someone how to defend themselves. Even at full speed, that set up looked sloppy and pathetic. Even worse, having the targets at pre-determined starting points is even worse. Its far better to teach general mechanics of a move, and how to apply them in different situations. For example,the standard Judo/Bjj armbar can be applied from a variety of angles and situations. I can throw someone down and apply it. I can apply it from my back. I can apply it if I'm top of someone. I can apply it if I'm on their back. I could even apply it in a flying arm bar if I was that flexible (and that crazy). Since I can do that one movement in so many ways, it makes it easy for my mind to remember the technique. Rhonda Rousey is a prime example of this phenomenon, because she defeats ALL of her opponents with the arm bar,



First of all, can we stop using that video as an example, he was terrible? To do a standard armbar you have to first get someone on the ground first (there are many arm locks you can apply standing, the standard armbar is not one of them). The flying armbar? Try doing that on concrete, you would smash your own head into the ground and they can help you do it and it would not take much for your opponent to step over and stomp on your head. As for the prearranged movements, if you do not do them then your technique often ends up sloppy and ineffective. In those prearranged starting points you mention, there are only a limited number of ways they can hold you like that (they are not going to grab you upside down or backwards). Prearranged movements teach you the mechanics of the situation that you can modify to suit a different situation. An example is the front choke (when someone reaches out with both hands and grabs your neck from the front), you are taught several methods to get out of it and they depend on; whether the attacker is physically stronger than you, you are pinned against a wall, the opponent is taller than you etc, you also are taught how to stop someone grabbing you that way. traditional martial arts are taught that way because it works.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Sais, Nunchuks, and Kamas are originally all farm tools.



I am well aware of that, I simply do not use them.



Hanzou said:


> I'm sure he knows how to throw a knife hand. My issue is with the result. He got the guy at exactly the right angle, at exactly the right time, hence the knockout blow. We both know that such a result is pretty rare, because if it wasn't, EVERYONE would be learning knife hands to instantly knock out people. That said, that gentleman did a good thing, and he should be applauded for knocking that scumbag to the ground.



It's rare for it to be caught on video, that's all. Everyone IS learning knife hand strike, it is a very powerful techniques that is taught in many TMA's to people who have the accuracy to use it effectievly. It's not taught in MMA because it is illegal to strike to the neck, once again, for the safety of the competitors.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Overall though, the most humane and civilized way to dispatch someone is via bjj (or Judo). Putting someone to sleep or pinning them on the ground is better than gouging out their eyes, biting their neck, breaking their windpipe, ripping off their nuts, etc. Its also safer and more reliable.



The last thing you should be thinking about when you get attacked is the well being of your attacker, that can get you hurt. I have never heard of anyone (except vampires) biting someones neck in a fight, as for the other things, that would only be for an extreme situation. It is safer and more reliable for you to knock out or knock the wind out of your attacker so he can't continue.




Hanzou said:


> If I was instructing a TMA, I would teach all of my students how to box and how to wrestle. I would teach them how to jab, boxing footwork, MT clinch and knees, guillotine chokes, and how to do a single leg and double leg takedown. Why? Because they work, and they're likely to encounter that sort of thing in a fight. Why learn 25 hand strikes when you really only need 4? IMO, its a waste of time. But then again, I view nothing as sacred.



Then you would be teaching MMA. Many, if not most TMA's have some form of jab, boxing foot work works well - for boxing, once you add kicking and grappling, not so much. The boxing style clinch is not very smart for self defence, in a competition fight headbutts and knees to the groin are illegal and most of the knees are to keep the fighter busy to avoid referee separation and score points. Grabbing behind the neck and kneeing is common to TMA's as well but it's not good to stay there very long. I have already explained the dangers of a double leg takedown. I have seen MMA bouts where the single leg was held for several minutes, not something that is recommended in the street. 4 hand strikes is not enough to cover enough situations, in boxing they have nothing that comes at a downward angle or from the inside to the outside, such as a backfist and no elbows, so you need more than 4.



Hanzou said:


> Boxing was developed for the ring, and its a great self defense tool.  Personally, I think its the top stand-up MA, because its simple,  scientific, mobile, and teaches you how to generate power with very  little movement.



Boxing has powerful punches and can be usefull for self defence but it is nowhere near the top standup MA because it is way too limited.



Hanzou said:


> You're starting to see a resurgence of boxing in MMA as the ground game is becoming neutralized due to so many people learning how to defend themselves from take downs.



Basically you are saying that things like BJJ are becoming less effective.



Hanzou said:


> If your school is pumping out bad students, its known almost instantly, because your guys are getting tapped out.



Bad students are not that difficult to spot:


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Ah but friends of drunks can be sneaky, they can wait until both guys are on the ground and then pick up a beer bottle and hit him over the head, then it would be too late to make any adjustments. If he had just knocked him out with a knife hand strike to the neck (like Jay Lee did) then he could have dealt with any other attackers without being so vulnerable.



Now we're entering silly country. 

Knocking someone out with a knife hand is a rare occurrence. Taking someone down with a double leg take down is common occurrence. Chances are, you're not going to knock someone out with a knife hand, which will force you to go to plan B. However with take downs, gravity isn't going anywhere, and neither is the surface of the Earth.

Also if you're leery of the double leg take down, try a safer take down. The shock of the impact alone is often enough to stun the attacker, and allow you to bounce right back up into standing position.

Like I said, its all about assessing the situation.



> First of all, can we stop using that video as an example, he was terrible?



Would you prefer this one?






I especially like the Mantis slap to the head. I don't think I've laughed that hard in a long time.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> The last thing you should be thinking about when you get attacked is the well being of your attacker, that can get you hurt. I have never heard of anyone (except vampires) biting someones neck in a fight, as for the other things, that would only be for an extreme situation. It is safer and more reliable for you to knock out or knock the wind out of your attacker so he can't continue.



Attempting to knock out your opponent, or knock the wind out of your opponent is unreliable. Like that security guard fighting that thug, he couldn't knock him out despite the fact that he was better trained, and about equal size. Utilizing takedowns, locks, holds, and chokes is quite a bit more reliable.

Of course if you can get a lucky knockout blow like the karateka in that video, more power to you.




> Then you would be teaching MMA. Many, if not most TMA's have some form of jab, boxing foot work works well - for boxing, once you add kicking and grappling, not so much. The boxing style clinch is not very smart for self defence, in a competition fight headbutts and knees to the groin are illegal and most of the knees are to keep the fighter busy to avoid referee separation and score points. Grabbing behind the neck and kneeing is common to TMA's as well but it's not good to stay there very long. I have already explained the dangers of a double leg takedown. I have seen MMA bouts where the single leg was held for several minutes, not something that is recommended in the street. 4 hand strikes is not enough to cover enough situations, in boxing they have nothing that comes at a downward angle or from the inside to the outside, such as a backfist and no elbows, so you need more than 4.



Its safe to say that there is a danger in everything you do, and one technique doesn't work in every situation. My point is that boxing is both simple to pick up, and its footwork is fantastic to keep you mobile, generate power, and judge distances. I would agree that I would prefer the MT clinch to the boxing clinch. Not only can you knee from the MT clinch, but cross-training with bjj has allowed many MT schools to teach how to throw someone to the ground while in the clinch. Few things suck more than getting kneed and elbowed in the head, and then getting thrown to the canvas.




> Basically you are saying that things like BJJ are becoming less effective.



In sport MMA yes. But that's only because everyone studies Bjj, so everyone becomes very good at it. They're training with some of the best Bjj instructors in the world.

I wouldn't exactly say that its less effective. However, it has definitely been neutralized, for now.



> Bad students are not that difficult to spot:



You'll get a kick out of this one too;






I think its the same school. What's even more hilarious is that they're ALL 6th degree black belts, and they kick and punch like garbage. 

Maybe they're all doing it for exercise?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Its easy if you're trained to do it. It's even more easy when you have multiple oppurtunities to do it.



Thats right JKS. What do we know we only have decades of police experience and been in countless real live fights with real live bad guys.  What do we know?  I've only been a law enforcement defensive tactics instructor for 10 years and part of my departments use of force review board for 4 years.  I couldn't possibly know what I'm talking about.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Thats right JKS. What do we know we only have decades of police experience and been in countless real live fights with real live bad guys.  What do we know?  I've only been a law enforcement defensive tactics instructor for 10 years and part of my departments use of force review board for 4 years.  I couldn't possibly know what I'm talking about.



Maybe we're talking about two different things here, but are you saying that your police department would rather have you punch and knee a suspect in the face multiple times instead of pinning him down and/or cuffing him?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Maybe we're talking about two different things here, but are you saying that your police department would rather have you punch and knee a suspect in the face multiple times instead of pinning him down and/or cuffing him?


No I'm saying that guy never made a single attempt to cuff that guy.  He wanted to fight not arrest.  He never made an attempt to take him down not because he wasn't trained but because he didn't want to.  He even told the suspect he wanted to fight.  He didn't want to pin and cuff him he wanted to beat him up.  So as you were using the exapmle of a poorly trained grappler I'm telling you he wasn't trying to grapple.  He wanted to duke it out in the street.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> No I'm saying that guy never made a single attempt to cuff that guy.  He wanted to fight not arrest.  He never made an attempt to take him down not because he wasn't trained but because he didn't want to.  He even told the suspect he wanted to fight.  He didn't want to pin and cuff him he wanted to beat him up.  So as you were using the exapmle of a poorly trained grappler I'm telling you he wasn't trying to grapple.  He wanted to duke it out in the street.



Okay, and like I said, if this guy had decided to take him to the ground and subdue him, it would have went a lot faster and smoother for him. Which is why I don't believe that this guy was trained in grappling. A grappler would have taken the fight to the ground and finished the fight decisively.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Okay, and like I said, if this guy had decided to take him to the ground and subdue him, it would have went a lot faster and smoother for him. Which is why I don't believe that this guy was trained in grappling. A grappler would have taken the fight to the ground and finished the fight decisively.


It don't matter if he was training in grappling or not.  He wanted to knock him out.  No street cred in going to the ground.  Its all about the knock out in the "hood" for lack of a better term.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> It don't matter if he was training in grappling or not.  He wanted to knock him out.  No street cred in going to the ground.  Its all about the knock out in the "hood" for lack of a better term.



 He could have knocked the guy out by throwing him down, or doing a takedown and putting him to sleep in a variety of ways. Those methods would have had a higher chance to actually knock out his adversary.

however, if he wanted to build street cred as the baddest transit worker on the block, he could have just maintained the mounted position and do an old fashioned ground and pound.

Fists and feet don't hit harder than gravity and concrete.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> He could have knocked the guy out by throwing him down, or doing a takedown and putting him to sleep in a variety of ways. Those methods would have had a higher chance to actually knock out his adversary.
> 
> Fists and feet don't hit harder than gravity and concrete.


Your right sorry I doubted you


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Yes, for a variety of reasons. However, it IS dependent on the situation. If I'm fighting multiple opponents, I'd use something more akin to boxing and muay thai to stay on my feet and move around as much as possible. If I happen to get taken down, I'll use bjj to get back on my feet as quickly as possible. If I'm fighting some oversized wrestler roid freak, I'm using bjj. Overall though, the most humane and civilized way to dispatch someone is via bjj (or Judo). Putting someone to sleep or pinning them on the ground is better than gouging out their eyes, biting their neck, breaking their windpipe, ripping off their nuts, etc. Its also safer and more reliable.



Your ignorance shines through again. Kung Fu is not simply about using dirty striking techniques, pulling hair, biting...etc

We have many chin na techniques within our system that can be used to take down and control an opponent, as opposed to smashing through their joints. 

Here is an example of what interestingly looks like a JJ practitioner using some of the techniques contained within the Seven Star Praying Mantis forms to takedown an opponent. 






Here we have an example of some takedowns in the Six Harmonies Mantis system.






If I'm fighting ANYONE the ground is the absolute last place I want to be and if I end up there then I'll be getting back on my feet as soon as possible. Actively trying to follow an opponent to ground is going to end up getting you kicked in the head. 



> Boxing is mobile, and its quick strikes is pretty solid if you got a lot of guys coming at you. I wouldn't do kicks, because there's a chance that you could be taken down.
> 
> Example;



Northern and Southern praying mantis are really quick systems and in northern we use a 'aim high to strike low' chain theory to quickly open up and deal with opponents.

Chain Theory: Full speed demo at 4 minutes






Southern Mantis






Fast, mobile, efficient.



> Sure, if properly trained, and removed of antiquated methods. One thing I dislike about TMAs is their insistence that their way is the best way because its "old". If I was instructing a TMA, I would teach all of my students how to box and how to wrestle. I would teach them how to jab, boxing footwork, MT clinch and knees, guillotine chokes, and how to do a single leg and double leg takedown. Why? Because they work, and they're likely to encounter that sort of thing in a fight. Why learn 25 hand strikes when you really only need 4? IMO, its a waste of time. But then again, I view nothing as sacred.



Which training methods do you consider antiquated?

We've already established that you don't have much understanding of true Kung Fu, therefore you're not in much of a position to make an informed judgement on styles that you know little about.



> Boxing was developed for the ring, and its a great self defense tool. Personally, I think its the top stand-up MA, because its simple, scientific, mobile, and teaches you how to generate power with very little movement. You're starting to see a resurgence of boxing in MMA as the ground game is becoming neutralized due to so many people learning how to defend themselves from take downs.
> 
> In the end, I don't think it really matters where and why something was developed. All that matters is if it works or not. If I had the opportunity to learn Wing Chun or Boxing, I'd choose Boxing every time.



I'd choose Wing Chun every time although I still appreciate the usefulness of Western Boxing when it comes to self defence. I certainly wouldn't outright state that it wasn't practical if I only had a little experience at a below par gym. 



> I would say that Kung Fu has that issue more than any other branch of TMA. Its just too easy to spew out BS with Kung Fu and claim legitimacy. You can string along a student for years by saying that you're holding off the "secret knowledge" while you toss them into a purgatory of forms and drills. One of the things I like about Bjj is that everything is out in the open, and its pretty easy to tell who is spewing the ********. Mainly because of the competition circuit. If your school is pumping out bad students, its known almost instantly, because your guys are getting tapped out.



It's pretty easy to spot bad Kung Fu, if you know what you're looking for. In sorry you had a bad experience but you sound very, very bitter and you've allowed this experience to cloud your judgement. Let it go and open your mind to the possibility that your experience of Kung Fu wasn't representative of the whole family of styles that originate from China.


----------



## Hanzou

Draculino shows why ball grabbing and biting doesn't work from guard;

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...=/watch?v=fxZKZsqWdFw&feature=player_embedded


----------



## Hanzou

Double post.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Your ignorance shines through again. Kung Fu is not simply about using dirty striking techniques, pulling hair, biting...etc
> 
> We have many chin na techniques within our system that can be used to take down and control an opponent, as opposed to smashing through their joints.
> 
> Here is an example of what interestingly looks like a JJ practitioner using some of the techniques contained within the Seven Star Praying Mantis forms to takedown an opponent.
> 
> http://youtu.be/HHcaPtDOTrE



That was pretty strange. The guy does a Kung Fu form, then to show how it works, he does Juijitsu/Judo.

Why not just do Judo?



> Here we have an example of some takedowns in the Six Harmonies Mantis system.
> 
> http://youtu.be/SVfOhBOrwrI



I'm always skeptical of things like that. The partner seems a bit too compliant. I would have rather seen more resistance shown by the opponent. Unfortunately, that vid reminded me of Steven Segal throwing people around in his Aikido demonstrations.





> If I'm fighting ANYONE the ground is the absolute last place I want to be and if I end up there then I'll be getting back on my feet as soon as possible. Actively trying to follow an opponent to ground is going to end up getting you kicked in the head.




Depends on the situation. If you can finish your opponent on the ground, then you should do so. Allowing him to get back up to do more harm to you would be a mistake.




> Which training methods do you consider antiquated?



Forms/Kata for starters. 



> We've already established that you don't have much understanding of true Kung Fu, therefore you're not in much of a position to make an informed judgement on styles that you know little about.



Well, maybe the "true Kung fu" folks should make a better effort of getting their art out there. The "fake Kung Fu" people are giving your branch of MA a bad name.




> I'd choose Wing Chun every time although I still appreciate the usefulness of Western Boxing when it comes to self defence. I certainly wouldn't outright state that it wasn't practical if I only had a little experience at a below par gym.



Well that's fine. People have different views on what is useful or not useful. 



> It's pretty easy to spot bad Kung Fu, if you know what you're looking for. In sorry you had a bad experience but you sound very, very bitter and you've allowed this experience to cloud your judgement. Let it go and open your mind to the possibility that your experience of Kung Fu wasn't representative of the whole family of styles that originate from China.



Well, let me just state that the CMAs never really appealed to me, so I'm not really bitter towards Kung Fu. As for being able to spot "bad Kung fu", I disagree. It all pretty much looks the same to me. I saw some very pretty Wushu demos a few years back, and a buddy of mine told me that Wushu wasn't "real Kung fu". So what is "real Kung Fu"? In my experience, "True Kung Fu" is whatever CMA someone is taking at a given time.

Its different than if you're looking for a good Bjj or Judo school. Bjj and Judo instructors are tested constantly by other martial artists. If you're a BB in Bjj you have a big target on your back, because as soon as you open a school, everyone from miles around is going to walk in to roll with you. That's not even including the competitive side of things.

That type of quality control just doesn't happen in the CMAs, or TMAs in general.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> He could have knocked the guy out by throwing him down, or doing a takedown and putting him to sleep in a variety of ways. Those methods would have had a higher chance to actually knock out his adversary.



With the way he was striking, definitely.



Hanzou said:


> Fists and feet don't hit harder than gravity and concrete.



Gravity doesn't hit anything and as for concrete, most of the people who have died from hitting the concrete have done so as the result of a punch.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I'm always skeptical of things like that. The partner seems a bit too compliant. I would have rather seen more resistance shown by the opponent. Unfortunately, that vid reminded me of Steven Segal throwing people around in his Aikido demonstrations.



When Steven Segal throws you around you comply or you get hurt, all that rolling around is to prevent injury.




Hanzou said:


> Depends on the situation. If you can finish your opponent on the ground, then you should do so. Allowing him to get back up to do more harm to you would be a mistake.



You can do that much more efficiently with a strike.



Hanzou said:


> Forms/Kata for starters.



That's just a lack of understanding on your part because you don't train them.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Knocking someone out with a knife hand is a rare occurrence. Taking someone down with a double leg take down is common occurrence. Chances are, you're not going to knock someone out with a knife hand, which will force you to go to plan B. However with take downs, gravity isn't going anywhere, and neither is the surface of the Earth.



The double leg take down is common occurrence because it is used in the UFC. Plan B is another strike (what you think someone would only use one?), say punch to the solar plexus, with a takedown that also puts you on the ground you are much more limited and vulnerable.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> That type of quality control just doesn't happen in the CMAs, or TMAs in general.



That's not quality control, that's competition and/or ego.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Attempting to knock out your opponent, or knock the wind out of your opponent is unreliable.



Have you ever been kicked or hit hard in the solar plexus or the ribs or seen it done?




Hanzou said:


> Like that security guard fighting that thug, he couldn't knock him out despite the fact that he was better trained, and about equal size. Utilizing takedowns, locks, holds, and chokes is quite a bit more reliable.



The guard was not a very efficient striker, that's why he was not able to knock him out.



Hanzou said:


> Of course if you can get a lucky knockout blow like the karateka in that video, more power to you.



There's nothing lucky about skill and power.



Hanzou said:


> You'll get a kick out of this one too;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think its the same school. What's even more hilarious is that they're ALL 6th degree black belts, and they kick and punch like garbage.
> 
> Maybe they're all doing it for exercise?



Yep, same school - one of the worst examples of any type of martial art.


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou let me make it simple for you. The only time i find my self on the ground with a grapper wont be in a cage. If i find my self  on the ground i will not hesitate to pull the one of 2 knives i carry or the revolver i ccw. Sorry. Im not a bjj guy i will shoot anyone on top of me in a self defense situation. Secondly you may beable to tie up one of my arms, but i have 2 knives, and good luck going for the Americana while i proceed to stab everything in range. 

Bjj works on the street if no one has weapons and no one brings a friend. You can not deny those facts. End of discussion.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> Maybe we're talking about two different things here, but are you saying that your police department would rather have you punch and knee a suspect in the face multiple times instead of pinning him down and/or cuffing him?



Without tearing into any one agency's policies -- police officers in the US are expected to use the force reasonably necessary to overcome the resistance we meet.  Depending on what's going on, that can be anything from the pig pile to a bullet.  Few set a policy on what technique to use anymore, though there are often policies to classify targets.  Many agencies still forbid the lateral vascular restraint AKA rear naked choke because if it's not done right... it becomes a literal chokehold and lethal force.  So long as I can articulate why the force used was necessary -- I can punch, kick, knee, elbow, arm bar, leg lock, wrist lock, finger lock, or whatever I want.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> That was pretty strange. The guy does a Kung Fu form, then to show how it works, he does Juijitsu/Judo.



No, he showed one application of a movement from a set form, it was definitely Kung Fu. The arm bar at the end was Juijitsu/judo.



> Why not just do Judo?



What would be the point? My predominantly striking art is more rounded than Judo and contains chin na, striking and throws. Why would I only want to train in the grappling/throwing elements? 

Granted, a Judo guy is probably going to be better at grappling than me but I'd be trying to get an opponent to play my game, not theirs.




> I'm always skeptical of things like that. The partner seems a bit too compliant. I would have rather seen more resistance shown by the opponent. Unfortunately, that vid reminded me of Steven Segal throwing people around in his Aikido demonstrations.



The video was purely a demonstration. These techniques, with proper alignment and body mechanics do work. Six Harmonies Mantis is closer to Taijiquan than the style of Mantis I train in and people who haven't ever experienced someone like that taking you down will always be skeptical. I was skeptical about the usefulness of Taijiquan until someone I train with   demonstrated yielding techniques to me in Yang they'd trained in.



> Depends on the situation. If you can finish your opponent on the ground, then you should do so. Allowing him to get back up to do more harm to you would be a mistake.



I agree, but there's absolutely no way I'm going to willingly start rolling about the ground with an attacker. If I want them to stay down then i can easily do it whilst on my own two feet. There are no rules on the street remember so you aren't nearly as protected as you'd be going to ground in the ring - multiple attackers, weapons and environmental dangers are additional variables that make the ring and real life so much different. 




> Forms/Kata for starters.



Do you think drilling techniques like kicks for instance are useless too? It's practically the same thing. Set forms are excellent training tools, its a shame you don't rate them. 



> Well, maybe the "true Kung fu" folks should make a better effort of getting their art out there. The "fake Kung Fu" people are giving your branch of MA a bad name.



...and arrogance gives MMA and BJJ a bad reputation, but I don't let that spoil my entire perception of their training methods. 

There's plenty of real Kung Fu out there but most aren't eager to film their arts and place them online or put them in the public eye. For many people its a way of life and not about money or publicity. 



> Well, let me just state that the CMAs never really appealed to me, so I'm not really bitter towards Kung Fu. As for being able to spot "bad Kung fu", I disagree. It all pretty much looks the same to me. I saw some very pretty Wushu demos a few years back, and a buddy of mine told me that Wushu wasn't "real Kung fu". So what is "real Kung Fu"? In my experience, "True Kung Fu" is whatever CMA someone is taking at a given time.



Wushu is martial gymnastics, its not practical and is designed to look nice and impressive. It might all look the same to you because you have very little interest in it. Each true kung fu style should have an 'essence' and that should be visible within the set forms which are cleverly designed encyclopaedias of techniques contained by the system. The styles should have characteristics that distinguish them from one and other, they should have originated from and have been developed in China 150+ years ago. True Kung Fu is tried, tested and proven methods of combat - not some chop suey American or British hybrid/combination of systems. 




> Its different than if you're looking for a good Bjj or Judo school. Bjj and Judo instructors are tested constantly by other martial artists. If you're a BB in Bjj you have a big target on your back, because as soon as you open a school, everyone from miles around is going to walk in to roll with you. That's not even including the competitive side of things.
> 
> That type of quality control just doesn't happen in the CMAs, or TMAs in general.



It happens a lot at any school I've trained with. 

Student: "Excuse me, could you show me this application again. I'm not sure I can really get it to work."

Teacher: Shows student slowly and then asks senior student to attack with full force. Teacher demonstrates controlled technique to deal with a forceful threat. 

This is exactly what would happen at both of the 'external' kung fu clubs I've trained in.


----------



## K-man

You guys just don't get it, do you? 

What are you all, stupid? 

 If anything looks like crap it is TMA. If you perform kata you are just stupid, if you demonstrate an application of kata you are no longer demonstrating a TMA because TMAs don't have any techniques that work. If you manage to get a technique to work it is only because at some stage you learnt it from an MMA guy because only those guys are any good! If you find a TMA guy demonstrating smooth takedowns, he either has a compliant partner or he is doing judo. If a guy has an effective punch he must have learned boxing because TMA guys don't use punching bags or focus mits, they just punch air. Locks and holds are fine in the MMA because those guys have learned how to make them work but the will never work on a non-complying partner because TMAs never train with non-complying partners. 

TMA guys are pretty gross because they bite, spit, pull hair and gouge eyes if their life is threatened, and that is unsporting.

And, for all you idiots out there that reckon TMAs are any good, TMAs suck because their people won't test their skills in the ring against genuine MMA fighters.

Do you get it now?

Oh, and stop training all those things like head buts, downward elbows to the spine, kicks to the side of the knee, knife hands to the neck, neck cranks, joint busts, fish hooks, knees to the neck (on the ground), stomps to the head (also on the ground), etc because unless someone with MMA training has shown you how to do them they won't work and anyway, if you are ever attacked on the street by an MMA guy (unlikely because they are God's own people) you can't use any of those things because that wouldn't be fair!

Did I miss anything? 

Oh, and BTW, I've seen the light ... :iws:

At 65 I just can't wait to get into the cage and show you young bucks how an old, flabby, overweight, unfit guy can use this new, watered down sporting style MMA s#1t to whip your arses in fair, sporting completion.

I'd really like to thank someone on this thread for pointing out how I have wasted half my life with stupid TMA training but I have now seen the error of my ways. I won't mention his name because he is so modest, but such an expert on TMA that I am sure you will all know the one I am so much in awe of.

And .... just a reminder .... :trollsign:


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> With the way he was striking, definitely.



His technique was solid, but it seemed that his blows missed a lot of its targets. I believe the problem was that the thug kept bypassing his punching range and coming in for the clinch. Again, perfect opportunity to grapple, and take that clown to the ground.



> Gravity doesn't hit anything and as for concrete, most of the people who have died from hitting the concrete have done so as the result of a punch.



That doesn't surprise me since more people know how to punch than know how to throw or take someone down.




RTKDCMB said:


> The double leg take down is common occurrence because it is used in the UFC. Plan B is another strike (what you think someone would only use one?), say punch to the solar plexus, with a takedown that also puts you on the ground you are much more limited and vulnerable.



Its common because its easy to do, and its very reliable. I was doing double leg take downs as a child because I watched wrasslin' and football. 

Unless you see it coming, or you've trained yourself to counter it, a DLT will land you flat on your back everytime.




RTKDCMB said:


> Have you ever been kicked or hit hard in the solar plexus or the ribs or seen it done?



Sure, but it takes a variety of factors to knock the wind out of someone. Its even more complicated if your opponent is wearing a jacket or heavy clothing.



> The guard was not a very efficient striker, that's why he was not able to knock him out.



I agree, but I would also say that he wasn't able to knock him out because knocking someone out isn't easy to do.



> There's nothing lucky about skill and power.



You should watch that vid again. The Karateka's attack wasn't all that crisp.



> Yep, same school - one of the worst examples of any type of martial art.



Agreed.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> No, he showed one application of a movement from a set form, it was definitely Kung Fu. The arm bar at the end was Juijitsu/judo.



You would think that, until you go to their webpage and read what they're doing;

From their site;



> *Learn the Mantis Fighter's strategy - Bridge, Strike, Hook, Throw, Submit.*
> 
> Bridge with deceptive kicking. Strike to overwhelm your enemy. Hook to latch on and control. Throw to disable. Submit with strikes/locks.
> Classes are full of teamwork and camaraderie. With each student helping one another to get better. Praying Mantis Kung Fu can be your sole focus, or increase your self-defense skills and augment your training with our Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu class.



http://noreastermartialarts.com/kungfu.html

So they're combining Mantis style Kung Fu with Bjj. That definitely explains the uniforms, and the JJ-style take downs and throws.

Its kind of funny that they're pushing their Bjj classes on the Kung Fu page. 

If you check out their belt ceremony, they're practicing a (sloppy) version of Osoto-gari along with some weird mantis stuff....






http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/osotogari.htm

Stick around for the sparring session. Its quite a sight to see. :lol2:



> What would be the point? My predominantly striking art is more rounded than Judo and contains chin na, striking and throws. Why would I only want to train in the grappling/throwing elements?
> 
> Granted, a Judo guy is probably going to be better at grappling than me but I'd be trying to get an opponent to play my game, not theirs.



Hey, if its good enough for those plumblossum guys.... 

In all seriousness, the reason I chose Bjj over a striking art was simple; I couldn't be bashing people's faces in with my fists, or kneeing them in the face and breaking their nose. I was dealing primarily with ED high school kids. Some were pretty huge, and I had to learn something that would not only allow me to restrain a larger opponent, but be able to not harm them as well. Say what you will, but punching someone only leads to harm. There's no way you can punch someone in a gentle fashion. When you punch somebody, your intent is to do damage. When you knife hand strike someone in their throat, your intent is to do damage. When I choke someone unconscious or place them in a body lock, my intent is to restrain and control them. 

Again, that was the genius of Jigaro Kano, Maeda, and the Gracies.

However, I fully acknowledge and respect the fact that we all chose our arts for personal reasons. 




> The video was purely a demonstration. These techniques, with proper alignment and body mechanics do work. Six Harmonies Mantis is closer to Taijiquan than the style of Mantis I train in and people who haven't ever experienced someone like that taking you down will always be skeptical. I was skeptical about the usefulness of Taijiquan until someone I train with   demonstrated yielding techniques to me in Yang they'd trained in.



Its unfortunate that neither of these arts are competitive. I would like to see both of them up against a different style, or an opponent intent on attacking the user.





> I agree, but there's absolutely no way I'm going to willingly start rolling about the ground with an attacker. If I want them to stay down then i can easily do it whilst on my own two feet. There are no rules on the street remember so you aren't nearly as protected as you'd be going to ground in the ring - multiple attackers, weapons and environmental dangers are additional variables that make the ring and real life so much different.



Well there's the other side of the equation as well; What if your attacker gets YOU down? The good thing about Bjj is that it teaches you how to fight from your back.




> Do you think drilling techniques like kicks for instance are useless too? It's practically the same thing. Set forms are excellent training tools, its a shame you don't rate them.



When you're drilling kicks, you're just drilling the kick. Its not sequence of complex movements that require the right set up to pull off.



> ...and arrogance gives MMA and BJJ a bad reputation, but I don't let that spoil my entire perception of their training methods.
> 
> There's plenty of real Kung Fu out there but most aren't eager to film their arts and place them online or put them in the public eye. For many people its a way of life and not about money or publicity.



That's fine, but I'm wondering why there's so much secrecy. Stuff like that simply rubs me the wrong way, because it makes it seem like there's some "secret knowledge" that I have to uncover by paying my sifu ridiculous amounts of money. Its just martial arts. Show us what you got. Share what you know. People aren't respected masters in Bjj because they have secret knowledge. They're respected because they can tap you out using simple things that you thought no one could ever get off on you.

Thank you for the tidbit about Wushu and how your school trains. Its appreciated.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> His technique was solid, but it seemed that his blows missed a lot of its targets. I believe the problem was that the thug kept bypassing his punching range and coming in for the clinch. Again, perfect opportunity to grapple, and take that clown to the ground.



Techniques need to be accurate as well as solid, his was not.





Hanzou said:


> Unless you see it coming, or you've trained yourself to counter it, a DLT will land you flat on your back everytime.


 

The DLT (not BLT, that's a sandwich) is very similar to the tackle, which is a technique many TMA's have learned to defend against, the defence is very similar. The standard counter in MMA is to move backwards, which is why they end up on their backs so often. You almost never see them move sideways, which is smarter.



Hanzou said:


> Sure, but it takes a variety of factors to knock the wind out of someone. Its even more complicated if your opponent is wearing a jacket or heavy clothing.


 

I have knocked the wind out of people holding kicking shields, wearing a jacket or heavy clothing is not going to do a damn thing to protect someone.




Hanzou said:


> I agree, but I would also say that he wasn't able to knock him out because knocking someone out isn't easy to do.


 

Knocking someone unconscious is not always the goal and not always necessary to end an attack.




Hanzou said:


> In all seriousness, the reason I chose Bjj over a striking art was  simple; I couldn't be bashing people's faces in with my fists, or  kneeing them in the face and breaking their nose. I was dealing  primarily with ED high school kids. Some were pretty huge, and I had to  learn something that would not only allow me to restrain a larger  opponent, but be able to not harm them as well. When I choke someone unconscious or place them  in a body lock, my intent is to restrain and control them.


 

And that is applaudable, the reason I chose the martial art I am studying is because I got tired of getting picked on and wanted to learn how to defend myself.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> So they're combining Mantis style Kung Fu with Bjj. That definitely explains the uniforms, and the JJ-style take downs and throws.
> 
> Its kind of funny that they're pushing their Bjj classes on the Kung Fu page.



Looks to me that they're using mantis to improve their BJJ.  



> If you check out their belt ceremony, they're practicing a (sloppy) version of Osoto-gari along with some weird mantis stuff....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/osotogari.htm
> 
> Stick around for the sparring session. Its quite a sight to see. :lol2:



I'll check it out later.




> Hey, if its good enough for those plumblossum guys....
> 
> In all seriousness, the reason I chose Bjj over a striking art was simple; I couldn't be bashing people's faces in with my fists, or kneeing them in the face and breaking their nose. I was dealing primarily with ED high school kids. Some were pretty huge, and I had to learn something that would not only allow me to restrain a larger opponent, but be able to not harm them as well. Say what you will, but punching someone only leads to harm. There's no way you can punch someone in a gentle fashion. When you punch somebody, your intent is to do damage. When you knife hand strike someone in their throat, your intent is to do damage. When I choke someone unconscious or place them in a body lock, my intent is to restrain and control them.



That's fine, but personally, I don't care too much for the safety of someone trying to inflict pain on me (outside of class!). That's why I've chosen a well rounded striking art. I also enjoy the meditative elements of Kung Fu too, which, with a style like Seven Star Praying Mantis is by no means mandatory, so it's something I can research into and practice in my own time.



> However, I fully acknowledge and respect the fact that we all chose our arts for personal reasons.



That's good. Although I do find it funny that someone who doesn't know the difference between Wushu and Kung Fu feels that they know enough about all TMAs to disregard them as a group. If you're starting to appreciate that you might have made a wrong assumption about a few things TMA related then I'll definitely be happy about the outcome of this thread. 



> Its unfortunate that neither of these arts are competitive. I would like to see both of them up against a different style, or an opponent intent on attacking the user.



We have small non-publicised bouts within the association (our association teaches Mantis, Wing Chun and Taijiquan but any student with any background, so long as they're part of the association can fight, I think). They're not open to the public though; I think you'd find that a lot of Kung Fu associations work in a similar manner. 

[/QUOTE]



> Well there's the other side of the equation as well; What if your attacker gets YOU down? The good thing about Bjj is that it teaches you how to fight from your back.



I have enough techniques in my locker to get back up from the ground but I definitely don't want to be rolling around with anyone, let alone a trained grappler, on the ground. Likewise, I'm not sure it would be the wisest idea for someone not trained in a predominantly striking art to try to match me on two feet.



> When you're drilling kicks, you're just drilling the kick. Its not sequence of complex movements that require the right set up to pull off.



Here's another thing that you don't understand about Seven Star Praying Mantis (can't speak for other Kung Fu here). I posted a video about our high/low chain theory. Chain theory means that each of our techniques within the system can practically setup or follow from any other technique in the system. I could literally start from the middle of the set and work my way backwards to the beginning and the techniques would flow fine from one to another - there might be an issue about walking backwards though 
Mantis is quite linear (like most Shaolin originated styles) so our set forms attack in coherent lines rather than include complicated , frequent directional changes. We might spend some time at home practicing sets from start to finish to develop good technique but in class we tear the sets apart and work on little sections (out of sequence) with a partner. So I might take the start of Bung Bo - inward block, cat stance, fist strike - to defend against a punch - and follow that up with hook, grab, stick with the arm, fist strike and stomp through the knee (using the stuck arm as additional leverage). This basic sequence is taken from little parts of two set forms (though one is more a lower leg kicking routine). 

I also spend much of my training at home time chaining together different strikes from the sets on my heavy bag to develop speed and power.

Starting to sound more practical?  



> That's fine, but I'm wondering why there's so much secrecy. Stuff like that simply rubs me the wrong way, because it makes it seem like there's some "secret knowledge" that I have to uncover by paying my sifu ridiculous amounts of money. Its just martial arts. Show us what you got. Share what you know. People aren't respected masters in Bjj because they have secret knowledge. They're respected because they can tap you out using simple things that you thought no one could ever get off on you.



With most good Kung Fu schools I don't think there is much secrecy, just a lack of publicity. Although we do have a formal syllabus structure if a student requests to be taught a particular set or weapon from higher up in the syllabus they will, in most cases, be taught it. Life is too short to keep knowledge locked away until you've jumped through hoops X, Y and Z.



> Thank you for the tidbit about Wushu and how your school trains. Its appreciated.



No problem.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Hanzou let me make it simple for you. The only time i find my self on the ground with a grapper wont be in a cage. If i find my self  on the ground i will not hesitate to pull the one of 2 knives i carry or the revolver i ccw. Sorry. Im not a bjj guy i will shoot anyone on top of me in a self defense situation. Secondly you may beable to tie up one of my arms, but i have 2 knives, and good luck going for the Americana while i proceed to stab everything in range.
> 
> Bjj works on the street if no one has weapons and no one brings a friend. You can not deny those facts. End of discussion.



A good Bjj practitioner can tie up both your arms in guard. Check out that Draculino vid I posted earlier. If a Bjj guy can do that to you while he's on his back, what do you think he can do to you when he's on top of you? In a dominant position a Bjj practioncioner can control your entire upper body and either snap both your arms, put you to sleep, or pound your face into hamburger. Heck, they would probably do all three since your intent is to use deadly force.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Techniques need to be accurate as well as solid, his was not.



No argument there.





> The DLT (not BLT, that's a sandwich) is very similar to the tackle, which is a technique many TMA's have learned to defend





> against, the defence is very similar. The standard counter in MMA is to move backwards, which is why they end up on their backs so often. You almost never see them move sideways, which is smarter.




I doubt your average thug is a TMA practitioner who has practiced defense against the DLT.




> I have knocked the wind out of people holding kicking shields, wearing a jacket or heavy clothing is not going to do a damn thing to protect someone.



Stationary target. Guy with jacket is moving in and out of your range, and there's always the threat of a leg grab.



> Knocking someone unconscious is not always the goal and not always necessary to end an attack.



When you're exchanging blows with someone, what is the goal?



> And that is applaudable, the reason I chose the martial art I am studying is because I got tired of getting picked on and wanted to learn how to defend myself.



I think most of us began our martial arts journey for that reason.


----------



## Kframe

I watched the vid, and at no point would I have been unable to reach a weapon.. If im on the ground ill already have one or two in my hands.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> You would think that, until you go to their webpage and read what they're doing;
> 
> From their site;
> 
> 
> 
> http://noreastermartialarts.com/kungfu.html
> 
> So they're combining Mantis style Kung Fu with Bjj. That definitely explains the uniforms, and the JJ-style take downs and throws.
> 
> Its kind of funny that they're pushing their Bjj classes on the Kung Fu page.
> 
> If you check out their belt ceremony, they're practicing a (sloppy) version of Osoto-gari along with some weird mantis stuff....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/osotogari.htm
> 
> Stick around for the sparring session. Its quite a sight to see. :lol2:



Those definitely are JJ guys dabbling in a little mantis. The sparring isn't any Mantis I've ever seen and is probably closer to JJ than anything else. 

Some of the takedowns in the first video were Seven Star Praying Mantis though, taken from this set form - Bung Bo. Here you can see the very essence of this particular flavour of northern mantis; high/low chained attacks, straight in direction but strikes are frequently round and not coming straight from the centre. Each little couple of movements can be (and in a good club is) trained individually with a partner and against heavy resistance. Each attack can be chained into a massive number of other strikes, blocks and counters.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> A good Bjj practitioner can tie up both your arms in guard. Check out that Draculino vid I posted earlier. If a Bjj guy can do that to you while he's on his back, what do you think he can do to you when he's on top of you? In a dominant position a Bjj practioncioner can control your entire upper body and either snap both your arms, put you to sleep, or pound your face into hamburger. Heck, they would probably do all three since your intent is to use deadly force.



The trick is getting him there:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9cXR9RWnEE&

The area of interest starts at 0:50.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I doubt your average thug is a TMA practitioner who has practiced defense against the DLT.



Average thug - no, but more and more people these days have some amount of training.




Hanzou said:


> Stationary target. Guy with jacket is moving in and out of your range, and there's always the threat of a leg grab.



He was not stationary after I kicked him. If he is moving into my range then my kicks will hit him harder (head on collision), if he is moving out of range then I can kick him with a longer range kick or wait until he comes back in range. Grabbing a leg is not easy during a good kick, which will be fast and will involve quickly retracting the leg. Kicking high increases the chance of your leg being grabbed and there are specific defences against leg grabs.



Hanzou said:


> When you're exchanging blows with someone, what is the goal?



Exchanging blows is what occurs in a sporting contest and is not very smart for self defence. In self defence, someone attacks, you defend with blocks and/or evasions and then counter attack. It's not he hits me and I hit him back, it's he tries to hit me, I defend and I hit him INSTEAD, unless something goes wrong.


----------



## Koshiki

Hanzou said:


> The argument was that people who compete aren't trying to do serious bodily harm o one another. I believe that someone trying to pound you in the face and potentially send you to the hospital is trying to do serious bodily harm to you.
> 
> And I believe they are trying to beat you WITHOUT doing you any sort of life changing bodily harm. Broken noses and sliced lips are completely different than smashed elbows and a knife in your gut. I also believe that someone trying to "choke you out," is different than someone squeezing your throat and curshing your windpipe, releasing lovely glue like fluid and ending your life without a tracheotomy ASAP.
> 
> I don't think anyone here is saying that MMA, or BJJ, or boxing is ineffective in an altercation. I think they are saying that OTHER THINGS ARE AS WELL.
> 
> MMA tends to be less dangerous than Hockey and Football because a MMA match doesn't last as long as a football or hockey game. Getting consistently blasted by huge linebackers for the better part of two hours tends to wear your body down.
> 
> Out of curiosity, are most sports-related injuries incurred in actual competition, or in training? Because that might have some bearing on your statement, here... Either way, the point is, that if two guys are intent on seriously injuring each other, they are able to do so pretty damn quickly. Let's assume that we've both been witness to situations where two guys really try to hurt one another. They're brief, not fun, generally graceless, and usually seem to end with someone pretty hurt, unless they get pulled apart in the first couple of seconds.
> 
> Im curious how you got all of that out of me simply pointing out that one of modern martial art's greatest advantages is its repetition of comparatively few techniques. I've even provided two videos of guys performing MMA and doing pretty basic skills to control a situation.
> 
> I got that out of you saying that you would "asses the situation and use a different technique." If you can do that while getting slugged/grabbed, you're a pretty impressive guy. If i get someone trying to pop me in the head, and I have 0.5 seconds to respond, I know that I, for one, and not skilled enough to simultaneously analyze whether ANYONE in the whol bar could conceivably come to the rescue of my newfound grapple-buddy.
> 
> Again, no one has said, "MMA is crap and doesn't work." What everyone has said is, "hey, TMAs work too, and you clearly don't have much experience with them." You don't need to defend MMA, no one wants to attack it. I've several times said that I like it. It's a great sparring game, a great training tool. Among others.
> 
> No, the MMA fellow has the benefit of randori. So they've simulated full resistance grappling in the dojo, and reinforced that full resistance grappling in a competition environment. The advantage that grappling arts have over striking arts is that I can go full blast with a Judo throw or Bjj takedown in the dojo because my partner (should) know how to fall without injuring themselves. So I don't need to pull back when I do a one-armed shoulder throw, a guillotine choke, or a rear takedown during randori. Additionally, my partner is giving me full resistance, because his goal is to do the same thing to me. on the ground, we're both going full blast to try to gain the dominant position, just like we would in an actual fight.
> 
> The term "randori" is not exactly MMA specific. I seem to remember that it's a Karate term? No? I think everyone would agree that one advantage of grappling, excluding limb bars and breaks, is that you can practice full force. Guess what? TMAs can practice THEIR grappling full force too! Much like in TMAs, however, strikes generally cannot be practiced full force without padding, in either TMA or MMA.
> 
> And I certainly hope you hold back some when you practice your guillotine chokes, because I'd hate for you to end up on trial for accidental manslaughter...
> 
> I also hope you use some control with your "rear takedown," depending on how you're performing it. A cracked neck or a smashed nose can cut a training session short, so I'm told. If rear takedown has a specific MMA meaning, I apologize for my ignorance. 'Round these parts it means taking someone down from behind, and there are a lot of ways to do it.
> 
> So if I end up in a clinch in a self defense situation, I can throw my untrained opponent with relative ease, and he won't be falling properly, and he will more than likely be landing on concrete. If I get bjj black belt in a choke, I'm probably going to get the untrained brawler in a choke as well. It's even better when you train without a gi.
> 
> ONE LAST TIME! WE ALL KNOW THAT MMA AND BJJ ARE INVOLVED SPORTS WHICH WILL GREATLY INCREASE YOUR ABILITY TO DEFEND YOURSELF. You keep trying to defend them as street-defense. I think we all agree. A trained BJJ guy or MMA stylist will likely win against a similarly sized/shaped untrained guy, assuming equal levels of intent. The conversation everyone else is having, is that TMA is not practicing meaningless kata in the air and pretending to disrupt chi-flow. You, however, Mr. Hanzou, refuse to believe us when we say that we, TMArtists all, are doing something other than what you think we are doing.
> 
> If you actually listen to what people are saying, you might learn that TMAs are a great deal more similar to MMA than you seem to think they are. We practice effective striking and footwork. We practice hitting bags. We do a heck of a lot of "randori," but it tends to be different, in many cases, than the MMA game. Hard contact restricted striking and grappling may be one game we play, but we play a great deal of other "randori" type games as well, because what we train for requires it.
> 
> And I completely agree with you. Techniques which rely on you wearing a gi pretty much mean you have to be attacked in your gym. They are great for the sport they come from, but it's kind of like practicing self-defense with a sword. Unless you plan on carrying a sword everywhere you go...Glad we agree on something!
> 
> This was the genius of Jigaro Kano, the founder of Judo.
> 
> You could always carry a pair of gloves in your back pocket, just in case something crazy pops off.
> 
> ...I'm going to assume that's a joke... It is, right?
> 
> Again, I'd rather not name styles. I don't want to be accused of style bashing.
> 
> What if we all promised to NOT accuse you of style bashing, because we are intensely interested in what sort of background you have? Anyway, I would say that bashing all TMAs as a group is probably going to land in in more hot water than bashing two specific ones. Or, you could refrain from bashing them, and just tell us what you did in classes there, and why you didn't like it. That's not bashing, that's explaining martial preferences in a calm and rational manner.
> 
> The difference being that that couch potato couldn't open up an MMA school and be taken seriously. The culture is different. In MMA, your instructor is tested by his students constantly. If you open up an MMA school, you better know how to grapple, box, and whatever else, because people will be rolling through to test you. In the TMAs, that couch potato could open up a school and perform some pretty movements, and few will question him, much less challenge him. It's simply a different culture. I call my bjj instructor by his first name for example, while in Karate it was sensei, or master.
> 
> I agree with you again, here. The advantage of a sport style is that it can be really and truly tested, because it was designed to be tested. Any style which is designed to end fights in seconds cannot be tested, because, as we say around here, "If you break your training buddy, you don't get a new one."
> 
> Look around the TMA forums, here and elsewhere. The fact that so many people can and do set themselves up as TMA instructors without any credentials or ability is a pretty sore spot among TMArtists. There are a lot of threads about McDojos, unqualified instructors, and dangerously poor technique. It is a different culture, and I wish we could somehow weed out all the duff around and teach nonsense schools. But, to do that, we'd either all have to start doing sport/competition martial arts, which I wouldn't want, or we'd have to really injure each other, which I also don't want. I've gotten slightly hurt enough times to know that I would prefer that I never be really hurt.
> 
> However, the fact that there are bad imitators out there, doesn't mean that people who practice good martial arts are also bad imitators.
> 
> The uninitiated won't be able to tell the difference between kenpo a, kenpo b, or kenpo c. To this day, I don't understand the entire story of the kenpo lineage, and I don't really care. If you tell me you know Kenpo Karate, I'm going to assume you know Kenpo Karate. The internal squabbles over what is true Kenpo or Kung Fu, and what isn't is fairly childish stuff.
> 
> Are you implying that, since you don't know much about Kenpo, it's all as bad as the youtube video you plucked out of the blue? I may be, once again, misunderstanding, but... You posted a video, essentially saying, "look, this stuff is fake and doesn't work." And we all said, "yeah, we know, that's not what we do." Which is the pattern of the past 13 pages of conversation. You seem to say, "TMA is porr because you do A, B, and C, and because you don't do enough of D." We say, "we don't do A, or C, B is actually used like this, where it is quite useful, and we do actually to D." Then you tell us that we can't test our stuff in the ring so it doesn't work... I may be oversimplifying, but that's what I keep reading.
> 
> And frankly, a few weeks back I started playing at a Shaolin Kempo Karate school, a style which I do not much care for. Those guys throw each other, they choke each other out, they mount, guard, etc. The things you seem to think are unique to MMA and BJJ are not. They've been around for a looooong time, and they haven't disappeared from the other arts simply because MMA became popular.



If you want to say that people who do good martial arts are legitimate, and that those who imitate poorly are not, I doubt you will meet with any resistance. Unless we are all misunderstanding you, it sounds like you claim that all contemporary traditional martial arts are illegitimate. If that's not what you mean, please clarify, because we have clearly got the wrong idea.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Those definitely are JJ guys dabbling in a little mantis. The sparring isn't any Mantis I've ever seen and is probably closer to JJ than anything else.



Unfortunately, its the type of sparring I see a lot of in a some CMA schools I've sat in. Sloppy technique, and fairly weak looking fighting ability. I'd send a 2-stripe white belt from my school up to that place and he'd have a field day.



> Some of the takedowns in the first video were Seven Star Praying Mantis though, taken from this set form - Bung Bo. Here you can see the very essence of this particular flavour of northern mantis; high/low chained attacks, straight in direction but strikes are frequently round and not coming straight from the centre. Each little couple of movements can be (and in a good club is) trained individually with a partner and against heavy resistance. Each attack can be chained into a massive number of other strikes, blocks and counters.
> 
> http://youtu.be/POSZFnXHCVU



its definitely a lovely form. I would be interested in seeing if anyone fights and moves like the form itself, instead of a broken form of kickboxing that I'm seeing in far too many places.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Average thug - no, but more and more people these days have some amount of training.



i agree, but not enough training to stop a skilled grappler from taking them down.



> He was not stationary after I kicked him. If he is moving into my range then my kicks will hit him harder (head on collision), if he is moving out of range then I can kick him with a longer range kick or wait until he comes back in range. Grabbing a leg is not easy during a good kick, which will be fast and will involve quickly retracting the leg. Kicking high increases the chance of your leg being grabbed and there are specific defences against leg grabs.




Yeah, I disagree with just about all of this. Kicking can get pretty risky in a lot of situations.



> Exchanging blows is what occurs in a sporting contest and is not very smart for self defence. In self defence, someone attacks, you defend with blocks and/or evasions and then counter attack. It's not he hits me and I hit him back, it's he tries to hit me, I defend and I hit him INSTEAD, unless something goes wrong.



Really? You didn't see that brawl between the transit cop and the street thug? That was nothing but an exchange of blows.


----------



## K-man

We all know how ineffective aikido is. 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QWpVUMCcSys
:asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, I disagree with just about all of this. Kicking can get pretty risky in a lot of situations.



 And so is grappling, punching and anything else for that matter. You obviously have little knowledge and/or skill with kicking. Here's something to consider:

http://www.wimsblog.com/2013/06/martial-arts-myths-high-kicks-dont-work-in-the-street/



Hanzou said:


> Really? You didn't see that brawl between the transit cop and the street thug? That was nothing but an exchange of blows.



You seem to have missed the point I was making so I will try again. EXCHANGING BLOWS IS NOT SMART FOR SELF DEFENCE, The transit cop was not very effective, he did all that punching for 30 seconds and and still did no significant damage to his opponent. You can not afford to do that in a self deffence situation, it only takes one good hit to end a fight so you can not afford to get hit, he was fighting as though it was a contest because that is what he was trained for (he was an MMA guy). You can not afford to let it drag out like that, you have to end the attackers ability and/or willingness to attack you immediately with whatever force is necessary, any smart TMA or MMA practitioner knows this.


----------



## Dinkydoo

RTKDCMB said:


> And so is grappling, punching and anything else for that matter. You obviously have little knowledge and/or skill with kicking.



He sounds like he doesn't have a significant amount of experience in training in anything other than grappling - certainly not enough to label pretty much everything other than Western Boxing and BJJ as useless.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> And so is grappling, punching and anything else for that matter. You obviously have little knowledge and/or skill with kicking. Here's something to consider:
> 
> http://www.wimsblog.com/2013/06/martial-arts-myths-high-kicks-dont-work-in-the-street/



LoL! Obviously. I have quite a bit of experience in TKD and MT. I still wouldn't kick someone in the head. It's a set up for disaster. Honestly I wouldn't kick above the waist. I'd do low kicks to the shin, or above the knee to damage their mobility.



> You seem to have missed the point I was making so I will try again. EXCHANGING BLOWS IS NOT SMART FOR SELF DEFENCE, The transit cop was not very effective, he did all that punching for 30 seconds and and still did no significant damage to his opponent. You can not afford to do that in a self deffence situation, it only takes one good hit to end a fight so you can not afford to get hit, he was fighting as though it was a contest because that is what he was trained for (he was an MMA guy). You can not afford to let it drag out like that, you have to end the attackers ability and/or willingness to attack you immediately with whatever force is necessary, any smart TMA or MMA practitioner knows this.



Of course exchanging blows isn't good for self defense. No one enters a brawl WANTING to exchange of blows, it just happens that way. That cop was trying to score the KO that entire time.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> He sounds like he doesn't have a significant amount of experience in training in anything other than grappling - certainly not enough to label pretty much everything other than Western Boxing and BJJ as useless.



I never said they were "useless". I said they were ineffective.

Mainly because we see pretty forms like this;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POSZFnXHCVU&feature=youtu.be

But when the fight begins it devolves into this;














A slappy-slap-slap fest. Lacking control, and definition of technique.


----------



## K-man

It really annoys me when people spout total crap as fact and in doing so demonstrate their total ignorance of the subject.
Below is a clip by Iain Abernathy demonstrating how kata Naihanchi can be used in a reality based scenario. For those who have trained KM you will see some very familiar techniques. To look at how kata is performed and how it is used are two totally different things. Learning to perform kata can happen in a session. Learning to fully utilise the fighting system of a kata takes much longer. To dismiss kata as useless or pretty because you have never been taught how to use it is ignorant. If guys from any style are fighting or even sparring, unless they are using a kata, what they do will be unrecognisable as kata because it simply isn't kata. If they were to use kata it would be at a much higher level of training and might still be difficult to recognise, especially to the untrained eye.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6QyoWdG1C5o

MMA is much quicker to learn because it doesn't have the complexity of the older TMAs but it doesn't mean one is more effective than the other.
 :asian:


----------



## Koshiki

Hanzou said:


> I never said they were "useless". I said they were ineffective.
> 
> Most people would consider "useless" and "ineffective" to be pretty close synonyms. Useless means it doesn't have a use. Ineffective means it has no effect. Pretty much the same thing...
> 
> But when the fight begins it devolves into this;
> 
> A slappy-slap-slap fest. Lacking control, and definition of technique.



For once, I agree completely with Hanzou, here! One of my pet peeves about some martial arts is that, they teach one mindset, one premise, and an accompanying arrat of techniques. Then they "spar," and they try to kickbox, which is something they have never studied. And it is horrible and embarrassing. If you train Win Chun, your sparring should involve direct techniques, simultaneous attack and defense, short lines to vital points, and especially, control/domination of the centerline. Why train Win Chun and then spar kickboxing? If you train a style that is full of locks and takedowns, and continuous controlling contact, (my school) don't spar kickboxing style. It's just not helpful. It's a different sport from your art. This baffles me in a lot of Modern Martial Arts schools.

They train one thing, spar another. So Baffling.



Hanzou said:


> LoL! Obviously. I have quite a bit of experience in TKD and MT. I still wouldn't kick someone in the head. It's a set up for disaster. Honestly I wouldn't kick above the waist. I'd do low kicks to the shin, or above the knee to damage their mobility.



Suddenly, Hanzou, you post a bunch of really down to earth stuff. Agreed. Kicks are best when kept to the knee/instep. If they can't walk, they can't chase you. That said, if you develop some really impressive kicking ability, kicks to the face/body can be wonderfully effective, but you better have some durn good balance, speed, control, and timing. Risky, but high payout.

I do have to say though, you have extensive experience in, according to you, Muay Thai, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, Taekwondo, Karate, and "Kung Fu." I have to question you a bit here. For example, in my style, a sort of TSD/CMA, mostly karate blend, I have 13 years of dedicated experience, but I'm still one of the more junior black belts, the "up and coming guy," certainly not the experienced one who fully understands the style. In spoprt martial arts, I frequently see that a few years is considered plenty of time to understand the style. In the TMAs, a great deal more dedication is required, so forgive us if we question whether or not you REALLY have a deep understanding of all these sports and styles.



K-man said:


> We all know how ineffective aikido is.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QWpVUMCcSys:asian:



Honestly, that was relatively unconvincing. The aikido guys defended against single, extremely uncommitted attacks, with attackers who seemed to offer little to no resistance. If we're going to convince hanzou that TMAs are not silly, we'll have to do better than that, I would guess.



Hanzou said:


> I agree, but not enough training to stop a skilled grappler from taking them down.
> 
> It's amazing how much a simple knee to the face, or elbow to the back of the neck will do to stop a takedown. Not exactly high-level-of-training abilities, more reflexes, really. Also, if you have any bare-knuckle experience, I'm sure you're well aware of the difference that thin layer of padding makes. Get hit hard with a glove, and it's like, "oof, wow, that sucked." Get hit hard without a glove, and there's a whole new level of pain, sharper, harder, much more direct and game-stopping. Stopping a takedown is much easier when you don't have padding or certain barred techniques.
> 
> On the note of gloves, have you ever played with those padded PVC pipe weapons? That half inch of padding makes the difference between painless, thumping toy, and the potentially lethal weapon of UN-padded PVC pipe...
> 
> Yeah, I disagree with just about all of this. Kicking can get pretty risky in a lot of situations.
> 
> Of course it can. You're standing on one leg, essentially sticking out a here-have-control-of-my-body lever. But, if done well, kicking can be hugely advantageous. Kicking to the body or head, anything above the knee, is one of those skill that a few skilled, trained people can pull off, for a few years of youth, but that most people should stay the heck away from. Agreed. Taking a foot off the floor and sticking it in the air is risky. There's a lot of it in MMA and TMA, though...
> 
> Really? You didn't see that brawl between the transit cop and the street thug? That was nothing but an exchange of blows.



Key word being "brawl," not "situation involving obviously well-trained and skilled Traditional Martial Artist." I'd like to think there's a difference betwixt the twain, though you may disagree.



Hanzou said:


> Unfortunately, its the type of sparring I see a lot of in a some CMA schools I've sat in. Sloppy technique, and fairly weak looking fighting ability. I'd send a 2-stripe white belt from my school up to that place and he'd have a field day.
> 
> its definitely a lovely form. I would be interested in seeing if anyone fights and moves like the form itself, instead of a broken form of kickboxing that I'm seeing in far too many places.



Again, I agree. Why do so many school try to teach traditional technique, and then practice it in sport martial art? The two are different. If you want to spar MMA/Kickboxing/Sport Karate, then TRAIN for sports! If you want to train for Traditional Martial Arts, then SPAR for traditional martial arts. Two different animals. These guys are not doing themselves any favours by practicing self-defense arts and trying to apply them as sports. If you're style focuses on taking it to the ground, the sparring should reflect that. If you focus on strikes to joints and vital areas, the sparring should reflect that. If you focus on ranged striking, the sparring should reflect that.

This pattern of training self-defense, sparring sport makes as much sense as training BJJ and sparring sport karate, or training Taekwondo but always sparring BJJ. Why? just Why?

So, again, Hanzou. Bad TMA is BAD. Butm Good TMA is good.


----------



## Koshiki

K-man said:


> MMA is much quicker to learn because it doesn't have the complexity of the older TMAs but it doesn't mean one is more effective than the other.
> :asian:



And THIS, here, is the heart of the matter. MMA is fast and effective to learn, so that people can become reasonably competent in a year or so, with good training. If you expect that out of a TMA, you will be dissapointed. TMAs are much more invloving. At a year, you're probably not done learning the basics of movement in that style, let alone how to apply it. If you want quick and simple fighting chops, go MMA. If you want to study and practise and struggle and hope to one day be able to turn combat into an artform, go TMA. Sport versus art. Two completely different goals, two different mindsets, two different effects.

A one year MMA student *should* be able to dominate a one year TMA student. TMA takes time, it takes patience, it takes a willingness to practice without immediate reward.


----------



## K-man

Zack Cart said:


> Honestly, that was relatively unconvincing. The aikido guys defended against single, extremely uncommitted attacks, with attackers who seemed to offer little to no resistance. If we're going to convince hanzou that TMAs are not silly, we'll have to do better than that, I would guess.


The problem with good aikido is that it appears unbelievably simple. I'm not referring to aikido that is a gimme with guys throwing themselves all over the shop. It is really hard to find good Aikidoka pitted against non aikido guys. To me a lot of the time you see guys trying to get a lock or a takedown where it has become bogged down in a physical struggle. That is not what aikido is about. And of course most aikido is practised without the atemi. That means that unless you are at a high level of aikido you can get into that physical clash and lose out. Aikido is about blending and redirecting. The same principles apply to karate and all other martial arts for that matter.

Oh yeah! Convincing Hanzou? I gave up sometime back. He's a one trick pony ... MMA.
:asian:


----------



## jks9199

Zack Cart said:


> And THIS, here, is the heart of the matter. MMA is fast and effective to learn, so that people can become reasonably competent in a year or so, with good training. If you expect that out of a TMA, you will be dissapointed. TMAs are much more invloving. At a year, you're probably not done learning the basics of movement in that style, let alone how to apply it. If you want quick and simple fighting chops, go MMA. If you want to study and practise and struggle and hope to one day be able to turn combat into an artform, go TMA. Sport versus art. Two completely different goals, two different mindsets, two different effects.
> 
> A one year MMA student *should* be able to dominate a one year TMA student. TMA takes time, it takes patience, it takes a willingness to practice without immediate reward.



Not true.  TMAs can be taught much more rapidly than is typically done.  I'd be ashamed of myself if a student with a year of training under their belt couldn't hold their own in a match.  Who'll win would be a question for the day...


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> But when the fight begins it devolves into this;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A slappy-slap-slap fest. Lacking control, and definition of technique.



Yeah it's like they hit each other over 200 times and still required a referee's decision to pick the winner - no wait, that was an MMA fight I saw once.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zack Cart said:


> For once, I agree completely with Hanzou, here! One of my pet peeves about some martial arts is that, they teach one mindset, one premise, and an accompanying arrat of techniques. Then they "spar," and they try to kickbox, which is something they have never studied. And it is horrible and embarrassing. If you train Win Chun, your sparring should involve direct techniques, simultaneous attack and defense, short lines to vital points, and especially, control/domination of the centerline. Why train Win Chun and then spar kickboxing? If you train a style that is full of locks and takedowns, and continuous controlling contact, (my school) don't spar kickboxing style. It's just not helpful. It's a different sport from your art. This baffles me in a lot of Modern Martial Arts schools.
> 
> They train one thing, spar another. So Baffling.



I find that odd as well, thankfully that does not happen where I train. I also found it odd in the early UFC that a fighter would be announced with a 4th Dan in this and/or a 5th Dan in that and then just come out swinging when the fight starts.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zack Cart said:


> On the note of gloves, have you ever played with  those padded PVC pipe weapons? That half inch of padding makes the  difference between painless, thumping toy, and the potentially lethal  weapon of UN-padded PVC pipe...



We use those for baton defence and to practice blocking. We also use pool noodles because you can swing them as fast as you want without hurting your training partner you can practice defenses at full speed.



Zack Cart said:


> Of course it can. You're standing on one leg,  essentially sticking out a here-have-control-of-my-body lever. But, if  done well, kicking can be hugely advantageous. Kicking to the body or  head, anything above the knee, is one of those skill that a few skilled,  trained people can pull off, for a few years of youth, but that most  people should stay the heck away from. Agreed. Taking a foot off the  floor and sticking it in the air is risky. There's a lot of it in MMA  and TMA, though...



I am 42 years old, 6'2', about 100lg and have 2 worn discs in my back but I can still kick head high cold without injuring myself.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> I never said they were "useless". I said they were ineffective.



Which, when it comes to fighting, are basically the same thing. 

You think kicking to the head or upper body is way too risky in a fight. I disagree. It is too risky FOR MOST PEOPLE. I've seen the speed and power of high kicks from people I've trained under and there's no way I'm even going to attempt to block that kind of power, I'd simply have to try to get out the way, if I could even see the kick coming that is. 

The fact that one style of set of techniques may be beyond the realms of practicality for myself in a self defence situation (like kicking above the waist) doesn't mean that those techniques are ineffective for everyone. 




> Mainly because we see pretty forms like this;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POSZFnXHCVU&feature=youtu.be
> 
> But when the fight begins it devolves into this;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A slappy-slap-slap fest. Lacking control, and definition of technique.



Another poster has practically written my response for me so there's not much left for me to say other than the bottom line is that you just don't have the experience to understand. I'm not going to keep wasting time trying to explain it to you because its quite obvious that you've closed your mind to any possibilities that conflict with your prejudices. What I will add is that for the vast majority of practitioners TMA is not a game, there are no points to be won and therefore people aren't maybe as keen as sport fighting practitioners are to get publicity from videos on YouTube. In addition to that, I literally showed you one of the less obvious applications from that Mantis set being used practically as a takedown by a BJJ school - I'm not sure what else I can do, the evidence is right in front of your face. 

From about 7 minutes is an example of two TMAists trying to use techniques they have learned in a competitive, light contact environment. 






It's quite good, they both seem capable of sparring without completely losing the essence of their respective styles. The fighter in black has trained their hands well and I can definitely see some similarities between that and the style I train in, but trained Kung Fu people who want to fight in a ring are better to learn Sanda IMO, which has been shown to be very effective against other sport fighting styles - and is based on traditional Kung Fu, but modified for the ring.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Which, when it comes to fighting, are basically the same thing.



Yes, but self defense isn't always about fighting. Kung Fu can get someone in shape, improve their attitude, and enhance their awareness. Nothing wrong with that. When it comes to defending them from a sociopath, I have my doubts. I've really seen nothing thus far that has changed that opinion. 



> You think kicking to the head or upper body is way too risky in a fight. I disagree. It is too risky FOR MOST PEOPLE. I've seen the speed and power of high kicks from people I've trained under and there's no way I'm even going to attempt to block that kind of power, I'd simply have to try to get out the way, if I could even see the kick coming that is.
> 
> The fact that one style of set of techniques may be beyond the realms of practicality for myself in a self defence situation (like kicking above the waist) doesn't mean that those techniques are ineffective for everyone.



Fair point. I simply think there's more practical ways to utilize that energy and power.




> Another poster has practically written my response for me so there's not much left for me to say other than the bottom line is that you just don't have the experience to understand. I'm not going to keep wasting time trying to explain it to you because its quite obvious that you've closed your mind to any possibilities that conflict with your prejudices. What I will add is that for the vast majority of practitioners TMA is not a game, there are no points to be won and therefore people aren't maybe as keen as sport fighting practitioners are to get publicity from videos on YouTube. In addition to that, I literally showed you one of the less obvious applications from that Mantis set being used practically as a takedown by a BJJ school - I'm not sure what else I can do, the evidence is right in front of your face.



Plum Blossum Academy isn't a Bjj school. Its a Kung Fu school that has added Bjj to their curriculum for self defense purposes. You can look up their association. They have academies all over the US, and they're all Kung Fu based. Are you trying to disown them as a Kung Fu school because their sparring was lackluster? Honestly, its par the course for most Kung Fu schools I've seen.



> From about 7 minutes is an example of two TMAists trying to use techniques they have learned in a competitive, light contact environment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's quite good, they both seem capable of sparring without completely losing the essence of their respective styles. The fighter in black has trained their hands well and I can definitely see some similarities between that and the style I train in, but trained Kung Fu people who want to fight in a ring are better to learn Sanda IMO, which has been shown to be very effective against other sport fighting styles - and is based on traditional Kung Fu, but modified for the ring.



That first vid was pretty lackluster. Reminded me of an Olympic TKD match with a couple of punches thrown in. Again, I'm not seeing the point of all those forms, weapons, etc. if at the end the only thing you're going to be doing is looking like a sloppy kickboxer.

As for Sanda/Sanshou;



> *Sanda or Sanshou or an "unsanctioned fight" is a Chinese self-defense system and combat sport. Sanshou is a martial art which was originally developed by the Chinese military based upon the study and practices of traditional Kung fu and modern combat fighting techniques; it combines full-contact kickboxing, which include close range and rapid successive punches and kicks, with wrestling, takedowns, throws, sweeps, kick catches, and in some competitions, even elbow and knee strikes.*



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanshou

No wonder its effective. 

I'll respond to the other comments soon.


----------



## Koshiki

K-man said:


> Oh yeah! Convincing Hanzou? I gave up sometime back. He's a one trick pony ... MMA.



...Point taken. In that case, I quite enjoyed the video!



jks9199 said:


> Not true.  TMAs can be taught much more rapidly than is typically done.  I'd be ashamed of myself if a student with a year of training under their belt couldn't hold their own in a match.  Who'll win would be a question for the day...



Can be, sure. I don't know if they *should* be. For example I first learned the "outside crescent kick" it was a full class of nothing but hip rotation, then a class of knee circles, then a class where I was allowed to let the lower leg swing out of it's own momentum, then FINALLY, after a couple weeks, actual kicking. None of which had any relevance to actual application, timing, sparring, etc, just beginning to learn the basic movement. I'm glad I learned it lick that, instead of being allowed to start it quickly and trying to adjust bad habits later. Versus, when I took boxing, the first class explained the different strikes, had us practicing them, and trying them out on each other. I won't say that boxers are sloppy, of course they aren't. I'm still glad I had to spend so much time working basic movements before learning applications.

If you're training to be imminently effective, then sure, I suppose, go with a quicker approach to training. To each their own.



RTKDCMB said:


> We use those for baton defence and to practice blocking. We also use pool noodles because you can swing them as fast as you want without hurting your training partner you can practice defenses at full speed.



They're a heck of a lot of fun. And useful. But as far as the gloves/bareknuckle analogy goes. Ouch, what a difference. I've played with a school that uses the pool noodles before. I found them really frustrating, as they whip and bend and can't hold tension. Fun, but frustrating.




RTKDCMB said:


> I am 42 years old, 6'2', about 100lg and have 2 worn discs in my back but I can still kick head high cold without injuring myself.



But you are someone who has obviously spent a good deal of time training and practicing doing so, right? If someone *starts* at 42 years old with some old injuries, they may never get there. I was just agreeing that for most of us, High kicks are going to be a dangerous waste of time in a scuffle. For those of us who CAN whip them off with power, and almost as fast as a punch, they may be a GREAT option. Just not an option for everyone.

For example, the original teacher of my style does that thing where you take someone down on their stomach, and with one foot, cross their legs, bring them up behind them and sit on them, pinning them painfully to the ground. I'm wiry and fast and good at wriggling, but he can still get me, pretty much as I hit the ground. In our whole system, I've never met anyone else who can do that at all efficiently. So, can it work for him? Yaw, I can personally vouch for that! But for anyone else...? Maaaaaaybe, but probably not a good go-to technique!



Hanzou said:


> Yes, but self defense isn't always about fighting. Kung Fu can get someone in shape, improve their attitude, and enhance their awareness. Nothing wrong with that. When it comes to defending them from a sociopath, I have my doubts. I've really seen nothing thus far that has changed that opinion.



I doubt there's anything that WOULD change your opinion.

Also, a ballet dancer may not train in ANYTHING like effective self-defense, but I sure as hell don't think they would be an easy target. Any guy that can lift someone over his head gracefully, and then run around lightly on his toes is NOT my idea of ineffective. Physical strength counts for a heck of a lot, outside of sparring. Likewise a Gymnast. Or a Bodybuilder.

Also, of course there is more to self-defense than fighting. But I was under the impression that we were discussing physical self-defense, aka, fighting. If, to you, fighting means "sparring," then that's a different story. To me, fighting means physical violence, conflict, combat, etc. Slipping a punch and stomping an instep, then running away, in my book, is fighting.

Lastly, as far as actually defending yourself from violence, Awareness, a good attitude, the ability to run like heck, and the confidence to suck it up and actually RUN, instead of displaying your manliness, is going to get you a heck of a lot more mileage than learning any sort of physical punching/kicking/grappling/whatever.



Hanzou said:


> Fair point. I simply think there's more practical ways to utilize that energy and power.



Agreed. For most people.



Hanzou said:


> That first vid was pretty lackluster. Reminded me of an Olympic TKD match with a couple of punches thrown in. Again, I'm not seeing the point of all those forms, weapons, etc. if at the end the only thing you're going to be doing is looking like a sloppy kickboxer.



If that looked like Olympic TKD to you, you might want to more carefully watch some more Olympic TKD. The only similarity that I saw, was that there were kicks involved. If that looked like Kickboxing to you, then yeah, it was pretty bad, because it definitely was NOT like kickboxing. And if you can look at a sport fight and simultaneously think it looks like WTF TKD and Kickboxing...? They're pretty different.

And finally, no, I don't think we really expected you to ever make the connection between forms and drills and sport fighting and actual fighting. Also, you and your forms! At my school, there is ONE specified forms class per week, out of 8 (sometimes 9) classes. And a fair portion of that "forms" class is often spent learning applications and practicing against an opponent, (yes, a resisting opponent). At beginner levels, yes, forms, at my school, are mostly taught and practiced as just patterns, until the patterns are well ingrained and clean. Then they stop being patterns, and start being technique repertoire. If you have, as you say, considerable TMA background, I would have thought you would have made it to a point where forms started to make sense to you.

To clarify: Forms are NOT for repeating, over and over, mindlessly. They are for practicing technique on it's own, to perfect it in the ideal, and then for testing it against resisting opponents, trying to, as closely as possible, approximate that ideal. Again, not that I expect you to change your beliefs.

Out of morbid curiosity, what WOULD convince you to consider changing your mind about traditional martial arts?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zack Cart said:


> For example, the original teacher of my style does that thing where you take someone down on their stomach, and with one foot, cross their legs, bring them up behind them and sit on them, pinning them painfully to the ground. I'm wiry and fast and good at wriggling, but he can still get me, pretty much as I hit the ground. In our whole system, I've never met anyone else who can do that at all efficiently. So, can it work for him? Yaw, I can personally vouch for that! But for anyone else...? Maaaaaaybe, but probably not a good go-to technique!



I believe that's called a scissor leg takedown, I tried that once avery long time ago and accidentally hurt my training partner's knee. it could be useful if someone grabs your leg a certain way.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Yes, but self defense isn't always about fighting. Kung Fu can get someone in shape, improve their attitude, and enhance their awareness. Nothing wrong with that. When it comes to defending them from a sociopath, I have my doubts. I've really seen nothing thus far that has changed that opinion.



So you're basically saying that its not fit for its main purpose...



> Fair point. I simply think there's more practical ways to utilize that energy and power.



There is for me too, but for someone who's an excellent kicker, a high, accurate, powerful kick can end a conflict within seconds.



> Plum Blossum Academy isn't a Bjj school. Its a Kung Fu school that has added Bjj to their curriculum for self defense purposes. You can look up their association. They have academies all over the US, and they're all Kung Fu based. Are you trying to disown them as a Kung Fu school because their sparring was lackluster? Honestly, its par the course for most Kung Fu schools I've seen.



Nope, you're getting confused with the Choy Li Fut Plum Blossom schools. This particular club do a mixture of dubious Taijiquan, Sanda and BJJ - here is their actual website:

http://noreastermartialarts.com/aboutus.html

You'll be unhappy to know that they are a not a TMA school. It is clear from their website that they are a modern school creating their own hybrid training based on combining applications from Paying Mantis set forms, BJJ and Kickboxing. 

Aside from that, all of the people who you were laughing at sparring were ALL wearing GIs and BJJ style belts - how's that for irony. 

Lets just allow that to sink in.......

A modern club was using techniques taken from traditional styles to improve their fighting skills.



> That first vid was pretty lackluster. Reminded me of an Olympic TKD match with a couple of punches thrown in. Again, I'm not seeing the point of all those forms, weapons, etc. if at the end the only thing you're going to be doing is looking like a sloppy kickboxer.



I didn't see any sloppy kickboxing in the first video...

I don't know what the scoring criteria was based on but I'm guessing it was on technical ability rather than being able to kick the crap out of the opposition.



> As for Sanda/Sanshou;
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanshou
> 
> No wonder its effective.
> 
> I'll respond to the other comments soon.



It's based upon many techniques and principles that you'll find in traditional Kung Fu. It is very effective; and some Sanshou clubs train set forms too.


----------



## Hanzou

Zack Cart said:


> I doubt there's anything that WOULD change your opinion.




Well I've been hearing these same arguments for years, and a lot of these arguments were settled before we were born. There's a reason Judo supplanted classical Jujutsu in Japan for example, because the Judo guys wiped the floor with them. Not much has changed in the last hundred or so years. Judo/Bjj guys continue to wipe the floor with classical Jujitsu folks, so much so that you now see classical Jujitsu incorporating Judo/Bjj techniques into their arts.


That Praying Mantis academy that Dinky posted is another example of an originally classical art that has adopted Bjj in order to give themselves some street cred.




> Lastly, as far as actually defending yourself from violence, Awareness, a good attitude, the ability to run like heck, and the confidence to suck it up and actually RUN, instead of displaying your manliness, is going to get you a heck of a lot more mileage than learning any sort of physical punching/kicking/grappling/whatever.




And if you can't run, you better know how to fight back and survive. Again I wouldn't recommend a TMA for that purpose, based on what I've seen out of them, and their antiquated training methods.






> And finally, no, I don't think we really expected you to ever make the connection between forms and drills and sport fighting and actual fighting. Also, you and your forms! At my school, there is ONE specified forms class per week, out of 8 (sometimes 9) classes. And a fair portion of that "forms" class is often spent learning applications and practicing against an opponent, (yes, a resisting opponent). At beginner levels, yes, forms, at my school, are mostly taught and practiced as just patterns, until the patterns are well ingrained and clean. Then they stop being patterns, and start being technique repertoire. If you have, as you say, considerable TMA background, I would have thought you would have made it to a point where forms started to make sense to you.
> 
> 
> To clarify: Forms are NOT for repeating, over and over, mindlessly. They are for practicing technique on it's own, to perfect it in the ideal, and then for testing it against resisting opponents, trying to, as closely as possible, approximate that ideal. Again, not that I expect you to change your beliefs.
> 
> 
> Out of morbid curiosity, what WOULD convince you to consider changing your mind about traditional martial arts?




I know what forms are for. I understand their purpose. However, they seem pretty unnecessary in the grand scheme of things. Granted, if you're goal is to preserve the old arts, then I can understand why you'd be all for them. Does it make you a proficient fighter? I don't think so. You have guys performing beautiful forms, but it doesn't translate unto the fighting side of things.


What would convince me? Certain TMAs participating in NHB fights, testing their art against other arts. Like the Gracie's did back in the day.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Yeah it's like they hit each other over 200 times and still required a referee's decision to pick the winner - no wait, that was an MMA fight I saw once.



LoL! Could you imagine an MMA fighter taking on one those Kung Fu "masters" in the ring? Those poor old Chinese guys would get demolished completely. Heck, I could smack down both of those guys, and I didn't spend decades studying some forms.

That last vid from the 1950s is the pinnacle of Chinese Kung fu. Those were two traditionally trained masters going at it with their Kung Fu. That's about as real as it gets, and it looked completely pathetic.

So what should I believe? Some guys in a forum saying I haven't seen real TMA, or believe my own two eyes, and a pretty darn good example of TMA in a NHB situation?


----------



## James Kovacich

Hanzou said:


> What would convince me? Certain TMAs participating in NHB fights, testing their art against other arts. Like the Gracie's did back in the day.



Plenty of TMA's were represented in the early UFC's and we know what Royce did...



Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## James Kovacich

Hanzou said:


> That last vid from the 1950s is the pinnacle of Chinese Kung fu. Those were two traditionally trained masters going at it with their Kung Fu. That's about as real as it gets, and it looked completely pathetic.



1950's martial arts were no comparison to todays art.



Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> LoL! Could you imagine an MMA fighter taking on one those Kung Fu "masters" in the ring? Those poor old Chinese guys would get demolished completely. Heck, I could smack down both of those guys, and I didn't spend decades studying some forms.


So your bragging about your ability to beat up old men?  Impressive:drink2tha
Heres an old guy that would give you a run for your money


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> That Praying Mantis academy that Dinky posted is another example of an originally classical art that has adopted Bjj in order to give themselves some street cred.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if you can't run, you better know how to fight back and survive. Again I wouldn't recommend a TMA for that purpose, based on what I've seen out of them, and their antiquated training methods.



Eh, no. I can't let you get away with that. You're doing exactly the same thing that you were accusing me of; just because their sparring is crap you're trying to disown them as a modern club. 

LOOK at their website - the one I posted (the one that actually pictures the folks from the YouTube video). Most pictures have guys wearing GIs and Japanese style belts, there is NO Mention of TMA lineage or even what style of Mantis or Taijiquan they are practicing. They openly admit to combining 'the way of the mantis' (read as a few Mantis applications and some basic principles) into their Sanda training which has been combined from their BJJ and Kickboxing. Absolutely no TMAist would consider these guys as traditional and it is about as far from traditional Kung Fu as you can get.

The Choy Li Fut school you mentioned has a similar name but does have a good reputation as a traditional Kung Fu association. You saw that they mentioned 'Self Defence Seminars' on their website and couldn't wait to inform me that they were introducing BJJ into their curriculum, which is just plain wrong. Plum Blossum do not teach any Mantis and they do not teach any BJJ; they are a traditional Choy Li Fut and Yang Taijiquan association. 

This little mixup is representative of your attitude on this entire thread: you experience little things and immediately jump to a conclusion that fits your prejudices - usually making sweeping generalisations along the way ("kicking is I effective", "TMAs are ineffective). 

I guess it really is true that 'none are so blind as those who are unwilling to see'.


----------



## RTKDCMB

James Kovacich said:


> Plenty of TMA's were represented in the early UFC's and we know what Royce did...
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2



And then he got so beaten up and exhausted that he could not continue by Kimo Leopoldo who had no martial arts training at all.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> LoL! Could you imagine an MMA fighter taking on one those Kung Fu "masters" in the ring? Those poor old Chinese guys would get demolished completely. Heck, I could smack down both of those guys, and I didn't spend decades studying some forms.
> 
> That last vid from the 1950s is the pinnacle of Chinese Kung fu. Those were two traditionally trained masters going at it with their Kung Fu. That's about as real as it gets, and it looked completely pathetic.
> 
> So what should I believe? Some guys in a forum saying I haven't seen real TMA, or believe my own two eyes, and a pretty darn good example of TMA in a NHB situation?



That video of the Chinese masters was nowhere near a pretty darn good example of TMA in a NHB situation it was an absolutely terrible one. Just because it says they were masters in the title of the video does not mean they are. Posters on YouTube always throw out terms like 'master' and 'expert' willy nilly, kinda like you do with the term TMA.  




Hanzou said:


> I know what forms are for. I understand their purpose. However, they seem pretty unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.



That statement alone proves you do not.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Eh, no. I can't let you get away with that. You're doing exactly the same thing that you were accusing me of; just because their sparring is crap you're trying to disown them as a modern club.
> 
> LOOK at their website - the one I posted (the one that actually pictures the folks from the YouTube video). Most pictures have guys wearing GIs and Japanese style belts, there is NO Mention of TMA lineage or even what style of Mantis or Taijiquan they are practicing. They openly admit to combining 'the way of the mantis' (read as a few Mantis applications and some basic principles) into their Sanda training which has been combined from their BJJ and Kickboxing. Absolutely no TMAist would consider these guys as traditional and it is about as far from traditional Kung Fu as you can get.



http://noreastermartialarts.com/aboutus.html

The head instructor is a 6th degree black belt in Praying Mantis, an expert Level Instructor in Yang Tai Chi, Qi Gong, and the founder of the school. He's only a blue belt in Bjj. Blue belt is a step up from white belt. Which probably explains why there's a black belt Bjj instructor at the school. I wouldn't consider him a Bjj guy. He's definitely more CMA than anything else.

*You're* the one who brought this school up as an example of good Praying Mantis in the first place. Why are you trying to disown them now? Is it because I "exposed" them?






A vid from their graduation ceremony. Looks pretty traditional.



> The Choy Li Fut school you mentioned has a similar name but does have a good reputation as a traditional Kung Fu association. You saw that they mentioned 'Self Defence Seminars' on their website and couldn't wait to inform me that they were introducing BJJ into their curriculum, which is just plain wrong. Plum Blossum do not teach any Mantis and they do not teach any BJJ; they are a traditional Choy Li Fut and Yang Taijiquan association.








They don't teach any Mantis?


----------



## Koshiki

RTKDCMB said:


> I believe that's called a scissor leg takedown, I tried that once avery long time ago and accidentally hurt my training partner's knee. it could be useful if someone grabs your leg a certain way.



Not a scissor leg takedown. THOSE, I think most people can do reasonably well, with some practice. This is like, you take them down on their stomachs first. THEN, using your foot, you scoop up one ankle and place it in the pit of the other knee, then using your same foot, you scoop up that other leg and bend it up towards their back, leaning your weight down onto their crossed legs to immobilize them. It's the kind of stupid trick hold that's really more of a parlour joke. Most people I know can't do it well with a compliant uke, let alone a resisting opponent who doesn't know it's coming. Except for this one guy, who can really surprise you with it and immobilize you.

Going to show, that no matter how silly and impractical the technique, SOMEONE out there can make it work really well for them! But would I recomend it to anyone else. Good golly no!



Hanzou said:


> Well I've been hearing these same arguments for years, and a lot of these arguments were settled before we were born.
> ....
> And if you can't run, you better know how to fight back and survive. Again I wouldn't recommend a TMA for that purpose, based on what I've seen out of them, and their antiquated training methods.
> ...
> What would convince me? Certain TMAs participating in NHB fights, testing their art against other arts. Like the Gracie's did back in the day.



Clearly they were NOT settled before we were born. If they had been, they would not be still continuing. They'd be, well, settled... Bit of a truism, that.

I agree that you had better know how to defend yourself in an actual fight. YOU, however, said that there was more to self-defense than fighting, and then went on to say that physical fitness, a good attitude, and awareness were not useful as self-defense. WHAT exactly, is not combat but IS self-defense, if not attitude, awareness, and fitness??? You're statements, not mine!

No holds barred is a wrestling term. I'm assuming, though, that you mean it in the vulgar sense of, "anything goes." The only place where anything goes is a third world street brawl. MMA is not anything goes. Which is the whole point. A large portion of many traditional martial arts consists of things which are Banned in the MMA game. There are lengthy lists of all the many "holds" (read: techniques) which are "barred" from MMA. Especially below the professional level. Do you fight professionally? Or, when testing your skills in public competition, must you follow amateur rules? A fight where I can't elbow to the head or do stomp kicks is NOT, in my humble opinion, "No holds Barred." It's, "all really dangerous techniques barred, our fighters would like to survive the game, thank you very much."

Not that you're likely to admit that, because, as we know, MMA is the most brutal, realistic depiction of combat possible.



RTKDCMB said:


> That video of the Chinese masters was nowhere near a pretty darn good example of TMA in a NHB situation it was an absolutely terrible one. Just because it says they were masters in the title of the video does not mean they are. Posters on YouTube always throw out terms like 'master' and 'expert' willy nilly, kinda like you do with the term TMA.



The number of times I have been frustrated by the names of Youtube videos. I never realized how frequently, "Full contac Kung fu Master KO May Buran dethmatch REEEEL!!!" actually means something like, "Skinny teenagers in boxing gloves go until first owwy!!!!." Although, if Youtube is Hanzou's primary source for what "Traditional Martial Arts Mastery" looks like, then I can see where he's coming from.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> That video of the Chinese masters was nowhere near a pretty darn good example of TMA in a NHB situation it was an absolutely terrible one. Just because it says they were masters in the title of the video does not mean they are. Posters on YouTube always throw out terms like 'master' and 'expert' willy nilly, kinda like you do with the term TMA.




You think a pair of nobodies could draw a crowd like that? They were both grandmasters. One was GM of White Crane, and the other was GM of Tai Chi, and their match took place in 1953.

I've seen this pattern among TMA types far too often. Dinky is trying to pull it with that Plum Blossum Mantis school, and you're doing it with these grandmasters. As soon as the curtain is pulled back, and the rubber meets the road, you guys disown anything that shows the TMAs lacking in effectiveness. If someone gets a beatdown, you immeadiately say "he wasn't a true exponent of his art!" As soon as a school is exposed, you say, "That school doesn't teach real (insert TMA style here)". 

If you want to see true Bjj, I can provide numerous videos, tell you where you should go to train, and I'll happily stand behind it. That's kind of the difference; We have nothing to hide. We don't have any secret techniques that we won't show people. We don't hide behind a laundry list of forms and katas in order for you to get the "real art". Its all right there for you to see, touch, and experience for yourself.

Of course, that type of fighting is for everyone. Not everyone is okay with a big guy sweating all over you as he puts you in a choke hold. I understand that dancing around in a silk outfit, swinging a beautiful chinese sword is far more appealing for a LOT of people.



> That statement alone proves you do not.



Even Bruce Lee said katas/forms were BS.


----------



## James Kovacich

RTKDCMB said:


> And then he got so beaten up and exhausted that he could not continue by Kimo Leopoldo who had no martial arts training at all.



At the time Kimo claimed a 3rd degree in TKD as did Joe Son his partner. Whether or not they were, who knows but that is what they claimed. Royce did prove what they set out to prove. As far as that match, someone like Kimo was bound to come out and do as he did sooner or later. That does not take away from the fact the GJJ caught everyone by surprise. For several years after (and some still today) people claimed they didn't need to learn the ground game.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> http://noreastermartialarts.com/aboutus.html
> 
> The head instructor is a 6th degree black belt in Praying Mantis, an expert Level Instructor in Yang Tai Chi, Qi Gong, and the founder of the school.



He can be 100th degree of secret Shaolin Black Grasshopper Kung Fu, but without a lineage or even a note of which style of Mantis he claims to train in, it means absolutely nothing. It is not a traditional school.

His Yang Taijiquan status - see above. 




> He's only a blue belt in Bjj. Blue belt is a step up from white belt. Which probably explains why there's a black belt Bjj instructor at the school. I wouldn't consider him a Bjj guy. He's definitely more CMA than anything else.



Ok, the founder claims to be a CMA guy, but the club isn't exactly what TMAists would consider traditional. 

They don't seem to distinguish between Kung Fu and San Shou either:

"Praying Mantis style Kung Fu/San Shou is one of our core programs at Nor'easter Martial Arts and Fitness."



> *You're* the one who brought this school up as an example of good Praying Mantis in the first place. Why are you trying to disown them now? Is it because I "exposed" them?



Oh behave. They're a modern club, training in a mixture of different things. The sparring was awful, everyone on the website is dressed in GIs but one of their videos did show a good application from the Seven Star Mantis set form Bung Bo, which was the point of my original post, if you'd care to re-read it. It wasn't to claim all BJJ was rubbish, or that BJJ could be improved by using Mantis or that this proves Praying Mantis is good - or even to belittle the club in question. 

Your absolute desperation to trash TMAs in any way you can was what had lead to the discussion of what style this training belongs to and the facts are:

No lineage
Mixed Kung Fu/Sanda classes
BJJ
Everyone wearing GIs
No verification of martial achievements
No recognisable style of Mantis being taught - aside from bits from the first Seven Star set form.



> A vid from their graduation ceremony. Looks pretty traditional.



*Cringe*

A modern club, doing Lion Dancing, military style training lines, bad quality of Black Sashes doing forms, people in GIs doing 'Kung Fu'. 

Whole load of 'nope' from me.




> They don't teach any Mantis?



This is the same club I presume? 

They're not following the traditional Seven Star Praying Mantis syllabus - we don't have a "Seven Hands" set form - and if that's a Black sash..... Enough said.

Boxing Forms of the Mantis: 

http://www.leekamwing.co.uk/formslist/forms_table.html

I don't think we need to attack this club's credibility any further (that was never my intention) but it is painfully obvious to anyone without the rose tinted spectacles on that this school isn't an example of a "Traditional" Martial Arts school.

Edit: I think the clue is in their Club's name - they're supposed to be doing Plum Blossom Praying Mantis. Which is pretty rare to find these days and even rarer to find as having a traditional lineage and syllabus (which is probably why they were doing applications from Seven Star). 

Edit: Edit: As alluded to above: After searching online I cannot find ANY western Mantis clubs that claim to teach authentic Plum Blossom. Hmm....


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> You think a pair of nobodies could draw a crowd like that? They were both grandmasters. One was GM of White Crane, and the other was GM of Tai Chi, and their match took place in 1953.



Which you read off the video no doubt, it may be the grainy video but they looked a bit young to be grand masters to me. Crowds will gather whenever they see a fight, no mater who it is, advertise it and you will get larger crowds.



Hanzou said:


> I've seen this pattern among TMA types far too often. Dinky is trying to pull it with that Plum Blossum Mantis school, and you're doing it with these grandmasters. As soon as the curtain is pulled back, and the rubber meets the road, you guys disown anything that shows the TMAs lacking in effectiveness. If someone gets a beatdown, you immeadiately say "he wasn't a true exponent of his art!" As soon as a school is exposed, you say, "That school doesn't teach real (insert TMA style here)".



Seriously? You pick the worst example you can find of two people who obviously are not very good at what they do just so that you can complain that TMA artists tell you that it is no good whilst expecting them to think it is.

I suppose the guy in the black shorts is not doing 'real MMA':








Hanzou said:


> If you want to see true Bjj, I can provide numerous videos, tell you where you should go to train, and I'll happily stand behind it. That's kind of the difference; We have nothing to hide. We don't have any secret techniques that we won't show people. We don't hide behind a laundry list of forms and katas in order for you to get the "real art". Its all right there for you to see, touch, and experience for yourself.



We don't have any secret techniques either. BJJ people put out a lot of videos becaues they are always trying to convince everyone they have the ultimate style that can beat anything, you see it all the time.



Hanzou said:


> Of course, that type of fighting is for everyone. Not everyone is okay with a big guy sweating all over you as he puts you in a choke hold. I understand that dancing around in a silk outfit, swinging a beautiful chinese sword is far more appealing for a LOT of people.



You mean like boxing -  two men in silk shorts with no shirt fighting over a belt and a purse. 

 I have never done Kung Fu by the way.



Hanzou said:


> Even Bruce Lee said katas/forms were BS.



And a great many masters have said otherwise. Bruce Lee was one of the greatest martial artists of all time and one of the people who inspired me to do martial arts in the first place but he was not the ultimate authority on all things.


----------



## RTKDCMB

James Kovacich said:


> At the time Kimo claimed a 3rd degree in TKD as did Joe Son his partner. Whether or not they were, who knows but that is what they claimed. Royce did prove what they set out to prove. As far as that match, someone like Kimo was bound to come out and do as he did sooner or later. That does not take away from the fact the GJJ caught everyone by surprise. For several years after (and some still today) people claimed they didn't need to learn the ground game.



Kimo had no prior martial arts experience apart from a few back yard street fights the promoters of the event 'gave' him a black belt to make him look better on paper (taken from a MMA website). AS for Joe Son - He was a disgrace to both the martial arts and to humanity in general who fought 4 professional fights and lost all of them. He claimed that he started his own style called Joe Son Do to which he was the only practitioner. He was then convicted of gang raping a woman at gun point (and with the gun) and then told her when they released her 'It's Christmas. This is your lucky day.' and got sent to prison. In prison he finally won a fight when he killed a convicted sex offender. BJJ did take people by surprise in the beginning, new things often do.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> He can be 100th degree of secret Shaolin Black Grasshopper Kung Fu, but without a lineage or even a note of which style of Mantis he claims to train in, it means absolutely nothing. It is not a traditional school.
> 
> His Yang Taijiquan status - see above.



They were originally the Plum Blossum Academy. They recently changed their name when they added Bjj to their curriculum. Now they seem to be more MMA focused, and seem to view Bjj as the self defense system of the school while the Kung Fu stuff is utilized for other purposes.



> Oh behave. They're a modern club, training in a mixture of different things. The sparring was awful, everyone on the website is dressed in GIs but one of their videos did show a good application from the Seven Star Mantis set form Bung Bo, which was the point of my original post, if you'd care to re-read it. It wasn't to claim all BJJ was rubbish, or that BJJ could be improved by using Mantis or that this proves Praying Mantis is good - or even to belittle the club in question.
> 
> Your absolute desperation to trash TMAs in any way you can was what had lead to the discussion of what style this training belongs to and the facts are:
> 
> No lineage
> Mixed Kung Fu/Sanda classes
> BJJ
> Everyone wearing GIs
> No verification of martial achievements
> No recognisable style of Mantis being taught - aside from bits from the first Seven Star set form.



Seems like the typical TMA McDojo besides the Bjj. What's the problem?




> *Cringe*
> 
> A modern club, doing Lion Dancing, military style training lines, bad quality of Black Sashes doing forms, people in GIs doing 'Kung Fu'.
> 
> Whole load of 'nope' from me.



So I take it that a "real" KF school wouldn't do these things?



> This is the same club I presume?
> 
> They're not following the traditional Seven Star Praying Mantis syllabus - we don't have a "Seven Hands" set form - and if that's a Black sash..... Enough said.
> 
> Boxing Forms of the Mantis:
> 
> http://www.leekamwing.co.uk/formslist/forms_table.html
> 
> I don't think we need to attack this club's credibility any further (that was never my intention) but it is painfully obvious to anyone without the rose tinted spectacles on that this school isn't an example of a "Traditional" Martial Arts school.
> 
> Edit: I think the clue is in their Club's name - they're supposed to be doing Plum Blossom Praying Mantis. Which is pretty rare to find these days and even rarer to find as having a traditional lineage and syllabus (which is probably why they were doing applications from Seven Star).
> 
> Edit: Edit: As alluded to above: After searching online I cannot find ANY western Mantis clubs that claim to teach authentic Plum Blossom. Hmm....




You do understand that your post above proves my point right? A TMA school with shifty lineage and questionable skills is just par the course, and really shouldn't surprise anyone.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> They were originally the Plum Blossum Academy. They recently changed their name when they added Bjj to their curriculum. Now they seem to be more MMA focused, and seem to view Bjj as the self defense system of the school while the Kung Fu stuff is utilized for other purposes.



I've no idea where you've derived this from. 

"Now they seem to be more MMA focused, and seem to view Bjj as the self defense system of the school while the Kung Fu stuff is utilized for other purposes."

How could you possibly know that? So I guess this bad sparring can be attributed to MMA in general then...why should TMA get all the blame?



> Seems like the typical TMA McDojo besides the Bjj. What's the problem?



Stop being petty. 

It looks like a McDojo, not a "TMA McDojo" or a "MMA/BJJ/Sanda McDojo". 




> So I take it that a "real" KF school wouldn't do these things?



Lion Dancing: that's just a personal thing, some good traditional Kung Fu schools do it, I just think it should be kept separate from the martial arts taught in the west - hence my *cringe*

The other three points: probably not.

Poor looking black belts/sashes: good TMA schools should produce good quality black sashes - no exceptions. 

GIs in Kung Fu: no TCMAs wear GIs. Either no uniform, or at least a suitable uniform. Its the same reason why a BJJ school training in silk pyjamas might have its authenticity questioned. We have a causal uniform and no sashes - which I personally favour. 

Training in lines: sometimes, to drill a few techniques its worth it, but time is much better spent working with a partner. No one ever became a great fighter by simply punching and kicking the air. 

Shouting "Yes sir to your teacher" (this is actually in the video): ridiculous. Show respect to students and teacher but its not the army, "Yes sir, no sir." Is too much for me. 

One of these things (aside from the poor Black Sash students) can be accepted but when they start to add up, and the club is mixing classes and doesn't have a lineage we move away from the realms of TMA into modern schools that are trying to claim to be authentic, traditional martial arts schools when they are not. 



> You do understand that your post above proves my point right? A TMA school with shifty lineage and questionable skills is just par the course, and really shouldn't surprise anyone.



Maybe in 'Hanzou land', but in the real world this is exactly what proper TMA schools are trying to fight - bastardised, chop suey fighting systems with questionable history. Hopefully one day I will have the honour of passing on the traditional fighting style and training methods of my Seven Star lineage (although that is a long way away), but until then, I will continue to try to educate the ignorant on what true Kung Fu is in an attempt to stop clubs like this from further tarnishing our reputation. 

Viva le resistance!!

*climbs down from soap box* 

Sorry, I forgot which movie I was supposed to be in there


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> I've no idea where you've derived this from.
> 
> "Now they seem to be more MMA focused, and seem to view Bjj as the self defense system of the school while the Kung Fu stuff is utilized for other purposes."
> 
> How could you possibly know that? So I guess this bad sparring can be attributed to MMA in general then...why should TMA get all the blame?



A little clever google searching derived from the original Youtube video you posted. This is the original name of their studio;

http://www.yelp.com/biz/plum-blossom-tai-chi-kung-fu-academy-littleton

[h=1]The Plum Blossom Tai Chi and Kung Fu academy.[/h]If you check out the address and phone number, its the same. They just changed the name because I guess Bjj had a huge impact on the school.



> Stop being petty.
> 
> It looks like a McDojo, not a "TMA McDojo" or a "MMA/BJJ/Sanda McDojo".



Hey, you're the one that liked their forms. 




> Lion Dancing: that's just a personal thing, some good traditional Kung Fu schools do it, I just think it should be kept separate from the martial arts taught in the west - hence my *cringe*
> 
> The other three points: probably not.
> 
> Poor looking black belts/sashes: good TMA schools should produce good quality black sashes - no exceptions.
> 
> GIs in Kung Fu: no TCMAs wear GIs. Either no uniform, or at least a suitable uniform. Its the same reason why a BJJ school training in silk pyjamas might have its authenticity questioned. We have a causal uniform and no sashes - which I personally favour.
> 
> Training in lines: sometimes, to drill a few techniques its worth it, but time is much better spent working with a partner. No one ever became a great fighter by simply punching and kicking the air.
> 
> Shouting "Yes sir to your teacher" (this is actually in the video): ridiculous. Show respect to students and teacher but its not the army, "Yes sir, no sir." Is too much for me.
> 
> One of these things (aside from the poor Black Sash students) can be accepted but when they start to add up, and the club is mixing classes and doesn't have a lineage we move away from the realms of TMA into modern schools that are trying to claim to be authentic, traditional martial arts schools when they are not.



Well its safe to assume that the Black sash students were in place before the Bjj introduction. Unless this place is a belt factory, I'm going to assume it took some time for them to reach Black sash.

Here's some of their full contact Praying Mantis sparring from 2011;






I'd like your opinion on it. 

My opinion: :lol:


----------



## Hanzou

Here's another old school vid of traditional Kung Fu on the rooftops of China c. 1956;






About the same quality of striking that I saw from other videos.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Which you read off the video no doubt, it may be the grainy video but they looked a bit young to be grand masters to me. Crowds will gather whenever they see a fight, no mater who it is, advertise it and you will get larger crowds.



Eh, they looked to be in their mid 40s or early 50s. Old enough to be "masters" or leaders of their respective styles. Besides, I posted another old Chinese video showing more authentic TMA in a street fight. The results are similar.



> Seriously? You pick the worst example you can find of two people who obviously are not very good at what they do just so that you can complain that TMA artists tell you that it is no good whilst expecting them to think it is.
> 
> I suppose the guy in the black shorts is not doing 'real MMA':



The difference being that we have several other examples of good MMA, including the guy who beat the crap out of the guy in your example. In that old Chinese video, both fighters looked terrible.




> We don't have any secret techniques either. BJJ people put out a lot of videos becaues they are always trying to convince everyone they have the ultimate style that can beat anything, you see it all the time.



Not really. The majority of Bjj videos on the web are instructional videos. The minority of videos show Bjj beating the crap out of other arts.



> And a great many masters have said otherwise. Bruce Lee was one of the greatest martial artists of all time and one of the people who inspired me to do martial arts in the first place but he was not the ultimate authority on all things.



Who would you consider the ultimate authority on such things?


----------



## Koshiki

Hanzou said:


> Who would you consider the ultimate authority on such things?



The answer is obvious. No one. No person, no style, no system, no training method, nothing. Some are better than other at some things, some have great weaknesses. That is what everyone aside from you is claiming. Most styles, when done well, have something to offer. No style is good when trained poorly. 

The same goes for practitioners, not a single one has ever been the authority on all things martial arts, even ones who make a huge career out of movie-style martial arts. Not even the ones with hugely overgrown egos. Not a single person. Ever.

That's pretty much how this thread should have started and ended. Instead, certain parties have decided that a few styles are immensely effective, and the rest are worthless. That contingent seems more intent on proving this, than finding out whether said party's claims are actually true. The thread has degraded to the point where it seems pretty pointless to continue. Comparing youtube vids to see which training method is best? Not much to be learned, there. At this point, I think anyone reading the thread will have a pretty good idea of how things stand.

I might also point out that, in the MMA forum, you'd expect more MMA-ers to jump in on Hanzou's side, were his claims thought to be especially legitimate by the bulk of practitioners...


----------



## Kframe

Found footage of a odd karate tournament.  Its got a mma style rule set. Here is the footage. 



 One thing I noticed right off the bat was the complete absence of anything resembling any of the standard fair karate defenses out side out movement.   No parries no blocking no intercepting no redirecting. It was just a slug fest.


----------



## Hanzou

Zack Cart said:


> The answer is obvious. No one. No person, no style, no system, no training method, nothing. Some are better than other at some things, some have great weaknesses. That is what everyone aside from you is claiming. Most styles, when done well, have something to offer. No style is good when trained poorly.
> 
> The same goes for practitioners, not a single one has ever been the authority on all things martial arts, even ones who make a huge career out of movie-style martial arts. Not even the ones with hugely overgrown egos. Not a single person. Ever.
> 
> That's pretty much how this thread should have started and ended. Instead, certain parties have decided that a few styles are immensely effective, and the rest are worthless. That contingent seems more intent on proving this, than finding out whether said party's claims are actually true. The thread has degraded to the point where it seems pretty pointless to continue. Comparing youtube vids to see which training method is best? Not much to be learned, there. At this point, I think anyone reading the thread will have a pretty good idea of how things stand.



This thread began because the TS wanted to know if any MMA folks had a distaste/mistrust/skepticism about the combat effectiveness of TMA in real life situations. I stepped up and said that I did have a distaste/mistrust/skepticism about the combat effectiveness of TMA styles, and I explained why.

Now as I've mentioned numerous times, I don't think TMAs are worthless, quite the opposite. For example, I've known people who's entire lives have been changed by studying Kung Fu and Ninjutsu for the better.

However, if my daughter or niece wanted to know where they should go to learn how to protect themselves, I wouldn't send them to those types of martial arts, because I don't feel that they would get the tools they need to defend themselves properly. I'd rather have my daughter learn how to choke a larger guy than learning katas and forms all day.

That's it, and that's all.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> One thing I noticed right off the bat was the complete absence of anything resembling any of the standard fair karate defenses out side out movement.   No parries no blocking no intercepting no redirecting. It was just a slug fest.


Why does that not surprise me? There are no 'blocks' in karate. All those fancy moves that are taught as blocks are other things. A punch is action, a block is reaction. The punch will win every time. However we have had threads on the effectiveness of blocks elsewhere. I do not teach blocks at all. If someone needs to protect their head they will put there arm up instinctively. Sure we can build on that with 'helmet' cover and the like but they are nothing like the things we call 'blocks'. But, in the video, the guys were slipping punches and moving inside the punches to clinch.

People like *Hanzou* see people in karate schools marching backwards and forwards blocking and quite correctly call it as BS. What people like him do not know or will not acknowledge is that what they are watching is not traditional martial art. It is the sanitised version that went into the schools for kids, then was exported out into the Western world as the real deal. Ask any karateka if his style is 'traditional' and he will almost certainly say yes. Probably most on this forum would claim their style is traditional. I would dispute that and say that most karate is not traditional. That doesn't mean that what is being trained is ineffective either in competition or on the street. How it stands up in the MMA arena depends on the person, not the style.

The guys in the video were almost at the exhaustion stage. One had difficulty even getting his hands up. In was a good example of gross motor skills coming to the fore with the loss of any fine motor skill. How would they have gone in MMA? Who knows? They did not seem to be highly skilled but what we see of MMA on TV is the elite level. Most MMA fighters are also nowhere near that elite level. That is what makes this sort of comparison a nonsense.
:asian:


----------



## Kframe

I don't want to start the blocking nonsense again, but that does not change the point that there are active interceptions in karate. You simply can not evade all shots, nor can you cover againt all shots. If a student wanted to learn to effectively do both, why bother with karate and just go learn kick boxing? They  do those things better and sooner..    In the end there are reactive defenses. Parries  and redirections are common in mma and boxing.  Case in point the inside soto uke I use in sparring all the time against straight punch's. 

Even though he may not know much about BBT I respect this guy with regards to karate and its defenses. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-blocks-do-work.html  Honestly when it comes to karate, during my conversations with him, and reading his blog, I can find no evidence to dispute him. 

It makes no logical sense. Why call the techniques "receiving" if there not receiving anything? I they are attacks then call them a attack, if they are to receive something then that is what they should do..  If you wanted to learn to turtle up and cover up, why take the long way around, why not just learn boxing or kick boxing or mt?   Where in all your forms are turtling up and covering? If they are attacks then the entire art, and all of its teachers in this country are lying to there students when they use the term Uke... 



Problem as I see it, no one is teaching movement with deflection. Combining those two things is essential. Yet most schools in the states don't have there students doing that till higher levels. Some never do.



They work, the problem is the crap that is being peddled as karate in just about every school in America.  Karate should have died with Funakoshi, he screwed it up, I blame him. 

I guess I just don't see that argument. My former coach taught me the karate blocks, and I used them in sparring to great effect. My experiences color my opinion. If it were not for my experience's I would be inclined to agree with the troll.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Who would you consider the ultimate authority on such things?



No one, especially not you.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> A little clever google searching derived from the original Youtube video you posted. This is the original name of their studio;
> 
> http://www.yelp.com/biz/plum-blossom-tai-chi-kung-fu-academy-littleton
> 
> *The Plum Blossom Tai Chi and Kung Fu academy.*
> 
> If you check out the address and phone number, its the same. They just changed the name because I guess Bjj had a huge impact on the school.
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, you're the one that liked their forms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well its safe to assume that the Black sash students were in place before the Bjj introduction. Unless this place is a belt factory, I'm going to assume it took some time for them to reach Black sash.
> 
> Here's some of their full contact Praying Mantis sparring from 2011;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like your opinion on it.
> 
> My opinion: :lol:



It appears to be a crap school, who cares? I don't train there, do you? Get over it.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Eh, they looked to be in their mid 40s or early 50s. Old enough to be "masters" or leaders of their respective styles. Besides, I posted another old Chinese video showing more authentic TMA in a street fight. The results are similar.
> 
> 
> 
> The difference being that we have several other examples of good MMA, including the guy who beat the crap out of the guy in your example. In that old Chinese video, both fighters looked terrible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. The majority of Bjj videos on the web are instructional videos. The minority of videos show Bjj beating the crap out of other arts.
> 
> 
> 
> Who would you consider the ultimate authority on such things?



We could spend all day comparing videos of bad schools and martial artists and prove absolutely nothing, who has that kind of time?


----------



## RTKDCMB

K-man said:


> People like *Hanzou* see people in karate schools marching backwards and forwards blocking and quite correctly call it as BS.



So you think that practicing single blocks over and over again to improve the technique by making it faster, more powerful, more precise and more instinctive to be BS? That says a lot.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Dinkydoo said:


> A modern club, doing Lion Dancing, military style training lines, bad quality of Black Sashes doing forms, people in GIs doing 'Kung Fu'.
> 
> Whole load of 'nope' from me.



A video I saw on TV said that the lion dance uses many of the stances that are used in Kug Fu training and requires strength and balance. That dragon head is heavy and they are jumping up and down on raised surfaces and that would not be easy.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> I don't want to start the blocking nonsense again, but that does not change the point that there are active interceptions in karate. You simply can not evade all shots, nor can you cover againt all shots. If a student wanted to learn to effectively do both, why bother with karate and just go learn kick boxing? They  do those things better and sooner..    In the end there are reactive defenses. Parries  and redirections are common in mma and boxing.  Case in point the inside soto uke I use in sparring all the time against straight punch's.
> 
> Not wanting to go back there either but I'm not disagreeing with anything you have said here.
> 
> Even though he may not know much about BBT I respect this guy with regards to karate and its defenses. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-blocks-do-work.html  Honestly when it comes to karate, during my conversations with him, and reading his blog, I can find no evidence to dispute him.
> 
> I read your link and was agree with almost all of it, especially;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the purposes of the latter, you should be aware that *every basic block contains 2 movements* - the primary block (a larger movement) and a secondary block (a smaller movement) in the "pullback" arm (what some people call the "crossing hand").* I am astounded as to how few karateka today are actually aware of this fact. *The 2 blocks are intended to be used in concert (in transferring, trapping etc.). Alternatively the secondary block can be seen as a kind of backup if the primary one fails. *Furthermore, what I have termed the "secondary" block could actually be used as the principal deflection - while the primary "block" is used offensively etc*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... and he concludes;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt I could execute a full classical hiki uke against a jab, or probably any basic block against a realistic attack. However basic blocks are necessary tools to gaining the ability to execute smaller deflections with the same internal "feel".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... which is what I am saying.
> 
> It makes no logical sense. Why call the techniques "receiving" if there not receiving anything? I they are attacks then call them a attack, if they are to receive something then that is what they should do..  If you wanted to learn to turtle up and cover up, why take the long way around, why not just learn boxing or kick boxing or mt?   Where in all your forms are turtling up and covering? If they are attacks then the entire art, and all of its teachers in this country are lying to there students when they use the term Uke...
> 
> Of course, they *are* receiving. I don't believe the teachers are lying. I think they are teaching what they have been taught and believe to be true. There are no turtling or covering in kata because kata is providing something totally different to what those same teachers are teaching. That is why the troll is dismissing kata as useless. The way it is mostly taught, I would agree with him but again, what is being taught is not traditional. Traditional kata came with instructions.
> 
> Problem as I see it, no one is teaching movement with deflection. Combining those two things is essential. Yet most schools in the states don't have there students doing that till higher levels. Some never do.
> 
> And this is exactly the problem. Dan talks about this omission then proceeds to demonstrate one arm 'blocks' just as you see them done in most karate schools. Those deflections, we use all the time.
> 
> They work, the problem is the crap that is being peddled as karate in just about every school in America.  Karate should have died with Funakoshi, he screwed it up, I blame him.
> 
> Once again, agreed, but the traditional schools do continue in Okinawa.
> 
> I guess I just don't see that argument. My former coach taught me the karate blocks, and I used them in sparring to great effect. My experiences color my opinion. If it were not for my experience's I would be inclined to agree with the troll.
Click to expand...

Using 'blocks' in sparring might well be possible because in sparring (sport) you have the luxury of distance and hence time. We do very little sparring from that distance. Our sparring starts at touching range, as it would be in a crowded bar. As for agreeing with our troll ... yes he has a point but I would argue that he has never seen, let alone trained in a traditional environment ... and he has his own agenda.
:asian:


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> I'd rather have my daughter learn how to choke a larger guy than learning katas and forms all day.
> 
> That's it, and that's all.



I'm glad you realise that all of this mistrust you have of TMA stems from the fact that you don't understand how to and/or have experienced training katas and forms effectively.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> A little clever google searching derived from the original Youtube video you posted. This is the original name of their studio;
> 
> http://www.yelp.com/biz/plum-blossom-tai-chi-kung-fu-academy-littleton
> 
> [h=1]The Plum Blossom Tai Chi and Kung Fu academy.[/h]If you check out the address and phone number, its the same. They just changed the name because I guess Bjj had a huge impact on the school.



Fair enough; I didn't see the point in looking much further than their current website after the first video because although it showed a good takedown from one of our sets; going to an arm bar after it is probably the last thing a traditional Mantis practitioner would do. 



> Hey, you're the one that liked their forms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well its safe to assume that the Black sash students were in place before the Bjj introduction. Unless this place is a belt factory, I'm going to assume it took some time for them to reach Black sash.



Doesn't matter when the black sashes were in place really, this club isn't traditional. 



> Here's some of their full contact Praying Mantis sparring from 2011;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like your opinion on it.
> 
> My opinion: :lol:



I'm in danger of style/club bashing myself on this thread so I don't think I really should say much more other than this: 

I think they get tied up in close quarters grappling far too much for 'mantis students'. We have some grappling techniques in our system but they're usually applied quickly on the wrists and arms which I admit are quite dangerous for free fighting - probably best left to pressure tested scenario training (for beginners at least). Striking should be more fluid and definitely chained more than simply shuffling in, jab, back out, in-kick, takedown. It's obvious that these guys haven't really learned to apply mantis basics in sparring - which is difficult for a beginner, but you have to force yourself to fight like this until it becomes natural, rather than reverting to sloppy BJJ or kickboxing. This just looked like BJJ with striking to me and wasn't much different from the BJJ guys sparring that you posted initially.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Here's another old school vid of traditional Kung Fu on the rooftops of China c. 1956;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About the same quality of striking that I saw from other videos.



Seen it before - I agree, it's shocking quality.


----------



## Dinkydoo

RTKDCMB said:


> A video I saw on TV said that the lion dance uses many of the stances that are used in Kug Fu training and requires strength and balance. That dragon head is heavy and they are jumping up and down on raised surfaces and that would not be easy.



That is true, Lion Dancing takes great athleticism, is nice to watch and goes quite well with Kung fu. The reasons why I don't think it sits well with Kung Fu taught in the west are mainly cultural - it's not part of our culture, we don't fully understand it and in most cases are probably just 'going through the motions'. I respect the fact that some clubs do this - even  within my lineage - but I'd rather just leave the Chinese festivities to the Chinese. A McDojo teaching a mixture of 'traditional' stuff, Sanda and BJJ doing Lion Dancing just doesn't sit right with me at all.


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> So you think that practicing single blocks over and over again to improve the technique by making it faster, more powerful, more precise and more instinctive to be BS? That says a lot.


I didn't say that at all. Uke as they should be performed to be technically correct utilise both hands or arms except possibly Uchi Uke. When the students go marching up and down practising those techniques they generally perform then correctly. Now pair them up and they promptly forget they have two arms and do one arm 'blocks'. IMO that is where they go wrong. When my students do that the first hand deflects and the second hand does whatever it is that the exercise requires, whether that be control or strike. So I'll quote Dan Djurdjevic's article that *Kframe* linked, "





> What misleads some people is the fact that basic blocks (including those in some kata like gekisai) appear to be "large" or "impractical" movements. However this thought process involves a fundamental misunderstanding: *basic blocks are training tools that contain the complete plane of deflection for a particular angle. When you apply the block you might only effect part of the basic movement. Basic blocks should not be applied literally."*



When you opponent is inside striking range no matter how much you have trained you will not perform a 'block' as you trained it. If you read more of Dan's article he says, _"I doubt I could execute a full classical hiki uke against a jab, or probably any basic block against a realistic attack. However basic blocks are necessary tools to gaining the ability to execute smaller deflections with the same internal 'feel'."
_
Now you might be a much better martial artist than Dan but I am prepared to put myself in the same boat as him. I will deflect instinctively as I have trained for over 20 years but it will be the first part of the technique that is doing the protecting, not the second more visible part. That will be counter attacking in one form or other.

Now, your principle art is TKD and that has its roots in Shotokan.  Shotokan was the original 'sanitised' karate that was designed to go into schools and universities. Some Shotokan teachers are teaching more RB techniques but many are not. I wouldn't have a clue about what you are training in TKD but if you comment above means anything, it also 'says a lot'. You are free to practise blocks any way you see fit and if you can use them in real life, fine.   I am just presenting an alternative approach.
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> I'm glad you realise that all of this mistrust you have of TMA stems from the fact that you don't understand how to and/or have experienced training katas and forms effectively.



My mistrust of TMA stems from way more than the forms, though I feel that forms are definitely part of the problem.

Think about that school you and I have been talking about. What if I were new to the martial arts and wanted to learn to defend myself and I joined that school? I would spend ample amounts of time and money learning sub par martial arts. I would earn a black sash, and walk around thinking I could defend myself with sloppy praying mantis boxing.

That's just not right.

That sort of thing doesn't happen in Bjj or Judo. In those arts, if you're not doing the real deal, none of the techniques are going to work. For example, if I'm trying to do a Kesa Gatame on someone much larger than me, I need to do it right, or I'm not going to be able to hold them down. If I'm trying to do a rear naked choke on someone, I need to do it right, or the person isn't going to get choked out. If I'm trying to do an Uchi Mata, if I don't do it right I'm not going to be able to throw them. All of that can be done in class against a fully resisting opponent. So I know almost instantly if I'm doing something wrong from the safety of my school. That is the advantage that Bjj and Judo has over TMAs.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> My mistrust of TMA stems from way more than the forms, though I feel that forms are definitely part of the problem.
> 
> Think about that school you and I have been talking about. What if I were new to the martial arts and wanted to learn to defend myself and I joined that school? I would spend ample amounts of time and money learning sub par martial arts. I would earn a black sash, and walk around thinking I could defend myself with sloppy praying mantis boxing.
> 
> That's just not right.



I wholeheartedly agree - it isn't right. 

The problem some TMAs is the westernization of the training that these clubs are undertaking - which has been touched upon by others on this thread - and that most people realize that learning how to use something like Kung Fu effectively takes a hell of a lot of time and effort. This is unfortunately exploited by certain individuals who either believe that they are teaching proper Kung fu themselves (learned behaviour) or by people that are happy to churn out highly graded 'below par' students. These schools tend to grade purely on how good you can perform your set forms and how good you can demonstrate technique by walking up and down a hall - there may be some 'tip tappy' sparring thrown in there too. *Proper *kung fu schools will usually grade students on things like chi sau and application based testing - in addition to the set forms - because we realize that being able to perform a set really nice and being able to actually use the techniques are two different things. If you practice a set without intent or an idea of what the applications are or if you haven't trained with a partner enough to actually be able to use the techniques then you may as well be doing a funny dance, for all the good it will do.




> That sort of thing doesn't happen in Bjj or Judo.



If we are going to discuss this sensibly then you will need to leave your bias at the front door. You obviously have a short memory, remember that Bjj sparring you were laughing at a few pages back? That was presumably being taught by the BJJ Black Belt that you stated had been drafted into the club...

Granted, this sort of thing may not be as frequent in BJJ or Judo. 



> In those arts, if you're not doing the real deal, none of the techniques are going to work. For example, if I'm trying to do a Kesa Gatame on someone much larger than me, I need to do it right, or I'm not going to be able to hold them down. If I'm trying to do a rear naked choke on someone, I need to do it right, or the person isn't going to get choked out. If I'm trying to do an Uchi Mata, if I don't do it right I'm not going to be able to throw them. All of that can be done in class against a fully resisting opponent. So I know almost instantly if I'm doing something wrong from the safety of my school. That is the advantage that Bjj and Judo has over TMAs.



I fear that you are far too blinkered to ever discuss this rationally.

It is the training methods adopted by schools claiming to teach TMAs that is the problem, not the art itself. Just last night we were doing some of the wrist and elbow locks/manipulation with a partner that we have in our system and it wasn't working for me because I wasn't doing it right either. Half an hour later, with a bit of practice and modified technique low and behold the techniques suddenly work and I have control of the person in front of me - because if they didn't move the way I wanted them to then the pain intensifies and they are going to injure themselves. That right there is an example of how TMAs should be taught.

Have a free 45 mins and want to learn a little about Praying Mantis Kung Fu, watch this - it is a tv program called Kung Fu Quest.


----------



## RTKDCMB

It seems I have misinterpreted what you were trying to say, my apologies.



K-man said:


> I didn't say that at all. Uke as they should be performed to be technically correct utilise both hands or arms except possibly Uchi Uke. When the students go marching up and down practising those techniques they generally perform then correctly. Now pair them up and they promptly forget they have two arms and do one arm 'blocks'. IMO that is where they go wrong. When my students do that the first hand deflects and the second hand does whatever it is that the exercise requires, whether that be control or strike. So I'll quote Dan Djurdjevic's article that *Kframe* linked, "
> 
> When you opponent is inside striking range no matter how much you have trained you will not perform a 'block' as you trained it. If you read more of Dan's article he says, _"I doubt I could execute a full classical hiki uke against a jab, or probably any basic block against a realistic attack. However basic blocks are necessary tools to gaining the ability to execute smaller deflections with the same internal 'feel'._



I completely agree with all of the above, the basic technique has to be learned correctly and then modified for the situation. A basic low section block for example would be practiced in basics during line work with the non-blocking hand returning to the hip. But when used in sparring or in a real attack both hands would be in a guarding position the blocking hand will block, the non-blocking hand will be stay there and the basic body movement will be the same as in the basics, not just moving one hand. I had to use that once in a real situation many years ago and it saved me from getting kicked in the groin and it felt quite natural to do so.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> My mistrust of TMA stems from way more than the forms, though I feel that forms are definitely part of the problem.
> 
> Think about that school you and I have been talking about. What if I were new to the martial arts and wanted to learn to defend myself and I joined that school? I would spend ample amounts of time and money learning sub par martial arts. I would earn a black sash, and walk around thinking I could defend myself with sloppy praying mantis boxing.
> 
> That's just not right.



That's why it pays to shop around until you find a good school.



Hanzou said:


> That sort of thing doesn't happen in Bjj or Judo. In those arts, if you're not doing the real deal, none of the techniques are going to work. For example, if I'm trying to do a Kesa Gatame on someone much larger than me, I need to do it right, or I'm not going to be able to hold them down. If I'm trying to do a rear naked choke on someone, I need to do it right, or the person isn't going to get choked out. If I'm trying to do an Uchi Mata, if I don't do it right I'm not going to be able to throw them. All of that can be done in class against a fully resisting opponent. So I know almost instantly if I'm doing something wrong from the safety of my school. That is the advantage that Bjj and Judo has over TMAs.



In a good TMA school if you are not doing something properly you will know. If your kick is no good then it will not have power when you kick the pads and you will be corrected on it until it does and beyond. If you can't block properly and don't have good defences then attacks will get through. If you are practicing releases from holds and throws and you do them wrong they will not work. If you are in a bad school you may not know or care if you are doing it wrong.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> If we are going to discuss this sensibly then you will need to leave your bias at the front door. You obviously have a short memory, remember that Bjj sparring you were laughing at a few pages back? That was presumably being taught by the BJJ Black Belt that you stated had been drafted into the club...



Bjj sparring isn't done standing up. Bjj sparring begins at most on the knees, and is entirely fought on the ground. You also don't wear headgear and gloves when you spar in Bjj, there's no need for it. The sparring I posted was Kung Fu (or Sansho) based.



> Granted, this sort of thing may not be as frequent in BJJ or Judo.



Bjj and Judo don't lend themselves well to that sort of thing. Both arts are highly combative to the point of making it very difficult for a fraud to come in and teach a bunch of BS. It also doesn't help that wrestlers, street fighters, and other types constantly steam into those schools to test the art out. Also everyone's fondest dream is to submit a black belt, and if you're a black belt constantly getting subbed by white belts, or clowns off the street, you're going to lose students fast. In short, you have to know how to fight to be taken seriously as a Bjj or a Judo instructor.



> It is the training methods adopted by schools claiming to teach TMAs that is the problem, not the art itself. Just last night we were doing some of the wrist and elbow locks/manipulation with a partner that we have in our system and it wasn't working for me because I wasn't doing it right either. Half an hour later, with a bit of practice and modified technique low and behold the techniques suddenly work and I have control of the person in front of me - because if they didn't move the way I wanted them to then the pain intensifies and they are going to injure themselves. That right there is an example of how TMAs should be taught.



Yes, but how are you testing that joint lock out? Are you doing partner drills, or are you guys both going full blast, exerting all of your energy and force into the blows and the counter locks? If the lock you're doing doesn't work, do you immeadiately transition into a strike or another lock? 

We do. Constantly.



> Have a free 45 mins and want to learn a little about Praying Mantis Kung Fu, watch this - it is a tv program called Kung Fu Quest.




Sure, I'm always down to watch some Martial Arts stuff.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Yes, but how are you testing that joint lock out? Are you doing partner drills, or are you guys both going full blast, exerting all of your energy and force into the blows and the counter locks? If the lock you're doing doesn't work, do you immeadiately transition into a strike or another lock?
> 
> We do. Constantly.



When you do a Kimoura or an arm bar do you do it full force or stop when they tap out? TMA joint locks are not designed for submissions, they are designed to destroy and incapacitate and you can't practice that with full force without injuring your training partner. If I put someone in a wrist/arm lock I don't have to break their arm to know it will work. As I am sure Mr doo will tell you, yes in a TMA that is taught properly you will be taught to immediately transition to a strike if the lock doesn't work and often you will strike before applying the hold.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Bjj sparring isn't done standing up. Bjj sparring begins at most on the knees, and is entirely fought on the ground. You also don't wear headgear and gloves when you spar in Bjj, there's no need for it. The sparring I posted was Kung Fu (or Sansho) based.



Ah, but how many street fights do you see starting on knees - hardly training for the 'real world' is it? 

Fair enough, but they WERE wearing GIs and immediately went looking to grapple, so I thought it was fair to assume that this was BJJ based. 



> Bjj and Judo don't lend themselves well to that sort of thing. Both arts are highly combative to the point of making it very difficult for a fraud to come in and teach a bunch of BS. It also doesn't help that wrestlers, street fighters, and other types constantly steam into those schools to test the art out. Also everyone's fondest dream is to submit a black belt, and if you're a black belt constantly getting subbed by white belts, or clowns off the street, you're going to lose students fast. In short, you have to know how to fight to be taken seriously as a Bjj or a Judo instructor.



The lack of competitiveness in TMA clubs CAN lead to poor quality students - from good and bad clubs. Bad clubs; we've been over. Good clubs; in the TMAs I've trained there certainly is a varying degree of commitment and drive shown by students where on one hand you have student A (me!) who gets up at 6:00 this morning so that I can fit two hours training in prior to University and student B who trains hard only once/twice per week. If Student B was getting their *** handed to them in training every week then they might not last very long. It will happen when they are paired up with someone like Student A for sparring but probably less than a club training in a competition style. 




> Yes, but how are you testing that joint lock out? Are you doing partner drills, or are you guys both going full blast, exerting all of your energy and force into the blows and the counter locks? If the lock you're doing doesn't work, do you immeadiately transition into a strike or another lock?
> 
> We do. Constantly.



We're not usually going full blast no, but we do resist the lock that our partner is trying to put us in. As for flowing and chaining techniques together (whether they succeed or not); Yes, all the time man! Chain theory! THIS is what our style of northern mantis is all about.



> Sure, I'm always down to watch some Martial Arts stuff.



Cool. 

I guess if you are disregarding TMAs as a whole then you should know a bit about some of the styles your grouping together under that umbrella. Kung Fu quest is made up of fighters from all walks of life (some MMA) training in traditional Kung Fu styles solid for a couple of weeks and contemplating on what they've learned. There is some light (sometimes bare knuckle) sparring throughout the series - cant remember if the Northern/Southern Mantis stuff is that good - probably better skill wise than YouTube videos though if my memory serves me well. 

I quite like the Karate guy taking up Wing Chun in the WC episode, quite fun (for someone like me) to watch,


----------



## Steve

first, I just want to be on record as saying that I don't really care what anyone does for fun.  It seems like some misconceptions are being thrown around regarding BJJ, so I'll try to clear some of that up.  

If you want to train in Tai Chi, Karate or flying monkey soup style, I don't care.  Have fun.  Knock yourself out. 

First, BJJ is a traditional martial art.  It has roots in traditional japanese styles that are shared with many other modern styles.  As a distinct, unique style, it was developed in the early 1900's, and is as old as many modern martial arts styles and older than some, including  TKD, Okinawan Karate, modern Judo, Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, yang style Tai Chi, Chen style Tai Chi, San Shou...  and the list goes on.





RTKDCMB said:


> When you do a Kimoura or an arm bar do you do it full force or stop when they tap out?


Depends upon who I'm sparring with.  If I'm sparring with another purple belt or higher, then yes.  I wouldput the kimura on full force... until it is successfully defended or my opponent taps out.   The two aren't mutually exclusive.  You can spar full speed/full force AND keep your partner safe.





> TMA joint locks are not designed for submissions, they are designed to destroy and incapacitate and you can't practice that with full force without injuring your training partner.


I disagree.  Well, more accurately, whether a technique will work or not is different than whether you can apply it successfully or not.  If you don't ever do it "full force" then you do not know whether it will work _for you.  _


> If I put someone in a wrist/arm lock I don't have to break their arm to know it will work.


That's why your opponent should tap before their arm is broken.  In any grappling art, such as Judo or BJJ, the techniques are also capable of breaking bone or permanently damaging a joint.  So, while you don't have to break the joint to know whether a technique works, if you don't apply the techniques in real speed against a resisting opponent, you can't know whether you can set the technique up or apply it fully speed.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> There's a reason Judo supplanted classical Jujutsu in Japan for example, because the Judo guys wiped the floor with them.



I think Judo supplanted classical Jujutsu in Japan because it could easily be transformed into a sport and thus became more popular.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Steve said:


> first, I just want to be on record as saying that I don't really care what anyone does for fun ....
> 
> If you want to train in Tai Chi, Karate or flying monkey soup style, I don't care.  Have fun.  Knock yourself out.



Oh, a comment taking the piss, great thread introduction. Really, was there any need for that?



> First, BJJ is a traditional martial art.  It has roots in traditional japanese styles that are shared with many other modern styles.  As a distinct, unique style, it was developed in the early 1900's, and is as old as many modern martial arts styles and older than some, including  TKD, Okinawan Karate, modern Judo, Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, yang style Tai Chi, Chen style Tai Chi, San Shou...  and the list goes on.



Taijiquan is A LOT older. San Shou isn't traditional.


----------



## K-man

Steve said:


> First, BJJ is a traditional martial art.  It has roots in traditional japanese styles that are shared with many other modern styles.  As a distinct, unique style, it was developed in the early 1900's, and is as old as many modern martial arts styles and older than some, including  TKD, Okinawan Karate, modern Judo, Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, yang style Tai Chi, Chen style Tai Chi, San Shou...  and the list goes on..


Mmm! A bit of history here. Certainly BJJ has been around since about 1914 and was refined by the Gracie family in particular and, yes, it is older than TKD. If you are going back and equating BJJ to traditional jujutsu then yes it is as old but if you are talking of specifically BJJ then it. Is not as old as Okinawan Karate which began centuries ago and was refined by people like Matsumura in the early to mid 1800s and Higaonna about 1800. Yang style tai chi was early 1800s, Chen style, considerably older. Even Judo started back in the 1880s.

So let's just say BJJ has been around for a long time. Now, here is the interesting part. If, as you claim, BJJ is a TMA, and I am prepared to accept that, then someone here has been actually arguing against himself.  
:hmm:


----------



## Steve

Dinkydoo said:


> Oh, a comment taking the piss, great thread introduction. Really, was there any need for that?


What does "taking the piss" mean?





> Taijiquan is A LOT older. San Shou isn't traditional.


Yang style tai chi is from the mid-1800s.  Right?  I wouldn't call that "A LOT" older.  This perpetual need to exaggerate is exactly what I was talking about.  

Point being that most modern styles, whether traditional or not, are relatively young, certainly younger than most realize.  And every style, whether traditional or not, has deeper roots.  Whether it's karate, tai chi, TKD, fencing, wrestling or whatever, the way WE do it isn't the way it was done centuries ago.  The best known form of kung fu is Wing Chun and the form most people train today goes back to Ip Man who died in 1972.

Also, every style has a culture.  Every style has traditions.  And every style trains and spars with rules.  If you don't think you are training with rules as rigid as any sport style, you are mistaken.   Your rules are simply different, just as your techniques are different.


----------



## Steve

K-man said:


> Mmm! A bit of history here. Certainly BJJ has been around since about 1914 and was refined by the Gracie family in particular and, yes, it is older than TKD. If you are going back and equating BJJ to traditional jujutsu then yes it is as old but if you are talking of specifically BJJ then it. Is not as old as Okinawan Karate which began centuries ago and was refined by people like Matsumura in the early to mid 1800s and Higaonna about 1800. Yang style tai chi was early 1800s, Chen style, considerably older. Even Judo started back in the 1880s.
> 
> So let's just say BJJ has been around for a long time. Now, here is the interesting part. If, as you claim, BJJ is a TMA, and I am prepared to accept that, then someone here has been actually arguing against himself.
> :hmm:


Modern Judo (post WWII) and BJJ are cousins, both derived from the judo/jujutsu taught in Japan in the late 1800s/early 1900s.  BJJ is, as they say, basically just judo.

But, Judo itself went through some pretty significant revisions and continues to evolve today.  Once again, the point being that the way we train today isn't the way they trained even 100 years ago.  And the only thing wrong with this, in my opinion, is when people don't acknowledge it.  

For whether it's "traditional" or not, I guess that depends upon how you define "TMA."  My position, if anything, is that I think the distinction is meaningless.


----------



## Steve

K-man said:


> Mmm! A bit of history here. Certainly BJJ has been around since about 1914 and was refined by the Gracie family in particular and, yes, it is older than TKD. If you are going back and equating BJJ to traditional jujutsu then yes it is as old but if you are talking of specifically BJJ then it. Is not as old as Okinawan Karate which began centuries ago and was refined by people like Matsumura in the early to mid 1800s and Higaonna about 1800. Yang style tai chi was early 1800s, Chen style, considerably older. Even Judo started back in the 1880s.
> 
> So let's just say BJJ has been around for a long time. Now, here is the interesting part. If, as you claim, BJJ is a TMA, and I am prepared to accept that, then someone here has been actually arguing against himself.
> :hmm:


FWIW, Isshinryu Karate was "founded" in the 1950s.  Kyokushin Karate was "founded" in the 1960s.  Wado ryu karate in the 1930s.  Shorin Ryu also in the 1930s.

Now, I'm not saying that they were invented from nothing at those times.  I am saying that these modern styles are derived from older styles, and that this is not really at all different than the history of modern TKD, Judo, BJJ or any other art.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Steve said:


> What does "taking the piss" mean?



Making fun of. 

Your opening statement in this thread was "making fun of" some TMAs.



> Yang style tai chi is from the mid-1800s.  Right?  I wouldn't call that "A LOT" older.  This perpetual need to exaggerate is exactly what I was talking about.



Yang style is, yes, but Taijiquan in general can be traced to a couple of hundred years prior to that. Yang is a derivative of original Taijiquan; its a great style. 



> Point being that most modern styles, whether traditional or not, are relatively young



Depends on your understanding if the art, I guess. 



> every style, whether traditional or not, has deeper roots.



True. 



> Whether it's karate, tai chi, TKD, fencing, wrestling or whatever, the way WE do it isn't the way it was done centuries ago.



Traditional arts taught by good schools IMO try to pass on the legacy and teaching methods of those who came before them. Styles do evolve but we need to remember that the people who developed Kung Fu (in particular) trained all day, most days. 



> The best known form of kung fu is Wing Chun and the form most people train today goes back to Ip Man who died in 1972.



Yip Man is probably the most well known teacher of the style to teach to the public (partially due to the movies) but the style's origins can be verified way further back than that.



> Also, every style has a culture.  Every style has traditions.  And every style trains and spars with rules.  If you don't think you are training with rules as rigid as any sport style, you are mistaken.   Your rules are simply different, just as your techniques are different.



No, we don't have "rules" but we do respect that you can't strike the groin, knee, elbow, throat, temple with much power before causing injury. So, instead of completely ignoring those striking points (like all competition styles do) we practice striking them within sets and against padded resistance during training (positioned appropriately, of course).


----------



## K-man

Steve said:


> FWIW, Isshinryu Karate was "founded" in the 1950s.  Kyokushin Karate was "founded" in the 1960s.  Wado ryu karate in the 1930s.  Shorin Ryu also in the 1930s.
> 
> Now, I'm not saying that they were invented from nothing at those times.  I am saying that these modern styles are derived from older styles, and that this is not really at all different than the history of modern TKD, Judo, BJJ or any other art.


Not wanting to get too involved in this but you did specify 'Okinawan' karate. 



> First, BJJ is a traditional martial art. It has roots in traditional japanese styles that are shared with many other modern styles. As a distinct, unique style, it was developed in the early 1900's, and is as old as many modern martial arts styles and older than some, including TKD, *Okinawan Karate*, modern Judo, Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, yang style Tai Chi, Chen style Tai Chi, San Shou... and the list goes on.



Kyokushin and Wado are Japanese styles. Isshin Ryu is the odd man out because it is a modern form now officially recognised in Okinawa as a traditional form along with Goju Ryu, Shorin Ryu and Uechi Ryu. FWIW, Goju Ryu and Shorin Ryu were 'named' in the 1930s, not founded. Prior to that most places trained without a label.
:asian:


----------



## Steve

Dinkydoo said:


> Making fun of.
> Your opening statement in this thread was "making fun of" some TMAs.


Not intended to make fun of anyone.  The point was that people train for a lot of reasons, and if you are happy with your training, have fun.  I don't personally care what you do, regardless of how odd it may look to me.  



> No, we don't have "rules" but we do respect that you can't strike the groin, knee, elbow, throat, temple with much power before causing injury. So, instead of completely ignoring those striking points (like all competition styles do) we practice striking them within sets and against padded resistance during training (positioned appropriately, of course).


Of course you have rules, whether you call them something else or not.  Unless you routinely destroy joints or kill people in your training, you train under a set of rules.  Your rules are different than other styles rules.  Your focus is different, and so your ruleset is different.  I think that there is some confusion in this thread about the actual definition of the term "rule."


----------



## Steve

K-man said:


> Not wanting to get too involved in this but you did specify 'Okinawan' karate.
> 
> 
> 
> Kyokushin and Wado are Japanese styles. Isshin Ryu is the odd man out because it is a modern form now officially recognised in Okinawa as a traditional form along with Goju Ryu, Shorin Ryu and Uechi Ryu. FWIW, Goju Ryu and Shorin Ryu were 'named' in the 1930s, not founded. Prior to that most places trained without a label.
> :asian:


I get what you're saying and appreciate the comments.  Do you think that if I walk into a modern Goju Ryu school, I will train exactly as they trained even 100 years ago?  I don't believe so.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> I think Judo supplanted classical Jujutsu in Japan because it could easily be transformed into a sport and thus became more popular.



Also because Judo defeated classical Jujitsu schools in 1886.

http://www.usjjf.org/articles/JuJitsuP3.htm

Judo's training methods proved to be superior to the training methods of classical Jujitsu.


----------



## K-man

Steve said:


> I get what you're saying and appreciate the comments.  Do you think that if I walk into a modern Goju Ryu school, I will train exactly as they trained even 100 years ago?  I don't believe so.


Hopefully, if you come to my school the answer would be yes. But in fairness, I don't teach what you see in most schools. The dog I have in this fight is really about how you define 'traditional'. If *Hanzou* had been less rigid in his definitions I could have agreed with what he was saying, wrt karate. That is exactly why I left the modern Japanese Goju system for the traditional Okinawan Goju practice some time back. That's not bagging the Japanese style, that's fine for what most people seem to want, and for those who wish to compete in tournaments.
:asian:


----------



## Dinkydoo

Steve said:


> Not intended to make fun of anyone.  The point was that people train for a lot of reasons, and if you are happy with your training, have fun.  I don't personally care what you do, regardless of how odd it may look to me.




You said:



Steve said:


> first, I just want to be on record as saying that I don't really care what anyone does for fun.  It seems like some misconceptions are being thrown around regarding BJJ, so I'll try to clear some of that up.
> 
> If you want to train in Tai Chi, Karate or flying monkey soup style, I don't care.  Have fun.  Knock yourself out.



That is really disrespectful, 

I mean, if I was training in a causal pastime like 'pogo stick', it might be more acceptable, but I'm training in a martial art here guys FFS, lets leave our arrogance out of the discussion.



> Of course you have rules, whether you call them something else or not.  Unless you routinely destroy joints or kill people in your training, you train under a set of rules.  Your rules are different than other styles rules.  Your focus is different, and so your ruleset is different.  I think that there is some confusion in this thread about the actual definition of the term "rule."



Just because we don't routinely destroy joints or bollocks doesn't mean that we don't train to do so. We literally have several sections of our set forms that end up in a groin, throat or temple strike, and you literally do not train to hit in that region of the body - presumably because you can't go "full force" in training. THAT is what we are defining as ''rules" within styles here.


----------



## Koshiki

Steve said:


> Of course you have rules, whether you call them something else or not.  Unless you routinely destroy joints or kill people in your training, you train under a set of rules.  Your rules are different than other styles rules.  Your focus is different, and so your ruleset is different.  I think that there is some confusion in this thread about the actual definition of the term "rule."



Exactly. No rules, you quickly run out of training partners. I think what he was getting at was no specific rules, aside from, "try not to break each other." More of a guideline, than a code of rules, really. It's all the same, really. 

Sport MA says, "don't do this, this, and this," and thereby avoids most really awful injuries. Specific rules/guidelines. 

Self Defense MA says, "Do whatever you want, but use control and judgement," and thereby avoids most really awful injuries. General rule/guideline.

I think it's fair then, to say that Sports have rules, and self-defense based training has guidelines. But they're both really the same thing. There's also a great deal of overlap between what is sport and what is self-defense. They're almost the same thing, in many cases. Which is why arguing that one or the other is the more effective becomes so silly...


----------



## Steve

Dinkydoo said:


> You said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is really disrespectful,
> 
> I mean, if I was training in a causal pastime like 'pogo stick', it might be more acceptable, but I'm training in a martial art here guys FFS, lets leave our arrogance out of the discussion.


I have already explained that it was not intended to be disrespectful. You've made it clear that you took offense.  I think I've made it clear that no offense was intended.   I'm not sure what you're looking for here other than to bicker.  

Funny aside (funny to me, at least).  I have always found the use of the royal "we" a little overbearing, unless you're the Queen.  That you used it when discussing arrogance made me chuckle.  So, "we" will try to keep "our" arrogance out of it, if "we" will.





> Just because we don't routinely destroy joints or bollocks doesn't mean that we don't train to do so.


No, but it does clearly mean that you train under a set of rules.  


> We literally have several sections of our set forms that end up in a groin, throat or temple strike, and you literally do not train to hit in that region of the body - presumably because you can't go "full force" in training. THAT is what we are defining as ''rules" within styles here.


The first definition of the term "rule" in the Oxford dictionary pretty much lays it out:  one of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity or sphere.

The rules you train under are different from the rules that I train under, but that you train with rules is really not in question.  You do.  Everyone does, otherwise everyone would only train once and then be dead or permanently maimed.  In order to make training safe, there are rules.


----------



## Steve

Zack Cart said:


> Exactly. No rules, you quickly run out of training partners. I think what he was getting at was no specific rules, aside from, "try not to break each other." More of a guideline, than a code of rules, really. It's all the same, really.
> 
> Sport MA says, "don't do this, this, and this," and thereby avoids most really awful injuries. Specific rules/guidelines.
> 
> Self Defense MA says, "Do whatever you want, but use control and judgement," and thereby avoids most really awful injuries. General rule/guideline.
> 
> I think it's fair then, to say that Sports have rules, and self-defense based training has guidelines. But they're both really the same thing. There's also a great deal of overlap between what is sport and what is self-defense. They're almost the same thing, in many cases. Which is why arguing that one or the other is the more effective becomes so silly...


I appreciate the comments, but I think I'd say that self defense schools have rules as strict and well defined as any sport school.  When you train full contact to the groin, do you wear a cup?  Do you wear padding of some kind.  

You mention that you use control when sparring.  Is there a time when it's okay to spar without control? 

When you are training a technique that you know is dangerous to a particular joint, do you ever break the joint?  Is there ever a time when it's okay to break a training partner's wrist?  

Those are rules.

What I think you guys are getting hung up with is that some styles have created a formalized, competitive ruleset and some have not.  But rules are rules.


----------



## Hanzou

Zack Cart said:


> Exactly. No rules, you quickly run out of training partners. I think what he was getting at was no specific rules, aside from, "try not to break each other." More of a guideline, than a code of rules, really. It's all the same, really.
> 
> Sport MA says, "don't do this, this, and this," and thereby avoids most really awful injuries. Specific rules/guidelines.
> 
> Self Defense MA says, "Do whatever you want, but use control and judgement," and thereby avoids most really awful injuries. General rule/guideline.
> 
> I think it's fair then, to say that Sports have rules, and self-defense based training has guidelines. But they're both really the same thing. There's also a great deal of overlap between what is sport and what is self-defense. They're almost the same thing, in many cases. Which is why arguing that one or the other is the more effective becomes so silly...



Effectiveness comes down to training methods.

Prime example;






Bad training methods.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Steve said:


> I have already explained that it was not intended to be disrespectful. You've made it clear that you took offense.  I think I've made it clear that no offense was intended.   I'm not sure what you're looking for here other than to bicker.



I could give you the whole logical reasoning why I found it disrespectful and why you might find it disrespectful if the shoe was on the other foot, but what's the point. You were purposefully making fun of certain TMAs and you know it. 



> Funny aside (funny to me, at least).  I have always found the use of the royal "we" a little overbearing, unless you're the Queen.
> That you used it when discussing arrogance made me chuckle.  So, we will try to keep our arrogance out of it, if we will



I don't believe I referred to myself in the tense of the 'royal' "we". 

...and I thought I was the one supposed to be looking for an argument....jeez. 



> .No, but it does clearly mean that you train under a set of rules.
> The first definition of the term "rule" in the Oxford dictionary pretty much lays it out:  one of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity or sphere.
> 
> The rules you train under are different from the rules that I train under, but that you train with rules is really not in question.  You do.  Everyone does, otherwise everyone would only train once and then be dead or permanently maimed.  In order to make training safe, there are rules.



So you do not differentiate between training how to use a technique, breaking someone's neck, and not actually having that technique within your curriculum....?

Ok, well, you're doing a grand job of representing Hanzou's side of the argument (so much so that I almost miss him) but I think I'll now bow out and leave you to discuss this amongst yourselves.


----------



## Steve

Dinkydoo said:


> I could give you the whole logical reasoning why I found it disrespectful and why you might find it disrespectful if the shoe was on the other foot, but what's the point. You were purposefully making fun of certain TMAs and you know it.


Okay.  Now you're presuming to tell me what I meant, and further, you're saying I was lying when I said I didn't mean offense.   Who's really being disrespectful here?  

My recommendation to you is to drop it.  Every response you make is more extreme than the last.  I don't know you and you don't know me, so if the shoe were on the other foot, I would take you at your word.  Taking people at their word is pretty important around here because misunderstandings happen ALL THE TIME.  It takes a thick skin and a willingness to accept that what someone wrote and what you read aren't always the same thing.  Misunderstandings are routine.  I'm not sure why you're carrying on about this.  



> So you do not differentiate between training how to use a technique, breaking someone's neck, and not actually having that technique within your curriculum....?


I'm not sure what you mean by this.  I'm pretty sure I differentiate between these things, but I'm not following you on what this has to do with whether you train under a rule set.





> Ok, well, you're doing a grand job of representing Hanzou's side of the argument (so much so that I almost miss him) but I think I'll now bow out and leave you to discuss this amongst yourselves.


There's part of the problem.  I have nothing against Hanzou (or you or anyone else in the thread) and I'm not trying to represent him.


----------



## jks9199

Whoa....  people have disagreed pretty politely so far.  Let's keep it that way before someone uninvolved has to take action, OK?


----------



## RTKDCMB

How old an art is has no bearing on how traditional it is.


----------



## Dirty Dog

RTKDCMB said:


> How old an art is has no bearing on how traditional it is.



Really? So in your mind, Ameri Do Te and Rex Kwan Do are as much traditional martial arts as, say, one of the Koryu arts?

Huh. Who'd a thunk it...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> How old an art is has no bearing on how traditional it is.





> *traditional*
> _adjective_
> * existing in or as part of a tradition; *long-established*:
> the traditional festivities of the Church year
> * produced, *done*, or used *in accordance with tradition:*
> a traditional fish soup
> **habitually done*, used, or found:
> the traditional drinks in the clubhouse
> (of a person or group) adhering to tradition, or to a particular tradition:
> http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/traditional


Respectfully, I do think the age of an art is important within the context of this discussion.
:asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB

Dirty Dog said:


> Ameri Do Te and Rex Kwan Do



So if they were conceived and practiced 200 years ago they would be traditional (and exist)?

A traditional art is defined in how it is practiced not how old it is. If two arts are conceived at exactly the same time and one is practiced by following traditions and one is not then you cannot distinguish them based on their age. Simple logic really.


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> So if they were conceived and practiced 200 years ago they would be traditional?
> 
> A traditional art is defined in how it is practiced not how old it is. If two arts are conceived at exactly the same time and one is practiced by following traditions and one is not then you cannot distinguish them based on their age. Simple logic really.


To a certain extent you are right. In Okinawa only four forms of karate are recognised as 'traditional'. Three of them are about one hundred years old and Isshin Ryu is only about sixty. Issin Ryu has only been accorded that recognition in the past few years. The criteria is that it is practised as it was when it started. So any style that started two hundred years ago would need to be principally the same now as it was then to be regarded as traditional.

But your distinction about age is not strictly true. If one follows tradition and one does not, only one is traditional, regardless of age. However, if these arts were only ten years old and in the same general grouping of arts a hundred years older, it would be hard to call either of them 'traditional' regardless as to how they are practised. 

It it really is like the proverbial question. How long is a piece of string? If an art develops from another art and continues to be practised in the same manner over a period of time, at what stage is it regarded as traditional? 
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> How old an art is has no bearing on how traditional it is.



My question is why would you train in a traditional method in the first place? I saw a program where two Americans went to Japan to learn the history of Jujitsu and Judo, and practiced at a classical jujitsu dojo where they had to practice break falling and getting thrown onto hard wooden floors. What's the purpose of that? To continue a method of training that was proven ineffective over a century ago by the founder of Judo?

When I see people practice those old arts, they just remind me of those people at the renaissance fairs who wear knight armor and swing around broadswords and maces.


----------



## RTKDCMB

K-man said:


> How long is a piece of string?



About that long.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> My question is why would you train in a traditional method in the first place?



Traditional methods become traditional because they work, otherwise they would not be around long enough to be traditional.



Hanzou said:


> I saw a program where two Americans went to Japan to learn the history of Jujitsu and Judo, and practiced at a classical jujitsu dojo where they had to practice break falling and getting thrown onto hard wooden floors. What's the purpose of that?



The purpose is to learn how to break fall properly on a real surface where it is going to hurt a bit (you seem to like realism in training don't you?) There is not likely going to be a mat under you when you get thrown around in the street. When I did Hapkido for a while we had to do all our rolls and breakfalls on hard wooden floors, you soon learn to do it properly.



Hanzou said:


> To continue a method of training that was *proven ineffective* over a century ago by the founder of Judo?



Only in your narrow mind. Go up to a classical jujitsu guy and ask him how effective you think his art is.



Hanzou said:


> When I see people practice those old arts, they just remind me of those  people at the renaissance fairs who wear knight armor and swing around  broadswords and maces.



When I see BJJ I think of this:






I am sure you see it like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0sWs7-Gkg0&


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Traditional methods become traditional because they work, otherwise they would not be around long enough to be traditional.



Traditional methods should only remain in place until a better method comes along. Judo, Aikido, and Bjj are better methods of training classical Jujitsu. 



> The purpose is to learn how to break fall properly on a real surface where it is going to hurt a bit (you seem to like realism in training don't you?) There is not likely going to be a mat under you when you get thrown around in the street. When I did Hapkido for a while we had to do all our rolls and breakfalls on hard wooden floors, you soon learn to do it properly.



And that's a pretty dumb way to train, because it leads to injury, or worse. Years of getting thrown to the mat will toughen you up just fine for landing on a harder surface. Again, Kano proved this over a century ago. People trying to replicate nonsense from old, disproven methods of training are simply thinking in a backwards fashion.





> Only in your narrow mind. Go up to a classical jujitsu guy and ask him how effective you think his art is.



LoL! I've rolled with plenty of classical JJ guys, even as a white belt. Lets just say it didn't go well for the classical JJ guys, because they're pretty bad at takedown defense, and have difficulty getting out of simple holds and locks on the ground. They simply lack the fluidity that randori from Judo and BJj develops.




> When I see BJJ I think of this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure you see it like this:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0sWs7-Gkg0&



LoL! That Simpsons vid was pretty funny. I got a big kick out of it.


----------



## Kframe

Yet one more reason I grow to hate bjj as the years go by.. The compete arrogance of a lot of its practitioners.. I quit mma/bjj because of the very ego you present Hanzou. Not everyone wants to be told everyday to get the sand out of there lady parts(even if your a guy... ) nor  do I want to deal with the constant need to dominate. Ego is why I HATE mma anymore. 

I don't see that level of arrogance in tma's. Hence, why if on the street you take me down, ill carve you up. Simple.


----------



## Dirty Dog

RTKDCMB said:


> So if they were conceived and practiced 200 years ago they would be traditional (and exist)?
> 
> A traditional art is defined in how it is practiced not how old it is. If two arts are conceived at exactly the same time and one is practiced by following traditions and one is not then you cannot distinguish them based on their age. Simple logic really.



An art that is 6 months old hasn't had time to develop traditions. 
Simple logic, really. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Dirty Dog said:


> An art that is 6 months old hasn't had time to develop traditions.
> Simple logic, really.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.



And how long does it take to develop traditions?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Traditional methods should only remain in place until a better method comes along. Judo, Aikido, and Bjj are better methods of training classical Jujitsu.



People always think they have found something better, people think a lot of things.



Hanzou said:


> And that's a pretty dumb way to train, because it leads to injury, or worse.



I turned out fine, the people who trained me turned out fine, and the people who trained them.



Hanzou said:


> Again, Kano proved this over a century ago. People trying to replicate nonsense from old, disproven methods of training are simply thinking in a backwards fashion.



Again only in your narrow mind.



Hanzou said:


> LoL! I've rolled with plenty of classical JJ guys, even as a white belt. Lets just say it didn't go well for the classical JJ guys, because they're pretty bad at takedown defense, and have difficulty getting out of simple holds and locks on the ground. They simply lack the fluidity that randori from Judo and BJj develops.



Without seeing their performance and knowing what and how they trained, their experience and the format of the rolling, means absolutely nothing. I have sparred with former kickboxers and had no trouble at all defending against them, still means nothing.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Bad training methods.



Finally something we can totally agree on 100%.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Also because Judo defeated classical Jujitsu schools in 1886.
> 
> http://www.usjjf.org/articles/JuJitsuP3.htm
> 
> Judo's training methods proved to be superior to the training methods of classical Jujitsu.



Taken from the web page:

In 1886?

According to Koizumi Gunji, the final score was nine victories and one draw for the Kodokan. Like the dates of the event mentioned above, this figure is also subject to some variation depending on the sources used. That the Kodokan was an overwhelming victor is beyond dispute.

In 1888;

*The rules also favored the Judo men.* There seems to have been no time limit. *The use of striking and kicking techniques known as atemi-waza and joint techniques called kansetsu-waza were prohibited, thereby drastically limiting the Jujitsu men. *Clean throws indicated victory, and this, too, *must have placed the Kodokan people at an advantage*. 

Were they the same rules? The article does not say.

And

*Can these tournaments really be called Kodokan Judo against Jujitsu; or were they merely Jujitsu matches where Kano had been able to secure the help of stronger practitioners?* And somewhat more curious, *why didn't Kano personally take part in any of the many bouts*?

So it doesn't actually *prove *anything.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> People always think they have found something better, people think a lot of things.



Yeah but in this case Kano applied scientific principles to spiritual mumbo jumbo and developed a more effective martial art in the process. He removed the crap that didn't work, and streamlined everything to benefit the practitioner, and make them more efficient in process. In short, Judo/Bjj is the car, and Classical Jj is the horse drawn carriage. Which is the better method of getting from A to B?





> I turned out fine, the people who trained me turned out fine, and the people who trained them.



It was still a dumb way to train. There's no logical reason to do something like that when there are far safer methods available.





> Again only in your narrow mind.



Better to have a narrow mind than being confined to a wheel chair because I was pretending to be a samurai warrior.

It reminds me of those clowns who do backyard wrestling.




> Without seeing their performance and knowing what and how they trained, their experience and the format of the rolling, means absolutely nothing. I have sparred with former kickboxers and had no trouble at all defending against them, still means nothing.



Format of the rolling? We just squared off and I took them down and subbed them. If you dont know how to stop a take down, you're going down. If you don't know how to counter a hold, you're not escaping the hold. If you don't know how to transition, you're screwed. If you try to punch me, or put your hands out, I'm going to break your arm or your shoulder. 

It's that simple. 

In the end, we're fundamentally doing the same thing. I'm simply utilizing a more modern form of Jujutsu. Again, the car vs the horse drawn carriage.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Taken from the web page:
> 
> In 1886?
> 
> According to Koizumi Gunji, the final score was nine victories and one draw for the Kodokan. Like the dates of the event mentioned above, this figure is also subject to some variation depending on the sources used. That the Kodokan was an overwhelming victor is beyond dispute.
> 
> In 1888;
> 
> *The rules also favored the Judo men.* There seems to have been no time limit. *The use of striking and kicking techniques known as atemi-waza and joint techniques called kansetsu-waza were prohibited, thereby drastically limiting the Jujitsu men. *Clean throws indicated victory, and this, too, *must have placed the Kodokan people at an advantage*.
> 
> Were they the same rules? The article does not say.
> 
> And
> 
> *Can these tournaments really be called Kodokan Judo against Jujitsu; or were they merely Jujitsu matches where Kano had been able to secure the help of stronger practitioners?* And somewhat more curious, *why didn't Kano personally take part in any of the many bouts*?
> 
> So it doesn't actually *prove *anything.




This page answers those questions;

http://www.bestjudo.com/article/1233/shiro-saigo-judos-secret-weapon

This part is especially potent;



> "Jigoro Kano 'stacked the deck' by using students who'd previously trained in Jujutsu".
> 
> 
> This is at least partially true, in the sense that many students of Kano had previous experience in various other arts, but completely misses the point. For example, it's well known that Shiro Saigo was studying Tenshin Shin'yo Ryu at the same dojo where Jigoro Kano was an assistant instructor. This was before Shiro Saigo started training exclusively under Jigoro Kano in what was to become Judo.
> 
> 
> Just as Jigoro Kano himself had studied both Tenshin Shin'yo Ryu, and Kito Ryu, before founding Judo.
> 
> 
> The point that is apparently being missed by some, is that the fact that some students of Kano had previous training doesn't explain anything. You still have Jujutsu students (that all train at one particular dojo) defeating other Jujutsu students.
> 
> 
> What was the difference between "Kano's Jujutsu" and the other styles of Jujutsu that allowed Kano's students to overwhelmingly defeat them?
> 
> 
> *In my opinion, it was the difference in training methods. Kano made a strict division between Jujutsu techniques that could be safely practiced at high speed and full power, and those techniques that could not. If they couldn't be practiced with full speed and power, he relegated them to Kata practice.
> 
> 
> Kano's students could concentrate on the relatively fewer techniques, and become much more proficient while keeping injuries to a minimum. During a discussion of this article at E-Budo.com, Joseph Svinth made the point that keeping injuries to a minimum is not a point to be glossed over. By keeping injuries down, the Kodokan Judoka could essentially multiply the time they spent practicing, as they were not recuperating from numerous injuries.*



Yet another reason why you should train on mats.


----------



## Mon Mon

Hanzou what do you get by debating on a message board how does it effect your training? You will do what you think is best just as others will do what they think is best this is fact. So what is the point of all this boredom?


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> So if they were conceived and practiced 200 years ago they would be traditional (and exist)?
> 
> A traditional art is defined in how it is practiced not how old it is. If two arts are conceived at exactly the same time and one is practiced by following traditions and one is not then you cannot distinguish them based on their age. Simple logic really.


Every art has its own culture and traditions.


----------



## Hanzou

Mon Mon said:


> Hanzou what do you get by debating on a message board how does it effect your training? You will do what you think is best just as others will do what they think is best this is fact. So what is the point of all this boredom?



I enjoy conversating with other martial artists, especially with people outside the MMA circle of styles.


----------



## Mon Mon

ok


----------



## Steve

Can we all agree that terms like "better" and "effective" are subjective?  When people use Simpson's cartoon clips to describe the art I enjoy, how can we have a constructive conversation?

I think that the term "traditional" is too vague.  I think many good points have been made on both sides.  As I said in my first post in the thread, do what you want.  If you enjoy it, go for it.  Just be self aware.  Be honest about what you're learning and what you're not learning.  

Is BJJ the be all and end all of self defense training?  Certainly not.   But I know what I know.  I know that I am reasonably fit and have a strong core.  I know that if I am taken to the ground by surprise, I am confident that I can get back up quickly, even if my opponent has some training.  I know that the techniques I practice work, and which ones I'm best at.  I know these things because of how I train.  

I chose BJJ because I like the traditions and the culture, and I really like that, because we don't punch or kick each other, we can spar at full speed.

So, does any of that make BJJ the best martial art?  It does to me.  If it didn't, I'd train in something else.  But, that's not relative to your art.  "Best" is subjective, and we all have different measures for it.  Best for me isn't the same as "best" for you.


----------



## Koshiki

Steve said:


> I appreciate the comments, but I think I'd say that self defense schools have rules as strict and well defined as any sport school.  When you train full contact to the groin, do you wear a cup?  Do you wear padding of some kind.



I don't actually wear a cup. Yeah, it hurts a lot sometimes. I've had enough bad experiences with cups making things hurt WORSE, that I kind of gave up on them.  What happens is that we DON'T train full contact to the groin. Or pretty much anywhere else. If you can train full contact with a certain technique to a specific target, it seems to me, that you have picked a fairly ineffective target. In terms of ending a fight as quickly as possible, that is. For example, straight punch to the abs? Sure, go full force. If it doesn't stop your sparring buddy, it likely won't stop other people, either.



Steve said:


> You mention that you use control when sparring. Is there a time when it's okay to spar without control?



No, there isn't. That's called trying to hurt each other, not sparring, and it's bad news for everyone involved. That's why that is our one rule. "Don't break your sparring buddy; you won't get a new one."



Steve said:


> When you are training a technique that you know is dangerous to a particular joint, do you ever break the joint? Is there ever a time when it's okay to break a training partner's wrist?



No. Obviously, there never is. There is rarely a time that it's ok to break ANYONE'S wrist.



Steve said:


> Those are rules.
> 
> What I think you guys are getting hung up with is that some styles have created a formalized, competitive ruleset and some have not. But rules are rules.



I know. I think, if you re-read the post that you quoted, you'll find that it doesn't say, "there are no rules." It says that Sport MAs have clearly defined lists of rules, and SD MAs have something like one general rule of "don't break each other." I then went on to say that they have the same end result, preventing most serious injuries, and that making a distinction between them is silly. Especially since there is a lot of overlap.

I think we agree on this point...

Finally, 
"So, does any of that make BJJ the best martial art? It does to me. If it didn't, I'd train in something else. But, that's not relative to your art. "Best" is subjective, and we all have different measures for it. Best for me isn't the same as "best" for you." -Steve.

Thank you for that. That is the agreement which SHOULD have been reached on page one. Which is where the thread should have ended. Kudos to Steve.


----------



## Hanzou

I agree that what is "best" is subjective, I disagree that what is "effective" is subjective.

For example, learning break falling on wooden floors and concrete isn't as effective as learning how to break fall on mats. 

I don't think that the problem is the art themselves, I think they're main issue is their training methods, and their inability to switch from a 16th century art for armored samurai warriors, to a 21st century art for modern people.

Kano already took care of that over 130 years ago. The problem is some folks _want_ to be Samurai (and Ninjas).


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I agree that what is "best" is subjective, I disagree that what is "effective" is subjective.
> 
> For example, learning break falling on wooden floors and concrete isn't as effective as learning how to break fall on mats.
> 
> I don't think that the problem is the art themselves, I think they're main issue is their training methods, and their inability to switch from a 16th century art for armored samurai warriors, to a 21st century art for modern people.
> 
> Kano already took care of that over 130 years ago. The problem is some folks _want_ to be Samurai (and Ninjas).


WHat arts taught to 16th century Armored warriors is still taught today in main stream schools?


----------



## Steve

Hanzou said:


> I agree that what is "best" is subjective, I disagree that what is "effective" is subjective.
> 
> For example, learning break falling on wooden floors and concrete isn't as effective as learning how to break fall on mats.


I apologize if you've explained this in the past, but could you define "effective" for me?  Also, could you explain why learning break falls on a wooden floor is less effective than on a mat?  





> I don't think that the problem is the art themselves, I think they're main issue is their training methods, and their inability to switch from a 16th century art for armored samurai warriors, to a 21st century art for modern people.
> 
> Kano already took care of that over 130 years ago. The problem is some folks _want_ to be Samurai (and Ninjas).


If someone wants to be a samurai, what's the problem?  It's not for me, that's for sure.  But some people don't like Whiskey, although I can't imagine why.


----------



## Hanzou

Steve said:


> I apologize if you've explained this in the past, but could you define "effective" for me?  Also, could you explain why learning break falls on a wooden floor is less effective than on a mat?



Effective: Capable of achieving the desired result.

Learning to fall on wooden floors is less effective because its more likely to cause injury. If you're injured,you can't train, reducing your ability to become proficient. If you get thrown to the floor six times and are injured, you're going to less skilled than a guy who got thrown six-hundred times and isn't injured. That detail was one of the keys to the Kodokan's victory over older styles of Jujutsu.



> If someone wants to be a samurai, what's the problem?  It's not for me, that's for sure.  But some people don't like Whiskey, although I can't imagine why.



I have no problem with it..... Until people start saying that their 600 year old style of MA is suited for modern times. Again, its like a guy walking around wearing medieval clothes, and carrying around a broadsword, saying that his style of medieval fighting is an effective form of self defense. We'd think such a person is a nut job, and we wouldn't take him seriously. 

However, when the exact same thing occurs with an Asian theme, people DO take it seriously.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> WHat arts taught to 16th century Armored warriors is still taught today in main stream schools?



Takenouchi Ryu for starters. Pretty sure they claim to have been founded in 1532.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> I enjoy conversating with other martial artists, especially with people outside the MMA circle of styles.


But you don't seem to be open to anything anyone says that's not in agreement with your beliefs...  Do you also enjoy poking sticks into hornet's nests?

I don't think many people have said anything negative in this thread about BJJ, except that it's not the ultimate be-all and end-all of martial arts.  And it's NOT.  You don't seem to be at all open to the idea that there is a method and purpose to the training methods in many traditional martial arts.  You seem to be locked into this idea that rolling and sparring are the only ways to practice effectively -- but then you hold up Krav Maga as a good approach, since it's eclectic.  Most Krav Maga limits sparring...  they do extensive partner work and application, but I'm not aware of much sparring.  (In the Krav Maga World Wide's LE program, they do not spar.  In fact, free sparring is not something you see in most LE DT training...)


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Takenouchi Ryu for starters. Pretty sure they claim to have been founded in 1532.


I said main stream that's not main stream I cant even find a school that teaches that around here


----------



## Hanzou

jks9199 said:


> But you don't seem to be open to anything anyone says that's not in agreement with your beliefs...  Do you also enjoy poking sticks into hornet's nests?



I'm merely being honest. It's not my intention to make people upset.



> I don't think many people have said anything negative in this thread about BJJ, except that it's not the ultimate be-all and end-all of martial arts.  And it's NOT.  You don't seem to be at all open to the idea that there is a method and purpose to the training methods in many traditional martial arts.  You seem to be locked into this idea that rolling and sparring are the only ways to practice effectively


 
Well to be fair many in this thread used the silly argument that Bjj is a sport, and then proceeded to use the sport vs. non-sport line. You know, "my art isn't a sport so I can grab your junk, or bite your eyes out" kind of deal.



> -- but then you hold up Krav Maga as a good approach, since it's eclectic.  Most Krav Maga limits sparring...  they do extensive partner work and application, but I'm not aware of much sparring.  (In the Krav Maga World Wide's LE program, they do not spar.  In fact, free sparring is not something you see in most LE DT training...)



When did I say anything about Krav Maga?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> I said main stream that's not main stream I cant even find a school that teaches that around here



I don't see what it being mainstream has much to do with anything. The point is you got people who are pretty much doing the Japanese equivalent of renaissance festivals.

Also Ninjutsu is pretty mainstream.


----------



## K-man

jks9199 said:


> But you don't seem to be open to anything anyone says that's not in agreement with your beliefs...  Do you also enjoy poking sticks into hornet's nests?
> 
> ... as he has done on other forums.
> 
> I don't think many people have said anything negative in this thread about BJJ, except that it's not the ultimate be-all and end-all of martial arts.  And it's NOT.  You don't seem to be at all open to the idea that there is a method and purpose to the training methods in many traditional martial arts.
> 
> You seem to be locked into this idea that rolling and sparring are the only ways to practice effectively -- but then you hold up Krav Maga as a good approach, since it's eclectic.  Most Krav Maga limits sparring...  they do extensive partner work and application, but I'm not aware of much sparring.  (In the Krav Maga World Wide's LE program, they do not spar.  In fact, free sparring is not something you see in most LE DT training...)


In KM we don't have any free sparring as such. All sparring is done in response to an attack or threat, either with weapon or without. OMG, I just realised. KM must be another crap art because we don't demonstrate our ability in competition!
 :asian:


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I don't see what it being mainstream has much to do with anything. The point is you got people who are pretty much doing the Japanese equivalent of renaissance festivals.
> 
> Also Ninjutsu is pretty mainstream.


Because your claim was that Traditional martial arts was not effective  then you use obscure examples that either don't exist or are very limited in scope to prove the point.  You ignore all main stream Karate styles Like Goju Ryu, Shotokan, Isshin Ryu, Wado Ryu, ect. because they hurt your point.   So Yes Main stream has a lot to do with it. 


 Are you saying Ninjutsu in not effective for self defense?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Because your claim was that Traditional martial arts was not effective  then you use obscure examples that either don't exist or are very limited in scope to prove the point.  You ignore all main stream Karate styles Like Goju Ryu, Shotokan, Isshin Ryu, Wado Ryu, ect. because they hurt your point.   So Yes Main stream has a lot to do with it.



Well, I didn't bring up Karate because I was talking about classical Jujitsu versus modern Jujitsu (Judo/Bjj). And yeah, Takenouchi-Ryu certainly does exist, and there a few schools in the Japan, US, and Europe.



> Are you saying Ninjutsu in not effective for self defense?



Let's just put it this way; If I had to send my daughter to a martial art school to learn self defense, it wouldn't be a Ninjutsu school. Additionally, if someone asked me if they should take up Ninjutsu for self defense, I would recommend against it. 

That said, if people out there enjoy the art, more power to them. I wish them nothing but the best in their training.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Well, I didn't bring up Karate because I was talking about classical Jujitsu versus modern Jujitsu (Judo/Bjj). And yeah, Takenouchi-Ryu certainly does exist, and there a few schools in the Japan, US, and Europe.



Again cherry picking a style with "a few Schools" to fit your point yet you ignore main stream martial arts that hurt your argument.



> Let's just put it this way; If I had to send my daughter to a martial art school to learn self defense, it wouldn't be a Ninjutsu school. Additionally, if someone asked me if they should take up Ninjutsu for self defense, I would recommend against it.


And you didn't answer the question.  Is it effective for self defense?  I didn't ask if your daughter wanted to learn.  I teach my daughter to shoot guns for self defense.


> That said, if people out there enjoy the art, more power to them. I wish them nothing but the best in their training.


yet you feel the need to bash them at every post?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Again cherry picking a style with "a few Schools" to fit your point yet you ignore main stream martial arts that hurt your argument.



I was answering your question about Samurai arts still being practiced today. Karate is not a Samurai art, so why would I mention them?



> And you didn't answer the question.  Is it effective for self defense?



Not in my opinion.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I was answering your question about Samurai arts still being practiced today. Karate is not a Samurai art, so why would I mention them?


Earlier you were bashing Okinawan martial arts, then Kung Fu and now who knows so I guess its hard to keep track with you.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> I'm merely being honest. It's not my intention to make people upset.
> 
> 
> 
> Well to be fair many in this thread used the silly argument that Bjj is a sport, and then proceeded to use the sport vs. non-sport line. You know, "my art isn't a sport so I can grab your junk, or bite your eyes out" kind of deal.
> 
> 
> 
> When did I say anything about Krav Maga?



I thought I recalled your mention of Krav Maga; I may well be wrong.  Things do blend in my head sometime...

I'm going to ask a blunt question: do you have any real world experience with violence?  As in cop, bouncer, or the like?   BJJ has some good things for self defense -- and there's an entire self defense curriculum within the art apart from the sport side.  BUT when the Gracies tried to introduce a BJJ based LE Defensive Tactics program, they discovered they had to rethink a lot of it.  

And it's not a silly argument that there's a difference between sportive training and training for violence.  Read some of Marc MacYoung's stuff, or Rory Miller, or Geoff Thompson, or Peyton Quinn...  There's lots more I could list.  I like how Rory's summed up the four truths of violence: it's closer, faster, harder, and more unexpected than commonly believed.  But let me revisit a few of the key differences
Sport
Violence
Equivalence in opponents
Victim often weaker, smaller than assailant
Time to anticipate & prepare
No warning, often from behind
Engage, score, separate, re-engange
Once on, doesn't stop until it's OVER
Safe environment (mats, refs, rules)
Chaotic environment with unique dangers (concrete, broken glass, curbs...)
Fun
Piss your pants scary
Time for strategy and ploys like feints
If you have enough time for a feint or anything else -- you're in deep trouble!

This isn't meant to be exhaustive or exclusive.  Now, sparring and competition does have some pros for preparing for real violence.  It's unscripted.  If you go with heavy contact, you have to learn to keep going.  You have to learn to work a plan, and adapt to what happens.  Those are some good things -- but there are also some bad habits.  Beat the guy, stop -- and reengage?  In a real attack, you've now become an attacker, not a defender, and may well find yourself on the wrong side of the jail bars.

You've found traditional kata training flawed.  Let's talk a bit about that.  There are two types of things that fall under the kata or form definition.  One is a solo exercise, often designed to include/incorporate and engrain principles and tactics for responding to attacks.  (Some other types are memorials, some are pure artistic expression, some purely for health/conditioning.)  These kata are often codebooks or catalogs of tactics, strategies, and techniques.  Another type is a two-person exercise...  In these, the beginner does a rote exercise, fed an ideal attack to respond to.  But, as the student develops skill, competence, and confidence in the technique, their partner (usually a more senior student in a very traditional setting, but not exclusively) begins to vary the attack.  They take advantage of mistakes or errors in the performance of the technique, or lapses in the student's focus.  They become less or even almost unscripted.  Does this sound a lot like something you're familiar with?  

Then there are exercises like randori, which are more free form.


----------



## Hanzou

jks9199 said:


> I thought I recalled your mention of Krav Maga; I may well be wrong.  Things do blend in my head sometime...
> 
> I'm going to ask a blunt question: do you have any real world experience with violence?  As in cop, bouncer, or the like?   BJJ has some good things for self defense -- and there's an entire self defense curriculum within the art apart from the sport side.  BUT when the Gracies tried to introduce a BJJ based LE Defensive Tactics program, they discovered they had to rethink a lot of it.



I worked security for a couple of years. I was also a bouncer at a club for about 1.5  years. I currently teach emotional disturbed teenagers and young adults. So yes, I've been exposed to several incidences of real world violence.

Also isn't Bjj taught to the U.S. military and to police departments all over the country? Wouldn't that somewhat validate its effectiveness as a self defense system?



> This isn't meant to be exhaustive or exclusive.  Now, sparring and competition does have some pros for preparing for real violence.  It's unscripted.  If you go with heavy contact, you have to learn to keep going.  You have to learn to work a plan, and adapt to what happens.  Those are some good things -- but there are also some bad habits.  Beat the guy, stop -- and reengage?  In a real attack, you've now become an attacker, not a defender, and may well find yourself on the wrong side of the jail bars.



If I beat the guy, I'm choking him unconscious, so there's no need to re-engage. You put the clown to sleep, and wait for the cops to come. The police aren't going to do much if your attacker is taking a snooze, and you're co-operative.

Now if I'm bashing the guys face into the concrete, rip off his nuts, or bite him like some animal, yeah I'm probably going to prison. But why do all that when I could simply restrain, or put him to sleep? Bjj is a gentle, yet effective way to dispatch someone.



> You've found traditional kata training flawed.  Let's talk a bit about that.  There are two types of things that fall under the kata or form definition.  One is a solo exercise, often designed to include/incorporate and engrain principles and tactics for responding to attacks.  (Some other types are memorials, some are pure artistic expression, some purely for health/conditioning.)  These kata are often codebooks or catalogs of tactics, strategies, and techniques.  Another type is a two-person exercise...  In these, the beginner does a rote exercise, fed an ideal attack to respond to.  But, as the student develops skill, competence, and confidence in the technique, their partner (usually a more senior student in a very traditional setting, but not exclusively) begins to vary the attack.  They take advantage of mistakes or errors in the performance of the technique, or lapses in the student's focus.  They become less or even almost unscripted.  Does this sound a lot like something you're familiar with?
> 
> Then there are exercises like randori, which are more free form.



Randori is free form at full speed and full power. Randori is the advantage Judo and Bjj have over other styles because randori takes place constantly. Every time I've been in a Bjj or Judo class, they've done randori.

Though katas have their uses, for fighting purposes, they simply don't compare.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I worked security for a couple of years. I was also a bouncer at a club for about 1.5  years. I currently teach emotional disturbed teenagers and young adults. So yes, I've been exposed to several incidences of real world violence.


Not even close



> Also isn't Bjj taght to the U.S. military and to police departments all over the country? Wouldn't that somewhat validate its effectiveness as a self defense system?


Nope its not.  



> If I beat the guy, I'm choking him unconscious, so there's no need to re-engage. You put the clown to sleep, and wait for the cops to come. The police aren't going to do much if your attacker is taking a snooze, and you're co-operative.


How many real live fights have you been in where you have put someone to sleep?  Its not as easy as it is in class.  


> Now if I'm bashing the guys face into the concrete, rip off his nuts, or bite him like some animal, yeah I'm probably going to prison. But why do all that when I could simply restrain, or put him to sleep? Bjj is a gentle, yet effective way to dispatch someone.


So then if its so great why do MMA fighters bother learning anything else.  Juat learn BJJ and you win every time?  Ive been a police Defensive tact. Instructor for years why dont we teach cops to put people to sleep?  


> Randori is free form at full speed and full power. Randori is the advantage Judo and Bjj have over other styles because randori takes place constantly. Every time I've been in a Bjj or Judo class, they've done randori.


Its not full speed and power in class not like fighting in real life.  It's controlled simulation


> Though katas have their uses, for fighting purposes, they simply don't compare.


because your not doing them right


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> How many real live fights have you been in where you have put someone to sleep?  Its not as easy as it is in class.



Only once. It was somewhat easier than class because the guy didn't know how to defend against it.



> So then if its so great why do MMA fighters bother learning anything else.  Juat learn BJJ and you win every time?



That's exactly how it used to be, until everyone learned Bjj. 



> Its not full speed and power in class not like fighting in real life.  It's controlled simulation



Actually it is full speed and power in class, and honestly, I have yet to see a fist fight where two people didn't clinch up or try to wrestle each other to the ground.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Actually it is full speed and power in class, and honestly, I have yet to see a fist fight where two people didn't clinch up or try to wrestle each other to the ground.



I have.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I agree that what is "best" is subjective, I disagree that what is "effective" is subjective.
> 
> For example, learning break falling on wooden floors and concrete isn't as effective as learning how to break fall on mats.



In all the time in Hapkido where we were rolling and break falling on wooden floors there was not one single injury for anyone in the entire class. In my primary style we train in community centers and high school gyms and don't usually have the luxury of using mats. If we are doing ground defences or certain takedowns it is on a wooden floor and the break falls are performed on the wooden floor. Break falls are designed to minimize injuries by spreading the force evenly over a wider area such as the palm and forearm, the worse you will get is stinging fingers for a few minutes and that is nothing. If the person we are taking down is going to be hurt by hitting the ground we control their descent. If we are doing throws such as then basic hip throw we get then mats out and do it on them or we will do them outside the hall on the grass (weather permitting) and when we do beach training. If I wanted to use your reasoning I would ask how you think the break falls and going to the ground in BJJ is going to be effective on a real world hard surface if you only ever practice it on soft cushy mats?

As for the effectiveness being subjective thing, it depends on what you are naturally good at and how and what you have trained. You could probably use a flying armbar effectively, I could not, I could use a side kick effectively, you could not.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> If I beat the guy, I'm choking him unconscious, so there's no need to re-engage. You put the clown to sleep, and wait for the cops to come. The police aren't going to do much if your attacker is taking a snooze, and you're co-operative.



You could say exactly the same thing about knocking the guy out with a punch.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Well to be fair many in this thread used the silly argument that Bjj is a sport, and then proceeded to use the sport vs. non-sport line. You know, "my art isn't a sport so I can grab your junk, or bite your eyes out" kind of deal.



What is it with you sport guys with your fascination with nuts and eyes, :s90: you know there are a great many more targets and techniques that are used for self defence? Attacking to the groin and eye is not the sole defining difference between self defence and sport you know.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Format of the rolling? We just squared off and I took them down and subbed them. If you dont know how to stop a take down, you're going down. If you don't know how to counter a hold, you're not escaping the hold. If you don't know how to transition, you're screwed. If you try to punch me, or put your hands out, I'm going to break your arm or your shoulder.
> 
> It's that simple.
> 
> In the end, we're fundamentally doing the same thing. I'm simply utilizing a more modern form of Jujutsu. Again, the car vs the horse drawn carriage.



I know how to stop takedowns, counter holds and transition. If someone tried to do one of those double leg takedowns on me, unless they took me by surprise, they would probably end up with a knife hand to the back of the neck or base of the skull and it would be lights out and there would not be any grappling after that or some other horrible thing could happen. The very last thing I would want to do when sparring one of our black belts would be to try to grab them around the body as there would likely be a nasty accident. Going for one of those clinches could get you headbutted. Grabbing someone's arm when they are striking full speed is very difficult and if you don't know how to counter a strike or a kick then you are going to get seriously hurt. 

The moral of the story is that if you can't defend against a certain type of attack then you are vulnerable to that attack. If you get choked out you cannot strike and if you are knocked then you cannot grapple.


----------



## RTKDCMB

This thread is starting to get a bit boring for me and I am getting a headache banging my head against the Hanzou wall. I think I will move on, but I can't promise I wont be back at some stage in the future.


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> This thread is starting to get a bit boring for me and I am getting a headache banging my head against the Hanzou wall. I think I will move on, but I can't promise I won&#8217;t be back at some stage in the future.


Welcome to the club!


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou you completely ignored JKS statements about Paired kata and how it is performed. How convenient for you to ignore something that contradicts your anti traditional rant.  

Why are you still even debating this? You wont change anyones mind, nor will we change yours.. So why keep bashing people for the style of martial arts they do? Honestly your not making any friends here by pissing everyone off with every post you make. 

Weather you like it or not these traditional arts work. Most are not good for competition and that is fine. Id say I someone uses Ninjutsu or some other really old jap art to defend them selves then It worked just fine. 

I don't know about you but I rather much enjoy the weapons training.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> I know how to stop takedowns, counter holds and transition. If someone tried to do one of those double leg takedowns on me, unless they took me by surprise, they would probably end up with a knife hand to the back of the neck or base of the skull and it would be lights out and there would not be any grappling after that or some other horrible thing could happen. The very last thing I would want to do when sparring one of our black belts would be to try to grab them around the body as there would likely be a nasty accident. Going for one of those clinches could get you headbutted. Grabbing someone's arm when they are striking full speed is very difficult and if you don't know how to counter a strike or a kick then you are going to get seriously hurt.



LoL! Learn some real takedown defense man. None of that is real takedown defense.

I also wouldn't grab someone's arm when they're striking full speed. I don't need to. 



> The moral of the story is that if you can't defend against a certain type of attack then you are vulnerable to that attack. If you get choked out you cannot strike and if you are knocked then you cannot grapple.



You're not going to knock someone out by knife handing someone in the back of the neck while they're taking you down. I'm just going to let you know that now before you hurt yourself. Your target is small and moving, and you need to generate a significant amount of force in a small amount of space. Meanwhile, the grappler has a huge target, and needs to utilize a relatively small amount of force to take you down.

What's worse, if the grappler knows what he's doing, he's going to make it so that you won't see it coming, and won't be able to hit them at all. 

Im really surprised that MA schools still teach that nonsense to people. Just teach your students how to fight on their back, or on the ground. It's not that difficult.


----------



## RTKDCMB

I wasn't going to make another comment on this thread for a while but since you  insist on making ridiculous statements about the 'indefensible' DL  takedown.



Hanzou said:


> LoL! Learn some real takedown defense man. None of that is real takedown defense.
> 
> You're not going to knock someone out by knife handing someone in the back of the neck while they're taking you down. I'm just going to let you know that now before you hurt yourself. Your target is small and moving, and you need to generate a significant amount of force in a small amount of space. Meanwhile, the grappler has a huge target, and needs to utilize a relatively small amount of force to take you down.
> 
> 
> What's worse, if the grappler knows what he's doing, he's going to make it so that you won't see it coming, and won't be able to hit them at all.
> 
> Im really surprised that MA schools still teach that nonsense to people. Just teach your students how to fight on their back, or on the ground. It's not that difficult.



Try this, make yourself a knifehand and hit yourself gently on the base  of the skull, do it a bit harder if you want to, and take notice of the  effect. Now get someone to do it to you with full force, then when you  get out of the hospital, post a comment about it. "Hit a small moving  target", not a problem, do it all the time it's called accuracy and precision, "generate a significant amount of force" easily  done. Now for that specific technique (its just one of many for a  variety of situations, and one I'm willing to bet you've never even seen), it involves only a slight sideways movement to  work and it is designed for a shallow shoot (from someone standing in  front of you a meter or so away). Against a charge from a distance the  strike will impact on the ribs or kidneys (based on actual training  against someone charging full speed). Another against a full speed  charge is to grab the head with both hands, one on the chin, one on the  back of the head, before the grab takes hold, and twist the head, and  you will go down without much resistance and it is very fast and easy to do. If I did that hard and fast you would not be looking left and right for a while.

We are used to kicks and strikes and whole people coming at us fast and suddenly all the time, a shoot is nothing special. The students in my art know how to defend themselves on their back and on the ground, they just don't do it your way and for the same reasons.

Once again your complete lack of understanding about they way things work outside of your little fantasy world of your art is superior and nothing else works,confounds me.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> I wasn't going to make another comment on this thread for a while but since you  insist on making ridiculous statements about the 'indefensible' DL  takedown.



Who said anything about the DLT? There is more than one take down in every grappling art, and a grappler doesn't need to bull charge you to get you to the ground. All they need to do is get their hands on you.



> Try this, make yourself a knifehand and hit yourself gently on the base  of the skull, do it a bit harder if you want to, and take notice of the  effect. Now get someone to do it to you with full force, then when you  get out of the hospital, post a comment about it. "Hit a small moving  target", not a problem, do it all the time it's called accuracy and precision, "generate a significant amount of force" easily  done. Now for that specific technique (its just one of many for a  variety of situations, and one I'm willing to bet you've never even seen), it involves only a slight sideways movement to  work and it is designed for a shallow shoot (from someone standing in  front of you a meter or so away). Against a charge from a distance the  strike will impact on the ribs or kidneys (based on actual training  against someone charging full speed). Another against a full speed  charge is to grab the head with both hands, one on the chin, one on the  back of the head, before the grab takes hold, and twist the head, and  you will go down without much resistance and it is very fast and easy to do. If I did that hard and fast you would not be looking left and right for a while.



http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc2oFvJspHA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=Xc2oFvJspHA

Check out the Sambo guy's SLT into a leglock. If you think you can stop that with your knife hand attack, you're delusional. Not only is his neck and head tucked past your hip, but he's also lifting off your feet with complete control of your leg.




> We are used to kicks and strikes and whole people coming at us fast and suddenly all the time, a shoot is nothing special. The students in my art know how to defend themselves on their back and on the ground, they just don't do it your way and for the same reasons.




Considering that you're using knife hand attacks to the neck to stop takedowns, I'm inclined to agree that you don't do things the way we do.



> Once again your complete lack of understanding about they way things work outside of your little fantasy world of your art is superior and nothing else works,confounds me.



Actually if you check out that video, I felt that the Sambo guys td was WAY better than the Bjj guys td. The Bjj guys leglock was way too complex, and took way too long to lock in. The Sambo guy's td and lock was quick, and to the point.

That's why we cross train. 

In fact, you should practice that SLT and use it at your next Hapkido sparring practice. See how it goes. I think you're going to love the results.


----------



## K-man

I certainly hope a number of people get to watch this video because it illustrates perfectly the difference between reality based self defence and sport. 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc2oFvJspHA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=Xc2oFvJspHA


If any of you guys practise this sort of stuff keep it for competition. If you do it against a trained martial artist on the street you will end up a paraplegic and the experienced guys on this forum will know exactly what I mean. 
:asian:


----------



## Kframe

To be fair though RTKDCMB you do have to stop the initial push of the SLT/DLT. You have to have a good sprawl or atleast not get taken down. If you manage to not go down immediately then  your attack to his neck would work great. That is predicated on you stopping his forward push on your lower extremities during the takedown.  Its not the counter attack it self that is in doubt its everything that leads up to it. Here is a Famous video showing exactly what he and you are talking about.. 




That was a simple DLT. Yes he could have knife handed his neck, but he couldn't because he didn't stop the forward momentum first.  Again its not your back of neck attack that is in question, its weather or not you can do it as he is tackling you. Im sorry but I hate this troll as much as you do, but in this instance a sprawl is a better option. 



RTKDCMB said:


> I wasn't going to make another comment on this thread for a while but since you  insist on making ridiculous statements about the 'indefensible' DL  takedown.
> 
> 
> 
> Try this, make yourself a knifehand and hit yourself gently on the base  of the skull, do it a bit harder if you want to, and take notice of the  effect. Now get someone to do it to you with full force, then when you  get out of the hospital, post a comment about it. "Hit a small moving  target", not a problem, do it all the time it's called accuracy and precision, "generate a significant amount of force" easily  done. Now for that specific technique (its just one of many for a  variety of situations, and one I'm willing to bet you've never even seen), it involves only a slight sideways movement to  work and it is designed for a shallow shoot (from someone standing in  front of you a meter or so away). Against a charge from a distance the  strike will impact on the ribs or kidneys (based on actual training  against someone charging full speed). Another against a full speed  charge is to grab the head with both hands, one on the chin, one on the  back of the head, before the grab takes hold, and twist the head, and  you will go down without much resistance and it is very fast and easy to do. If I did that hard and fast you would not be looking left and right for a while.
> 
> We are used to kicks and strikes and whole people coming at us fast and suddenly all the time, a shoot is nothing special. The students in my art know how to defend themselves on their back and on the ground, they just don't do it your way and for the same reasons.
> 
> Once again your complete lack of understanding about they way things work outside of your little fantasy world of your art is superior and nothing else works,confounds me.


----------



## Kframe

Kman umm that video does not exist. Can you give us the cliffs notes?


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> Kman umm that video does not exist. Can you give us the cliffs notes?


Not sure what happened there but it should work now.
Just in case;
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc2oFvJspHA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=Xc2oFvJspHA
Cheers.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> To be fair though RTKDCMB you do have to stop the initial push of the SLT/DLT. You have to have a good sprawl or atleast not get taken down. If you manage to not go down immediately then  your attack to his neck would work great. That is predicated on you stopping his forward push on your lower extremities during the takedown.  Its not the counter attack it self that is in doubt its everything that leads up to it. Here is a Famous video showing exactly what he and you are talking about..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was a simple DLT. Yes he could have knife handed his neck, but he couldn't because he didn't stop the forward momentum first.  Again its not your back of neck attack that is in question, its weather or not you can do it as he is tackling you. Im sorry but I hate this troll as much as you do, but in this instance a sprawl is a better option.



Actually, the entire concept of karate chopping someone who is performing a take down on you is questionable. Your chances of success are minimal at best, and if you're against someone who knows what they're doing, your chances of doing anything other than pissing the guy off is pretty close to zero.

There's several ways to stop a takedown. A karate chop to the neck isn't one of them.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Anyone else thinking that if another man's face gets that close to my groin area in a combat situation, then they're going to get quite a powerful knee to the underside of their jaw?


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Anyone else thinking that if another man's face gets that close to my groin area in a combat situation, then they're going to get quite a powerful knee to the underside of their jaw?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Actually it is full speed and power in class, and honestly, I have yet to see a fist fight where two people didn't clinch up or try to wrestle each other to the ground.



1st your not going full speed and power in a class.  You may be going hard but not like you would be in a real fight for your life.  2nd How many real life fights have you seen?  That myth that every fight goes to the ground is well....a myth.  

Again you ignored the rest of my post.  If BJJ /Judo was the end all be all to self defense why dont we teach it to every cop on the street?  Why does any MMA fighter bother learning anything else?  Every art has its plus and minus.  There is no perfect art.  Which is why may people do cross train in different arts to be more well rounded because there is no perfect art.  Most people are smart enough to know that.  You enjoy BJJ and Judo thats great.  I suggest you add a striking art to be more rounded because there my be a time you cant or its not smart to go to the ground to choke a guy out. Id go as far as to say its almost never the best idea to go to the ground in a real fight, but nobody can tell you anything so you will probably ignore my advise.  I wish you the best and hope you never need to learn that lesson.  You like what you like and thats fine but to talk down to others styles because you dont understand them is rude and shows your ignorance.


----------



## K-man

I've started a separate thread to get away from the toxic nature of this one.

Samurai Spirit Karate

I don't expect all you guys to watch this as it is a lengthy video but for those interested in TMA it does show 'traditional' karate and explains a little as to why it is not used in competition.
:asian:


----------



## Mauthos

I've kept quiet with regard to this thread as felt there was a little bit of trolling and that no matter what anyone has said or what proof has been given Hanzo is just not going to change his opinion.  However, two things bug me with his arguments:

- Break falling on mats is better practice for 'real' world situations than a hard solid floor?  This I cannot agree with, yes I understand that being able to fall hundreds of times on a nice soft mat avoids injury and means you can practice more often, yet this style of training also breeds complacency.  I learnt break falls on a crash mat and once I was confident moved onto thin matts and then onto the wooden floors and in some training halls on concrete floors.  This has meant that I am more than confident to be thrown from any type of throw onto any surface and I will not end up hurt.  The flip side to this is that I also know that when thrown onto a mat I do not have to be as precise with my break fall and can relax a little knowing that the mat will take some of the power out of the fall.  Therefore I can be complacent and my break fall will not be as technically accurate as when I am thrown onto a hard surface.

This to me then proves that training break falls on a 'real' solid surface will instill better habits than falling onto a mat and ensure that your break falls maintain their effectiveness as you will not become complacent by relying on a soft surface to cushion the fall.  My opinion, but considering I have trained this way for over 20 years and have never sustained and injury from a break fall or failed a break fall, I think it works.

- Hanzo has stated when pushed with, what is the point in learning anything else in martial arts outside of BJJ if it is so effective, that in the early days of UFC this was proven and now people have to learn other styles as now everyone knows BJJ.  To a certain extent this is true, most fighters learn some level of BJJ to use in the ring, but not always in order to win a fight with it.  Chuck Liddell for example used it to stop people being able to take him down and at one point had the highly impressive record of the longest time he was held down on the ground being13 seconds.  Did this mean he used BJJ to win his fights?  Considering most of his wins came from KO/TKO I don't think BJJ contributed to his style of winning fights, but I will concede it helped him prevent people using their BJJ against him.

Now, Hanzo, as you respect the Gracies, this also brings me to Matt Hughe's fights over the last few years of his career.  Sure, I expect he has learnt some BJJ (I haven't checked to confirm this) but when he beat Royce it was his wrestling ability he used to take him down and his poor use of BJJ that meant he couldn't get the leverage onto the armbar to break Royce's arm as Royce was refusing to tap.  Therefore, he changed his game and used ground and pound to win the fight, he effectively showed that only knowing BJJ was not enough to win in the UFC anymore and I wouldn't say he particularly showed any good BJJ skill himself that led to the win.

More significantly is his defeat of Renzo Grazie.  Over the 3 rounds he only took Renzo down once maybe twice.  He effectively stood toe to toe with him and won by TKO due to strikes.  His leg kicks were that powerful he was knocking Renzo down who really couldn't answer the power.  It was a relatively dull fight, but again Matt Hughes showed no BJJ skills in this particular fight and barely used any of his wrestling pedigree to win and therefore if BJJ was all you needed, surely Renzo should have defeated Matt Hughes effectively by using BJJ against him, but no, he decided to stand toe to toe with him and was distinctly lacking and was unuable to utilise his BJJ when he tried to use it.

That is my opinion and no doubt if the rest of this thread is any indication you will disagree with this as well and still claim BJJ is the be all and end all (I won't mention going to the ground to choke someone out on the street in a street fight is dangerous as, you know, mates, kicking you in the head, stupidity of being on the ground when you have no idea who else could be around or want to get involved, other people better than me have tried to explain this to you) so take it or leave it.  This is all I will say in the matter.  

Oh and before you claim that I am just another TMArtist that knows nothing, for your information due to my military service and travelling around I have trained in many martial arts including BJJ, Thai Boxing etc and found that my more traditional styles (Tang Soo Do & Kenpo (although not that traditional really)) have helped me more in self defence situations than the MMA styles (oh, and yes I also still train in Kick Boxing and have for the past 20 years) and I have also been to jujitsu classes that were awful with instructors teaching techniques ineffectively.  So there are bad MMA style clubs out there just as there are bad TMA clubs, it is just something we can't escape from unfortunately.

My 2 pence.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Kframe said:


> To be fair though RTKDCMB you do have to stop the initial push of the SLT/DLT. You have to have a good sprawl or atleast not get taken down. If you manage to not go down immediately then  your attack to his neck would work great. That is predicated on you stopping his forward push on your lower extremities during the takedown.  Its not the counter attack it self that is in doubt its everything that leads up to it. Here is a Famous video showing exactly what he and you are talking about..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was a simple DLT. Yes he could have knife handed his neck, but he couldn't because he didn't stop the forward momentum first.  Again its not your back of neck attack that is in question, its weather or not you can do it as he is tackling you. Im sorry but I hate this troll as much as you do, but in this instance a sprawl is a better option.



I agree with you on those points, you do have to stop his forward momentum from forcing you backwards, and that is hard to do which is why the technique would not be used against a full speed charge. You would have to get out of the line of attack and if he was charging too fast the knife hand would impact too far down his body to be completely effective. The video below is the closest thing I could find on the technique in question.






Before anyone says so, I realize it is not being shown at full speed because he is only demonstrating.

The sprawl is a good option but it does leave you in a rather unbalanced position that could leave you briefly vulnerable to a second attacker.

As for the knee to the face, that would have the danger of the leg being caught, making it easier to take you down, you'd be better off sidestepping and using a front kick or turning (roundhouse) kick at the appropriate angle. If it is powerful enough it may still get through a grab attempt. Here is another video for a shallow shoot (ignore everything after the 4 second mark). by using the blocks you can stop him from grabbing you, using a forward stance (as long as the back leg is locked out straight, the back foot is at a 45 degree angle and flat on the floor it is very difficult to push you over), once the forward momentum is stopped, you can then knee him in his now wide open head.






It seems I could not stay away for long.

_Disclaimer - By 'you' I mean whoever is doing the takedown defence, not anyone in particular._


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


>




Not many non-professional fighters could withstand this and carry on with the takedown IMO: 






As soon as you lower yourself into going for the takedown a whole load of strikes are on.


----------



## Hanzou

Mauthos said:


> I've kept quiet with regard to this thread as felt there was a little bit of trolling and that no matter what anyone has said or what proof has been given Hanzo is just not going to change his opinion.  However, two things bug me with his arguments:
> 
> - Break falling on mats is better practice for 'real' world situations than a hard solid floor?  This I cannot agree with, yes I understand that being able to fall hundreds of times on a nice soft mat avoids injury and means you can practice more often, yet this style of training also breeds complacency.  I learnt break falls on a crash mat and once I was confident moved onto thin matts and then onto the wooden floors and in some training halls on concrete floors.  This has meant that I am more than confident to be thrown from any type of throw onto any surface and I will not end up hurt.  The flip side to this is that I also know that when thrown onto a mat I do not have to be as precise with my break fall and can relax a little knowing that the mat will take some of the power out of the fall.  Therefore I can be complacent and my break fall will not be as technically accurate as when I am thrown onto a hard surface.
> 
> This to me then proves that training break falls on a 'real' solid surface will instill better habits than falling onto a mat and ensure that your break falls maintain their effectiveness as you will not become complacent by relying on a soft surface to cushion the fall.  My opinion, but considering I have trained this way for over 20 years and have never sustained and injury from a break fall or failed a break fall, I think it works.




I said that practicing on mats is more effective than practicing on harder surfaces. Unless your mat is actually a mattress, I wouldn't consider a mat to be soft. It's definitely softer than wood or concrete, but landing on it still produces a significant level of force. To say that training on a mat breeds complacency is a pretty silly statement. People get injured or hurt practicing on mats all the time. Look at Judo players. Their bodies are beaten to heck and back by constant Judo throws on mats. You could literally kill someone by Judo throwing them on concrete.

As I stated before, Jigaro Kano proved this over 100 years ago. Training on mats instead of on harder surfaces is how Judo defeated classical Jujutsu.

The rest of your post is just silly. I never said that Bjj was be all end all. Nor did I say that the Gracie's are gods who couldn't be defeated. What is said was that Bjj dominated the UFC for a long time until people learned the game, and can now effectively fight fire with fire. In short, you can't win in the MMA arena without a background in Bjj. If you need proof of this, look at the woman's side of MMA, and Rhonda Rousey's dominance due to her combination of Bjj and Judo. Most women fighters tend to focus on kickboxing instead of Bjj and wrestling, and Rousey has capitalized on that fact.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Not many non-professional fighters could withstand this and carry on with the takedown IMO:
> 
> http://youtu.be/gz2lSgVtd2A
> 
> As soon as you lower yourself into going for the takedown a whole load of strikes are on.



LoL! You have to actually get the knee to connect. The grappler has a higher chance of taking you down, than you do of getting the knee. Additionally, DLT isn't the only type of takedown.

Still better than the karate chop to the back of the head.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> LoL! You have to actually get the knee to connect. The grappler has a higher chance of taking you down, than you do of getting the knee. Additionally, DLT isn't the only type of takedown.
> 
> Still better than the karate chop to the back of the head.



The grappler has a better chance of the takedown if the knee doesn't connect properly. If it does, then I'd say the opposite was true. The video is an example of what I was getting at about the DLT, the grappler, for a split second, is left wide open - a good, trained striker should have a reasonably high chance of connecting with a well timed strike. If the grappler has a lot of momentum and a chin of titanium then they could well steam through the strike and succeed with a takedown, but a DLT at that speed on concrete has a very high risk associated with - and that's before the other guy's mates decide to get involved - therefore making it, IMO, a silly strategy in a real self defence scenario.


----------



## Koshiki

RTKDCMB said:


> Try this, make yourself a knifehand and hit yourself gently on the base  of the skull, do it a bit harder if you want to, and take notice of the  effect. Now get someone to do it to you with full force, then when you  get out of the hospital, post a comment about it.



I realize this is sarcasm, but just to jump in here, as Hanzou, and likely others, tend to very much disbelieve and very much want to disprove anything said in favour of non MMA/BJJ training. DON'T try this. 
-It takes, relatively, a VERY small amount of focused force to severely damage the cervical vertebrae (top ones in your neck). Jarring these can, yes, cause a black out, but also a concussion. 
-Even if it doesn't knock you out, you will likely suffer from a permanently weakened neck and increased likelihood of serious spinal injury during rough activity. 
-Slightly more force can lead to full body paralysis, and if you are unlucky enough to crack a vertebra, the edges can easily sever a variety of nerves, some of the most common leading to instant fatality, or paralysis of the respiratory system, which can also be instantly fatal, or take a few, very unpleasant minutes.

Which is another reason where I try not to mess around with techniques that put the back of my neck in range, and rely on being fast enough to not get hit. I'd rather take a good solid blow almost anywhere else...



RTKDCMB said:


> This thread is starting to get a bit boring for me and I am getting a headache banging my head against the Hanzou wall. I think I will move on, but I can't promise I won&#8217;t be back at some stage in the future.



But yes. The thread is very tiring, at this point. Also, those in it seem to have a great deal more time to devote to online sparring than I do, so I cannot keep up at all. Each login shows me another 2-3 pages of posts. So, have fun, keep the peace, what's left of it, and please don't get your buddies to "karate chop" your cervical vertebrae!


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zack Cart said:


> I realize this is sarcasm, but just to jump in here, as Hanzou, and likely others, tend to very much disbelieve and very much want to disprove anything said in favour of non MMA/BJJ training. DON'T try this.
> -It takes, relatively, a VERY small amount of focused force to severely damage the cervical vertebrae (top ones in your neck). Jarring these can, yes, cause a black out, but also a concussion.
> -Even if it doesn't knock you out, you will likely suffer from a permanently weakened neck and increased likelihood of serious spinal injury during rough activity.
> -Slightly more force can lead to full body paralysis, and if you are unlucky enough to crack a vertebra, the edges can easily sever a variety of nerves, some of the most common leading to instant fatality, or paralysis of the respiratory system, which can also be instantly fatal, or take a few, very unpleasant minutes.
> 
> Which is another reason where I try not to mess around with techniques that put the back of my neck in range, and rely on being fast enough to not get hit. I'd rather take a good solid blow almost anywhere else...



The reason why I said it that way was to illustrate how dangerous that strike is, that's why I said to do it gently,after doing that you don't need to do it hard to guess how nasty it would be. A less severe option would be to strike the back of the neck on an angle with a bit less force.


----------



## Koshiki

RTKDCMB said:


> The reason why I said it that way was to illustrate how dangerous that strike is, that's why I said to do it gently,after doing that you don't need to do it hard to guess how nasty it would be. A less severe option would be to strike the back of the neck on an angle with a bit less force.



I know, I know. The hospital bit was especially telling! I just wanted to jump in to make it ABSOLUTELY clear to anyone reading that you were NOT exaggerating, and if anything, understating the effectiveness/danger of strikes here!


----------



## MJS

I've skimmed thru this thread but haven't posted until now.  Even though this is a topic that has been done to death, I'll jump in and offer my thoughts.  

BJJ and TMA can both benefit from each other.  IMO, they both tend to have their strong and weak areas.  Both train alive and resistance, although depending on the TMA school, that may not always be the case.  

Sparring vs full contact/street fights:  Some will say that sparring is bad, that instead, training should be done with just the SD techniques.  To each their own I suppose.  Me personally, I like sparring, as well as scenario training.  As for there being a difference between sparring in a club and sparring in a full contact setting...well, I'd say it would depend.  Last year, I fought my first semi knockdown Kyokushin tournament, and the 'feeling' was certainly different when we were out there. Of course we all wanted to win, so the intensity was really there.  OTOH, there have been some pretty hard and heavy sparring sessions in the dojo, as well as on belt exams.  

Going to the ground in a street fight/90% of all fights go to the ground.  Sorry, but that is a marketing claim by the Gracies, and their work with various LE agencies.  There is a time and place for everything, and while forming a circle in Brazil, with 2 people in the middle, while everyone else stands around watching...well, the odds of that happening in the US, are pretty slim.  Now, I'm not saying I hate BJJ.  Many of my friends train it on a regular basis and I've done my share of it as well, however, when the poop is hitting the fan, should I find myself on the ground, I'm going to do whatever I can, to get back to a standing position.  I'm not going to continue to roll around, looking for a sub.  That's foolish IMO.  

In the end, as I said, each have their pros and cons.  Odds are, you're never going to change someones point of view, so that said, just enjoy the training, for whatever reasons you want to train.


----------



## Kframe

MJS I know you say youll do what ever it takes to get back to your feet. I know you train bjj some times, but this for those that don't. You don't really know how to get back to your feet if your entangled with someone, till you actually grapple with someone. 

Im not advocating that TMA go out and adopt a full white to black ground system but they should start adding some to there training. Not the full curriculum but  say a set of teachings for the various positions. Mount/sidemount/halfguard/guard/back. Have a beginner a intermediate and a advanced curriculum.  It needs to be paired down. GJJ is some where north of 600+ techs. I say just focus on defending the main subs, and how to escape each of the positions. 

I fully support tma, but I hear it often how they will do what ever it takes to get back to your feet. If you don't know the proper way to trap and roll from mount or escape the other positions, your going to waste a lot of precious energy flailing futilely trying, while not accomplishing anything.

Trust me, before I had any training, I was in a few fights. I know how scary it is to be on the bottom of mount, trying desperately to escape and not getting anything done. Had I known then, the simple trap and roll, id have beat his ****. TMA often understate just how scary the ground really is.


----------



## James Kovacich

Kframe said:


> MJS I know you say youll do what ever it takes to get back to your feet. I know you train bjj some times, but this for those that don't. You don't really know how to get back to your feet if your entangled with someone, till you actually grapple with someone.
> 
> Im not advocating that TMA go out and adopt a full white to black ground system but they should start adding some to there training. Not the full curriculum but  say a set of teachings for the various positions. Mount/sidemount/halfguard/guard/back. Have a beginner a intermediate and a advanced curriculum.  It needs to be paired down. GJJ is some where north of 600+ techs. I say just focus on defending the main subs, and how to escape each of the positions.
> 
> I fully support tma, but I hear it often how they will do what ever it takes to get back to your feet. If you don't know the proper way to trap and roll from mount or escape the other positions, your going to waste a lot of precious energy flailing futilely trying, while not accomplishing anything.
> 
> Trust me, before I had any training, I was in a few fights. I know how scary it is to be on the bottom of mount, trying desperately to escape and not getting anything done. Had I known then, the simple trap and roll, id have beat his ****. TMA often understate just how scary the ground really is.



Your assuming that MJS hasn't trained BJJ and your assuming wrong. The same goes for for many many MAist. This discussion is old and has been going on since UFC1 in 1993. I trained BJJ for a few years (on my off days from regular training) starting in 1998 and one day I was on the mat and I said to myself "why am I still here?" I loved it but BJJ has many holes too and I got what I needed.

I don't disagree that all ranges need to be addressed. Just don't assume they are not. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Kframe

Jame you did not read my post. I was not addressing her. I specifically said, MJS I know your train bjj, this is for those that don't.. 

Why did you skip that?   Lastly I am not that little troll Hanzou. I am not attacking TMA. I merely stated that they need to start realistically addressing the basic ground positions so that its practitioners don't end up like fish out of water should they happen to fall down in a street altercation. I never once said they needed to add the entirety of bjj to the tma.. 

I am not assuming that all ranges are not addressed. You pointed out UFC 1. Guess what that proved that karate and tkd don't address the ground range. In my quest to find a good martial art to join since my mma gym died, I have visited just about every quality TMA in my area, and for a fact none of them did any ground survival. Sorry Your dojo may address it, but it is in the minority.

Yes some Maist do cross train, but a hell of a lot of them don't. That is why it needs to be addressed in there main class. Not all people have the luxury of training in more then one place.


----------



## James Kovacich

Kframe said:


> Jame you did not read my post. I was not addressing her. I specifically said, MJS I know your train bjj, this is for those that don't..
> 
> Why did you skip that?   Lastly I am not that little troll Hanzou. I am not attacking TMA. I merely stated that they need to start realistically addressing the basic ground positions so that its practitioners don't end up like fish out of water should they happen to fall down in a street altercation. I never once said they needed to add the entirety of bjj to the tma..
> 
> I am not assuming that all ranges are not addressed. You pointed out UFC 1. Guess what that proved that karate and tkd don't address the ground range. In my quest to find a good martial art to join since my mma gym died, I have visited just about every quality TMA in my area, and for a fact none of them did any ground survival. Sorry Your dojo may address it, but it is in the minority.
> 
> Yes some Maist do cross train, but a hell of a lot of them don't. That is why it needs to be addressed in there main class. Not all people have the luxury of training in more then one place.



Your right I did miss that and miss interpeted your words. 

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Going to the ground in a street fight/90% of all fights go to the ground.  Sorry, but that is a marketing claim by the Gracies, and their work with various LE agencies.  There is a time and place for everything, and while forming a circle in Brazil, with 2 people in the middle, while everyone else stands around watching...well, the odds of that happening in the US, are pretty slim.  Now, I'm not saying I hate BJJ.  Many of my friends train it on a regular basis and I've done my share of it as well, however, when the poop is hitting the fan, should I find myself on the ground, I'm going to do whatever I can, to get back to a standing position.  I'm not going to continue to roll around, looking for a sub.  That's foolish IMO.



This is a common misconception. Like Judo, Bjj teaches you have to take opponents to the ground and finish them once they get there. It also teaches you how to control the situation should you ever end up on the ground. Often times, all it takes is one solid takedown or throw, and the fights done, because while every fight doesn't go to the ground, almost every fight I've seen wound up in a clinching situation. One good Osoto Gari or Hip throw on the concrete, and the guy's going to be in a world of pain.

What a lot of people seem to misunderstand is that Bjj teaches you how to fight while on your back. That's one of the weakest positions, and for Bjj artists it's one of their strongest. Bjj teaches you how to lock, sweep, or completely reverse someone on top of you while on your back. That is invaluable for self defense, and most arts DON'T teach it.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> This is a common misconception. Like Judo, Bjj teaches you have to take opponents to the ground and finish them once they get there. It also teaches you how to control the situation should you ever end up on the ground. Often times, all it takes is one solid takedown or throw, and the fights done, because while every fight doesn't go to the ground, almost every fight I've seen wound up in a clinching situation. One good Osoto Gari or Hip throw on the concrete, and the guy's going to be in a world of pain.
> 
> What a lot of people seem to misunderstand is that Bjj teaches you how to fight while on your back. That's one of the weakest positions, and for Bjj artists it's one of their strongest. Bjj teaches you how to lock, sweep, or completely reverse someone on top of you while on your back. That is invaluable for self defense, and most arts DON'T teach it.



Except most fights you should not go to the ground even if you can fight on the ground.  Its just not smart.


----------



## Kframe

James Kovacich said:


> Your right I did miss that and miss interpeted your words.
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2



That's ok, I some times are not the clearest of typists with my intentions.  No harm no foul.  

Basically all im saying is, most people only have time for one school. That school should dedicate some time each class to basic position escapes and sub defense. That's the gist of my last two posts.


----------



## MJS

Kframe said:


> MJS I know you say youll do what ever it takes to get back to your feet. I know you train bjj some times, but this for those that don't. You don't really know how to get back to your feet if your entangled with someone, till you actually grapple with someone.
> 
> Im not advocating that TMA go out and adopt a full white to black ground system but they should start adding some to there training. Not the full curriculum but  say a set of teachings for the various positions. Mount/sidemount/halfguard/guard/back. Have a beginner a intermediate and a advanced curriculum.  It needs to be paired down. GJJ is some where north of 600+ techs. I say just focus on defending the main subs, and how to escape each of the positions.
> 
> I fully support tma, but I hear it often how they will do what ever it takes to get back to your feet. If you don't know the proper way to trap and roll from mount or escape the other positions, your going to waste a lot of precious energy flailing futilely trying, while not accomplishing anything.
> 
> Trust me, before I had any training, I was in a few fights. I know how scary it is to be on the bottom of mount, trying desperately to escape and not getting anything done. Had I known then, the simple trap and roll, id have beat his ****. TMA often understate just how scary the ground really is.



Oh I agree with you on this.  I remember the first time I rolled.  I was literally a fish out of water.  Couldn't escape anything.  Tried to use my arms to push and make some distance...sure, and I got arm locked. LOL!  Made the mistake of turning.  RNC. LOL!  

I remember when I first joined this forum.  I took so much crap from the pure Kenpo guys, because I was saying that Kenpo lacked grappling/ground work.  I was told that I just didn't understand Kenpo.  Umm...sure, ok...I never claimed to be a Kenpo GM or that my Kenpo was the best on the block, but looking around, I never saw anything useful in Kenpo that could be used on the ground against someone who really knew how to fight on the ground.  

My intentions were never to drive someone away from Kenpo and to the nearest BJJ school, but instead to cross train.  Of course, I was met with the "Well, how can someone train more than 1 art and really devote time" line.  I call BS on that and chalked it up as an excuse.  No, my point was simple:  Learn the basics...that's all.  If you want to pursue BJJ, then great, but at the least, learn how to escape the basic positions, how to get back to your feet, maybe some simple submissions.  

For the record....I do not claim to be affiliated with any BJJ gym currently.  I don't hold any rank in BJJ although that is something that I would like to look into in the future.  My current ground training consists of the 'back yard/garage' workouts, with folks that do train in a grappling art, on a regular basis.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> This is a common misconception. Like Judo, Bjj teaches you have to take opponents to the ground and finish them once they get there. It also teaches you how to control the situation should you ever end up on the ground. Often times, all it takes is one solid takedown or throw, and the fights done, because while every fight doesn't go to the ground, almost every fight I've seen wound up in a clinching situation. One good Osoto Gari or Hip throw on the concrete, and the guy's going to be in a world of pain.



I don't disagree with you.  The guy who I first started doing some BJJ with, also had a Judo background, and we would often work various throws, so yes, I agree that when done correctly, the guy on the receiving end will be in a world of pain.   IMO, I think one of the misconceptions, is the fact that in the early UFC days, we rarely saw Royce do anything other than clinch, pull guard and do his thing.  If there are guys adding in throws now, I don't know, mainly due to the fact that I no longer buy the fights on PPV.  I am going to a MMA fight here in CT in Nov of this year.  I'm looking forward to it!   I'll report back if I see these guys doing throws.  

My point was simply that each situation should be assessed accordingly.  A packed nightclub might not be the best place to start rolling, but that's just my opinion.  



> What a lot of people seem to misunderstand is that Bjj teaches you how to fight while on your back. That's one of the weakest positions, and for Bjj artists it's one of their strongest. Bjj teaches you how to lock, sweep, or completely reverse someone on top of you while on your back. That is invaluable for self defense, and most arts DON'T teach it.



Again, I'm not disagreeing with you here.  I've done my share of training, so I think you may be preaching to the choir here, but in any case, as I've said countless times, I feel that having even a small background in a grappling art, is key, if one is really serious about rounding out your self defense base.  My point was simply that to intentionally take someone down and look for a lock/sub, etc, if you don't have to, might be a bit foolish.  If someone is good enough in BJJ, they should also understand how to avoid going to the ground, should they get into a clinch, as well as apply some of their techs. while standing, though slight adjustments might need to be made.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> This is a common misconception. Like Judo, Bjj teaches you have to take opponents to the ground and finish them once they get there.



That can't be right.... In BJJ are you really taught that you HAVE to take opponents to ground? Surely that's a typo. 

As for other comments by MJS and KFrame, I agree. TMA clubs should at least offer seminars on 'street fighting' that involves some - if relatively unsophisticated - ground work. A club I used to train with occasionally offered such seminars and although I only attended one for ~ 4 hours, I'm much more confident that I can get back up to my feet should an unskilled attacker manage to take me down. Yea, if a BJJ guy takes me down, I'm screwed, but the chances of that happening in a SD situation are minimal enough for me not want to immediately go out and join a BJJ gym.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Except most fights you should not go to the ground even if you can fight on the ground.  Its just not smart.



Not necessarily. Ground fighting neutralizes a lot of advantages an opponent has over you. If they don't know how to use leverage, a much weaker person can overcome a much stronger person.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Not necessarily. Ground fighting neutralizes a lot of advantages an opponent has over you. If they don't know how to use leverage, a much weaker person can overcome a much stronger person.



Ok, question for you.  Since it seems like you're very pro ground, let me ask you:  in your opinion, are there any situations in which you personally, would not go to the ground?


----------



## Tames D

Hanzou said:


> Not necessarily. Ground fighting neutralizes a lot of advantages an opponent has over you. If they don't know how to use leverage, a much weaker person can overcome a much stronger person.



This is very true, until the guys friends jump in and start kicking you.


----------



## Steve

Tames D said:


> This is very true, until the guys friends jump in and start kicking you.



Or your friends jump in and start kicking him...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Ok, question for you.  Since it seems like you're very pro ground, let me ask you:  in your opinion, are there any situations in which you personally, would not go to the ground?



I'm sure there are, but I've seen a lot of altercations that end up on the ground naturally, or two guys wrestling for control/takedown. Being able to grapple and fight from any position is a stupidly big advantage in a fight.


----------



## K-man

Tames D said:


> This is very true, until the guys friends jump in and start kicking you.


I remember my KM instructor, who is a LEO, telling us not to stay on the ground as when Joe Public comes on the scene and sees you winning the contest he belts you around the ears as he assumes the guy you are restraining is the innocent party. Given the option you won't find me on the ground but if I am it will be something other than locks and holds I will be applying, and I won't be staying down longer than I need.
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> That can't be right.... In BJJ are you really taught that you HAVE to take opponents to ground? Surely that's a typo.
> 
> As for other comments by MJS and KFrame, I agree. TMA clubs should at least offer seminars on 'street fighting' that involves some - if relatively unsophisticated - ground work. A club I used to train with occasionally offered such seminars and although I only attended one for ~ 4 hours, I'm much more confident that I can get back up to my feet should an unskilled attacker manage to take me down. Yea, if a BJJ guy takes me down, I'm screwed, but the chances of that happening in a SD situation are minimal enough for me not want to immediately go out and join a BJJ gym.



Though you probably won't have to worry about a Bjj person, you should be concerned about wrestlers, UFC wannabes, and ex football players. All of those groups are fully capable of taking you down, slamming you down, and beating the crap out of you. There's also a good chance that they'll be stronger than you as well.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Not necessarily. Ground fighting neutralizes a lot of advantages an opponent has over you. If they don't know how to use leverage, a much weaker person can overcome a much stronger person.


Here's the thing anyone over the age of 25 shouldn't be getting into random fights.  I have not even been close to getting into a fight since I got out of the USMC.  Other then work but most people dont have a job like mine.

So if you find yourself needing to actually defend yourself for real from becoming  victim of violence Im not talking about some random bar fight but real violence.  Going to the ground makes it impossible to run away, makes it impossible to defend against more then one attacker, makes it impossible to keep up with your family who I also hope you have told to run. While you laying on the ground going for this sub or that choke, you have lost all mobility and ability to assess your surroundings and react to new threats.
But
Even in my young and dumb days in the military where a good fight was a weekly occurrence it always involved Lots of Alcohol, and one of my friends starting a fight with some other guy and his friends.  It usually occurred in a  bar or street with lots of other drunk and rowdy spectators.  None of that lends itself well to getting on the ground.

Bjj has its place should you find your self on the ground, but going there in purpose is just not smart.  Sure if its one on one and there are no outside factors then go for it.  Just normally doesnt happen that way.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Though you probably won't have to worry about a Bjj person, you should be concerned about wrestlers, UFC wannabes, and ex football players. All of those groups are fully capable of taking you down, slamming you down, and beating the crap out of you. There's also a good chance that they'll be stronger than you as well.



Ive responded to 1000's of bar fights it almost NEVER happens that way in real life.  Also just because someone wrestled in high school or played high school ball or  watched some UFC on you tube = a good chance they are stronger then you? Sounds like something you read in a Gracie sales brochure right below 90% of fights go to the ground


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Ive responded to 1000's of bar fights it almost NEVER happens that way in real life.  Also just because someone wrestled in high school or played high school ball or  watched some UFC on you tube = a good chance they are stronger then you? Sounds like something you read in a Gracie sales brochure right below 90% of fights go to the ground



So you're saying that you've never seen a fight where one person is on top of another punching him (or her) in the face or head over and over again? You've never seen a fight where one guy slammed the other to the floor or into an object? You've never seen a fight where two people are wrestling for control?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> So you're saying that you've never seen a fight where one person is on top of another punching him (or her) in the face or head over and over again? You've never seen a fight where one guy slammed the other to the floor or into an object? You've never seen a fight where two people are wrestling for control?


Not what I said I said it almost never.   There is no 100% when it cones to fighting and violence.  Of course some fights go to the ground.  Its just not how "most" fights go.


----------



## Kframe

You know what we need. We as a community on martial talk, need to put money together and invite special guests in. Say A few really top notch Army and Marine H2H instructors and some Top notch Federal trainers and LEO trainers and the various Civil guys that make the rounds. Get them to come on here and do a Q&A.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> You know what we need. We as a community on martial talk, need to put money together and invite special guests in. Say A few really top notch Army and Marine H2H instructors and some Top notch Federal trainers and LEO trainers and the various Civil guys that make the rounds. Get them to come on here and do a Q&A.


No real need for that. Many of us have trained or are training already with those people. We know what they say and what they teach. That information is reinforced over and over throughout this forum. Just that occasionally  people come along with a point to prove that is contra to what everyone else is saying. Spending money to get someone to point out they are wrong won't prove much. They will move along to another forum and make the same claims there.
:asian:


----------



## jks9199

Kframe said:


> You know what we need. We as a community on martial talk, need to put money together and invite special guests in. Say A few really top notch Army and Marine H2H instructors and some Top notch Federal trainers and LEO trainers and the various Civil guys that make the rounds. Get them to come on here and do a Q&A.



Um...  A number of us ARE those sorts.  We may not all be big names like Tony Blauer, Jim Wagner or Rory Miller... but several of us are qualified DT instructors, as well as working LE officers.  Names don't equal real knowledge (Blauer has no personal experience, though he's done a lot of research and put together a very solid approach, Wagner's history has problems...  I'll vouch for Rory, though, as having been there, done it & able to teach it.)


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Though you probably won't have to worry about a Bjj person, you should be concerned about wrestlers, UFC wannabes, and ex football players. All of those groups are fully capable of taking you down, slamming you down, and beating the crap out of you. There's also a good chance that they'll be stronger than you as well.



Living in the UK means that I don't really need to worry about those groups of people either; although I do agree that 'ground and pound' for relatively unskilled, teenage fighters seems to be a popular strategy (I haven't ever seen anyone go to ground on purpose in a bar). A strategy that does work against other untrained fighters but I've personally seen what can happen when the larger guy attempts this manoeuvre when the defender starts swinging fists, elbows, knees and feet at his head. If the 'ground and pounder' is not conditioned to take a full force knee or elbow to the face (and lets face it, not many people are - myself included) then the brute force tactic of slamming might not go down so well. Add to that, the striker has had training in a striking art that has taught them how to use their opponents energy against them and suddenly the little guy has the odds stacked in their favour. Now, you may argue that a BJJ guy wouldn't allow themselves to be smashed in the face whilst going for a takedown, but I'm not really talking about those guys - and I'd disagree with the generalisation anyway 

You didn't answer my question: 

Are you really taught in BJJ that you MUST take your opponent to ground? 

I'm genuinely curious because I haven't been trained in it, and if that is the case then it sounds like a ridiculously unrealistic training method, for something that has practically been described as the 'be all and end all' of self defence on this thread, by yourself.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> You didn't answer my question:
> 
> Are you really taught in BJJ that you MUST take your opponent to ground?
> 
> I'm genuinely curious because I haven't been trained in it, and if that is the case then it sounds like a ridiculously unrealistic training method, for something that has practically been described as the 'be all and end all' of self defence on this thread, by yourself.



Ridiculously unrealistic, yet numerous people have used it in street fight situations and have done just fine? Bjj was raised in Brazil, a very violent place. For it to garner the reputation it earned, and for it to smash other martial arts at home and abroad, it had to be doing something right. Part of "doing something right" is taking your adversary to the ground where they are weaker and you are stronger.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> I'm sure there are, but I've seen a lot of altercations that end up on the ground naturally, or two guys wrestling for control/takedown. Being able to grapple and fight from any position is a stupidly big advantage in a fight.



I agree...having the edge over someone, regardless of whether its size, strength, a better puncher, etc, is always a plus.  But as I've said, the posts in this thread that I've read, since I began posting, seem to paint you as a big advocate of going to the ground or grappling with someone.  

So, to ask again, in your opinion, would there be any situations in which you personally would not go to the ground?  If you feel that there are, then I'd have to ask why you seem to be such a big advocate of it in the majority of situations?


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Ridiculously unrealistic, yet numerous people have used it in street fight situations and have done just fine? Bjj was raised in Brazil, a very violent place. For it to garner the reputation it earned, and for it to smash other martial arts at home and abroad, it had to be doing something right. Part of "doing something right" is taking your adversary to the ground where they are weaker and you are stronger.



And as I said, in Brazil, you have 2 people, standing in a circle of others, so they can fight, with none of the others standing around, joining in.  Rare that you see that today, in the US.  I think, given your reply here, you pretty much answered the question that I already asked you twice.  IMO, reading your posts, I'm going to say that you would opt to go to the ground in every situation.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> I agree...having the edge over someone, regardless of whether its size, strength, a better puncher, etc, is always a plus. But as I've said, the posts in this thread that I've read, since I began posting, seem to paint you as a big advocate of going to the ground or grappling with someone.
> 
> So, to ask again, in your opinion, would there be any situations in which you personally would not go to the ground? If you feel that there are, then I'd have to ask why you seem to be such a big advocate of it in the majority of situations?



Considering that going to the ground is my strength, and where I have the most skill, I would more than likely use that ability in a confrontation. Especially since there is a pretty high chance that the person I'm going against doesn't have the same level of skill that I do on the ground. 

Is there a time I wouldn't use it? Probably not. If you've exhausted all other avenues of avoding conflict, then you gotta do what you gotta do.



MJS said:


> And as I said, in Brazil, you have 2 people, standing in a circle of others, so they can fight, with none of the others standing around, joining in. Rare that you see that today, in the US. I think, given your reply here, you pretty much answered the question that I already asked you twice. IMO, reading your posts, I'm going to say that you would opt to go to the ground in every situation.



Don't confuse a Bjj class in Brazil with a street fight in Brazil. Brazil has ghettos that make some of the worst areas of the U.S. look like Disney Land in comparison. Any martial art coming out of Brazil with a reputation like Gracie JJ or BJJ is an MA that has throughly earned its reputation.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Considering that going to the ground is my strength, and where I have the most skill, I would more than likely use that ability in a confrontation. Especially since there is a pretty high chance that the person I'm going against doesn't have the same level of skill that I do on the ground.
> 
> Is there a time I wouldn't use it? Probably not. If you've exhausted all other avenues of avoding conflict, then you gotta do what you gotta do.



Well, to each their own, but IMO, that's pretty foolish.





> Don't confuse a Bjj class in Brazil with a street fight in Brazil. Brazil has ghettos that make some of the worst areas of the U.S. look like Disney Land in comparison. Any martial art coming out of Brazil with a reputation like Gracie JJ or BJJ is an MA that has throughly earned its reputation.



Well, if you say so, but since the Gracies are such great marketing guru's, who are known for posting numerous challenge match clips, you'd figure if it was anything different, that they'd have posted it.  

Like I've said countless times...the MMA vs. TMA debate is old...very, very old.  Frankly it gets boring.  You or I or anyone else, is highly unlikely to change the minds, and personally, that is not my intent not, or ever.  I'm happy with what I train, and I don't force anyone to change.  I've openly said that MMA/BJJ is good, but it's certainly not the end all, be all.

Edit: Just to add to this...there are many arts out there, other than BJJ, than have earned their reputation.  Brazil isn't the only place in the world that puts out quality arts.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Ridiculously unrealistic, yet numerous people have used it in street fight situations and have done just fine? Bjj was raised in Brazil, a very violent place. For it to garner the reputation it earned, and for it to smash other martial arts at home and abroad, it had to be doing something right. Part of "doing something right" is taking your adversary to the ground where they are weaker and you are stronger.



"Ridiculously unrealistic" in the sense that you openly admit to only training for one eventuality - when is anything in life ever that straight forward?

What happens when an attacker knows a bit about grappling and successfully evades/counters your takedown attempts, is that the fight effectively won, time to run away? 

Just to make this even clearer (not that i should have to): I'm not questioning the effectiveness of BJJ - I'm sure it's been used to great effect in SD situations - it's the training methodology that you're telling me your school follows to the letter that I'm concerned about.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Is there a time I wouldn't use it? Probably not. If you've exhausted all other avenues of avoding conflict, then you gotta do what you gotta do.
> .



So, good TMA schools should eradicate old training methods because, well, they're old (and you don't understand them), but at the same time you don't think there is ever really a time where you shouldn't take an opponent to ground...

This irony right here is what is undermining your entire argument. I believe I mentioned something about you having a 'closed mind' in my early posts on this thread, whilst literally accusing TMAs of the same thing - several pages later, and its only gotten worse.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Any martial art coming out of Brazil with a reputation like Gracie JJ or BJJ is an MA that has throughly earned its reputation.


Or benefited from some really good marketing


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Well, to each their own, but IMO, that's pretty foolish.



Its foolish to use my strongest skills in an attack? Okay....





> Well, if you say so, but since the Gracies are such great marketing guru's, who are known for posting numerous challenge match clips, you'd figure if it was anything different, that they'd have posted it.



They're also known for backing up their claims, and putting their money where their mouths are.



> Like I've said countless times...the MMA vs. TMA debate is old...very, very old.  Frankly it gets boring.  You or I or anyone else, is highly unlikely to change the minds, and personally, that is not my intent not, or ever.  I'm happy with what I train, and I don't force anyone to change.  I've openly said that MMA/BJJ is good, but it's certainly not the end all, be all.



No one was claiming that. The very nature of mixed martial arts kind of contradicts that notion.



> Edit: Just to add to this...there are many arts out there, other than BJJ, than have earned their reputation.  Brazil isn't the only place in the world that puts out quality arts.



No one was claiming that either.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> "Ridiculously unrealistic" in the sense that you openly admit to only training for one eventuality - when is anything in life ever that straight forward?
> 
> What happens when an attacker knows a bit about grappling and successfully evades/counters your takedown attempts, is that the fight effectively won, time to run away?



You mean what happens when I run into someone who is a better fighter than I am? I'm probably going to lose or die. That's a pretty silly question.



> Just to make this even clearer (not that i should have to): I'm not questioning the effectiveness of BJJ - I'm sure it's been used to great effect in SD situations - it's the training methodology that you're telling me your school follows to the letter that I'm concerned about.



You're not questioning the effectiveness of Bjj, but you question my training methodology which comes from Bjj?

That makes sense....


----------



## ballen0351

ballen0351 said:


> Here's the thing anyone over the age of 25 shouldn't be getting into random fights.  I have not even been close to getting into a fight since I got out of the USMC.  Other then work but most people dont have a job like mine.
> 
> So if you find yourself needing to actually defend yourself for real from becoming  victim of violence Im not talking about some random bar fight but real violence.  Going to the ground makes it impossible to run away, makes it impossible to defend against more then one attacker, makes it impossible to keep up with your family who I also hope you have told to run. While you laying on the ground going for this sub or that choke, you have lost all mobility and ability to assess your surroundings and react to new threats.
> But
> Even in my young and dumb days in the military where a good fight was a weekly occurrence it always involved Lots of Alcohol, and one of my friends starting a fight with some other guy and his friends.  It usually occurred in a  bar or street with lots of other drunk and rowdy spectators.  None of that lends itself well to getting on the ground.
> 
> Bjj has its place should you find your self on the ground, but going there in purpose is just not smart.  Sure if its one on one and there are no outside factors then go for it.  Just normally doesnt happen that way.


Han Id like to see your thoughts on some of my points I made here.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> You mean what happens when I run into someone who is a better fighter than I am? I'm probably going to lose or die. That's a pretty silly question.



No that wasn't what I was asking. All good fighters have a 'plan B', what is yours if you come up against a better grappler? 

If I come up against a faster, stronger, more accurate striker than myself (even in sparring) I change strategy - *inner monologue* ok, he's quicker than me (not much point in trying to match 'blow for blow') lets try to stick to a few of his strikes and see how he reacts....oh, yep, there's the opening I was looking for. The style I train in teaches so much more than pure striking so that I can adapt myself and I don't believe for one second that good BJJ purely teaches techniques that can only be applied on the ground -  joint manipulation is joint manipulation after all, regardless of context. 

The fact that you're not even considering this tells me that you are not only vastly under qualified to judge what REALLY is effective (or not) in a self defence situation but you also appear to be participating in limited training methods. 



> You're not questioning the effectiveness of Bjj, but you question my training methodology which comes from Bjj?
> 
> That makes sense....



Does all BJJ teach that you HAVE to take an opponent to ground?


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> No that wasn't what I was asking. All good fighters have a 'plan B', what is yours if you come up against a better grappler?
> 
> If I come up against a faster, stronger, more accurate striker than myself (even in sparring) I change strategy - *inner monologue* ok, he's quicker than me (not much point in trying to match 'blow for blow') lets try to stick to a few of his strikes and see how he reacts....oh, yep, there's the opening I was looking for. The style I train in teaches so much more than pure striking so that I can adapt myself and I don't believe for one second that good BJJ purely teaches techniques that can only be applied on the ground -  joint manipulation is joint manipulation after all, regardless of context.



Okay, but your argument is that you're fighting against someone who is better than you are at what you do best. So chances are that you're going to lose, unless you get lucky, or the superior fighter is having a bad day, and you're having a good one. It's like asking a boxer what's their plan B if they're fighting a better boxer. It's a pretty silly question, because 9 times out of 10, someone who hits you faster, stronger, and more accurately than you do is going to beat you.

I don't know where you got the notion that I said that Bjj only teaches ground techs. Heck, you have to get the opponent to the ground in the first place. Some of that requires striking, some of that requires throws, some of that requires takedowns. 



> The fact that you're not even considering this tells me that you are not only vastly under qualified to judge what REALLY is effective (or not) in a self defence situation but you also appear to be participating in limited training methods.



What exactly am I not considering?



> Does all BJJ teach that you HAVE to take an opponent to ground?



No, but the ground is where we have the most fun.




ballen0351 said:


> Han Id like to see your thoughts on some of my points I made here.



Will do. I'll respond shortly.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Okay, but your argument is that you're fighting against someone who is better than you are at what you do best. So chances are that you're going to lose, unless you get lucky, or the superior fighter is having a bad day, and you're having a good one. It's like asking a boxer what's their plan B if they're fighting a better boxer. It's a pretty silly question, because 9 times out of 10, someone who hits you faster, stronger, and more accurately than you do is going to beat you.



If you only train for one eventuality, the chances are, you're going to lose - regardless of whether the person you were fighting with is better than you or not. That is my point. 



> I don't know where you got the notion that I said that Bjj only teaches ground techs. Heck, you have to get the opponent to the ground in the first place. Some of that requires striking, some of that requires throws, some of that requires takedowns.



You said that you probably don't think there is any self defence situation that would make you not want to take an opponent to ground. Therefore, it's not the individual techniques of the BJJ you've learned that I'm criticising, it is the methodology. Is there anything that you think you could apply effectively standing up? If so, then why are you taught to ALWAYS go to ground? 



> What exactly am I not considering?



The possibility that you might fight someone bigger and stronger who just won't go to ground (some people have a naturally strong root!). If they wont go to ground then, by your own admission, you don't have a strategy to deal with them.





> No, but the ground is where we have the most fun.



Self defence isn't usually fun.


----------



## Hanzou

@Ballen,

When I say "take someone to the ground" I'm not talking about always pulling guard, or laying on top of someone. I'm talking about getting someone to hit the ground. Once someone has hit the ground, that is when I determine what to do next. If he is no longer a threat, I'll leave. If I need to do some more work, then I'll do that.

in short, my goal isn't to stand there and brawl with someone. My goal is to throw someone down and either knock them out from the throws impact, or control them on the ground.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> If you only train for one eventuality, the chances are, you're going to lose - regardless of whether the person you were fighting with is better than you or not. That is my point.



If the guy is better than you, chances are you're going to lose. It doesn't matter what you train. Again, you're putting forth a pretty silly argument here.




> You said that you probably don't think there is any self defence situation that would make you not want to take an opponent to ground. Therefore, it's not the individual techniques of the BJJ you've learned that I'm criticising, it is the methodology. Is there anything that you think you could apply effectively standing up? If so, then why are you taught to ALWAYS go to ground?



I'm pretty sure I said that Bjj has numerous techs for takedowns. I suppose you must not understand what I mean when I said "take someone to the ground". If I preform an Osoto Gari on someone and their head hits the concrete and they're unconscious, I've "taken the guy to the ground". From Osoto Gari, I could immediately transition into an armbar, a pin, or I could just walk away. You'd be surprised how many people don't know how to break fall.



> The possibility that you might fight someone bigger and stronger who just won't go to ground (some people have a naturally strong root!). If they wont go to ground then, by your own admission, you don't have a strategy to deal with them.



If they're not going to the ground, then I've done something wrong technique-wise. Judo/Bjj throws and takedowns are based on leverage and balance, not strength or size. Unless I'm going against a black belt in Judo, they're going to get tossed or taken down.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> If the guy is better than you, chances are you're going to lose. It doesn't matter what you train. Again, you're putting forth a pretty silly argument here.



If the guy is better than you at ONE thing, it sounds like you're going to lose. I might lose against a better striker, but I have enough variation in my training to at least try something else.



> I'm pretty sure I said that Bjj has numerous techs for takedowns. I suppose you must not understand what I mean when I said "take someone to the ground". If I preform an Osoto Gari on someone and their head hits the concrete and they're unconscious, I've "taken the guy to the ground". From Osoto Gari, I could immediately transition into an armbar, a pin, or I could just walk away. You'd be surprised how many people don't know how to break fall.



I understand exactly what you mean. In every self defence situation you will try to make your opponent hit the ground. Good luck.



> If they're not going to the ground, then I've done something wrong technique-wise. Judo/Bjj throws and takedowns are based on leverage and balance, not strength or size.



Yes but, strength and size definitely help you get to a position to apply techniques based on leverage and balance. 



> Unless I'm going against a black belt in Judo, they're going to get tossed or taken down.



There's that arrogance again; which is about as dangerous as planning how you will handle all self defence scenarios.


----------



## Mauthos

Dinkydoo said:


> There's that arrogance again; which is about as dangerous as planning how you will handle all self defence scenarios.



I have to agree with this as I am not a BB in either BJJ or Judo and even though I have trained briefly in traditional Jujitsu (only about 1 year) I have a very senior traditional jujitisu instructor as a friend who is a 4th degree BB (also trained in bjj as he likes to compare the differences between the two, especially pros and cons) and also a friend who is BB in judo.  I train with both a few times a year and they have both stated that I am one of the most difficult  people they fight to take to the ground.

In fact the judo guy has remarked that my base is that solid and my centre of gravity is always low (short and stocky) that I already mitigate several of his throws before we even start.  Therefore, I am not a jujitsu BB or Judo BB, yet these two very respected BB both state they find it very difficult to take me to the ground and when we fight, for want of a better description, anything goes rules, generally they eat a lot of strikes and punches whilst they a)try to get in, b)attempt to get hold of me and C) whilst attempting the throw/takedown.  

In the years we have trained and sparred/fought together (yes me and the Judo guy do fight full contact, I don't against the JJ friend as he is late 60's and we take it easier as I respect him and don't want to hurt him (and in return when we fight jj rulesets he takes it a little easier on me)) I have come out on top of probably 80% of the fights.  So I do find it incredibly arrogant that you think the only way you will not be able to take a guy down in a fight is, and I quote:



> If they're not going to the ground, then I've done something wrong technique-wise. Judo/Bjj throws and takedowns are based on leverage and balance, not strength or size. Unless I'm going against a black belt in Judo, they're going to get tossed or taken down.



I would almost think that you have the belief that you are an unstoppable bjj/judo machine, but as Dinkydoo said, you may meet a better grappler (and it is odd that you think if they are better than you at one skill you will lose) then you have to reasess the situation.  My example stands, my friends are better than me at judo and bjj, with their rulesets in mind, I rarely beat them.  I am mainly a striker but have trained a variety of arts due to moving around in my career, therefore when we fight my skillset only, I tend to mainly win (which supports your theory, they are better grapplers than me, they win, I am a better striker than them I win).  However, fighting 'anything goes' I tend to win as I have a greater skillset and tend to be able to adapt better than they do.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> If the guy is better than you at ONE thing, it sounds like you're going to lose. I might lose against a better striker, but I have enough variation in my training to at least try something else.




Grappling isn't one thing. So if someone is superior to you in all the different facets of grappling, you're more than likely going to lose.



> I understand exactly what you mean. In every self defence situation you will try to make your opponent hit the ground. Good luck.



So your goal with Kung Fu isn't to knock someone out, or incapacitate them?


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Grappling isn't one thing. So if someone is superior to you in all the different facets of grappling, you're more than likely going to lose.



They don't need to be far superior than yourself in every aspect of grappling. Sometimes techniques just don't work for a number of reasons and the fact that you don't train for such a circumstance where you can't get someone to ground isn't training for the 'real world'. 



> So your goal with Kung Fu isn't to knock someone out, or incapacitate them?



Incapacitate, deter, control, destroy....whatever is necessary. The difference being that I don't purely train to do all of the above via one method. 

I can see that we've came to impasse, which is fine, and I'm fully convinced now that you're not qualified to write off the entire family of martial arts that my style belongs to, so for now at least, I'm going to take a step back from this thread. 

Train well.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> They don't need to be far superior than yourself in every aspect of grappling. Sometimes techniques just don't work for a number of reasons and the fact that you don't train for such a circumstance where you can't get someone to ground isn't training for the 'real world'.



That isn't a fact, and if you can't get someone to the ground you're doing something wrong, or the other guy is simply better than you.




> Incapacitate, deter, control, destroy....whatever is necessary. The difference being that I don't purely train to do all of the above via one method.



Again, grappling isn't one method. Grappling encompasses a huge variety of methods.



> I can see that we've came to impasse, which is fine, and I'm fully convinced now that you're not qualified to write off the entire family of martial arts that my style belongs to, so for now at least, I'm going to take a step back from this thread.



I don't need to write off CMA. The large amounts of evidence shown in this thread does that all on its own.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Ok, tough guy.

I'm out.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> @Ballen,
> 
> When I say "take someone to the ground" I'm not talking about always pulling guard, or laying on top of someone. I'm talking about getting someone to hit the ground. Once someone has hit the ground, that is when I determine what to do next. If he is no longer a threat, I'll leave. If I need to do some more work, then I'll do that.


Your changing your answers now.  You have said over and over again your goal is it take them down and choke them out.  Which is just a terrible idea for several reasons


> in short, my goal isn't to stand there and brawl with someone. My goal is to throw someone down and either knock them out from the throws impact, or control them on the ground.


Good luck.  Do you train doing your throws in street clothes on street surfaces against attackers not following the rules?  I train judo myself and there's a huge difference between class and real life.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Its foolish to use my strongest skills in an attack? Okay....



Yup, that's what I said...it's foolish....foolish to assume that going to the ground in every situation, is the best option.







> They're also known for backing up their claims, and putting their money where their mouths are.



As are other arts as well.  But thanks for avoiding my question though.  





> No one was claiming that. The very nature of mixed martial arts kind of contradicts that notion.



No one was saying what?  That BJJ is the best?  LOL...I think you should read some of your own posts as that is certainly the impression that YOU give.  





> No one was claiming that either.



Well, as I just said, it seems that you think that BJJ is the only quality art out there.  While this may not have been your intent, looking at your posts, its the impression that you give.


----------



## MJS

Dinkydoo said:


> Ok, tough guy.
> 
> I'm out.



I was going to reply to a few more of his posts, but I'd rather not continue to bang my head against the wall. LOL!  FWIW, I'm in agreement with the points you've been making.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Your changing your answers now.  You have said over and over again your goal is it take them down and choke them out.  Which is just a terrible idea for several reasons.



I do believe that I said my goal is to get them to the ground and control them once they're there. If that means choking them out, pinning them down, or kicking them in the face, that's what I'm going to do. Throwing or knocking someone to the ground is far more efficient than trying to beat them into the ground using strikes. See that video of the cop brawling with that thug for reference. A simple throw into control (lock/pin from standing position) would have ended that confrontation right then and there.



> Good luck.  Do you train doing your throws in street clothes on street surfaces against attackers not following the rules?  I train judo myself and there's a huge difference between class and real life.



We train in gi and no gi for both throws and grappling. Throwing someone onto a street surface while training is unnecessary, and a pretty huge liability for the school. However, I wouldn't be surprised if some people tried it outside of school to test their ukemi.


----------



## Hanzou

Great video about separating realism from the fantasy in the martial arts;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Oy4TwtoDs50#t=468


----------



## Kframe

I don't understand why we are continuing to "debate" with this person. He I trying to get members here riled up and in a frenzy to defend their chosen TMA.  Honestly at this point he is not going to change his mind, nor we going to change ours. Most of us have provided more then enough insight for any wandering Newbies whom may show up looking for insights on mma vs tma.  

So far  I think the most valuable thing is not to get into fights. I don't honestly see my self getting into a fight. I don't go to bars, I don't go to sporting events.(that's what ppv is for). Honestly the only time I plan on fighting is when I decide to test my self in the cage. That will likely be the final confrontation I have with anyone. 

Hanzou, what stand up do you do? Bjj is not the answer for a lot of situations. 100% of all altercations start standing. Most quality stand up arts will teach you good foot work and evasion, which is what you need on the street. Especially when trying to get away from multiple attackers. BJJ and multiple attackers simply do not mix well. 

Lastly if your going to tout bjj/mma as the end all be all of street altercation survival I have to point out the spectacular failure bjj was in situation regarding Miguel Falco. Fight started on the feet, and yet at no point was his Black belt in BJJ of any use to him. 

You have not convinced anyone.  Most here know that rudimentary ground grappling skill is required. Most here have it, or have access to it.

Honestly your continued hostility towards tma and striking arts in general is the kind of thing that turns non martial artists and non mixed martial artists off to mma/bjj. The ego and need to dominate everything, the hatred for all things traditional unless its muay thai then that's ok..  

Just because some arts don't compete doesn't mean they cant defend themselves. I need not look any further then my own father. Many many street altercations, most involving multiple attackers. He always came out on top, thanks to a solid foundation and application of TKD basics. Not sport Taedo, but the combative, traditional TKD my father did. I still marvel to day about it. He loves the "range" tkd gives him, but all his fights and all his skills are geared towards close range survival. I love sparring with him. 

He is in my eyes, THE example of what a TMA should produce. Sadly his teacher and that school no longer exist and with the continued dilution TKD It nolonger resembles the combative art my father practices. I have yet to meet a TKD that moves in a similar way, using similar stances and defenses. Though I know he cross trained in HKD so that explains his fascination with joint locks and grappling.. 

Its to bad, this modern MMA generation will have fewer and fewer chances to meet real quality combative TMA. So many Mcdojo and sportive schools out there teaching diluted skills.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

When you go to the ground, you lose your "mobility". IMO, hit and run is the best strategy to be used in any street situation. Not only you may have to run away from your opponent's flying bullets, you may have to run away from fat cops too.

You can take your opponent down but you can still maintain your "mobility" and you don't need to go to the ground.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzA1MjQ1OTAw.html

If you have to use finish move, you can use "follow on strike" and still maintain your "mobility".


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Hanzou, what stand up do you do? Bjj is not the answer for a lot of situations. 100% of all altercations start standing. Most quality stand up arts will teach you good foot work and evasion, which is what you need on the street. Especially when trying to get away from multiple attackers. BJJ and multiple attackers simply do not mix well.



If your goal is get away from multiple attackers, I recommend studying the ancient art of track and field.



> Lastly if your going to tout bjj/mma as the end all be all of street altercation survival I have to point out the spectacular failure bjj was in situation regarding Miguel Falco. Fight started on the feet, and yet at no point was his Black belt in BJJ of any use to him.



That wasn't a failure of Bjj. That was a failure of Miguel Falcoa to not be a douchebag and not slap women around when said woman has several friends with baseball bats waiting for him outside. Falcoa got what he deserved. I hope he enjoys the unemployment line.



> Just because some arts don't compete doesn't mean they cant defend themselves.



It goes beyond simply that. People who do compete don't go to the majority of TMAs because you can't use it in a fighting situation. Good luck trying to perform a middle or upper block, or a reverse punch while someone is jabbing you in the face.


----------



## Kframe

I have,  you are wrong.   Do you have proof  they don't work in a fightint situation.


----------



## Koshiki

Kframe said:


> He is in my eyes, THE example of what a TMA should produce. Sadly his teacher and that school no longer exist and with the continued dilution TKD It nolonger resembles the combative art my father practices. I have yet to meet a TKD that moves in a similar way, using similar stances and defenses. Though I know he cross trained in HKD so that explains his fascination with joint locks and grappling..
> 
> Its to bad, this modern MMA generation will have fewer and fewer chances to meet real quality combative TMA. So many Mcdojo and sportive schools out there teaching diluted skills.



I have this same issue. My school teaches, primarily, old school taekwondo. A few years into my training, I and a student I was coming up through with found out that, when mingling with other TKD schools, we had nothing in common, and that we didn't really like Taekwondo, actually. I really don't. Not to offend any TKD practitioners, but generally speaking, TKD is quite possibly my least favourite martial art. Confusingly, it is also my personal favourite, as done in my school. (Albeit with a healthy CMA influence and a bunch of locks and throws mixed in.) 

As the Sensei of my Taekwondo school once said, as we watched another school, with whom we are friends. "Wow, sometimes I realize how much I really don't like Taekwondo."


----------



## MJS

Kframe said:


> I have,  you are wrong.   Do you have proof  they don't work in a fightint situation.



Ohh...careful there...you know what is going to come next.....something along the lines of, "Well, just look at the UFC.  Lots of examples of TMAs not working." LOL!  Of course, the fact of the matter is, there are folks out there, who have used their art with success, in the real world.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> I have,  you are wrong.   Do you have proof  they don't work in a fightint situation.



Yeah, no competitive fighters use them. That proves that they don't work in fights. If they don't work in a controlled environment with rules, how can they work in an uncontrolled environment without rules?


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, no competitive fighters use them. That proves that they don't work in fights. If they don't work in a controlled environment with rules, how can they work in an uncontrolled environment without rules?



:bs:


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> People who do compete don't go to the majority of TMAs because you can't use it in a fighting situation. Good luck trying to perform a middle or upper block, or a reverse punch while someone is jabbing you in the face.



I think this may well be the single most completely incorrect thing I've seen written in a long long time.


In short:
TMA does not mean not competing. TMA skills can and are used in fighting situations. I have and I do. 

Every single thing you've said here is wrong.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Zack Cart said:


> I have this same issue. My school teaches, primarily, old school taekwondo. A few years into my training, I and a student I was coming up through with found out that, when mingling with other TKD schools, we had nothing in common, and that we didn't really like Taekwondo, actually. I really don't. Not to offend any TKD practitioners, but generally speaking, TKD is quite possibly my least favourite martial art. Confusingly, it is also my personal favourite, as done in my school. (Albeit with a healthy CMA influence and a bunch of locks and throws mixed in.)
> 
> As the Sensei of my Taekwondo school once said, as we watched another school, with whom we are friends. "Wow, sometimes I realize how much I really don't like Taekwondo."




There is no need for locks and throws to be "mixed in" to TKD. Such techniques have been a part of TKD from the very beginning. If you're training in TKD and not being taught these techniques, the lack is in the teacher, not the art.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> I think this may well be the single most completely incorrect thing I've seen written in a long long time.
> 
> 
> In short:
> TMA does not mean not competing. TMA skills can and are used in fighting situations. I have and I do.
> 
> Every single thing you've said here is wrong.



Nonsense. Sure, you can take bits and pieces from old school arts, but the majority of those old styles can't be used because they're antiquated. You see any fighter in the ring using a horse stance? You think you're ever going to see someone in the street using a horse stance on the street?


----------



## CNida

Wow @ this thread. 

"That escalated quickly."

Comparing MMA to TMA is not at all like comparing apples and oranges. More like comparing an apple or an orange to a bowl of assorted fruits, which also includes apples and oranges, coincidentally.

MMA is not a martial art. By its very name it is an amalgam, a unified assortment of techniques from various martial arts. MMA does not include an entirety of any martial art. If it did, it would cease to be MMA, and be "Shotokan Karate with a bit of Brazilian Jiujitsu and freestyle wrestling thrown in for flavor".

On that note... If I had to resort to choosing who I would want to back me up in a street fight, and my choices were between an elite level MMA fighter and a 3rd degree black belt in Shotokan Karate, then the answer is obvious. I would go with whoever has the most experience in street-fighting, because at the end of the day, it's not what you know that matters, but how you use it.

Just my two pennies.


____________________________

"A man who has attained mastery of an art reveals it in his every action." - Anonymous


----------



## MJS

CNida said:


> Wow @ this thread.
> 
> "That escalated quickly."
> 
> Comparing MMA to TMA is not at all like comparing apples and oranges. More like comparing an apple or an orange to a bowl of assorted fruits, which also includes apples and oranges, coincidentally.
> 
> MMA is not a martial art. By its very name it is an amalgam, a unified assortment of techniques from various martial arts. MMA does not include an entirety of any martial art. If it did, it would cease to be MMA, and be "Shotokan Karate with a bit of Brazilian Jiujitsu and freestyle wrestling thrown in for flavor".
> 
> On that note... If I had to resort to choosing who I would want to back me up in a street fight, and my choices were between an elite level MMA fighter and a 3rd degree black belt in Shotokan Karate, then the answer is obvious. I would go with whoever has the most experience in street-fighting, *because at the end of the day, it's not what you know that matters, but how you use it.*
> 
> Just my two pennies.
> 
> 
> ____________________________
> 
> "A man who has attained mastery of an art reveals it in his every action." - Anonymous



Nice post!  I couldn't agree more with the bold part!  That's something that I've said many times!  Very, very true!!


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> Nonsense. Sure, you can take bits and pieces from old school arts, but the majority of those old styles can't be used because they're antiquated. You see any fighter in the ring using a horse stance? You think you're ever going to see someone in the street using a horse stance on the street?



Perhaps, just perhaps, the stances aren't the end, but the means...


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Nonsense. Sure, you can take bits and pieces from old school arts, but the majority of those old styles can't be used because they're antiquated. You see any fighter in the ring using a horse stance? You think you're ever going to see someone in the street using a horse stance on the street?



Ahh, I get it. The problem is you don't understand what TMA teach, or how.
In confrontations, without a ring in sight, I've been in just about every stance taught by any TMA I've had any exposure to.
Yes, I've been in a back stance (dwit seogi). Yes, I've been in a horse stance (juchum seogi). Yes, I've been in a crane stance (hakdari seogi). 
And I do, in fact, see fighters in the ring using all these stances too. If you fail to recognize the stances as the fighters shift in and out of them, the fault lies with you.

Don't blame TMA for your lack of comprehension. The blame lies much closer to home.


----------



## Hanzou

jks9199 said:


> Perhaps, just perhaps, the stances aren't the end, but the means...



Its a waste of time. Boxing for example teaches superior footwork without making the student cycle through several pointless stances, and its the natural fighting stance that fighters take anyway.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Its a waste of time. Boxing for example teaches superior footwork without making the student cycle through several pointless stances, and its the natural fighting stance that fighters take anyway.



The footwork you're talking about is nothing more than moving from one stance to another. Exactly as any martial artist will do in a fight.


----------



## MJS

Dirty Dog said:


> The footwork you're talking about is nothing more than moving from one stance to another. Exactly as any martial artist will do in a fight.



Exactly!  I have to laugh when people talk about stances, as if they're something static, that never changes.


----------



## K-man

The further this thread goes, the greater the demonstration of total ignorance of TMAs and the techniques they employ. 
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> The footwork you're talking about is nothing more than moving from one stance to another. Exactly as any martial artist will do in a fight.



Actually I'm not. Switching between stances isn't the same as moving from one point to another.

This is why you don't see traditional stances in fights. Street or competitive.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> This is why you don't see traditional stances in fights. Street or competitive.


The TMA throws are all built on the following 3 TMA stances:

1. horse stance - hip throw, shoulder throw, firemen's carry, ...
2. bow-arrow stance - front cut, leg block, leg spring, ...
3. golden rooster stance - knee lifting throw, ...

We should look at TMA from both striking art and grappling art point of views.


----------



## jks9199

Hanzou said:


> Actually I'm not. Switching between stances isn't the same as moving from one point to another.
> 
> This is why you don't see traditional stances in fights. Street or competitive.



Stance is a positioning of the body for combat; a moment of stability and balance between steps.  Steps are transitions between stances.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Actually I'm not. Switching between stances isn't the same as moving from one point to another.
> 
> This is why you don't see traditional stances in fights. Street or competitive.



So in addition to your other vast ignorances of TMA, you also think that you can't move from one point to another in TMA stances?
You continue to assert that traditional stances are not used, despite myself and others pointing out that we *do*, in fact, use exactly those traditional stances.
That shows two things:
1 - phenomenal ignorance.
2 - incredible arrogance.


----------



## Hanzou

jks9199 said:


> Stance is a positioning of the body for combat; a moment of stability and balance between steps.  Steps are transitions between stances.



And again, I'm talking about footwork, not transitioning between stances. 

Examples:

Karate footwork;
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dMAzyQ-aGps&desktop_uri=/watch?v=dMAzyQ-aGps

Boximg Footwork;
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jmdN6CV2NVc&desktop_uri=/watch?v=jmdN6CV2NVc


Notice they maintain the same stance throughout.

in either case, the boxer displays superior and more active footwork than the Karatekas. In fighting, footwork is more important than learning several stances you're never going to use.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> So in addition to your other vast ignorances of TMA, you also think that you can't move from one point to another in TMA stances?




Yeah, I never said that. *I* said that learning 10 different stances is a waste of time, and that footwork is more important. Footwork in many TMAs is pretty terrible, while footwork in boxing is superb.



> You continue to assert that traditional stances are not used, despite myself and others pointing out that we *do*, in fact, use exactly those traditional stances.
> That shows two things:
> 1 - phenomenal ignorance.
> 2 - incredible arrogance.



Where's your evidence beyond personal anecdotes?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Where's your evidence beyond personal anecdotes?



Of your ignorance? In your posts, of course. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.


----------



## K-man

Obviously I've been doing something wrong in my teaching. I say to people, "if you can't use it in a pub fight we don't train it". Can someone please tell me which of the traditional stances I shouldn't be using because I'm probably going to have to stop teaching a number of throws, take-downs and neck cranks if I can't teach the proper footwork. Now I'm happy to use the proper boxing stance because it is pretty much the same as moto dachi with a bit of tsabaki tossed in that we train anyway. Trouble with that is it only works at striking distance, not when we close the distance and use all the useless tradition stances. 
:s40:


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Obviously I've been doing something wrong in my teaching. I say to people, "if you can't use it in a pub fight we don't train it". Can someone please tell me which of the traditional stances I shouldn't be using because I'm probably going to have to stop teaching a number of throws, take-downs and neck cranks if I can't teach the proper footwork. Now I'm happy to use the proper boxing stance because it is pretty much the same as moto dachi with a bit of tsabaki tossed in that we train anyway. Trouble with that is it only works at striking distance, not when we close the distance and use all the useless tradition stances.
> :s40:



You should dump all of them, and teach the boxer stance. its mobile, solid, and far more natural than the 10-20 traditional stances that most TMA teaches.

As for it only working in striking range, that's false. You can perform throws, takedowns, clinches, kicks, and punches from the boxer stance. MMA and Kickboxing has proven this for years, and its the reason why nearly every martial artist reverts to a similar stance when they're actually fighting. 

Except Dirty Dog who supposedly takes down bad guys while in horse stance...

In the end, it shouldn't be about tradition, it should be about the superior method. Boxing has the superior method.


----------



## pgsmith

Hanzou said:


> You should dump all of them, and teach the boxer stance. its mobile, solid, and far more natural than the 10-20 traditional stances that most TMA teaches.
> 
> As for it only working in striking range, that's false. You can perform throws, takedowns, clinches, kicks, and punches from the boxer stance. MMA and Kickboxing has proven this for years, and its the reason why nearly every martial artist reverts to a similar stance when they're actually fighting.
> 
> Except Dirty Dog who supposedly takes down bad guys while in horse stance...
> 
> In the end, it shouldn't be about tradition, it should be about the superior method. Boxing has the superior method.



  I usually try and stay out of these testosterone fests, but the question just has to be asked ... how many "my life's in danger and I have to take this guy out to survive" fights have you been in Hanzou? For that matter, how many top level MMA fights have you been in? Are you basing all of your arguments upon your personal experiences, or are you simply spouting what you *think* is correct based on what you watch on youtube?


----------



## K-man

In Goju technically we don't have 'horse stance'. We have Shiko dachi which is a wide low stance with the feet turned out. We use it all the time to utilise body weight for choking, strangling and takedowns. (Obviously *DD* and I have learned similar skills from our TMA training. What a strange coincidence.)  It is used in front or behind your opponent. For what it's worth it is in 10 of the 12 Goju kata so the old guys must have thought it was worth teaching for some strange reason.  I prefer my chokes to be performed standing up. That way if old mate has friends I can keep him between me and them. I would like to see how I could use boxer stance to take any one down, unless of course is was a gimme.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> And again, I'm talking about footwork, not transitioning between stances.



Those are the same things.



Hanzou said:


> Boximg Footwork;
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jmdN6CV2NVc&desktop_uri=/watch?v=jmdN6CV2NVc



The boxer's stances looked an awful lot like a horse riding stance to me.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> In Goju technically we don't have 'horse stance'. We have Shiko dachi which is a wide low stance with the feet turned out. We use it all the time to utilise body weight for choking, strangling and takedowns. (Obviously *DD* and I have learned similar skills from our TMA training. What a strange coincidence.)  It is used in front or behind your opponent. For what it's worth it is in 10 of the 12 Goju kata so the old guys must have thought it was worth teaching for some strange reason.  I prefer my chokes to be performed standing up. That way if old mate has friends I can keep him between me and them. I would like to see how I could use boxer stance to take any one down, unless of course is was a gimme.



The Muay Thai clinch from which numerous chokes and takedowns can be utilized, all while in a boxer stance. Here's one example;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QpwUXBdbrjU#t=152


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Those are the same things.



Please explain what stances those karateka were switching into as they moved across the mat in that first video.



> The boxer's stances looked an awful lot like a horse riding stance to me.



Except is doesn't. Boxers would never be in horse riding stance because its too square, gives up too much reach, and lacks mobility.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> The Muay Thai clinch from which numerous chokes and takedowns can be utilized, all while in a boxer stance. Here's one example;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QpwUXBdbrjU#t=152


Two things. As an example of footwork, you can't see the feet at all. And this stance is nothing like the 'boxer' stance you showed a few posts back. It is exactly like our TMA natural fighting stance. The take down is similar to what we would do using Sanchin dachi, so what's the big deal? What you have shown, apart from the actual clinch is almost exactly what we do in TMA.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Please explain what stances those karateka were switching into as they moved across the mat in that first video..



Once again you are using one video of one aspect to try to explain all aspects. Footwork also includes staying in one stance and moving in different directions i.e the foot is doing work.



Hanzou said:


> Except is doesn't. Boxers would never be in horse riding stance because its too square, gives up too much reach, and lacks mobility.



It's not square if you stand side on. A horse riding stance is designed for situations where you need stability, not mobility.Boxers need to remain mobile at all times because if the stand still for too long the referee will separate them.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> And again, I'm talking about footwork, not transitioning between stances.
> 
> Examples:
> 
> Karate footwork;
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dMAzyQ-aGps&desktop_uri=/watch?v=dMAzyQ-aGps
> 
> Boximg Footwork;
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jmdN6CV2NVc&desktop_uri=/watch?v=jmdN6CV2NVc
> 
> 
> Notice they maintain the same stance throughout.
> 
> in either case, the boxer displays superior and more active footwork than the Karatekas. In fighting, footwork is more important than learning several stances you're never going to use.



In this forum you have been comparing apples to oranges, now you are comparing oranges to different oranges.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Great video about separating realism from the fantasy in the martial arts;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Oy4TwtoDs50#t=468



The guy in the video just sounds like someone who does not understand the first thing about traditional martial arts training.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Once again you are using one video of one aspect to try to explain all aspects. Footwork also includes staying in one stance and moving in different directions i.e the foot is doing work.



Read my post again. I'm talking about footwork, not stance transitioning. I'm also pointing out that learning 10-12 stances when you only use 1 is a pretty dumb way to train. Boxers do it better.



> It's not square if you stand side on. A horse riding stance is designed for situations where you need stability, not mobility.Boxers need to remain mobile at all times because if the stand still for too long the referee will separate them.



Boxer stances have stability, and mobility. Again, its why when people fight, they all jump right into a similar stance.



K-man said:


> Two things. As an example of footwork, you can't see the feet at all. And this stance is nothing like the 'boxer' stance you showed a few posts back. It is exactly like our TMA natural fighting stance. The take down is similar to what we would do using Sanchin dachi, so what's the big deal? What you have shown, apart from the actual clinch is almost exactly what we do in TMA.



You just asked that you would like to see a takedown done from a boxer stance. I just showed you one. Unless you actually think a kickboxer couldn't perform a muay thai clinch from a boxing stance. Standard boxers clinch all the time.

The point is this; You can do everything you need to do from the boxer stance, or the natural fighting stance. Everything else is just traditional fluff.

Here's another example. It comes from Kyokushin;






Where's the dozens of stances? They're all utilizing a boxer/natural fighting stance.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Read my post again. I'm talking about footwork, not stance transitioning. I'm also pointing out that learning 10-12 stances when you only use 1 is a pretty dumb way to train. Boxers do it better.
> 
> In terms of functional stances I teach five. One of those is pretty much your boxing stance but not as deep, one makes up distance, one is multipurpose for take down or quick movement and the other two are part of throws such as you would find in judo.
> 
> Boxer stances have stability, and mobility. Again, its why when people fight, they all jump right into a similar stance.
> 
> So what you are actually saying is that there is no practical difference here between a TMA and MMA.
> 
> You just asked that you would like to see a takedown done from a boxer stance. I just showed you one. Unless you actually think a kickboxer couldn't perform a muay thai clinch from a boxing stance. Standard boxers clinch all the time.
> 
> What garbage! The video at no stage shows the footwork on the floor. What you see is one guy standing in front of the other. Nothing at all to do with 'boxer' stance. The fact that boxers clinch proves the point that they are not just using one stance. The fact that they are not at risk of a knee to the groin means they can just stand there, unlike Muay Thai or MMA fighter or a TMA fighter.
> 
> The point is this; You can do everything you need to do from the boxer stance, or the natural fighting stance. Everything else is just traditional fluff.


Which again just demonstrates you total ignorance of what we are trying to discuss. For example you quote judo as being practical. Here is a clip of basic judo. The stance that the guy is using an 4:00 is Shiko dachi. One or the useless fluff that I teach.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=31lUAp-PIrg

And here is another. The take down at 1:13 is using Sanchin dachi. At 7:45 he's using Zenkutsu dach to facilitate a throw. At 8:49 he's using Shiko dachi. At 9:18 he's using Zenkutsu dachi to enter. Again the useless fluff I teach. 
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wKYGuPNdmls
Why don't judo guys just use 'boxing' stance if it is the best?

As for your Kyokushin video. There are no takedowns so of course all they are using is moto dachi. That is our basic TMA fighting stance.

So there are four of the five stances I teach in the styles that you are holding up as best.

But let's not get to carried away. You like BJJ.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V62IUmra09I
All the takedowns that don't follow to the ground I teach in TMA and the last double leg takedown looks surprisingly like Shiko dachi, but it couldn't possibly be because these guys are BJJ and they don't use TMA methods .. or maybe they do. And BTW, no sign of 'boxing' stance in the BJJ clip. Now I'm really confused.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Read my post again. I'm talking about footwork, not stance transitioning. I'm also pointing out that learning 10-12 stances when you only use 1 is a pretty dumb way to train. Boxers do it better.



Stance transitioning IS footwork. Boxing is simple and limited to only punches as attacks and does not use things like kicks, takedowns, joint locks etc, therefore it does not require many stances, that is why they only use a small number of them. You can kick a with a lot more power from a back stance than you can with a boxing stance so if you do more than just punch, then only having 1 stance would be a pretty dumb way to train, as you put it.



Hanzou said:


> Boxer stances have stability, and mobility. Again, its why when people fight, they all jump right into a similar stance.



So does the basic TMA back stance, which is the stance many TMA practitioners 'jump right into' when they have to defend themselves.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Stance transitioning IS footwork. Boxing is simple and limited to only punches as attacks and does not use things like kicks, takedowns, joint locks etc, therefore it does not require many stances, that is why they only use a small number of them. You can kick a with a lot more power from a back stance than you can with a boxing stance so if you do more than just punch, then only having 1 stance would be a pretty dumb way to train, as you put it.



MMA utilizes the same stance, and it does far more than one thing. Judo, Bjj, and Kickboxing all use the natural stance. In all my years in boxing, Judo and Bjj, we never spent a class drilling dozens of stances. Karate, Kung Fu, TKD on the other hand......



> So does the basic TMA back stance, which is the stance many TMA practitioners 'jump right into' when they have to defend themselves.



I know. My point is why waste time learning the other stances when you can do everything from that one stance? No one is going to be fighting in Cat Stance for example.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I do believe that I said my goal is to get them to the ground and control them once they're there.


No I do believe you said your goal was to take them down and choke them out because thats more humane. 



> If that means choking them out, pinning them down, or kicking them in the face, that's what I'm going to do.


Good your learning something here.  


> Throwing or knocking someone to the ground is far more efficient than trying to beat them into the ground using strikes.


Its not about getting them on the ground.  Its about getting away or ending the threat by any means you can.


> See that video of the cop brawling with that thug for reference. A simple throw into control (lock/pin from standing position) would have ended that confrontation right then and there.


1st hes not a cop hes a security guard, 2nd he had no intention of controlling the confrontation, he wanted to throw blows.  That was his desire and that was what he did.  



> We train in gi and no gi for both throws and grappling. Throwing someone onto a street surface while training is unnecessary, and a pretty huge liability for the school. However, I wouldn't be surprised if some people tried it outside of school to test their ukemi.


Dont need to throw people into the street but you do need try things out doors on different surfaces with different clothing.  For example Im a cop and I also train in Judo, there are several throws I wont use in uniform because the gun belt, gun position, radio cord,ect.  I know this because Ive tried it.  if you have never tried to complete a throw on gravel in shoes its alot harder then in the dojo.  

Bjj, Judo, Boxing, Aikido, wrestling, Goju, all have pluses and minuses and can all be used in different situations.  There is no perfect system.  Each is effective in what it was designed to do.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I know. My point is why waste time learning the other stances when you can do everything from that one stance? No one is going to be fighting in Cat Stance for example.


Oh dear! Wrong again! You really need to do some research. People might get the impression you know nothing about TMA if you keep this up. 
Gogen Yamaguchi was known for fighting out of cat stance. When I did fight in tournaments my front kick from cat stance won me more points than any other technique. I was a bit older than my contemporaries so I let them jump around and come to me rather than chase them. Cat stance was great for that. Now that I'm out of that scene I teach neko as a technique to use against taller opponents and the perfect platform to move quickly in any direction. There you go, now you have all five 'fluff' stances I teach.   They all have their uses in reality based self defence and you were obviously not shown any of them with their application. I'm not sure where all the 'dozens' of stances you are talking about are taught. Certainly nowhere I have been.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> My point is why waste time learning the other stances when you can do everything from that one stance? No one is going to be fighting in Cat Stance for example.


Again, you may only look at this from a "striker" point of view. In order to apply a proper "hip throw", your 1st landing step has to be a "cat stance". If you have your leading foot landing flat, your opponent can sweep you.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> No I do believe you said your goal was to take them down and choke them out because thats more humane.



Ideally, yes.



> Its not about getting them on the ground.  Its about getting away or ending the threat by any means you can.



Of course it is, and getting them on the ground is the fastest way to end the threat.



> 1st hes not a cop hes a security guard, 2nd he had no intention of controlling the confrontation, he wanted to throw blows.  That was his desire and that was what he did.



I'm pretty sure his intention was to knock the guy out.



> Dont need to throw people into the street but you do need try things out doors on different surfaces with different clothing.  For example Im a cop and I also train in Judo, there are several throws I wont use in uniform because the gun belt, gun position, radio cord,ect.  I know this because Ive tried it.  if you have never tried to complete a throw on gravel in shoes its alot harder then in the dojo.
> 
> Bjj, Judo, Boxing, Aikido, wrestling, Goju, all have pluses and minuses and can all be used in different situations.  There is no perfect system.  Each is effective in what it was designed to do.



Which is why I do mixed martial arts.


----------



## Hanzou

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Again, you may only look at this from a "striker" point of view. In order to apply a proper "hip throw", your 1st landing step has to be a "cat stance". If you have your leading foot landing flat, your opponent can sweep you.



Where exactly is the cat stance being used when executing a "proper" hip throw?






or


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> Where exactly is the cat stance being used when executing a "proper" hip throw?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or



In the 1st clip at 0.09 and 2nd clip at 0.11, when he lands his right foot, he should land on his toes first to avoid being swept. To commit 100% on that forward stepping is not a good idea. When you use "cat stance", you can divide your commitment in 2 steps, cat stance (not committed), and full foot landing (committed). It's much safer this way.

In the following solo drill, 






it's easy to see that 

- cat stance (0% weight on the leading foot),
- 4-6 stance (40%  weight on the leading foot), and 
- horse stance (50% weight on each foot), 

are the building blocks for the most basic "hip throw" (the mother of all throws). A simple boxing stance is just not enough for the throwing art that you train.

If a student doesn't understand the basic stances, how can you teach him the detail of your throwing art? Without understanding the weight distribution, it's very difficult to learn the throwing art. I assume we both agree that the throwing art is more than just "pull guard" and "jump guard".


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Except is doesn't. Boxers would never be in horse riding stance because its too square, gives up too much reach, and lacks mobility.



Ahhh, more ignorance. Where did you get the patently false idea that horseriding stance is only used facing an opponent.? As early as Kicho 3, (BASIC form 3...) it's taught side-on to the opponent.
Stances, as taught in TMA, are fluid and flexible. Once again, the problem is your lack of understanding.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Ideally, yes.


Nothing ideal about getting on the ground and choking someone in a real fight.  


> Of course it is, and getting them on the ground is the fastest way to end the threat.


Sometimes.  Sometimes its just better to hit and run


> I'm pretty sure his intention was to knock the guy out.


Right so wjybdo you keep trying to use it as an example of poor grappling when Ive told you all along he had no intention of grappling.  Thats like saying its a poor examole of marksmanship beacuse he didnt shoot him.


----------



## Hanzou

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In the 1st clip at 0.09 and 2nd clip at 0.11, when he lands his right foot, he should land on his toes first to avoid being swept. To commit 100% on that forward stepping is not a good idea. When you use "cat stance", you can divide your commitment in 2 steps, cat stance (not committed), and full foot landing (committed). It's much safer this way.
> 
> In the following solo drill,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's easy to see that
> 
> - cat stance (0% weight on the leading foot),
> - 4-6 stance (40%  weight on the leading foot), and
> - horse stance (50% weight on each foot),




Sorry, but I put a bit more faith behind the technique of a Judoka that's actually throwing someone, than a Kung Fu guy waving his hands around in the air.



> are the building blocks for the most basic "hip throw" (the mother of all throws). A simple boxing stance is just not enough for the throwing art that you train.



Ronda Rousey did exactly that around the 3:25 mark in this video;

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp82n1_miesha-tate-vs-ronda-rousey-full-fight-hd_sport



> If a student doesn't understand the basic stances, how can you teach him the detail of your throwing art? Without understanding the weight distribution, it's very difficult to learn the throwing art. I assume we both agree that the throwing art is more than just "pull guard" and "jump guard".



Judoka have been learning to throw without learning "cat stances" or "horse stances" for well over a century, and have been doing just fine.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> Ahhh, more ignorance. Where did you get the patently false idea that horseriding stance is only used facing an opponent.? As early as Kicho 3, (BASIC form 3...) it's taught side-on to the opponent.
> Stances, as taught in TMA, are fluid and flexible. Once again, the problem is your lack of understanding.




















So fluid.... :lol:


----------



## ballen0351

When did random you tube clips of random people become proof of anything?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> When did random you tube clips of random people become proof of anything?



It's proof that traditional arts aren't teaching fluid or flexible stance work. It also backs up my point that people aren't cycling through several stances while fighting. They're using a natural stance while slapping each other with their terrible hand techniques.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> It's proof that traditional arts aren't teaching fluid or flexible stance work. It also backs up my point that people aren't cycling through several stances while fighting. They're using a natural stance while slapping each other with their terrible hand techniques.


How do you know?  do you know what these guys are taught?  just because its on you tube and its got a title doesnt mean anything

this guys claims to be a master too:


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> It's proof that traditional arts aren't teaching fluid or flexible stance work. It also backs up my point that people aren't cycling through several stances while fighting. They're using a natural stance while slapping each other with their terrible hand techniques.


You cycle through stances in Judo even if they dont name them and go over them in great detail.  I see several of my Goju stances in my Judo.


----------



## Tames D

This thread is a train wreck!


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> It's proof that traditional arts aren't teaching fluid or flexible stance work. It also backs up my point that people aren't cycling through several stances while fighting. They're using a natural stance while slapping each other with their terrible hand techniques.


But it is also proof that you don't even know what you are looking at. All you have shown is basically sport sparring. In particular the Shotokan guys are not even using a natural stance. That is not TMA. In TMA you enter and engage and don't disengage until it's over. In that way it is no different to what you would see in your MMA contest. Your grappler is going to come in, engage and throw or take down his opponent. The only difference with the TMA is I don't want to be on the ground as well. What you don't seem to be able to comprehend, or you are being deliberately stupid and just trolling, is that the stances we are discussing are not stances you use when you are jumping up and down and waving hands and feet at each other like the sport sparring videos you have posted. You use the stances when you have hold of your opponent to throw him to the ground or get him into a position for a choke. 

You have dragged this thread out by 20 pages with your ridiculous posts that you keep repeating even though those amongst us that actually train TMA tell you are BS. You have no experience of TMA, you have no knowledge of TMA yet you keep posting drivel that continues to demonstrate that total lack of knowledge.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> You cycle through stances in Judo even if they dont name them and go over them in great detail.  I see several of my Goju stances in my Judo.



So then Judo has the superior method. You're not wasting large amounts of class time drilling pointless stances. You're spending class time drilling actual throws.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> So then Judo has the superior method. You're not wasting large amounts of class time drilling pointless stances. You're spending class time drilling actual throws.


There not pointless if your doing them.  My judo class does talk about the stances.  Yours doesn't.  Maybe your teacher just doesn't know.  It all starts with the basics.  Basic stances and rooting.  Just because you don't understand it or your teacher doesn't know it doesn't mean its pointless


----------



## MJS

http://www.videojug.com/film/how-to-do-judo-stances

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070103083145AAuHapk

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f12/bent-over-stance-bjj-2173121/











When people hear 'stance' it seems that some, well, at least 1 person here, thinks that it's stationary, with no movement.  In reality, a stance is simply a quick transition.  Oh sure, in the Kenpo and Kyokushin that I train, there are static stances, that we use to train kata, punches, kicks, etc., however, even during sparring, we see stances.  One drill that we worked on one night, was transitioning into a slight cat stance, while throwing a lead leg front kick to the stomach.  We then went on to spar, where a number of the people in the class, made this work with ease.

Oh and I agree with Tames D...the train crash quite a few pages ago.


----------



## Koshiki

Hanzou said:


> Well. think about the nemesis of TMA practitioners; Wrestlers and Boxers. During my Karate days, most of my peers considered beating a boxer or a wrestler to be the ultimate showcase of the effectiveness of our styles. That says something, because it immediately implies that our TMA is inherently inferior to boxing and wrestling, and frankly for the most part it was.
> 
> Not because of the art itself, but how we practiced it. A boxer is in the ring hitting an opponent, or outside the ring hitting a heavy bag or jumping rope. Meanwhile, we're in our dojo hitting empty air and doing katas. The boxer has 5 punches they perfect, and we have hundreds that we have to cycle through. Most boxers are lean, and in shape, while most of us were flabby and out of shape. So when it came time to spar against a boxer, the outcome wasn't surprising. Wrestling is no different.
> 
> I don't believe that TMAs are all that effective. Swinging a sword around or doing katas/forms isn't going to prepare you for that 250lb gorilla trying to bring pain down upon you. The martial sports are simply better. Why? Because the martial sports get you in better shape, are highly competitive, are highly combative, and cross train constantly. For example, Anderson Silva's domination in MMA made more people check out Muay Thai kickboxing. Rhonda Rousey's success has gotten people to check out Judo.
> 
> People who practice MMA have nothing against TMA styles, as long as they're proven. Judo and Muay Thai are as old as many Kung Fu styles, Aikido, and Bujinkan Ninjutsu. The problem is when the latter starts saying that they're too "deadly" for the ring, or forbid their students from cross-training, MMA folks start rolling their eyes. If you can't fight in the ring with rules and safety, you're not going to be able to fight in the street where there are no rules or safety. When your sensei or sifu doesn't want you training at the local BJJ gym, something's wrong.



I dropped out of this thread, but I'll jump back in for a second. This is where Hanzou started out. Basically, I think most any of us would agree with him at this point. He says, basically;
1. Traditional Arts may teach great techniques and theories and practices, but there is a tendency to neglect fitness in many cases. This is bad. Competitive Martial Sports can NOT be out of shape, or they will lose.
2. Sword forms are probably not the most practical way to learn self-defense.
3. Kata doesn't train self-defense.
4. Sport Martial Arts are forced to evolve to contain the changing rules and techniques of the game.

1. Definitely true of many schools. I might even say most non-sport schools tend to focus more on skill and technique than physical fitness, while the opposite is true of many sport competitors.
2. Probably true, too. Unless you routinely carry a three foot edged hunk of steel with you, or are likely to be able to grab one in a split second... Then again, I work at a grocery store where I have a 14" blade machete/melon knife at hand almost all the time, so maybe I should learn more machete self-defense!
3. Shows a complete lack of knowledge of how kata/bunkai/application function, but I would say is typical of a good deal of schools claiming traditional martial art lineage.
4. Inarguabley true.

What Hanzou starts out saying, is that there are a lot of "TMA" schools that don't understand or teach "TMA" as the ore traditional "TMA" schools do. I agree. I think most of the rest of us do as well. From there, the conversation quickly degenerates into a desperate attempt to resist and keep claiming that traditional methods are useless.

However, let's remember that the conversation started at some fairly common ground, which most of us acknowledge *is* very definitely a problem among "traditional" martial schools. There are many schools that I would not call McDojos, that I believe really believe they are teaching effective combative principles and training, but that are producing people who train kata mindlessly in the air with no attempt to develop the technique within, and who do tag-sparring, and think that the two will somehow mesh and form a complete, effective fighter. This clearly is NOT the traditional mindset, but we can see how Hanzou got might think it to be, especially with limited or poor experience in TKD, "kung fu", and the several other styles he has extensive experience with...


----------



## Koshiki

MJS said:


> When people hear 'stance' it seems that some, well, at least 1 person here, thinks that it's stationary, with no movement.  In reality, a stance is simply a quick transition.  Oh sure, in the Kenpo and Kyokushin that I train, there are static stances, that we use to train kata, punches, kicks, etc., however, even during sparring, we see stances.  One drill that we worked on one night, was transitioning into a slight cat stance, while throwing a lead leg front kick to the stomach.  We then went on to spar, where a number of the people in the class, made this work with ease.



There are some FMA guys that we see a few times a year. They always mention how they don't do stances, how their footwork is fluid, and how the Japanese/Korean/Chinese Martial arts DO do these static stances. They always say, "In the Philippines, there is no such thing as a static stance." Yet, neither is there in any of the applied Karate/Taekwondo I have done. Stances, yes. Static ones, no, not for more than a fraction of a second at the end of a linear strike, perhaps. But it is still a prevailing mindset, which I think many people in Traditional Martial Arts hold as well as those without. Again, Hanzou clearly has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to stance-work, but I can see WHY it is that he assumes what he does. There are many who DO practice static stances and assume that they are a viable option.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I'm pretty sure his intention was to knock the guy out.



We wasn't very good at it then.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tames D said:


> This thread is a train wreck!



And we know who the driver is.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Just popping back in to clarify something:

Static stances do have their uses; in the Kung Fu styles I've trained in they are used for developing leg strength, balance and in some cases static-active flexibility. In application, very few of these stances will be used for more than a second. Having a good, strong root in TMA is important.


----------



## MJS

Zack Cart said:


> There are some FMA guys that we see a few times a year. They always mention how they don't do stances, how their footwork is fluid, and how the Japanese/Korean/Chinese Martial arts DO do these static stances. They always say, "In the Philippines, there is no such thing as a static stance." Yet, neither is there in any of the applied Karate/Taekwondo I have done. Stances, yes. Static ones, no, not for more than a fraction of a second at the end of a linear strike, perhaps. But it is still a prevailing mindset, which I think many people in Traditional Martial Arts hold as well as those without. Again, Hanzou clearly has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to stance-work, but I can see WHY it is that he assumes what he does. There are many who DO practice static stances and assume that they are a viable option.



I've seen many schools teaching static.  For example...my Kyokushin dojo, we'll do our blocks and hand strikes, from a static stance (sanchin dachi).  Of course, we also do them while moving.  As for the FMAs...the Modern Arnis that I do, has stances.  You can see the list of them here:
http://www.modernarnis.net/ranking/level2.shtml

So, yes, when a new student is learning something for the first time, it's done slow and somewhat static.  Of course, once they get the idea, then movement is added.  IMO, things need to be done slow at first, even in the grappling arts, in order to get the basics/foundation down pat, and then, movement is gradually added.


----------



## Koshiki

Dinkydoo said:


> Static stances do have their uses; in the Kung Fu styles I've trained in they are used for developing leg strength, balance and in some cases static-active flexibility. In application, very few of these stances will be used for more than a second. Having a good, strong root in TMA is important.



Agreed. Oh, definitely. I think even Hanzou has alluded to traditional martial arts formal work being great for things like balance, flexibility, etc. He just seems to think that they do not occur in application, because they occur too swiftly and smoothly for him to be able to notice them. He thinks we use horse stance the same way as a base from which movement comes, not as a position which is integral to the motion-structure of many fluid movements. I *think* hanzou agrees that the ability to hold a deep, strong horse stance is great in terms of general athleticism, just not in terms of martial application, yes?


----------



## MJS

Zack Cart said:


> I dropped out of this thread, but I'll jump back in for a second. This is where Hanzou started out. Basically, I think most any of us would agree with him at this point. He says, basically;
> 1. Traditional Arts may teach great techniques and theories and practices, but there is a tendency to neglect fitness in many cases. This is bad. Competitive Martial Sports can NOT be out of shape, or they will lose.
> 2. Sword forms are probably not the most practical way to learn self-defense.
> 3. Kata doesn't train self-defense.
> 4. Sport Martial Arts are forced to evolve to contain the changing rules and techniques of the game.
> 
> 1. Definitely true of many schools. I might even say most non-sport schools tend to focus more on skill and technique than physical fitness, while the opposite is true of many sport competitors.
> 2. Probably true, too. Unless you routinely carry a three foot edged hunk of steel with you, or are likely to be able to grab one in a split second... Then again, I work at a grocery store where I have a 14" blade machete/melon knife at hand almost all the time, so maybe I should learn more machete self-defense!
> 3. Shows a complete lack of knowledge of how kata/bunkai/application function, but I would say is typical of a good deal of schools claiming traditional martial art lineage.
> 4. Inarguabley true.
> 
> What Hanzou starts out saying, is that there are a lot of "TMA" schools that don't understand or teach "TMA" as the ore traditional "TMA" schools do. I agree. I think most of the rest of us do as well. From there, the conversation quickly degenerates into a desperate attempt to resist and keep claiming that traditional methods are useless.
> 
> However, let's remember that the conversation started at some fairly common ground, which most of us acknowledge *is* very definitely a problem among "traditional" martial schools. There are many schools that I would not call McDojos, that I believe really believe they are teaching effective combative principles and training, but that are producing people who train kata mindlessly in the air with no attempt to develop the technique within, and who do tag-sparring, and think that the two will somehow mesh and form a complete, effective fighter. This clearly is NOT the traditional mindset, but we can see how Hanzou got might think it to be, especially with limited or poor experience in TKD, "kung fu", and the several other styles he has extensive experience with...



1) IMO, being fit is important.  No, I'm not saying people have to look like Arnold, but when you see some MAists out there...well, it has me shaking my head.

2) Agreed.  Of course, as we know, some TMAs practice things, that seem non practical to some, yet there is some historical/traditional meaning behind it.  Of course, if someone chooses to do this, nothing wrong with it, IMO.  Of course, some things can be translated to a different weapon, ie: a bo with a broom handle.  

3) Agreed 100%!!!  I've been at my share of schools, and while doing kata, I asked about what the moves were doing, what they were for, why we were doing them, and was told, "Well.....because that's the way the kata is done."  Doesn't sound like a good breakdown of the movements to me. LOL!  Fortunately, I explored things myself, as well as with others who were able to give an explaination.  At my current dojo, my teacher explains as well as shows, what the moves do.

4) Yup.

So, in a nutshell, there are poor schools out there, and there are very good schools out there.  IMO, it's up to the individual to find the right one.  Not all schools are the same.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

*Static stances do have their uses;* 

It's not difficult to see that the following stance 

http://imageshack.us/a/img718/3319/chang13tb.jpg

can help you to "polish" your "leg lift" throw (Uchi Mata).

http://imageshack.us/a/img831/4315/linleglift.jpg

and "leg block" throw (O Guruma).

http://imageshack.us/a/img19/3762/johnleglift.jpg

The static stances can help you to push yourself much harder than the true application can. If your body can't feel comfortable to be in certain shape, you just can't do certain techniques well.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> There not pointless if your doing them.  My judo class does talk about the stances.  Yours doesn't.  Maybe your teacher just doesn't know.  It all starts with the basics.  Basic stances and rooting.  Just because you don't understand it or your teacher doesn't know it doesn't mean its pointless



My Judo class also talk about stances. However, we don't sit in cat stance or horse stance for several minutes perfecting our stance, we discuss the proper stance while we're performing the action. So if I'm doing a throw, my instructor will correct my posture as I perform the throw. This is done so when mastered, the movement is smooth and fluid. You can also "feel" it, because if your movement isn't correct, the throw will be more difficult to perform. The better the technique, the easier the throw becomes.

If we learned 10 different stances, and then attempted to break down those stances into steps in a throw, it would be a cumbersome mess. Whenever I go up against a Karateka, TKD, or Kung Fu exponent, their throws and takedowns are pretty non existent. You also get two types; The ones who stick in one spot like a giant target, or the kind that bounce around.

Both types are easy to take down.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> But it is also proof that you don't even know what you are looking at. All you have shown is basically sport sparring. In particular the Shotokan guys are not even using a natural stance. That is not TMA. In TMA you enter and engage and don't disengage until it's over. In that way it is no different to what you would see in your MMA contest. Your grappler is going to come in, engage and throw or take down his opponent. The only difference with the TMA is I don't want to be on the ground as well. What you don't seem to be able to comprehend, or you are being deliberately stupid and just trolling, is that the stances we are discussing are not stances you use when you are jumping up and down and waving hands and feet at each other like the sport sparring videos you have posted. You use the stances when you have hold of your opponent to throw him to the ground or get him into a position for a choke.
> 
> You have dragged this thread out by 20 pages with your ridiculous posts that you keep repeating even though those amongst us that actually train TMA tell you are BS. You have no experience of TMA, you have no knowledge of TMA yet you keep posting drivel that continues to demonstrate that total lack of knowledge.



Did you miss the parts where I showed that you can perform all of those throws from a natural or boxer stance?

The majority of MMA fighters blend kickboxing/boxing and wrestling/judo/Bjj incredibly well. 

Again, its the simple fact that you have one side that is obsolete, and another side that is dynamic and ever-changing.

For example, watch this video;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSX0PCQXiO4&feature=c4-overview&list=UUsUbFOUqtrU4oRSDfjb78ig

That head movement and evasion comes form boxing. Which is superior for self defense? That level of evasion and defense, or the archiac blocking and static stances of traditional MA?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> My Judo class also talk about stances


Wait you just said before stances are pointless now you say you do learn them.  so how are they pointless?  Id like to hear your instructors opinion on his pointless stances he teaches you


> However, we don't sit in cat stance or horse stance for several minutes perfecting our stance,


yes why would we ever want to make sure we have the basics down


> we discuss the proper stance while we're performing the action. So if I'm doing a throw, my instructor will correct my posture as I perform the throw.


but but stances are pointless remember


> This is done so when mastered, the movement is smooth and fluid. You can also "feel" it, because if your movement isn't correct, the throw will be more difficult to perform. The better the technique, the easier the throw becomes.


so the better the basic fundamentals and stances are the easier it is huh?  no kidding


> If we learned 10 different stances, and then attempted to break down those stances into steps in a throw, it would be a cumbersome mess. Whenever I go up against a Karateka, TKD, or Kung Fu exponent, their throws and takedowns are pretty non existent. You also get two types; The ones who stick in one spot like a giant target, or the kind that bounce around.


I guess your just so much better then everyone else.  So much better then all  Karateka, TKD, anf Kung Fu guys.  See I had no Idea you were such a bad *** fighter  Im sorry I doubted you


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Did you miss the parts where I showed that you can perform all of those throws from a natural or boxer stance?
> 
> I'm sorry, that is just not correct and none of the videos you have linked show any takedowns from a boxing stance. Boxers don't train other footwork because they don't do takedowns. If you look at judo videos there stance is totally different and they step into other stances as they do the throw, look at any of the throws they do apart from when they go to the ground with their opponent and you will have a TMA stance. Whether they train those stances or not is immaterial. We do train them but mostly by performing the throw.
> 
> The majority of MMA fighters blend kickboxing/boxing and wrestling/judo/Bjj incredibly well.
> 
> No argument.
> 
> Again, its the simple fact that you have one side that is obsolete, and another side that is dynamic and ever-changing.
> 
> Here is where you go of the rails again. It is *not* a simple fact that one side is obsolete at all. In fact I would challenge you, apart from when we perform kihon kata, to differentiate between most of our training and general MMA training. The difference is that you want to go to the ground and I don't. Even if I do go to the ground you will have to have a good ground game to get me, especially if we agree that once I could damage you we stop, same as tapping out. TMA training is very similar. It is hands on against total resistance. Obviously we don't punch each other full power in training but we do let our partner know if their guard is not right. There isn't much in the Krav Maga course that isn't found in TMA, firearm training excepted. Sure there are variations of technique and the KM is less complicated but the base material is the same.
> 
> For example, watch this video;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSX0PCQXiO4&feature=c4-overview&list=UUsUbFOUqtrU4oRSDfjb78ig
> 
> That head movement and evasion comes form boxing. Which is superior for self defense? That level of evasion and defense, or the archiac blocking and static stances of traditional MA?


Once again you are spouting crap. Head movement and evasion is part of every TMA. We even have words for it. Tai Tsabaki when you evade by moving your head and body and Ashi Tsabaki when you move by stepping. The only time we block is when we are caught by surprise or when we are being pummelled and you close up. Basically they are instinctive but the ones I teach are the KM ones. Archaic blocking does not exist. What you have seen people doing in basic karate classes is schoolboy karate at its worst. It is not TMA. I teach there are no blocks in karate. To my mind it is totally illogical to use those techniques as blocks. I invite anyone to stand in front of me and use any 'block' that they have been taught to stop me hitting them. So far I have not had one. So when you spoke earlier about someone stopping you punching them in the face using an upper block, I agree with you. If you did the same to me I believe it a reasonable chance you might be sleeping it off because for me, one of the applications of Age Uke is an uppercut. None of the applications I teach is a block. Almost all the Ukes involve a deflection but there is in almost all applications a simultaneous strike.

And I'm not sure where this obsession with static stances come from. They are not used in a static situation.  The only fighting stance we have is similar to your boxer's stance except we fight off both sides. All other stances we slip into as we are doing takedowns or moving about. Sure we train them separately to teach them but again we are talking schoolboy karate. I really think you should go and watch training in a real TMA school before you start posting such inaccurate crap. 

Oh, by the way. As for competition, some of us don't want to compete. I did actually go in tournaments until I was 58 but in honesty it was not my scene. I read elsewhere to that the vast majority of MMA guys also have no intention to compete. Like people across the whole spectrum, most of us train to keep fit, to have fun and to learn to defend ourselves if attacked. I have no doubt that MMA is like that as are TMAs.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Again, its the simple fact that you have one side that is obsolete, and another side that is dynamic and ever-changing.
> 
> For example, watch this video;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSX0PCQXiO4&feature=c4-overview&list=UUsUbFOUqtrU4oRSDfjb78ig
> 
> That head movement and evasion comes form boxing. Which is superior for self defense? That level of evasion and defense, or the archiac blocking and static stances of traditional MA?




Well let's see, get some regular people off the street with little or no  martial arts training and tell them exactly where to punch you and have  them only punch you there while you use the head movement you have used  in many years of boxing. Then get someone on a martial arts forum to  put that up as "proof' that boxing is superior to traditional martial  arts. Good luck with that.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Here is an example of how applications should be taught in Kung Fu; not enough power to injure your partner but enough force to train correct body mechanics - use solo practice with heavy bag or pad work to develop power within the applications. 

Also note the (very) subtle use of horse, twisted and bow stances. 

Low stances = conditioning (usually)

High stances = fighting application

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTcyMDI0MDcy.html?x


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Did you miss the parts where I showed that you can perform all of those throws from a natural or boxer stance?
> 
> The majority of MMA fighters blend kickboxing/boxing and wrestling/judo/Bjj incredibly well.
> 
> Again, its the simple fact that you have one side that is obsolete, and another side that is dynamic and ever-changing.
> 
> For example, watch this video;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSX0PCQXiO4&feature=c4-overview&list=UUsUbFOUqtrU4oRSDfjb78ig
> 
> That head movement and evasion comes form boxing. Which is superior for self defense? That level of evasion and defense, or the archiac blocking and static stances of traditional MA?


Evasion is a major part of my training.  You just have no clue what your talking about.  Thats all there is to it.  You have very limited knowledge of TMA and based your opinion on something you know little to nothing about.  You have yet to post anything you claim is so great that we dont already do in my Goju Class.   Where do you think all these great techniques come from?  They come from TMA.


----------



## ballen0351

Im going back to the Study where at least when people make an argument they may be wrong but they at least have some idea about what they are talking about.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> My Judo class also talk about stances. However, we don't sit in cat stance or horse stance for several minutes perfecting our stance, we discuss the proper stance while we're performing the action. So if I'm doing a throw, my instructor will correct my posture as I perform the throw. This is done so when mastered, the movement is smooth and fluid. You can also "feel" it, because if your movement isn't correct, the throw will be more difficult to perform. The better the technique, the easier the throw becomes.
> 
> If we learned 10 different stances, and then attempted to break down those stances into steps in a throw, it would be a cumbersome mess. Whenever I go up against a Karateka, TKD, or Kung Fu exponent, their throws and takedowns are pretty non existent. You also get two types; The ones who stick in one spot like a giant target, or the kind that bounce around.
> 
> Both types are easy to take down.



Let me ask you...when you're doing BJJ, do you not spend time learning various positions, escapes, counters, submissions, etc, all from the top and bottom?  I don't know about you, but my grappling teachers would always stress position before submission.  So, going on that, if you're not spending the time perfecting those things, just like the stances, well..when you go to use them, you're going to suck.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> That head movement and evasion comes form boxing. Which is superior for self defense? That level of evasion and defense, or the archiac blocking and static stances of traditional MA?



Gee, thats funny....if you watch a TMA such as Kyokushin, well, I don't know about you, but I see lots of evasion and defense.  Oh yeah, and those static stances...well, those guys look like they're moving pretty fluidly to me.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Wait you just said before stances are pointless now you say you do learn them.  so how are they pointless?  Id like to hear your instructors opinion on his pointless stances he teaches you



I said cycling through dozens of stances you never use is pointless. How many people are going to be fighting in Front Stance, Cat Stance, or that low Kung Fu stance for example?



> yes why would we ever want to make sure we have the basics down



In Judo the basics are the motions and proper posture during execution. Its not the same thing as standing in a stance for several minutes, then switching to the opposite side for several more minutes. All the while, when you begin free sparring, you're in a different stance altogether. 



> so the better the basic fundamentals and stances are the easier it is huh?  no kidding



Again, the fundamentals are taught within execution. They aren't taught in isolation. So when its time for me to actually execute a throw, my mind is replicating the body motion, not the stance I'm supposed to be in to properly execute the throw.



> I guess your just so much better then everyone else.  So much better then all  Karateka, TKD, anf Kung Fu guys.  See I had no Idea you were such a bad *** fighter  Im sorry I doubted you



Just my experience. I've seemed to have missed all of these amazing TMA practitioners.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Gee, thats funny....if you watch a TMA such as Kyokushin, well, I don't know about you, but I see lots of evasion and defense.  Oh yeah, and those static stances...well, those guys look like they're moving pretty fluidly to me.



Kyokushin is not a TMA. It was founded in 1964, places a pretty high value on competition, and it forms the basis of most Japanese kickboxing.



> Let me ask you...when you're doing BJJ, do you not spend time learning various positions, escapes, counters, submissions, etc, all from the top and bottom? I don't know about you, but my grappling teachers would always stress position before submission. So, going on that, if you're not spending the time perfecting those things, just like the stances, well..when you go to use them, you're going to suck.




Its not the same thing though. When I'm learning positioning, I'm learning its application at the same time, and that application is exactly how I would use it in a self defense situation.

When I did Karate and TKD before that, we were kicking and punching from every stance. Reverse punching from a front stance isn't very practical. When it came time to spar, our bodies instinctively returned to a more natural fighting posture. However, while training, we were still doing those awkward stances, and forced to hold those awkward stances until it was correct. This practice also stretched into the katas, which taught us more awkward stances and movements. 

When I started practicing kickboxing, everything was practiced from the natural fighting posture.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Well let's see, get some regular people off the street with little or no  martial arts training and tell them exactly where to punch you and have  them only punch you there while you use the head movement you have used  in many years of boxing. Then get someone on a martial arts forum to  put that up as "proof' that boxing is superior to traditional martial  arts. Good luck with that.



You think you're going to be fighting a bunch of black belts or prize fighters if you get into a fight on the street? :lol:


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Once again you are spouting crap. Head movement and evasion is part of every TMA. We even have words for it. Tai Tsabaki when you evade by moving your head and body and Ashi Tsabaki when you move by stepping. The only time we block is when we are caught by surprise or when we are being pummelled and you close up. Basically they are instinctive but the ones I teach are the KM ones. Archaic blocking does not exist. What you have seen people doing in basic karate classes is schoolboy karate at its worst. It is not TMA. I teach there are no blocks in karate. To my mind it is totally illogical to use those techniques as blocks. I invite anyone to stand in front of me and use any 'block' that they have been taught to stop me hitting them. So far I have not had one. So when you spoke earlier about someone stopping you punching them in the face using an upper block, I agree with you. If you did the same to me I believe it a reasonable chance you might be sleeping it off because for me, one of the applications of Age Uke is an uppercut. None of the applications I teach is a block. Almost all the Ukes involve a deflection but there is in almost all applications a simultaneous strike.
> 
> And I'm not sure where this obsession with static stances come from. They are not used in a static situation.  The only fighting stance we have is similar to your boxer's stance except we fight off both sides. All other stances we slip into as we are doing takedowns or moving about. Sure we train them separately to teach them but again we are talking schoolboy karate. I really think you should go and watch training in a real TMA school before you start posting such inaccurate crap.




Check out that awesome Goju Ryu stance transitioning, footwork and head movement;














Some of that black belt sparring..... :lol:


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I said cycling through dozens of stances you never use is pointless. How many people are going to be fighting in Front Stance, Cat Stance, or that low Kung Fu stance for example?
> 
> 
> 
> In Judo the basics are the motions and proper posture during execution. Its not the same thing as standing in a stance for several minutes, then switching to the opposite side for several more minutes. All the while, when you begin free sparring, you're in a different stance altogether.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, the fundamentals are taught within execution. They aren't taught in isolation. So when its time for me to actually execute a throw, my mind is replicating the body motion, not the stance I'm supposed to be in to properly execute the throw.
> 
> 
> 
> Just my experience. I've seemed to have missed all of these amazing TMA practitioners.



Here's a thought, instead of denigrating all things TMA and trying to convince everyone that you have training methods that are so much better than any TMA that ever existed, why don't you put up a video or 2 of yourself training and let everyone here decide for themselves if they are wasting their time or not drilling "pointless stances" and striking and blocking? Lets see if your modern training methods are making TMA training obsolete.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> You think you're going to be fighting a bunch of black belts or prize fighters if you get into a fight on the street? :lol:



You never know, one thing is for sure though, they won't be punching where I tell them to.:duh:


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Kyokushin is not a TMA. It was founded in 1964, places a pretty high value on competition, and it forms the basis of most Japanese kickboxing.



Be that as it may, for the sake of discussion here, *I* was putting any art that is not considered MMA, in the TMA category.  So, going on what you say, I take it that because Kyokushin places value on competition, that you're ok with it as a martial art, despite having stances, and other traditional things about it?





> Its not the same thing though. When I'm learning positioning, I'm learning its application at the same time, and that application is exactly how I would use it in a self defense situation.
> 
> When I did Karate and TKD before that, we were kicking and punching from every stance. Reverse punching from a front stance isn't very practical. When it came time to spar, our bodies instinctively returned to a more natural fighting posture. However, while training, we were still doing those awkward stances, and forced to hold those awkward stances until it was correct. This practice also stretched into the katas, which taught us more awkward stances and movements.
> 
> When I started practicing kickboxing, everything was practiced from the natural fighting posture. [/COLOR]



Ok, but you still started from a slower pace right?  To be clear, when learning an escape from the mount, you're learning the basics, the fine points, so the top guy isn't really offering much resistance at that initial time.  As the bottom guy gets more comfortable, more pressure, resistance is given, until you're now in a full rolling/sparring setting.  

I can't speak for anyone else, but when I was learning to punch, I started off slow, and gradually added in the movement/footwork, to make things more practical.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Be that as it may, for the sake of discussion here, *I* was putting any art that is not considered MMA, in the TMA category.  So, going on what you say, I take it that because Kyokushin places value on competition, that you're ok with it as a martial art, despite having stances, and other traditional things about it?



I'm okay with every martial art. I just believe that some waste their time doing pointless things that bog down the training process. Kyokushin is guilty of that since it has the trappings of a lot of traditional karate styles.



> Ok, but you still started from a slower pace right?  To be clear, when learning an escape from the mount, you're learning the basics, the fine points, so the top guy isn't really offering much resistance at that initial time.  As the bottom guy gets more comfortable, more pressure, resistance is given, until you're now in a full rolling/sparring setting.
> 
> I can't speak for anyone else, but when I was learning to punch, I started off slow, and gradually added in the movement/footwork, to make things more practical.



I'm not criticizing the pace, I'm criticizing the purpose. Why are you learning techniques that have little to no practical value? Why are you going through all of this traditional nonsense when the end result has you fighting like a crippled kickboxer with bad footwork and hand skills? 

The intentions are noble, but the results speak for themselves.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> I'm okay with every martial art. I just believe that some waste their time doing pointless things that bog down the training process. Kyokushin is guilty of that since it has the trappings of a lot of traditional karate styles.



Ok.





> I'm not criticizing the pace, I'm criticizing the purpose. Why are you learning techniques that have little to no practical value? Why are you going through all of this traditional nonsense when the end result has you fighting like a crippled kickboxer with bad footwork and hand skills?
> 
> The intentions are noble, but the results speak for themselves.



I would say the best answer to that, is for the sake of the traditions in the art.  Some arts train with a sword, yet you don't see anyone walking around with one.  I train in the FMA (Arnis) but I don't walk around with a stick and rarely carry a blade.  Yet you can pick up a pen and apply some of the same moves as you can with a blade.  Obviously you can't cut.  

As I've said, everyones goals are different, and while I personally think that some are kinda crazy, well, to each his own.  Personally, as much as some things may piss me off, it's not my job to police the martial arts world.  I care about how I train, and of course anyone that I might teach, but other than that...to each their own.  IMO though, I do find it hard to believe that ALL arts that fall under the TMA umbrella, are useless.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> I would say the best answer to that, is for the sake of the traditions in the art.  Some arts train with a sword, yet you don't see anyone walking around with one.  I train in the FMA (Arnis) but I don't walk around with a stick and rarely carry a blade.  Yet you can pick up a pen and apply some of the same moves as you can with a blade.  Obviously you can't cut.
> 
> As I've said, everyones goals are different, and while I personally think that some are kinda crazy, well, to each his own.  Personally, as much as some things may piss me off, it's not my job to police the martial arts world.  I care about how I train, and of course anyone that I might teach, but other than that...to each their own.  IMO though, I do find it hard to believe that ALL arts that fall under the TMA umbrella, are useless.



I have no issue with that. Just know what your martial art is, and what it isn't. For example, when I see people believe that they are Ninjas, and do all that bizarre Ninja stuff, that's fine, they can do what they wish. However, when they start making claims that their art is too "deadly" to be part of the competitive MA world, I have to call them out on their nonsense. A guy who thinks he's a Ninja or a samurai is no different than a guy at a renaissance fair thinking he's a squire or a knight because he wears the armor and participates in jousting tournaments. We'd laugh at the knight wannabe, but actually take the Ninja and Samurai guy seriously, and give them 100s of dollars to teach us 16th century battlefield tactics.

You might as well call MMA "Modern Martial Arts".


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I have to call them out on their nonsense. .



Why?  Who made you the keeper of the Fighting World


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Why?  Who made you the keeper of the Fighting World



I have my reasons....

The point is, many TMA schools use that "no competition" label as a shield to protect their style from objective scrutiny. Take Aikido for example. Though Aikido is a pretty modern art, it teaches things in a pretty traditional way. Often lacking aliveness, or any sense of true resistance. So what happens when an Aikidoka goes up against a Judoka?

This happens;






or this against wrestling;






And its a direct result of how the Aikidoka trains.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I have my reasons....


Like?


> The point is, many TMA schools use that "no competition" label as a shield to protect their style from objective scrutiny. Take Aikido for example. Though Aikido is a pretty modern art, it teaches things in a pretty traditional way. Often lacking aliveness, or any sense of true resistance. So what happens when an Aikidoka goes up against a Judoka?
> 
> This happens;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And its a direct result of how the Aikidoka trains.



Again more nonsense with a random Youtube clip as your "proof".  I have personally used Aikido in real life as a cop on a real bad guy and it worked perfectly.  So dont tell me it doesnt work I know for a fact it does because unlike you Ive been in the real world and used techniques on real bad guys with no rules not in a cage with preset agreements on what your allowed and not allowed to do.  You know nothing about the guys in this clip yet you want to use it as evidence.  You see one clip as proof that every Judo player will win against every Aikidoka.  You have your mind made up and thats fine.  YOUR the only one that cant see through your BS.  I hope for your sake your like 14 and just dont know any better yet because with your mindset your in for a rough road ahead if your ever really forced to defend yourself in a real fight and you try to use your sport rules.


----------



## ballen0351

using your debate skills heres a Karate Guy beating a Judo player so Karate is better then Judo always no exceptions


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Like?
> 
> 
> Again more nonsense with a random Youtube clip as your "proof".  I have personally used Aikido in real life as a cop on a real bad guy and it worked perfectly.  So dont tell me it doesnt work I know for a fact it does because unlike you Ive been in the real world and used techniques on real bad guys with no rules not in a cage with preset agreements on what your allowed and not allowed to do.  You know nothing about the guys in this clip yet you want to use it as evidence.  You see one clip as proof that every Judo player will win against every Aikidoka.  You have your mind made up and thats fine.  YOUR the only one that cant see through your BS.  I hope for your sake your like 14 and just dont know any better yet because with your mindset your in for a rough road ahead if your ever really forced to defend yourself in a real fight and you try to use your sport rules.



Would you prefer the second video where the Aikidoka shodan got smashed even faster by a wrestler?

Like I said before, I have nothing against any martial art. I actually rather like the concept behind Aikido, it is unfortunate that the concept falls short when the rubber hits the road. Also, I know that Aikido wristlocks work. The problem is (again) in the training of the art itself.

Unfortunately I'm not 14. When I was 14 I was wasting my time doing Tae Kwon Do at a local rec center. I wish I had started Bjj at that point in my life, instead of starting it over a decade later.


----------



## ballen0351

Oh wait here is Aikido tossing a TKD guy so by your logic Aikido is better then TKD


----------



## ballen0351

Oh no here Aikido beating a boxer well if its on You tube it must be true so Aikido is greater then Boxing


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> using your debate skills heres a Karate Guy beating a Judo player so Karate is better then Judo always no exceptions



A Karate guy who clearly cross-trained in Bjj.

Did you miss the ridiculously smooth omoplata he put on the Judo guy, or the mount and take down defense? The commentators even mentioned it during the fight.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Would you prefer the second video where the Aikidoka shodan got smashed even faster by a wrestler?


You missing the point.  Just because you find a random clip on you tube its not proof of anything other then that guy lost to that other guy while the camera was on.  you know nothing about either ones training, back ground, the rules they set, or the reason they were even fighting.  


> Like I said before, I have nothing against any martial art. I actually rather like the concept behind Aikido, it is unfortunate that the concept falls short when the rubber hits the road. Also, I know that Aikido wristlocks work. The problem is (again) in the training of the art itself.


And again you have no idea what your talking about.  You know so little about Aikido that when I say I used it in real life you assume I used a wrist lock.  When IN reality I launched a guy halfway across the room with one arm using a technique I was taught in class.  


> Unfortunately I'm not 14. When I was 14 I was wasting my time doing Tae Kwon Do at a local rec center. I wish I had started Bjj at that point in my life, instead of starting it over a decade later.


Well good luck my friend your going to need it


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Oh wait here is Aikido tossing a TKD guy so by your logic Aikido is better then TKD



To be fair, just about everything is better than TKD. :lol:



ballen0351 said:


> And again you have no idea what your talking about. You know so little about Aikido that when I say I used it in real life you assume I used a wrist lock. When *IN reality I launched a guy halfway across the room with one arm using a technique I was taught in class.*



And this is why I resort to youtube videos. People can spew whatever make-believe stuff they want on the internet.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> A Karate guy who clearly cross-trained in Bjj.
> 
> Did you miss the ridiculously smooth omoplata he put on the Judo guy, or the mount and take down defense? The commentators even mentioned it during the fight.



Prove it.  Prove hes trained in anything.  I learn sweeps, throws, mounts and take down defense in my standard Goju Class.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> To be fair, just about everything is better than TKD. :lol:



Easy to say from the safety of your keyboard my friend


----------



## ballen0351

Oh darn Karate must be better then BJJ its on You Tube after all


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Prove it.  Prove hes trained in anything.  I learn sweeps, throws, mounts and take down defense in my standard Goju Class.



1. He's from Brazil. If you're a MMA fighter in Brazil, you're going to be training in Bjj.
2. He performed a submission lock on a Judo black belt, and he did it with ridiculous ease.
3. His mount defense was clear Bjj, as was his sprawl.
4. The commentators mentioned it.

Please show me the Omoplata in the Kyokushin or Goju curriculum. I have a black belt in Shotokan, and Kyokushin came from Shotokan. The Omoplata doesn't exist in Shotokan, and I seriously doubt it exists in Kyokushin.

Its important to note that had the "karate guy" not cross trained in Bjj, he would have lost that fight.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> 1. He's from Brazil. If you're a MMA fighter in Brazil, you're going to be training in Bjj.
> 2. He performed a submission lock on a Judo black belt, and he did it with ridiculous ease.
> 3. His mount defense was clear Bjj, as was his sprawl.
> 4. The commentators mentioned it.
> 
> Please show me the Omoplata in the Kyokushin or Goju curriculum. I have a black belt in Shotokan, and Kyokushin came from Shotokan. The Omoplata doesn't exist in Shotokan, and I seriously doubt it exists in Kyokushin.
> 
> Its important to note that had the "karate guy" not cross trained in Bjj, he would have lost that fight.



Wait so what your saying is everything labeled on YouTube might not be what it says it is huh?


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Wait so what your saying is everything labeled on YouTube might not be what it says it is huh?



I'm saying that you should actually watch the video before you post it.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I'm saying that you should actually watch the video before you post it.



I did you still have not proven anything.  Saying all Brazilians train BJJ is stupid.  Do all Russians train Sambo?  Do all Israeli train Krav?  Do all Brazilian train Capoerota?  Oh no they can't they all train BJJ do all philliopino train Arnis?  
I don't Need to show you anything.  I train Goju and Judo and BJJ I see parts of each in the other.  I see Judo throws in Goju or vise versa I see Goju Arm bars and wrist locks in BJJ I don't need to prove to you something I know already.  Your the one that claims it's not there so............


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou you do realize its people like you, with your attitude that is hurting mma? Normal people cant stand the ego that you are displaying that is so common in mma. Your not doing your art any service.  Secondly I have met some very respected BJJ trainers and they have this thing called respect. They teach about respect and they give respect to every art. You are clearly not showing any respect for other arts.   Ask Renor or Renzo Gracie at the GJJ Academy. They preach on and on about respect from day one. They would never tolerate attitudes such as yours. 

I honestly hope that mma gets banned for ever from the USA, that way I no longer have to deal with the thugs, and miscreants, and the shear volume of bad people with even worse attitudes. The sooner this gladiator crap is scrubbed from Rome, excuse me America the better society will be.


----------



## Kframe

FYI click click pow and knives beat bjj every time.  Im not going to post it for you, but go watch the final challenge of Human Warrior MCMAP. The trained BJJ Brown belt and MMA pro gets KNIFED 8 times while trying to BJJ what would amount to a 2-3 stripe white belt.. Not that much bjj in MCMAP.


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou reading your posts, im getting the impression that you feel that anyone in a tradional tma be it a strike centric one or not, should just quit and join a bjj/judo gym.  Do you honestly expect people to just drop something they have large amounts of there lives doing, just to do something that is perceived as superior? Weather you want to admit it or not but bjj is only effective in the cage/mat. It is not the priemier street defense art. Why on earth would you want to go to ground on the street? How in gods name would you deal with multiple assailants when in guard on the ground? You cant. Nor does bjj address weapons defense.  

I don't really understand why your on this forum. Only thing your accomplishing is angering members and spouting ignorant nonsense. I honestly expected to see a thread on sherdog, bragging of the poop storm your stirring up here, but alas there isn't one there. We all know that the members of sherdog love to hate on TMA. 

Good lord, one person there, told me TMA have been conning people out of money for the last 70 years. Taking there cash and teaching them choreographed nonsense.. Yet I don't see a brag thread on sherdog. So whats your game? What are you trying to achieve by stirring the nest here?  Do you really want the thousands of active memebers in tma here, to just drop there arts, and start doing judo/bjj?


Edit to add. Your "stuff" about stances. You posted a few videos of Goju sparring. I hate to break it to you, but I saw a bunch of stances being used in that. Oh and my new art that I just left mma for, has a fighting stance that is weighted to the front. In fact it looks really similar to a karate front stance.. HMMM  You clearly don't do judo, or any other grappling art. Some of the throws I was taught in mma, came from judo. I didn't know it  at first but the front stance is used in a number of them. 

Why don't you try being honest about the level of training you have. Who is your instructor, what is your lineage to whom. That will prove or disprove anything you have to say. IF you cant post that, then your not worth listening to in the first place. For you have no credibility if you don't.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> I did you still have not proven anything.  Saying all Brazilians train BJJ is stupid.  Do all Russians train Sambo?  Do all Israeli train Krav?  Do all Brazilian train Capoerota?  Oh no they can't they all train BJJ do all philliopino train Arnis?



I didn't say ALL Brazilians. I said Brazilian MMA fighters train in Bjj. Its sort of the standard down there. That is backed up based on what the guy did in the ring. Sorry, but Kyokushin isn't going to teach you Omoplata, Mount defense and escape, or how to sprawl. And based on how that guy was outclassing that Judoka at his own game, its pretty obvious that he cross-trained.




> I don't Need to show you anything. I train Goju and Judo and BJJ I see parts of each in the other. I see Judo throws in Goju or vise versa I see Goju Arm bars and wrist locks in BJJ I don't need to prove to you something I know already. Your the one that claims it's not there so............



So once again I get no evidence for anything you've said? Well, next time you throw someone across the room with your Aikido, record it for me. I would love to see it.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I didn't say ALL Brazilians. I said Brazilian MMA fighters train in Bjj. Its sort of the standard down there. That is backed up based on what the guy did in the ring. Sorry, but Kyokushin isn't going to teach you Omoplata, Mount defense and escape, or how to sprawl. And based on how that guy was outclassing that Judoka at his own game, its pretty obvious that he cross-trained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So once again I get no evidence for anything you've said? Well, next time you throw someone across the room with your Aikido, record it for me. I would love to see it.


I'll make sure I post it on YouTube since according to you everything on YouTube is true and a fact.   Well unless its a Clip that goes against your argument that clip is wrong.


----------



## ballen0351

By the way the dude is Japanese and trains out of Florida  He was born in Brazil but his parents are Japanese and at the time of this fight in the clip he was a blue belt in BJJ had no judo training and is a black belt in Karate.  So really hurts your Judo is the best thing since sliced bread that a karate blackbelt and BJJ blue belt kicked his butt


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Hanzou reading your posts, im getting the impression that you feel that anyone in a tradional tma be it a strike centric one or not, should just quit and join a bjj/judo gym.  Do you honestly expect people to just drop something they have large amounts of there lives doing, just to do something that is perceived as superior? Weather you want to admit it or not but bjj is only effective in the cage/mat. It is not the priemier street defense art. Why on earth would you want to go to ground on the street? How in gods name would you deal with multiple assailants when in guard on the ground? You cant. Nor does bjj address weapons defense.
> 
> I don't really understand why your on this forum. Only thing your accomplishing is angering members and spouting ignorant nonsense. I honestly expected to see a thread on sherdog, bragging of the poop storm your stirring up here, but alas there isn't one there. We all know that the members of sherdog love to hate on TMA.
> 
> Good lord, one person there, told me TMA have been conning people out of money for the last 70 years. Taking there cash and teaching them choreographed nonsense.. Yet I don't see a brag thread on sherdog. So whats your game? What are you trying to achieve by stirring the nest here?  Do you really want the thousands of active memebers in tma here, to just drop there arts, and start doing judo/bjj?



Actually, everyone dropping their arts and picking up Bjj/Judo is the exact opposite of what I would like people around here to do.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> By the way the dude is Japanese and trains out of Florida  He was born in Brazil but his parents are Japanese and at the time of this fight in the clip he was a blue belt in BJJ had no judo training and is a black belt in Karate.  So really hurts your Judo is the best thing since sliced bread that a karate blackbelt and BJJ blue belt kicked his butt



Where did I say that Judo was the best thing since sliced bread?

Like I said, Bjj cross-training, and considering that it takes on average about 2-3 years to get a blue belt in Bjj, he's been doing it for awhile. I know a Bjj ground game when I see one. 

To be fair to the Judoka, Bjj is quite a bit stronger on the ground than Judo, and a blue belt in Bjj is the equivalent of upper belts in other martial arts. As stated before, the Judoka got beat at his own game.


----------



## ballen0351

Actually that fight was from 2008 he wasn't even a blue belt yet.  After looking more into it.  




Hanzou said:


> Where did I say that Judo was the best thing since sliced bread?
> 
> Like I said, Bjj cross-training, and considering that it takes on average about 2-3 years to get a blue belt in Bjj, he's been doing it for awhile. I know a Bjj ground game when I see one.
> 
> To be fair to the Judoka, Bjj is quite a bit stronger on the ground than Judo, and a blue belt in Bjj is the equivalent of upper belts in other martial arts. As stated before, the Judoka got beat at his own game.


----------



## ballen0351

Oh and the Guy he fought wasn't some judo bum


> Yoon was a well-known judoka with over 50 international judo competitions under his belt and had a winning streak of 47 straight victories without conceding a single koka, with notable wins over World champions and Olympic gold-medalists




Doesnt look well for your judo is amazing and kicks karate trainings butt


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Oh and the Guy he fought wasn't some judo bum
> 
> Doesnt look well for your judo is amazing and kicks karate trainings butt



Considering that he cross trained in Bjj and kickboxing, I think its safe to say that MMA kicked Judo's butt in this case.

Also we are talking about Kyokushin, probably the most MMA friendly karate in existence. If we were talking about Goju-Ryu or Shuri-te, you'd have a point here.



ballen0351 said:


> Actually that fight was from 2008 he wasn't even a blue belt yet. After looking more into it.



That really doesn't mean anything. It can take years to get from blue to purple, even if you compete. The way he schooled that Judoka, he was intermediate level at the very least.


----------



## ballen0351

Really so how much Goju do you know to make a statement like that?  You must be an expert in it

What other arts you plan on bashing in one thread.  So far I've seen kung fu ninjitsu goju TKD TMA. Aikido. Any others?


----------



## jks9199

All right, folks, let's rein things in quite a bit.  In the last 2 pages, I've seen borderline challenge posts, style bashing, and insults lobbed.  It's bad enough that I'm bending our policy and addressing it officially, even though I've participated in the this thread.  

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Keep the conversation polite and respectful.

jks9199
Asst. Administrator
*


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Check out that awesome Goju Ryu stance transitioning, footwork and head movement.
> 
> Tut, tut. Sarcasm is not your strong suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some of that black belt sparring..... :lol:


Lol! As the quote erroneously attributed to Einstein goes, 'the difference between genius and stupidity is that genius is limited. By not listening to what is being said you have one again demonstrated your ignorance in TMA. What you have posted here are three examples of the Japanese version of Goju which is no more traditional than Kyokushin. In the third video they even have the Goju Kai badge.  Basically it is a sport based style that I trained for many years before switching to the traditional Okinawan style of Goju.

But let's look at what you actually posted. All three are examples of Awasse Kumite or slow sparring. It is designed to allow you opponent to probe your defence and vice versa. It is the type of training you build on if you want to go into tournaments. The first video is classic. You have one kid with about three months experience (9th Kyu) and the other one (6th Kyu) with about 12 months training performing slow sparring to build experience and confidence. I have no issue with the standard of their work for their level, keeping in mind the fact that the the 6th Kyu is sparring at the beginner's level.

The second video is of the same ilk albeit at a higher level and even slower. There are no transitional stances because they are not training the grappling elements. I know this is a difficult concept for you to grasp but they are not performing anything that is TMA. The are demonstrating sport based kumite.

The third video is same, same, but a little faster. How many real fights go three minutes? They are training and if either of them were in a pub brawl I would back either of them to be effective. 

But you are totally ignorant of what is traditional karate. Here, I am being specific to karate and in this case Goju karate. This is my type of training. Straight from the Jundokan.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UttTa7hGYqA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=UttTa7hGYqA

And, it is half paced. Taira is faster than a cut snake in real life.

Oh, I forgot to mention, what he is demonstrating is straight from that useless kata.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> To be fair, just about everything is better than TKD. :lol:
> 
> I would have thought that was style bashing!
> 
> And this is why I resort to youtube videos. *People can spew whatever make-believe stuff they want on the internet.*


As you have been doing ever since you have graced us with your presence on this forum.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> The point is, many TMA schools use that "no competition" label as a shield to protect their style from objective scrutiny.



 TMA such as the "Shuai Jiao (Chinese wrestling)" system had used the "sport" format long before the MMA or BJJ was even born.

http://imageshack.us/a/img806/6752/shanpuyin4.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img232/5288/shanpuyin1.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img849/3119/changtournament1.jpg

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDYzNzQyMjQw.html
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDUzNzY0NzQ4.html
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDUzNzUzMTUy.html
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDUzODIyNjQw.html
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDUzODI4Mzc2.html


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I said cycling through dozens of stances you never use is pointless. How many people are going to be fighting in Front Stance, Cat Stance, or that low Kung Fu stance for example?
> 
> Hyperbole! There are not dozens of stances. Stances that are trained have specific application. Obviously you were never taught the applications.
> 
> In Judo the basics are the motions and proper posture during execution. Its not the same thing as standing in a stance for several minutes, then switching to the opposite side for several more minutes. All the while, when you begin free sparring, you're in a different stance altogether.
> 
> Hyperbole! I have never seen any training where anyone stands in one stance for one minute, let alone several minutes.
> 
> Again, the fundamentals are taught within execution. They aren't taught in isolation. So when its time for me to actually execute a throw, my mind is replicating the body motion, not the stance I'm supposed to be in to properly execute the throw.
> 
> Against a trained opponent you need technical proficiency. That includes proper stance.
> 
> Just my experience. I've seemed to have missed all of these amazing TMA practitioners.
> 
> Mate, it seems you've missed everything!





Hanzou said:


> Kyokushin is not a TMA. It was founded in 1964, places a pretty high value on competition, and it forms the basis of most Japanese kickboxing.
> 
> Nor is Goju Kai yet you posted it as a TMA. Kyokushin is actually more like Goju Kai than Shotokan. Mas Oyama crossed to Goju Kai because the kumite was stronger there.
> 
> Its not the same thing though. When I'm learning positioning, I'm learning its application at the same time, and that application is exactly how I would use it in a self defense situation.
> 
> All that means is that there are different training methodologies.
> 
> When I did Karate and TKD before that, we were kicking and punching from every stance. Reverse punching from a front stance isn't very practical. When it came time to spar, our bodies instinctively returned to a more natural fighting posture. However, while training, we were still doing those awkward stances, and forced to hold those awkward stances until it was correct. This practice also stretched into the katas, which taught us more awkward stances and movements.
> 
> Your karate (Shotokan) and TKD are not traditional in the sense we are discussing. What you were doing punching from every stance is not traditional. It may be training for a purpose but I never teach punching from those stances in traditional Goju. All our punching is from a natural fighting stance.
> 
> When I started practicing kickboxing, everything was practiced from the natural fighting posture.
> 
> So there is no difference.
> 
> [/COLOR]





Hanzou said:


> You think you're going to be fighting a bunch of black belts or prize fighters if you get into a fight on the street? :lol:
> 
> Which is exactly why TMAs don't have to be tested in the ring. We are not training to fight black belts or prize fighters. We are training for fun, for fitness and to get the skills to defend ourselves in the unlikely event we will be be attacked on the street.






Hanzou said:


> I'm okay with every martial art. I just believe that some waste their time doing pointless things that bog down the training process. Kyokushin is guilty of that since it has the trappings of a lot of traditional karate styles.
> 
> Not what you have been saying. You have caned every style except BJJ at some stage including Judo and Kyokushin.
> 
> I'm not criticizing the pace, I'm criticizing the purpose. Why are you learning techniques that have little to no practical value? Why are you going through all of this traditional nonsense when the end result has you fighting like a crippled kickboxer with bad footwork and hand skills?
> 
> Again, it is your ignorance of the techniques. My criteria for teaching is this. If you wouldn't use it in the pub I don't teach it. For example I no longer teach high kicks. They are in Japanese Goju but not the Okiinawan.
> 
> The intentions are noble, but the results speak for themselves.
> 
> Ironic! What you are saying is exactly right, even though you intended it to mean the opposite.





Hanzou said:


> I have my reasons....
> 
> The point is, many TMA schools use that "no competition" label as a shield to protect their style from objective scrutiny.
> 
> That is purely your opinion. Every "no competition" school I know of is that because they are not teaching to compete. My school is a 'no swimming' school. My guys come to be to learn reality based traditional karate, not compete in the ring or the swimming pool!
> 
> Take Aikido for example. Though Aikido is a pretty modern art, it teaches things in a pretty traditional way. Often lacking aliveness, or any sense of true resistance.
> 
> Ignorance or arrogance? You have never trained Aikido. I train it twice a week. Most of the time we train against total resistance which in some ways is unrealistic because in real life we would hit first. If you can make stuff work against total resistance in training without the strike, how much easier with the strike? Some of the time we train without resistance to practise reversals. There is total aliveness in our training.
> 
> So what happens when an Aikidoka goes up against a Judoka?
> 
> This happens;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this against wrestling;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And its a direct result of how the Aikidoka trains.
> OK! You have a video of an Aikidoka trying to do Judo. In every instance the Judo guy is throwing by holding the gi. None of our training does that because in real life I've never seen anyone wearing their gi in the pub. The Turkish wrestler was very good. Just because a good martial artist from one style is more skilful than someone from another means nothing in the total picture.





Hanzou said:


> Would you prefer the second video where the Aikidoka shodan got smashed even faster by a wrestler?
> 
> Like I said before, I have nothing against any martial art. I actually rather like the concept behind Aikido, it is unfortunate that the concept falls short when the rubber hits the road. Also, I know that Aikido wristlocks work. The problem is (again) in the training of the art itself.
> 
> You have never trained it so how come you are suddenly the expert on it. Sure it takes a while to learn. I would say that it took me about six years to feel confident in my ability to use it a real situation. But then again, I'm obviously a slow learner.
> 
> Unfortunately I'm not 14. When I was 14 I was wasting my time doing Tae Kwon Do at a local rec center. I wish I had started Bjj at that point in my life, instead of starting it over a decade later.
> 
> And I wish I had started with traditional karate back in the 70s instead of just the last 10 years. But back then I was as oblivious to traditional RBSD as you are now.





Hanzou said:


> A Karate guy who clearly cross-trained in Bjj.
> 
> Not clear at all! He has obviously cross trained in something but I thought that's what you do if you want to compete.
> 
> Did you miss the ridiculously smooth omoplata he put on the Judo guy, or the mount and take down defense? The commentators even mentioned it during the fight.
> Actually, I did. And I watched it twice because I didn't see it the first time.





Hanzou said:


> 1. He's from Brazil. If you're a MMA fighter in Brazil, you're going to be training in Bjj.
> 
> And the MMA fighter from Turkey will train Turkish wrestling, the guy from Russia, Systema. The guy from Israel, Krav. Oh sorry, scrap the last two. Their techniques are banned from competition!
> 
> 2. He performed a submission lock on a Judo black belt, and he did it with ridiculous ease?
> 
> I obviously watch the wrong video. I saw a fight that was stopped by the ref, no submission.
> 
> 3. His mount defense was clear Bjj, as was his sprawl.
> 
> I teach the sprawl against takedowns in my classes. I've never trained BJJ.
> 
> 4. The commentators mentioned it.
> 
> I must be going deaf!
> 
> Please show me the Omoplata in the Kyokushin or Goju curriculum. I have a black belt in Shotokan, and Kyokushin came from Shotokan. The Omoplata doesn't exist in Shotokan, and I seriously doubt it exists in Kyokushin.
> 
> And it didn't exist in that fight either!
> 
> Its important to note that had the "karate guy" not cross trained in Bjj, he would have lost that fight.
> 
> Yeah, right. And every other MMA fighter would lose if they hadn't cross trained too.





Hanzou said:


> Considering that he cross trained in Bjj and kickboxing, I think its safe to say that MMA kicked Judo's butt in this case.
> 
> Crap! The judo guy had cross trained as well!
> 
> Also we are talking about Kyokushin, probably the most MMA friendly karate in existence. If we were talking about Goju-Ryu or Shuri-te, you'd have a point here.
> 
> Pardon? There are people from all styles of karate who have competed successfully in MMA. I'm not sure where the Shuri-te reference comes from. Ignorance of history probably. Shuri-te pretty much went the same way as Naha-te and Tomari-te. They all morphed into other styles.
> 
> That really doesn't mean anything. It can take years to get from blue to purple, even if you compete. The way he schooled that Judoka, he was intermediate level at the very least.


Have another try. So far if I was grading your posts I would be writing across the paper,
"2/10 ... must pay more attention to those trying to help your understanding  "


----------



## RTKDCMB

ballen0351 said:


> You missing the point.  Just because you find a random clip on you tube its not proof of anything other then that guy lost to that other guy while the camera was on.  you know nothing about either ones training, back ground, the rules they set, or the reason they were even fighting.



It looked to me like the Turkish wrestler was visiting the Aikido dojo and demonstrating some of his techniques to the Aikido students.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> I have no issue with that. Just know what your martial art is, and what it isn't. For example, when I see people believe that they are Ninjas, and do all that bizarre Ninja stuff, that's fine, they can do what they wish. However, when they start making claims that their art is too "deadly" to be part of the competitive MA world, I have to call them out on their nonsense. A guy who thinks he's a Ninja or a samurai is no different than a guy at a renaissance fair thinking he's a squire or a knight because he wears the armor and participates in jousting tournaments. We'd laugh at the knight wannabe, but actually take the Ninja and Samurai guy seriously, and give them 100s of dollars to teach us 16th century battlefield tactics.
> 
> You might as well call MMA "Modern Martial Arts".



Personally, if someone doesn't wish to compete, I don't think that makes the art useless.  Of course, speaking for myself only, I tend to cringe a bit when I hear the 'deadly' stuff as well.  Before I started Kyokushin, which I've only been doing for a bit over 2yrs, I did Kenpo.  Anyone who knows about that art, should know that there are lots of breaks, pokes, etc in pretty much every tech.  While these are certainly valid things to do, I also feel that since every situation we may face, might not require poking someone in the eye, that we should be able to adjust accordingly.  Would I fall back on a poke to the eye?  Absolutely, if it was warranted, but I'm also not going to crumble and die if I can't do that eye poke. LOL!  

At the least, if someone wasn't interested in competing, I'd say that some good pressure testing with scenario training, is the next best thing.  I've been doing the FMAs for quite a while.  I've never competed in a Dog Bros event, however, I have done some stick sparring with one of my instructors, outside of class.  I always have and always will be a big advocate of pressure testing your stuff.  My point is simply that I don't feel that you have to enter a competition to do it.

As for having the need to call someone out on something...as I said, I have NO desire to police the MA world.  Frankly, I wonder why there are so many out there that feel that they have to.  As long as you're happy with the way you train, as long as you have no intention of training with those that appear to be less serious, then why waste time worrying about how they train or calling someone out?  I've got better things to do.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> I have my reasons....
> 
> The point is, many TMA schools use that "no competition" label as a shield to protect their style from objective scrutiny. Take Aikido for example. Though Aikido is a pretty modern art, it teaches things in a pretty traditional way. Often lacking aliveness, or any sense of true resistance. So what happens when an Aikidoka goes up against a Judoka?
> 
> This happens;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this against wrestling;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And its a direct result of how the Aikidoka trains.





ballen0351 said:


> Like?
> 
> 
> Again more nonsense with a random Youtube clip as your "proof".  I have personally used Aikido in real life as a cop on a real bad guy and it worked perfectly.  So dont tell me it doesnt work I know for a fact it does because unlike you Ive been in the real world and used techniques on real bad guys with no rules not in a cage with preset agreements on what your allowed and not allowed to do.  You know nothing about the guys in this clip yet you want to use it as evidence.  You see one clip as proof that every Judo player will win against every Aikidoka.  You have your mind made up and thats fine.  YOUR the only one that cant see through your BS.  I hope for your sake your like 14 and just dont know any better yet because with your mindset your in for a rough road ahead if your ever really forced to defend yourself in a real fight and you try to use your sport rules.



I have to agree with Ballen on this.  I think it's pretty funny that so many people tend to fall back on YT as the gospel of truth in the MA world.  Can't really add much to what he said.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> And this is why I resort to youtube videos. People can spew whatever make-believe stuff they want on the internet.



Interestingly enough, quite a few of my training partners are LEOs, COs, and one just retired after 30+yrs, working in a Psych Hospital.  They have all, on more than one occasion, had to fall back on their training.  They're all still alive and well today.  This "If it isn't on video, then it didn't happen" BS, is just that.....BS!  Sorry, not everyone walks around with a camera.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Actually, everyone dropping their arts and picking up Bjj/Judo is the exact opposite of what I would like people around here to do.



So tell me...what would you like to see people around here do exactly?


----------



## K-man

MJS said:


> I have to agree with Ballen on this.  I think it's pretty funny that so many people tend to fall back on YT as the gospel of truth in the MA world.  Can't really add much to what he said.


Reminds me of a few of the others who have come to MT with inflated opinions of themselves then posted some YT video that shows they have not got the ability they claim. I look at a lot of the videos as "Look at me, aren't I good". From my POV a very good reason not to post video.
:asian:


----------



## K-man

MJS said:


> So tell me...what would you like to see people around here do exactly?


Keep this thread running! 

:feedtroll:


----------



## ballen0351

MJS said:


> I have to agree with Ballen on this.  I think it's pretty funny that so many people tend to fall back on YT as the gospel of truth in the MA world.  Can't really add much to what he said.



Thats the problem with Youtube.  You have no context or background info on the people in the clip. I can go film a clip tomorrow of me crushing my buddy who has like 6 classes of BJJ total in his life and title it Karate vs BJJ.  And someone out there would use it as proof Karate is"better" then BJJ.


----------



## Mauthos

The one thing I think has not been mentioned in this thread is that at the end of the day MMA has its basis in TMAs and as such the majority of MMA fighters (especially those at the higher levels) have a grounding in what are considered TMAs, in fact the majority of champions, although cross trained in BJJ, wrestling etc, have held BB in TMAs for years (Lyoto Machida, GSP, Chuck Liddell to name 3 off the top of my head) and naturally they have relied on these deeper ingrained skills to win their fights. Although I will give it to you that GSP relies more on his wrestling ability to win nowadays which has made his fights pretty dull of late.

What this means is really to be an effective mixed martial artist you need to have a grounding in the basics which mainly were developed by TMAs. Personally I don't know what really defines a TMA, maybe it is an age thing, maybe it is the way of maintaining traditions. If you think that the age of the art defines it as traditional, although you (Hanzou) seem to respect Goju a little more than others the rough documentation of this art states that Higashionna started teaching his new art in 1882. Now Mitsuyo Maeda originally taught his (more than likely much older) version of JJ to Carlos Gracie in 1917 who passed it on to his brothers and therefore BJJ was born.

Now JJ, which I am sure you can agree on formed the basis of BJJ and JJ supposedly dates back to 1532 according to a quick google search which I am pretty sure would classify it as a TMA. Therefore, even if you don't consider BJJ a TMA it has its basis firmly planted in one and I am pretty sure that there will be a lot of techniques and training methods that have barely changed throughout the transition form JJ to BJJ.

Basically what I am trying to say is without TMA there would be no MMA, after all you can't develop a dictionary without knowing your ABC first and therefore in my humble opinion, without a fair understanding and training within TMAs I don't think you can be fully effective as a fighter as you will not fully understand or grasp the concepts taught by the basics.


----------



## Hanzou

Mauthos said:


> The one thing I think has not been mentioned in this thread is that at the end of the day MMA has its basis in TMAs and as such the majority of MMA fighters (especially those at the higher levels) have a grounding in what are considered TMAs, in fact the majority of champions, although cross trained in BJJ, wrestling etc, have held BB in TMAs for years (Lyoto Machida, GSP, Chuck Liddell to name 3 off the top of my head) and naturally they have relied on these deeper ingrained skills to win their fights. Although I will give it to you that GSP relies more on his wrestling ability to win nowadays which has made his fights pretty dull of late.
> 
> What this means is really to be an effective mixed martial artist you need to have a grounding in the basics which mainly were developed by TMAs. Personally I don't know what really defines a TMA, maybe it is an age thing, maybe it is the way of maintaining traditions. If you think that the age of the art defines it as traditional, although you (Hanzou) seem to respect Goju a little more than others the rough documentation of this art states that Higashionna started teaching his new art in 1882. Now Mitsuyo Maeda originally taught his (more than likely much older) version of JJ to Carlos Gracie in 1917 who passed it on to his brothers and therefore BJJ was born.
> 
> Now JJ, which I am sure you can agree on formed the basis of BJJ and JJ supposedly dates back to 1532 according to a quick google search which I am pretty sure would classify it as a TMA. Therefore, even if you don't consider BJJ a TMA it has its basis firmly planted in one and I am pretty sure that there will be a lot of techniques and training methods that have barely changed throughout the transition form JJ to BJJ.
> 
> Basically what I am trying to say is without TMA there would be no MMA, after all you can't develop a dictionary without knowing your ABC first and therefore in my humble opinion, without a fair understanding and training within TMAs I don't think you can be fully effective as a fighter as you will not fully understand or grasp the concepts taught by the basics.



To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu. Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, which is an archiac battlefield art. Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era. I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu. Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.

 Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj. Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan. Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> But you are totally ignorant of what is traditional karate. Here, I am being specific to karate and in this case Goju karate. This is my type of training. Straight from the Jundokan.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UttTa7hGYqA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=UttTa7hGYqA
> 
> And, it is half paced. Taira is faster than a cut snake in real life.
> 
> Oh, I forgot to mention, what he is demonstrating is straight from that useless kata.



Choreographed moves against willing targets is easy to look effective. See Aikdo, or that Kiai Master who made people spin around in the air using his "chi".


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Interestingly enough, quite a few of my training partners are LEOs, COs, and one just retired after 30+yrs, working in a Psych Hospital. They have all, on more than one occasion, had to fall back on their training. They're all still alive and well today. This "If it isn't on video, then it didn't happen" BS, is just that.....BS! Sorry, not everyone walks around with a camera.



If you're going to tell me that you threw someone across a room with a one-hand Aikido throw, I need proof.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> If you're going to tell me that you threw someone across a room with a one-hand Aikido throw, I need proof.



No, I never heard of that happening with them, however, blocks, various controlling methods, sweeps/takedowns, were used.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Choreographed moves against willing targets is easy to look effective. See Aikdo, or that Kiai Master who made people spin around in the air using his "chi".


I'll call BS on that. None of the moves in our bunkai are choreographed. I can demonstrate the kata bunkai with anyone off the street. If it was choreographed I would agree with you. But what you are saying is, even when I post a video that shows something working, it must be false. 

By the way. The biggest problem when you are working with someone like Taira, even when you think you know what is coming next, he varies the technique. (As to the willing target. All techniques even in BJJ are trained against willing targets.)

Your ignorant dig at aikido again shows again how little you understand of aikido and the irrelevance of the reference to the kiai master crap is putting both Taira's work and Aikido in the same basket.  I find that extremely offensive and it is against forum rules.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu. Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, which is an archiac battlefield art. Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era. I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu. Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.
> 
> Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj. Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan. Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.


Do you know anything about the history of judo? Kano started out with classical jujutsu much the same way as Ueshiba. Kano actually taught classical jujutsu the same way that Ueshiba taught Daito Ryu. They both had the understanding that soft overcomes hard and the same concept exists in traditional Goju karate (hard and soft). Both aikido and judo originally contained strikes and both were basically jujutsu. As Ueshiba progressed he reduced the emphasis on the atemi but it is still inherent in all the techniques. Where I study Aikido we include the strikes in our training. Kano's judo went into the Universities and to make it suitable for competition the potentially harmful or damaging techniques like strikes to vital points and joint breaks were removed. As a result Judo places more emphasis on the nage waza. Now because one (Judo) has evolved for competition  and one (Aikido) is not for competition the only one that is practical and dynamic is the Judo. ????

You really are incredible. You demonstrate your lack of knowledge and understanding of traditional martial arts in *every *post.


----------



## Kframe

Kano added in some rudimentary newaza, after getting beaten at a competition by them. My question is why did Ueshiba not do the same? Honestly watching Aikido videos, I think that, it combined with some good ground grappling would make a fantastic ring art.  As it stands, just based on my less then basic understanding, from videos it is a good street art.

This might be better in the Aikido forum. 

Still wondering why this thread is still open...


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> I'll call BS on that. None of the moves in our bunkai are choreographed. I can demonstrate the kata bunkai with anyone off the street. If it was choreographed I would agree with you. But what you are saying is, even when I post a video that shows something working, it must be false.



It is choregraphed because the target is just standing there accepting the technique. That sort of thing is wonderful for demonstrations, but I'd like to see it against a moving, resisting opponent in order to judge its effectiveness. Since I've never seen a Goju-Ryu stylist fighting like that, I can only guess that my assertion is correct.



> By the way. The biggest problem when you are working with someone like Taira, even when you think you know what is coming next, he varies the technique. (As to the willing target. All techniques even in BJJ are trained against willing targets.)



For demonstration purposes. We have randori for resistance training, and amazingly, how we fight matches our demonstrations and our randori.



> Your ignorant dig at aikido again shows again how little you understand of aikido and the irrelevance of the reference to the kiai master crap is putting both Taira's work and Aikido in the same basket.  I find that extremely offensive and it is against forum rules.



I'm merely drawing a comparison. You have a compliant uke and you can make anything appear awesome. I would like to see Taira do those awesome hand techs against a boxer, or a wrestler trying to pop his head off. What's wrong with that?



K-man said:


> Do you know anything about the history of judo? Kano started out with classical jujutsu much the same way as Ueshiba. Kano actually taught classical jujutsu the same way that Ueshiba taught Daito Ryu. They both had the understanding that soft overcomes hard and the same concept exists in traditional Goju karate (hard and soft). Both aikido and judo originally contained strikes and both were basically jujutsu. As Ueshiba progressed he reduced the emphasis on the atemi but it is still inherent in all the techniques. Where I study Aikido we include the strikes in our training. Kano's judo went into the Universities and to make it suitable for competition the potentially harmful or damaging techniques like strikes to vital points and joint breaks were removed. As a result Judo places more emphasis on the nage waza. Now because one (Judo) has evolved for competition and one (Aikido) is not for competition the only one that is practical and dynamic is the Judo. ????



Pretty much. I've seen and felt Judo work first hand. I can pull up numerous YT vids showing Judo working. Heck, Bjj and Sambo comes from Judo. I also know that Bjj and Sambo are pushing Judo's evolution, because new techniques are being brought into all three systems constantly.

Aikido? I just can't say the same. I'd like to believe that someone could catch another person's wrist and throw them 20 feet into the air, but I just can't. My experience against an Aikido Brown belt was similar to those videos of Aikido against a wrestler, and Aikido against a Judoka. Its pretty to watch, but not very practical, outside of the wrist lock applications, which work great once you get control.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> If you're going to tell me that you threw someone across a room with a one-hand Aikido throw, I need proof.



Sorry bud I live in the real world with real criminals real fights, no rules, no ref, no tapping out when its gets tough and I don't have a camera crew following me around.  You don't believe me I really don't care.  All your history of this art or analysis of that art is so utterly wrong I really don't care about your opinion.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> Kano added in some rudimentary newaza, after getting beaten at a competition by them. My question is why did Ueshiba not do the same? Honestly watching Aikido videos, I think that, it combined with some good ground grappling would make a fantastic ring art.  As it stands, just based on my less then basic understanding, from videos it is a good street art.
> 
> This might be better in the Aikido forum.
> 
> Still wondering why this thread is still open...


A little topic drift might be refreshing in actual fact. 

Kano actually developed an art not unlike karate. He even visited Okinawa and was particularly impressed by what he saw in the Naha-te style. In his training he added the randori but even with randori part of it was compliant. As with Aikido, that is important to train the reversals something that our unlearned friend doesn't understand. 



> *Randori* (free practice)
> Judo pedagogy emphasizes randori (&#20081;&#21462;&#12426;?, literally "taking chaos", but meaning "free practice"). This term covers a variety of forms of practice, and the intensity at which it is carried out varies depending on intent and the level of expertise of the participants. At one extreme, is a compliant style of randori, known as Yakusoku geiko (&#32004;&#26463;&#31293;&#21476;?, prearranged practice), in which neither participant offers resistance to their partner's attempts to throw. A related concept is that of Sute geiko (&#25448;&#31293;&#21476;?, throw-away practice), in which an experienced judoka allows himself to be thrown by his less-experienced partner. At the opposite extreme from yakusoku geiko is the hard style of randori that seeks to emulate the style of judo seen in competition. While hard randori is the cornerstone of judo, over-emphasis of the competitive aspect is seen as undesirable by traditionalists if the intent of the randori is to "win" rather than to learn.
> Randori is usually limited to either tachi waza (standing techniques) or ne waza (ground work) and, when one partner is thrown in tachi waza randori, practice is resumed with both partners on their feet.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judo


In aikido some practitioners like Tomiki did go down the competition route. 



> Shodokan Aikido (&#26157;&#36947;&#39208;&#21512;&#27671;&#36947; Sh&#333;d&#333;kan Aikid&#333;?) is the style of Aikido founded by Kenji Tomiki(&#23500;&#26408; &#35609;&#27835; Tomiki Kenji, 1900&#8211;1979). Shodokan Aikido is sometimes referred to as "Sport Aikido" because of its use of regular competitions, and although Tomiki used the name Shodokan, the style is still often referred to as 'Tomiki Aikido'. Shodokan places more emphasis on free-form randori sparring than most other styles of aikido. The training method requires a balance between randori and the more stylized kata training along with a well-developed set of training drills both specific for randori and for general aikido development. The participation in actual shiai (competitive randori) very much depends on the club with greater emphasis being found in the university clubs, although randori is core to all Shodokan clubs.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shodokan_Aikido




Others like Saito who trained with Ueshiba after WWII still taught a hard style of Aikido including atemi. 


> Saito's instruction of aikido is particularly remembered for its emphasis upon the basics of aikido, and especially upon the relationship between the armed and unarmed aspects of the art.
> Kazuo Chiba, a live-in student (uchideshi) of Ueshiba at the Aikikai Hombu Dojo in Tokyo, recalled in particular the intensity of the training that occurred at the Iwama dojo,
> &#8220;	A large portion of the membership at Iwama Dojo consisted of local farmers, hard workers who spent all day in the fields. They had thick bones and great physical strength, combined with a peculiar local character known as &#8220;Mito kishitsu,&#8221; a type of manliness close to gallantry. Altogether, it was quite an opposite culture from Hombu Dojo in Tokyo. Because it is in the capital of Japan, Hombu&#8217;s membership consists of white-collar workers, intellectuals, businessmen, politicians and university students.
> Any members who came to visit Iwama Dojo from Hombu must have looked pale and weak from city living to Iwama members. Indeed, the Iwama students treated us from Hombu as such and challenged us vigorously. It was a matter of survival for members from Hombu Dojo, including Hombu uchideshi like myself. And Saito Sensei was on top of that mountain, which we had to climb with all our might.
> &#8221;
> *Chiba also emphasized Saito's focus upon katai-keiko (&#22266;&#12356;&#31293;&#21476;?), or vigorous practice without holding back, which Ueshiba taught and Saito demonstrated in his methods of teaching and practice. Apparently, this rigorous training with Saito, which Ueshiba would often observe, also included intense conditioning exercises*, as well as general farmwork that students at the Iwama dojo were expected to assist with.
> Other students of Saito attest to his commitment to carry on Ueshiba's legacy, and to follow and preserve Ueshiba's teachings as Saito had learned them. Saito believed that striking techniques (atemi) are a "vital element" of aikido, and also that the principles of swordsmanship formed the basis of aikido techniques. He also advocated training to cope with the attacks of other martial arts, such as the kicks practiced in karate.


Ueshiba may well have gone another way if it wasn't for the horrors of WWII.



> His third experience was in 1942 during the worst fighting of WWII, Ueshiba had a vision of the "Great Spirit of Peace".
> "The Way of the Warrior has been misunderstood. It is not a means to kill and destroy others. Those who seek to compete and better one another are making a terrible mistake. To smash, injure, or destroy is the worst thing a human being can do. The real Way of a Warrior is to prevent such slaughter &#8211; it is the Art of Peace, the power of love."
> 
> 
> *The early form of training under Ueshiba was characterized by the ample use of strikes to vital points *(atemi), a larger total curriculum, a greater use of weapons, and a more linear approach to technique than would be found in later forms of aikido. These methods are preserved in the teachings of his early students Kenji Tomiki (who founded the Shodokan Aikido sometimes called Tomiki-ry&#363, Noriaki Inoue (who founded Shin'ei Taid&#333, Minoru Mochizuki (who founded Yoseikan Budo), Gozo Shioda (who founded Yoshinkan Aikido). Many of these styles are considered "pre-war styles", although some of the teachers continued to have contact and influence from Ueshiba in the years after the Second World War.
> Later, as Ueshiba seemed to slowly grow away from Takeda, he began to implement more changes into the art. These changes are reflected in the differing names with which he referred to his art, first as aiki-j&#363;jutsu, then Ueshiba-ry&#363;, Asahi-ry&#363;, aiki bud&#333;,nand finally aikido.
> As Ueshiba grew older, more skilled, and more spiritual in his outlook, his art also changed and became softer and more circular. Striking techniques became less important and the formal curriculum became simpler. In his own expression of the art there was a greater emphasis on what is referred to as koky&#363;-nage, or "breath throws" which are soft and blending, utilizing the opponent's movement in order to throw them. Many of these techniques are rooted in the aiki-no-jutsu portions of the Dait&#333;-ry&#363; curriculum rather than the more direct jujutsu style joint-locking techniques.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morihei_Ueshiba



I can understand where Ueshiba was going.  As his understanding and use of Ki developed he had no need to train fast and hard. Hence the expression enter with irimi, hit with kokyu, the same principle I teach in my karate. Once you start down that path there is no turning back. It is like you just put a supercharger on your car. Once you experience that you don't want to go back to what you had before.
:s510:


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Kano added in some rudimentary newaza, after getting beaten at a competition by them. My question is why did Ueshiba not do the same? Honestly watching Aikido videos, I think that, it combined with some good ground grappling would make a fantastic ring art.  As it stands, just based on my less then basic understanding, from videos it is a good street art.
> 
> This might be better in the Aikido forum.
> 
> Still wondering why this thread is still open...



Supposedly, Ueshiba's original Aikido was pretty hardcore and practical. As he aged, his Aikido went from hardcore and physical to more soft and spiritual. The latter is what spread around the world.

I will say this; Aikido breakfalls are pretty fantastic.

I wouldn't send my daughter to an Aikido school for self defense though.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> It is choregraphed because the target is just standing there accepting the technique. That sort of thing is wonderful for demonstrations, but I'd like to see it against a moving, resisting opponent in order to judge its effectiveness. Since I've never seen a Goju-Ryu stylist fighting like that, I can only guess that my assertion is correct.
> 
> You really are full of it aren't you? I tell you it's not choreographed because it is not but you still say it is. It teach it every class against proper attacks but because you haven't seen it it doesn't exist. Unbelievable! I haven't seen an atom either but I have no doubt it exists.  You assertion has absolutely no basis and your arrogance is unassailable.
> 
> For demonstration purposes. We have randori for resistance training, and amazingly, how we fight matches our demonstrations and our randori.
> 
> I don't care what you do! I'm not arguing against the effectiveness of MMA. We train as we would fight all the time, just not at full speed and force. Just the same but because I don't teach MMA or BJJ it can't be as effective. What about when I teach the same technique as Krav Maga? Does that now make it valid. You have absolutely no idea of what training occurs in other places.
> 
> I'm merely drawing a comparison. You have a compliant uke and you can make anything appear awesome. I would like to see Taira do those awesome hand techs against a boxer, or a wrestler trying to pop his head off. What's wrong with that?
> 
> Oh Mate! You don't know how wrong you are. Taira is one of the best I have ever seen. That's why I have trained with him as often as possible. He was an undercover cop and he would be one of the toughest guys you could ever meet on the street. All his stuff is reality based, not the competition stuff you are playing with.
> 
> Pretty much. I've seen and felt Judo work first hand. I can pull up numerous YT vids showing Judo working. Heck, Bjj and Sambo comes from Judo. I also know that Bjj and Sambo are pushing Judo's evolution, because new techniques are being brought into all three systems constantly.
> 
> No one is questioning that Judo works.
> 
> Aikido? I just can't say the same. I'd like to believe that someone could catch another person's wrist and throw them 20 feet into the air, but I just can't. My experience against an Aikido Brown belt was similar to those videos of Aikido against a wrestler, and Aikido against a Judoka. Its pretty to watch, but not very practical, outside of the wrist lock applications, which work great once you get control.


Your experience against an aikido brown belt means that aikido doesn't work? What garbage. Every time a guy comes into my dojo with BJJ experience I invite them to show me their locks and holds. They don't work either if you are skilful enough. That doesn't mean BJJ doesn't work. 

What at is loose in your head that prevents you from realising that their are probably thousands of really good martial artists out in the real world who don't practise MMA and don't want to play around in the ring?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> It is choregraphed because *the target is just standing there accepting the technique*. That sort of thing is wonderful for demonstrations, but I'd like to see it against a moving, resisting opponent in order to judge its effectiveness. Since I've never seen a Goju-Ryu stylist fighting like that, I can only guess that my assertion is correct.



Again you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing. To be any good at a technique, you must first practice it under controlled conditions to learn the basics of the technique and then apply it to a moving, resisting target. To not practice the basics is a very poor training method.



Hanzou said:


> I can pull up numerous YT vids showing Judo working.




You are yet to provide a video of YOUR training to as proof of your supposed superior training methods.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Again you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing. To be any good at a technique, you must first practice it under controlled conditions to learn the basics of the technique and then apply it to a moving, resisting target. To not practice the basics is a very poor training method.



Then please show me the Goju Ryu stylists utilizing similar movements in a full contact setting.

There surely must be some Goju Ryu practitioners that have mastered the Bunkai.


----------



## Chris Parker

I was staying out of this one since my earlier comments, as to go through it, I'd want to pick up everything that is wrong and correct it... but I don't have the next 5 years to do so, and bluntly, I douby Hanzou here would hear any of it. But then you posted this.... you nearly had me in on your "ninjas" comments (dude, just no...), but this? Right....



Hanzou said:


> To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu.



Judo is Jujutsu. It's original name was Kano-ha Jujutsu... pretty simply "Kano's branch of Jujutsu". Judo is simply one form of Jujutsu, you realize. BJJ has it's roots in an early expression of Kano-ha Jujutsu, combined with a few other things, and given a focus on groundwork, but the origins are Jujutsu. 

So, uh... no. Wrong.



Hanzou said:


> Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, which is an archiac battlefield art.



No, Judo is a particular subset of Jujutsu, founded by Kano Jigoro, and developed/spread as much as an educational tool as a martial art. Kano's focus was on education as much as, if not more than, martial arts. Secondly, "Jujutsu... is an archaic battlefield art"? Uh, nope. Jujutsu is a generic term applied to a very wide range of Japanese unarmed or lightly armed systems of combat, which might be a stand-alone system, or part of a larger syllabus. If part of a larger syllabus, it might be a major, or minor section. But very, very little of it was "battlefield"... why? Well, because you'd use weapons on a battlefield... bows and arrows (later, firearms), spears and other polearms. Why would you go onto a battlefield and use unarmed methods in anything other than the worst of all possible situations? Then you get into the various forms Jujutsu can take... there were some systems that were very much for the Bushi (warrior class), which often involved small arms (and might be referred to as Kogusoku, referring to a "small set [of weapons]", or Koshi no Mawari, referring to "[the weapons found] around the waist", or might be Yawara, Yawaragei, Hade, Goho, Judo [here's a history lesson for you... that term was used in at least one system about 150 years before Kano...], Kumiuchi, Wajutsu, Torite, Te, and many more), or there were systems that were geared up as a form of "commoners yawara", which would not include weapons, but be almost exclusively unarmed. These systems developed in a large variety of circumstances over a very  long period of time, with the earliest Jujutsu-centric system being founded in 1542 (Takenouchi Ryu - although there were unarmed aspects to some earlier systems, such as Kashima Shinryu and Katori Shinto Ryu), and continue to be developed today, some of which are new branches/variants of existing ones (such as Moto-ha Yoshin Ryu, a branch of Hontai Yoshin Ryu founded a few decades ago, or Hakko Ryu, a derivative of Daito Ryu from the 50's), others are purely new systems. And they are all Jujutsu. 

So, uh... no. Wrong. 



Hanzou said:


> Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era.



Judo became favoured of the Police and the educational system due to Kano's very effective lobbying of the education department, and in part due to the performance of Kano's students in competitions. The "modernization" you refer to is more about Kano re-structuring the way he presented and taught his approach to Jujutsu, dominantly for the school system. In a number of ways, Kano simplified his approach from the Ryu (systems) he had been taught... but that's not really the same as "modernizing" the system. The structure, the mechanics, the uniform, the etiquette, the forms of attacks, the usage of Japanese kata, and so on, are all straight out of classical Jujutsu... in fact, the only real thing he "modernized" was the idea of mass-teaching, which lead to the development of the i-dan (kyu and dan) ranking, as well as the adoption of coloured belts. But, to be blunt, that form of ranking was adapted from the game "Go"... which is a very old game... so maybe not so much "modernizing". The fact that other modern systems have followed suit, particularly in the ranking ideas, doesn't mean that Kano was "modernizing" Jujutsu... just that he hit upon an idea that caught. 

So, uh.... no. Wrong.



Hanzou said:


> I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu.



Judo absolutely has it's basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu, specifically Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu and Kito Ryu. In fact, it's considered by some to be the current branch of Kito Ryu, as Kano was the successor to his line of that system... and it's teachings are preserved within the kata of the Kodokan (the Koshiki no Kata basically is Kito Ryu, in a nutshell). It's restructured (well, the Koshiki no Kata isn't, but Judo as a whole is), but so are many classical systems. 

So, uh... no. Wrong.



Hanzou said:


> Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.



What do you think has been added to Judo? Here's a clue... there's been a lot simplified, not added in. As far as BJJ, not much has been added there, either, it's simply developed along a different line (focusing on the ground, as a major aspect), with the overtly competitive aspect demanding constant adjustment, additions to, and adaptations to the mechanical methods... but it's basic approach is the same. Basically, someone comes up with a new sweep... so someone comes up with a counter... and then a counter to the counter... and so on. That's not adding things, it's developing naturally within it's context. And, for the record, that type of development has nothing to do with real fights/self defence, as it's to do with a competitive arms race... a street fight (to use an over-used and inaccurate stereotype) simply doesn't require development in that direction.

So, uh... no. Wrong.



Hanzou said:


> Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.



And what, exactly, is your experience with actual Jujutsu? I'm assuming you're referring to the way Judo and BJJ do randori/roll/spar (whichever term you want) here... you do realize that such training methods have been a part of classical traditions for centuries, yeah? I mean, the reason Judo has such a focus on randori is because Kano's first teacher (classical Jujutsu) was a big proponent of it... it comes directly out of Jujutsu training methods. His second school had randori as well... and so did his third (although the teacher wasn't as fond of it, and Kano ran those sessions himself). This was in two separate systems, not just one, you realize... and how could Kano have "supplanted Jujutsu" by winning all the Police tournaments if none of the other systems did randori? They'd have had to to be in the tournament at all... how about the guys from the Handa Dojo learning under the head of Fusen Ryu? They beat Kano's guys, based on their explorations in randori, under the guidance of Mataemon Tanabe... but, of course, these classical systems are dead, and can't possibly do all that sparring and stuff....

So, uh... no. Wrong.



Hanzou said:


> Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj.



No, they don't. They consider BJJ to be BJJ. Jujutsu is pretty much any unarmed combat system, particularly non-striking ones (throws, chokes, locks etc). Perhaps MMA fans in Japan think automatically of BJJ, but that's like saying that if you say "Kobudo" to a karate student, they think of Okinawan weapons systems, but say it to a Koryu practitioner, and they have a very different idea in mind. 

So, uh... no. Wrong.



Hanzou said:


> Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan.



Wow, I'll have to tell my friends that are training in, or have trained in, Sosuishi Ryu, Takeuchi Ryu, Araki Ryu, Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu, Kukishin Ryu, Asayama Ichiden Ryu, Shinden Fudo Ryu, Hontai Yoshin Ryu, Kashima Shinryu, Tatsumi Ryu, Shindo Yoshin Ryu, Yagyu Shingan Ryu, Shinto Tenshin Ryu, Fusen Ryu, and more that they've trained in non-existant things... not to mention the dozens of other systems that I know of, have seen demonstrations of, have contact with people involved with, and so on.

So, uh... no. Wrong.



Hanzou said:


> Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.



There's certainly a lot to make us wonder here, yes....


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Then please show me the Goju Ryu stylists utilizing similar movements in a full contact setting.
> 
> There surely must be some Goju Ryu practitioners that have mastered the Bunkai.



1) I have practically no knowledge or experience in the Goju Ryu system that qualifies me to judge them. 
2) It's not my job to hunt for videos for you.
3) Even if I found one you would not accept it anyway so why should I bother.
4) Your statements above are only proving my point (*that you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing*)


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu. Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, []which is an archiac battlefield art.[/b] Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era. I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu. Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.
> 
> Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj. Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan. Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.



Gee, I just all the Small Circle JJ guys, as well as all of the other JJ schools out there, are nothing but a joke then, huh?  Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with this post.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Choreographed moves against willing targets is easy to look effective. See Aikdo, or that Kiai Master who made people spin around in the air using his "chi".



So, you assume that everything is done against compliant opponents?  Ok.  I always find it interesting how people use YT as the measuring stick as far as what's legit and what isn't.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> 1) I have practically no knowledge or experience in the Goju Ryu system that qualifies me to judge them.
> 2) It's not my job to hunt for videos for you.
> 3) Even if I found one you would not accept it anyway so why should I bother.
> 4) Your statements above are only proving my point (*that you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing*)



Actually I would accept it, if you provided the evidence. There has to be a Goju guy somewhere that can fight like Taira.

Why don't Goju guys fight like that kata, and if they don't then what's the problem? I don't think that's an unfair question to ask.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Gee, I just all the Small Circle JJ guys, as well as all of the other JJ schools out there, are nothing but a joke then, huh?  Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with this post.



Small Circle comes from Judo and Danzen Ryu. Judo actually predates Danzen Ryu.

And yeah, a lot of them are a joke. Usually its some guy who combined Karate and Judo and call it Jj to make more money. Obviously there's some legit schools out there (if you can trace their lineage), but you're better off taking Judo. Less chance of being taken for a ride.



MJS said:


> So, you assume that everything is done against compliant opponents? Ok. I always find it interesting how people use YT as the measuring stick as far as what's legit and what isn't.



Where did I say that? I simply said that some old Asian guy slapping around his students doesn't really prove the effectiveness of his art. It certainly looks cool, but then again, so does Steven Segal throwing his students around without touching them.

Show me that guy against a meathead who wants to pop his head off, and him using that great looking kata bunkai to subdue him. Then I'll be impressed.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Actually I would accept it, if you provided the evidence. There has to be a Goju guy somewhere that can fight like Taira.


Taira is a Goju guy?  So he is a goju guy that fights like himself.  I don't get the question


> Why don't Goju guys fight like that kata, and if they don't then what's the problem? I don't think that's an unfair question to ask.


what kata?  We dont fight like entire Kata because that would be a long fight but we use different parts of the kata in a fight.


----------



## K-man

ballen0351 said:


> Taira is a Goju guy?  So he is a goju guy that fights like himself.  I don't get the question
> 
> what kata?  We dont fight like entire Kata because that would be a long fight but we use different parts of the kata in a fight.


Absolutely spot on with both points. All fighting with kata bunkai means is that if the first technique fails there is a follow up technique available. If you are not training kata bunkai you are not less effective, you just don't have that option. Very few schools teach like Taira.
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

Chris Parker said:


> I was staying out of this one since my earlier comments, as to go through it, I'd want to pick up everything that is wrong and correct it... but I don't have the next 5 years to do so, and bluntly, I douby Hanzou here would hear any of it. But then you posted this.... you nearly had me in on your "ninjas" comments (dude, just no...), but this? Right....
> 
> Judo is Jujutsu. It's original name was Kano-ha Jujutsu... pretty simply "Kano's branch of Jujutsu". Judo is simply one form of Jujutsu, you realize. BJJ has it's roots in an early expression of Kano-ha Jujutsu, combined with a few other things, and given a focus on groundwork, but the origins are Jujutsu.
> 
> So, uh... no. Wrong.



More like semantics. I'm pretty sure that I said that Judo is a modernized form of Jujutsu. In fact you quoted me saying that.




> No, Judo is a particular subset of Jujutsu, founded by Kano Jigoro, and developed/spread as much as an educational tool as a martial art. Kano's focus was on education as much as, if not more than, martial arts. Secondly, "Jujutsu... is an archaic battlefield art"? Uh, nope. Jujutsu is a generic term applied to a very wide range of Japanese unarmed or lightly armed systems of combat, which might be a stand-alone system, or part of a larger syllabus. If part of a larger syllabus, it might be a major, or minor section. But very, very little of it was "battlefield"... why? Well, because you'd use weapons on a battlefield... bows and arrows (later, firearms), spears and other polearms. Why would you go onto a battlefield and use unarmed methods in anything other than the worst of all possible situations? Then you get into the various forms Jujutsu can take... there were some systems that were very much for the Bushi (warrior class), which often involved small arms (and might be referred to as Kogusoku, referring to a "small set [of weapons]", or Koshi no Mawari, referring to "[the weapons found] around the waist", or might be Yawara, Yawaragei, Hade, Goho, Judo [here's a history lesson for you... that term was used in at least one system about 150 years before Kano...], Kumiuchi, Wajutsu, Torite, Te, and many more), or there were systems that were geared up as a form of "commoners yawara", which would not include weapons, but be almost exclusively unarmed. These systems developed in a large variety of circumstances over a very  long period of time, with the earliest Jujutsu-centric system being founded in 1542 (Takenouchi Ryu - although there were unarmed aspects to some earlier systems, such as Kashima Shinryu and Katori Shinto Ryu), and continue to be developed today, some of which are new branches/variants of existing ones (such as Moto-ha Yoshin Ryu, a branch of Hontai Yoshin Ryu founded a few decades ago, or Hakko Ryu, a derivative of Daito Ryu from the 50's), others are purely new systems. And they are all Jujutsu.
> 
> So, uh... no. Wrong.



Again, semantics. I wouldn't consider Judo a subset of Jujutsu, nor would many other people. You clearly feel differently, but that's all a matter of opinion.

As for Jujutsu not being a battlefield art;



> Jujutsu developed among the samurai of feudal Japan as a method for defeating an armed and armored opponent in which one uses no weapon, or only a short weapon.[SUP][3][/SUP] Because striking against an armored opponent proved ineffective, practitioners learned that the most efficient methods for neutralizing an enemy took the form of pins, joint locks, and throws. These techniques were developed around the principle of using an attacker's energy against him, rather than directly opposing it.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jujutsu#cite_note-Murata-3




> Judo became favoured of the Police and the educational system due to Kano's very effective lobbying of the education department, and in part due to the performance of Kano's students in competitions. The "modernization" you refer to is more about Kano re-structuring the way he presented and taught his approach to Jujutsu, dominantly for the school system. In a number of ways, Kano simplified his approach from the Ryu (systems) he had been taught... but that's not really the same as "modernizing" the system. The structure, the mechanics, the uniform, the etiquette, the forms of attacks, the usage of Japanese kata, and so on, are all straight out of classical Jujutsu... in fact, the only real thing he "modernized" was the idea of mass-teaching, which lead to the development of the i-dan (kyu and dan) ranking, as well as the adoption of coloured belts. But, to be blunt, that form of ranking was adapted from the game "Go"... which is a very old game... so maybe not so much "modernizing". The fact that other modern systems have followed suit, particularly in the ranking ideas, doesn't mean that Kano was "modernizing" Jujutsu... just that he hit upon an idea that caught.
> 
> So, uh.... no. Wrong.



So teaching breakfalling on mats as opposed to wooden floors, developing a belt system, removing dangerous techniques, applying scientific methods to techniques, etc. isn't a more modern approach?




> What do you think has been added to Judo? Here's a clue... there's been a lot simplified, not added in. As far as BJJ, not much has been added there, either, it's simply developed along a different line (focusing on the ground, as a major aspect), with the overtly competitive aspect demanding constant adjustment, additions to, and adaptations to the mechanical methods... but it's basic approach is the same. Basically, someone comes up with a new sweep... so someone comes up with a counter... and then a counter to the counter... and so on. That's not adding things, it's developing naturally within it's context. And, for the record, that type of development has nothing to do with real fights/self defence, as it's to do with a competitive arms race... a street fight (to use an over-used and inaccurate stereotype) simply doesn't require development in that direction.
> 
> So, uh... no. Wrong.




The point was that classical Jujutsu isn't evolving in that way. Hence why its a "dead" art.




> And what, exactly, is your experience with actual Jujutsu? I'm assuming you're referring to the way Judo and BJJ do randori/roll/spar (whichever term you want) here... you do realize that such training methods have been a part of classical traditions for centuries, yeah? I mean, the reason Judo has such a focus on randori is because Kano's first teacher (classical Jujutsu) was a big proponent of it... it comes directly out of Jujutsu training methods. His second school had randori as well... and so did his third (although the teacher wasn't as fond of it, and Kano ran those sessions himself). This was in two separate systems, not just one, you realize... and how could Kano have "supplanted Jujutsu" by winning all the Police tournaments if none of the other systems did randori? They'd have had to to be in the tournament at all... how about the guys from the Handa Dojo learning under the head of Fusen Ryu? They beat Kano's guys, based on their explorations in randori, under the guidance of Mataemon Tanabe... but, of course, these classical systems are dead, and can't possibly do all that sparring and stuff....
> 
> So, uh... no. Wrong.



Judo supplanted Jujutsu because by Kano's time Jujutsu was out of favor to most of the Japanese people. To this day, Jujutsu is rare in Japan, and if you ask someone to point you to a Jujutsu school, you're more than likely going to be directed to a Bjj school instead.




> Wow, I'll have to tell my friends that are training in, or have trained in, Sosuishi Ryu, Takeuchi Ryu, Araki Ryu, Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu, Kukishin Ryu, Asayama Ichiden Ryu, Shinden Fudo Ryu, Hontai Yoshin Ryu, Kashima Shinryu, Tatsumi Ryu, Shindo Yoshin Ryu, Yagyu Shingan Ryu, Shinto Tenshin Ryu, Fusen Ryu, and more that they've trained in non-existant things... not to mention the dozens of other systems that I know of, have seen demonstrations of, have contact with people involved with, and so on.



You can tell them whatever you like. The fact of the matter is that classical Jujutsu is rare in the country of its origin. That makes all classical Jj schools outside of Japan highly suspect. If someone wanted to learn Japanese JJ, I'd point them towards a Judo school without hesitation. That at least insures that the prospective student is learning something genuine.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Taira is a Goju guy?  So he is a goju guy that fights like himself.  I don't get the question



I don't fight like every Bjj stylist, but there are signature moves that Bjj stylists do that immediately tells you that they had training in Bjj. Just like I could tell that Andrews Nakahara had a Bjj background.

However, whenever I see Goju guys spar, it looks like karate-kickboxing. I don't see those crisp locks and holds that Taira does. Why is that?



> what kata?  We dont fight like entire Kata because that would be a long fight but we use different parts of the kata in a fight.



It would be nice to see any aspect of the Kata being utilized in a non-compliant demonstration.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> However, whenever I see Goju guys spar, it looks like karate-kickboxing. I don't see those crisp locks and holds that Taira does. Why is that?


See alot of Goju guys sparing huh?  Been to many Goju Dojos?  Maybe you dont see it because you dont train Goju and you dont know Goju?



> It would be nice to see any aspect of the Kata being utilized in a non-compliant demonstration.


Every aspect of the Kata is used in the Bunkai


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I don't fight like every Bjj stylist, but there are signature moves that Bjj stylists do that immediately tells you that they had training in Bjj. Just like I could tell that Andrews Nakahara had a Bjj background.
> 
> However, whenever I see Goju guys spar, it looks like karate-kickboxing. I don't see those crisp locks and holds that Taira does. Why is that?
> 
> Lol! The Goju guys sparring are sport based, not TMA.  Taira in TMA. The fact that you can't acknowledge the difference speaks volumes. At my dojo we don't spar like your 'Goju guys' either and you won't see it in Okinawa. If you want to see those crisp locks and holds there are at least two schools in America teaching it, Carlsbad and New Jersey.
> 
> It would be nice to see any aspect of the Kata being utilized in a non-compliant demonstration.
> 
> I doubt you would recognise the difference and where it is non compliant I'm sure you would claim it to be choreographed.


I just heard a great quote that is so applicable to your posts.

"Against logic there is no armour like ignorance."

:asian:


----------



## K-man

For those of you interested in traditional Goju here is another clip of Taira. Things to look for is the way he performs _useless_ kata at the advanced level, little snippets at the beginning and end, and the neat way he causes people to fall over when he demonstrates the application of the _stupid_ stances we practise. And, as in the previous clip everything you see is from the kata. Enjoy 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zCKsvOrjuEE&desktop_uri=/watch?v=zCKsvOrjuEE


----------



## ballen0351

Another thing I was thinking about you cant really compare Taira to any joe schmo Goju guy you meet.  Thats like looking at a guy at your local boxing gym and asking why he does not look at crisp and clean as Floyd Mayweather Jr.  People like Taira and Morio Higonna are at the top of Goju you cant compare them to some guy you see at the local YMCA


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Another thing I was thinking about you cant really compare Taira to any joe schmo Goju guy you meet.  Thats like looking at a guy at your local boxing gym and asking why he does not look at crisp and clean as Floyd Mayweather Jr.  People like Taira and Morio Higonna are at the top of Goju you cant compare them to some guy you see at the local YMCA



Its not even about looking crisp and clean. If I'm looking at those Taira vids, then looking at Goju-Ryu sparring, they're completely different from each other. The sparring is more believable, because that's two people going at it in an unpredictable fashion. Taira is doing a demonstration, but he isn't really fighting anyone. Its no different than when I demonstrate an arm lock with my instructor, and then try to apply that same arm lock against a resisting, unyielding opponent. Clearly my arm lock is going to look less crisp and clean than when I demonstrated it with my instructor.

However, we know that Judokas and Bjjers can apply the arm lock if someone's trying to pop their heads off, because we've seen tons of said martial artists applying it.

Where's the Goju guys fighting the way Taira fights? Frankly, he might as well be doing a completely different style. Of course, we'll never know how Taira actually fights, because he doesn't fight competitively.

How convenient.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> For those of you interested in traditional Goju here is another clip of Taira. Things to look for is the way he performs _useless_ kata at the advanced level, little snippets at the beginning and end, and the neat way he causes people to fall over when he demonstrates the application of the _stupid_ stances we practise. And, as in the previous clip everything you see is from the kata. Enjoy
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zCKsvOrjuEE&desktop_uri=/watch?v=zCKsvOrjuEE




And here is Goju Ryu (Okinawan) and Shito Ryu sparring each other;






The fun begins at 3:10.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> And here is Goju Ryu (Okinawan) and Shito Ryu sparring each other;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fun begins at 3:10.


What is your issue with this?  It was a simple Demonstration.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> What is your issue with this?  It was a simple Demonstration.



They were sparring. However, its interesting to note that they were still doing that kickboxer style. It didn't resemble what Taira was doing during his demonstration.

Just to further the point, this is a bjj demonstration;






And we're going to be fighting like that during the roll. So that demonstration is more representative of Bjj than something else.

Those two guys free sparring was more representative of Goju Ryu and Shito Ryu (and Okinawan karate in general) than Taira's demonstrations.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> They were sparring. However, its interesting to note that they were still doing that kickboxer style. It didn't resemble what Taira was doing during his demonstration.
> 
> Isn't that amazing? It didn't resemble what Taira was doing because it is a totally different style of training that they do! Taira isn't into sport.  What part of that do you have so much trouble understanding or is it just more trolling? I'm sure you have the record for the most useless posts in one thread. (And you can take 'most' with either meaning)
> 
> Just to further the point, this is a bjj demonstration;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we're going to be fighting like that during the roll. So that demonstration is more representative of Bjj than something else.
> 
> Although this has absolutely nothing to do with the thread, all of a sudden a demonstration of technique with a complying partner is ok? That's consistency! But no one is questioning the effectiveness of BJJ. When I show you effective karate you deny it exists.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BLibKL7OzDY&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DBLibKL7OzDY
> 
> Those two guys free sparring was more representative of Goju Ryu and Shito Ryu (and Okinawan karate in general) than Taira's demonstrations.
> 
> The Goju guy is Akihito Yagi. He is Meibukan style. It is purely a demonstration as *ballen* pointed out. Meibukan like most of Okinawan styles does not compete in tournaments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Goju-Ryu Meibu-kan, Dojos practice forms of Yakusoku Kumite only. Yakusoku Kumite means pre-arranged sparring. There is no practice of Jiyu Kumite or free sparring. There has never been free fighting in classical Okinawan Goju-Ryu.
> *In Jiyu Kumite, Karate becomes a sport, and classical Karate is not a sport.* Okinawans practice Karate-Do, meaning the way of the empty hand. Also Jiyu Kumite can hinder the development of good Karate techniques, especially in Okinawan Goju-Ryu, where the emphasis is ending the fight with one devastating technique (Hito Tsuki).
Click to expand...

This thread is about TMA. What Taira was demonstrating it TMA. You have been whinging all through that TMA people don't compete then you show a demonstration of Sport sparring again and say it is typical of Goju Ryu. There are sport based Goju schools and there are traditional schools. I show you the traditional school and it obviously doesn't penetrate that thick outer layer.

As to whether it is representative of Okinawan karate. I'm not sure if I posted this video before but it is Nicholas Pettas, a Kyokushin karateka doing a show called Samurai Spirit. In this episode he is trying to find someone to fight in Okinawa. None of them are interested. I think you'll find this a lot more representative of Okinawan karate than the crap you keep peddling.  
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BLibKL7OzDY&desktop_uri=/watch?v=BLibKL7OzDY

The Okinawan bit starts at 10:00. The guy he is with, Hokama Sensei, we visited when I was in Okinawa a couple of years back. I'm hoping I can train with him next year. He is a traditional practitioner, like Taira and the rest of his associates at the Jundokan where I was training. Mate, I have been there and seen and been involved in the training in Okinawa. You are talking through your **** when it comes to Okinawan Goju.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Just to further the point, this is a bjj demonstration;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we're going to be fighting like that during the roll. So that demonstration is more representative of Bjj than something else.



So you are going to be choreographing your techniques and letting your rolling partner do his moves without resisting then?


----------



## Chris Parker

So my constant pointing out that every single thing you typed was wrong didn't sink in, huh? 



Hanzou said:


> More like semantics. I'm pretty sure that I said that Judo is a modernized form of Jujutsu. In fact you quoted me saying that.



It's not semantics, it's accurate history and terminology. And yeah, you said that Judo is a modernized form of Jujutsu... you did pick up on the whole "So, uh... no. Wrong" motif, yeah?

In other words, Judo is not (repeated here for emphasis) NOT "modernized" anything. It's Judo. Which is a form (repeated here for emphasis) ONE FORM of Jujutsu. While a number of it's aspects have been adopted by other modern systems, that doesn't mean that Kano was "modernizing" anything... he was simply adapting what he knew to a particular context (which was to do with ingratiating Judo into schools and the education system, nothing to do with "modernizing" anything, other than matching an evolving education system).



Hanzou said:


> Again, semantics. I wouldn't consider Judo a subset of Jujutsu, nor would many other people. You clearly feel differently, but that's all a matter of opinion.



No, it's a matter of recognizing what it is, which is something you've shown to be unable to do in all respects.



Hanzou said:


> As for Jujutsu not being a battlefield art;
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jujutsu#cite_note-Murata-3



Ah, wiki... Here's a fun fact.. when I accessed that page from my phone, it said "This article has issues"... from a PC it expands by saying it requires additional verification for some aspects. But let's get to the real problem here: You don't know what Jujutsu is, and that wiki article misses it as well, albeit it's a lot closer than you are. We'll deal with that in a bit.



Hanzou said:


> So teaching breakfalling on mats as opposed to wooden floors, developing a belt system, removing dangerous techniques, applying scientific methods to techniques, etc. isn't a more modern approach?



No, it's not a more modern approach. Teaching breakfalls occurred on whatever surface the school used... what makes you think that Judo classes weren't held on wooden floors at times? Besides that, traditionally, you'd be training unarmed methods on matted floors (tatami), the wooden floored dojo are for weapon arts... so no, you're out there. The belt system wasn't anything to do with "modernizing", it was simply a practical answer to there being schools (in universities and educational institutions across Japan) all over the place, so when Kano went to teach, he wanted an immediately recognizable indication of the level of experience the student held if he'd never met them before. In most older systems, there would only be a single dojo, so the level of ability of each student would be known by the instructor already. The removal of "dangerous techniques" also isn't anything to do with "modernizing", it's to do with altering the art to suit a new context (teaching kids in schools, far more than anything to do with competition, for the record). And, as for applying scientific methods to techniques? Seriously old-school, mate. Kashima Shinryu has used such ideas since the mid 16th Century, and they're hardly alone.



Hanzou said:


> The point was that classical Jujutsu isn't evolving in that way. Hence why its a "dead" art.



And my point is "how would you know?" To take Kashima Shinryu as an example again, the Jujutsu syllabus has been altered/restructured with each successive generation over at least the last 3... and a number of times prior to that. Araki Ryu has a long-standing tradition of pressure testing everything they do, altering, or even dropping any part of any method, even whole kata, if they don't "work". That art goes back to the beginning of the 17th Century. One of the best regarded modern combative teachers around, an absolute go-to guy for understanding real violence, is Rory Miller... who is trained in Sosuishi Ryu, a banpa ryu (off-shoot system) of Takenouchi Ryu. Again, seriously old school here... and if you think that Rory Miller is wasting his time with stuff that doesn't have any value, you're seriously out of your mind, and completely out of your depth.



Hanzou said:


> Judo supplanted Jujutsu because by Kano's time Jujutsu was out of favor to most of the Japanese people.



 Judo supplanted nothing. There was a backlash against anything seen to be related to the samurai after the Meiji Restoration of 1868, but there was no public school system teaching Jujutsu. Individual police areas would pick their own approach, but after the Meiji Restoration, there was a push to make things uniform, which is where the police tournaments came into it.



Hanzou said:


> To this day, Jujutsu is rare in Japan, and if you ask someone to point you to a Jujutsu school, you're more than likely going to be directed to a Bjj school instead.



No, you're not. You'd more likely get a quizzical look, and be asked if you mean Judo or Aikido... 



Hanzou said:


> You can tell them whatever you like. The fact of the matter is that classical Jujutsu is rare in the country of its origin. That makes all classical Jj schools outside of Japan highly suspect. If someone wanted to learn Japanese JJ, I'd point them towards a Judo school without hesitation. That at least insures that the prospective student is learning something genuine.



Right, let's deal with this idea of "Jujutsu is rare in Japan". When you're looking at the older systems, in most cases each system would have a single dojo. There was no single art called "Jujutsu", so saying that "Jujutsu is rare" is just missing the point in the first place... it'd be like saying that "East LA High School" is rare... but High Schools, well, aren't. I can list dozens, if not hundreds of genuine Jujutsu schools in Japan, not to mention what's found in other schools, or the fact that there are more modern, larger organizations that offer genuine Jujutsu (and Jujutsu related) systems around the world... seriously, you're way out of your depth here. Suggesting Judo is fine, of course... you'll find that many classical practitioners have some exposure or experience in Judo as well (if they're Japanese, they did it in school), but your reasoning is way off base. Oh, and the word is "ensure", not "insure"... one means "to make certain", the other is "to provide financial compensation for loss".


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> So you are going to be choreographing your techniques and letting your rolling partner do his moves without resisting then?



You miss the point. I have no problem with someone demonstrating a technique. My issue is show me someone fighting (or sparring) using those techniques.

I haven't seen a single Goju-Ryu stylist who does. Every Goju-Ryu sparring vid I've seen shows them fighting in a kickboxer-lite sort of way. That is similar to what I've seen in person when I sparred against a Goju-Ryu stylist a long time ago when I still did Shotokan.


----------



## Hanzou

Chris Parker said:


> So my constant pointing out that every single thing you typed was wrong didn't sink in, huh?
> 
> It's not semantics, it's accurate history and terminology. And yeah, you said that Judo is a modernized form of Jujutsu... you did pick up on the whole "So, uh... no. Wrong" motif, yeah?
> 
> In other words, Judo is not (repeated here for emphasis) NOT "modernized" anything. It's Judo. Which is a form (repeated here for emphasis) ONE FORM of Jujutsu. While a number of it's aspects have been adopted by other modern systems, that doesn't mean that Kano was "modernizing" anything... he was simply adapting what he knew to a particular context (which was to do with ingratiating Judo into schools and the education system, nothing to do with "modernizing" anything, other than matching an evolving education system).



Again, that's a matter of opinion. I believe that making Jujutsu safer, applying modern principles, spreading martial arts to children, etc. is a modernization of the art. Afterall, Judo emerged during the period of Japanese modernization. It wouldn't have survived and flourished if it was "just another Jujutsu school".




> Ah, wiki... Here's a fun fact.. when I accessed that page from my phone, it said "This article has issues"... from a PC it expands by saying it requires additional verification for some aspects. But let's get to the real problem here: You don't know what Jujutsu is, and that wiki article misses it as well, albeit it's a lot closer than you are. We'll deal with that in a bit.



The source of that quote was this; Kan&#333;, Jigor&#333; (2006) [2005]. "A BRIEF HISTORY OF JUJUTSU". In Murata, Naoki. _Mind over muscle: writings from the founder of Judo._

I guess you now know more about Jujutsu than Jigoro Kano. :lol2:




> No, it's not a more modern approach. Teaching breakfalls occurred on whatever surface the school used... what makes you think that Judo classes weren't held on wooden floors at times? Besides that, traditionally, you'd be training unarmed methods on matted floors (tatami), the wooden floored dojo are for weapon arts... so no, you're out there. The belt system wasn't anything to do with "modernizing", it was simply a practical answer to there being schools (in universities and educational institutions across Japan) all over the place, so when Kano went to teach, he wanted an immediately recognizable indication of the level of experience the student held if he'd never met them before. In most older systems, there would only be a single dojo, so the level of ability of each student would be known by the instructor already. The removal of "dangerous techniques" also isn't anything to do with "modernizing", it's to do with altering the art to suit a new context (teaching kids in schools, far more than anything to do with competition, for the record). And, as for applying scientific methods to techniques? Seriously old-school, mate. Kashima Shinryu has used such ideas since the mid 16th Century, and they're hardly alone.



You do understand that the scientific method in Japan c. 1500-1599 is far different and less accurate than the scientific method applied in Japan during the Meiji restoration when the Japanese had access to western technology. I mean, Issac Newton, the father of modern physics wasn't even born until 1642. 




> Judo supplanted nothing. There was a backlash against anything seen to be related to the samurai after the Meiji Restoration of 1868, but there was no public school system teaching Jujutsu. Individual police areas would pick their own approach, but after the Meiji Restoration, there was a push to make things uniform, which is where the police tournaments came into it.



Aren't there more Judo dojos in Japan than Jujutsu dojos?



> No, you're not. You'd more likely get a quizzical look, and be asked if you mean Judo or Aikido...



Actually more than likely a Brazilian Jujutsu school. Bjj is very popular in Japan.




> Right, let's deal with this idea of "Jujutsu is rare in Japan". When you're looking at the older systems, in most cases each system would have a single dojo. There was no single art called "Jujutsu", so saying that "Jujutsu is rare" is just missing the point in the first place... it'd be like saying that "East LA High School" is rare... but High Schools, well, aren't. I can list dozens, if not hundreds of genuine Jujutsu schools in Japan, not to mention what's found in other schools, or the fact that there are more modern, larger organizations that offer genuine Jujutsu (and Jujutsu related) systems around the world... seriously, you're way out of your depth here. Suggesting Judo is fine, of course... you'll find that many classical practitioners have some exposure or experience in Judo as well (if they're Japanese, they did it in school), but your reasoning is way off base. Oh, and the word is "ensure", not "insure"... one means "to make certain", the other is "to provide financial compensation for loss".



Considering that most JJJ here in the states is more than likely a scam created by a guy who combined Judo with Karate in the hopes of roping in gullible people, "insure" works just fine in this context.


----------



## Kframe

How about we point him to Dan DJurivics blog?  Ya he may not be the best with other arts, but regarding GOJU I feel he is great. It will take a lot of digging on his forum and blog but there are links to him and others sparring. He is a traditionalist and at shows in the sparring.  You can clearly see stance transitions, deflection with movement and other nice things..  

Honestly, with the proliferation of sport karate and taedo  he is about the only karate instructor id trust to teach me. Sadly he lives down under and im not moving there.


----------



## Kframe

K man, I hate to ask this, but if traditional Goju schools don't do free sparring and only pre arranged, how do they actually pressure test any of there skills?  Pre arranged sparring of any flavor does not help the student deal with unexpected attacks, it only helps them read a script.  My feeling is script reading does not equal martial arts fighting.  

Now if im mistaken, and have misread what you posted please help me clear up the confusion.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Small Circle comes from Judo and Danzen Ryu. Judo actually predates Danzen Ryu.
> 
> And yeah, a lot of them are a joke. Usually its some guy who combined Karate and Judo and call it Jj to make more money. Obviously there's some legit schools out there (if you can trace their lineage), but you're better off taking Judo. Less chance of being taken for a ride.



I'm not saying there aren't mcdojos out there, however, I wouldn't paint every SCJJ or JJJ dojo out there, as a joke, unless you've seen them all.  





> Where did I say that? I simply said that some old Asian guy slapping around his students doesn't really prove the effectiveness of his art. It certainly looks cool, but then again, so does Steven Segal throwing his students around without touching them.
> 
> Show me that guy against a meathead who wants to pop his head off, and him using that great looking kata bunkai to subdue him. Then I'll be impressed.



Where did you say that?  Have you been reading your own posts?  Pretty much every post you make, you imply that the vast majority..other than MMA of course, don't train alive, with resistance, and unless it's on film, it didn't happen.  Sorry, but I call BS on all that.


----------



## Jaeimseu

Some people seem to be getting emotional about their art, but I think some of what's being said has merit. I, too, have noticed that when I have seen sparring done by various styles, the sparring has looked remarkably similar, so I can see how someone could come to some of the conclusions in this thread. I remember watching a "kung fu" competition on TV. If it hadn't been called "kung fu" by title and by the announcers, I wouldn't have recognized it as kung fu. It looked like sloppy kickboxing.

I'm not saying TMA are all ineffective, but I can see how people might come to that conclusion.

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk


----------



## MJS

RTKDCMB said:


> So you are going to be choreographing your techniques and letting your rolling partner do his moves without resisting then?



I was just going to say the same thing!   So, to sum this up: A clip of a high ranking Goju master is posted, and its deemed garbage.  A BJJ clip is posted, also of a demo, and it's the real deal.  Alrighty then. LOL!


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I mean, Issac Newton, the father of modern physics wasn't even born until 1642.



Not that it has anything to do with this thread (or forum for that matter) but modern physics was not even invented until the 20th century. Issac Newton was a classical physicist. Galileo (1564-1642) was also called the 'father of modern physics' which was modern at the time but still only classical physics.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Jaeimseu said:


> I, too, have noticed that when I have seen sparring done by various styles, the sparring has looked remarkably similar, so I can see how someone could come to some of the conclusions in this thread. I remember watching a "kung fu" competition on TV. If it hadn't been called "kung fu" by title and by the announcers, I wouldn't have recognized it as kung fu. It looked like sloppy kickboxing.



I have noticed that as well but that was not the case with the Goju Ryu versus Shito Ryu video.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Jaeimseu said:


> when I have seen sparring done by various styles, the sparring has looked remarkably similar,...


The guy in the following clip had drilled this combo so many times. That's why he can pull it out twice within 15 seconds. It's from training and not from luck.






You should always trains as the way you fights. When you fight, you always use your best skill. Whether your best skills will work or not is one thing, it you keep trying to use your best skill, you will never fight the same way as everybody else does.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> K man, I hate to ask this, but if traditional Goju schools don't do free sparring and only pre arranged, how do they actually pressure test any of there skills?  Pre arranged sparring of any flavor does not help the student deal with unexpected attacks, it only helps them read a script.  My feeling is script reading does not equal martial arts fighting.
> 
> Now if im mistaken, and have misread what you posted please help me clear up the confusion.


My school, we don't do any sparring like you see on the clips posted. If someone is that far away we don't have to fight. If they are in your face, like shoving or in your face threatening, yes that's the real situation. Someone rushing into hit you sure. Someone grabbing you from behind etc. so we train against those situations. How much experience you have determines the intensity. Occasionally we will put on head guards but normally not. We don't do any prearranged sparring as people normally think of prearranged being a sequence. Our prearranged means you know what the initial attack is. For example you know your partner is going to attack with a left right combo or a grab and punch, things you're likely to encounter in a real fight. After that you are on your own. Next step after that, you move on to random attacks. 

I'm not saying that people shouldn't spar but I belong to the school that says you fight as you train. If you train for sport you may not be prepared for real violence. That's not denigrating any style. Hopefully all training should provide the means to defend yourself.

One other thing re sparring. When I trained Japanese Goju we had two types of sparring. Awasse kumite and Jiyu kumite. Awasse is slow sparring testing for openings etc but not trying to belt the crap out of each other. Almost all video posted of Goju sparring is Awasse. Even tournament fighting is not full contact. Jiyu kumite is reserved for the cage as in really trying to hit hard. 
:asian:


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Originally Posted by RTKDCMB
> So you are going to be choreographing your techniques and letting your rolling partner do his moves without resisting then?
> 
> 
> 
> You miss the point. I have no problem with someone demonstrating a technique. My issue is show me someone fighting (or sparring) using those techniques.
> 
> I haven't seen a single Goju-Ryu stylist who does. Every Goju-Ryu sparring vid I've seen shows them fighting in a kickboxer-lite sort of way. That is similar to what I've seen in person when I sparred against a Goju-Ryu stylist a long time ago when I still did Shotokan.
Click to expand...

Lol. You have never seen 'traditional' karate. You keep saying it over and over and keep quoting the same sport based karate to prove your point. Even when a clip of traditional type training is posted you dismiss it because it wasn't within your experience. It wasn't within my understanding either until recently. The difference is in our attitudes. You say "It's different to my experience so it can't be real". I saw it and said, "Wow, this is incredible. I need to change my training".


----------



## Dinkydoo

Kframe said:


> Pre arranged sparring of any flavor does not help the student deal with unexpected attacks, it only helps them read a script.  My feeling is script reading does not equal martial arts fighting.



I have to agree with this. Prearranged drills have their purpose (and a firm place within my training) but my real learning always comes from
the free-fighting type partner work each week. Being caught out and having a near miss (or a receiving light bare hand strike) is how I learn best.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> I'm not saying there aren't mcdojos out there, however, I wouldn't paint every SCJJ or JJJ dojo out there, as a joke, unless you've seen them all.




No, but it makes every Jjj school suspect, because like many TMA styles its legitimacy is wrapped up in dusty old history books, and not on its effectiveness. Unlike Judo, Bjj, Boxing, and other styles that are pressure tested by every wanna-be MMA guy or meathead that pops in, TMA instructors can sit back and peddle bullcrap upon their students for decades and no one will question it.



> Where did you say that?  Have you been reading your own posts?  Pretty much every post you make, you imply that the vast majority..other than MMA of course, don't train alive, with resistance, and unless it's on film, it didn't happen.  Sorry, but I call BS on all that.



I've said it throughout my posts. And no, most TMAs don't have alive training. Simply the nature of the beast. That's why their demonstrations don't match their sparring.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Lol. You have never seen 'traditional' karate. You keep saying it over and over and keep quoting the same sport based karate to prove your point. Even when a clip of traditional type training is posted you dismiss it because it wasn't within your experience. It wasn't within my understanding either until recently. The difference is in our attitudes. You say "It's different to my experience so it can't be real". I saw it and said, "Wow, this is incredible. I need to change my training".



So again, where are the Goju-Ryu black belts fighting like Taira? The black belts I've seen are all fighting in that pseudo kick boxer style.

watch this;  

Bjj demonstration:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EbGabrl2GZc&desktop_uri=/watch?v=EbGabrl2GZc

Bjj sparring:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vqDwWfgOeoc&desktop_uri=/watch?v=vqDwWfgOeoc

Its simple man.


----------



## seasoned

I'm going to side tract just once and that will be it. I qualify every year with a firearm and I'm on the range a few times per month shooting targets. We make it as real as possible but all shooting is done on inanimate objects. I hope you get my point. The training is as much mental as physical and both count. Grant you people have been known to freeze up and I'm not saying pressure testing is not good, but there are a lot of people doing a lot of serious jobs with the type of training I am talking about above. Please don't take me wrong and I apologize for any side tracking, but.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> No, but it makes every Jjj school suspect, because like many TMA styles  its legitimacy is wrapped up in dusty old history books, and not on its  effectiveness.  TMA  instructors can sit back and peddle bullcrap upon their students for  decades and no one will question it.



I don't know where you get your misinformation from but that is complete rubbish.



Hanzou said:


> I've said it throughout my posts. And no, most TMAs don't have alive training. Simply the nature of the beast. That's why their demonstrations don't match their sparring.



Yeah they do, it's called free sparring.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> I don't know where you get your misinformation from but that is complete rubbish.



How is it complete rubbish? 

Think about it; which is less likely to be a fraud, a boxing club, or some exotic sounding JJJ or Kung Fu school that you've never heard of before?





> Yeah they do, it's called free sparring.



Only if its full contact and no ones pulling punches. Sort of like old school Kyokushin where you had to fight through 30 black belts full contact to get your black belt. Here's a video of a Kyokushin belt exam. It's not for the squeamish, because they beat the hell out of each other.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=naq30Oak978

Stuff like this is why Kyokushin is respected in MMA circles, despite its semi-traditional slant (and some Kyokushin schools have gone soft).

Of course, Kyokushin isn't TMA.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> How is it complete rubbish?
> 
> Think about it; which is less likely to be a fraud, a boxing club, or some exotic sounding JJJ or Kung Fu school that you've never heard of before?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only if its full contact and no ones pulling punches. Sort of like old school Kyokushin where you had to fight through 30 black belts full contact to get your black belt. Here's a video of a Kyokushin belt exam. It's not for the squeamish, because they beat the hell out of each other.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=naq30Oak978
> 
> Stuff like this is why Kyokushin is respected in MMA circles, despite its semi-traditional slant (and some Kyokushin schools have gone soft).
> 
> Of course, Kyokushin isn't TMA.




So do you go full contact in BJJ?  Or do you let up when someone taps before anyone gets hurt?  So unless your walking around with two broken elbows right now your point is meaningless.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> So again, where are the Goju-Ryu black belts fighting like Taira? The black belts I've seen are all fighting in that pseudo kick boxer style.
> 
> watch this;
> 
> Bjj demonstration:
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EbGabrl2GZc&desktop_uri=/watch?v=EbGabrl2GZc
> 
> Bjj sparring:
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vqDwWfgOeoc&desktop_uri=/watch?v=vqDwWfgOeoc
> 
> Its simple man.


It is unbelievably simple so you must be unbelievably stupid!

*Traditional Goju does not compete.* What part of that simple sentence can't you understand? 

I have already posted two videos of Taira, someone else posted a clip of Paul Enfield from Carlsbad.

Here's another of a Taira with Taba.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IwMZNPkCdL0&desktop_uri=/watch?v=IwMZNPkCdL0

A bit more traditional training, this time Portuguese.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SCGSOm3LL1Y&desktop_uri=/watch?v=SCGSOm3LL1Y

That's plenty of Black Belts training.

Maybe some more from Lithuania?
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XXpjQGoUeR8&desktop_uri=/watch?v=XXpjQGoUeR8

Maybe Canada is closer to home.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rVVrmTWg3NE&desktop_uri=/watch?v=rVVrmTWg3NE

I don't know what you need to see to convince you that we don't train to compete. As I've said. You have never seen traditional Goju so stop making such a fool of yourself with your inane comments. I find your comments offensive to be honest.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Think about it; which is less likely to be a fraud, a boxing club, or some exotic sounding JJJ or Kung Fu school that you've never heard of before?


I'm thinking about it but I can't understand why any of them are likely to be a fraud. In fact I think the number of fraudulent martial art clubs world wide as a percentage would be minuscule.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> So do you go full contact in BJJ?  Or do you let up when someone taps before anyone gets hurt?  So unless your walking around with two broken elbows right now your point is meaningless.



Yes, we go full contact until someone submits. There's no reason to continue to go full blast if someone submits to you.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> It is unbelievably simple so you must be unbelievably stupid!
> 
> *Traditional Goju does not compete.* What part of that simple sentence can't you understand?
> 
> I have already posted two videos of Taira, someone else posted a clip of Paul Enfield from Carlsbad.
> 
> Here's another of a Taira with Taba.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IwMZNPkCdL0&desktop_uri=/watch?v=IwMZNPkCdL0
> 
> A bit more traditional training, this time Portuguese.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SCGSOm3LL1Y&desktop_uri=/watch?v=SCGSOm3LL1Y
> 
> That's plenty of Black Belts training.
> 
> Maybe some more from Lithuania?
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XXpjQGoUeR8&desktop_uri=/watch?v=XXpjQGoUeR8
> 
> Maybe Canada is closer to home.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rVVrmTWg3NE&desktop_uri=/watch?v=rVVrmTWg3NE
> 
> I don't know what you need to see to convince you that we don't train to compete. As I've said. You have never seen traditional Goju so stop making such a fool of yourself with your inane comments. I find your comments offensive to be honest.



Again, great demonstrations. Now where's two Goju Ryu guys fighting like that Bunkai?


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Again, great demonstrations. Now where's two Goju Ryu guys fighting like that Bunkai?


Sorry, I have posted half a dozen clips showing black belts training the bunkai at various levels of intensity because you intimated nobody, apart from Taira trains that way. If the speed and intensity is any faster the receiver cannot defend. The defence is what we call predicted response. You either respond to protect or you get hit. Even at half speed you have to pull your strike. You won't find any video of two Goju guys 'fighting' as in playing like you do in MMA because *traditional Okinawan Goju does not spar and does not fight in tournaments*. That must be six or eight times I have said that to you. I'll ask again. *What part of "traditional Okinawan Goju Ryu karate does not spar and does not train for competition" are you having such trouble comprehending. *I put it to my four year old grandson, whom I am already teaching traditional karate, and he understands perfectly. 

But I suppose I should say thank you for acknowledging that they were 'great demonstrations'. That's a big step from TMA is crap which was your start point.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> How is it complete rubbish?
> 
> Think about it; which is less likely to be a fraud, a boxing club, or some exotic sounding JJJ or Kung Fu school that you've never heard of before?



There are a great many boxing clubs I have never heard off before - must be all frauds then?



Hanzou said:


> Only if its full contact and no ones pulling punches. Sort of like old school Kyokushin where you had to fight through 30 black belts full contact to get your black belt. Here's a video of a Kyokushin belt exam. It's not for the squeamish, because they beat the hell out of each other.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=naq30Oak978
> 
> Stuff like this is why Kyokushin is respected in MMA circles, despite its semi-traditional slant (and some Kyokushin schools have gone soft).
> 
> Of course, Kyokushin isn't TMA.



1) There is no such thing as 'full contact' except for actual fighting.
2) Full contact, semi-contact, non-contact, none of these equal aliveness.
3) Although good, they are hardly beating the hell out of each other, they are not punching to the head or trying to incapacitate or knock out their training partners (if they were then there would not be adults sparring children).
4) It would be extremely difficult for BJJ to do anything that did not have full contact since combat cuddling requires actual touching.  You cannot mount or choke someone without touching them
5) Full contact in grappling and full contact in striking have vastly different meanings.
6) How do you define 'pulling punches'? To me it suggests that you do not contact by not finishing your punch.
7) YOU HAVE STILL TO POST A VIDEO OF YOUR TRAINING TO SHOW EVERYONE YOUR SUPERIOR TRAINING METHODS AS YOU SEE THEM.


----------



## Chris Parker

Still? This'll be fun...



Hanzou said:


> Again, that's a matter of opinion. I believe that making Jujutsu safer, applying modern principles, spreading martial arts to children, etc. is a modernization of the art. Afterall, Judo emerged during the period of Japanese modernization. It wouldn't have survived and flourished if it was "just another Jujutsu school".



Right. What "modern principles"? If you're talking about things like sparring, you do realize that I've already pointed out the usage of that as a training tool for centuries, yeah? Training on mats? Again, I've already shown that to be quite traditional. Looking for marketing opportunities? So old as to be railed against by Musashi in the Gorin no Sho. Targeting your teaching at an educational position? Heard of Yagyu Shinkage Ryu? Ono-ha Itto Ryu? Shinto Muso Ryu? Any of a hundred other traditional arts? Do you know what an Otome Ryu was/is? Applying what you refer to as "scientific principles"? Again, common, in a number of senses of the term (we'll come back to this). Teaching children? Seriously old-school. And just because Judo is a modern system doesn't mean that it was "modernized", it just means that it's a modern system. It's survival and flourishment was largely due to (one more time, now) Kano's lobbying of the education department... nothing to do with modernizing anything in the art itself. And, when all's said and done, it really is "just another jujutsu school".... it's just an incredibly successful one.

You really don't know what you're dealing with here.



Hanzou said:


> The source of that quote was this; Kan&#333;, Jigor&#333; (2006) [2005]. "A BRIEF HISTORY OF JUJUTSU". In Murata, Naoki. _Mind over muscle: writings from the founder of Judo._
> 
> I guess you now know more about Jujutsu than Jigoro Kano. :lol2:



You know, I love context... it puts things in position so that their meaning and importance can be easily gleaned.... the only part of Kano's writings that was quoted there was "Jujutsu developed among the samurai of fuedal Japan as a method for defeating an armed and armoured opponent in which one uses no weapon, or only a short weapon". The rest of your quote was not part of the reference. And the point was not the quote.... it was the entire wiki article as a whole. But, for the record, that quote (just the Kano one) oversimplifies things to the point of removing accuracy as a statement. Even Kano would agree with that, I feel.

Oh, but, for the record, what do you think of sword defences? Modern? Part of a modernization? Something that was necessary after the Haitorei Edict of 1876 that banned the wearing of swords?

Do you know the Kime no Kata?






What do you think of the Koshiki no Kata? Modern?






These are demonstrations of kata from Judo. But, of course, they can't be Judo, as this isn't what randori looks like, right?

Oh, and the point is that I know a hell of a lot more about Jujutsu than you do. 



Hanzou said:


> You do understand that the scientific method in Japan c. 1500-1599 is far different and less accurate than the scientific method applied in Japan during the Meiji restoration when the Japanese had access to western technology. I mean, Issac Newton, the father of modern physics wasn't even born until 1642.



Wow, that's a wonderfully narrow view of things... "Scientific" only means modern, Western science? Really? I suppose music only means current American bands, too... and art is only Europeans.... post Warhol, of course... 

Let's put it this way, the application of a scientific approach is pretty simple... it's a repeatable and testable hypothesis or theory. Which fits, well, pretty much all martial arts. If you're thinking only of a set of rules based on leverage, anatomy, vectors, physics etc, again, you're way off... as I mentioned, Kashima Shinryu has applied such things since the 16th Century. The study of anatomy was more advanced in the East than it was in the West at the time, you realize? Or do you think that there was no understanding of such things until Newton came around? If you do? Uh.... no. Wrong. Again. Still.



Hanzou said:


> Aren't there more Judo dojos in Japan than Jujutsu dojos?



So what? Aren't there more McDonalds than 5 star restaurants? I mean, did you notice where I said that most schools only have one location, in many cases only one teacher at a time? The prevalence of one school doesn't mean the supplanting of the others, you realize.



Hanzou said:


> Actually more than likely a Brazilian Jujutsu school. Bjj is very popular in Japan.



It's getting there... the UFC and similar have helped a lot there. But BJJ is BJJ, and Jujutsu is Jujutsu... the only way they get confused is when people don't know the difference.



Hanzou said:


> Considering that most JJJ here in the states is more than likely a scam created by a guy who combined Judo with Karate in the hopes of roping in gullible people, "insure" works just fine in this context.



So you're in the states.... and you know how Japanese people will respond to a question on Jujutsu how? And, while there are a large number of gendai (modern), commonly Western systems using the name Jujutsu (or it's less accurate spellings), that doesn't make them "scams" unless they are claiming to be old Japanese traditions (I know a number who do, but it's hardly all of them). Personally, I feel your assessment is inaccurate, to say the least. You're attributing motives where there isn't any reason to suggest it, and you're trying to tar all schools with the same biased brush... it just doesn't work that way. 



Hanzou said:


> Hanzou said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, but it makes every Jjj school suspect, because like many TMA styles its legitimacy is wrapped up in dusty old history books, and not on its effectiveness. Unlike Judo, Bjj, Boxing, and other styles that are pressure tested by every wanna-be MMA guy or meathead that pops in, TMA instructors can sit back and peddle bullcrap upon their students for decades and no one will question it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RTKDCMB said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know where you get your misinformation from but that is complete rubbish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is it complete rubbish?
> 
> Think about it; which is less likely to be a fraud, a boxing club, or some exotic sounding JJJ or Kung Fu school that you've never heard of before?
Click to expand...

[/QUOTE]

It's complete rubbish as it's unsubstantiated drivel, with nothing other than bias and prejudice, combined with a deep lack of understanding, respect, knowledge, or education on the topic. Besides which, the idea that you've never heard of something doesn't mean it's not genuine... ever heard of Unkou Ryu? Shosho Ryu? Higo Shinkage Ryu? Owari-kan Ryu? Toda-ha Buko Ryu? Shojitsu Kenri Kataichi Ryu? Ogasawara Ryu? Kanshin Ryu? Kanemaki Ryu? Morishige Ryu? Yo Ryu? Shin Muso Hayashizaki Ryu? Masaki Ryu? Shingyoto Ryu? Maniwa-Nen Ryu? Shibukawa Ryu? Ryushin Shochi Ryu? Hozoin Ryu? I haven't even gotten to the rare ones yet.... 



Kframe said:


> K man, I hate to ask this, but if traditional Goju schools don't do free sparring and only pre arranged, how do they actually pressure test any of there skills? Pre arranged sparring of any flavor does not help the student deal with unexpected attacks, it only helps them read a script. My feeling is script reading does not equal martial arts fighting.
> 
> Now if im mistaken, and have misread what you posted please help me clear up the confusion.



Hi Kframe, considering your recent change in your martial system, perhaps I can help here as well.

The majority of what you do will be "scripted". However, it should be understood that that approach has been the norm (and continues to be the norm) for anyone wanting to deal with actual violence, not sparring. Why? Because it's much easier to teach methods of movement, tactics, principles, and so on that way. You learn to do things the way that the tried and tested system has learnt is the best. The problem is when people stop at the "do this slow so you can remember the whole sequence" level... that's the absolute beginning, and is actually something you do before you begin actually training the art. When these "scripted" actions (Japanese kata... paired) are done properly, it should be at an speed, power, intensity, and range/distance of an actual fight... and it should be done at a level where you can't "remember" what the next step is... you simply do it instinctively. That's the real aim of kata training here. And, when you get it wrong, you get hit. Hard. Properly. For real.

Tell you what, here's a few examples:






This is Araki Ryu, performed by Ellis Amdur. One aim of this Ryu, and it's training methods, are to constantly pressure test by taking the kata to the extreme... in this demonstration (which isn't that far removed from the intensity they train with), one of the weapons breaks... it goes "off script"... but the sequence continues. Without proper kata training, that doesn't happen.






Very old footage of Katori Shinto Ryu... which is here for the moment when one of the swordsmen doesn't quite get his bokken (wooden sword) up in time... and gets a nasty whack to the head! That's the reality of kata, when done well... you have to get it right... but you don't have time to remember.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Yes, we go full contact until someone submits. There's no reason to continue to go full blast if someone submits to you.



So what your saying is because I don't shatter my training partners jaw my art is not effective but there is no reason for you to shatter your partners elbow.  

Ummmmmm yeah ok


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> . *What part of "traditional Okinawan Goju Ryu karate does not spar and does not train for competition" are you having such trouble comprehending. *I put it to my four year old grandson, whom I am already teaching traditional karate, and he understands perfectly.
> 
> But I suppose I should say thank you for acknowledging that they were 'great demonstrations'. That's a big step from TMA is crap which was your start point.



Ah, you never said that your school never spars. Thank you for that information. Now it all makes perfect sense, and it explains why we have so much footage of Goju Karatekas fighting like kick boxers.

If you're not sparring, how do you know what you are learning actually works? Doing line drills and kata isn't an effective method of testing your techniques. Even mid-speed sparring is better than NO sparring at all.


----------



## Chris Parker

You do realize, of course, that sparring only tests that you can apply things in sparring... not actual combat. It's different in a whole world of ways.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> 1) There is no such thing as 'full contact' except for actual fighting.



Thats not the definition of full contact. This is;



> A (full) contact sport is any sport for which significant physical impact force on players, either deliberate or incidental, is allowed for within the rules of the game.Contact actions include tackling, blocking and a whole range of other moves that can differ substantially in their rules and degree of application.
> 
> 
> Examples of contact sports are Australian rules football, lacrosse, rugby league, Rugby Union, Roller Derby, American football, water polo, wrestling, sumo, team handball, slamball and ice hockey. Full-contact martial arts include boxing, mixed martial arts, jujutsu, Muay Thai, judo, and various forms of full contact karate. Also, kickboxing, in the early 1970s in the United States, was born and introduced a controlled version of full contact to martial arts.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-contact#Full-contact




> 2) Full contact, semi-contact, non-contact, none of these equal aliveness.



Full contact does.



> 3) Although good, they are hardly beating the hell out of each other, they are not punching to the head or trying to incapacitate or knock out their training partners (if they were then there would not be adults sparring children).



People getting knocked out during Kyokushin belt testing isn't unheard of. Obviously they're not going to be blasting children with full power attacks, but adults are a different story.



> 4) It would be extremely difficult for BJJ to do anything that did not have full contact since combat cuddling requires actual touching.  You cannot mount or choke someone without touching them



Which is why grapplers tend to have an advantage in fights over strikers.



> 6) How do you define 'pulling punches'? To me it suggests that you do not contact by not finishing your punch.



Thats exactly what it means.



> 7) YOU HAVE STILL TO POST A VIDEO OF YOUR TRAINING TO SHOW EVERYONE YOUR SUPERIOR TRAINING METHODS AS YOU SEE THEM.



Look up any video showing Bjj training. Unlike others in this thread I don't train in some secret form of martial arts.


----------



## Hanzou

Chris Parker said:


> You do realize, of course, that sparring only tests that you can apply things in sparring... not actual combat. It's different in a whole world of ways.



How do you think Mohammed Ali learned how to evade punches, knock out people, and to take a punch?

It came from sparring.


----------



## Chris Parker

Really? That's what you come up with? Ali? 

No, his evasions, punching power, etc, came from drills... on people, on pads and bags, and so on. His ability to fight in the ring came from sparring. I can give you a pretty mean knockout strike without ever sparring it, you understand... and get you to apply it in a real situation. A boxing ring? Maybe, maybe not... depends how good you are, and how well you take to the drills. You do them properly, especially in the scenario training I'd give you, and you can apply it "for real" pretty damn well. Just not necessarily in a sporting context.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Thats not the definition of full contact. This is;
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-contact#Full-contact



You missed the point entirely.



Hanzou said:


> Full contact does.



 So if you stand still and let someone knock you out without trying to stop them, that's aliveness is it?



Hanzou said:


> People getting knocked out during Kyokushin belt testing isn't unheard of. Obviously they're not going to be blasting children with full power attacks, but adults are a different story.



But not being shown in that video.



Hanzou said:


> Which is why grapplers tend to have an advantage in fights over strikers.



In the UFC and other competitions mainly.



Hanzou said:


> Thats exactly what it means.



You can train semi-contact and non-contact without pulling punches you know.



Hanzou said:


> Look up any video showing Bjj training. Unlike others in this thread I don't train in some secret form of martial arts.



Tell me which ones have *YOU* in them and I will.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> So what your saying is because I don't shatter my training partners jaw my art is not effective but there is no reason for you to shatter your partners elbow.
> 
> Ummmmmm yeah ok



You don't need to shatter your partner's jaw. In boxing for example, you can knock your training partner out, knock them down repeatedly,  or otherwise dominate them in the ring. In Bjj, if I choke out my partner, force them to tap from an armbar, wristlock, or leglock, or I pin them to the mat so that they can't get up, that shows superiority against a non compliant opponent. 

The advantages of sparring versus non-sparring are innumerable. My school has entire sessions devoted to just rolling (sparring) everyday. I couldn't imagine not having that testing ground available to me to test what I've learned against bigger, faster, or smarter opponents.

Heck, you do Judo. Could you imagine Judo without sparring?  Without getting slammed to the mat at full power, or the feeling you get when you pull off a perfect throw against an opponent trying to throw you or take you down? I couldn't even imagine.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Doing line drills and kata isn't an effective method of testing your techniques. Even mid-speed sparring is better than NO sparring at all.



Doing line drills and kata IS an effective method of *learning*, *practicing *and *improving *your techniques.


----------



## Hanzou

Chris Parker said:


> Really? That's what you come up with? Ali?
> 
> No, his evasions, punching power, etc, came from drills... on people, on pads and bags, and so on. His ability to fight in the ring came from sparring.



And when he sparred, he took the drills from people, pads, and bags, and APPLIED them. As Bruce Lee said " boards don't hit back". Ali learned boxing in the drills, and when he applied it during sparring, he developed his fighting method. Without that sparring portion of his training, he wouldn't have been nearly as effective in the ring.



> I can give you a pretty mean knockout strike without ever sparring it, you understand... and get you to apply it in a real situation. A boxing ring? Maybe, maybe not... depends how good you are, and how well you take to the drills. You do them properly, especially in the scenario training I'd give you, and you can apply it "for real" pretty damn well. Just not necessarily in a sporting context.



How do you know of its a reliable knockout strike if you've never knocked someone out with it in a consistent manner? Mike Tyson had a knockout strike, because he consistently knocked people out with it.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Doing line drills and kata IS an effective method of *learning*, *practicing *and *improving *your techniques.



But not * applying* your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> But not * applying* your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.



That's where the sparring and bag/pad work comes in.


----------



## Chris Parker

Hanzou said:


> And when he sparred, he took the drills from people, pads, and bags, and APPLIED them. As Bruce Lee said " boards don't hit back". Ali learned boxing in the drills, and when he applied it during sparring, he developed his fighting method. Without that sparring portion of his training, he wouldn't have been nearly as effective* in the ring.*



Relevant portion highlighted for you.

If you want to get good for the ring, you have to practice for the ring... and that means sparring... no-one has argued against that. Same with any form of competition. But we're not talking about training for competition when we discuss TMA methods... so applying the same yardstick is completely irrelevant, and just shows how little you get this whole discussion, let alone anything else.



Hanzou said:


> How do you know of its a reliable knockout strike if you've never knocked someone out with it in a consistent manner? Mike Tyson had a knockout strike, because he consistently knocked people out with it.



Son, who says I haven't? I've knocked people out in training, and in "the street"... and the times in training, I wasn't even aiming to. Hell, I knocked out one guy with another guy's head once... that was... amusing.

The point is that you're trying to argue from a position of ignorance, and, despite being corrected on it a number of times, you refuse to listen to those who have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, and washed the blood off it.


----------



## Chris Parker

Hanzou said:


> But not * applying* your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.



I really don't think you get kata, as this is exactly what kata is for... it isn't for teaching techinques, it's for teaching applications of them... timing, distancing, angling, sequencing, targeting, and so on, in an easily repeatable and reliable fashion. It's probably more obvious in Japanese kata rather than Okinawan/Chinese/Korean forms, but the aim is the same.

Oh, and in Japanese (paired) kata? The opponent is definitely trying to hurt you... get it wrong, and they will.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> That's where the sparring and bag/pad work comes in.



Exactly.


----------



## Hanzou

Chris Parker said:


> Relevant portion highlighted for you.
> 
> If you want to get good for the ring, you have to practice for the ring... and that means sparring... no-one has argued against that. Same with any form of competition. But we're not talking about training for competition when we discuss TMA methods... so applying the same yardstick is completely irrelevant, and just shows how little you get this whole discussion, let alone anything else.



So you think a boxer couldn't knock someone out on the street? I would argue that a boxer has a higher chance of knocking someone out than someone doing Asian martial arts.



> Son, who says I haven't? I've knocked people out in training, and in "the street"... and the times in training, I wasn't even aiming to. Hell, I knocked out one guy with another guy's head once... that was... amusing.
> 
> The point is that you're trying to argue from a position of ignorance, and, despite being corrected on it a number of times, you refuse to listen to those who have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, and washed the blood off it.



The only things I refuse to listen to is outright nonsense. If you tell me that you can knock out people without ever actually hit anyone, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you tossed a guy across the room with one hand, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you practice some secret Okinawan karate style that is so deadly that your dojo doesn't spar, that's nonsense too.

You can tell me anything about yourself, and I'll take it at face value, and we can discuss. However, if you're trying to peddle some BS and push it as fact, I gotta call you on it. 

Remember, I'm just a guy who does Bjj, been in a few scraps, and fought some TMA guys, and wasn't impressed.  



Chris Parker said:


> I really don't think you get kata, as this is exactly what kata is for... it isn't for teaching techinques, it's for teaching applications of them... timing, distancing, angling, sequencing, targeting, and so on, in an easily repeatable and reliable fashion. It's probably more obvious in Japanese kata rather than Okinawan/Chinese/Korean forms, but the aim is the same.
> 
> 
> Oh, and in Japanese (paired) kata? The opponent is definitely trying to hurt you... get it wrong, and they will.




LoL! I get kata, and I'm sure there's some benefit to doing it. However, in my experience, a great kata doesn't translate into great fighting skills. As far as I can tell, Kata is largely used for belt purposes. In other words, you do kata A and kata B perfectly during your belt test, and you get your next belt.


----------



## Chris Parker

Hanzou said:


> So you think a boxer couldn't knock someone out on the street? I would argue that a boxer has a higher chance of knocking someone out than someone doing Asian martial arts.



Please. I said it wasn't necessary to spar to be able to knock someone out, nothing at all about saying a boxer couldn't do it. Try harder.



Hanzou said:


> The only things I refuse to listen to is outright nonsense. If you tell me that you can knock out people without ever actually hit anyone, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you tossed a guy across the room with one hand, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you practice some secret Okinawan karate style that is so deadly that your dojo doesn't spar, that's nonsense too.
> 
> You can tell me anything about yourself, and I'll take it at face value, and we can discuss. However, if you're trying to peddle some BS and push it as fact, I gotta call you on it.
> 
> Remember, I'm just a guy who does Bjj, been in a few scraps, and fought some TMA guys, and wasn't impressed.



You've been told a lot in this thread, and ignored all of it. But, to placate you, we were training group defence, I hit the guy in front, his head knocked back into the guy behind him and to his left, right on the jaw, and knocked the second guy out. Could I do that deliberately on command? Doubt it. A week or so later, we were doing a different defence, and a solid elbow to the side of the jaw knocked out another guy. Did I mean to? No. In fact, it was just because he asked if that was really the best target to choose... I aimed to rattle him a bit, nothing more. If you want to call that BS, but not actually come up with any answers as to your own experiences, go for it.

Oh, and no, in my schools we don't spar. Nothing to do with being "too deadly" (as that is patently absurd), it's because sparring (competitive forms) teaches a whole range of dangerous, bad habits that go directly against what we teach. To spar would be to undo the benefits of what we train, and how we train. We do, however, engage in scenario training, resistance training, free-form drills, and so on... but we don't spar.



Hanzou said:


> LoL! I get kata, and I'm sure there's some benefit to doing it. However, in my experience, a great kata doesn't translate into great fighting skills. As far as I can tell, Kata is largely used for belt purposes. In other words, you do kata A and kata B perfectly during your belt test, and you get your next belt.



Then you don't get kata. Tell you what, have you watched the clips I put up earlier? They're kata... and nothing to do with getting any belt.


----------



## seasoned

Hanzou said:


> But not *applying* your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.


All the above can be accomplished with the Makiwara for striking power, partner drills for timing, realistic drills with no nonsense partners. 
It's never how hard one can hit but where the hit goes that counts anyway. (Eyes, neck and knee) from someone that trains for those hits daily. 
A well trained boxer is a devastating weapon, but, up against a TMA that is likewise well trained in bare knuckle strikes and low kicks, would make for an interesting situation indeed.
Commercialized TMA dojo that train the masses are providing a much needed service to people that want and are willing to put the time in. But, as with hardcore boxing clubs, there are as many small TMA clubs that train in cellars and garages as close to the old ways as possible.


----------



## Kframe

Chris Parker you said. "Hi Kframe, considering your recent change in your martial system, perhaps I can help here as well.

 The majority of what you do will be "scripted". However, it should be understood that that approach has been the norm (and continues to be the norm) for anyone wanting to deal with actual violence, not sparring. Why? Because it's much easier to teach methods of movement, tactics, principles, and so on that way. You learn to do things the way that the tried and tested system has learnt is the best. The problem is when people stop at the "do this slow so you can remember the whole sequence" level... that's the absolute beginning, and is actually something you do before you begin actually training the art. When these "scripted" actions (Japanese kata... paired) are done properly, it should be at an speed, power, intensity, and range/distance of an actual fight... and it should be done at a level where you can't "remember" what the next step is... you simply do it instinctively. That's the real aim of kata training here. And, when you get it wrong, you get hit. Hard. Properly. For real."

Thank you for the videos you posted. That was awesome watching that first kata video. They were really moving there, I was kinda shocked by the level of speed they were using.  I was hoping you could give me the time stamp in the second video that the guy gets hit. I watched it and they were moving so quickly I missed it. 

Honestly if more people did kata  like that, with that kind of speed and intent, more people would respect TMA. To many tma treat kata like a glorified dance.


----------



## Hanzou

Chris Parker said:


> Please. I said it wasn't necessary to spar to be able to knock someone out, nothing at all about saying a boxer couldn't do it. Try harder.



So why is it that we don't question a boxers ability to knock someone out, despite them training in a sport? Could it be that we fully recognize that despite the fact that they're training in a sport, they've developed skills and attributes that can be utilized outside a sport environment?



> You've been told a lot in this thread, and ignored all of it. But, to placate you, we were training group defence, I hit the guy in front, his head knocked back into the guy behind him and to his left, right on the jaw, and knocked the second guy out. Could I do that deliberately on command? Doubt it. A week or so later, we were doing a different defence, and a solid elbow to the side of the jaw knocked out another guy. Did I mean to? No. In fact, it was just because he asked if that was really the best target to choose... I aimed to rattle him a bit, nothing more. If you want to call that BS, but not actually come up with any answers as to your own experiences, go for it.



I don't find that unbelievable at all. You could very well be a naturally big mofo who can knock people out without any training whatsoever. However, its important to note that just because you have the power to knock someone out without much effort, doesn't mean that the smaller guy next to you can do the same thing. That's why pressure testing what you've learned outside of drills and kata (i.e. sparring) is important.

For example, in Bjj we have a few female practitioners, and they all have to roll. Why? Because line drilling and demonstrations arent sufficient enough for the application of the technique. You simply cannot simulate a person several times your body weight trying to control you on the ground, in the seated position, or standing up. Further, drilling has a predetermined stopping point, rolling does not. Rolling doesn't end until someone submits. If a 120lb woman can submit a 250lb guy she's better off than a woman who wins numerous kata/form competitions.

Wouldn't you agree?



> Oh, and no, in my schools we don't spar. Nothing to do with being "too deadly" (as that is patently absurd), it's because sparring (competitive forms) teaches a whole range of dangerous, bad habits that go directly against what we teach. To spar would be to undo the benefits of what we train, and how we train. We do, however, engage in scenario training, resistance training, free-form drills, and so on... but we don't spar.



Well with all due respect, I think that's a bit silly. However, you guys are free to train any way you deem necessary towards accomplishing your goals.


----------



## Hanzou

seasoned said:


> All the above can be accomplished with the Makiwara for striking power, partner drills for timing, realistic drills with no nonsense partners.
> It's never how hard one can hit but where the hit goes that counts anyway. (Eyes, neck and knee) from someone that trains for those hits daily.



No it can't. No stationary object or compliant training partner in a drill can rival you squaring up with someone who has the goal of beating you in mind. It's unpredictable, fast paced, and is invaluable. The idea that there are martial art schools that don't practice sparring blows my mind.



> A well trained boxer is a devastating weapon, but, up against a TMA that is likewise well trained in bare knuckle strikes and low kicks, would make for an interesting situation indeed.
> Commercialized TMA dojo that train the masses are providing a much needed service to people that want and are willing to put the time in. But, as with hardcore boxing clubs, there are as many small TMA clubs that train in cellars and garages as close to the old ways as possible.



What makes a trained boxer a devastating weapon? They have about 5 hand techniques, some footwork, and a high stance. Could it be the ridiculous amount of time they spend applying their abilities in a ring?

Many years ago, people believed that TMA stylists could rival boxers and wrestlers. That was until TMA artists stepped forward and got constantly whooped upon by boxers and wrestlers, and later kickboxers, Judo/Bjj stylists, and MMA exponents. 

Now no one believes that anymore.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Ah, you never said that your school never spars. Thank you for that information. Now it all makes perfect sense, and it explains why we have so much footage of Goju Karatekas fighting like kick boxers.
> 
> See below for you inconsistency!  I'm not sure what the fact that my school and all the traditional Okinawan schools don't fight like kick boxers has to do with so muck footage of Japanese Goju karateka fighting in the traditional stance of moto dachi which is fighting stance after all.
> 
> There are thousands of videos of people doing stuff on you tube. Things like ballet or line dancing. Strangely we don't practise those activities either. But the analogy is as appropriate as your videos of sport sparring. It is not part of our training.
> 
> If you're not sparring, how do you know what you are learning actually works? Doing line drills and kata isn't an effective method of testing your techniques. Even mid-speed sparring is better than NO sparring at all.
> 
> In your uninformed opinion we should be doing the type of sparring that you have labeled ineffective and a waste of time! That makes complete sense (not) and is probably among the most stupid remarks you have made so far!





Hanzou said:


> You don't need to shatter your partner's jaw. In boxing for example, you can knock your training partner out, knock them down repeatedly,  or otherwise dominate them in the ring. In Bjj, if I choke out my partner, force them to tap from an armbar, wristlock, or leglock, or I pin them to the mat so that they can't get up, that shows superiority against a non compliant opponent.
> 
> Beautiful! In boxing for example they use gloves so that they don't break there partner's jaw. We don't wear gloves so we don't strike the jaw at all. Why is that? Well boxing is a sport. If the loser goes to hospital after every session it won't have many adherents in very short time.
> 
> And in my training I choke out my partner, force them to tap from an arm bar, wrist lock or leg lock. Oh, and they are non compliant too. So why is your training the best and mine a waste of time? I don't want to be on the ground, you do. My choice is to destroy my attacker and keep my feet. You want to roll round on the ground with your playmate, your choice.
> 
> The advantages of sparring versus non-sparring are innumerable. My school has entire sessions devoted to just *rolling (sparring) *everyday. I couldn't imagine not having that testing ground available to me to test what I've learned against bigger, faster, or smarter opponents.
> 
> Ah! Now the definition of *sparring* includes *rolling*! Now that is totally different. The videos of Taira and all the others are doing our style of 'rolling'.  In that case we spar in aikido every session and 90% of my karate training is spent sparring. Why did you waste 30 pages of this thread posts video of sport karate when sparring means hands on? All our bunkai is sparring by this new definition. Totally different context. So if my form of hands on combat practice is in effect sparring, why do I need to do the type of sparring you put up to prove karate is ineffective?
> 
> Heck, you do Judo. Could you imagine Judo without sparring?  Without getting slammed to the mat at full power, or the feeling you get when you pull off a perfect throw against an opponent trying to throw you or take you down? I couldn't even imagine.
> 
> If grappling is now sparring. No I could not imagine judo without sparring and I can't imagine traditional Goju karate without sparring either, the new definition of course.



The are no traditional Goju practitioners fighting like kick boxers. You actually did post one of the traditional Goju men sparring but it was Awasse kumite and basically they didn't actually touch each other. You have posted lots of videos but none of any competition including traditional practitioners. Why do you think that is? 

But the crux of the matter is you have now shifted the goal posts.  By your new definition of sparring, all martial art schools spar. It just depends what their form of sparring entails.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Thats not the definition of full contact. This is;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A (full) contact sport is any sport for which significant physical impact force on players, either deliberate or incidental, is allowed for within the rules of the game.Contact actions include tackling, blocking and a whole range of other moves that can differ substantially in their rules and degree of application.
> 
> 
> Examples of contact sports are Australian rules football, lacrosse, rugby league, Rugby Union, Roller Derby, American football, water polo, wrestling, sumo, team handball, slamball and ice hockey. Full-contact martial arts include boxing, mixed martial arts, jujutsu, Muay Thai, judo, and various forms of full contact karate. Also, kickboxing, in the early 1970s in the United States, was born and introduced a controlled version of full contact to martial arts.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-contact#Full-contact
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is *not* the definition of 'full contact'. It is the definition of 'full contact *SPORT*'!
> 
> Full contact is what happens with HTH on the battlefield. Full contact fighting can easily result in serious injury or death. My training is designed for full contact. Your training is designed for sport. That is a huge difference. If I have to use my skills there is a fair chance my attacker will be badly injured.
Click to expand...

Me thinks you be an armchair warrior!


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> So you think a boxer couldn't knock someone out on the street? I would argue that a boxer has a higher chance of knocking someone out than someone doing Asian martial arts.
> 
> I'll back the Asian guy! On the street the boxer won't have time to put on his gloves.
> Have you seen the callouses on the Okinawan guys hands from makiwara training?
> 
> The only things I refuse to listen to is outright nonsense. If you tell me that you can knock out people without ever actually hit anyone, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you tossed a guy across the room with one hand, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you practice some secret Okinawan karate style that is so deadly that your dojo doesn't spar, that's nonsense too.
> 
> That's a bit rich coming from you. You have been writing nonsense from page 10 of this thread. The difference is that when most people write nonsense they know it is nonsense. When you write nonsense you seem to believe it is real. I would call it delusional!
> 
> No one on this forum has ever claimed they can knock someone out without hitting them. No one on this forum has claimed they can throw someone across the room with one hand. No one has claimed to practise some secret Okinawan karate. So why do you post this nonsense in this thread. I have my suspicion. You have no idea about any of this stuff because you have never done anything. I'll call you an armchair warrior again. Your ignorance stems from inexperience.
> 
> You can tell me anything about yourself, and I'll take it at face value, and we can discuss. However, if you're trying to peddle some BS and push it as fact, I gotta call you on it.
> 
> Did you really say that? Wow! I gotta call you on it too. You are full of BS!
> 
> Remember, I'm just a guy who does Bjj, been in a few scraps, and fought some TMA guys, and wasn't impressed.
> 
> No! Remember you are the guy who has never seen TMA and from your posts I'm not sure you've ever done BJJ either.
> 
> LoL! I get kata, and I'm sure there's some benefit to doing it.
> 
> No! You posts have adequately demonstrated you have absolutely no idea of kata. You have said it is useless on many occasions.
> 
> However, in my experience, a great kata doesn't translate into great fighting skills.
> l
> You have no experience so how would you know?
> 
> As far as I can tell, Kata is largely used for belt purposes. In other words, you do kata A and kata B perfectly during your belt test, and you get your next belt.
> 
> Kniwing kata is a requirement for grading. Demonstrating how to apply the kata is also a requirement.


You are trolling. You peddle the same rubbish post after post and are called on it post after post. Perhaps if you went to a reputable school somewhere and did some real training you might pick up a little knowledge that you could apply to your posts.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> No it can't. No stationary object or compliant training partner in a drill can rival you squaring up with someone who has the goal of beating you in mind. It's unpredictable, fast paced, and is invaluable. The idea that there are martial art schools that don't practice sparring blows my mind.
> 
> As we have established. The contact drills are by your definition sparring so the fact that your mind is blown is more to do with your ignorance of other training methodologies than anything else.
> 
> What makes a trained boxer a devastating weapon? They have about 5 hand techniques, some footwork, and a high stance. Could it be the ridiculous amount of time they spend applying their abilities in a ring?
> 
> What makes a TMA trained karateka a devastating weapon. He has a number of hand techniques, some footwork and the ability to apply strangles, chokes, locks, holds and takedowns. Could that be because of the ridiculous amount of time we spend training RBSD?
> .
> Many years ago, people believed that TMA stylists could rival boxers and wrestlers. That was until TMA artists stepped forward and got constantly whooped upon by boxers and wrestlers, and later kickboxers, Judo/Bjj stylists, and MMA exponents.
> 
> This is patently false. Initially different practitioners had varying results against other styles. MMA by its very name developed basically by cross training to counter the skills of the different practitioners.
> 
> Now no one believes that anymore.


Sorry what you mean is, no one believes you any more. You twist too many facts.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> _See below for you inconsistency! I'm not sure what the fact that my school and all the traditional Okinawan schools don't fight like kick boxers has to do with so muck footage of Japanese Goju karateka fighting in the traditional stance of moto dachi which is fighting stance after all. _



According to you they don't fight at all. According to your posts, you guys just do a form of hard dancing that could possibly be attributed to fighting.

_



			There are thousands of videos of people doing stuff on you tube. Things like ballet or line dancing. Strangely we don't practise those activities either. But the analogy is as appropriate as your videos of sport sparring. It is not part of our training.
		
Click to expand...

_
Okay, but when I type in Goju-Ryu sparring, or Goju-Ryu Kumite, I expect two Goju-Ryu stylists doing exactly that. When I see multiple Goju-Ryu schools doing essentially the same thing, I assume that this is what Goju-Ryu is about. You're the only one saying that Goju-Ryu as shown to the public isn't Goju-Ryu. It reminds me of when a TMA gets flattened, people start saying "well that's not real TMA, real TMA is out there somewhere". I just want to see Goju-Ryu sparring. Not a demonstration of some guy doing hand techniques to a guy standing still, but two people fighting each other, and one (or both) using Goju karate.

_



			In your uninformed opinion we should be doing the type of sparring that you have labeled ineffective and a waste of time! That makes complete sense (not) and is probably among the most stupid remarks you have made so far!
		
Click to expand...

_
My argument has always been that if the end result is fighting like a kickboxer, then just take kickboxing. Kickboxers actually look cleaner than that without all the additional kata and drill training.



> The are no traditional Goju practitioners fighting like kick boxers. You actually did post one of the traditional Goju men sparring but it was Awasse kumite and basically they didn't actually touch each other. You have posted lots of videos but none of any competition including traditional practitioners. Why do you think that is?



I'd just like to point out that the Awasse Kumite looked more like kickboxing than it did those demonstration videos you showed.



> But the crux of the matter is you have now shifted the goal posts.  By your new definition of sparring, all martial art schools spar. It just depends what their form of sparring entails.



Um no. Sparring is free form fighting. Free form isn't pre-arranged drills or kata.

_



			Beautiful! In boxing for example they use gloves so that they don't break there partner's jaw. We don't wear gloves so we don't strike the jaw at all. Why is that? Well boxing is a sport. If the loser goes to hospital after every session it won't have many adherents in very short time.
		
Click to expand...

_


>



And of course in the process, the boxer learns how to punch, and the person on the receiving end learns how to take a punch. No benefit to be found in that at all... 

_



			And in my training I choke out my partner, force them to tap from an arm bar, wrist lock or leg lock. Oh, and they are non compliant too. So why is your training the best and mine a waste of time? I don't want to be on the ground, you do. My choice is to destroy my attacker and keep my feet. You want to roll round on the ground with your playmate, your choice.
		
Click to expand...

_
Mainly because anyone can see or test out Bjj chokes and armbars and know they are effective. We have no evidence beyond your word that what you're doing is effective.

*



			Ah! Now the definition of sparring includes rolling! Now that is totally different. The videos of Taira and all the others are doing our style of 'rolling'. In that case we spar in aikido every session and 90% of my karate training is spent sparring. Why did you waste 30 pages of this thread posts video of sport karate when sparring means hands on? All our bunkai is sparring by this new definition. Totally different context. So if my form of hands on combat practice is in effect sparring, why do I need to do the type of sparring you put up to prove karate is ineffective?
		
Click to expand...


No, Taira is doing a pre-arranged form against a person standing in front of him. Rolling is two Bjj stylists trying to submit each other, and using everything in their tool box to do so. I.e. Sparring. I hope you realize that the two are not even close to being the same thing.
**


*


----------



## Kframe

I needed a laugh today, thanks hanzou for providing it.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> *This is not the definition of 'full contact'. It is the definition of 'full contact SPORT'!
> 
> Full contact is what happens with HTH on the battlefield. Full contact fighting can easily result in serious injury or death. My training is designed for full contact. Your training is designed for sport. That is a huge difference. If I have to use my skills there is a fair chance my attacker will be badly injured.*



So you're saying that no one has gotten seriously injured or even died in full contact sports?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/794374-10-unfortunate-deaths-in-the-ring-within-the-last-10-years

That's just boxing, and that's just in the last 10 years.

Like I said before, the debate between fighting sports and fighting arts was settled a long time ago. Fighting arts lost badly because the fighting athletes were better trained, better conditioned, and were better able to utilize their techniques. Let's be honest; If someone can stomp you inside a gym, they could more than likely stomp you outside the gym as well. 

Anyone think they could beat down a professional boxer or MMA fighter outside the ring just because they can do some dirty fighting? The very notion is ridiculous. That guy will beat the tar out of you inside the ring AND outside the ring.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> I needed a laugh today, thanks hanzou for providing it.



Make sure you return the favor by posting pics/vids of your Ninjutsu training.


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou said:


> Make sure you return the favor by posting pics/vids of your Ninjutsu training.



Not doing Ninjutsu, im doing Budo taijutsu.  1/10 poor attempt, getting old.  

I have more then enough experience with people trying to hit me.. I actually want to train a art with substance to it.. 

Ill say this though, if I could afford it, I would do GJJ and BBT, the combination of the two would be awesome.


----------



## Kframe

Oh and you still seam to be under the impression many TMA don't cross train.  Case in point. If I actually wanted to do TKD I would go to the one KKW place in town. WHY? Well because he like many other quality TMA Instructors cross trains. Black belt in judo(covering ground skills and throwing quite nicely) and 5th dan in KKW. Not to mention that he trains traditionally.  He is a example of many of this forum and others in the industry. Not the mcdojo you keep finding. 

Honestly what do you stand to gain continuing this? I just don't see your endgame..


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Not doing Ninjutsu, im doing Budo taijutsu.  1/10 poor attempt, getting old.
> 
> I have more then enough experience with people trying to hit me.. I actually want to train a art with substance to it..
> 
> Ill say this though, if I could afford it, I would do GJJ and BBT, the combination of the two would be awesome.



Relax, I was just messing with you. I'm glad that you found an art that fit your needs. I think everyone needs to find an art that fits their individual goals.

You ARE learning Ninjutsu though. :lol: I do like their black uniforms. They're pretty snazzy, and great for winter practice.




> Oh and you still seam to be under the impression many TMA don't cross train. Case in point. If I actually wanted to do TKD I would go to the one KKW place in town. WHY? Well because he like many other quality TMA Instructors cross trains. Black belt in judo(covering ground skills and throwing quite nicely) and 5th dan in KKW. Not to mention that he trains traditionally. He is a example of many of this forum and others in the industry. Not the mcdojo you keep finding.



I wouldn't consider Judo or TKD to be traditional martial arts. Both tend to be very competition oriented.




> Honestly what do you stand to gain continuing this? I just don't see your endgame..



Just having a discussion, that's it and that's all.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> According to you they don't fight at all. According to your posts, you guys just do a form of hard dancing that could possibly be attributed to fighting.
> 
> What are you talking about? No. According to your posts of tappy, tappy, tappy ... kicky, kicky, kicky like kick boxers, we don't do that. If you want to call what we do hard dancing, I'll accept that. So what do you reckon MMA guys do when they are grappling? Same hard dancing!
> 
> Okay, but when I type in Goju-Ryu sparring, or Goju-Ryu Kumite, I expect two Goju-Ryu stylists doing exactly that. When I see multiple Goju-Ryu schools doing essentially the same thing, I assume that this is what Goju-Ryu is about. You're the only one saying that Goju-Ryu as shown to the public isn't Goju-Ryu. It reminds me of when a TMA gets flattened, people start saying "well that's not real TMA, real TMA is out there somewhere". I just want to see Goju-Ryu sparring. Not a demonstration of some guy doing hand techniques to a guy standing still, but two people fighting each other, and one (or both) using Goju karate.
> _&#8203;_Wrong again. Did you ever learn comprehension at school. Never mind that was rhetorical! Goju Ryu started in Okinawa and Gogen Yamaguchi established Goju Kai in Japan and developed one of the largest karate organisations in the world. That is what you keep posting. It is the style I trained for years before switching to the traditional Okinawan style in more recent times. Now your ignorance compounds as you just cannot understand. There are thousands of Videos of Japanese Goju Ryu fighters on YouTube. They are doing Goju Ryu sparring and they are competing. Whether they are effective or not is purely speculative but personally I wouldn't want to be hit by any of them. You will find video of Okinawan Goju Ryu people practising and if you want to call that sparring, fine. You just won't find them doing what you are demanding to see! If you are that determined to see Okinawan Goju, get up off you fat **** and go to an Okinawan Goju school.
> 
> My argument has always been that if the end result is fighting like a kickboxer, then just take kickboxing. Kickboxers actually look cleaner than that without all the additional kata and drill training.
> 
> And I would say, if you want to compete in Karate tournaments then take on a sport based karate style. If you want to be a world class swimmer don't go to an MMA class, get a swimming coach. Same logic most people not doing MMA have no desire to fight anyway.
> 
> I'd just like to point out that the Awasse Kumite looked more like kickboxing than it did those demonstration videos you showed.
> 
> Oh really. Just shows how little attention to detail you have!
> 
> Um no. Sparring is free form fighting. Free form isn't pre-arranged drills or kata.
> 
> Um yes! As I've said time and time again, that's what we do most of the time. You just refuse to accept the fact that there is a lot of training you can't comprehend but if you don't have intelligence to begin with it's not something you can learn.
> 
> And of course in the process, the boxer learns how to punch, and the person on the receiving end learns how to take a punch. No benefit to be found in that at all...
> 
> Even at close range you can punch. Every one of our 'hard dancing' sessions involves hitting and getting hit.
> 
> Mainly because anyone can see or test out Bjj chokes and armbars and know they are effective. We have no evidence beyond your word that what you're doing is effective.
> 
> Lol*! *I'll back my word against yours on this forum any day! You can train with me anytime you like.
> 
> A (full) contact sport is any sport for which significant physical impact force on players, either deliberate or incidental, is allowed for within the rules of the game.Contact actions include tackling, blocking and a whole range of other moves that can differ substantially in their rules and degree of application.
> 
> Exactly. But we don't play by rules.
> 
> 
> Examples of contact sports are Australian rules football, lacrosse, rugby league, Rugby Union, Roller Derby, American football, water polo, wrestling, sumo, team handball, slamball and ice hockey. Full-contact martial arts include boxing, mixed martial arts, jujutsu, Muay Thai, judo, and various forms of full contact karate. Also, kickboxing, in the early 1970s in the United States, was born and introduced a controlled version of full contact to martial arts.
> 
> These are all sports. My martial art is not sport and I don't treat it as Sport.
> 
> 
> *No, Taira is doing a pre-arranged form against a person standing in front of him. Rolling is two Bjj stylists trying to submit each other, and using everything in their tool box to do so. I.e. Sparring. I hope you realize that the two are not even close to being the same thing.*
> 
> And every bit of Judo, or jujutsu or BJJ demonstrating technique is the same.  Your stupid fixation on what is kata stops you from understanding how the kata is flexible and how it is applied in a non compliant situation. There are an infinite no of tools in a kata toolkit.
> 
> 'Hard Dancing' is exactly the same as what you train in BJJ just ours involves more striking. Just because I don't call that 'sparring' is incidental.





Hanzou said:


> So you're saying that no one has gotten seriously injured or even died in full contact sports?
> 
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/794374-10-unfortunate-deaths-in-the-ring-within-the-last-10-years
> 
> That's just boxing, and that's just in the last 10 years.
> 
> Oh really! Just when did I say that?
> 
> Like I said before, the debate between fighting sports and fighting arts was settled a long time ago. Fighting arts lost badly because the fighting athletes were better trained, better conditioned, and were better able to utilize their techniques. Let's be honest; If someone can stomp you inside a gym, they could more than likely stomp you outside the gym as well.
> 
> In your own arrogant mind.
> 
> Anyone think they could beat down a professional boxer or MMA fighter outside the ring just because they can do some dirty fighting? The very notion is ridiculous.
> 
> Yep! Totally ridiculous! If you say so.
> 
> That guy will beat the tar out of you inside the ring AND outside the ring.
> 
> I'd love to see you try to prove this ridiculous statement of opinion!


You must be getting disparate. Your posts are becoming even more stupid and I wouldn't have thought that possible!
:trollsign:


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> _What are you talking about? No. According to your posts of tappy, tappy, tappy ... kicky, kicky, kicky like kick boxers, we don't do that. If you want to call what we do hard dancing, I'll accept that. So what do you reckon MMA guys do when they are grappling? Same hard dancing!_


_
_

Again, there's a difference between free form fighting (sparring) and pre-arranged drilling of techniques (Kata and Drills). Surely you know the difference.

In the end, needless amounts of kata and drilling tend to develop sub par martial arts. I've seen the results over and over again.

Here's what happens; This is reportedly a Traditional Mantis Kung Fu school;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsArkm55b_0&feature=youtu.be

And here is an MMA school;







Unfortunately, no one can produce a traditional martial art sparring video that can show anything other than the slop-fests that we currently have on the net.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> OK... here. Andy Hug. A kyokushin and Seidokaikan practitioner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Wallace. Another TMA practitioner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A whole slew of K1 fighters...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The world - including the various MMA venues - is full of excellent fighters with a TMA background.
> 
> You do realize that, at this point, you're not doing anything but making yourself look a fool, right?


----------



## K-man

Dirty Dog said:


> You do realize that, at this point, you're not doing anything but making yourself look a fool, right?


Unfortunately *Hanzou* has a severe disability that prevents comprehension of simple English.


----------



## Tames D

K-man said:


> *You are trolling. You peddle the same rubbish post after post and are called on it post after post*. Perhaps if you went to a reputable school somewhere and did some real training you might pick up a little knowledge that you could apply to your posts.



Good observation. Why do you think this train wreck has gone on so long? It's because you and the others are feeding him. You're playing into his game. That's what he wants and is getting. He's playing everyone beautifully, and getting lots of attention. I'm surprised the Mods haven't shut it down by now. But I'm ok with it, very intertaining reading


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> The world - including the various MMA venues - is full of excellent fighters with a TMA background.



I guess you weren't paying attention. Those guys you posted are all professional kick boxers. I'm asking for evidence of someone using traditional MA that doesn't resemble kickboxing while fighting.

Your post reinforces my argument, because it appears that the highest form of striking arts is kickboxing in every case.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> [/I][/COLOR]
> 
> Again, there's a difference between free form fighting (sparring) and pre-arranged drilling of techniques (Kata and Drills). Surely you know the difference.
> 
> Sure. Free form fighting is one thing, sparring is between boxers, (see definition below), and pre arranged drilling I don't do. Kata performance and application is none of those things in karate. So, yes. I know the difference and you don't. So what?
> 
> In the end, needless amounts of kata and drilling tend to develop sub par martial arts. I've seen the results over and over again.
> 
> Oh dear. More crap. You have never seen kata used as it was intended so why do you keep trying to put people down who are using it as intended? I have seen literally hundreds of people who can't make locks and holds work properly. That doesn't make the locks and holds ineffective. It means the practitioner is not performing them in the correct manner.
> 
> Here's what happens; This is reportedly a Traditional Mantis Kung Fu school;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsArkm55b_0&feature=youtu.be
> 
> And beginners having a bit of fun. So what does it show. You keep posting video with no relevance.
> 
> And here is an MMA school;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, no one can produce a traditional martial art sparring video that can show anything other than the slop-fests that we currently have on the net.
> 
> By definition there cannot be traditional martial art sparring! Why are you so thick?


OK! As you obviously don't understand the real meaning so sparring I'll go for the dictionary.



> *Oxford Dictionary* (English)
> 
> verb (spars, sparring, sparred)
> 
> 
> 1.   make the motions of boxing without landing heavy blows, as a form of training:
> one contestant broke his nose while sparring
> 
> 
> argue with someone without marked hostility:
> mother and daughter spar regularly over drink, drugs, and career
> 
> 2.     (of a gamecock) fight with the feet or spurs.



As English is not your first language we'll try another


> *Webster Dictionary (*American)
> 
> 2  spar intransitive verb
> : to box with someone as a form of training or practice
> 
> 
> : to argue with someone in a friendly way
> sparredspar·ring
> Full Definition of SPAR
> 
> 
> 1
> a :  box; especially :  to gesture without landing a blow to draw one's opponent or create an opening
> b :  to engage in a practice or exhibition bout of boxing
> 2
> :  skirmish, wrangle
> 3
> :  to strike or fight with feet or spurs in the manner of a gamecock


Oh! That's not what you want either. Let's try again.



> *Dictionary.com
> *
> sparring partner
> noun
> a boxer who spars with and otherwise serves to train a boxer who is preparing for a bout.
> Also called sparring mate.
> 
> 
> Origin:
> 1905&#8211;10


Mmm! That might explain why we don't have sparring. We are not boxers, we don't train like boxers and we aren't training for competition. Isn't that strange?

And when the Japanese Goju style I used to train was doing that sort of thing, we called it kumite, not sparring.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> [/I][/COLOR]
> 
> Here's what happens; This is reportedly a Traditional Mantis Kung Fu school;
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsArkm55b_0&feature=youtu.be



1. These look like beginners.
2. If its the same Russian club that have multiple videos like this on YouTube, I doubt they are teaching traditional mantis - none of it looks like northern mantis. 
3. As per the above, very little Seven Star Praying Mantis on show here. 

Seven Star Praying Mantis is quite a complicated style so in cases where a club is letting beginners spar it's best to spar at a slower pace to develop good technique and reactions than to go full blast like this. Not a fan of these big protective helmets either. I just have a foam one the protects primarily the back of my head (in case i fall) and taking a punch to the face is about as real as it gets whilst wearing it - control is required from both sparring. 

We had people trying to spar like this in the style I started in 2.5 years ago too and they'd get told off time and time again for it. I do think that people spar like this when they have been given a bunch of techniques to train but either haven't been taught the fighting strategy that allows them to use them properly or simply haven't grasped the concept yet. 

When sparring THE most beneficial thing you can do when you're a Kung Fu beginner is to force yourself into fighting in the style in which you've been taught. If that means that you take an extra couple of digs then so be it, you'll learn a hell of a lot more than simply reverse punching and flailing your arms about trying to take each others head off. 

Rome wasn't built in a day.


----------



## Chris Parker

Kframe said:


> Chris Parker you said. "Hi Kframe, considering your recent change in your martial system, perhaps I can help here as well.
> 
> The majority of what you do will be "scripted". However, it should be understood that that approach has been the norm (and continues to be the norm) for anyone wanting to deal with actual violence, not sparring. Why? Because it's much easier to teach methods of movement, tactics, principles, and so on that way. You learn to do things the way that the tried and tested system has learnt is the best. The problem is when people stop at the "do this slow so you can remember the whole sequence" level... that's the absolute beginning, and is actually something you do before you begin actually training the art. When these "scripted" actions (Japanese kata... paired) are done properly, it should be at an speed, power, intensity, and range/distance of an actual fight... and it should be done at a level where you can't "remember" what the next step is... you simply do it instinctively. That's the real aim of kata training here. And, when you get it wrong, you get hit. Hard. Properly. For real."
> 
> Thank you for the videos you posted. That was awesome watching that first kata video. They were really moving there, I was kinda shocked by the level of speed they were using.  I was hoping you could give me the time stamp in the second video that the guy gets hit. I watched it and they were moving so quickly I missed it.
> 
> Honestly if more people did kata  like that, with that kind of speed and intent, more people would respect TMA. To many tma treat kata like a glorified dance.



Ellis's demonstration wasn't really that fast... but the intensity was definitely there! For some speed, I'd go to this one from Katori Shinto Ryu... specifically the Gogyo no Tachi from about 2:20 onwards...






With regards to the older clip of Katori Shinto Ryu, the hit is in the first kata, at 0:35 (when one of the practitioners goes to a kneeling position, he doesn't get his sword up in time for the block). It's easier to see if you watch the clip in full-screen mode.



Hanzou said:


> So why is it that we don't question a boxers ability to knock someone out, despite them training in a sport? Could it be that we fully recognize that despite the fact that they're training in a sport, they've developed skills and attributes that can be utilized outside a sport environment?



Seriously? Boxers train with the aim of a knockout... so why would it be questioned? But, on the other hand, not all boxing matches end in a knockout... so is that an indication of the failing of the training method? After all, they spar all the time, and still can't get consistent success... 

The point is, you don't seem to understand the aim of the training in traditional systems... nor how it is achieved. You're only applying your very narrow criteria (what you think equals "effective", without ever even realizing that "effective" can mean completely different things), and you're missing the fact that your sparring doesn't guarantee success in your self-imposed context either.



Hanzou said:


> I don't find that unbelievable at all. You could very well be a naturally big mofo who can knock people out without any training whatsoever. However, its important to note that just because you have the power to knock someone out without much effort, doesn't mean that the smaller guy next to you can do the same thing. That's why pressure testing what you've learned outside of drills and kata (i.e. sparring) is important.



Uh... I'm not sure you read my description. And, for the record, I'm not a big guy... so, uh, no.... wrong. 

Oh, here's a fun fact for you... sparring isn't pressure testing.



Hanzou said:


> For example, in Bjj we have a few female practitioners, and they all have to roll. Why? Because line drilling and demonstrations arent sufficient enough for the application of the technique. You simply cannot simulate a person several times your body weight trying to control you on the ground, in the seated position, or standing up. Further, drilling has a predetermined stopping point, rolling does not. Rolling doesn't end until someone submits. If a 120lb woman can submit a 250lb guy she's better off than a woman who wins numerous kata/form competitions.
> 
> Wouldn't you agree?



Firstly, you don't seem to get what I'm talking about as kata... secondly, the apples aren't fond of always being compared to the oranges.



Hanzou said:


> Well with all due respect, I think that's a bit silly. However, you guys are free to train any way you deem necessary towards accomplishing your goals.



I don't think you have a clue what respect is due, so forgive me if I take that as a bit disingenuous... nor do I think you've understood the goals, the aims, or the methods. We ain't sport, and frankly, you don't understand that.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> 1. These look like beginners.
> 2. If its the same Russian club that have multiple videos like this on YouTube, I doubt they are teaching traditional mantis - none of it looks like northern mantis.
> 3. As per the above, very little Seven Star Praying Mantis on show here.



Nah, its a school in the states. In fact, its pretty close to my neck of the woods. The instructor claims to be teaching traditional mantis, and if you follow his videos he shows a couple of traditional mantis movements.



> We had people trying to spar like this in the style I started in 2.5 years ago too and they'd get told off time and time again for it. I do think that people spar like this when they have been given a bunch of techniques to train but either haven't been taught the fighting strategy that allows them to use them properly or simply haven't grasped the concept yet.
> 
> When sparring THE most beneficial thing you can do when you're a Kung Fu beginner is to force yourself into fighting in the style in which you've been taught. If that means that you take an extra couple of digs then so be it, you'll learn a hell of a lot more than simply reverse punching and flailing your arms about trying to take each others head off.



Well according to the publisher of the video, some of these students are intermediate. Unfortunately, it falls into the same pattern I've seen before; tradtional martial arts looking nothing like their kata or demonstration forms when actually fighting/sparring.

Could you explain why this is the case? Why do people trained in a very distinctive looking style like Mantis end up fighting like sloppy kickboxers?.



> Rome wasn't built in a day.



Im still waiting to see Rome.


----------



## Hanzou

Chris Parker said:


> Seriously? Boxers train with the aim of a knockout... so why would it be questioned? But, on the other hand, not all boxing matches end in a knockout... so is that an indication of the failing of the training method? After all, they spar all the time, and still can't get consistent success...
> 
> The point is, you don't seem to understand the aim of the training in traditional systems... nor how it is achieved. You're only applying your very narrow criteria (what you think equals "effective", without ever even realizing that "effective" can mean completely different things), and you're missing the fact that your sparring doesn't guarantee success in your self-imposed context either.



See my earlier quote about the female grappler being able to submit someone much larger than herself. That's my criteria of effective. I have yet to see anyone consider doing amazing kata to pop music as "effective".




> Uh... I'm not sure you read my description. And, for the record, I'm not a big guy... so, uh, no.... wrong.
> 
> Oh, here's a fun fact for you... sparring isn't pressure testing.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliveness




> Firstly, you don't seem to get what I'm talking about as kata... secondly, the apples aren't fond of always being compared to the oranges.



So two Jujutsu methods with the same goal in mind are apples and oranges? More correctly, one method is effective (sparring), and the other method is ineffective (kata).


----------



## Kframe

Hanzou does bring up one valid point. I have made this observation in the past.  He is correct in that, a lot of times what you see of a karate ka in a sparring or competitive environment they look nothing how they train.  I have been mystified by this as well. My favorite karate blogger has a number of  posts on it.  In this first link he talks about exactly what hanzou is saying with regards to fighters not looking like how they train. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/10/faux-boxing.html

This one also talks about.  http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/07/melee-karates-fighting-range.html

I think it is a valid question, why do a lot of karate fighters end up looking like piss poor bouncy kickboxers?


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Nah, its a school in the states. In fact, its pretty close to my neck of the woods. The instructor claims to be teaching traditional mantis, and if you follow his videos he shows a couple of traditional mantis movements.



I might give them a watch later.



> Well according to the publisher of the video, some of these students are intermediate. Unfortunately, it falls into the same pattern I've seen before; tradtional martial arts looking nothing like their kata or demonstration forms when actually fighting/sparring.
> 
> Could you explain why this is the case? Why do people trained in a very distinctive looking style like Mantis end up fighting like sloppy kickboxers?.



Most of this has already been covered in this thread; gloves and rule-sets definitely play a part but that's not really the issue with that video - it was sloppy, unskilled sparring.

It's certainly not a problem that is unique to any system or collection of systems and in my opinion, it comes down to one thing, the people sparring don't have enough skill - or confidence in their skill - to fight in a non-scripted environment like the way they are training to. 

The club I used to train with were not traditional Kung Fu - although they were marketed as such and our training methods were, but the style wasn't - and even during our sparring the instructor wouldn't tolerate us fighting like that. There has to be some control and skill on show and the students need to at least try to fight like how they have been taught. It is easy to fall back on primitive, less complicated movements whilst under stress - such as swinging and grabbing at your opponent aimlessly. Good training methods, good teaching from a skilled instructor and a willing student are all required components when you are trying to fight in a new way. I would hope that after the session these students were told what they needed to improve on and avoid doing next time - if they weren't then that's just encouraging crappy sparring.



> Im still waiting to see Rome.



I've seen a few really good Kung Fu guys use their skills in a non-scripted environment, these people generally tend to be folks that would rather not have themselves filmed and put online.


----------



## jks9199

Folks,
The thread, despite some major train wreck aspects, has remained open because it's generally stayed civil.  Ok, it's resembled two rams butting heads and neither yielding, but civil.  The civility is degenerating, and I strongly suggest it return before infractions are handed out.  This is a final warning. 

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the discussion civil.  Discuss the issues, not the poster.

jks9199
Asst. Administrator
*


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> Hanzou does bring up one valid point. I have made this observation in the past.  He is correct in that, a lot of times what you see of a karate ka in a sparring or competitive environment they look nothing how they train.  I have been mystified by this as well. My favorite karate blogger has a number of  posts on it.  In this first link he talks about exactly what hanzou is saying with regards to fighters not looking like how they train. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/10/faux-boxing.html
> 
> This one also talks about.  http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/07/melee-karates-fighting-range.html
> 
> I think it is a valid question, why do a lot of karate fighters end up looking like piss poor bouncy kickboxers?


 Mainly because we aren't kick boxers and you shouldn't try to be what you are not. 

I agree with your sentiments and I agree with most of what Dan is saying. One thing he points out, and I agree with totally is that karate was never meant to be used this way. I could never understand, when I was learning Japanese Goju, why they kept telling us to bounce around. I believe now that it all came from Gogen Yamaguchi developing a sporting system but in an environment where he did not come from a sport background. (Mas Oyama trained with Yamaguchi before he developed Kyokushin, another competitive style.) The other aspect that Dan discusses is 'melee' range, another thing I strongly agree with. In Okinawa we were told, "you enter and engage and you do not disengage until it is over".  In the clips Dan included the guys were fighting at melee range but they still were not controlling the fight with traditional techniques. This is where the Jundokan method of training might be closer to the original than Dan's interpretation as passed down by Morio Higaonna. For example, the 'carriage' hand. Why do you pull the hand back to the side in virtually every technique? When these guys fight at distance it has no relevance, but at close quarters it is gripping and holding your opponent which not only restricts his movement but gives you the opportunity to deliver a strike for which your opponent can only block using one hand. We call this a predictive response and despite Hanzou's mistaken belief that it is choreographed, it is actually a brilliant way to control the fight. Basically your opponent has two options. First is to not block, because at full speed in that environment (range) there is not enough time, and if the strike is to a vital area the fight is over, as all traditional karate was targeted at vital areas (Kyusho). The second option is that your opponent gets lucky and throws his arm up to defend, predictive response. Unfortunately for him, the kata you have drilled provides you with an 'instinctive' response to the gift he has offered and you do what ever comes next, usually a joint break or follow up strike.

One thing that Dan discussed was the three step sparring video. To my mind that is more attuned to the style of karate that went into the schools than fighting in a pub brawl. Once again, although that might be considered 'traditional' training, I don't do any of that. At the Jundokan they do train it but in a way that conditions the arms. At the end of our first training session we all had very bruised arms.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Kframe said:


> a lot of times what you see of a karate ka in a sparring or competitive environment they look nothing how they train.



This is not only the Karate issue. This is the issue for all form base MA s well. In the form, you punch from your waist. In sparring, you punch from your on guard position. If you want your training to be the same as your sparring, you have 2 options:

1. Change your form to match the sparring.
2. Leave the traditional forms along. Create a new set of forms that comes from sparring reality.

Here is a throwing art example. It's easy to see that the solo training (form) = partner training without partner.

partner train:






solo train:






When you spend your time like this in solo training (if you don't have training partner 24/7 at home), you can apply it direct in sparring without modification. The striking art should be able to borrow this training model as well.


----------



## Hanzou

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is not only the Karate issue. This is the issue for all form base MA s well. In the form, you punch from your waist. In sparring, you punch from your on guard position. If you want your training to be the same as your sparring, you have 2 options:
> 
> 1. Change your form to match the sparring.
> 2. Leave the traditional forms along. Create a new set of forms that comes from sparring reality.
> 
> Here is a throwing art example. It's easy to see that the solo training (form) = partner training without partner.
> 
> partner train:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> solo train:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you spend your time like this in solo training (if you don't have training partner 24/7 at home), you can apply it direct in sparring without modification. The striking art should be able to borrow this training model as well.



Thats actually a very nice takedown.  I think I'll incorporate it into my stand up. 

As for your post I agree, and I think because of this situation among the TMA styles, arts likes Muay Thai and Boxing have an advantage over traditional striking arts.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> I might give them a watch later.



Please do. I would like your input on this guys methods. He makes quite a few "interesting" claims.



> Most of this has already been covered in this thread; gloves and rule-sets definitely play a part but that's not really the issue with that video - it was sloppy, unskilled sparring.
> 
> It's certainly not a problem that is unique to any system or collection of systems and in my opinion, it comes down to one thing, the people sparring don't have enough skill - or confidence in their skill - to fight in a non-scripted environment like the way they are training to.
> 
> The club I used to train with were not traditional Kung Fu - although they were marketed as such and our training methods were, but the style wasn't - and even during our sparring the instructor wouldn't tolerate us fighting like that. There has to be some control and skill on show and the students need to at least try to fight like how they have been taught. It is easy to fall back on primitive, less complicated movements whilst under stress - such as swinging and grabbing at your opponent aimlessly. Good training methods, good teaching from a skilled instructor and a willing student are all required components when you are trying to fight in a new way. I would hope that after the session these students were told what they needed to improve on and avoid doing next time - if they weren't then that's just encouraging crappy sparring.



Like I said, check out that guys vids and give me your opinion. I was pretty shocked by the overall quality, but then a lot of this Kung Fu stuff is new to me outside of a few sparring sessions.



> I've seen a few really good Kung Fu guys use their skills in a non-scripted environment, these people generally tend to be folks that would rather not have themselves filmed and put online.



That attitude really bothers me. If the crappy guys are advertising everywhere, and the "real deal" is hard to find, you're just setting up people to be taken for a ride by the frauds.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Hanzou said:


> Please do. I would like your input on this guys methods. He makes quite a few "interesting" claims.


 
Any video in particular?

I watched an upload of someone's attempt at the first set form taught in our lineage - it is taught later in other branches of Seven Star but its an absolutely fundamental set, so it really has to be correct. 

This:

http://youtu.be/faP6b534THg

Is supposed to look like the first line if this: 

http://youtu.be/cuEfYk9xWN4

There's basically no resemblance. No idea whether this was the person sparring but its the same YT account and I would suggest that someone with technique that (I would say bad, but its more than that) wrong should be spending time on solo practice rather than sparring at that skill level. 

I'll comment on other videos if you want but I think that we'll be wasting our time. You'll need to tell me which one though as I'm not going to sift through them.



> Like I said, check out that guys vids and give me your opinion. I was pretty shocked by the overall quality, but then a lot of this Kung Fu stuff is new to me outside of a few sparring sessions.



The one video I've watched was way worse than the other Mantis/Taiji/BJJ club. Can't comment on the others.




> That attitude really bothers me. If the crappy guys are advertising everywhere, and the "real deal" is hard to find, you're just setting up people to be taken for a ride by the frauds.



The blame for teaching crappy martial arts lies only at the door of those teaching crappy martial arts. There does seem to be a hell of a lot of these guys around though, which really doesn't help Kung Fu's reputation in some circles. 

It's difficult enough for the 'good guys' to find suitable people to inherit well taught traditional systems, without spending time actively 'outing' those who are not teaching the real deal.


----------



## Hanzou

Dinkydoo said:


> Any video in particular?
> 
> I watched an upload of someone's attempt at the first set form taught in our lineage - it is taught later in other branches of Seven Star but its an absolutely fundamental set, so it really has to be correct.
> 
> This:
> 
> http://youtu.be/faP6b534THg
> 
> Is supposed to look like the first line if this:
> 
> http://youtu.be/cuEfYk9xWN4
> 
> There's basically no resemblance. No idea whether this was the person sparring but its the same YT account and I would suggest that someone with technique that (I would say bad, but its more than that) wrong should be spending time on solo practice rather than sparring at that skill level.



That's the head instructor at that school......



> I'll comment on other videos if you want but I think that we'll be wasting our time. You'll need to tell me which one though as I'm not going to sift through them.



That's alright. I just wanted your opinion on this guy, because I was discussing martial arts with him on another forum, and he showed me that video of his students sparring. I admittedly don't know much about Mantis, but I know that sparring like that isn't proper instruction. Based on your comparison above, I think I know what the problem is.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Many years ago, people believed that TMA stylists could rival boxers and wrestlers. That was until TMA artists stepped forward and got constantly whooped upon by boxers and wrestlers, and later kickboxers, Judo/Bjj stylists, and MMA exponents.



Yet in the early days of the UFC when there were little or no rules pure boxers did very poorly, in the 1st 4 UFC's they did not win a single fight. In any case the competitors in those events made up only an insignificant proportion of all the TMA's out there and only represented those that chose to compete and thus proves nothing.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Kframe said:


> Hanzou does bring up one valid point. I have made this observation in the past.  He is correct in that, a lot of times what you see of a karate ka in a sparring or competitive environment they look nothing how they train.  I have been mystified by this as well. My favorite karate blogger has a number of  posts on it.  In this first link he talks about exactly what hanzou is saying with regards to fighters not looking like how they train. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/10/faux-boxing.html
> 
> This one also talks about.  http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/07/melee-karates-fighting-range.html
> 
> I think it is a valid question, why do a lot of karate fighters end up looking like piss poor bouncy kickboxers?



Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I wouldn't consider TKD to be traditional martial arts.



Mine is.



Hanzou said:


> Both tend to be very competition oriented.



Mine is not - not even slightly.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I guess you weren't paying attention. Those guys you posted are all professional kick boxers. I'm asking for evidence of someone using traditional MA that doesn't resemble kickboxing while fighting.



Here's one:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXcuwcwj78M


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Yet in the early days of the UFC when there were little or no rules pure boxers did very poorly, in the 1st 4 UFC's they did not win a single fight. In any case the competitors in those events made up only an insignificant proportion of all the TMA's out there and only represented those that chose to compete and thus proves nothing.



Yeah, but they at least stepped up. If the real deal doesn't want to post videos of themselves fighting, or are willing to compete in any tournaments, then we have to assume that the real deal is what we've been seeing all along. It's like Bigfoot; If it exists, we would have found it by now.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Mine is.
> 
> Mine is not - not even slightly.



Wasn't TKD created in the 1950s?


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> No, but it makes every Jjj school suspect, because like many TMA styles its legitimacy is wrapped up in dusty old history books, and not on its effectiveness. Unlike Judo, Bjj, Boxing, and other styles that are pressure tested by every wanna-be MMA guy or meathead that pops in, TMA instructors can sit back and peddle bullcrap upon their students for decades and no one will question it.



And this is why I talk about people doing their homework.  IMHO, anyone who would make a large purchase, without investigating what they're buying, is a fool, and deserves what they get!  Would you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a home, without looking at it?  How about a car without a test drive?  I'm the first to say there is a lot of crap out there, but there are also a lot of what *I* like to call the 'rare gems'.  Those things do exist, but you have to look hard to find them.  There are a few JJJ schools around my area, as well as in neighboring MA, that are good quality.  





> I've said it throughout my posts. And no, most TMAs don't have alive training. Simply the nature of the beast. That's why their demonstrations don't match their sparring.



Keep in mind, the majority of demos that you'll see, are just that...demos...usually which are pre set.  Of course, as I've said, just because a clip of an art, doesn't show something on youtube, does not mean that it doesn't exist.


----------



## MJS

RTKDCMB said:


> There are a great many boxing clubs I have never heard off before - must be all frauds then?
> 
> 
> 
> 1) There is no such thing as 'full contact' except for actual fighting.
> 2) Full contact, semi-contact, non-contact, none of these equal aliveness.
> 3) Although good, they are hardly beating the hell out of each other, they are not punching to the head or trying to incapacitate or knock out their training partners (if they were then there would not be adults sparring children).
> 4) It would be extremely difficult for BJJ to do anything that did not have full contact since combat cuddling requires actual touching.  You cannot mount or choke someone without touching them
> 5) Full contact in grappling and full contact in striking have vastly different meanings.
> 6) How do you define 'pulling punches'? To me it suggests that you do not contact by not finishing your punch.
> 7) YOU HAVE STILL TO POST A VIDEO OF YOUR TRAINING TO SHOW EVERYONE YOUR SUPERIOR TRAINING METHODS AS YOU SEE THEM.



Good points!!  At my Kyokushin dojo, we designate semi contact sparring and full contact sparring, as either with gear or without.  Of course, the contact itself is hard....harder than I ever did in any of the Kenpo schools that I was a part of.  In the 2 yrs that I've been a part of that dojo, aside from a tournament, I've never seen anyone intentionally try to KO someone.  The only KO that I've seen was during a BB test.  As far as head shots go...no punches, but kicks are allowed.  Actually, that KO on that test was from a kick.  Recently, some tournaments in Japan, have begun doing face punches.  MMA type gloves are worn.  As far as the rest of your post...can't disagree with anything!


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Yes, we go full contact until someone submits. There's no reason to continue to go full blast if someone submits to you.



While I'm an advocate of contact, I personally do not feel it's something that should be done in every session.  To clarify...sometimes when I'm working with one of my training partners outside of class, we might isolate something specific, and drill it.  We might then drill it at a faster pace, maybe 1/2 speed/contact.  Going full out every single time is eventually going to take a serious toll on the body.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> But not * applying* your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.



Interestingly enough, during some of the Kenpo classes I'd teach, I'd take a technique, say against a rt. hand lapel grab.  I'd have the student do the tech as usual.  Then, I'd slowly start to have the attacker, do something to throw off the defender, ie: add in a left punch, add in their left hand to the grab, push/pull the defender, etc.  We were not sparring, but doing what you're calling a line drill.  However, it still created a more realistic scenario, minus the sparring.  Sorry, but you can still train in an effective manner without getting into the ring.


----------



## MJS

K-man said:


> You are trolling. You peddle the same rubbish post after post and are called on it post after post. Perhaps if you went to a reputable school somewhere and did some real training you might pick up a little knowledge that you could apply to your posts.



Regarding this:

I'll back the Asian guy! On the street the boxer won't have time to put on his gloves. 
 Have you seen the callouses on the Okinawan guys hands from makiwara training?

I have! My teacher is Japanese.  He's done quite a bit of conditioning on his hands and shins.  The man is fast and hits like a brick!


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Wasn't TKD created in the 1950s?



So?


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hanzou said:


> Wasn't TKD created in the 1950s?



TKD did not get heavy into competition until 1988, I trained pre Olympic TKD and it is very different than post Olympic TKD

But there was some competition training beginning around 1978....I trained before that and during that but the classes were separate for sparing and some of the drills...there was a sport class and a traditional class... I tried both and hated the sport


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Regarding this:
> 
> I'll back the Asian guy! On the street the boxer won't have time to put on his gloves.
> Have you seen the callouses on the Okinawan guys hands from makiwara training?
> 
> I have! My teacher is Japanese.  He's done quite a bit of conditioning on his hands and shins.  The man is fast and hits like a brick!



Then why arent they professional fighters? Why did they never use their martial art skills to make millions of dollars for themselves? A small Okinawan karate guy taking down a pro or semi-pro boxer would be a huge money-maker for all parties involved.

The problem with stories like these is that they're simply not believable. Those super Okinawan punchers have never appeared, and they're never going to appear because they don't exist.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Then why arent they professional fighters? Why did they never use their martial art skills to make millions of dollars for themselves? A small Okinawan karate guy taking down a pro or semi-pro boxer would be a huge money-maker for all parties involved.
> 
> The problem with stories like these is that they're simply not believable. Those super Okinawan punchers have never appeared, and they're never going to appear because they don't exist.



1) Not every martial artist wants to make a living hurting people.
2) Not every martial artist wants to turn their art into a sport.
3) Not every martial artist wants to put their bodies through injury every day (how many 60 year old kickboxers do you know that still compete full contact?)
4) Some martial artists have jobs and careers that do not include martial arts or fighting.
5) Many martial artists care more about their art than they do about money (that's what jobs and careers are for).


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> If the real deal doesn't want to post videos of themselves fighting, or are willing to compete in any tournaments, then we have to assume that the real deal is what we've been seeing all along.



Yet you have still not put a video up of yourself so you must not be the real deal.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Then why arent they professional fighters? Why did they never use their martial art skills to make millions of dollars for themselves? A small Okinawan karate guy taking down a pro or semi-pro boxer would be a huge money-maker for all parties involved.
> 
> The problem with stories like these is that they're simply not believable. Those super Okinawan punchers have never appeared, and they're never going to appear because they don't exist.



My teacher fought many times in full contact fights while in Japan.  Why don't these people enter MMA and make millions? Don't know.  You know though, not everyone in the world has a desire to enter tournaments or be the next MMA fighter.  Furthermore, the part that I quote from K-man was to simply comment on what he said about the conditioning.  

Personally, as I've said before, I could really give a **** less what anyone thinks about the arts I train.  I know what I can and can't do, I know the folks that I train with, and what they do and have done and I have no reason to doubt them.  I also have no reason to doubt my Kyokushin teacher.  His reputation speaks for itself.  

Out of curiosity, are you interested in being a pro fighter?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Kframe said:


> Hanzou does bring up one valid point. I have made this observation in the past.  He is correct in that, a lot of times what you see of a karate ka in a sparring or competitive environment they look nothing how they train.  I have been mystified by this as well. My favorite karate blogger has a number of  posts on it.  In this first link he talks about exactly what hanzou is saying with regards to fighters not looking like how they train. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/10/faux-boxing.html
> 
> This one also talks about.  http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/07/melee-karates-fighting-range.html
> 
> I think it is a valid question, why do a lot of karate fighters end up looking like piss poor bouncy kickboxers?



I read some of his other blogs as well, they are all good.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Then why arent they professional fighters? Why did they never use their martial art skills to make millions of dollars for themselves? A small Okinawan karate guy taking down a pro or semi-pro boxer would be a huge money-maker for all parties involved.
> 
> The problem with stories like these is that they're simply not believable. Those super Okinawan punchers have never appeared, and they're never going to appear because they don't exist.


:BSmeter:


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, but they at least stepped up. If the real deal doesn't want to post videos of themselves fighting, or are willing to compete in any tournaments, then we have to assume that the real deal is what we've been seeing all along. It's like Bigfoot; If it exists, we would have found it by now.


:BSmeter:


----------



## Xue Sheng

look to Masutatsu Oyama and his students


----------



## jrrrr

Some people are fighters and some are martial artists.
Fighters..well...fight. Wrestlers don't train to know wrestling. They train to compete in wrestling matches. Amateur boxers train to fight other boxers in the ring, not to "know the art of boxing."
Martial artists train to know how to fight using their particular style.
Most MMA guys are fighters. They will train with multiple methodologies to win a fight within the rules irregardless of styles.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

jrrrr said:


> Some people are fighters and some are martial artists.
> Fighters..well...fight. Wrestlers don't train to know wrestling. They train to compete in wrestling matches. Amateur boxers train to fight other boxers in the ring, not to "know the art of boxing."
> Martial artists train to know how to fight using their particular style.
> Most MMA guys are fighters. They will train with multiple methodologies to win a fight within the rules irregardless of styles.



This is so true. If one ever has chance to cross train the grappling art, his view about MA will be different for the rest of his life. I have always believed that the striking art can borrow the grappling art   training model, no forms but drills and those drills are exactly what you will use in fighting.


----------



## James Kovacich

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is so true. If one ever has chance to cross train the grappling art, his view about MA will be different for the rest of his life. I have always believed that the striking art can borrow the grappling art   training model, no forms but drills and those drills are exactly what you will use in fighting.



And some still don't get it!

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> 1) Not every martial artist wants to make a living hurting people.
> 2) Not every martial artist wants to turn their art into a sport.
> 3) Not every martial artist wants to put their bodies through injury every day (how many 60 year old kickboxers do you know that still compete full contact?)
> 4) Some martial artists have jobs and careers that do not include martial arts or fighting.
> 5) Many martial artists care more about their art than they do about money (that's what jobs and careers are for).



Of course. However, my point is that its odd that out of these supposedly great Okinawan punchers, none have ever emerged and competed (calloused hands and all) against professional fighters.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> My teacher fought many times in full contact fights while in Japan.  Why don't these people enter MMA and make millions? Don't know.  You know though, not everyone in the world has a desire to enter tournaments or be the next MMA fighter.  Furthermore, the part that I quote from K-man was to simply comment on what he said about the conditioning.
> 
> Personally, as I've said before, I could really give a **** less what anyone thinks about the arts I train.  I know what I can and can't do, I know the folks that I train with, and what they do and have done and I have no reason to doubt them.  I also have no reason to doubt my Kyokushin teacher.  His reputation speaks for itself.



I wasn't talking about your Kyokushin teacher. Nor was I slamming Kyokushin. In fact, I rather enjoy Kyokushin as a Karate style. Your art is part of the solution because it does almost everything right.



> Out of curiosity, are you interested in being a pro fighter?



Nope. I just want to enjoy the art of Bjj.


----------



## Hanzou

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is so true. If one ever has chance to cross train the grappling art, his view about MA will be different for the rest of his life. I have always believed that the striking art can borrow the grappling art   training model, no forms but drills and those drills are exactly what you will use in fighting.



Agreed.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Of course. However, my point is that its odd that out of these supposedly great Okinawan punchers, none have ever emerged and competed (calloused hands and all) against professional fighters.


:trollsign:


----------



## Hanzou

Any opinions on this article?

Going to the Ground:Lessons from Law Enforcement



> The LAPD study does not show that &#8220;90% of fights go to the ground.&#8221; Instead, the LAPD study shows that 95% of altercations took on one of five familiar patterns (with which any street cop will be intimately familiar). It also shows that of that 95%, 62% ended up with both the officer and the suspect grappling on the ground.
> 
> Obviously, being professionally charged with restraining someone versus being primarily focused on escaping an attack will change the dynamic of a confrontation after the initial engagement. This is why I believe police in an arrest situation are more likely than a citizen in a self-defense situation to stay on the ground during a physical encounter.
> 
> 
> Nonetheless, it is interesting to note that more than half the officers surveyed by Calibre Press reported that suspects had attempted to take them down, and that the suspects accomplished this 60% of the time. Of that number, the overwhelming majority stayed on the ground grappling with the officer (77%). When considering these patterns of assault, they are of the same nature as criminal assaults on citizens. In other words, the mechanics of an assault (versus the mechanics of arrest) do not change simply because one of the people involved is a police officer. [EN4]
> 
> 
> To conclude, one can quibble with the exact percentages, but being on the ground happens frequently during serious altercations. Could a person&#8217;s being taken down and not having an effective means to deal with the situation increase odds of death or serious injury, either to him/herself or to the assailant? My personal view is that this is the case.


----------



## SENC-33

Street altercations, law enforcement altercations and sport competition offer differing variables when it comes to ground fighting. It is a natural instinct to want to take an opponent to the ground as we tumble, roll around and wrestle from the time we are born. I worked the door for years when I was younger and the ground is the last place you want to be in a "street altercation" period unless you have backup to control "others". With that being said I do train groundwork but I take the approach that you work to get back on your feet as quickly as possible. If you have to control the situation from the ground do so from on top not your backside and I attempt to control the neck with my shin or a side choke.


----------



## Xue Sheng

God this topic is so over done here 






The ONLY difference between sport and non-spot MA is this

One trains to fight a person that they expect to see sometime later in a rematch the other trains to fight a person they hope to never see again.

The End


Note:
It has been my experience here and in the real world those that seem to be INCREDIBLY against Traditional arts and yelling the loudest about the superiority of Sports based arts (or fighting in the ring) tend to be arm chair marital artists. As for the real MMA people I have talked to they seem to be very interested in ANYTHING that will help them win and I have even talked to some that train Qigong.


----------



## Hanzou

SENC-33 said:


> Street altercations, law enforcement altercations and sport competition offer differing variables when it comes to ground fighting. It is a natural instinct to want to take an opponent to the ground as we tumble, roll around and wrestle from the time we are born. I worked the door for years when I was younger and the ground is the last place you want to be in a "street altercation" period unless you have backup to control "others". With that being said I do train groundwork but I take the approach that you work to get back on your feet as quickly as possible. If you have to control the situation from the ground do so from on top not your backside and I attempt to control the neck with my shin or a side choke.



The common misconception is that Bjj stylists seek to pull guard when going to the ground. That's not the case. When a Bjj stylist takes you to the ground, their goal is to be in the mounted position to have maximum control, and to be able to stand up quickly. We train a lot in guard because it is potentially the most vulnerable position to be in, so if you do wind up on your back (which can happen), you have plenty of tools to get out of that position and regain a dominant position, or to finish a fight from that position.



Xue Sheng said:


> God this topic is so over done here
> 
> The ONLY difference between sport and non-spot MA is this
> 
> One trains to fight a person that they expect to see sometime later in a rematch the other trains to fight a person they hope to never see again.
> 
> The End



And who is better prepared for that scenario? An athlete, or a chubby person who does Kung Fu twice a week?


----------



## SENC-33

Hanzou said:


> The common misconception is that Bjj stylists seek to pull guard when going to the ground. That's not the case. When a Bjj stylist takes you to the ground, their goal is to be in the mounted position to have maximum control, and to be able to stand up quickly. We train a lot in guard because it is potentially the most vulnerable position to be in, so if you do wind up on your back (which can happen), you have plenty of tools to get out of that position and regain a dominant position, or to finish a fight from that position.



I don't think there is any misconception about BJJ when it comes to a realistic situation. Remaining on the ground "if" there is any potential of multiple attackers around is plain crazy no matter the style. I have seen too many heads kicked in


----------



## Hanzou

SENC-33 said:


> I don't think there is any misconception about BJJ when it comes to a realistic situation. Remaining on the ground "if" there is any potential of multiple attackers around is plain crazy no matter the style. I have seen too many heads kicked in



I don't think anyone is advocating remaining on the ground if the situation doesn't deem it necessary. People are advocating that you know what to do if you end up on the ground, or are knocked to the ground. For example, there's dozens if not hundreds of sweeps from the guard position. So if someone winds up on top of you in mounted position, you can reverse the position and put yourself in mounted, and them in guard. Furthermore, we are trained on how to maintain the mounted position once we have it. Once in mounted position, you can pound the guys face, go for break, or a choke, or just get up and kick him in the face and walk/run away.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> And who is better prepared for that scenario? An athlete, or a chubby person who does Kung Fu twice a week?



You really have a bug up your butt about Praying Mantis Kung Fu don't you? (Pun intended)


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> You really have a bug up your butt about Praying Mantis Kung Fu don't you? (Pun intended)



No, I just think those videos are pretty funny (and kinda creepy).


----------



## SENC-33

Hanzou said:


> I don't think anyone is advocating remaining on the ground if the situation doesn't deem it necessary. People are advocating that you know what to do if you end up on the ground, or are knocked to the ground. For example, there's dozens if not hundreds of sweeps from the guard position. So if someone winds up on top of you in mounted position, you can reverse the position and put yourself in mounted, and them in guard. Furthermore, we are trained on how to maintain the mounted position once we have it. Once in mounted position, you can pound the guys face, go for break, or a choke, or just get up and kick him in the face and walk/run away.



Not arguing that at all but when I ground train I put more focus on getting up. Now in a situation where I may be unfortunate enough to be taken to the ground by a seasoned grappler said person had best be prepared to be hit in the throat or have his eyes gouged.


----------



## Hanzou

SENC-33 said:


> Not arguing that at all but when I ground train I put more focus on getting up. Now in a situation where I may be unfortunate enough to be taken to the ground by a seasoned grappler said person had best be prepared to be hit in the throat or have his eyes gouged.



Yeah, eye gouges and throat shots aren't going to help you against a seasoned grappler who has a dominant position. You start trying to gouge his eyes, he'll start banging your head into the concrete.


----------



## SENC-33

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, eye gouges and throat shots aren't going to help you against a seasoned grappler who has a dominant position. You start trying to gouge his eyes, he'll start banging your head into the concrete.



LOL....Partner I have been at this game a looooooong time. Sooner or later you have to get close enough to me to do any real damage and it doesn't take much of a throat strike to injure you severely. If you can reach my face or head with a powerful enough strike I can reach your throat.


----------



## SENC-33

I will say this based on my own experience. I can escape most grapplers that train with me within seconds. Reason being I don't train to stay on the ground grappling or fighting with them. I train to escape and get back to my feet.......


----------



## Hanzou

SENC-33 said:


> LOL....Partner I have been at this game a looooooong time. Sooner or later you have to get close enough to me to do any real damage and it doesn't take much of a throat strike to injure you severely. If you can reach my face or head with a powerful enough strike I can reach your throat.



I thought the scenario was you already been taken to the ground by a "seasoned grappler"?

What amazes me about arguments such as yours is the notion that it takes a great deal of training to bite someone, dig in nails, pull hair, or poke in the eye. I was doing that in grade school. If a seasoned grappler has taken you to the ground and has a dominant position, who do you think is more likely to be able to do "dirty stuff"? Its like saying "if I get taken to the ground, I'm going to punch him in the face!" Who do you think is more capable of punching who in the face? 

Furthermore, going the dirty route opens up a path towards escalation which you're going to lose because again, *the person has a dominant position*.

Wouldn't it just be easier (and more logical) to simply learn ground fighting?


----------



## SENC-33

Hanzou said:


> I thought the scenario was you already been taken to the ground by a "seasoned grappler"?
> 
> What amazes me about arguments such as yours is the notion that it takes a great deal of training to bite someone, dig in nails, pull hair, or poke in the eye. I was doing that in grade school. If a seasoned grappler has taken you to the ground and has a dominant position, who do you think is more likely to be able to do "dirty stuff"? Its like saying "if I get taken to the ground, I'm going to punch him in the face!" Who do you think is more capable of punching who in the face?
> 
> Furthermore, going the dirty route opens up a path towards escalation which you're going to lose because again, *the person has a dominant position*.
> 
> Wouldn't it just be easier (and more logical) to simply learn ground fighting?



You think being on top of me is really a dominant position? In a real life situation where there is no ring, a ref or points and you do happen to get me to the ground and on top of me you will likely go into ground and pound mode. Yes my movement will be somewhat limited but I CAN get a throat strike no problem (we both can). Where you choose to strike is up to you obviously but I will cover long enough to get the small window I need.


----------



## SENC-33

To sum it up and for the sake of not wanting to get into a pissing contest.....Ground fighting defense is secondary to me. YES you should train for it but your are better off focusing on how best to get up and back on your feet as quickly as possible. I would treat any situation of being taken to the ground as a dangerous one with the potential of mutiple attackers being a real possibility. That isn't a situation you desire to be in.


----------



## Hanzou

SENC-33 said:


> You think being on top of me is really a dominant position? In a real life situation where there is no ring, a ref or points and you do happen to get me to the ground and on top of me you will likely go into ground and pound mode. Yes my movement will be somewhat limited but I CAN get a throat strike no problem (we both can). Where you choose to strike is up to you obviously but I will cover long enough to get the small window I need.



YES a seasoned grappler on top of you IS a dominant position. Honestly, even someone who doesn't know what they're doing in that position is in a dominant position. Additionally (depending on where they trained) if you go for a throat jab from guard, that leads to your arm getting grabbed and possibly broken, or locked up and you continued to get pummeled.

However, the very idea of trying to punch someone's throat in guard is ridiculous, especially when someone is raining blows down upon you, and your head is on the concrete.

This isn't a pissing contest. This is what is reality and what is fantasy.


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> LOL....Partner I have been at this game a looooooong time. Sooner or later you have to get close enough to me to do any real damage and it doesn't take much of a throat strike to injure you severely. If you can reach my face or head with a powerful enough strike I can reach your throat.


Hold on, guys.  I want to add my disclaimer here:  I have no personal issues with anyone doing anything that they enjoy.  

But, let's be realistic here.  If you are not a "seasoned grappler" as you put it, and someone who is competent has you in a high mount, you will not be able to reach their face or throat.  In fact, you will likely not be able to move your arms.  Low mount is when I have you mounted, and my hips are closer to your hips.  In this position, I can grapevine your legs for control, making it hard for you to breathe.  But, if I'm punching you or working to submit you, I will have you in high mount.  In this position, I'm sitting directly on your chest, with my thighs high under your shoulders.  It is extremely difficult to breathe, and motion for your arms is very limited.  If you extend your arms in this position for any reason, you are asking to have it broken in some way. 

Regarding escaping grapplers, depends on who you train with, I guess, and under what rules you are "sparring."  

My only point here is to suggest that we all stick with what we know.  I know diddley about kung fu, but don't tell me that you would be able to gouge my eyes while under mount.  That's completely unrealistic.


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> To sum it up and for the sake of not wanting to get into a pissing contest.....Ground fighting defense is secondary to me. YES you should train for it but your are better off focusing on how best to get up and back on your feet as quickly as possible. I would treat any situation of being taken to the ground as a dangerous one with the potential of mutiple attackers being a real possibility. That isn't a situation you desire to be in.


No.  Sorry.  This is wrong.  You will not be able to reach my throat under high mount, and further, if you try I'd likely be able to break your wrist without compromising my position at all.  In fact, it is very likely that without a lot of experience in that position, you will panic when you realize how difficult it is to breathe and how limited your movement really is.  I see it all the time.  You really don't know how sucky that position is until you've got someone competent doing it to you.

To help show what I mean, this is high mount:



This is low mount:


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> Not arguing that at all but when I ground train I put more focus on getting up. Now in a situation where I may be unfortunate enough to be taken to the ground by a seasoned grappler said person had best be prepared to be hit in the throat or have his eyes gouged.





SENC-33 said:


> I will say this based on my own experience. I can escape most grapplers that train with me within seconds. Reason being I don't train to stay on the ground grappling or fighting with them. I train to escape and get back to my feet.......



Ditto!  This is something that I touched on when I first started posting in this thread.  To each his own I suppose, but for me, I prefer to not prolong, if possible, my time on the ground, in the event I end up there.


----------



## Hanzou

Steve said:


> No.  Sorry.  This is wrong.  You will not be able to reach my throat under high mount, and further, if you try I'd likely be able to break your wrist without compromising my position at all.  In fact, it is very likely that without a lot of experience in that position, you will panic when you realize how difficult it is to breathe and how limited your movement really is.  I see it all the time.  You really don't know how sucky that position is until you've got someone competent doing it to you.



Just to piggy back off of this; You also don't realize how much energy you exert trying to get out of that position if you're in panic mode. You're flopping around trying to get out of guard, and the guy on top is just sitting there pounding you like a piece of hamburger meat. Open up your defense to try to throat jab, you get a fist in your face, and your head is bouncing off the concrete. Try to grab his arm to bite him, and another fist is going to knock your teeth out, and your head is probably going to bounce off the concrete again.

Again, your better off just learning ground fighting.



> Not to nitpick, but if I have you mounted, you are not in a guard position. Having observed this thread from the beginning, I think that there is a lot of unnecessary conflict because people aren't being specific.




LoL! Whoops, thanks for the correction. :asian:


----------



## MJS

Regarding the posts/pics that Steve posted...I have to concur...being the mount, especially the high mount, well...there's no other way to say it other than it sucks!!! LOL!  It sucks enough in the regular mount, but once they get under your arms...hopefully luck is on your side or you're capable of shrimping, if possible, to change his position on you.  

If the guy is sitting high, ie: upright, he'll easily be able to rain down strikes.  The bottom guy most likely will not be able to reach the face, unless the top guy leans in...then you might have a chance to target the eyes, throat, etc.  

I'm by far, not an expert grappler, but IMHO, I would say the best chance to target the eyes, throat, etc, would be when the grappler is making his initial contact.  Not saying its impossible once you're on the ground, but if the guy knows what he's doing, it's not going to be easy.  

Will every person in the street that you face, be an expert grappler?  Probably not.  However, due to the fact that Wrestling is taught in a lot of schools and colleges, in addition to MMA being popular, not to mention those 'wanna-bes' that would rather watch youtube and mimic what they see on the clip, in the backyard with their friends, it is possible that you could run into someone with some grappling experience, limited as it may be.


----------



## Steve

Hanzou said:


> Just to piggy back off of this; You also don't realize how much energy you exert trying to get out of that position if you're in panic mode. You're flopping around trying to get out of guard, and the guy on top is just sitting there pounding you like a piece of hamburger meat. Open up your defense to try to throat jab, you get a fist in your face, and your head is bouncing off the concrete. Try to grab his arm to bite him, and another fist is going to knock your teeth out, and your head is probably going to bounce off the concrete again.
> 
> Again, your better off just learning ground fighting.


Not to nitpick, but if I have you mounted, you are not in a guard position.  Having observed this thread from the beginning, I think that there is a lot of unnecessary conflict because people aren't being specific.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hanzou said:


> And who is better prepared for that scenario? An athlete, or a chubby person who does Kung Fu twice a week?



Since you don't seem to not have any idea what Kung Fu really s or how it trains I find your choice of words in your response rather ironic and your use of one video as proof of your argument is laughable but if this is how you want to play it

A successful sports based fighter who was not exactly svelte.







And since you are using one shot example that you think make your case

Non-sport martial artists that you seem to think are all chubby and only train a couple times a week, I am assuming in a class.... oh and these I believe you might be able to call Kung Fu people 

Wing Chun - Jun Fan Gong Fu - Jeet Kune Do





Wing Chun





Xingyiquan





Taijiquan 






Bajiquan








But regardless of all that your statement has nothing to do with what I originally said and it was a bad attempt at misdirection.

Both can train equally hard the only difference is what I previously stated....but I doubt you know that from first had experience on either side of this all to old and over done argument


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Steve sums up the facts pretty well, with regards to the feasibility of striking the throat from under the mount.  I just want to add that this is not just armchair theorizing.  We have the evidence of many, many MMA fights where throat strikes were legal.  Yes, the current UFC rules disallow throat strikes.  They didn't always do so.  For the first 8 years or so of the UFC they were legal.  (FYI - the rules were changed for political reasons to get the sport accepted, not because anyone was ever injured by a throat strike.)  The rules for the Pride Fighting Championships allowed throat strikes.  Numerous vale tudo contests and individual challenge matches in Brazil allowed throat strikes.  Despite this, I don't believe there is a single instance in all these fights of someone effectively striking the throat from the bottom of the mount.

In addition to the evidence of all these fights, we have the experience from many, many, many rounds of sparring against all kinds of opponents in different positions on the ground.  I'm not the toughest guy in the world.  There are plenty of people out there from any art you can name who could easily kick my butt in a fair fight.  Nevertheless, I can guarantee that if I get to start out mounted on top of you that you will not be able to effectively strike my throat from that position.  Maybe you could do it against someone who has no idea of how to grapple - but why would someone like that ever be on top of you in the first place?

BTW - the throat is a perfectly cromulent target in self-defense.  If you can land a clean, solid shot on the throat it might be a fight-ender.  That does not mean it's a magical "touch this and you win" button.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, eye gouges and throat shots aren't going to help you against a seasoned grappler who has a dominant position. You start trying to gouge his eyes, he'll start banging your head into the concrete.


:BSmeter:


----------



## Hanzou

Xue Sheng said:


> Since you don't seem to not have any idea what Kung Fu really s or how it trains I find your choice of words in your response rather ironic and your use of one video as proof of your argument is laughable but if this is how you want to play it
> 
> 
> 
> And since you are using one shot example that you think make your case
> 
> Non-sport martial artists that you seem to think are all chubby and only train a couple times a week, I am assuming in a class.... oh and these I believe you might be able to call Kung Fu people



Where did I say that all non-sport martial artists are chubby and only train a couple times a week?

What I'm saying is that if you're in a sport MA and compete, you're more likely to be in shape than someone who does non-competitive MA.

Which is why you see so many vids of ripped boxers, wrestlers, and Bjj types vs. skinny or flabby traditional martial artists. Part of the reason why the latter loses is because many of them don't compete, and are simply not in shape. Obviously this isn't the case in all situations.


----------



## SENC-33

It's really pointless to set up these hypotheticals with people you don't even know on a forum. Whether or not  I can or can't get to your throat makes little difference.......If you train to fight on the ground that's fine enough by me and it may very well be deadly for you as long as there is nobody else around to kick your skull in.

My ground training is comprised of getting out of a bad situation and back on my feet as quickly as possible and IMO that focus will serve me better in the situations I am more likely to find myself in outside of the training gym.


----------



## K-man

SENC-33 said:


> To sum it up and for the sake of not wanting to get into a pissing contest.....Ground fighting defense is secondary to me. YES you should train for it but your are better off focusing on how best to get up and back on your feet as quickly as possible. I would treat any situation of being taken to the ground as a dangerous one with the potential of mutiple attackers being a real possibility. That isn't a situation you desire to be in.


The problem is, *Hanzou* has never trained RBSD like Systema, Krav, MCMAC or a TMA. Even when you show him RB training he ignores it. He cannot comprehend that some training is to disable or kill and some is purely for fun/sport. To intentionally go to the ground when that is not required is just plain dumb. Staying on the ground when you have the chance to regain your feet is dumber still. To think a sport fighter will not be subjected to disabling strikes because of his sport training is fairyland when his opponent specialises in disabling techniques.


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> It's really pointless to set up these hypotheticals with people you don't even know on a forum. Whether or not  I can or can't get to your throat makes little difference.......If you train to fight on the ground that's fine enough by me and it may very well be deadly for you as long as there is nobody else around to kick your skull in.
> 
> My ground training is comprised of getting out of a bad situation and back on my feet as quickly as possible and IMO that focus will serve me better in the situations I am more likely to find myself in outside of the training gym.


Personally, I think it's great if you have found a school you enjoy where your training is suiting your needs.  However, your suggestion that you could gouge my eyes or strike my throat from under mount is an indication that your ground training might not be as complete as you believe.  

I know that this has been brought up, but I feel like it's important to acknowledge, though, that most of us are not going to be getting into fights and the chances that any of us will ACTUALLY have to use our martial arts in a real fight are slim.  And, further, if you are getting into fights routinely (and aren't a professional combat athlete, a soldier or LEO), you might want to rethink your lifestyle. 

What I'm trying to say is, if you think your training is adequate for you, great.  More power to you.  But don't confuse that with expertise in anything other than what you specifically do.  In other words, if you train kyokushin karate, does that make you a self defense expert?  No.  It makes you a kyokushin karate expert.  Same with Ninjutsu or whatever you train in.  My opinion is that there is really no such thing as a self defense "expert."  It's too vague a term to be useful.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say that all non-sport martial artists are chubby and only train a couple times a week?
> 
> What I'm saying is that if you're in a sport MA and compete, you're more likely to be in shape than someone who does non-competitive MA.
> 
> Which is why you see so many vids of ripped boxers, wrestlers, and Bjj types vs. skinny or flabby traditional martial artists. Part of the reason why the latter loses is because many of them don't compete, and are simply not in shape. Obviously this isn't the case in all situations.



Sorry, you did not actually use the word "all" but by your posted video and response it is not to much of a stretch to come to that conclusion



Hanzou said:


> And who is better prepared for that scenario? An athlete, or a chubby person who does Kung Fu twice a week?




...and ripped does not always translate into good fighter...see George Forman...but again I doubt you have much experience on either side of this argument... and I have had my share of arm chair MAists over the years on MT so I'm out of this because honestly you are not worth my time..... zàijiàn hu&#257; quán xìu t&#468;i"


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> My ground training is comprised of getting out of a bad situation and back on my feet as quickly as possible and IMO that focus will serve me better in the situations I am more likely to find myself in outside of the training gym.



I have absolutely no problem with that.  If you aren't preparing to fight in the cage, then that is all the ground training you will probably ever need.  I'm just pointing out that trying to strike the throat of someone who is mounted on you is not a particularly effective approach to getting out of the bad situation and back to your feet.  There are techniques which are much more reliable for that purpose.


----------



## SENC-33

K-man said:


> The problem is, *Hanzou* has never trained RBSD like Systema, Krav, MCMAC or a TMA. Even when you show him RB training he ignores it. He cannot comprehend that some training is to disable or kill and some is purely for fun/sport. To intentionally go to the ground when that is not required is just plain dumb. Staying on the ground when you have the chance to regain your feet is dumber still. To think a sport fighter will not be subjected to disabling strikes because of his sport training is fairyland when his opponent specialises in disabling techniques.



Agree.....I have enough real world experience and have seen too many people get sent to the hospital from fighting on the ground. It's a foolish strategy to go there deliberately.


----------



## SENC-33

Tony Dismukes said:


> I have absolutely no problem with that.  If you aren't preparing to fight in the cage, then that is all the ground training you will probably ever need.  I'm just pointing out that trying to strike the throat of someone who is mounted on you is not a particularly effective approach to getting out of the bad situation and back to your feet.  There are techniques which are much more reliable for that purpose.



Yes and I pointed out that my first approach is to get up quickly. If however  I can't get back up for whatever reason I can and will look for any opportunity to get to the throat or eyes and it can be done especially when your well being is at stake.


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Agree.....I have enough real world experience and have seen too many people get sent to the hospital from fighting on the ground. It's a foolish strategy to go there deliberately.


really?  What do you do in order for you to see so many people in real life altercations?  It just seems unlikely that you would see so many fights that you haven't just seen _some_ people fight on the ground... but have seen "too many" get sent to the hospital for it.  The implications here are troubling, if true.


----------



## SENC-33

Steve said:


> really?  What do you do in order for you to see so many people in real life altercations?  It just seems unlikely that you would see so many fights that you haven't just seen _some_ people fight on the ground... but have seen "too many" get sent to the hospital for it.  The implications here are troubling, if true.



I was a bouncer and doorman for over a decade. I also contracted with event organizers and concert promoters. I was involved in it every weekend.......


----------



## Hanzou

SENC-33 said:


> Yes and I pointed out that my first approach is to get up quickly. If however  I can't get back up for whatever reason I can and will look for any opportunity to get to the throat or eyes and it can be done especially when your well being is at stake.



Why don't you just do this;


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> I was a bouncer and doorman for over a decade. I also contracted with event organizers and concert promoters. I was involved in it every weekend.......


Ah.  Makes sense, I guess.  So, is it fair to say that alcohol was a contributing factor?   

Here's a question for the group at large.  Do any RBSD guys here train drunk?  I mean, when are we most likely to get into a fight?  Answer:  When we've had too much to drink and aren't behaving properly.  So, how realistic can your training be if you're not schnockered at least a little?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> Yes and I pointed out that my first approach is to get up quickly. If however  I can't get back up for whatever reason I can and will look for any opportunity to get to the throat or eyes and it can be done especially when your well being is at stake.



If you are mounted, there are several effective methods for escaping the position and getting back to your feet quickly.  I could teach you the basics of what you need to know in just a few classes.  (Of course, it takes time and practice to get really good at those basics, especially against a skilled opponent.)

Trying to attack the eyes or throat from underneath the mount is not an effective tactic and will very likely get you hurt.


----------



## SENC-33

Steve said:


> Ah.  Makes sense, I guess.  So, is it fair to say that alcohol was a contributing factor?
> 
> Here's a question for the group at large.  Do any RBSD guys here train drunk?  I mean, when are we most likely to get into a fight?  Answer:  When we've had too much to drink and aren't behaving properly.  So, how realistic can your training be if you're not schnockered at least a little?



Whatever works for you outside the safe confines of a controlled environment good on ya! Like I said it's not a pissing contest to me. I hope you never have to face a situation where you aren't aware of the assailants you can't see. It won't matter to your skull if they are drunk or sober.


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Whatever works for you outside the safe confines of a controlled environment good on ya! Like I said it's not a pissing contest to me. I hope you never have to face a situation where you aren't aware of the assailants you can't see. It won't matter to your skull if they are drunk or sober.


Invisible assailants would be a true test, indeed.   You train for that, too?


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> Here's a question for the group at large.  Do any RBSD guys here train drunk?  I mean, when are we most likely to get into a fight?  Answer:  When we've had too much to drink and aren't behaving properly.  So, how realistic can your training be if you're not schnockered at least a little?



This is. A great point and why everyone's first line of self defense should be not to get schnockered or drunk in public in the first place.  You can go out have a few beers or drinks in moderation but stay sober enough so you can avoid fighting in the first place.  I never understood why people find the need to get plastered in public.  You put yourself at such a greater risk for all kinds of problems


----------



## Steve

ballen0351 said:


> This is. A great point and why everyone's first line of self defense should be not to get schnockered or drunk in public in the first place.  You can go out have a few beers or drinks in moderation but stay sober enough so you can avoid fighting in the first place.  I never understood why people find the need to get plastered in public.  You put yourself at such a greater risk for all kinds of problems


I agree.  I think that the most practical self defense techniques one can learn involve being a good communicator, de-escalation techniques and situational awareness.  Those skills along with some common sense things like, don't get sloppy drunk with people you don't know and trust, don't be a jerk, don't flash large amounts of money in a bar, don't pick up prostitutes, don't buy drugs from dealers in dark alleys, don't take on invisible assailants (that one's for you, senc-33 ) just seem like practical self defense to me.

But, I'm not an expert, so take it for what it's worth.  I do know how to put you to sleep in a number of ways, though.


----------



## Kframe

SENC-33 said:


> You think being on top of me is really a dominant position? In a real life situation where there is no ring, a ref or points and you do happen to get me to the ground and on top of me you will likely go into ground and pound mode. Yes my movement will be somewhat limited but I CAN get a throat strike no problem (we both can). Where you choose to strike is up to you obviously but I will cover long enough to get the small window I need.



Ok I have to jump in on Hanzou's side here. Sorry that is not correct at all. I have done BJJ  in my mma class and there is no way you will ever reach my throat. Secondly and this is important, reaching up to strike my eyes or throat or anything else for that matter is 2 things. 1. it is the single most foolish thing you can do and here is the reason. 2 its a gift to the person on top. Go a head reach that hand or 2 up there, makes it REALLY easy to arm bar you. Its a gift to the grappler..  NEVER reach up like that in a ground fight... I was taught the T-rex for a reason.. 

I  grow tired of reading and hearing in person from tma artists how they don't need ground grappling they will just use dirty tricks. Sorry that is patently incorrect. THEY DO NOT WORK WITH A SEASONED GRAPPLER!!  Sadly the proof I need is UFC 1-4. Eye gouging and biting and sack grabbing and hair pulling and small joint manipulation were all allowed. NOONE who tried those tactics won. Not one single TMAist won. It was the grapplers.  

Look, no one here is disputing that a tma is a great thing for self defense on the streets were most of the attackers you will likely face are untrained to poorly trained. Most combat sport athletes that should give TMA worries and nightmares is to busy training for there competition goals  and are generally good people. Getting into fights and pissing contests in bars and on the streets will screw up there dreams.  Permanently. Especially for those with UFC dreams, as they do not tolerate criminals.   

For the average TMA they don't need to worry about Rouge BJJ Blackbelts roaming the streets looting and pillaging.(unless they are close to a Loyd Irving training center then watch out)  Though getting tackled  and put into a crappy mount and pounded.  I feel that EVERY Single TMA needs to learn basic mount escape and variations such as the GNP mount escape, and escapes from side and half guard. Plus defenses from  the basic joint attacks.  They need to at least get experience being on the ground in the bottom position. The last thing  a non grounder needs to do is panic and start flailing away. That will sap your energy and you'll be unable to fend off anything. 

In this day and age there is no excuse to not atleast know these very basic ground solutions. NO need to go and simultaneously train to black belt in bjj just to survive a street ground encounter.  It doesn't take that much training time to be prepared for ground street encounters... 

Cant believe im siding with Hanzou...   You know what no im not..  He has no respect for any other martial arts.  The Gracies are big into respect, and they are proponents of respecting all people and styles.  You need to learn respect and stop insulting traditional artists.  You claim to believe in BJJ and the Jiu Jitsu lifestyle, then actually live it and show respect and deciency and be friendly and open to other styles, not bashing them.


----------



## Hanzou

Kframe said:


> Cant believe im siding with Hanzou...   You know what no im not..  He has no respect for any other martial arts.  The Gracies are big into respect, and they are proponents of respecting all people and styles.  You need to learn respect and stop insulting traditional artists.  You claim to believe in BJJ and the Jiu Jitsu lifestyle, then actually live it and show respect and deciency and be friendly and open to other styles, not bashing them.



Its pretty hard to respect certain TMA styles when they teach their students that they can escape a ground and pound by a seasoned grappler with a throat punch or an eye gouge. I just saw some Ninja guy teach a student some silly eye gouge as a counter to a grappler. I just can't take them seriously because its like they're living in fantasy land.

The most hilarious thing about all of this is that the escapes to that situation are easy to find, and there's multiple ways to do it. The fact that TMAs aren't teaching simple Bjj escapes just shows that they have their heads in the sand.

Beyond that, you can train in whatever you like. I respect everyone's right to choose the art that's best for them.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> Its pretty hard to respect certain TMA styles when ...



Sometime if we have to respect all MA styles, we won't be able to have any deep level discussion. In the past, I have criticized both my major TCMA styles and my minor TCMA styles such as:

- WC Bong Shou expose elbow and chest,
- Bagua circle walking cross legs for swept,
- Yang Taiji has hand moves but not enough leg move such as sweep, scoop, hook, lift, spring, ...,
- longfist system form has too much abstraction,
- SC depends too much on sleeve hold,
- ...

If we want our style to "evolve", we have to first detect the weakness of our style. No matter what style that we train, we should not be bounded by our styles. We should have "no style boundary" in mind. The moment that we say, "My style doesn't do this." or "This is against my style principle", we have stopped ourselves the opportunity to grow.


----------



## K-man

MJS said:


> Regarding the posts/pics that Steve posted...I have to concur...being the mount, especially the high mount, well...there's no other way to say it other than it sucks!!! LOL!  It sucks enough in the regular mount, but once they get under your arms...hopefully luck is on your side or you're capable of shrimping, if possible, to change his position on you.
> 
> If the guy is sitting high, ie: upright, he'll easily be able to rain down strikes.  The bottom guy most likely will not be able to reach the face, unless the top guy leans in...then you might have a chance to target the eyes, throat, etc.
> 
> I'm by far, not an expert grappler, but IMHO, I would say the best chance to target the eyes, throat, etc, would be when the grappler is making his initial contact.  Not saying its impossible once you're on the ground, but if the guy knows what he's doing, it's not going to be easy.
> 
> Will every person in the street that you face, be an expert grappler?  Probably not.  However, due to the fact that Wrestling is taught in a lot of schools and colleges, in addition to MMA being popular, not to mention those 'wanna-bes' that would rather watch youtube and mimic what they see on the clip, in the backyard with their friends, it is possible that you could run into someone with some grappling experience, limited as it may be.


To be fair we are ranging between professional fighters, highly trained martial artists, not so highly trained martial artists and the Joe Average street thug who might be a seasoned brawler or an untrained guy with too much grog in him.

Now as was said 50 pages back, it is virtually impossible to compare TMAs with MMAs. For 40 pages Hanzou has been bitching because TMAs don't compete in competition. 

But let's look at this last little bit of grappling. Escaping the mount is standard fare for basic grapplers. I was taught not to allow the guy on top to get the high mount in the first place. To use that as an example of why someone can't grab your throat or gouge your eyes is like me saying that you are not going to be able to do much when I have you in a good rear naked choke. The fight was really over before that time. Having said that, it is still possible for a trained person to escape a rear naked choke and it is still possible for a trained person to escape a high mount.

So let's start comparing apples with apples. It makes no sense to compare beginners with advanced grapplers or vice versa. As I said from page one, you will never be able to compare MMA with TMA but if you are reasonably trained in either discipline both are practical for self defence. But don't for one moment believe TMAs don't possess basic grappling skills.
:asian:


----------



## Kframe

K-man said:


> But don't for one moment believe TMAs don't possess basic grappling skills.
> :asian:



Umm sorry but no.  In my quest to find the tma for me after my mma closed, I visited nearly 20 of them in a 20 minute drive and NONE of them did any form of ground grappling.  If its not being practiced at least once or twice a week, then its not seriously being taught and not benefiting then its not on the syllabus. 

Were in goju or shorin or Ishhin ryu is the ground fighting syllabus? Were in TKD? (ATA has a ground grappling course. No clue how crappy or not it is)  Were in Muay thai? 

Sorry Unless it is consistently taught every week for more then 10 minutes at a time it is not really being trained.  

Im not sure how you can make that statement with a straight face and actually mean it.  IF tma  had  a valid ground syllabus then this whole thread would never exist...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

I believe when K-man said, "TMAs don't possess basic grappling skills." He means TMA may have "stand up grappling" but don't have "ground skill grappling". I have trained TCMA all my life and there is no shame for me to admit that TCMA has no ground skill. TCMA has the ground skill that when you take your opponent down, you get into full mount or side mount as shown in the following clip.






But if a TCMA guy was thrown down and be on the bottom, the TCMA guy will have no skill to reverse the bottom position back to the top position. This is why to be able to obtain that skill from BJJ is always a good idea.


----------



## Hanzou

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Sometime if we have to respect all MA styles, we won't be able to have any deep level discussion. In the past, I have criticized both my major TCMA styles and my minor TCMA styles such as:
> 
> - WC Bong Shou expose elbow and chest,
> - Bagua circle walking cross legs for swept,
> - Yang Taiji has hand moves but not enough leg move such as sweep, scoop, hook, lift, spring, ...,
> - longfist system form has too much abstraction,
> - SC depends too much on sleeve hold,
> - ...
> 
> If we want our style to "evolve", we have to first detect the weakness of our style. No matter what style that we train, we should not be bounded by our styles. We should have "no style boundary" in mind. The moment that we say, "My style doesn't do this." or "This is against my style principle", we have stopped ourselves the opportunity to grow.



Of course. The thing is this though; Most people have a general idea on how to do stand up. Let's face it, if you're into martial arts, you've probably done karate, shadow boxing, or something else. Throwing a punch is pretty simple. Throwing a kick is fairly simple. In short, the average person knows how to do average stand up. Like that thug and that meter cop who was trained in Muay Thai. The untrained thug hung with him and they were just trading blows because boxing is like 4 punches and some fancy footwork. How hard is that to emulate with a VCR and a punching bag?

You just can't say the same about ground fighting. Anyone who has rolled with a legit Bjj purple, brown, or black belt can attest to that. Some of the crazy counters that I've heard like a Karate chop to the neck to stop a takedown, or a throat punch to stop the ground and pound back that up. Its like Royce Grace and the first UFCs all over again. If you're not prepared for it, it sucks. If you are prepared for it, it sucks for THEM.

What's sad is that its not like the BJJ escapes are impossible to find. They're right there on youtube for you to check out and incorporate. Like this Ninjutsu school for example that incorporated a Bjj mount counter;






Simple.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> If you're not prepared for it, it sucks. If you are prepared for it, it sucks for THEM.



Many years ago, I had very cross mind. I would let BJJ to be effective on the ground, and I only care about the effectiveness of the stand up grappling. Today, I may be too old to get a BJJ black belt (what's the usage to obtain a PhD degree after you have retired and no longer looking for job?), but I encourage all my guys to cross trained the ground skill. As you have said, it's always be better to prepare for yourself.


----------



## ballen0351

Kframe said:


> Umm sorry but no.  In my quest to find the tma for me after my mma closed, I visited nearly 20 of them in a 20 minute drive and NONE of them did any form of ground grappling.  If its not being practiced at least once or twice a week, then its not seriously being taught and not benefiting then its not on the syllabus.
> 
> Were in goju or shorin or Ishhin ryu is the ground fighting syllabus? Were in TKD? (ATA has a ground grappling course. No clue how crappy or not it is)  Were in Muay thai?
> 
> Sorry Unless it is consistently taught every week for more then 10 minutes at a time it is not really being trained.
> 
> Im not sure how you can make that statement with a straight face and actually mean it.  IF tma  had  a valid ground syllabus then this whole thread would never exist...



I'm not sure how you can decide by visiting a school for one class what they do and don't teach.  If your just cheking our a school then your a beginner in that art but you now claim that you know everything that's taught in Goju/Isshin ryu/ect to make that blanket statement.  There are many things we don't teach in beginners classes or even intermediate classes so how do you know what's taught?


----------



## Kframe

Please inform me Ballen. If it is taught why save it for high ranking belts? That should be in the syllabus from the beginning not at the end were it does no good.   I have done more then enough internet research and talking with various karateka in real life to make my assertion..


----------



## RTKDCMB

Steve said:


> No.  Sorry.  This is wrong.  You will not be able to reach my throat under high mount, and further, if you try I'd likely be able to break your wrist without compromising my position at all.  In fact, it is very likely that without a lot of experience in that position, you will panic when you realize how difficult it is to breathe and how limited your movement really is.  I see it all the time.  You really don't know how sucky that position is until you've got someone competent doing it to you.
> 
> To help show what I mean, this is high mount:
> View attachment 18395



There are a number of things that are possible from this position; From the picture it is clear that the mounted man has both arms free so any punches that can be rained down can also be blocked with the forearms (often in the UFC you will see someone raining down punches and the only defence you will see is the flailing of arms), the grappler's wrist can also be grabbed and broken. After grabbing the wrist he can use the legs to topple him over and escape. If the mounted guy wants to strike for the face he would have to bring it closer down (striking there from that position would be unwise) by either grabbing the clothes or the arm and then striking. A bear hand fist or middle knuckle strike to the side of the neck, the temple or the facial nerve under the cheek bone would not take much power to be effective. There is also the possibility of kicking to the back of the head with the shin,instep or ball of the foot or getting the leg around the front and pulling him backwards or kneeing in the kidneys. Nothing from this position would be ideal but there are manyt things that could work. That being said, if you are put in this position then something has already gone terribly wrong.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

RTKDCMB said:


> There are a number of things that are possible from this position; From the picture it is clear that the mounted man has both arms free so any punches that can be rained down can also be blocked with the forearms (often in the UFC you will see someone raining down punches and the only defence you will see is the flailing of arms), the grappler's wrist can also be grabbed and broken. After grabbing the wrist he can use the legs to topple him over and escape. If the mounted guy wants to strike for the face he would have to bring it closer down (striking there from that position would be unwise) by either grabbing the clothes or the arm and then striking. A bear hand fist or middle knuckle strike to the side of the neck, the temple or the facial nerve under the cheek bone would not take much power to be effective. There is also the possibility of kicking to the back of the head with the shin,instep or ball of the foot or getting the leg around the front and pulling him backwards or kneeing in the kidneys. Nothing from this position would be ideal but there are manyt things that could work. That being said, if you are put in this position then something has already gone terribly wrong.



Wow. Just about everything in that paragraph is wrong except for the last two sentences.

Seriously.  I've got respect for just about all martial arts and I totally understand those who advocate avoiding ground fighting as much as possible. However if you are going to opine on how to do ground fighting then you should get some experience in it first.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Why don't you just do this;


I did .. with Bas earlier this year. Awesome!


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> Ok I have to jump in on Hanzou's side here. Sorry that is not correct at all. I have done BJJ  in my mma class and there is no way you will ever reach my throat. Secondly and this is important, reaching up to strike my eyes or throat or anything else for that matter is 2 things. 1. it is the single most foolish thing you can do and here is the reason. 2 its a gift to the person on top. Go a head reach that hand or 2 up there, makes it REALLY easy to arm bar you. Its a gift to the grappler..  NEVER reach up like that in a ground fight... I was taught the T-rex for a reason..
> 
> Certainly just reaching up to eye gouge by itself normally isn't going to be the first option but assuming you have basic grappling skills the option may well arise depending on the skills of the person you are fighting. I wouldn't be in any way concerned if I ended up on my back on the ground. Basic Krav teaches that for starters. Sure against highly skilled grapplers, different story, but what are the chances of me being in that position to start with?
> 
> I  grow tired of reading and hearing in person from tma artists how they don't need ground grappling they will just use dirty tricks. Sorry that is patently incorrect. THEY DO NOT WORK WITH A SEASONED GRAPPLER!!  Sadly the proof I need is UFC 1-4. Eye gouging and biting and sack grabbing and hair pulling and small joint manipulation were all allowed. NOONE who tried those tactics won. Not one single TMAist won. It was the grapplers.
> 
> I'm sorry I have never heard that and I do teach basic ground grappling. But sorry, I have to question. Who were the TMAs competing in UFC?
> 
> Look, no one here is disputing that a tma is a great thing for self defense on the streets were most of the attackers you will likely face are untrained to poorly trained. Most combat sport athletes that should give TMA worries and nightmares is to busy training for there competition goals  and are generally good people. Getting into fights and pissing contests in bars and on the streets will screw up there dreams.  Permanently. Especially for those with UFC dreams, as they do not tolerate criminals.
> 
> For the average TMA they don't need to worry about Rouge BJJ Blackbelts roaming the streets looting and pillaging.(unless they are close to a Loyd Irving training center then watch out)  Though getting tackled  and put into a crappy mount and pounded.  I feel that EVERY Single TMA needs to learn basic mount escape and variations such as the GNP mount escape, and escapes from side and half guard. Plus defenses from  the basic joint attacks.  They need to at least get experience being on the ground in the bottom position. The last thing  a non grounder needs to do is panic and start flailing away. That will sap your energy and you'll be unable to fend off anything.
> 
> Exactly right, but I do teach basic grappling skills because TMA is very similar to MMA, at least in karate. Every lock and arm bar I have learned in aikido is in our karate kata so I teach then and the reversals (also how to stop the reversals in many instances). So never assume TMAs don't train that way ... or maybe, yes assume they don't but be prepared for a surprise if you come across one of my guys.
> 
> In this day and age there is no excuse to not atleast know these very basic ground solutions. NO need to go and simultaneously train to black belt in bjj just to survive a street ground encounter.  It doesn't take that much training time to be prepared for ground street encounters...
> 
> Agree 100% but it should be part of your regular training if your instructor is properly trained.
> 
> Cant believe im siding with Hanzou...   You know what no im not..  He has no respect for any other martial arts.  The Gracies are big into respect, and they are proponents of respecting all people and styles.  You need to learn respect and stop insulting traditional artists.  You claim to believe in BJJ and the Jiu Jitsu lifestyle, then actually live it and show respect and deciency and be friendly and open to other styles, not bashing them.


No, don't side with Hanzou .. the few good points he makes are buried too deep in copious amounts of brown, smelly stuff excreted by male cattle.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> Umm sorry but no.  In my quest to find the tma for me after my mma closed, I visited nearly 20 of them in a 20 minute drive and NONE of them did any form of ground grappling.  If its not being practiced at least once or twice a week, then its not seriously being taught and not benefiting then its not on the syllabus.
> 
> Were in goju or shorin or Ishhin ryu is the ground fighting syllabus? Were in TKD? (ATA has a ground grappling course. No clue how crappy or not it is)  Were in Muay thai?
> 
> Sorry Unless it is consistently taught every week for more then 10 minutes at a time it is not really being trained.
> 
> Im not sure how you can make that statement with a straight face and actually mean it.  IF tma  had  a valid ground syllabus then this whole thread would never exist...


Once again, this is about as valid as Hanzou's assertions. I don't practise it twice a week but we still practise regularly. Whether you consider that sufficient is fine by me. I don't advocate people go to the ground and we spend a lot of time training skills to develop centre so it is less likely we will go to the ground. Even in the KM training there isn't that much grappling training so why should we?

if you can find 20 TMA schools within 20 minutes of where you live then you are indeed fortunate. I doubt there are many more than that in the whole of Australia! When I refer to TMA karate I don't include any that I call 'schoolboy karate'. That is not denigrating that training but it is the type of karate taken into the schools in the early 20th century and taught to Westerners post WWII. (My comment only pertains to karate and no other style of TMA.)

As to the syllabus, there is no standardised syllabus in TMA karate that I have seen. I have my own syllabus and there are certain criteria for grading but that is up to the individual school. So I can say what I say with a straight face and that is why I take such offence against the crap being thrown at TMA.  I agree with a lot of the criticism levelled at many schools, but I doubt I would classify many of them, particularly karate, as TMA. But having said that, it is up to the individual to declare what they teach or what they are taught to assess whether they really are TMA and if the are TMA they can surely say whether their training is complete or deficient. I'm the first to admit that the karate I used to train, and which I thought was traditional because that's what I was told, was not what it claimed to be. Hence I began cross training. What I now teach is far more comprehensive and certainly much more hands on.

But this thread had gone 40 pages past its use by date because of Hanzou's position on competition. Most of my students are on the wrong side of fifty. They have no desire to compete and if they did they are welcome to train at a school that prepares people for competition.


----------



## K-man

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I believe when K-man said, "TMAs don't possess basic grappling skills." He means TMA may have "stand up grappling" but don't have "ground skill grappling". I have trained TCMA all my life and there is no shame for me to admit that TCMA has no ground skill. TCMA has the ground skill that when you take your opponent down, you get into full mount or side mount as shown in the following clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But if a TCMA guy was thrown down and be on the bottom, the TCMA guy will have no skill to reverse the bottom position back to the top position. This is why to be able to obtain that skill from BJJ is always a good idea.


Sorry, if I said "TMAs *don't* possess basic grappling skills" I made a mistake in my post. I teach basic grappling skills to a far higher level than what was shown in this clip. The kata contain many takedowns and it is quite possible that you might end up on the ground too. So as I said in my previous post, every individual has to make the call as to whether your training is sufficient by itself to meet most scenarios. You say you haven't the training to cope with being on the bottom on the ground and that is fine. I believe against untrained people and your average martial artist I do have the necessary skills as I have trained that sort of thing for many years.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> Please inform me Ballen. If it is taught why save it for high ranking belts? That should be in the syllabus from the beginning not at the end were it does no good.   I have done more then enough internet research and talking with various karateka in real life to make my assertion..


I teach it from white belt. This may be quite different to other schools but I am proud of my students of all rank in any company. Your assertion is valid within your own experience but you are welcome to visit my school any time.


----------



## Chris Parker

Hanzou said:


> See my earlier quote about the female grappler being able to submit someone much larger than herself. That's my criteria of effective. I have yet to see anyone consider doing amazing kata to pop music as "effective".



Er... yeah, I saw that hypothetical you tried floating (flawed, at the least), and I gotta tell you, that (combined with the comment here about "kata to pop music") is what tells me you have no clue about kata training, especially in the Japanese form I was talking about. And, if that's you criteria for "effective", I gotta tell you... that's better suited by TMA systems than sport ones... sport systems will be more based on similar weight classes etc, so the idea of the petite girl against the big guy isn't really the purview of a sporting system....

But, to really deal with how badly you're missing everything, can you go back to post #602, and, I don't know, answer any of it?



Hanzou said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliveness



Oh, you didn't really just try to invoke Matt Thornton and his "aliveness" thing with me, did you? You do realize that I've ripped it apart here a number of times, yeah? The thing is, what Matt is talking about, is just standard in actual traditional systems... he's just come up with a more limited form, and given it a new name. It's hardly new, and it's hardly news.



Hanzou said:


> So two Jujutsu methods with the same goal in mind are apples and oranges? More correctly, one method is effective (sparring), and the other method is ineffective (kata).



Tell you what, when you can follow what you're being told, maybe we can discuss things. You don't understand what kata is, how it works, what it's aims are, or it's place. Again, though, the question has to be "effective at what"? If you're wanting effective for competition, you need sparring (and that's been stated from the beginning)... but, if you're training for a different context, you need to address that context... and, in many cases, that doesn't mean sparring.



Kframe said:


> Hanzou does bring up one valid point. I have made this observation in the past.  He is correct in that, a lot of times what you see of a karate ka in a sparring or competitive environment they look nothing how they train.  I have been mystified by this as well. My favorite karate blogger has a number of  posts on it.  In this first link he talks about exactly what hanzou is saying with regards to fighters not looking like how they train. http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/10/faux-boxing.html
> 
> This one also talks about.  http://dandjurdjevic.blogspot.com/2008/07/melee-karates-fighting-range.html
> 
> I think it is a valid question, why do a lot of karate fighters end up looking like piss poor bouncy kickboxers?



Yeah... you know my opinion of Dan... I'm not really that impressed by these articles either, honestly. For example, he's completely failed to recognize the actual reasons for the issues he's seeing... namely the influence of mass media, the rules, and the adoption of protective equipment, as well as forcing everything into a false (alien) context from the actual application of the system itself.



Hanzou said:


> Any opinions on this article?
> 
> Going to the Ground:Lessons from Law Enforcement



Sure... there are a number of leaps of logic, and a lack of understanding of the various factors that go into chosen tactics. The biggest is the assumption that, when a suspect decided to become offensive in their actions (and commonly attempted to take the officer down), it was similar to any engagement that did not involve a police officer, therefore takedowns/ground fighting are common for non-police engagements. Uh, no. The primary reason the suspects/offenders sought to take the officers down is because they were police officers. The fact that one or more person was an LEO cannot be discounted... after all, an attempt to takedown someone is an effort to control, not damage. And, when your opponent is an LEO, that means either controlling their access to weapons, or gaining control of them yourself.

The article was flawed by being unable to see past the immediate.



Steve said:


> Here's a question for the group at large.  Do any RBSD guys here train drunk?  I mean, when are we most likely to get into a fight?  Answer:  When we've had too much to drink and aren't behaving properly.  So, how realistic can your training be if you're not schnockered at least a little?



Hey, Steve. Actually training drunk? Nah, haven't heard of that... simulating the effects? That I've been involved in... ranging from role-playing being drunk (more commonly when being the attacking/aggressive side), to a range of physical methods which simulate the effects (such as loss of balance, a spinning head, and so on). Of course, when one of my guys asked one night how to best prepare to defend themselves, should they get plastered at a party, or in a bar, what type of training they should do, I suggested training their will-power, and not getting that drunk. Not the answer they were looking for, but very much an RBSD one... (and, for that matter, a TMA one as well.... many, if not all old schools would have rules that prohibited training drunk, in some cases extolling not drinking at all, and so on).



Steve said:


> Invisible assailants would be a true test, indeed.   You train for that, too?



Ha... er, yes. Well, maybe not "invisible", but close enough... 



Kframe said:


> Ok I have to jump in on Hanzou's side here. Sorry that is not correct at all. I have done BJJ  in my mma class and there is no way you will ever reach my throat. Secondly and this is important, reaching up to strike my eyes or throat or anything else for that matter is 2 things. 1. it is the single most foolish thing you can do and here is the reason. 2 its a gift to the person on top. Go a head reach that hand or 2 up there, makes it REALLY easy to arm bar you. Its a gift to the grappler..  NEVER reach up like that in a ground fight... I was taught the T-rex for a reason..



Agreed with this....



Kframe said:


> I  grow tired of reading and hearing in person from tma artists how they don't need ground grappling they will just use dirty tricks. Sorry that is patently incorrect. THEY DO NOT WORK WITH A SEASONED GRAPPLER!!  Sadly the proof I need is UFC 1-4. Eye gouging and biting and sack grabbing and hair pulling and small joint manipulation were all allowed. NOONE who tried those tactics won. Not one single TMAist won. It was the grapplers.


 
... less so with this. Look, "dirty tricks" aren't an instant cure-all, they're not magic touch techniques, but they can give an edge. Thing is, they need to be done in conjunction with other things. Oh, and the first UFC's (well, any competitive context) isn't really an accurate analogue of a self defence situation at all, on a number of levels.... one of which is what effect different things/actions can have. Believe it or not, some things that don't work in competitive environments work very well out of them... and vice versa.

Oh, and the "grapplers" were very much single-art sports-TMAists, for the record. 



Kframe said:


> Look, no one here is disputing that a tma is a great thing for self defense on the streets were most of the attackers you will likely face are untrained to poorly trained. Most combat sport athletes that should give TMA worries and nightmares is to busy training for there competition goals  and are generally good people. Getting into fights and pissing contests in bars and on the streets will screw up there dreams.  Permanently. Especially for those with UFC dreams, as they do not tolerate criminals.


 
Kinda yes and no on this one....   



Kframe said:


> For the average TMA they don't need to worry about Rouge BJJ Blackbelts roaming the streets looting and pillaging.(unless they are close to a Loyd Irving training center then watch out)  Though getting tackled  and put into a crappy mount and pounded.  I feel that EVERY Single TMA needs to learn basic mount escape and variations such as the GNP mount escape, and escapes from side and half guard. Plus defenses from  the basic joint attacks.  They need to at least get experience being on the ground in the bottom position. The last thing  a non grounder needs to do is panic and start flailing away. That will sap your energy and you'll be unable to fend off anything.



Every single TMA? Really? So you think that Iaido needs defence against ground and pound? Kyudo? How about Katori Shinto Ryu? How about Daito Ryu, if we want to get away from weapons?

The point here is that every martial art only has to worry about it's own context... self defence is not the context of every martial art... especially not of genuinely traditional ones... sport is not the context of every martial art... there are a number of martial arts that have no real concern for either, and have a completely different context altogether... and these are still highly effective arts... you just need to know what they're meant to be effective in, which is something that Hanzou has never really gotten an understanding of. 



Kframe said:


> In this day and age there is no excuse to not atleast know these very basic ground solutions. NO need to go and simultaneously train to black belt in bjj just to survive a street ground encounter.  It doesn't take that much training time to be prepared for ground street encounters...



There are heaps of "excuses" (or, better, reasons). The biggest is that it's got nothing to do with the set-up and context of the art in question. You were asking about the differences between suwari waza and ne waza in another thread recently, and I told you that the context was incredibly different... there is no reason for any of the arts within the Bujinkan, for example, to have any ground defence at all... it's just got nothing to do with the context of those Ryu-ha. If you want to use the Bujinkan's methods as a framework for modern self defence, then yeah, there's a good reason to look into it... but that's quite a different thing.



Kframe said:


> Cant believe im siding with Hanzou...   You know what no im not..  He has no respect for any other martial arts.  The Gracies are big into respect, and they are proponents of respecting all people and styles.  You need to learn respect and stop insulting traditional artists.  You claim to believe in BJJ and the Jiu Jitsu lifestyle, then actually live it and show respect and deciency and be friendly and open to other styles, not bashing them.



Really? You think the Gracies are big into respect? With the false challenges to Benny the Jet, the talking down of other arts, the promotion of Gracie BJJ as being superior to the denigration of other arts? Hmm, maybe we've had different experiences with the Gracies.... 



Kframe said:


> Umm sorry but no.  In my quest to find the tma for me after my mma closed, I visited nearly 20 of them in a 20 minute drive and NONE of them did any form of ground grappling.  If its not being practiced at least once or twice a week, then its not seriously being taught and not benefiting then its not on the syllabus.
> 
> Were in goju or shorin or Ishhin ryu is the ground fighting syllabus? Were in TKD? (ATA has a ground grappling course. No clue how crappy or not it is)  Were in Muay thai?
> 
> Sorry Unless it is consistently taught every week for more then 10 minutes at a time it is not really being trained.
> 
> Im not sure how you can make that statement with a straight face and actually mean it.  IF tma  had  a valid ground syllabus then this whole thread would never exist...



Since when is grappling meaning "ground"....? 



Kframe said:


> Please inform me Ballen. If it is taught why save it for high ranking belts? That should be in the syllabus from the beginning not at the end were it does no good.   I have done more then enough internet research and talking with various karateka in real life to make my assertion..



You can't give everything straight away. Some things require prior groundwork to be laid (ha, I see what I did there...!), and when you're dealing with something like, let's say, Isshin Ryu, the core of the art is standup striking with some standing grappling. The way Isshin Ryu teaches power, angling, footwork, use of body, and so on, is taught via these standing methods... there's no reason to put you on the ground if you can't do it standing up. And, contextually, the ground isn't a large consideration... so why would they need to bring it up, and possibly adversely affect the actual basis for the system and the way it teaches?


----------



## SENC-33

The throat and eye gouge thing has gotten blown way out of proportion. You BJJ guys are assuming a bit to much IMO. Posting pictures of a guy sitting on top of another guy in a controlled environment and telling me I can't hit your throat from that position is making a best case scenario for you. If my safety is threatened in a "real life" scenario and your throat presents itself for a strike it would be foolish to think  I cant hit you because sooner or later you will come into range. I never said this was what I advocate as a first choice self defense technique.....

I am curious as to how many of you have actually had to defend yourself with your ground skills away from a soft mat?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> The throat and eye gouge thing has gotten blown way out of proportion. You BJJ guys are assuming a bit to much IMO. Posting pictures of a guy sitting on top of another guy in a controlled environment and telling me I can't hit your throat from that position is making a best case scenario for you. If my safety is threatened in a "real life" scenario and your throat presents itself for a strike it would be foolish to think  I cant hit you because sooner or later you will come into range. I never said this was what I advocate as a first choice self defense technique.....
> 
> I am curious as to how many of you have actually had to defend yourself with your ground skills away from a soft mat?



I'm not sure that we're the ones who are making assumptions.  The statements that you will not be able to effectively strike the throat from the bottom of the mount isn't based on armchair speculation.  It's based on observations of hundreds of fights and experience of hundreds of hours of sparring.  That observation and experience tells us that the throat of the top guy doesn't "just present itself for a strike" and that if you try to engage in a striking contest from the bottom of the mount you will end up getting hurt.

That is in no way a claim that BJJ is superior for self-defense to whatever art you practice or that choosing to go to the ground in a self-defense situation is a good idea.  It's just a statement about what works if you happen to end up in that particular position.

So - what _do _you advocate as a first choice self defense technique if you were to end up on the bottom of the mount?


----------



## SENC-33

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm not sure that we're the ones who are making assumptions.  The statements that you will not be able to effectively strike the throat from the bottom of the mount isn't based on armchair speculation.  It's based on observations of hundreds of fights and experience of hundreds of hours of sparring.  That observation and experience tells us that the throat of the top guy doesn't "just present itself for a strike" and that if you try to engage in a striking contest from the bottom of the mount you will end up getting hurt.
> 
> That is in no way a claim that BJJ is superior for self-defense to whatever art you practice or that choosing to go to the ground in a self-defense situation is a good idea.  It's just a statement about what works if you happen to end up in that particular position.
> 
> So - what _do _you advocate as a first choice self defense technique if you were to end up on the bottom of the mount?



I'm done talking about the throat thing (wish I had never brought it up)......as far as what my first choice of defense is if I end up on the bottom?

I have become extremely good at keeping my body relaxed enough to help me manuever and experience has taught me not to panic. I am going to get hit so my goal is to roll over or roll the attacker over if possible and as quickly as possible. Strength, relaxation and flexibility are my best techniques. When all hell breaks loose you aint got time to look for the perfect grab.


----------



## MJS

Kframe said:


> Ok I have to jump in on Hanzou's side here. Sorry that is not correct at all. I have done BJJ  in my mma class and there is no way you will ever reach my throat. Secondly and this is important, reaching up to strike my eyes or throat or anything else for that matter is 2 things. 1. it is the single most foolish thing you can do and here is the reason. 2 its a gift to the person on top. Go a head reach that hand or 2 up there, makes it REALLY easy to arm bar you. Its a gift to the grappler..  NEVER reach up like that in a ground fight... I was taught the T-rex for a reason..



I remember the first time I did that when I was learning how to grapple.  Both hands went up in an attempt to create some space, and try to get the guy out of the mount, and well....armbar. LOL.  The next time I did that, he moved to the high mount.  Needless to say, I was up the creek without the paddle. LOL.



> I  grow tired of reading and hearing in person from tma artists how they don't need ground grappling they will just use dirty tricks. Sorry that is patently incorrect. THEY DO NOT WORK WITH A SEASONED GRAPPLER!!  Sadly the proof I need is UFC 1-4. Eye gouging and biting and sack grabbing and hair pulling and small joint manipulation were all allowed. NOONE who tried those tactics won. Not one single TMAist won. It was the grapplers.



I hear ya.  As I've said before, I took A LOT of heat on here, when I first joined, from the Kenpo guys, because I was saying that despite Kenpo teaching techniques to defend a takedown, I never really saw any ground fighting.  As I said then, and still say to this day, IMHO, I feel that it's very important, to learn the basics.  True, we're probably not going to face a bunch of evil Gracies', and if we did, we'd probably be helpless anyways, but the basics will certainly help against the 'average Joe' that we could face.  I also like to use the Maurice Smith/Mark Coleman fight in one of the early UFCs.  Mo trained with Frank Shamrock.  IMO, Mo wasn't the best grappler, but despite Mark being a good wrestler, Mo was able to fend off Marks attacks, and use the basics to get back to his feet, where he used his striking, which was his strong point.  He KO'd Mark with a kick to the head.  



> Look, no one here is disputing that a tma is a great thing for self defense on the streets were most of the attackers you will likely face are untrained to poorly trained. Most combat sport athletes that should give TMA worries and nightmares is to busy training for there competition goals  and are generally good people. Getting into fights and pissing contests in bars and on the streets will screw up there dreams.  Permanently. Especially for those with UFC dreams, as they do not tolerate criminals.



Yup!



> For the average TMA they don't need to worry about Rouge BJJ Blackbelts roaming the streets looting and pillaging.(unless they are close to a Loyd Irving training center then watch out)  Though getting tackled  and put into a crappy mount and pounded.  I feel that EVERY Single TMA needs to learn basic mount escape and variations such as the GNP mount escape, and escapes from side and half guard. Plus defenses from  the basic joint attacks.  They need to at least get experience being on the ground in the bottom position. The last thing  a non grounder needs to do is panic and start flailing away. That will sap your energy and you'll be unable to fend off anything.



Amen!  The basics, drilled repeatedly, IMO, will serve someone much better, than if they had nothing at all.  



> In this day and age there is no excuse to not atleast know these very basic ground solutions. NO need to go and simultaneously train to black belt in bjj just to survive a street ground encounter.  It doesn't take that much training time to be prepared for ground street encounters...



Agreed!



> Cant believe im siding with Hanzou...   You know what no im not..  He has no respect for any other martial arts.  The Gracies are big into respect, and they are proponents of respecting all people and styles.  You need to learn respect and stop insulting traditional artists.  You claim to believe in BJJ and the Jiu Jitsu lifestyle, then actually live it and show respect and deciency and be friendly and open to other styles, not bashing them.



LOL...hang on...let me :whip: a few times to put some sense back into you!   Shame on you for siding with him! LOL!  All kidding aside though, once again, I agree.  I've said it hundreds of times...I feel that ALL arts, in some way, shape or form, can benefit from each other.  If I can cross train (which I love to do BTW) with someone, and 'steal' something to make something I do better, hell yeah I'm going to do it!  But no, I certainly don't see a ton of respect towards other arts from him.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Its pretty hard to respect certain TMA styles when they teach their students that they can escape a ground and pound by a seasoned grappler with a throat punch or an eye gouge. I just saw some Ninja guy teach a student some silly eye gouge as a counter to a grappler. I just can't take them seriously because its like they're living in fantasy land.
> 
> The most hilarious thing about all of this is that the escapes to that situation are easy to find, and there's multiple ways to do it. The fact that TMAs aren't teaching simple Bjj escapes just shows that they have their heads in the sand.
> 
> Beyond that, you can train in whatever you like. I respect everyone's right to choose the art that's best for them.



OTOH though, as long as you're not training with those styles, as long as you've got no intention of doing it, then who cares what they do, right?  I guess I'll never understand why people think it's their job to police the MA world.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> There are a number of things that are possible from this position; From the picture it is clear that the mounted man has both arms free so any punches that can be rained down can also be blocked with the forearms (often in the UFC you will see someone raining down punches and the only defence you will see is the flailing of arms), the grappler's wrist can also be grabbed and broken. After grabbing the wrist he can use the legs to topple him over and escape. If the mounted guy wants to strike for the face he would have to bring it closer down (striking there from that position would be unwise) by either grabbing the clothes or the arm and then striking. A bear hand fist or middle knuckle strike to the side of the neck, the temple or the facial nerve under the cheek bone would not take much power to be effective. There is also the possibility of kicking to the back of the head with the shin,instep or ball of the foot or getting the leg around the front and pulling him backwards or kneeing in the kidneys. Nothing from this position would be ideal but there are manyt things that could work. That being said, if you are put in this position then something has already gonea
> terribly wrong.



Or you could bypass all of that nonsense and just do the move in the video I posted. It's easier to accomplish, doesn't require insane amounts of flexibility, and it doesn't leave your head exposed to punches and elbow from above.

Shin kick to the back of the head? :lol:   Is that what TKD is teaching for ground defense these days?


----------



## SENC-33

Hanzou......how many serious altercations have you encountered in your BJJ life? I'm just curious


----------



## MJS

K-man said:


> To be fair we are ranging between professional fighters, highly trained martial artists, not so highly trained martial artists and the Joe Average street thug who might be a seasoned brawler or an untrained guy with too much grog in him.
> 
> Now as was said 50 pages back, it is virtually impossible to compare TMAs with MMAs. For 40 pages Hanzou has been bitching because TMAs don't compete in competition.



Agreed!  



> But let's look at this last little bit of grappling. Escaping the mount is standard fare for basic grapplers. I was taught not to allow the guy on top to get the high mount in the first place. To use that as an example of why someone can't grab your throat or gouge your eyes is like me saying that you are not going to be able to do much when I have you in a good rear naked choke. The fight was really over before that time. Having said that, it is still possible for a trained person to escape a rear naked choke and it is still possible for a trained person to escape a high mount.



I was taught not to allow the top guy to get that high up as well.    Like I said, escape isn't impossible from that position, obviously much more difficult than the regular mount, but for someone with no ground exp., well, that's why I said that they better hope luck is on their side.  Regardless of the position, high mount or when they're on your stomach, even if the bottom guy could reach the face, he's not going to have the power that the top guy will.  



> So let's start comparing apples with apples. It makes no sense to compare beginners with advanced grapplers or vice versa. As I said from page one, you will never be able to compare MMA with TMA but if you are reasonably trained in either discipline both are practical for self defence. But don't for one moment believe TMAs don't possess basic grappling skills.
> :asian:



Oh I'm sure they do.   For myself though, I like to test my stuff out with those that specialize in a certain area.  If I can improve on a Kenpo takedown defense, by having a grappler do the takedown, well, IMO, I just made myself that much better.  Is this a requirement of the TMAs or anyone for that matter?  Of course not.  It's just something that I like to do.  A bit of a reality check, so to speak.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> OTOH though, as long as you're not training with those styles, as long as you've got no intention of doing it, then who cares what they do, right?  I guess I'll never understand why people think it's their job to police the MA world.



Because its wrong, that's why. It just smacks of some TMA instructor believing their art is "complete" and has all the answers instead of simply incorporating an ability outside his art that is simpler and more effective. That is a very dangerous and counterintuitive mindset to have.

You think I'm not going to use the front cut takedown because it comes from Kung Fu?

Nope! It's an awesome takedown, and I'm sharing it with my Bjj brothers and sisters.


----------



## MJS

Kframe said:


> Umm sorry but no.  In my quest to find the tma for me after my mma closed, I visited nearly 20 of them in a 20 minute drive and NONE of them did any form of ground grappling.  If its not being practiced at least once or twice a week, then its not seriously being taught and not benefiting then its not on the syllabus.
> 
> Were in goju or shorin or Ishhin ryu is the ground fighting syllabus? Were in TKD? (ATA has a ground grappling course. No clue how crappy or not it is)  Were in Muay thai?
> 
> Sorry Unless it is consistently taught every week for more then 10 minutes at a time it is not really being trained.
> 
> Im not sure how you can make that statement with a straight face and actually mean it.  IF tma  had  a valid ground syllabus then this whole thread would never exist...



Well, this is what I was thinking, when I wasn't seeing it in Kenpo.  I've had some Kenpo guys tell me that what you can do standing, you should be able to apply on the ground.  Hmm...ok, well, if you say so, but personally, I'd much rather spend the time learning an actual proven escape, rather than trying to make something I do standing, work while laying down.  Not saying you can't add in bits and pieces, but you know what I mean.


----------



## MJS

Chris Parker said:


> ... less so with this. Look, "dirty tricks" aren't an instant cure-all, they're not magic touch techniques, but they can give an edge. Thing is, they need to be done in conjunction with other things. Oh, and the first UFC's (well, any competitive context) isn't really an accurate analogue of a self defence situation at all, on a number of levels.... one of which is what effect different things/actions can have. Believe it or not, some things that don't work in competitive environments work very well out of them... and vice versa.
> 
> Oh, and the "grapplers" were very much single-art sports-TMAists, for the record.



I agree Chris.  IMO though, I think one of the biggest problems, is when people talk about those 'dirty tricks' as if they are in fact the saving grace.  Hey, I came from a Kenpo background, where every tech in the system has those 'dirty tricks' in them.  And yes, I'm all for using them, providing they're used in the context that you mentioned above.


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Because its wrong, that's why. It just smacks of some TMA instructor believing their art is "complete" and has all the answers instead of simply incorporating an ability outside his art that is simpler and more effective. That is a very dangerous and counterintuitive mindset to have.



Well, be that as it may, don't you think that your time would be better spent putting in the blood, sweat and tears by training, rather than worrying what the school down the road is doing?  



> You think I'm not going to use the front cut takedown because it comes from Kung Fu?
> 
> Nope! It's an awesome takedown, and I'm sharing it with my Bjj brothers and sisters.



LMFAO!!  Well, considering that you've pretty much bashed the hell out of every TMA out there, I'd find what you just said, hard to believe, but if you say so....


----------



## ballen0351

Kframe said:


> Please inform me Ballen. If it is taught why save it for high ranking belts? That should be in the syllabus from the beginning not at the end were it does no good.   I have done more then enough internet research and talking with various karateka in real life to make my assertion..


That's like asking why are some katas taught to only black belts and some taught to white belts

Beginners need to learn basics.  There are grappling techniques in the more advanced Kara and Bunkai.


----------



## K-man

MJS said:


> Oh I'm sure they do.   For myself though, I like to test my stuff out with those that specialize in a certain area.  If I can improve on a Kenpo takedown defense, by having a grappler do the takedown, well, IMO, I just made myself that much better.  Is this a requirement of the TMAs or anyone for that matter?  Of course not.  It's just something that I like to do.  A bit of a reality check, so to speak.


Exactly. One of my training partners is a BJJ black belt and he also trains security guards. If I need to know something I just need to ask. He soon let's me know if something won't be effective and that doesn't just apply to ground work.


----------



## SENC-33

K-man said:


> Exactly. One of my training partners is a BJJ black belt and he also trains security guards. If I need to know something I just need to ask. He soon let's me know if something won't be effective and that doesn't just apply to ground work.



Training with other backgrounds is paramount IMO.....especially when it comes to how they move. I get asked all the time to stop in at different gyms to give them some exposure to Systema.


----------



## K-man

SENC-33 said:


> Training with other backgrounds is paramount IMO.....especially when it comes to how they move. I get asked all the time to stop in at different gyms to give them some exposure to Systema.


When I was in Toronto a few years back I visited Vladimir Vasiliev's school. Unfortunately he was in the US conducting a seminar but it was interesting to train there nevertheless. Another thread talks of _principles_ and the principles of Systema apply right across the board. I've also been to seminars by Alex Kostic. Interesting stuff.


----------



## SENC-33

K-man said:


> When I was in Toronto a few years back I visited Vladimir Vasiliev's school. Unfortunately he was in the US conducting a seminar but it was interesting to train there nevertheless. Another thread talks of _principles_ and the principles of Systema apply right across the board. I've also been to seminars by Alex Kostic. Interesting stuff.



Alex is a very good instructor as well.......Kevin Secours is the best IMO and Val Riazanov. Great teachers!


----------



## SENC-33

K-man said:


> When I was in Toronto a few years back I visited Vladimir Vasiliev's school. Unfortunately he was in the US conducting a seminar but it was interesting to train there nevertheless. Another thread talks of _principles_ and the principles of Systema apply right across the board. I've also been to seminars by Alex Kostic. Interesting stuff.



I assume you were lucky enough to experience Alex "systema" punch? What was your initial reaction?


----------



## K-man

SENC-33 said:


> I assume you were lucky enough to experience Alex "systema" punch? What was your initial reaction?


I felt it for about 10 minutes.


----------



## Hanzou

MJS said:


> Well, be that as it may, don't you think that your time would be better spent putting in the blood, sweat and tears by training, rather than worrying what the school down the road is doing?



Sure, but we're discussing style differences here. IRL, I could care less if people are getting taught crazy things.



> LMFAO!!  Well, considering that you've pretty much bashed the hell out of every TMA out there, I'd find what you just said, hard to believe, but if you say so....



There's some effective stuff in CMA. It's not much, but it's there.


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> There are a number of things that are possible from this position; From the picture it is clear that the mounted man has both arms free so any punches that can be rained down can also be blocked with the forearms (often in the UFC you will see someone raining down punches and the only defence you will see is the flailing of arms), the grappler's wrist can also be grabbed and broken. After grabbing the wrist he can use the legs to topple him over and escape. If the mounted guy wants to strike for the face he would have to bring it closer down (striking there from that position would be unwise) by either grabbing the clothes or the arm and then striking. A bear hand fist or middle knuckle strike to the side of the neck, the temple or the facial nerve under the cheek bone would not take much power to be effective. There is also the possibility of kicking to the back of the head with the shin,instep or ball of the foot or getting the leg around the front and pulling him backwards or kneeing in the kidneys. Nothing from this position would be ideal but there are manyt things that could work. That being said, if you are put in this position then something has already gone terribly wrong.



There are a number of things that can be done.  That's true.  

But Not having been in this position leads to unrealistic ideas like being able to gouge the eyes, kick the back of the head, reach the neck, temple or face, or kneeing the kidney with enough force to do anything at all.  That's fantasy. 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> I'm done talking about the throat thing (wish I had never brought it up)......as far as what my first choice of defense is if I end up on the bottom?
> 
> I have become extremely good at keeping my body relaxed enough to help me manuever and experience has taught me not to panic. I am going to get hit so my goal is to roll over or roll the attacker over if possible and as quickly as possible. Strength, relaxation and flexibility are my best techniques. When all hell breaks loose you aint got time to look for the perfect grab.



If you try to roll over, I will let you and thank you for giving me your back so that I can safely choke you without exposing my eyes to deadly gouging.

Here's the thing.  Is Bjj the be all and end all?  No.  But the obvious arguments from ignorance undermine your position, even from guys like me who are inclined to agree with you.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> Sure, but we're discussing style differences here. IRL, I could care less if people are getting taught crazy things.



Well, yes, that is what we're discussing...MMA vs. TMA.  My point was simply...who cares if a particular TMA is ineffective or not?  If you're not currently training in it, and you have no plans to train in it, why worry what they're doing?  You're happy with BJJ and whatever else you may be doing, so.....





> There's some effective stuff in CMA. It's not much, but it's there.



Ok


----------



## SENC-33

Steve said:


> If you try to roll over, I will let you and thank you for giving me your back so that I can safely choke you without exposing my eyes to deadly gouging.
> 
> Here's the thing.  Is Bjj the be all and end all?  No.  But the obvious arguments from ignorance undermine your position, even from guys like me who are inclined to agree with you.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD



I don't know what to say. If I am ever in the position of having a super human bjj master on top of me pounding my brains in ill remember this advice. Do you guys ever leave the safety of a mat? You ever train on pavement or gravel or in the woods in the brush? How bout in water? When you are in a situation of survival looking pretty isn't your objective.


----------



## Jaeimseu

Steve said:


> If you try to roll over, I will let you and thank you for giving me your back so that I can safely choke you without exposing my eyes to deadly gouging.
> 
> Here's the thing.  Is Bjj the be all and end all?  No.  But the obvious arguments from ignorance undermine your position, even from guys like me who are inclined to agree with you.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD





SENC-33 said:


> I don't know what to say. If I am ever in the position of having a super human bjj master on top of me pounding my brains in ill remember this advice. Do you guys ever leave the safety of a mat? You ever train on pavement or gravel or in the woods in the brush? How bout in water? When you are in a situation of survival looking pretty isn't your objective.



Who said anything about looking pretty? What are you talking about here? Are we breaking it down to separate debates? TMA vs MMA on pavement? On gravel? In the woods? In water?

I think Steve's point (he can correct me if I'm wrong) was that many of the defenses you brought up weren't realistic, not that BJJ is pretty.

Also, although I'm not a BJJ practitioner, I've dabbled enough to know that you don't need to be a "super human BJJ master" to make things work, especially if your opponent doesn't know how to defend, and maybe even more especially, if your opponent doesn't know how to defend, but is convinced he does.

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk


----------



## SENC-33

Jaeimseu said:


> Who said anything about looking pretty? What are you talking about here? Are we breaking it down to separate debates? TMA vs MMA on pavement? On gravel? In the woods? In water?
> 
> I think Steve's point (he can correct me if I'm wrong) was that many of the defenses you brought up weren't realistic, not that BJJ is pretty.
> 
> Also, although I'm not a BJJ practitioner, I've dabbled enough to know that you don't need to be a "super human BJJ master" to make things work, especially if your opponent doesn't know how to defend, and maybe even more especially, if your opponent doesn't know how to defend, but is convinced he does.
> 
> Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk



My point exactly! You don't have to be a bjj master to make it work in "real life".


----------



## K-man

SENC-33 said:


> My point exactly! You don't have to be a bjj master to make it work in "real life".


OK. I think I owe everyone here an apology. I am obviously totally wrong in my assumption that I train a TMA. I am thoroughly confused and maybe someone on the forum can tell me what I am doing wrong. I would like to describe our training session from tonight. Almost all my high ranked guys were away so it left me carrying the can, so to speak.

We started  out with a bit of a warm up and then a bit of sticky hands, like the Kung Fu guys do but with a little bit of Chi Na for good measure, not to mention the application of some locks and holds. Some of the guys got some sore fingers but nothing broke that I was aware of. Then I thought I should teach some basics because we don't do as much of that as we should. To much reality based stuff usually. I started out teaching all the useless stances that you find in our Goju system. Well, not quite all but half a dozen or so. You know the ones, totally impractical for self defence but part of the fluff you need in TMA to get your next belt. 

Then I got the guys to move forward in those stupid stances, not punching, just hands up in the ready position. Then we just stood around for a while discussing where in the kata, you know that other useless fluff you need for grading, you would find those stances and how did they work. 

Well we explored how they could all be used to get your opponent to the ground, mostly variations of hip throws. Funny thing was the person being thrown almost always ended up in a choke or potential neck break. Must have just been a coincidence I know but surprising just the same. Seeing our opponent was now on the ground I thought of Hanzou, you know, what would a top MMA fighter do in this situation. So I told the guys just to jump on top of the guy on the ground and pretend to punch the crap out of him. That was going well but I started to feel really sorry for the guy on the bottom. I got him to try and get away, you know what I mean, escaping the mount. Well my guys don't know a lot so often they were too high up on the chest so I had to get them to escape the high mount too. Some rolled over and let the top guy get a choke on. Bugger! It was getting too much so we had to do a bit on escaping from rear naked chokes as well. Others managed to roll their opponent over but they ended up in a type of scissor lock. I think the grappling guys call it 'guard'. Of course by now I am totally out of my tree. Not only had we escaped from the mount and the rear naked choke we had to pass the guard too. 

After all this exertion on the ground I thought, in for a penny, in for a pound and got the guys to start applying various other chokes from the standing position because that was the position they all seemed to end up in from the stupid kata moves we had been practising. Again it's not nice seeing these young guys struggling to breathe so we had to practise escaping from those as well. I'm almost embarrassed to admit, I showed the guys that they could use their teeth. Well we played around for a bit and played with some nasty vital points on the head. Surprising really how much a knuckle in the right place can almost cause paralysis! We call it Kyusho. 

By this time 2 hours had passed and we hadn't done anything with weapons so I grabbed a couple of knives and away we went again. I know this isn't at all traditional but a lot of the moves were very similar to the moves in our kata. What a coincidence!  Half an hour later and time was up. Really just another day at the office. 

I do feel really bad. We didn't have time for any kata tonight and we didn't get a chance to practise the bunkai. What am I doing wrong? :idunno:


----------



## Kframe

SENC-33 said:


> I don't know what to say. If I am ever in the position of having a super human bjj master on top of me pounding my brains in ill remember this advice. Do you guys ever leave the safety of a mat? You ever train on pavement or gravel or in the woods in the brush? How bout in water? When you are in a situation of survival looking pretty isn't your objective.



It doesn't take a super bjj artist to do it, any average bjj could.

  I think that Ryan Halls encounter on the streets more the proves that bjj is up to the task of dealing with a street encounter. You do realize that most good bjj schools teach a mix of good take downs  that threaten your knees?(the slt/dlt are not the only ones)  Many schools that I train at also teach good break falling as well.  Not sure were the pavement thing comes from. Honestly it means nothing in the grand scheme of things.  The only things I don't see working well for bjj on pavement are single and double leg take downs that commit the knee to hitting the mat/ground(can be modified to not do this, so it is still a G2G move). The other thing I see is if the artist has the presence of mind to not stay there for very long. IE take them down and snap it then get back to feet.


----------



## SENC-33

All my days bouncing, working the door and event security I have seen countless altercations end up on the ground. Most times my involvement means breaking the altercation up and eviction of the parties involved; sometimes I was the one they were having a go at. In all those years I can't remember a single time when there was an armbar or fight ending choke applied. You couldn't label it anything other than adrenaline and attitude.

I know and train with many grapplers of differing backgrounds; some of them worked and continue to work various security jobs with me. Not a single one of them has ever put somebody in an armbar or even mounted a guy ground and pound style that I have witnessed. Chokes or locks from a side mount or sprawl are pretty much all I have seen. Just my experience but I have yet to witness any gracie style grappling outside of a gym or on TV.


----------



## Kframe

That sounds like a Amazingly fun class!  Im telling you, if there were more Karate teachers that put in quality class's like you and the others here do, tma would get more respect.  In my neck of the woods is literally ALL mcdojo karate.  Most  of it started by some guy whose actually training lineage cant even be proven yet he has a huge empire of schools... I wont train in those schools.  

I don't really see were a tma is in trouble with a BJJ/mma. Its the rules that screw tma. Not the dirty trick crap either. Im talking about no side kick/side stomp kick to the knees, no attacks to the front of the knees. I have been watching a lot of tma vs mma on you tube. Outside of those that didn't see a DLT/SLT coming and ate it, most of them ended up engaged in a clinch fight. Now they did ok there but were unable to strike at the knees, which are very very vulnerable in the clinch, despite what mma will tell you. 

Of course then the inevitable happens and they go down and die. I think tma need to work a little  more on striking from the clinch and using some of those uselessly fluffy low and wide stances for a better base in the clinch.  IF tma and by that I mean the standard fare karate and tkd and what not, can get the clinch take down defense game dialed in, they stand a great chance.. 



K-man said:


> OK. I think I owe everyone here an apology. I am obviously totally wrong in my assumption that I train a TMA. I am thoroughly confused and maybe someone on the forum can tell me what I am doing wrong. I would like to describe our training session from tonight. Almost all my high ranked guys were away so it left me carrying the can, so to speak.
> 
> We started  out with a bit of a warm up and then a bit of sticky hands, like the Kung Fu guys do but with a little bit of Chi Na for good measure, not to mention the application of some locks and holds. Some of the guys got some sore fingers but nothing broke that I was aware of. Then I thought I should teach some basics because we don't do as much of that as we should. To much reality based stuff usually. I started out teaching all the useless stances that you find in our Goju system. Well, not quite all but half a dozen or so. You know the ones, totally impractical for self defence but part of the fluff you need in TMA to get your next belt.
> 
> Then I got the guys to move forward in those stupid stances, not punching, just hands up in the ready position. Then we just stood around for a while discussing where in the kata, you know that other useless fluff you need for grading, you would find those stances and how did they work.
> 
> Well we explored how they could all be used to get your opponent to the ground, mostly variations of hip throws. Funny thing was the person being thrown almost always ended up in a choke or potential neck break. Must have just been a coincidence I know but surprising just the same. Seeing our opponent was now on the ground I thought of Hanzou, you know, what would a top MMA fighter do in this situation. So I told the guys just to jump on top of the guy on the ground and pretend to punch the crap out of him. That was going well but I started to feel really sorry for the guy on the bottom. I got him to try and get away, you know what I mean, escaping the mount. Well my guys don't know a lot so often they were too high up on the chest so I had to get them to escape the high mount too. Some rolled over and let the top guy get a choke on. Bugger! It was getting too much so we had to do a bit on escaping from rear naked chokes as well. Others managed to roll their opponent over but they ended up in a type of scissor lock. I think the grappling guys call it 'guard'. Of course by now I am totally out of my tree. Not only had we escaped from the mount and the rear naked choke we had to pass the guard too.
> 
> After all this exertion on the ground I thought, in for a penny, in for a pound and got the guys to start applying various other chokes from the standing position because that was the position they all seemed to end up in from the stupid kata moves we had been practising. Again it's not nice seeing these young guys struggling to breathe so we had to practise escaping from those as well. I'm almost embarrassed to admit, I showed the guys that they could use their teeth. Well we played around for a bit and played with some nasty vital points on the head. Surprising really how much a knuckle in the right place can almost cause paralysis! We call it Kyusho.
> 
> By this time 2 hours had passed and we hadn't done anything with weapons so I grabbed a couple of knives and away we went again. I know this isn't at all traditional but a lot of the moves were very similar to the moves in our kata. What a coincidence!  Half an hour later and time was up. Really just another day at the office.
> 
> I do feel really bad. We didn't have time for any kata tonight and we didn't get a chance to practise the bunkai. What am I doing wrong? :idunno:


----------



## SENC-33

Kframe said:


> It doesn't take a super bjj artist to do it, any average bjj could.
> 
> I think that Ryan Halls encounter on the streets more the proves that bjj is up to the task of dealing with a street encounter. You do realize that most good bjj schools teach a mix of good take downs  that threaten your knees?(the slt/dlt are not the only ones)  Many schools that I train at also teach good break falling as well.  Not sure were the pavement thing comes from. Honestly it means nothing in the grand scheme of things.  The only things I don't see working well for bjj on pavement are single and double leg take downs that commit the knee to hitting the mat/ground(can be modified to not do this, so it is still a G2G move). The other thing I see is if the artist has the presence of mind to not stay there for very long. IE take them down and snap it then get back to feet.



Are you referring to the video where he tackled a drunk and sat on him


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> I don't know what to say. If I am ever in the position of having a super human bjj master on top of me pounding my brains in ill remember this advice. Do you guys ever leave the safety of a mat? You ever train on pavement or gravel or in the woods in the brush? How bout in water? When you are in a situation of survival looking pretty isn't your objective.



See.  This is the problem.  You think this is about leaving the mats or being super human.   It's like grappling 101.  The things you're talking about are as fundamental as a break fall or forward roll. And while, as I said, I'm inclined to agree that self defense is different from Bjj training, it's hard to support you guys when it is so clear that you have no idea what Bjj is.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> Do you guys ever leave the safety of a mat? You ever train on pavement or gravel or in the woods in the brush? How bout in water? When you are in a situation of survival looking pretty isn't your objective.



I don't know about most BJJ practitioners, but I have.  (Not all the time, but I've done it.)  None of those environments will make your proposed escapes work any better.  We're not concerned about looking pretty.  We're concerned about what works.  The escapes you are suggesting will get you hurt against someone who has even a little bit of experience on the ground, let alone a "superhuman BJJ practitioner."




			
				SENC-33 said:
			
		

> All my days bouncing, working the door and event security I have seen countless altercations end up on the ground. Most times my involvement means breaking the altercation up and eviction of the parties involved; sometimes I was the one they were having a go at. In all those years I can't remember a single time when there was an armbar or fight ending choke applied. You couldn't label it anything other than adrenaline and attitude.
> 
> I know and train with many grapplers of differing backgrounds; some of them worked and continue to work various security jobs with me. Not a single one of them has ever put somebody in an armbar or even mounted a guy ground and pound style that I have witnessed. Chokes or locks from a side mount or sprawl are pretty much all I have seen. Just my experience but I have yet to witness any gracie style grappling outside of a gym or on TV.



This doesn't surprise me.  The drunks getting into fights don't know anything about jiu-jitsu and the experienced grapplers working security know that ground & pound or mounted armlocks aren't the appropriate tools for a bouncer.

Anyway, it seems that you continue miss the point that I (and Steve and others) am making.  I'm *not *saying that BJJ is better than your art (or any other art).  I'm *not *saying that I could beat you in a fight.  I'm *not *saying that anyone should ever deliberately choose to fight on the ground.  I *am *saying that if you were to somehow end up on the ground on the bottom of the mount in a real fight, then the defenses you suggest are not effective.  Against someone with any real skill in the ground game they have zero chance of working.  Against an opponent who doesn't know what he's doing, there is a small chance that they might work but a much larger chance that you will end up in the hospital with a concussion.  I'm saying that there are other techniques which offer a much greater chance of escaping without injury to yourself.  If you choose not to learn those techniques, that's your own business, but please don't encourage anyone else to get hurt by advocating for ineffective techniques from that position.


----------



## Steve

Tony Dismukes said:


> I don't know about most BJJ practitioners, but I have.  (Not all the time, but I've done it.)  None of those environments will make your proposed escapes work any better.  We're not concerned about looking pretty.  We're concerned about what works.  The escapes you are suggesting will get you hurt against someone who has even a little bit of experience on the ground, let alone a "superhuman BJJ practitioner."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This doesn't surprise me.  The drunks getting into fights don't know anything about jiu-jitsu and the experienced grapplers working security know that ground & pound or mounted armlocks aren't the appropriate tools for a bouncer.
> 
> Anyway, it seems that you continue miss the point that I (and Steve and others) am making.  I'm *not *saying that BJJ is better than your art (or any other art).  I'm *not *saying that I could beat you in a fight.  I'm *not *saying that anyone should ever deliberately choose to fight on the ground.  I *am *saying that if you were to somehow end up on the ground on the bottom of the mount in a real fight, then the defenses you suggest are not effective.  Against someone with any real skill in the ground game they have zero chance of working.  Against an opponent who doesn't know what he's doing, there is a small chance that they might work but a much larger chance that you will end up in the hospital with a concussion.  I'm saying that there are other techniques which offer a much greater chance of escaping without injury to yourself.  If you choose not to learn those techniques, that's your own business, but please don't encourage anyone else to get hurt by advocating for ineffective techniques from that position.



Yes.  Very well put.  Some of the proposed defenses to mount are alarmingly bad ideas against anyone, but particularly against someone with a little training.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## SENC-33

Tony Dismukes said:


> I don't know about most BJJ practitioners, but I have.  (Not all the time, but I've done it.)  None of those environments will make your proposed escapes work any better.  We're not concerned about looking pretty.  We're concerned about what works.  The escapes you are suggesting will get you hurt against someone who has even a little bit of experience on the ground, let alone a "superhuman BJJ practitioner."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This doesn't surprise me.  The drunks getting into fights don't know anything about jiu-jitsu and the experienced grapplers working security know that ground & pound or mounted armlocks aren't the appropriate tools for a bouncer.
> 
> Anyway, it seems that you continue miss the point that I (and Steve and others) am making.  I'm *not *saying that BJJ is better than your art (or any other art).  I'm *not *saying that I could beat you in a fight.  I'm *not *saying that anyone should ever deliberately choose to fight on the ground.  I *am *saying that if you were to somehow end up on the ground on the bottom of the mount in a real fight, then the defenses you suggest are not effective.  Against someone with any real skill in the ground game they have zero chance of working.  Against an opponent who doesn't know what he's doing, there is a small chance that they might work but a much larger chance that you will end up in the hospital with a concussion.  I'm saying that there are other techniques which offer a much greater chance of escaping without injury to yourself.  If you choose not to learn those techniques, that's your own business, but please don't encourage anyone else to get hurt by advocating for ineffective techniques from that position.



Yes there are tons of techniques that could work. I could try lots of really cool techniques to reverse a mount. Is it guarenteed to work when my well being is at stake in a potentially hostile situation? HELL NO......IF you get me on my back I am going to immediately try to roll over and get back to my feet because that is naturally what my body tells me to do. If you think you can easily choke me out because I am in what you think is a good position good luck to you. I will be kicking, bucking, wiggling, throwing elbows, turning, whatever I have to do to survive and escape.  If you can get a good hold on me, maintain that hold and choke me out when my brain is in survival mode you are one hell of a man. What I encourage people I train to do is survive and use their instincts they were born with. You may not agree with that approach but in my mind teaching somebody to rely on techniques practiced on a mat in a controlled environment is just as foolish. IF you ever find yourself in a situation with multiple people involved and you get your skull kicked in while performing a rear naked choke maybe you will have time to reflect on this difference of opinion while YOU are recovering in the hospital


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Yes there are tons of techniques that could work. I could try lots of really cool techniques to reverse a mount. Is it guarenteed to work when my well being is at stake in a potentially hostile situation? HELL NO......IF you get me on my back I am going to immediately try to roll over and get back to my feet because that is naturally what my body tells me to do. If you think you can easily choke me out because I am in what you think is a good position good luck to you. I will be kicking, bucking, wiggling, throwing elbows, turning, whatever I have to do to survive and escape.  If you can get a good hold on me, maintain that hold and choke me out when my brain is in survival mode you are one hell of a man. What I encourage people I train to do is survive and use their instincts they were born with. You may not agree with that approach but in my mind teaching somebody to rely on techniques practiced on a mat in a controlled environment is just as foolish. IF you ever find yourself in a situation with multiple people involved and you get your skull kicked in while performing a rear naked choke maybe you will have time to reflect on this difference of opinion while YOU are recovering in the hospital


Everything you say is true if both people are completely incompetent on the ground.  But, if the person you're giving a ride to has more than 6 months to a year training 3 or more times per week at the average grappling school, your instincts are only going to put you in more danger.  

Yes.  We are saying that there are tons of training that will work.  Bucking, rolling, kicking, wiggling and throwing elbows are kind of ridiculous, to the point where I'd even be leery of them working on an untrained person, unless you have a significant size or strength advantage.  I give you less than 60 seconds of bucking, kicking, or wiggling before all you're doing is gassing and panting and have rendered yourself completely helpless.  In BJJ, we call that spazzing, and it's what every amped up, athletic, ego driven, tough guy does the first time they panic.  And they panic because they realize that all of the things they SAID they'd do don't work.  

In fact, one of the first things I share with new white belts is that the first thing they will learn is that their instincts suck.  

Adding a billion more what if's to the situation don't change any of the above points, because we can both play that game.  What if I'm the one with friends?  I can take you to the ground where you're defenseless, and MY friends will kick you in the head.  You will be helpless.  What if I'm the one with the knife?  What if I'm on top and you're the one who's being ground into the rocks?  What ifs work both ways and we can play that game ad infinitum.  

Once again, I and several others haven't said that BJJ is the greatest martial art ever.  It is what it is, and while I agree that self defense is something else, and that staying on the ground in a fight is a bad idea, that's philosophy.  And philosophically, we agree.  

I don't know who you are, but I'm willing to accept at face value that you have experience as a bouncer.  But none of that changes the points made above.  You have wacky ideas about BJJ.  That's just all there is to it.  And the more you say, the more clear this becomes.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> Yes there are tons of techniques that could work. I could try lots of really cool techniques to reverse a mount. Is it guarenteed to work when my well being is at stake in a potentially hostile situation? HELL NO



Quite correct.  No technique is guaranteed to work all the time, especially when you are starting out in a bad situation.  Some techniques have a much higher percentage chance of working than others.  



SENC-33 said:


> IF you get me on my back I am going to immediately try to roll over and get back to my feet because that is naturally what my body tells me to do. ... What I encourage people I train to do is survive and use their instincts they were born with.



 A huge part of what made the Gracie family so successful for decades in challenge matches was the fact that most people do not have good natural instincts for how to defend themselves on the ground.



SENC-33 said:


> You may not agree with that approach but in my mind teaching somebody to rely on techniques practiced on a mat in a controlled environment is just as foolish.



You don't train in a controlled environment?  Really?  You tell your students to forget about technique and go crazy and beat each other down for real?  Somehow I'm skeptical.



SENC-33 said:


> If you think you can easily choke me out because I am in what you think is a good position good luck to you. I will be kicking, bucking, wiggling, throwing elbows, turning, whatever I have to do to survive and escape.  If you can get a good hold on me, maintain that hold and choke me out when my brain is in survival mode you are one hell of a man.



Been there, done that.  Seen lots of other people do it too.  Now - was anyone's life really on the line?  Nope.  My training partners know that I will let go when they tap.  I suppose you could argue that even though your approach doesn't work in a training situation or in a challenge match, it will work in a life-or-death situation because your adrenaline will magically make you impossible to choke.  That seems like a risky proposition to me.  

Let's imagine I was discussing standup technique with a good boxer or karateka and they told me to keep my hands up, my elbows in and my chin down while striking.  Let's say I were to respond by saying "_If you think you can easily punch me out because I am in what you think is a good position good luck to you. I will be kicking, ducking, wiggling, throwing elbows, turning, whatever I have to do to survive and escape.  If you can land a good strike on me and knock me out when my brain is in survival mode you are one hell of a man._"  What do you suppose the experienced striker would think of me at that point?



SENC-33 said:


> IF you ever find yourself in a situation with multiple people involved and you get your skull kicked in while performing a rear naked choke maybe you will have time to reflect on this difference of opinion while YOU are recovering in the hospital



See, this is what I meant when I pointed out that you didn't seem to be getting the point of what I was saying.  That sentence would be a perfectly good argument if I was advocating going to the ground and choking someone in a multiple opponent situation.  It has absolutely nothing to do with a discussion of what you should do if you are the person who has been taken down and is mounted.  I think we agree that in that situation you would want to escape the mount and get back to your feet as quickly as possible (especially if the attacker's friends are getting ready to kick your head in).  Where we disagree is one the safest and most reliable methods to do so.  You apparently want to abandon any sort of actual technique and just go on natural instinct.  I'd prefer to go with what I've seen work time and time again.

Out of curiosity, do you advocate just going on pure natural survival instinct in all combat situations or just on the ground?


----------



## Steve

Tony Dismukes said:


> Out of curiosity, do you advocate just going on pure natural survival instinct in all combat situations or just on the ground?


Excellent question.


----------



## Koshiki

Kframe said:


> Umm sorry but no.  In my quest to find the tma for me after my mma closed, I visited nearly 20 of them in a 20 minute drive and NONE of them did any form of ground grappling.  If its not being practiced at least once or twice a week, then its not seriously being taught and not benefiting then its not on the syllabus.
> 
> Were in goju or shorin or Ishhin ryu is the ground fighting syllabus? Were in TKD? (ATA has a ground grappling course. No clue how crappy or not it is)  Were in Muay thai?
> 
> Sorry Unless it is consistently taught every week for more then 10 minutes at a time it is not really being trained.
> 
> Im not sure how you can make that statement with a straight face and actually mean it.  IF tma  had  a valid ground syllabus then this whole thread would never exist...



My TKD system spends a great deal of time dealing with ground oriented stuff. For starters, if you train pre-sport TKD, it seems like pretty much everything ends with one or the other guy on the ground. Granted, that's not ground fighting.

Fortunately, we spend time on that too. It's not ground fighting training, though, it's how-to-not-ground fight training. And not eye gouging and hair pulling, but bridging and sweeping and yes, even barring and locking. We have a set of 10 sets of 10 "self-defense" techniques, which are really just short-cuts around bunkai straight to application to get people thinking. There are three sets against stand up hand strikes. One set against kicks. There's a set against stand up body grabs and chokes, etc. There's a set wherin you are on the ground with a standing attacker, and there are two sets where both you and the attacker are on the ground. Then there's also a seated in a chair set, a trapped against a wall set, and a knife survival set.

You know where all the ground stuff comes from. Basically BJJ and related approaches. TKD lacks it, TKD needs it, TKD should learn it from the people who do it, and BJJ guys do it best. Some of the stuff we do is modified, and it's definitely cherry-picked. For example, we almost never do the the standard legs across the body, between the leg arm bar. If we're doing that, it's one leg across the throat, one bent and tucked in the arm pit, arm barred across the bent shin or over the throat-leg, from that position, you can drop and stand immediately, with no untangling. But it's all borrowed from ground fighters. Why? Because you learn from the people who do it best!

There are differences, though, for us, having someone in guard is NOT a good place to be. It's just another place to learn to get out of and back on your feet. Hanging out there is a no no, for us.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> I believe when K-man said, "TMAs don't possess basic grappling skills." He means TMA may have "stand up grappling" but don't have "ground skill grappling". I have trained TCMA all my life and there is no shame for me to admit that TCMA has no ground skill. TCMA has the ground skill that when you take your opponent down, you get into full mount or side mount as shown in the following clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But if a TCMA guy was thrown down and be on the bottom, the TCMA guy will have no skill to reverse the bottom position back to the top position. This is why to be able to obtain that skill from BJJ is always a good idea.



At our school, to pass high rank tests, you have to be able to get out of a high mount GnP, with full resistance. Usually a much bigger dude. No, 95% of all fights don't "go to the ground" in the sense of sustained ground grappling, but if you're there, you better learn how to get out of there, if you're touting your system as self-defense. And BJJ guys are the guys to learn from!

On a side note, a BJJ school just moved in RIGHT NEXT DOOR to my old TKD school. Some of the students there are actually trained in our system as well. I'm hoping they start visiting door to door. Could be fabulous for both schools.


----------



## SENC-33

Steve and Tony

If you were giving a seminar to a group of people on ground self defense (with zero experience in anything) and you had 3 hours to instruct them on what to do in the case that they were attacked and taken to the ground by a BJJ grappler, what would you teach them? Would you teach them a couple BJJ techniques and send them on their way hoping for the best? Would you teach them to prey to god and hope everything turns out ok? Or would you teach them to scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them? I'm talking a group of strangers with no training that will go out into the world with what you have taught them in 3 hours and never step foot in a dojo again.


----------



## SENC-33

Tony Dismukes said:


> Out of curiosity, do you advocate just going on pure natural survival instinct in all combat situations or just on the ground?



Survival instinct factors into any situation when you are being threatened (atleast it does with me). Is it nice to be able to strike effectively? YES.....Good to be able to handle a ground situation? YES. Good to be able control your emotions and adrenaline without panicking? YES. What if you had no training at all, no means to escape and your wife and kids with you facing an attacker. What would you do? You would fight for your life and that of your family. You ingrain that survival mentality into your self defense training and some grappler on top of you isn't going to shake you a hell of difference. Sorry but this is just how I see it......


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Steve and Tony
> 
> If you were giving a seminar to a group of people on ground self defense (with zero experience in anything) and you had 3 hours to instruct them on what to do in the case that they were attacked and taken to the ground by a BJJ grappler, what would you teach them? Would you teach them a couple BJJ techniques and send them on their way hoping for the best? Would you teach them to prey to god and hope everything turns out ok? Or would you teach them to scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them? I'm talking a group of strangers with no training that will go out into the world with what you have taught them in 3 hours and never step foot in a dojo again.


I would teach them high percentage techniques that will be most likely to work under stress, are simple and easy to practice.   Wouldn't you?  

Seems to me that saying, "If your life is in danger, scrap and fight for your lives with everything you have inside you," takes about 10 seconds to "teach."  Even were I to lead with that, I'd still have 2 hours 59 minutes and 50 seconds to show them something that would be potentially useful.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> Steve and Tony
> 
> If you were giving a seminar to a group of people on ground self defense (with zero experience in anything) and you had 3 hours to instruct them on what to do in the case that they were attacked and taken to the ground by a BJJ grappler, what would you teach them? Would you teach them a couple BJJ techniques and send them on their way hoping for the best? Would you teach them to prey to god and hope everything turns out ok? Or would you teach them to scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them? I'm talking a group of strangers with no training that will go out into the world with what you have taught them in 3 hours and never step foot in a dojo again.



I'm wondering if we aren't having some communication difficulties with basic terminology.  I'd define *natural *survival *instincts *as the stuff you would do _anyway_, without anybody teaching you anything.  With time and effort you can replace those with trained survival responses.

With regards to your question - either way, a single 3 hour class isn't going to make much difference.  I can show them some techniques, but if they don't practice them after the class is done then they won't be able to rely on them.  I can tell them to "s_crap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them", _but it won't make much difference.  If they are the sort of person who has that natural fighter mentality then they will be doing that regardless.  If they aren't, then I'm not going to be able to permanently instill that instinct with a 3 hour class any more than I could permanently ingrain a given technique.



			
				SENC-33 said:
			
		

> Survival instinct factors into any situation when you are being threatened (atleast it does with me). Is it nice to be able to strike effectively? YES.....Good to be able to handle a ground situation? YES. Good to be able control your emotions and adrenaline without panicking? YES. What if you had no training at all, no means to escape and your wife and kids with you facing an attacker. What would you do? You would fight for your life and that of your family. You ingrain that survival mentality into your self defense training and some grappler on top of you isn't going to shake you a hell of difference. Sorry but this is just how I see it......



Based on this quote, I'm guessing that by "survival mentality" and "survival instinct" you are referring to the sort of fighting spirit that keeps you from giving up and drives you do whatever necessary to win, yes?  (Please correct me if I am wrong.)

If so, I agree that this is a very valuable thing to cultivate if you don't already have it naturally.  I'm wondering how you recommend doing so.  For me, what has worked is training where I'm put into threatening situations, given the tools to deal with them, and spending many, many hours getting used to them.  I've been in the ring with opponents hitting me hard and learning to keep myself cool so I can hit back effectively.  I've been trapped underneath grapplers crushing the air out of me.  I've been in scenario-based simulations where I had to deal with verbal abuse, multiple attackers, hidden weapons, and so on.  This has been effective for me, speaking as someone who started out rather lacking in the fighting spirit department.  What has worked for you in this regard?

(BTW - my earlier posts were based on the impression I got that you were advocating a specific set of physical movements because they were "naturally what my body tells me to do."  If that is what you meant by "survival instinct", then I'm going to have to disagree pretty strongly.)


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Survival instinct factors into any situation when you are being threatened (atleast it does with me). Is it nice to be able to strike effectively? YES.....Good to be able to handle a ground situation? YES. Good to be able control your emotions and adrenaline without panicking? YES. What if you had no training at all, no means to escape and your wife and kids with you facing an attacker. What would you do? You would fight for your life and that of your family. You ingrain that survival mentality into your self defense training and some grappler on top of you isn't going to shake you a hell of difference. Sorry but this is just how I see it......


So, then, training in martial arts isn't really helpful at all?  I'm really struggling to understand your point.  Why do we train at all?  Why do you train, if not to learn techniques that will serve you better than balls out panic and adrenaline fueled rage?


----------



## SENC-33

Ok let me rephrase the question.....

If either one of you (Steve and Tony) had no training experience whatsoever and you were jumped by an attacker with your own grappling experience you don't think you could escape without "serious injury"?

Obviously I believe it is better to have well rounded self defense training but both you guys seem to take on this notion that the "average" bjj practitioners ground fighting skills are impossible to overcome without those same skills.


----------



## ballen0351

SENC-33 said:


> Ok let me rephrase the question.....
> 
> If either one of you (Steve and Tony) had no training experience whatsoever and you were jumped by an attacker with your own grappling experience you don't think you could escape without "serious injury"?
> 
> Obviously I believe it is better to have well rounded self defense training but both you guys seem to take on this notion that the "average" bjj practitioners ground fighting skills are impossible to overcome without those same skills.


Well average BJJ practitioners ground fighting would be much much better then someone not training in ground fighting.  That's their thing.  There is no way on the ground I could fight off Steve and I do some ground fighting in Judo and some BJJ.  But that's why I won't go to the ground with Steve or any BJJ or anyone else for that matter.  Now are Steve's skills to get me to the ground better then my skills to stay off the ground? Who knows.  I know my stand up skills are better then a straight BJJ guy with no cross training that's my strong suit.  There is not now nor ever was a perfect art


----------



## SENC-33

ballen0351 said:


> Well average BJJ practitioners ground fighting would be much much better then someone not training in ground fighting.  That's their thing.  There is no way on the ground I could fight off Steve and I do some ground fighting in Judo and some BJJ.  But that's why I won't go to the ground with Steve or any BJJ or anyone else for that matter.  Now are Steve's skills to get me to the ground better then my skills to stay off the ground? Who knows.  I know my stand up skills are better then a straight BJJ guy with no cross training that's my strong suit.  There is not now nor ever was a perfect art



Now when you say you can't fight this guy off on the ground you are telling me you couldn't get any kind of strike in or escape if you were facing possible serious injury? What if your life was at stake? (not from steve but somebody else with intent to kill you)


----------



## ballen0351

SENC-33 said:


> Now when you say you can't fight this guy off on the ground you are telling me you couldn't get any kind of strike in or escape if you were facing possible serious injury? What if your life was at stake? (not from steve but somebody else with intent to kill you)



Im saying on the ground Steve or other BJJ guys have the advantage.  Of course if Im on the ground im going to do what I can but I also know a good BJJ guy wants me to spaz so he can get me.  So My goal is to not get on the ground to begin with or if I do not to stay there.  In a real fight as you say for my life Ill do anything including bite, scratch, claw, grab genetials, fingers, toes, ect.  Anyhting I can to get up.  But facts are facts on the ground a BJJ guy has the advantage.  Ive rolled enough to know some things not to do that he would want me to do.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> Ok let me rephrase the question.....
> 
> If either one of you (Steve and Tony) had no training experience whatsoever and you were jumped by an attacker with your own grappling experience you don't think you could escape without "serious injury"?



Kind of an odd question.  Assuming all other factors were equal (size, strength, determination, health, weaponry, tactical factors, etc), if you magically robbed me of all my martial arts training and pitted me against an attacker with all my grappling experience then I would definitely get taken down and crushed unless I could run fast enough to get away.  For that matter, if you magically robbed me of all my training and pitted me against an attacker with all my stand-up striking experience, then I would definitely get knocked out.  I've been training martial arts for over three decades.  If I can't reliably defeat a version of myself without any of that training, then something is definitely wrong.

You'll notice that I specified all other factors being equal.  If you pit an 300 pound NFL linebacker with no martial arts training against an average 120 pound female BJJ practitioner, then the BJJ practitioner is the one who will be struggling for survival.  There's more to combat than what martial art you happen to study.




SENC-33 said:


> Obviously I believe it is better to have well rounded self defense training but both you guys seem to take on this notion that the "average" bjj practitioners ground fighting skills are impossible to overcome without those same skills.



Yeah, if you have never trained ground fighting and the fight goes to the ground then you are at a huge disadvantage against someone who has even basic competence in that arena - especially if they end up on top.  It doesn't have to be BJJ - it could be judo, wrestling, sambo, whatever.  You need some kind of experience in that domain.  This isn't just theory - it's experience and observation.  I've done sparring and grappling with hundreds of people - boxers, wrestlers, karateka, judoka, kung fu practitioners, street fighters, big guys, little guys, football players, you name it.  I've watched plenty of fights where one person had grappling experience and the other didn't.  It really does make a big, big difference.


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Ok let me rephrase the question.....
> 
> If either one of you (Steve and Tony) had no training experience whatsoever and you were jumped by an attacker with your own grappling experience you don't think you could escape without "serious injury"?


I think it would be pretty likely, if the attacker were intent and I didn't have some kind of equalizer, such as a weapon or friends.





> Obviously I believe it is better to have well rounded self defense training


I agree, which is why I wonder at your persistent denial that this would include ground training.





> but both you guys seem to take on this notion that the "average" bjj practitioners ground fighting skills are impossible to overcome without those same skills.


Not at all impossible, and since you ask (sort of), I don't think it would even take equivalent skill.  It's far easier to defend than to attack in grappling.  I'd say that a year of deliberate training in BJJ would be sufficient to develop pretty solid skills adequate for self defense.  Provided you aren't being attacked by a BJJ black belt, you will have the body awareness and skill to handle yourself in a bad situation.  More is better, but it really depends upon what you want.  



SENC-33 said:


> Now when you say you can't fight this guy off on the ground you are telling me you couldn't get any kind of strike in or escape if you were facing possible serious injury? What if your life was at stake? (not from steve but somebody else with intent to kill you)


If you have no training on the ground and are unarmed, honestly, you'd be in bad shape.  Which is why it's so alarming and bizarre to me that you are so cavalierly dismissing this area of your training. 

And the more clothing you have on, the worse it gets.  The "uniform" in MMA evolved as its own defense against grapplers.  Fabric provides friction for purchase and to use as a weapon against you.  We wear gis in class because they're sturdy and durable, but I'm confident your t-shirt would hold up for one choke, and the fabric itself would prevent you from becoming so slippery that you could easily escape.

So, once again, I am curious as to why you train at all.  You said this:  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



 Originally Posted by *SENC-33* 

_Survival instinct factors into any situation when you are being threatened (atleast it does with me). Is it nice to be able to strike effectively? YES.....Good to be able to handle a ground situation? YES. Good to be able control your emotions and adrenaline without panicking? YES. What if you had no training at all, no means to escape and your wife and kids with you facing an attacker. What would you do? You would fight for your life and that of your family. You ingrain that survival mentality into your self defense training and some grappler on top of you isn't going to shake you a hell of difference. Sorry but this is just how I see it......

_

So, then, training in martial arts isn't really helpful at all? I'm really struggling to understand your point. Why do we train at all? Why do you train, if not to learn techniques that will serve you better than balls out panic and adrenaline fueled rage?


----------



## SENC-33

ballen0351 said:


> Im saying on the ground Steve or other BJJ guys have the advantage.  Of course if Im on the ground im going to do what I can but I also know a good BJJ guy wants me to spaz so he can get me.  So My goal is to not get on the ground to begin with or if I do not to stay there.  In a real fight as you say for my life Ill do anything including bite, scratch, claw, grab genetials, fingers, toes, ect.  Anyhting I can to get up.  But facts are facts on the ground a BJJ guy has the advantage.  Ive rolled enough to know some things not to do that he would want me to do.



I agree with you when there is a mat and rules involved but some of these comments telling me that I "can't" or that it is "impossible" or even "improbable" to strike or escape a grappler without serious injury? That is downright foolish IMO especially when my well being is threatened. I train with grapplers all the time and I set up scenarios where my purpose is to escape and nothing more. Getting free even without true technique has never been a problem.


----------



## SENC-33

Tony and Steve
Were just gonna have to agree to disagree. Like my post above states I train with guys like you two all the time. 2 of my long time training partners are experienced shoot fighters. They go at me all the time (with little success) with my intent being to escape and get back to my feet. I don't know maybe my survival philosophy makes the difference.


----------



## ballen0351

SENC-33 said:


> Tony and Steve
> Were just gonna have to agree to disagree. Like my post above states I train with guys like you two all the time. 2 of my long time training partners are experienced shoot fighters. They go at me all the time (with little success) with my intent being to escape and get back to my feet. I don't know maybe my survival philosophy makes the difference.



So is your position you dont need any ground fighting training at all?


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Tony and Steve
> Were just gonna have to agree to disagree. Like my post above states I train with guys like you two all the time. 2 of my long time training partners are experienced shoot fighters. They go at me all the time (with little success) with my intent being to escape and get back to my feet. I don't know maybe my survival philosophy makes the difference.


Maybe so.  I just hope you aren't promoting this philosophy with any kind of student, because it's akin in my mind to telling people to eschew modern medicine in lieu of praying away cancer.  As I said, it is completely bizarre to me that you think ground fighting is simply a matter of instincts.  I've asked you twice now, and you haven't answered, why do you train at all if your survival instincts are what keep you safe?  Why drill any techniques, whether striking or grappling, if none of it matters?  Or is it only grappling you consider unnecessary?

And, for what it's worth, Tony and I aren't a lot alike.  Tony is a much more serious martial artist than I am.


----------



## SENC-33

ballen0351 said:


> So is your position you dont need any ground fighting training at all?



Not at all. I made that pretty clear.....but I value escape and get to your feet quickly training over staying on the ground rolling around training. If the situation is one where "friends" or multiple bad guys could become part of the equation staying on the ground will get your skull kicked in. If I can't get to my feet I am going for throat, eyes, groin but I have already been told I "can't" accomplish such a feat with a super human grappler on top of me which is news to me.


----------



## SENC-33

Steve said:


> Maybe so.  I just hope you aren't promoting this philosophy with any kind of student, because it's akin in my mind to telling people to eschew modern medicine in lieu of praying away cancer.  As I said, it is completely bizarre to me that you think ground fighting is simply a matter of instincts.  I've asked you twice now, and you haven't answered, why do you train at all if your survival instincts are what keep you safe?  Why drill any techniques, whether striking or grappling, if none of it matters?  Or is it only grappling you consider unnecessary?
> 
> And, for what it's worth, Tony and I aren't a lot alike.  Tony is a much more serious martial artist than I am.



My points are strickly pertaining to ground fighting. I don't want to be there to start with and sure don't want to stay there so why would I focus on staying there rolling around? Again if there are multiple bad people you are a sitting duck.......I train for that worse case scenario. I don't train students. The people that train with me (although I am the instructer per se) are like minded individuals that share the same ideas as me.


----------



## SENC-33

And as far as instincts go......your insticts first taught you to stand and walk as a baby. They taught you to walk after you learned to stand. Your instincts tell you to run from trouble so why wouldn't they be the most important tool you have when on the ground facing danger? You can't easily escape from the ground rolling around if the situation turns bad for you no matter how much BJJ training you have.


----------



## Hanzou

SENC's belief that he is immune to choke holds has been the highlight of this discussion.


His defense against the Mount by giving up his back (i.e. escaping from a vulnerable position by getting into a MORE vulnerable position) is a close second.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> My points are strickly pertaining to ground fighting. I don't want to be there to start with and sure don't want to stay there so why would I focus on staying there rolling around?



I have no problem with that philosophy.  I just have a strong disagreement with you as to the quickest, safest, and most reliable methods of getting back to your feet if you happen to get taken down and mounted.  (For the record, the techniques I would teach for that purpose don't involve focusing on "staying there rolling around.")



			
				SENC-33 said:
			
		

> 2 of my long time training partners are experienced shoot fighters. They go at me all the time (with little success) with my intent being to escape and get back to my feet. I don't know maybe my survival philosophy makes the difference.



Just to be clear on what you're saying - you're starting out with these training partners fully mounted on you, they're allowed to strike or use submissions from the top, and you are reliably escaping by either striking from the bottom or turning to your knees underneath them?  Is that correct?  If it works for you, great.  Unless you have a significant advantage in size/athleticism or your training partners aren't very well trained in the ground game, then it doesn't match my experience and observations of what works.


----------



## SENC-33

Hanzou said:


> SENC's belief that he is immune to choke holds has been the highlight of this discussion.
> 
> 
> His defense against the Mount by giving up his back (i.e. escaping from a vulnerable position by getting into a MORE vulnerable position) is a close second.



Immune no.....But training to "ground fight" instead of training to get up and fight is a foolish one and that is my belief. To each his own.....


----------



## SENC-33

Tony Dismukes said:


> I have no problem with that philosophy.  I just have a strong disagreement with you as to the quickest, safest, and most reliable methods of getting back to your feet if you happen to get taken down and mounted.  (For the record, the techniques I would teach for that purpose don't involve focusing on "staying there rolling around.")
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be clear on what you're saying - you're starting out with these training partners fully mounted on you, they're allowed to strike or use submissions from the top, and you are reliably escaping by either striking from the bottom or turning to your knees underneath them?  Is that correct?  If it works for you, great.  Unless you have a significant advantage in size/athleticism or your training partners aren't very well trained in the ground game, then it doesn't match my experience and observations of what works.



The shoot fighters I train with are 20+ year veterans. We start on top and they obviously shoot in on me or attempt to throw me. If I can sprawl I do so if we roll around I have gotten adept at springing up quickly. If they get me in the mount I go into combatives mode because that is obviously the last place  I want to be. I found that any time spent looking for grabs to counter is wasted effort. If I went the BJJ route to get on top of them what have I accomplished? They could easily reverse that or wrap me and I am not interested in a game of cat and mouse when time and energy are against me. All I need is just enough space created to kick of strike a vital area and  Ican get back to my feet.


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Immune no.....But training to "ground fight" instead of training to get up and fight is a foolish one and that is my belief. To each his own.....


I'm not sure about anyone else, but I've never said one way or the other about what I train.  I simply observed that when you shared some details of your defensive strategy, it was a pretty naive and unrealistic.  You presume we don't teach students how to get up from the ground safely.  And the more you say, the more obviously uninformed you are about what BJJ training is.  

For what it's worth, we have drills and techniques for regaining your feet safely.  One drill, for example, is typically called the technical standup, the idea being to create space and stand up in a way that doesn't bring your head forward and mitigates the risks during the transition from the ground back to your feet.  Here's one example from Stefan Kesting, a guy up in Vancouver, BC:


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> The shoot fighters I train with are 20+ year veterans. We start on top and they obviously shoot in on me or attempt to throw me. If I can sprawl I do so if we roll around I have gotten adept at springing up quickly. If they get me in the mount I go into combatives mode because that is obviously the last place  I want to be. I found that any time spent looking for grabs to counter is wasted effort. If I went the BJJ route to get on top of them what have I accomplished? They could easily reverse that or wrap me and I am not interested in a game of cat and mouse when time and energy are against me. All I need is just enough space created to kick of strike a vital area and  Ican get back to my feet.


It looks like there are some quality BJJ schools in Raleigh.  I hope someday you are open minded and courageous enough to risk learning how little you actually know about it.


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> I'm not sure about anyone else, but I've never said one way or the other about what I train.



Don't take a rocket scientist or Elder to figure it out look at your signature lol


----------



## Steve

ballen0351 said:


> Don't take a rocket scientist or Elder to figure it out look at your signature lol


Ha.  Thanks, Ballen.  I wasn't being clear.  What I mean is, yeah, I train BJJ, but I never said anything like, "And that means that all we do is roll around on the mats and never train any technical stand up."  

The point was that there are some presumptions being made about what BJJ training entails which are factually incorrect.


----------



## Kframe

That's a bad argument. I would teach them about conflict avoidance and S.P.E.A.R. and run if it gets violent. 1 seminar is pointless. They will not learn anything, or more importantly retain anything.   This kind of seminar is only good for one thing, and that is relieving people of there there money. It will ONLY serve to get people hurt. NOTHING good will ever come from it. 



SENC-33 said:


> Steve and Tony
> 
> If you were giving a seminar to a group of people on ground self defense (with zero experience in anything) and you had 3 hours to instruct them on what to do in the case that they were attacked and taken to the ground by a BJJ grappler, what would you teach them? Would you teach them a couple BJJ techniques and send them on their way hoping for the best? Would you teach them to prey to god and hope everything turns out ok? Or would you teach them to scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them? I'm talking a group of strangers with no training that will go out into the world with what you have taught them in 3 hours and never step foot in a dojo again.


----------



## K-man

Kframe said:


> That's a bad argument. I would teach them about conflict avoidance and S.P.E.A.R. and run if it gets violent. 1 seminar is pointless. They will not learn anything, or more importantly retain anything.   This kind of seminar is only good for one thing, and that is relieving people of there there money. It will ONLY serve to get people hurt. NOTHING good will ever come from it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve and Tony
> 
> 
> If you were giving a seminar to a group of people on ground self defense (with zero experience in anything) and you had 3 hours to instruct them on what to do in the case that they were attacked and taken to the ground by a BJJ grappler, what would you teach them? Would you teach them a couple BJJ techniques and send them on their way hoping for the best? Would you teach them to prey to god and hope everything turns out ok? Or would you teach them to scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them? I'm talking a group of strangers with no training that will go out into the world with what you have taught them in 3 hours and never step foot in a dojo again.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about totally untrained people, I agree. A seminar is pretty much a waste of time. However for a reasonably trained martial artist it is a different matter. I go to a lot of seminars over time. I don't necessarily attend to learn anything new but if I do it is a bonus. Take for example the seminar with Bas Rutten. It was an MMA seminar. Why would a TMA guy want to attend that when he has never done an MMA class in his life. Well the answer is several fold. Firstly Bas is primarily a karate-ka so we have a similar base. Secondly, because he teaches no BS RBSD and I have a lot of his material I have enormous respect for his ability and his ability to teach. Thirdly, although I'm not attending to learn anything in particular there will always be something that you pick up on that you can apply to your own training. But for me the most important thing that I get from it is the measure of where my ability and training compares with other top class training. If I  can hold my head up in that sort of company it gives me a fair idea of whether the stuff I teach is up to speed. A quality check if you like. Sure a few of my mates have shown me basic rolling techniques but it has been at seminars that I have been able to ensure that my technique is sound.
:asian:


----------



## SENC-33

Steve said:


> It looks like there are some quality BJJ schools in Raleigh.  I hope someday you are open minded and courageous enough to risk learning how little you actually know about it.



I don't how many times I have to say I have trained with ground fighters. 2 of my training partners are seasoned shoot fighters. I have been on the ground with them countless times along with BJJ guys and sambo grapplers. I have flipped them, bucked them, rolled them over, landed strikes on them and I have even managed to escape their wrath. Amazingly enough my get to your feet strategy actually works. I'm confused as to why this pisses some of you off to no end.......is it some sort of slap in the face?


----------



## Kframe

In your fantasy maybe, but its the kind of attitude that will get you and your students killed..  



SENC-33 said:


> I don't how many times I have to say I have trained with ground fighters. 2 of my training partners are seasoned shoot fighters. I have been on the ground with them countless times along with BJJ guys and sambo grapplers. I have flipped them, bucked them, rolled them over, landed strikes on them and I have even managed to escape their wrath. Amazingly enough my get to your feet strategy actually works. I'm confused as to why this pisses some of you off to no end.......is it some sort of slap in the face?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> I don't how many times I have to say I have trained with ground fighters. 2 of my training partners are seasoned shoot fighters. I have been on the ground with them countless times along with BJJ guys and sambo grapplers. I have flipped them, bucked them, rolled them over, landed strikes on them and I have even managed to escape their wrath. Amazingly enough my get to your feet strategy actually works. I'm confused as to why this pisses some of you off to no end.......is it some sort of slap in the face?



Doesn't piss me off at all.  It's just that the techniques you originally described - striking from the bottom or rolling underneath the top guy - have not been very effective for the many, many people I have seen try them.

Bridging the top guy over and getting back to your feet - that's one of the first techniques I teach.  It does work a lot better if you take the time to learn the technical details rather than just going berserk, but even the berserk version can work if you have an advantage in strength and athleticism and your opponent doesn't have the experience to counter that advantage.  

So which is it?  Are you bridging your opponents or are you striking from the bottom/turning underneath them?


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> I don't how many times I have to say I have trained with ground fighters. 2 of my training partners are seasoned shoot fighters. I have been on the ground with them countless times along with BJJ guys and sambo grapplers. I have flipped them, bucked them, rolled them over, landed strikes on them and I have even managed to escape their wrath. Amazingly enough my get to your feet strategy actually works. I'm confused as to why this pisses some of you off to no end.......is it some sort of slap in the face?


I want to assure you that this doesn't piss me off at all.  It's a head shaker, for sure.  Your general assurances that you train with "ground fighters" just doesn't seem plausible given the completely unrealistic "techniques" you say you use.  It just doesn't compute.  It's like someone saying that they live eating only rocks and drinking gasoline.  Just doesn't seem likely.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tony Dismukes said:


> Wow. Just about everything in that paragraph is wrong except for the last two sentences.



So what are the specific issues that you have with those suggestions. Notice I said they were possible without any mention of their effectiveness.



Tony Dismukes said:


> However if you are going to opine on how to do ground fighting then you should get some experience in it first.



Well obviously I do not have the ground experience of a BJJ blackbelt, the main exposure I have had with the mount is somewhere between thew high and low mount (a mid mount if you will) where the attacker is sitting on your chest and choking you with his hands, which is quite a common exercise.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Steve said:


> There are a number of things that can be done.  That's true.
> 
> But Not having been in this position leads to unrealistic ideas like being able to gouge the eyes, kick the back of the head, reach the neck, temple or face, or kneeing the kidney with enough force to do anything at all.  That's fantasy.



If you go back and read my post again you might notice that I said that you have to bring them down into range to reach those places. If he comes down to punch you can grab his arm as you block the punch and pull him down into range. I think, kneeing the spine would hurt a bit more, in any case if you look at Royce Gracie in the early UFC's you will see him use little heel kicks to the kidneys, they don't do much damage but they are a means to an end.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Of course. The thing is this though; Most people have a general idea on how to do stand up. Let's face it, if you're into martial arts, you've probably done karate, shadow boxing, or something else. *Throwing a punch is pretty simple*. *Throwing a kick is fairly simple*. In short, the average person knows how to do average stand up. Like that thug and that meter cop who was trained in Muay Thai. The untrained thug hung with him and they were just trading blows because boxing is like 4 punches and some fancy footwork. How hard is that to emulate with a VCR and a punching bag?
> 
> 
> You just can't say the same about ground fighting. Anyone who has rolled with a legit Bjj purple, brown, or black belt can attest to that.



The 2 bolded statements above show how little you know of striking, yeah throwing an unrefined and sloppy punch or kick is easy, striking hard, fast, accurate, focussed and effective is hard and takes a lot of training, anyone who has been hit hard by a trained traditional martial artist can attest to that.



Hanzou said:


> Some of the crazy counters that I've heard like a Karate chop to the neck to stop a takedown,



I have already explained how and in what circumstances that will work.




Hanzou said:


> What's sad is that its not like the BJJ escapes are impossible to find. They're right there on youtube for you to check out and incorporate. Like this Ninjutsu school for example that incorporated a Bjj mount counter;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simple.



That was just lift up and roll over, they may have just thought of that themselves. Oh and look at 0:11 and 0:19 the guy on the bottom can reach the other guy's neck.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Or you could bypass all of that nonsense and just do the move in the video I posted. It's easier to accomplish, doesn't require insane amounts of flexibility, and it doesn't leave your head exposed to punches and elbow from above.
> 
> Shin kick to the back of the head? :lol:   Is that what TKD is teaching for ground defense these days?



It does require some flexibility but hardly an insane amount, but hey that's what all that stretching in class is done for. It's not just the shin, the ball of the foot removes about 6 inches off the required flexibility. I was never taught that particular one for that particular situation by the way. The technique shown in the video is a good one though.


----------



## SENC-33

I can see now there isn't much in the way of reasoning with you ground fighting weapons of mass destruction. I can assure you guys I don't live in a fantasy land and the strategy I utilize works. If it didn't I wouldn't continue to train it........This has gotten to much like politics and you just can't convince some people that are hell bent on trying to prove somebody wrong. I'm sure there are better conversations to be had here


----------



## Dinkydoo

Traditional Northern Mantis practitioners training to use their Mantis techniques in combat:

http://youtu.be/rB7Wvvw_Ht4

This school does have Sanda training too but the above video is a typical drill used in traditional CMA clubs - we use drills like this in Seven Star every class. 

The start of this is also a pretty good demonstration of people using the traditional Northern Mantis techniques in an unscripted environment. 

http://youtu.be/su0mLG9a6bM


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> So what are the specific issues that you have with those suggestions. Notice I said they were possible without any mention of their effectiveness.
> 
> 
> 
> Well obviously I do not have the ground experience of a BJJ blackbelt, the main exposure I have had with the mount is somewhere between thew high and low mount (a mid mount if you will) where the attacker is sitting on your chest and choking you with his hands, which is quite a common exercise.





Dinkydoo said:


> Traditional Northern Mantis practitioners training to use their Mantis techniques in combat:
> 
> http://youtu.be/rB7Wvvw_Ht4
> 
> This school does have Sanda training too but the above video is a typical drill used in traditional CMA clubs - we use drills like this in Seven Star every class.
> 
> The start of this is also a pretty good demonstration of people using the traditional Northern Mantis techniques in an unscripted environment.
> 
> http://youtu.be/su0mLG9a6bM


I understand exactly where you are at.  Unfortunately I don't think it will impress our friends. For what it's worth we do very similar training, sometimes with just one arm against two and other times with eyes closed. 
:asian:


----------



## SENC-33

This video is similar to some of the things I like to do in my training granted it's hard to understand when slowed down. I like to create space for strikes and roll if I can. If I am forced to roll over into a less than ideal position and the bad guy is still on top of me I try to buck, twist, arch up, throw elbows and mini kicks, anything  I can do to keep moving until  I can get in a better position or escape.


----------



## Dinkydoo

Actually, having just watched the whole video in my previous post, the little round of light sparring at the end where the blind folded student is allowed to see again is a better example of light Mantis boxing. Interesting experiment.


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> I don't know what to say. If I am ever in the position of having a super human bjj master on top of me pounding my brains in ill remember this advice. Do you guys ever leave the safety of a mat? You ever train on pavement or gravel or in the woods in the brush? How bout in water? When you are in a situation of survival looking pretty isn't your objective.



IMHO, I don't think that it has anything to do with being 'super human' but instead, simply a) understanding the basics of grappling, and b) training against these things.  I can't speak for anyone else, but for myself, there have been many times while grappling with one of my training partners, we'd go slower and isolate certain things.  One of the things we'd do, would be whoever was on the bottom at the moment, regardless of the position, would try to target vital areas, ie: groin, throat, eyes, and see if contact could be made.  A small percentage of the time, contact could be made, however, depending on the situation, even if one of those targets could be reached, there wouldn't be enough energy in the strike to be worried about it.  

As I said, I came from a Kenpo background.  Pretty much every technique, has some sort of rake, poke, gouge, etc, in it.  I certainly do not discount the value in these 'dirty tricks' but for me, I don't bank all of my money on them.  Why?  Because situation depending, those dirty tricks might not be the best to use.  IMHO, if someone has to rely on those tools for everything they do, then I'd say they've seriously missed out on things in their training.  If all someone has is A, then I guess if someone grabs them, they're always going to fall back on the eye gouge, when something else would be better, again situation depending.


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> IMHO, I don't think that it has anything to do with being 'super human' but instead, simply a) understanding the basics of grappling, and b) training against these things.  I can't speak for anyone else, but for myself, there have been many times while grappling with one of my training partners, we'd go slower and isolate certain things.  One of the things we'd do, would be whoever was on the bottom at the moment, regardless of the position, would try to target vital areas, ie: groin, throat, eyes, and see if contact could be made.  A small percentage of the time, contact could be made, however, depending on the situation, even if one of those targets could be reached, there wouldn't be enough energy in the strike to be worried about it.
> 
> As I said, I came from a Kenpo background.  Pretty much every technique, has some sort of rake, poke, gouge, etc, in it.  I certainly do not discount the value in these 'dirty tricks' but for me, I don't bank all of my money on them.  Why?  Because situation depending, those dirty tricks might not be the best to use.  IMHO, if someone has to rely on those tools for everything they do, then I'd say they've seriously missed out on things in their training.  If all someone has is A, then I guess if someone grabs them, they're always going to fall back on the eye gouge, when something else would be better, again situation depending.



You can train technique all day until you are blue in the face and I still do just like everyone else, but when the **** hits the fan, your life is perhaps on the line and everybody isn't aligned in a perfect position  like they are inside the dojo you had better be able to improvise and rely on instincts and brute force. There isn't time to pick and choose in most situations. If  I can bring you in long enough to get my thumb in your eye or strike your throat your will to continue will be broken and/or severly diminished. Strikes come naturally to me and are what I look for because I want to end it and get back up. If I wanted to stay on the ground looking for control methods I would train that way. I am always taking into consideration that more people could be involved. What do you do as a grappler when you are on the ground locking in an armbar and somebody you didn't see before charges in to kick your skull in?


----------



## MJS

K-man said:


> OK. I think I owe everyone here an apology. I am obviously totally wrong in my assumption that I train a TMA. I am thoroughly confused and maybe someone on the forum can tell me what I am doing wrong. I would like to describe our training session from tonight. Almost all my high ranked guys were away so it left me carrying the can, so to speak.
> 
> We started  out with a bit of a warm up and then a bit of sticky hands, like the Kung Fu guys do but with a little bit of Chi Na for good measure, not to mention the application of some locks and holds. Some of the guys got some sore fingers but nothing broke that I was aware of. Then I thought I should teach some basics because we don't do as much of that as we should. To much reality based stuff usually. I started out teaching all the useless stances that you find in our Goju system. Well, not quite all but half a dozen or so. You know the ones, totally impractical for self defence but part of the fluff you need in TMA to get your next belt.
> 
> Then I got the guys to move forward in those stupid stances, not punching, just hands up in the ready position. Then we just stood around for a while discussing where in the kata, you know that other useless fluff you need for grading, you would find those stances and how did they work.
> 
> Well we explored how they could all be used to get your opponent to the ground, mostly variations of hip throws. Funny thing was the person being thrown almost always ended up in a choke or potential neck break. Must have just been a coincidence I know but surprising just the same. Seeing our opponent was now on the ground I thought of Hanzou, you know, what would a top MMA fighter do in this situation. So I told the guys just to jump on top of the guy on the ground and pretend to punch the crap out of him. That was going well but I started to feel really sorry for the guy on the bottom. I got him to try and get away, you know what I mean, escaping the mount. Well my guys don't know a lot so often they were too high up on the chest so I had to get them to escape the high mount too. Some rolled over and let the top guy get a choke on. Bugger! It was getting too much so we had to do a bit on escaping from rear naked chokes as well. Others managed to roll their opponent over but they ended up in a type of scissor lock. I think the grappling guys call it 'guard'. Of course by now I am totally out of my tree. Not only had we escaped from the mount and the rear naked choke we had to pass the guard too.
> 
> After all this exertion on the ground I thought, in for a penny, in for a pound and got the guys to start applying various other chokes from the standing position because that was the position they all seemed to end up in from the stupid kata moves we had been practising. Again it's not nice seeing these young guys struggling to breathe so we had to practise escaping from those as well. I'm almost embarrassed to admit, I showed the guys that they could use their teeth. Well we played around for a bit and played with some nasty vital points on the head. Surprising really how much a knuckle in the right place can almost cause paralysis! We call it Kyusho.
> 
> By this time 2 hours had passed and we hadn't done anything with weapons so I grabbed a couple of knives and away we went again. I know this isn't at all traditional but a lot of the moves were very similar to the moves in our kata. What a coincidence!  Half an hour later and time was up. Really just another day at the office.
> 
> I do feel really bad. We didn't have time for any kata tonight and we didn't get a chance to practise the bunkai. What am I doing wrong? :idunno:



The difference between you and A LOT of other schools/teachers out there, is you are going over this, you are explaining it, and you're making it work.  I've told this story many times, but it's worth repeating.  I remember when I was coming up thru the ranks in Kenpo.  We'd go over kata.  I would often ask, what the moves were for.  I mean, there must have been some reason for these moves, as I couldn't imagine just going thru moves with no purpose behind them.  Here's how the typical conversation went:

Me: I'm curious as to what this move is.  How come we step and block like this?  Is there some sort of application for it?

Teacher: Well, we do it because (insert VERY LONG pause) well, we do it because that's the way it's done in the kata.

Me: (Insert LONG moment of silence, while I try to comprehend the BS that I just heard) Ok.  Thanks.

The same could be said about the self defense techniques.  In Kenpo, you'll notice that we have A LOT of techs per belt, for various attacks, ie: grabs, punches, kicks, weapons. While the attack appears to be the same for 2 techs, ie: a rear bearhug, the application of what is really happening, is very different.  Ex: Lapel grab.  Some of these defenses will be if the badguy is pulling and some are if he's pushing.  However, in the vast majority of schools I've seen, not once heard this explained to the students.  Why not?  Because they legit don't know?  Because they don't care?  Because they themselves were never taught?  

I thank God that I finally found a teacher who makes corrections, is a stickler for perfection, and not only explains, but shows why things are done a certain way.  How refreshing after 20+yrs of NOT seeing it.


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> Yes there are tons of techniques that could work. I could try lots of really cool techniques to reverse a mount. Is it guarenteed to work when my well being is at stake in a potentially hostile situation? HELL NO......IF you get me on my back I am going to immediately try to roll over and get back to my feet because that is naturally what my body tells me to do. If you think you can easily choke me out because I am in what you think is a good position good luck to you. I will be kicking, bucking, wiggling, throwing elbows, turning, whatever I have to do to survive and escape.  If you can get a good hold on me, maintain that hold and choke me out when my brain is in survival mode you are one hell of a man. What I encourage people I train to do is survive and use their instincts they were born with. You may not agree with that approach but in my mind teaching somebody to rely on techniques practiced on a mat in a controlled environment is just as foolish. IF you ever find yourself in a situation with multiple people involved and you get your skull kicked in while performing a rear naked choke maybe you will have time to reflect on this difference of opinion while YOU are recovering in the hospital





Steve said:


> Everything you say is true if both people are completely incompetent on the ground.  But, if the person you're giving a ride to has more than 6 months to a year training 3 or more times per week at the average grappling school, your instincts are only going to put you in more danger.
> 
> Yes.  We are saying that there are tons of training that will work.  Bucking, rolling, kicking, wiggling and throwing elbows are kind of ridiculous, to the point where I'd even be leery of them working on an untrained person, unless you have a significant size or strength advantage.  I give you less than 60 seconds of bucking, kicking, or wiggling before all you're doing is gassing and panting and have rendered yourself completely helpless.  In BJJ, we call that spazzing, and it's what every amped up, athletic, ego driven, tough guy does the first time they panic.  And they panic because they realize that all of the things they SAID they'd do don't work.
> 
> In fact, one of the first things I share with new white belts is that the first thing they will learn is that their instincts suck.
> 
> Adding a billion more what if's to the situation don't change any of the above points, because we can both play that game.  What if I'm the one with friends?  I can take you to the ground where you're defenseless, and MY friends will kick you in the head.  You will be helpless.  What if I'm the one with the knife?  What if I'm on top and you're the one who's being ground into the rocks?  What ifs work both ways and we can play that game ad infinitum.
> 
> Once again, I and several others haven't said that BJJ is the greatest martial art ever.  It is what it is, and while I agree that self defense is something else, and that staying on the ground in a fight is a bad idea, that's philosophy.  And philosophically, we agree.
> 
> I don't know who you are, but I'm willing to accept at face value that you have experience as a bouncer.  But none of that changes the points made above.  You have wacky ideas about BJJ.  That's just all there is to it.  And the more you say, the more clear this becomes.



Gotta go with Steve on this.  When I was getting my first exposure to the ground, the guy I was working with encouraged me to do just that....whatever I could to get him out of the mount position.  Tried punching= proved to be useless as you can't generate enough power from the bottom.  Tried to use my hands to push= that resulted in armlocks.  Tried to turn= ok, he let me do that, and just rode with it.  Now I was screwed because he was on my back. I was then choked.  Oh yeah, even when I tried to defend my neck, he simply brought his forearm across the bridge of my nose and cranked.  That got a tap! LOL!


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> Steve and Tony
> 
> If you were giving a seminar to a group of people on ground self defense (with zero experience in anything) and you had 3 hours to instruct them on what to do in the case that they were attacked and taken to the ground by a BJJ grappler, what would you teach them? Would you teach them a couple BJJ techniques and send them on their way hoping for the best? Would you teach them to prey to god and hope everything turns out ok? Or would you teach them to scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them? I'm talking a group of strangers with no training that will go out into the world with what you have taught them in 3 hours and never step foot in a dojo again.



I'm not Steve or Tony, I'm Mike, but I'll comment on this as well.  What would I teach?  Just what Steve said...some basic, high percentage moves.  I'm sorry, but if you think that you could just take someone with no ground experience, put them on the ground, tell them to escape and have it actually be effective, well, I think you're living in a fantasy land, no disrespect intended.  That's akin to throwing someone in the deep end of the pool, if they don't know how to swim. " There ya go!  Now figure out how to survive!!!"


----------



## MJS

Steve said:


> .Not at all impossible, and since you ask (sort of), I don't think it would even take equivalent skill.  It's far easier to defend than to attack in grappling.  I'd say that a year of deliberate training in BJJ would be sufficient to develop pretty solid skills adequate for self defense.  Provided you aren't being attacked by a BJJ black belt, you will have the body awareness and skill to handle yourself in a bad situation.  More is better, but it really depends upon what you want.



Exactly!  I you and I were on the mat, odds are, you would tap me every time.  Why?  Well, it's a no brainer.  You've put in a hell of a lot more mat time than I, you've trained to a higher level.  There's probably more, but you get my point.   Now, with the small amount of knowledge that I have, would I be able to deal with some of the guys at the Kenpo schools that Ive been to?  Yes.  And I have.  During some sparring sessions at one of my first Kenpo schools, we'd often open it up to a controlled, anything goes setting.  We were still geared up for safety, but sweeps, take downs, G&P, it was all allowed.  Funny (well not really) how a lot of these guys were like fish out of water, once they went down.


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> Not at all. I made that pretty clear.....*but I value escape and get to your feet quickly training over staying on the ground rolling around training.* If the situation is one where "friends" or multiple bad guys could become part of the equation staying on the ground will get your skull kicked in. If I can't get to my feet I am going for throat, eyes, groin but I have already been told I "can't" accomplish such a feat with a super human grappler on top of me which is news to me.



As do I.  I've preached that many times.  For me, I'm more interested in learning some effective basics, some counters, escapes, some subs, and drilling the hell out of them, rather than enrolling in the local BJJ club.  I'm not against that idea, just that at this point in my life, it's not something high on the list.  Down the road? Who knows.  My point is, and always has been: learn some basics, and drill them like there's no tomorrow.  Odds are you'll survive against the average joe.  Against a BJJ blue, purple, black?  Probably not.  But if the person doesn't know or understand the ground game, all the wild arm swinging is pretty moot and crazy, IMHO.


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> Gotta go with Steve on this.  When I was getting my first exposure to the ground, the guy I was working with encouraged me to do just that....whatever I could to get him out of the mount position.  Tried punching= proved to be useless as you can't generate enough power from the bottom.  Tried to use my hands to push= that resulted in armlocks.  Tried to turn= ok, he let me do that, and just rode with it.  Now I was screwed because he was on my back. I was then choked.  Oh yeah, even when I tried to defend my neck, he simply brought his forearm across the bridge of my nose and cranked.  That got a tap! LOL!



Don't take this the wrong way but the guy working with you wasn't trying to hurt you or kill you. Granted that is a difficult thing to simulate......I am able to do it but everybody has to go with what they are confident with


----------



## MJS

Hanzou said:


> SENC's belief that he is immune to choke holds has been the highlight of this discussion.
> 
> 
> His defense against the Mount by giving up his back (i.e. escaping from a vulnerable position by getting into a MORE vulnerable position) is a close second.



You know, this is probably the first thing I've read from you, that I actually agree with 100%.  Holy ****, is there a full moon tonight? LOL!


----------



## MJS

Steve said:


> I'm not sure about anyone else, but I've never said one way or the other about what I train.  I simply observed that when you shared some details of your defensive strategy, it was a pretty naive and unrealistic.  You presume we don't teach students how to get up from the ground safely.  And the more you say, the more obviously uninformed you are about what BJJ training is.
> 
> For what it's worth, we have drills and techniques for regaining your feet safely.  One drill, for example, is typically called the technical standup, the idea being to create space and stand up in a way that doesn't bring your head forward and mitigates the risks during the transition from the ground back to your feet.  Here's one example from Stefan Kesting, a guy up in Vancouver, BC:



Lots of value in that.  I remember when the guy that was training me, told me to get up, and when I started, he simply took me back down.  Sometimes, we'd drill half our workout, with just working on getting back to your feet, the right way.


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> As do I.  I've preached that many times.  For me, I'm more interested in learning some effective basics, some counters, escapes, some subs, and drilling the hell out of them, rather than enrolling in the local BJJ club.  I'm not against that idea, just that at this point in my life, it's not something high on the list.  Down the road? Who knows.  My point is, and always has been: learn some basics, and drill them like there's no tomorrow.  Odds are you'll survive against the average joe.  Against a BJJ blue, purple, black?  Probably not.  But if the person doesn't know or understand the ground game, all the wild arm swinging is pretty moot and crazy, IMHO.



I know plenty of chokes. I can do arm bars, ankle locks the whole nine yards. Why would I in self defense? What would a black belt in BJJ do when he is choking a guy out and 2 guys rush in to kick his skull in?


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> You can train technique all day until you are blue in the face and I still do just like everyone else, but when the **** hits the fan, your life is perhaps on the line and everybody isn't aligned in a perfect position  like they are inside the dojo you had better be able to improvise and rely on instincts and brute force. There isn't time to pick and choose in most situations. If  I can bring you in long enough to get my thumb in your eye or strike your throat your will to continue will be broken and/or severly diminished. Strikes come naturally to me and are what I look for because I want to end it and get back up. If I wanted to stay on the ground looking for control methods I would train that way. I am always taking into consideration that more people could be involved. What do you do as a grappler when you are on the ground locking in an armbar and somebody you didn't see before charges in to kick your skull in?



I'd rather not speak on how others train, but for me, the first line of your post, implies that I don't train outside of the cozy, comfy confines of the perfect world training hall. LOL!  My friend, that couldn't be further from the truth.  I love doing scenario drills.  I love doing those spontaneous reaction drills, where your training partner just randomly attacks, and I have no idea what he's going to do.  THAT type of training, IMHO, is key to anyone who is serious about self defense.  

In the end, despite how it may appear, you and I probably have a lot in common, training wise, though as I said, it might not look that way because often on the forum, misunderstandings happen because we're reading vs. actually hearing or seeing what the other guy is talking about.  Furthermore, I'm far from a grappler.  I enjoy it, but as I've said, it's not something I train daily.  I'm primarily a stand up guy, who trained in Kenpo, and currently trains in Arnis and Kyokushin.  So when you imply that *I* prefer to stay on the ground, no, that is not correct at all.


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> I'd rather not speak on how others train, but for me, the first line of your post, implies that I don't train outside of the cozy, comfy confines of the perfect world training hall. LOL!  My friend, that couldn't be further from the truth.  I love doing scenario drills.  I love doing those spontaneous reaction drills, where your training partner just randomly attacks, and I have no idea what he's going to do.  THAT type of training, IMHO, is key to anyone who is serious about self defense.
> 
> In the end, despite how it may appear, you and I probably have a lot in common, training wise, though as I said, it might not look that way because often on the forum, misunderstandings happen because we're reading vs. actually hearing or seeing what the other guy is talking about.  Furthermore, I'm far from a grappler.  I enjoy it, but as I've said, it's not something I train daily.  I'm primarily a stand up guy, who trained in Kenpo, and currently trains in Arnis and Kyokushin.  So when you imply that *I* prefer to stay on the ground, no, that is not correct at all.



I was just making a general comment about anybody not you personally


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> Don't take this the wrong way but the guy working with you wasn't trying to hurt you or kill you. Granted that is a difficult thing to simulate......I am able to do it but everybody has to go with what they are confident with



No offense taken.   However, this does still imply that I don't train out of the box.  In that given situation I described, no, of course not, but that was my intro. to the ground.   However, I like to mix up my training.  Sometimes we work something specific, and other times, we'll put on some gear, ie: mouth piece, mma type gloves, and just go.  Fat lips, bloody noses, bumps and bruises are all part of the game, and I've gotten my fair share of them.   Many of my training partners outside of the school, are former/current LEO, CO, etc., and I enjoy working with them, as they tend to keep things more real.


----------



## SENC-33

I think the confusion here isn't about whether or not a person should train the ground for self defense. The confusion seems to be about training philosophy.

You SHOULD train the ground......But I prefer to focus on strikes and escapes instead of chokes and locks. My concern isn't centered around whether or not I am being attacked by a BJJ black belt. My concern is ALWAYS the unknown which could be multiple attackers.


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> I know plenty of chokes. I can do arm bars, ankle locks the whole nine yards. Why would I in self defense? What would a black belt in BJJ do when he is choking a guy out and 2 guys rush in to kick his skull in?



For the same reason I wouldn't just haul off and bust the guy up, if it wasn't warranted.  The drunk idiot who is, well, being an idiot, might not need his arm broke, eyes gouged, or teeth knocked out if he simply puts his hand on you, when a simple controlling method would work.  Assess the situations accordingly.  If the situation warrants busting the guy up, then do so.


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> No offense taken.   However, this does still imply that I don't train out of the box.  In that given situation I described, no, of course not, but that was my intro. to the ground.   However, I like to mix up my training.  Sometimes we work something specific, and other times, we'll put on some gear, ie: mouth piece, mma type gloves, and just go.  Fat lips, bloody noses, bumps and bruises are all part of the game, and I've gotten my fair share of them.   Many of my training partners outside of the school, are former/current LEO, CO, etc., and I enjoy working with them, as they tend to keep things more real.



Sorry if there was any confusion and thumbs up for mixing it up!


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> I think the confusion here isn't about whether or not a person should train the ground for self defense. The confusion seems to be about training philosophy.
> 
> You SHOULD train the ground......But I prefer to focus on strikes and escapes instead of chokes and locks. My concern isn't centered around whether or not I am being attacked by a BJJ black belt. My concern is ALWAYS the unknown which could be multiple attackers.



Agreed.  Situational awareness is key, and it's amazing how many people I see when I'm out, that have their head in the clouds.  Too busy texting or having the phone to their ear, to notice potential hazards.  To each their own I suppose.  For me, it's just another tool in the box.  If all else fails, and all I have is a limb or something the guy is presenting, well, I'd rather lock, choke or try to break something.


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> For the same reason I wouldn't just haul off and bust the guy up, if it wasn't warranted.  The drunk idiot who is, well, being an idiot, might not need his arm broke, eyes gouged, or teeth knocked out if he simply puts his hand on you, when a simple controlling method would work.  Assess the situations accordingly.  If the situation warrants busting the guy up, then do so.



A drunk isn't getting me to the ground period. I have handled drunks for many years.....When I worked the doors you had legal ramifications to consider as I still do when I do an event security job. In that situation I go open hand all the way. Big hits from a fist don't look good on cameras in a court room


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> Don't take this the wrong way but the guy working with you wasn't trying to hurt you or kill you. Granted that is a difficult thing to simulate......I am able to do it but everybody has to go with what they are confident with


Psst.  Here's the big secret.  The guys working with you aren't trying to hurt you or kill you, either.


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> Agreed.  Situational awareness is key, and it's amazing how many people I see when I'm out, that have their head in the clouds.  Too busy texting or having the phone to their ear, to notice potential hazards.  To each their own I suppose.  For me, it's just another tool in the box.  If all else fails, and all I have is a limb or something the guy is presenting, well, I'd rather lock, choke or try to break something.



I would agree about the lock or choke if it weren't for the ever present multiple attacker scenario that you can't always see. I have seen some brutal outcomes in my lifetime that permanently instilled in me that worse case scenario.


----------



## SENC-33

Steve said:


> Psst.  Here's the big secret.  The guys working with you aren't trying to hurt you or kill you, either.



You ever fought competitively? You train like you intend to fight why would that be different in self defense? It's difficult to physically mimic brutal strikes and techniques but mentally there is no barrier which was my point.


----------



## RTKDCMB

What was this thread about again? I forget.:idunno:


----------



## Steve

SENC-33 said:


> I know plenty of chokes. I can do arm bars, ankle locks the whole nine yards. Why would I in self defense? What would a black belt in BJJ do when he is choking a guy out and 2 guys rush in to kick his skull in?


Now you're alleging to be a competent grappler.  The internet is truly amazing.

But, who's advocating submissions on the ground?  No one.  While there have been references to chokes and I think I mentioned wristlocks at one point, the entire genesis of this line of conversation was referencing some whackadoo ideas about escaping from under mount.  And, speaking just for myself, the emphasis in every response I've written has been escaping mount and getting safely to one's feet.  I wouldn't even be involved in this conversation at this point unless there were some significant misconceptions about what happens on the ground, specifically from mount.  

And while, in general, we can agree that being on your feet is preferred in a "real" self defense situation, where we disagree is on how best to get there.  And, just for the record, I've never asked you guys to provide any details.  You volunteered them, and they are exactly the kinds of things one would expect from people who have never done it.  They seem reasonable until you try them.  For example, how would you kick someone with your instep to their head from under mount, particularly with enough force to do anything more than amuse them?  

Kicks to the kidneys... someone mentioned that.  How would you execute that technique from under mount?  Answer:  You can't.  When Royce Gracie did it, he was in guard.


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> What was this thread about again? I forget.:idunno:


LOL.  I have been wondering the same thing.  I apologize for my part in derailing it.  It's become RBSD vs BJJ, I think.


----------



## MJS

SENC-33 said:


> A drunk isn't getting me to the ground period. I have handled drunks for many years.....When I worked the doors you had legal ramifications to consider as I still do when I do an event security job. In that situation I go open hand all the way. Big hits from a fist don't look good on cameras in a court room





SENC-33 said:


> I would agree about the lock or choke if it weren't for the ever present multiple attacker scenario that you can't always see. I have seen some brutal outcomes in my lifetime that permanently instilled in me that worse case scenario.



For a short period, I worked in Corrections.  Unfortunately, you're always out numbered and the importance to be aware of what's going on, is high.  As for the cameras...yeah, big brother is always watching..lol.  As tempting as it is/was to smack the **** out of some of these people, well, like I said, BB is watching.  And no, I'm not advocating smacking the **** out of them, just saying that if a use of force issue came up, you have to make sure your bases are covered.


----------



## MJS

RTKDCMB said:


> What was this thread about again? I forget.:idunno:





Steve said:


> LOL.  I have been wondering the same thing.  I apologize for my part in derailing it.  It's become RBSD vs BJJ, I think.



LOL!  Yeah, it's taken a different path now, but I will say this is one of the longest threads I've seen in a while.


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> The 2 bolded statements above show how little you know of striking


I know your response wasn't to me, but I will admit that I know VERY little about striking, although I have some limited experience.  In the spirit of your response above, would you be willing to consider that you have made statements which show how little you know of grappling?


----------



## SENC-33

MJS said:


> For a short period, I worked in Corrections.  Unfortunately, you're always out numbered and the importance to be aware of what's going on, is high.  As for the cameras...yeah, big brother is always watching..lol.  As tempting as it is/was to smack the **** out of some of these people, well, like I said, BB is watching.  And no, I'm not advocating smacking the **** out of them, just saying that if a use of force issue came up, you have to make sure your bases are covered.



Working corrections, event security or the door at a club is the best knowledge you can ever gain when it comes to "reality" and self defense. I have seen about everything you can imagine and it opened up my eyes to a dearth of possibilities


----------



## RTKDCMB

Steve said:


> I know your response wasn't to me, but I will admit that I know VERY little about striking, although I have some limited experience.  In the spirit of your response above, would you be willing to consider that you have made statements which show how little you know of grappling?



Here's basically what I know and what I don't about grappling;

What I know little of - BJJ grappling, Sport grappling, the low mount is relatively new to me (more used to somewhere between high and low mount) but I will be working on that soon. 

What I know a bit about - multitudes of joint locks and breaks and escapes from holds, a few throws, defense of takedowns, takedowns, leg sweeps and trips and how to stop someone for getting on top of me (have done that in a real situation once, got neither mounted nor hit) and how to get up after being knocked down, like in the video of the technical standup (have done that in a real situation too), although the last 4 were not technically grappling per se.

All of the grappling that I have learned is from the standpoint of self defence, trying to avoid being on the ground in the first place and getting up before anything bad happens once I am there. Putting someone in a joint lock to persuade them from attacking me further and being ready to increase the pressure or break that joint if they resist, or if necessary to just break the joint straight away. The mount defence is not taught with a competent grappler in mind, just the average thug who wants to sit on your chest/stomach with his hands around your neck trying to squeeze your head off or punch you in the face. Now I am not entirely sure (that's why I said *possible*) how the striking and blocking will work during the high mount (I will have to test it out sometime) but it works just fine from the lower position. Now if I was ever to be attacked by someone I knew to be a BJJ guy I would do everything in my power to keep him from getting a hold of me to put me in any kind of mount because if he did he would have the advantage and that's just not acceptable.

It is a little difficult coming up with possibilities and/or conveying knowledge on unfamiliar positions based on one 2 dimensional representation of the top of your head, you really need to see them in 4 dimensions, but coming up with things on the fly is a very important skill to have.


----------



## Koshiki

SENC-33 said:


> This video is similar to some of the things I like to do in my training granted it's hard to understand when slowed down. I like to create space for strikes and roll if I can. If I am forced to roll over into a less than ideal position and the bad guy is still on top of me I try to buck, twist, arch up, throw elbows and mini kicks, anything  I can do to keep moving until  I can get in a better position or escape.



To be fair, there was very little in there about escaping from a mount, high, or otherwise. The entire first video was escaping from guard... Also, what there was looked like very competent ground fighting as learned and trained by a ground fighter, albeit with the strikes not allowed in general bjj competition. Seems to back up the point that to learn effective ground fighting or anti-ground fighting, you should refer to those you practice, well, ground fighting. Great videos though. Especially the second one.



SENC-33 said:


> You can train technique all day until you are blue in the face and I still do just like everyone else, but when the **** hits the fan, your life is perhaps on the line and everybody isn't aligned in a perfect position  like they are inside the dojo you had better be able to improvise and rely on instincts and brute force. There isn't time to pick and choose in most situations. If  I can bring you in long enough to get my thumb in your eye or strike your throat your will to continue will be broken and/or severly diminished. Strikes come naturally to me and are what I look for because I want to end it and get back up. If I wanted to stay on the ground looking for control methods I would train that way. I am always taking into consideration that more people could be involved. What do you do as a grappler when you are on the ground locking in an armbar and somebody you didn't see before charges in to kick your skull in?



Many times, in anti-ground fighting stuff that we do in my school, people will suggest, as a defense or escape, something like, "well, how about I strike the throat? Or poke the eyes? Or fish-hook and spread both cheeks?" The response is generally, "Ok, you do that and I'll snap this when I think you're about to. Ready? Go." These dirty tricks are; A. hard to pull off; B. harder to pull off from under a mount, whether for GnP or for straight up grappling; C. not guaranteed to do anything more than piss off the angry dude on your chest; and D. much better put to use as 'softening' techniques to help facilitate your game-plan, rather than as your game-plan. Anything in SD that relies on the "wait for the opportunity/opening," or the "sooner or later he's going to _________ and then I'll _________," is generally a bad idea. SD cannot be a waiting game. That's for sparring.



MJS said:


> Me: I'm curious as to what this move is.  How come we step and block like this?  Is there some sort of application for it?
> 
> Teacher: Well, we do it because (insert VERY LONG pause) well, we do it because that's the way it's done in the kata.
> 
> Me: (Insert LONG moment of silence, while I try to comprehend the BS that I just heard) Ok.  Thanks.





Steve said:


> Psst.  Here's the big secret.  The guys working with you aren't trying to hurt you or kill you, either.



Oh golly. This sounds like a certain school I've been playing at lately... MOST FRUSTRATING THING IN THE WOOOOORLD.



RTKDCMB said:


> What was this thread about again? I forget.:idunno:





MJS said:


> LOL!  Yeah, it's taken a different path now, but I will say this is one of the longest threads I've seen in a while.



I don't know WHAT this thread WAS about, but it's gotten mildly more interesting. I feel like feeding it just because I think it has the potential to reach 100+ pages, and that would be awesome. Someday I hope there's a film based on this thread...


----------



## SENC-33

Zack

My approach when "mounted" (if the person can even pull that off) is to get the person the "F" off of me and END THE CONFRONTATION. I can grab and pull them to me, try to wrap them, try to turn them. There are lots of things I "could" do including strikes which is my greatest strength. If I became a BJJ expert with all the skills in the world and wrapped up with another BJJ expert ON THE STREET what is going to happen is a grappling match on the ground where I have seen people mangled from 3rd parties many times over. I am a big, strong, agile guy so perhaps that gives me an advantage in this situation but locking up with somebody on the ground for any period of time past a few seconds is dangerous. Is dirty fighting difficult to pull off in the mount? Sure it can be but what value do you see in staying down there?

If I was an average Joe at an event or bar and you and I got into a tussle with you getting on top of me what would you do if I got my legs around you in the guard or somehow grabbed you and held on?

Now what would you do if the 3 guys with me you didn't notice started kicking your skull in because you were trapped on the ground?


----------



## K-man

MJS said:


> I thank God that I finally found a teacher who makes corrections, is a stickler for perfection, and not only explains, but shows why things are done a certain way.  How refreshing after 20+yrs of NOT seeing it.


Same, same. Twenty years of not knowing but I've made up for a lot of that time now.


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> What was this thread about again? I forget.:idunno:


Mainly about *Hanzou*, about 50 pages of it.  But it has become a better discussion thanks to thread drift.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> Zack
> 
> My approach when "mounted" (if the person can even pull that off) is to get the person the "F" off of me and END THE CONFRONTATION. I can grab and pull them to me, try to wrap them, try to turn them. There are lots of things I "could" do including strikes which is my greatest strength. If I became a BJJ expert with all the skills in the world and wrapped up with another BJJ expert ON THE STREET what is going to happen is a grappling match on the ground where I have seen people mangled from 3rd parties many times over. I am a big, strong, agile guy so perhaps that gives me an advantage in this situation but locking up with somebody on the ground for any period of time past a few seconds is dangerous. Is dirty fighting difficult to pull off in the mount? Sure it can be but what value do you see in staying down there?
> 
> If I was an average Joe at an event or bar and you and I got into a tussle with you getting on top of me what would you do if I got my legs around you in the guard or somehow grabbed you and held on?
> 
> Now what would you do if the 3 guys with me you didn't notice started kicking your skull in because you were trapped on the ground?



You keep coming back to this, even though the BJJ practitioners in this thread have said repeatedly _*that we agree with you*_ regarding the importance of escaping and getting back to the feet as quickly as possible.  It's almost as if you aren't reading what is actually being said and are arguing with some straw BJJ man in your head.  Where we disagree is on the safest, quickest, and most reliable methods to achieve that immediate goal.  Certain of the techniques that you've claimed you can pull off  are ones that we've seen fail time and again under pressure.  Of course, you've changed your story a couple of times now about which techniques you could use/have used in that situation.  My best guess so far, based on reading all your posts and presuming complete honesty on your part, is that you are a big, strong, athletic guy and when you get mounted you just go berserk trying to get out with any old movement that comes to mind and that has worked for you so far.  This is plausible - it takes a certain amount of skill to hold down a wildly thrashing opponent who is much bigger and stronger than you.  It's possible that none of your training partners has that level of grappling experience.  What we're telling you is that there are techniques for escaping and getting back to your feet that are much safer and more reliable and don't depend on being bigger/stronger/more athletic/more psycho than your opponents.

It also seems like you're framing this whole discussion in terms of who is tougher or more badass.  Neither Steve nor I have claimed that we are more deadly than you or that we could beat you in a fight or that our art is better than yours or anything of the sort.  (In fact I've specifically disavowed any such claims.)  All we are saying is that with regards to one particular position we have seen and experienced a whole lot of people try a whole lot of techniques and the ones that you initially described are not the ones that we've seen be successful in most cases.  Maybe you're the exception and can make things work for you that do not for 99.5% of the people out there.  I'm going to stick to training and advocating moves that work for more than .5% of the population.

BTW - you seem to be attaching a lot of importance to the whole "forget technique, focus on all-out survival instinct and fighting fury" approach.  You never did answer my question (back on page 53) on how you would go about ingraining that mindset in someone who didn't already have it.  Care to offer any suggestions on the topic?


----------



## SENC-33

Tony Dismukes said:


> You keep coming back to this, even though the BJJ practitioners in this thread have said repeatedly _*that we agree with you*_ regarding the importance of escaping and getting back to the feet as quickly as possible.  It's almost as if you aren't reading what is actually being said and are arguing with some straw BJJ man in your head.  Where we disagree is on the safest, quickest, and most reliable methods to achieve that immediate goal.  Certain of the techniques that you've claimed you can pull off  are ones that we've seen fail time and again under pressure.  Of course, you've changed your story a couple of times now about which techniques you could use/have used in that situation.  My best guess so far, based on reading all your posts and presuming complete honesty on your part, is that you are a big, strong, athletic guy and when you get mounted you just go berserk trying to get out with any old movement that comes to mind and that has worked for you so far.  This is plausible - it takes a certain amount of skill to hold down a wildly thrashing opponent who is much bigger and stronger than you.  It's possible that none of your training partners has that level of grappling experience.  What we're telling you is that there are techniques for escaping and getting back to your feet that are much safer and more reliable and don't depend on being bigger/stronger/more athletic/more psycho than your opponents.
> 
> It also seems like you're framing this whole discussion in terms of who is tougher or more badass.  Neither Steve nor I have claimed that we are more deadly than you or that we could beat you in a fight or that our art is better than yours or anything of the sort.  (In fact I've specifically disavowed any such claims.)  All we are saying is that with regards to one particular position we have seen and experienced a whole lot of people try a whole lot of techniques and the ones that you initially described are not the ones that we've seen be successful in most cases.  Maybe you're the exception and can make things work for you that do not for 99.5% of the people out there.  I'm going to stick to training and advocating moves that work for more than .5% of the population.
> 
> BTW - you seem to be attaching a lot of importance to the whole "forget technique, focus on all-out survival instinct and fighting fury" approach.  You never did answer my question (back on page 53) on how you would go about ingraining that mindset in someone who didn't already have it.  Care to offer any suggestions on the topic?



Not missing your point at all. If you and I locked up (with your grappling experience) and following your "safer techniques" you think I could just get up without you attempting to pull me back down to the ground? Would you just allow me to stand back up on my feet? You seem to think like a grappler who will always be fighting a grappler who will choose to battle you on the ground.

If I followed your advice to get back to my feet safely what the hell would you do? Stand up where you aren't as comfortable? NO you would attempt to get me back on the ground. 

As far as my techniques I'm not changing them....I could write a small novel on all the variables but discussions go in different directions. That's just how it goes


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> BTW - you seem to be attaching a lot of importance to the whole "forget technique, focus on all-out survival instinct and fighting fury" approach.  You never did answer my question (back on page 53) on how you would go about ingraining that mindset in someone who didn't already have it.  Care to offer any suggestions on the topic?


Actually, thus is a really good point. I'm not so sure about the 'fighting fury' but I agree totally with the 'forget technique' and just use what comes to hand. But that is top level training. It just is not possible to teach that to a beginner, IMHO.
:asian:


----------



## SENC-33

Tony

As far as ingraining survival instincts into people that is natural. One upping the natural part to add "fury" I don't have a textbook message for other than to train with people who do have it. But don't forget I am not a teacher with a class of students. I haven't told a single person here to train the way I do. I do local seminars from time to time and cross train with other gyms when asked but the core group of guys who train with me are like minded individuals. All but a couple of them are prior military who stayed in North Carolina after their service was up.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

SENC-33 said:


> Not missing your point at all.



The reason I suggest that is because you keep reiterating the whole message of "get to your feet right away, you BJJers are going to get your heads kicked in by choosing to stay on the ground" as if we were advocating staying on the ground or as if we hadn't already agreed that getting up quickly was a priority.



SENC-33 said:


> If you and I locked up (with your grappling experience) and following your "safer techniques" you think I could just get up without you attempting to pull me back down to the ground? Would you just allow me to stand back up on my feet? You seem to think like a grappler who will always be fighting a grappler who will choose to battle you on the ground.
> 
> If I followed your advice to get back to my feet safely what the hell would you do? Stand up where you aren't as comfortable? *NO you would attempt to get me back on the ground.*



By "you" do you mean me specifically?  Then you are incorrect.  Please see the point I just made above and that I have made repeatedly in this conversation.

Or by "you" do you mean some generic opponent who has tackled you to the ground and is determined to keep you there? I suppose that opponent might try to drag you back down if you executed a technical escape and got back to your feet.  By that same token, they would also try to drag you back down if you managed to escape by relying on pure instinct and physical attributes.  What's your point?  



SENC-33 said:


> You seem to think like a grappler who will always be fighting a grappler who will choose to battle you on the ground.



Please point to even one sentence I have written that suggests this in the slightest.



			
				SENC-33 said:
			
		

> As far as ingraining survival instincts into people that is natural. One upping the natural part to add "fury" I don't have a textbook message for other than to train with people who do have it. But don't forget I am not a teacher with a class of students. I haven't told a single person here to train the way I do.



Fair enough.  I asked because of your earlier question about whether I would prefer to teach technique or survival instinct:



			
				SENC-33 said:
			
		

> If you were giving a seminar to a group of people on ground self defense (with zero experience in anything) and you had 3 hours to instruct them on what to do in the case that they were attacked and taken to the ground by a BJJ grappler, what would you teach them? Would you teach them a couple BJJ techniques and send them on their way hoping for the best? Would you teach them to prey to god and hope everything turns out ok? Or would you teach them to scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them? I'm talking a group of strangers with no training that will go out into the world with what you have taught them in 3 hours and never step foot in a dojo again.



That seems to imply that you think it is possible and desirable to teach inexperienced students to "scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them."  If you don't know how to do it, then I'm not sure why you were advocating for it.

Frankly, this conversation seems to be going nowhere.  From my standpoint, it seems that you are being vague, inconsistent, and self-contradictory in your claims while responding to assumptions in your head about what people are thinking rather than anything they are actually writing.  Unless you have something new to say, I'll leave you to enjoy your training.


----------



## Steve

Tony Dismukes said:


> It also seems like you're framing this whole discussion in terms of who is tougher or more badass.  Neither Steve nor I have claimed that we are more deadly than you or that we could beat you in a fight or that our art is better than yours or anything of the sort.  (In fact I've specifically disavowed any such claims.)


Regarding this, I'm not a badass at all.  I'm a big teddy bear.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> The 2 bolded statements above show how little you know of striking, yeah throwing an unrefined and sloppy punch or kick is easy, striking hard, fast, accurate, focussed and effective is hard and takes a lot of training, anyone who has been hit hard by a trained traditional martial artist can attest to that.



Which is why TMA guys usually get their butts handed to them by untrained brawlers right? You don't need to train in traditional arts to throw a good punch, you just need to know how to punch, and its very easy to learn how to punch. All you really need is a punching bag and two hands. Good enough to fight professionally? Nah. Good enough to beat the average guy coming out of a dojo? Sure.



> I have already explained how and in what circumstances that will work.



Yes you have, and I find them even more hilarious when you try to explain it. I yearn for the day I see the video of your class practicing that technique. I bet you guys have one guy coming in for the tackle, and another student karate chopping them in the back of the head, and the tackling student collapses in front of you.

Do you go "Hee-Yah!" when you do the chop? That would be icing on the cake. :lol:



> That was just lift up and roll over, they may have just thought of that themselves. Oh and look at 0:11 and 0:19 the guy on the bottom can reach the other guy's neck.



The goal of that move is to move from a position of weakness to a position of dominance without relying on physical strength. Is it a perfect move? No. However, its far more reliable than shin kicks to the back of the head, or knees to the kidneys while a person is sitting on your sternum punching you in the face.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Which is why TMA guys usually get their butts handed to them by untrained brawlers right? You don't need to train in traditional arts to throw a good punch, you just need to know how to punch, and its very easy to learn how to punch. All you really need is a punching bag and two hands. Good enough to fight professionally? Nah. Good enough to beat the average guy coming out of a dojo? Sure.
> 
> :bs:
> 
> Yes you have, and I find them even more hilarious when you try to explain it. I yearn for the day I see the video of your class practicing that technique. I bet you guys have one guy coming in for the tackle, and another student karate chopping them in the back of the head, and the tackling student collapses in front of you.
> 
> Do you go "Hee-Yah!" when you do the chop? That would be icing on the cake. :lol:
> 
> :bs:


you are off the scale.   :BSmeter:


----------



## SENC-33

Tony Dismukes said:


> The reason I suggest that is because you keep reiterating the whole message of "get to your feet right away, you BJJers are going to get your heads kicked in by choosing to stay on the ground" as if we were advocating staying on the ground or as if we hadn't already agreed that getting up quickly was a priority.
> 
> 
> 
> By "you" do you mean me specifically?  Then you are incorrect.  Please see the point I just made above and that I have made repeatedly in this conversation.
> 
> Or by "you" do you mean some generic opponent who has tackled you to the ground and is determined to keep you there? I suppose that opponent might try to drag you back down if you executed a technical escape and got back to your feet.  By that same token, they would also try to drag you back down if you managed to escape by relying on pure instinct and physical attributes.  What's your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Please point to even one sentence I have written that suggests this in the slightest.
> 
> 
> 
> Fair enough.  I asked because of your earlier question about whether I would prefer to teach technique or survival instinct:
> 
> 
> 
> That seems to imply that you think it is possible and desirable to teach inexperienced students to "scrap and fight for their lives with everything they have inside them."  If you don't know how to do it, then I'm not sure why you were advocating for it.
> 
> Frankly, this conversation seems to be going nowhere.  From my standpoint, it seems that you are being vague, inconsistent, and self-contradictory in your claims while responding to assumptions in your head about what people are thinking rather than anything they are actually writing.  Unless you have something new to say, I'll leave you to enjoy your training.



Tony I have never advocated the ground training I do to ANYBODY on here. This entire debacle started when one of you pretty much told me I was "unrealistic" for thinking I could reach a trained ground fighters eyes or throat. From there it went in a dozen different directions.......at the sake of going back and forth and getting nowhere I will "try" to wrap it up with this.

I have NEVER; not even once in all my years of involvement in real life situations seen a trained grappler take a guy to the ground, mount him and do any kind of damage to the guy on the bottom. I have never seen an armbar or even a choke out. I'm sure it happens but never seen it. What I have seen is a lot of rolling around, wild punches being thrown, thrashing about and utter chaos. I have also seen (as mentioned many times before) a lot of ribs broke and heads kicked from bystanders. In every BJJ gym I have ever cross trained at I have seen 2 guys rolling around on a mat mounting each other and choking and locking each other up in a "competition" on the ground. I haven't seen one thing in any BJJ gym I have ever been to that looked anything like self defense. Maybe it's just the places I have been to or the videos I have seen but it all looks the same to me. Just my personal opinion but the last thing I am worried about during an altercation is being taken to the ground and "kept on the ground" by a grappler. I train on the ground all the time but I train for that mass chaos that I have always seen because the odds are better that this scenario is more likely to happen. I am sure you have talent on a mat and you could probably lock me up on a mat when we are "competing" but outside the gym on the street I'm not concerned about my survivalist strategy one bit.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zack Cart said:


> Someday I hope there's a film based on this thread...



Knowing the world the way it is someone will make a reality TV show about it, they make them about just about everything else.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Which is why TMA guys usually get their butts handed to them by untrained brawlers right?



No that is how untrained brawlers get hurt.



Hanzou said:


> You don't need to train in traditional arts to throw a good punch, you just need to know how to punch, and its very easy to learn how to punch. All you really need is a punching bag and two hands. Good enough to fight professionally? Nah. Good enough to beat the average guy coming out of a dojo? Sure.



By your reasoning, you do not have to train BJJ to put someone on the ground, jump on top of them or twist their arm or choke someone, all you need is a body with arms and legs and a partner and you will be good enough to beat an average BJJ practitioner - and I know that is simply not true. Once again your complete lack of understanding astounds me.



Hanzou said:


> Yes you have, and I find them even more hilarious when you try to explain it. I yearn for the day I see the video of your class practicing that technique. I bet you guys have one guy coming in for the tackle, and another student karate chopping them in the back of the head, and the tackling student collapses in front of you.



1) I am yet to see ANY video of YOU doing ANYTHING despite numerous requests by me, maybe after you post something credible I may show a video or two. 
2) Only Karate has karate chops.
3) Only someone with little experience would chop the back of the head because that would be silly - the target is the back of the neck or base of the skull where the head meets the spine.
4) That is only one of a number of techniques and for a specific situation.
5) Students in my school will only collapse in front of me in that situation if I was to actually hit them there full force and then there would be less students to train with.
6) I taught students that on Friday, did not take a video though, so I guess you will just have to miss out.
7) We do not make videos of our regular training, if someone wants to find out how we train all they have to do is come to a class and see for themselves.



Hanzou said:


> Do you go "Hee-Yah!" when you do the chop? That would be icing on the cake. :lol:



Are you 12 years old? Statements such as this only go to prove ignorance and immaturity.

Finally, and I'm sure I am not the only one who is wondering, did you escape from somewhere?


----------



## The Last Legionary

Seriously, grow up already children. Or are you incapable of discussing this topic without looking like colicky infants?


----------



## Bob Hubbard

*ADMIN NOTE

Thread Closed Pending Staff Review*


----------

