# Is Cross training detremental to your Life?



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 8, 2009)

I was woundering. This is day of Cross training and Mixing alot of different arts all day every day.

Here is an article from a Wing Chun Site I thought was interesting...Tell me what you think?


*Here is one Qoute from: *http://www.springtimesong.com/wctechnote4.htm



> _Split second mistakes will get you beat. _
> _When you confuse ideas or use conflicting principles in your fighting, you will lose to people who are good. If you hesitate because you don't know whether to back up, or to advance, or to turn you will lose to an opponent who has no hesitation in what they do. If you train in the methods of art A on Monday, art B on Tuesday and art C on Wednesday, then in the real fight which art will you use. At the slow speed, you have the option to use any art. At a high speed any hesitation could end your life. Many Jeet Kune Do people feel that the more arts they mix together the better. Wing Chun people disagree with this concept. If you are really serious about self defense and combat, you have to make up your mind what you really want to train! If you are just having fun and playing around then it doesn't matter what you _




​*Wang Kiu said*_: 






			The good thing about Bruce Lee was that he made up his mind to hit. All his intent was to get the fist through even if there was a mountain between him and his opponent. Yip Man did not like Bruce Lee shooting his mouth off. Wing Chun used to take a low profile. Wong Shun Leung and Bruce Lee did not take a low profile. Bruce started to teach the Cha Cha in the USA because he was the Hong Kong Cha Cha champion. No one was interested in the Cha Cha. Then Bruce switched to teaching Wing Chun. Then Wing Chun people said, "what qualifies you to teach Wing Chun? You don't know the third set, the dummy etc." Then Bruce did a lot of research to change the style and called it Jeet Kune Do.
		
Click to expand...

_ 

*Wang Kiu Said:*​


> In all my years of experience, even today, I have not found one reason why anything in Wing Chun needs to be changed. Wing Chun is a very perfect art. If you feel the need to change then still keep the classical art the same. Just tell the student why you feel you need to change. But don't change the original or all will eventually get lost.


----------



## geezer (Jan 8, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> I was woundering. This is day of Cross training and Mixing alot of different arts all day every day.
> 
> "Here is an article from a Wing Chun Site I thought was interesting...Tell me what you think?"
> 
> ...


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 8, 2009)

Okay...So your saying just randomly pulling techniques from other styles before you have mastered one system is usesless? Also would you say it would be better to for someone to practice only their style but to regularly spar with ten high level Fighters all from different styles. Or would it be more beneficial for that person to spar with no one and just learn two or three styles?

Which would make the person a more well rounded fighter?

_Check this out_*?*
*Patrick Chow Said:*


> When I asked Patrick if it is good to practice a few different styles at once, Patrick said if you practice one day with the elbow out and the next with the elbow in, what will you use in the real fight when you have no time to think? You will lose the fight because your mind will hesitate. You use what you practice, so you have to make up your mind what you want to practice.


 


geezer said:


> Yoshiyahu said:
> 
> 
> > I was woundering. This is day of Cross training and Mixing alot of different arts all day every day.
> ...


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 8, 2009)

I would say that in the long run it is better to be fully competent in your art and be ready to adapt what you have as the circumstances are presented to you.

Training is all about ironing out the "What if's .." in terms of principles rather than having a prepared kata for a thousand different circumstances. Skill in your art (and luck) is what allows you to survive a conflict, not being cross-trained in half a dozen different arts.

For myself, I proved this to my satisfaction when I used to spar with a chap who was mid-graded in seven different arts. When I was low grade, he could beat me handily simply by using a technique I'd never seen before. When I was black sash (kung fu), the reverse was true as, no matter what he pulled out of his mutli-kata grab-bag, I simply applied base principles in response and was never lost for a defence or a counter.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 8, 2009)

I would say that it is not detremental. In fact, it might be something that saves your life. Being stuck within a system might be a problem. Even in real life, technicians go extinct in the long run. It is those that can adapt that continue on. Training one extreme or the other (a grappler training striking, a striker-grappling) in your own style is ok and maybe be useful most of the time. But, if it is your life on the line and the other is an expert or very skilled in one of those areas, no one in your particular style can duplicate the skill and technical level of those people. Besides, even though you are cross training and add tech's, your still doing so from the view point and use of your style.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 8, 2009)

At what point does the two styles become some merged that your no longer looking through the point of view of one style any more but you see them both equally as one style together?


When they become so merged that you no longer see the differences just the similarities. What then?


Do you think its possible to see training three or more styles as being detremental and causing you to loose your life? 

For instance the movie the "The Five Deadly Venoms" There was a guy who learn all of their styles but he was not as strong as they were because he didn't specialize in one particular style. So on his own he couldn't fight one of them an win even though he had learn all their forms and drills? His master taught him all their Gung Fu. But they had only trained in one thing for longer period of time so their fighting in that one style was supeior to his combined style. 


If the Snake or Centepede had caught up with him before he met the Lizard he would have died for sure.




> When you confuse ideas or use conflicting principles in your fighting, you will lose to people who are good. If you hesitate because you don't know whether to back up, or to advance, or to turn you will lose to an opponent who has no hesitation in what they do. If you train in the methods of art A on Monday, art B on Tuesday and art C on Wednesday, then in the real fight which art will you use. At the slow speed, you have the option to use any art. At a high speed any hesitation could end your life. Many Jeet Kune Do people feel that the more arts they mix together the better. Wing Chun people disagree with this concept. If you are really serious about self defense and combat, you have to make up your mind what you really want to train! If you are just having fun and playing around then it doesn't matter what you train.





Hand Sword said:


> I would say that it is not detremental. In fact, it might be something that saves your life. Being stuck within a system might be a problem. Even in real life, technicians go extinct in the long run. It is those that can adapt that continue on. Training one extreme or the other (a grappler training striking, a striker-grappling) in your own style is ok and maybe be useful most of the time. But, if it is your life on the line and the other is an expert or very skilled in one of those areas, no one in your particular style can duplicate the skill and technical level of those people. Besides, even though you are cross training and add tech's, your still doing so from the view point and use of your style.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 8, 2009)

When a system becomes yours. (As it eventually happens to all) Then, you can flow easily from one range to another as it's all adapted to your specifics.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 8, 2009)

styles are somewhat artifical boundries set on a collection of techniques.  fighting is fighting, & effective principles are universal.  all styles have the same basic principles; primarily it is just the terminology & emphasis that changes.  

a martial artist should be encouraged to develop their own personal style to some extent.  once they do that, any art can be theirs with proper training.  i'll use myself as an example:

when i box, i like to bore in; i use direct footwork coupled with circular blocks & head movement to get infront of my opponent, uproot him, then hit him.  

when i do judo, i use footwork & gripping to get inside my opponent, uproot him, & throw him.

when i do jujitsu, i use circular motions with my hands & legs to get close to my opponent, then isolate a limb & attack it.  isolating a limb is the same as uprooting for all intents in purposes, you're just uprooting an arm or a leg instead of a whole body.  

so that's my personal style. i like to get close & destroy balance.  whatever attack i do once i get there is subjective.  bruce lee once said a punch is just a punch, a kick is just a kick.  i think if you have a good understanding of cross training, then an attack is just an attack, a defense is just a defense.  

jf


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 8, 2009)

Eaxactly! Well said jarrod. Everyone practices a style and tries to copy the teacher. With comfort, it eventually becomes your way of doing it, maybe with slight variations, but it still is "that style" just with a twist. In the end, from enough practice you will gain some adeptness at using your tech's and being effective with them, as countless have all ready-hence the many styles that have emerged and keep doing so.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 9, 2009)

Excellent Post Jarrod and Hand Sword. I enjoy how you show to posistive aspects to crosstraining. But we must realize all things have pro's and con's. You did a great job of sharing the Pro's. Now let me ask you what would be draw backs, weaknesses and hindering effects of cross training?

Please share the down side to cross training. What do you think would be the down side of cross training in contrast to all the wounderful posistives you share. I am saying negate all the great pro's but please share some of the con's you see as well?


----------



## jarrod (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Excellent Post Jarrod and Hand Sword. I enjoy how you show to posistive aspects to crosstraining. But we must realize all things have pro's and con's. You did a great job of sharing the Pro's. Now let me ask you what would be draw backs, weaknesses and hindering effects of cross training?
> 
> Please share the down side to cross training. What do you think would be the down side of cross training in contrast to all the wounderful posistives you share. I am saying negate all the great pro's but please share some of the con's you see as well?


 
i think that it is important to have a base art.  often the reason people have difficulties with crosstraining is because they are thinking of the different arts as truly different, rather than individual expressions of the same idea.  you can't see the similarities in principles if you don't even understand the principles of the art you're coming from.  now i don't think that means you can't study two arts at once as a beginner, but one of them should get most of your attention.  

so with that qualifier in mind, i can't really think of a negative.  you could say that, hypothetically, training a 2nd or 3rd art takes time away from your primary art.  but personally speaking, i am prone to burn out so this hasn't been the case for me.  right now i train 5-6 times a week in different arts.  you could say that i could spend all that time training jujitsu instead of boxing & judo as well.  but i wouldn't do jujitsu 5-6 times a week for very long.  i'd get bored, & drop down to a couple times a week.  cross training get's me doing more, & so far i haven't suffered any confusion.  i'm also very fortunate to have extremely open-minded coaches who share my interest in exploring the similarities between fighting arts.

jf


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 9, 2009)

Beat me to it!


----------



## jarrod (Jan 9, 2009)

the advantage of working a night shift with little actual work to do.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> At what point does the two styles become some merged that your no longer looking through the point of view of one style any more but you see them both equally as one style together?
> 
> 
> When they become so merged that you no longer see the differences just the similarities. What then?
> ...




Are you basing this train of thought off of a movie???  

Even high ranking people in (insert any art here) can lose to untrained fighters.  There are people that maybe grew up in bad areas and "learned  on the fly" or were picked on and had to fight a lot in their youth and had to back themselves up.  Then you have people with naturally athletic attributes and are naturally quicker and tougher.  We used to box and wrestle in friends basements or yards all the time.  There were many things I picked up from just doing that and as a result had positive effects for me in actual fights...especially in getting off of the ground.  Cross training would be no different in this aspect because you are going to react wether you are a master in one or master in none.  There are "masters" out there that never even been in a street fight, let alone sparred with contact.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 9, 2009)

I do see your point Yoshiyahu.  Some people can and do make one art work in all aspects and ideally, a perfect base would be the way to go before cross training.  The problem is that if you are limited solely to one way of fighting against another "one way" of fighting, one would be limiting itself from the other.  Karate and TKD for example are technique based arts where as Wing Chun (as I understand it at this point) is principle based, therefore making it more adaptable.

Hopefully I wrote this to convey my point clearly and not with a condescending tone.  I can only write from what I have learned...and I am still learning.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2009)

Sigh....against my better judgement, I decided to throw myself into this deadhorse debate once again. I will start by saying, I highly doubt anything new will come about this. I mean, look at those huge threads in this section on the same subject. The people involved will most likely not change their way of thinking.

That being said...its simple...if you want to crosstrain, do it. If you don't, then don't. Its that simple. I would suggest not crosstraining until you have a solid base art first. In other words, wait until you're in the advanced/black belt ranks. So that should put you in your base art somewhere around 5-6 yrs. If you can't understand the base system by that time, may as well hang up your belt. It should not take 30yrs. 

As for being confused on what techs. to use...I don't see that happening. Heres why. When I train a punch tech., I'll usually do it the standard way the first couple of times. I then have my partner begin to resist. Resisting can come in the form of throwing other strikes, moving while I'm attempting to strike, trying to counter what I'm doing, changing from a striking attack to a grappling attack. So, this is training me to adapt and be able to flow to something else. If I'm trying to do something and its not working, I need to do something else. If he grabs me, working a punch defense is fruitless, so I need to change to a Kenpo defense against whatever grab he's doing on me. 

This is the goal...to be able to adapt and flow from one thing to the next. I get the impression that some are either not working on that, or are not at that point in their training yet, because its not as difficult as some of you are making it seem. Just yesterday in a private lesson with my Kenpo teacher, we were running thru some techs. about half speed. We did each one 2 times, the first, letting me do the tech. as written, the second, with him blocking my counters. So, it forced me to simply alter where I would strike him. If the strike was towards the head and he blocked or moved me in a way that would not allow that to happen, I simply picked another target to hit with that same strike or if that strike was not the right one for that target, I simply changed the strike to something else.

So, yes, this can be done with other arts as well. However, no sense in repeating myself, as its already been said in the other threads.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay...So your saying just randomly pulling techniques from other styles before you have mastered one system is usesless?


 
Let me say this.  If I can improve my kicking my taking a stretching method from TKD, I'm going to do it.  If I can better a jab/cross combo by working with a boxer on just that move, I'll do it.  I'll take just that ONE combo, and drill the hell out of it.  Thats it, thats the only thing I'd take.  Drill over and over and over, every day, hitting the bag, hitting the focus mitts.

I train in BJJ.  However, my goal is not to get rank.  My goal is to get good at the basics.  I'm not interested in learning 40 mount escapes, 40 guard passes, or 40 side mount escapes.   Instead I have my favs. that I drill over and over and over.  So, when I find myself in the mount, I have my fav. techs. the ones I've worked hundreds of times, to rely on.  Its not different than a punch tech.  I have a huge number of straight punch defenses, however, I have my fav. ones, the ones that I put more attention on, the ones I feel most comfortable using.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2009)

dungeonworks said:


> Are you basing this train of thought off of a movie???


 
Looks like it to me.



> Even high ranking people in (insert any art here) can lose to untrained fighters. There are people that maybe grew up in bad areas and "learned on the fly" or were picked on and had to fight a lot in their youth and had to back themselves up. Then you have people with naturally athletic attributes and are naturally quicker and tougher. We used to box and wrestle in friends basements or yards all the time. There were many things I picked up from just doing that and as a result had positive effects for me in actual fights...especially in getting off of the ground. Cross training would be no different in this aspect because you are going to react wether you are a master in one or master in none. There are "masters" out there that never even been in a street fight, let alone sparred with contact.


 
Enough said.  Can't add anything more to the above!  Good post!


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2009)

I would say that it depends entirely upon four things: the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the desired outcome.   

Once again, and I know I sound like a broken record, my belief is that it's not often the techniques involved, but how they're trained that makes the difference.  If the techniques are poorly integrated, it would have more to do with how the person trains than what they're training.  Poorly integrated technique occurs all the time even in one style as a result of poor training.  Crosstraining has little to do with it.

The intent seems to be to conclude that it's either bad or good to crosstrain, or that one should only crosstrain if the moons are in alignment or the timing is otherwise right.  I disagree with any hard and fast conclusion.  It all depends on the person, the styles involved, the desired outcome and how the person trains.


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 9, 2009)

I cross train. I was told this by a master in Japan:

"Master body movement and you can master any art"

I see more in common in the different arts than I see difference.

If you can cook one great dish people will remember it
If you can cook several good dishes people will be full.
In the end both accomplish the same thing joy.

This metaphor shows those who want to practice one art 
and those who cross train accomplishing the same goal of being a competent fighter.

As humans we are always thinking we are always trying to evolve it is within our nature to be curious,adaptive,and process things to insure our survival.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2009)

I don't believe cross training damages you however when training cross I usually end up hurting my knuckles.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Jan 9, 2009)

> styles are somewhat artifical boundries set on a collection of techniques. fighting is fighting, & effective principles are universal. all styles have the same basic principles; primarily it is just the terminology & emphasis that changes.
> 
> a martial artist should be encouraged to develop their own personal style to some extent. once they do that, any art can be theirs with proper training. i'll use myself as an example:
> 
> ...


 


> i think that it is important to have a base art. often the reason people have difficulties with crosstraining is because they are thinking of the different arts as truly different, rather than individual expressions of the same idea. you can't see the similarities in principles if you don't even understand the principles of the art you're coming from. now i don't think that means you can't study two arts at once as a beginner, but one of them should get most of your attention.


 
For me this was the highlight of the thread. Jarrod, I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 9, 2009)

No, I am not basing my train of thought off a movie. I utlize the movies lines as a simple comparison most people interested in Kung Fu would be able to relate too. But if I wanted to based it on something. I would base it on the words of Grand Masters and Masters who have actually fought and sparred full contact fights. Who thus said it is dangerous. Anyway. As for your comment. Let me add upon it. Lets say you train Karate only. An you get with a bunch of guys from different styles. You start a fight club and all of you challenge and fight one another. Over time you adapt your Karate to be able to defeat, defend and attack people of different skill sets. You adapt and evolve by fighting different styles. This is not the same as cross training. True you get experience but its not corss training.

*You said*: 





> _We used to box and wrestle in friends basements or yards all the time. There were many things I picked up from just doing that and as a result had positive effects for me in actual fights...especially in getting off of the ground_.


 
I totally agree we should fight people of other styles to evolve and learn more about our own art. Discovering our personal limitations and what we need to improve or innovate.


dungeonworks said:


> Are you basing this train of thought off of a movie???
> 
> Even high ranking people in (insert any art here) can lose to untrained fighters. There are people that maybe grew up in bad areas and "learned on the fly" or were picked on and had to fight a lot in their youth and had to back themselves up. Then you have people with naturally athletic attributes and are naturally quicker and tougher. We used to box and wrestle in friends basements or yards all the time. There were many things I picked up from just doing that and as a result had positive effects for me in actual fights...especially in getting off of the ground. Cross training would be no different in this aspect because you are going to react wether you are a master in one or master in none. There are "masters" out there that never even been in a street fight, let alone sparred with contact.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> No, I am not basing my train of thought off a movie. I utlize the movies lines as a simple comparison most people interested in Kung Fu would be able to relate too. But if I wanted to based it on something. I would base it on the words of Grand Masters and Masters who have actually fought and sparred full contact fights. Who thus said it is dangerous.


 
So in other words, instead of finding things out for yourself, you always take the word of someone else?  This sounds like a page out of a thread that I've been involved in, where I was debating with some hardcore MMA people.  These folks were so deadset in saying that X would not work because its never been used in the ring, or X wouldn't work because Rickson doesn't use it, so it must be a low percentage move.  BTW, I'm not intending this to be a shot at MMA people, but I'm sure we've all seen what I'm talking about.

IMHO, each and every person should find out what works for THEM.  I hate the line of, "Well, my Master said it works and his Master said it works, and, and, and......."  Sorry, but we're all built differently, so what this persons "master" says, may not apply to each and every person.


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> No, I am not basing my train of thought off a movie. I utlize the movies lines as a simple comparison most people interested in Kung Fu would be able to relate too. But if I wanted to based it on something. I would base it on the words of Grand Masters and Masters who have actually fought and sparred full contact fights. Who thus said it is dangerous.


But do you train as these Grand Masters of yore trained?  You even say "the way the grand masters who have actually fought and sparred full contact fights"?  Isn't that the secret ingredient?  That to me is crucial.  

I may have the golf swing of Tiger Woods, able to drive a golf ball over 300 yards on the driving range.  If I don't every play a round of golf, my skills are incomplete because I haven't integrated my training.  I've never dealt with a bad lie, rain, fatigue or noise.  

I said this in the other BJJ/WC thread, but it's relevant here.  It's telling to me that the people who are referenced as authorities all seem to have cross trained, and all seem to have sparred full contact, and all seem to have applied the techniques in what is now commonly referred to as an "alive" way of training using the three I's of Introduction, Isolation and Integration.  It seems to me to be very much a "do as I say, not as I do" situation, and I think it does you a disservice.  I can't take credit for effectiveness based upon what my teacher or his teacher are able to do unless I actually walk the walk.  

Or said another way, Helio Gracie is a badass.  I am not, even though we both train BJJ.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 9, 2009)

Okay. So in other words you want me to share my personal experiences on why I feel Cross training is determental? Is that what your saying? 
My opinion is different. But I am more bias to reason for cross training. But let me say this. I don't think cross training will make you a better fighter. It may give you an edge over some people but not all. To become a better fighter you have to fight alot. You need to fight people of all skill levels and you need fight people of other styles An learn from your experiences not other people words or martial arts systems or principals. You learn ten different styles with 10 different principals each. That won't make you a better figther than Mr. Chung Wong the Tiger Claw Fighter who has been fighting and sparring people of different styles for twenty years. Chong Wong is a totally ficticous charater so no need to google him...lol...

My point is this if your cross training to fill the gaps of your style....you may be doing it for the wrong reasons.




MJS said:


> So in other words, instead of finding things out for yourself, you always take the word of someone else? This sounds like a page out of a thread that I've been involved in, where I was debating with some hardcore MMA people. These folks were so deadset in saying that X would not work because its never been used in the ring, or X wouldn't work because Rickson doesn't use it, so it must be a low percentage move. BTW, I'm not intending this to be a shot at MMA people, but I'm sure we've all seen what I'm talking about.
> 
> IMHO, each and every person should find out what works for THEM. I hate the line of, "Well, my Master said it works and his Master said it works, and, and, and......." Sorry, but we're all built differently, so what this persons "master" says, may not apply to each and every person.


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay. So in other words you want me to share my personal experiences on why I feel Cross training is determental? Is that what your saying?
> .


Not quite what I was getting at.  I'm presuming that what you've been sharing are your personal experiences and opinions.  What I was driving at is that you can't use someone else's skill as evidence of your own current or potential future skill unless your training is equivalent.  You have to have all the pieces.  If I trained in Western Boxing but only ever hit the bags and shadow boxed, I'd NEVER progress pass a certain point.  Cross training becomes academic because I won't ever integrate even the skills within my primary discipline.  I can't use Muhammed Ali as an example as his training is fundamentally different than my own even though the style is the same.  

That's what is continuously done in these threads.   You denounce cross training but do so using flawed logic.  

I have no problems with whether someone cross trains or not.  I can see both sides of the coin and as I've said, I think it's very, very subjective depending upon the four criteria I mentioned earlier.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 9, 2009)

MJS said:


> That being said...its simple...if you want to crosstrain, do it. If you don't, then don't. Its that simple. I would suggest not crosstraining until you have a solid base art first. In other words, wait until you're in the advanced/black belt ranks. So that should put you in your base art somewhere around 5-6 yrs. If you can't understand the base system by that time, may as well hang up your belt. It should not take 30yrs.


 
Agreed, no sense in me repeating it here



MJS said:


> IMHO, each and every person should find out what works for THEM. I hate the line of, "Well, my Master said it works and his Master said it works, and, and, and......." Sorry, but we're all built differently, so what this persons "master" says, may not apply to each and every person.


 
Again agreed


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay. So in other words you want me to share my personal experiences on why I feel Cross training is determental? Is that what your saying?


 
Did you read what I said?  I said for each person to decide for themselves what works for them, not to go by what works for 10 other people.  Everyone is different.



> My opinion is different. But I am more bias to reason for cross training. But let me say this. I don't think cross training will make you a better fighter. It may give you an edge over some people but not all. To become a better fighter you have to fight alot. You need to fight people of all skill levels and you need fight people of other styles An learn from your experiences not other people words or martial arts systems or principals. You learn ten different styles with 10 different principals each. That won't make you a better figther than Mr. Chung Wong the Tiger Claw Fighter who has been fighting and sparring people of different styles for twenty years. Chong Wong is a totally ficticous charater so no need to google him...lol...


 
Nothing will give you a 100% guarentee that it will work.  You're preaching to the choir my friend.  



> My point is this if your cross training to fill the gaps of your style....you may be doing it for the wrong reasons.


 
As I've said oh, probably a thousand times now...any art has the ability to defend against weapons, grabs, knives, guns, grapplers, etc.  However, as I have already said, it may be necessary to expand by training with someone who specializes in a certain area.  Again, if someone doesn't want to, thats fine.  Speaking for myself, I like to train in BJJ and Arnis, as they're both arts that specialize in particular areas.  I've made changes to my Kenpo with both arts.  Again, I still atempt to keep with the Kenpo defense, but the other arts have expanded my knowledge.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 9, 2009)

some people really over-analyze this issue.  i like to make candles.  i don't make candles to fill the gaps in my hobby of playing guitar.  i just like to play guitar & make candles.

jf


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 9, 2009)

jarrod said:


> some people really over-analyze this issue. i like to make candles. i don't make candles to fill the gaps in my hobby of playing guitar. i just like to play guitar & make candles.
> 
> jf


 
But would it be ok to make guitar shaped candles


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 9, 2009)

It should be since they share the same core principles....strings. :ultracool


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2009)

Technically, it's a wick. Confusing a wick and a string in a moment of crisis could be a disaster.   And that's why cross training is bad. 

Reminds me of Princess Bride: "Truly you have a dizzying intellect." "Wait til I get going!"


----------



## jarrod (Jan 9, 2009)

actually i use cloth strings for the wick.  sometimes, i do get confused: i pluck my wicks & burn my guitar strings.

i guess cross-training can be detrimental.

jf


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 9, 2009)

OH MAN..Now you all have me so confused I filled my guitar full of wax and lit the strings or are the wicks.....


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 9, 2009)

I did agree with one point...let me share.....


Someone said something about taking the stretches from like TKD and using them to become more flexible. This is probably what my Sifu did. Because he taught me strecthes from my head to my toes. But these same streches I also see in Phyiscal education and even in many Shaolin and Gung fu books. Also many of streches bruce lee did are also from Shaolin and Gung Fu books. I see track runners and other atheletes using the same streches as Tae Kwon Do. But I think the best Stecthing formula would come from Ballet in my humble opion. Because they are most limber I have ever seen. Of course the streching regiment of Karate would come next and then after that would be Tae Kwn Do. But either way. If you practice TKD Kicks, Some Judo throws,Some Aikido arm Locks. In my opinion your still doing Wing Chun. Wing Chun doesn't kick above the waist that often. But that doesn't mean Wing Chun can not kick High. It just usually tries to choose the most direct path. But their are always exceptions to rule in actual fight and in training. For one When you train Wing Chun you need to be able to throw High kicks in order to do partner drills where you can defend against high round house kicks to head. You need to work on joint locks and throws so you know how to apply them in Wing Chun. Wing Chun uses grappling and Chin Na. So you have Judo and Aikido also with in the WC system. 

Wing Chun fights inside mostly. But Wing Chun can fight outside too. Wing Chun doesn't usually throw long punches but it does in demostration to show defenses. 

So the principals of Wing Chun are designed to give you the best advantage in a fight. 

But exceptions to every rule...

In Wing Chun you can throw long puncs
Throw High Kicks
Do Wrestling moves(Feel your opponent on the ground)
Inact Chin Na techniques


But there is nothing wrong with Cross training for fun. But its for combat purposes there may be a problem. You need contact sparring with people of other styles and those in your system more skilled than you. Now there is nothing wrong with drawing from other systems in a fight either. 

How ever we agree to agree on these issues:

*A beginner in any art shouldn't cross train two arts until he has foundation in atleast one art first.

*A person who cross trains should have one style that is main style that he draws from. 

But I do say study Throws and Joint Lock techniques Study High kicks. Study Wrestling. But study your WC more. Do not neglect your WC to go train in another style for two years and keep flip flopping...

I feel training two new styles at once is extremely hard. Like if your a golden glove boxer and start training Karate and Tae Kwon Do to increase your hard style combat with kicks and chops along with aerial Kicks and high stamina kicks. It will be harder to become one with the two new styles. It will take longer for your body to comform to both styles. It will take longer to remember the basics and forms too. These are some draw backs in my humble Opinion I am now facing. But any way You may feel differently thats cool. 


Personally I think Wing Chun is a great style that doesn't need any cross training to become a better fighter. I also feel the same about Five Animals, Xing Yi Quan, Tai Chi Chaun, Eagle Claw, Pak Mei, Bagua Zhang etc. If you practice these styles and progress to a mastery level you won't need another style to supplement them. 

But I do see a benefit to cross training. Its about being deceptive. Like for instance. When I spar or fight. I throw up a boxing guard. This way the average street fighter feels comfortable. An he expects to fight a boxers fight. Then When the clinch comes inside fighting springs up. Along with some wing chun kicks. When distance is regain then outside long fighting comes. Long Kicks and Long Punches. So inside they are terrorize and outside they are terrorize. 





stevebjj said:


> Not quite what I was getting at. I'm presuming that what you've been sharing are your personal experiences and opinions. What I was driving at is that you can't use someone else's skill as evidence of your own current or potential future skill unless your training is equivalent. You have to have all the pieces. If I trained in Western Boxing but only ever hit the bags and shadow boxed, I'd NEVER progress pass a certain point. Cross training becomes academic because I won't ever integrate even the skills within my primary discipline. I can't use Muhammed Ali as an example as his training is fundamentally different than my own even though the style is the same.
> 
> That's what is continuously done in these threads. You denounce cross training but do so using flawed logic.
> 
> I have no problems with whether someone cross trains or not. I can see both sides of the coin and as I've said, I think it's very, very subjective depending upon the four criteria I mentioned earlier.


----------



## Steve (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshi.  What you're doing isn't judo or aikido.  I wouldn't go to a science teacher to learn French and I wouldn't pretend to learn some judo from a WC sifu.  This was exactly my criticism on the Emin video posted by Sije.  In that video, he "defended" against flawed technique. 

I won't argue against having a primary style, but I would say that it really depends.  For some, I'm sure you're right.  But I can learn to play two things at once.  Most people can.  While it certainly does depend upon the person, I think you're selling most people short.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 9, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> I feel training two new styles at once is extremely hard. Like if your a golden glove boxer and start training Karate and Tae Kwon Do to increase your hard style combat with kicks and chops along with aerial Kicks and high stamina kicks. It will be harder to become one with the two new styles. It will take longer for your body to comform to both styles. It will take longer to remember the basics and forms too. These are some draw backs in my humble Opinion I am now facing. But any way You may feel differently thats cool.


 
on another thread along this topic i mentioned that all styles are the product of crosstraining. what you described here (karate & boxing) is just kickboxing, & it's really not any more difficult to learn than anything else.  the only difference is whether you train them already synthesized (kickboxing) or seperate (karate & boxing).  

jf


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 10, 2009)

What is your definition of Aikido?

What is your definition of Judo?

I have taken both. An I can say with in the WC system I learn there are already aspects of both Judo and Aikido with in system. You just need to consult your sifu about the techniques to learn how to drill them...





stevebjj said:


> Yoshi. What you're doing isn't judo or aikido. I wouldn't go to a science teacher to learn French and I wouldn't pretend to learn some judo from a WC sifu. This was exactly my criticism on the Emin video posted by Sije. In that video, he "defended" against flawed technique.
> 
> I won't argue against having a primary style, but I would say that it really depends. For some, I'm sure you're right. But I can learn to play two things at once. Most people can. While it certainly does depend upon the person, I think you're selling most people short.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 10, 2009)

so if i have one of my jujitsu students attack me with lots of forward pressure & linear punches, am i learning to fight against wing chun?  or am i learning to fight against a jujitsuka imitating WC?

jf


----------



## Archangel M (Jan 10, 2009)

"Is Cross training detremental to your Life?"

If you depend on keeping students in your doors for the cash it may be. *smirk*


----------



## MJS (Jan 10, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> I did agree with one point...let me share.....
> 
> 
> Someone said something about taking the stretches from like TKD and using them to become more flexible. This is probably what my Sifu did. Because he taught me strecthes from my head to my toes. But these same streches I also see in Phyiscal education and even in many Shaolin and Gung fu books. Also many of streches bruce lee did are also from Shaolin and Gung Fu books. I see track runners and other atheletes using the same streches as Tae Kwon Do. But I think the best Stecthing formula would come from Ballet in my humble opion. Because they are most limber I have ever seen. Of course the streching regiment of Karate would come next and then after that would be Tae Kwn Do. But either way. If you practice TKD Kicks, Some Judo throws,Some Aikido arm Locks. In my opinion your still doing Wing Chun. Wing Chun doesn't kick above the waist that often. But that doesn't mean Wing Chun can not kick High. It just usually tries to choose the most direct path. But their are always exceptions to rule in actual fight and in training. For one When you train Wing Chun you need to be able to throw High kicks in order to do partner drills where you can defend against high round house kicks to head. You need to work on joint locks and throws so you know how to apply them in Wing Chun. Wing Chun uses grappling and Chin Na. So you have Judo and Aikido also with in the WC system.


 
Yes, that was me that mentioned TKD and the stretching.  That was simply an example.  IMO, it seems like you're still grasping at something, trying to dismiss the examples to justify your points.  The borrowing can be applied to anything.  Note I also used the boxing as an example.  Seems that when an example is given, you say that it doesn't apply to WC.  Note that I also said that if you didnt want to crosstrain, to not do it.




> But I do say study Throws and Joint Lock techniques Study High kicks. Study Wrestling. But study your WC more. Do not neglect your WC to go train in another style for two years and keep flip flopping...


 
Did you get the impression that I suggested otherwise?  Show me where I said to stop your base art.  I've been doing Kenpo for over 20yrs. yet I still crosstrain.  Still doing Kenpo.  



> I feel training two new styles at once is extremely hard. Like if your a golden glove boxer and start training Karate and Tae Kwon Do to increase your hard style combat with kicks and chops along with aerial Kicks and high stamina kicks. It will be harder to become one with the two new styles. It will take longer for your body to comform to both styles. It will take longer to remember the basics and forms too. These are some draw backs in my humble Opinion I am now facing. But any way You may feel differently thats cool.


 
Are you reading any replies before you post?  If you were, you'd notice that I said that one should have a solid base art first, waiting at least until the upper ranks, which would most likely put the person at around 5-6 yrs in a base first BEFORE  starting to crosstrain.




> Personally I think Wing Chun is a great style that doesn't need any cross training to become a better fighter. I also feel the same about Five Animals, Xing Yi Quan, Tai Chi Chaun, Eagle Claw, Pak Mei, Bagua Zhang etc. If you practice these styles and progress to a mastery level you won't need another style to supplement them.


 
Then dont crosstrain!  Why do you start threads like this, then dismiss all the suggestions?  



> But I do see a benefit to cross training. Its about being deceptive. Like for instance. When I spar or fight. I throw up a boxing guard. This way the average street fighter feels comfortable. An he expects to fight a boxers fight. Then When the clinch comes inside fighting springs up. Along with some wing chun kicks. When distance is regain then outside long fighting comes. Long Kicks and Long Punches. So inside they are terrorize and outside they are terrorize.


 
Man, if this and the above posts of yours are not contradicting, I don't know what is.  One post you're saying you don't need to crosstrain, and this in this one you do.


----------



## MJS (Jan 10, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> But there is nothing wrong with Cross training for fun. But its for combat purposes there may be a problem. You need contact sparring with people of other styles and those in your system more skilled than you. Now there is nothing wrong with drawing from other systems in a fight either.


 
Do you think that this isn't done?  This is the idea of crosstraining, to work with other arts, so of course its going to include pressure testing and sparring against the other arts.  Are you missing what I've been saying????

I dont know man, it seems that one minute you dismiss something, and then in the next post, you say the complete opposite.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 10, 2009)

MJS said:


> Do you think that this isn't done?  This is the idea of crosstraining, to work with other arts, so of course its going to include pressure testing and sparring against the other arts.  Are you missing what I've been saying????
> 
> I dont know man, it seems that one minute you dismiss something, and then in the next post, you say the complete opposite.



...or asks you to define it again! :uhyeah:


----------



## Steve (Jan 10, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> What is your definition of Aikido?
> 
> What is your definition of Judo?
> 
> I have taken both. An I can say with in the WC system I learn there are already aspects of both Judo and Aikido with in system. You just need to consult your sifu about the techniques to learn how to drill them...


I would say that aikido taught by a competent aikido instructor is aikido.  Just as Judo taught by a competent Judo instructor is Judo.

As a blue belt in BJJ, I am learning BJJ from a competent BJJ instructor, and have been for a few years now.  I am not, however, competent myself to TEACH BJJ.  So, while what I'm learning is teh r34l BJJ, I wouldn't then go to a Karate school and presume to uke for them with the idea that if they can beat me, they can defeat "a grappler."  Make sense?  

This is the value of cross training. It's dangerous to take an imperfect understanding of an art and then attempt to translate that imperfect understanding to another art (vis a vis Aikido/Judo/BJJ to WC).  Instead, it seems far better to learn WC from a WC sifu and BJJ from a BJJ Black Belt (or even a high Purple/Brown).  Then, as you gain experience in both, you can begin to synthesize the techniques for yourself.  After all, it's you (or me or whoever) who has to synthesize the techniques through application.

And once again, I'm not sure I agree that a base art is strictly necessary.  It can help, and I can certainly see it being good for some people.  But people all over are learning multiple athletic or academic activities at the same time.  We tend to treat Martial Arts differently than almost every other activity we learn.  I'm not sure why.   I can learn to play football and baseball at the same time... not actually at the same exact time, but you get the point.


----------



## MJS (Jan 10, 2009)

dungeonworks said:


> ...or asks you to define it again! :uhyeah:


 
Exactly.  Hmm...I'm thinking of a 7 letter word, starts with T........


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 10, 2009)

All of you have some great points...Jarrod I am n0ot sure what you mean by is he attcking Jujitsuka. Or Wing Chun. Well just because someone is being aggressive and linear punches doesn't mean they are doing Wing Chun. They could be doing Xing Yi or may be Karate. But ne way as for contradictiong statement. I am sharing both Posistives and Negatives of Cross training. As some have stated that its better to crosstrain after 4 to 6 years. You need a base art first. I totally agree.


As for me stating the benefits of cross training rhat is correct...There are benefits but not to know what other fighters are doing. The only way to truly do that by cross training would be take every art that people practice in America. I doubt even if that was your job no one can actually do that. But I stated some of the benefits of Crosstraining.

But I would like those support Crosstraining to share some of the negatives or cons of cross training?


So I haver shared both cons and pros...


Please MJS, Jarrod,Stevebjj Share the negatives of cross training?






jarrod said:


> so if i have one of my jujitsu students attack me with lots of forward pressure & linear punches, am i learning to fight against wing chun? or am i learning to fight against a jujitsuka imitating WC?
> 
> jf


 


MJS said:


> Do you think that this isn't done? This is the idea of crosstraining, to work with other arts, so of course its going to include pressure testing and sparring against the other arts. Are you missing what I've been saying????
> 
> I dont know man, it seems that one minute you dismiss something, and then in the next post, you say the complete opposite.


----------



## Steve (Jan 10, 2009)

I don't think there are any negatives to cross training.  To be clear, I draw a very firm distinction between cross training and dabbling.  If you have the time to devote a couple of nights each week to multiple styles, I think that it can only help you.  More is better, but 2 to 3 nights per week is enough to improve.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 10, 2009)

To the topic - "Is Cross training detremental to your Life?"

Oh for crying out loud :whip: if someone wants to cross train and they are serious about it who cares and it is not (insert sinister music) Detrimental to your Life. 

But then it would truely depend on how you define cross training and what your goals were in MA (but then this was already said a few posts back)

If your goal is to master a style, lets say Changquan then no you do not want to cross train because the other styles could potentially get in the way of learning Changquan and all is facets. Basically you do not want to train Changquan for a year and then start White Crane, you will only confuse yourself. 

If your goal is to learn all possible aspects as they are listed in the 21st century then cross training is necessary, not much ground fighting in Changquan

Does that mean Changquan cant handle a grappler, likely no if you have a well trained Changquan person I wouldnt want to be the one charging in and trying to go to the ground that is a great way to get upper body parts broken. 

If you have trained Changquan for many years, meaning greater than 10, and one afternoon while sitting at your favorite coffee shop enjoying a cup of coffee and a scone you thoughtHEY. You know I think Shuaijiao is pretty neat I might just give it a try I see nothing wrong or detrimental to your Life.

Actually I see nothing in any of those scenarios that I would say was (DA DA DAAAAA) detrimental to your Life. 

However if by cross training you mean a week or 2 of Changquan a few days of BJJ and couple if months of Taiji and week of Xingyiquan, a week of Wing Chun another couple of months Karate 2 days of Muay Thai a full day of TKD and a hour and a half of MMA you will likely be rather ineffective but still not detrimental to your Life, But if from that conglomerate of training you decide you are the ultimate warrior and go out looking for a fight then that might be approaching detrimental to your Life depending on who you pick a fight with (I suggest avoiding the local biker bar). But then if you train a month of Changquan and from that decide you are the ultimate warrior then that to could be rather detrimental to your Life depending on who you decided to fight with. 

Now this topic much like any topic that involves Martial Art "X" vs. Martial Art "Y" has been done to death and deserves :deadhorse :deadhorse

Now quit bothering me I have to clean all that damn wax out of my guitar and put on new strings... or was it wicks......


----------



## MJS (Jan 10, 2009)

To answer the question that was addressed to me...I agree with what Steve said in his last post.  Keep in mind, that there is no set time, IMO, to learn an art, when someone cross trains.  People talk all the time about how long this and that takes.  For me, time isnt a factor.  I train, take what I learn, drill it repeatedly, learn more, drill, etc.  I'll keep doing that until I can no longer train.  

I crosstrain for myself, not necessarily to teach others.  Sure, there're times when, during a Kenpo class, I'll show a lock flow from Arnis.  I make it clear that it is Arnis NOT Kenpo that they're learning.  I also make a point to show how that lock flow can fit into Kenpo.  If someone is really serious about learning more, I will teach them, or I will refer them to someone else to trains in the art.

I dont see the cons in cross training.  There is something that can be learned from every art IMHO.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 10, 2009)

Comical but true....

I agree with you on two to three points..

Also thank you for that...you are the first to address both the Pro's and Con's of Cross Training. I fear your wise beyond years. 


I look forward to discussing many other topics with you as well?

*Points of Agreement concerning the possible Con's*

*Xue Sheng*


> If your goal is to master a style, lets say Changquan then no you do not want to cross train because the other styles could potentially get in the way of learning Changquan and all is facets. Basically you do not want to train Changquan for a year and then start White Crane, you will only confuse yourself.


 

*Points of Agreements concerning* *Pro's*

*Xue Sheng*


> If you have trained Changquan for many years, meaning greater than 10, and one afternoon while sitting at your favorite coffee shop enjoying a cup of coffee and a scone you thoughtHEY. You know I think Shuaijiao is pretty neat I might just give it a try I see nothing wrong or detrimental to your Life.


 



Xue Sheng said:


> To the topic - "Is Cross training detremental to your Life?"
> 
> Oh for crying out loud :whip: if someone wants to cross train and they are serious about it who cares and it is not (insert sinister music) Detrimental to your Life.
> 
> ...


----------



## Steve (Jan 10, 2009)

Yoshi, are you suggesting that we should fabricate cons for the sake of argument?   That's what it sounds like to me.  Very strange.  Seriously.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 10, 2009)

There is always a pro and con to everything

From Reading a book from having sex with woman you just met. There are pro's and con's to drinking wine to eating beef. There are pro's and con's to studying Martial Arts to not studying Martial Arts. If you can not see both pro's and con's of Crosstraining to not cross training? Than I can't help you buddy.

But everything has pro's and con's


The only one thus far to prove that is the Magnificent Xue Sheng who has shared truth with us. He shared both benefits and drawbacks to cross training. I feel there is alot to learn Xue who is both humble and knowledgable.


Stevebjj let me asked?

Do you see and pro's and con's for cross training?

If so name just one Pro and One Con for cross training Two or more arts at the same time? 

*Xue Sheng Said*:





> However if by cross training you mean a week or 2 of Changquan a few days of BJJ and couple if months of Taiji and week of Xingyiquan, a week of Wing Chun another couple of months Karate 2 days of Muay Thai a full day of TKD and a hour and a half of MMA you will likely be rather ineffective but still not detrimental to your Life, But if from that conglomerate of training you decide you are the ultimate warrior and go out looking for a fight then that might be approaching detrimental to your Life depending on who you pick a fight with (I suggest avoiding the local biker bar).


 

*For those who don't know Changquan is "Longfist"




stevebjj said:


> Yoshi, are you suggesting that we should fabricate cons for the sake of argument? That's what it sounds like to me. Very strange. Seriously.


----------



## Steve (Jan 10, 2009)

Yoshi, I think that MJS, Jarrod and everyone else who has tried to approach this discussion seriously, has been careful to qualify their statements appropriately and to be clear.

To try and answer your question... or more accurately, to rebut your assertion that there is always a pro and a con, there are many situations in which there is either no pro or no con.  Eating one's vegetables is, for most people who have no specific allergies, a definitively positive act with no perceivable downside.   You only get healthier by eating well.  

Giving to charity is a good thing with no down side.  I don't think you'll find anyone out there who will say, "No," if you ask them, "Hey.  Is giving to charity a bad thing?"

Trying each day to act with integrity.  I would challenge you to provide a con to seeing one's doctor for regular checkups or brushing one's teeth three times each day. These are all actions that are positive.  

At the same time, there are actions with no positive side.  Smoking crack, for example.  There is an inevitable bad ending to that story.  

In this spirit, I suggest to you that, considering the qualifications already mentioned such as time, physical ability, and desired outcome, I believe that crosstraining is a positive thing with no downside.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 11, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> There is always a pro and con to everything
> 
> From Reading a book from having sex with woman you just met. There are pro's and con's to drinking wine to eating beef. There are pro's and con's to studying Martial Arts to not studying Martial Arts. If you can not see both pro's and con's of Crosstraining to not cross training? Than I can't help you buddy.
> 
> ...


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Jan 11, 2009)




----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 11, 2009)

Hmm I guess a con would be

If you suck at one martial art then crosstraining you might suck at two arts. :rofl:


Or if you suck at one art cross training might make you less suck.:idea:


----------



## paulus (Jan 11, 2009)

I don't understand the purpose of this thread. But... one disadvantage of cross training is that you then have less time to devote to one art you might otherwise specialise in.

But that's true of anything you do. The disadvantage of training any martial art is that I have less time to devote to becoming an opera singer.

Surely the disadvantages of cross training would be subjective, and peculiar to the individual's circumstances and experiences. Then it would be better to say "In my experience, I found the disadvantages to be....".

If you suspect that in training martial art A and martial art B you would get conflicting principles (whatever that means) then don't train A and B - find a more compatible combination. If you are worried about getting confused and not knowing which art to draw from when having a fight, then practise more.

But again, I'm not sure what the original poster wants from this thread.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 11, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> *There is always a pro and con to everything*
> 
> From Reading a book from *having sex with woman you just met*. There are pro's and con's to drinking wine to eating beef. There are pro's and con's to studying Martial Arts to not studying Martial Arts. If you can not see both pro's and con's of Crosstraining to not cross training? Than I can't help you buddy.
> 
> ...


 

Absolutely no pros and cons there for me I'm afraid.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 11, 2009)

Once again you prove my point...To everything you just said I find con's and pro's

You may not see them. But thanks to College and studing on my own I see them...

Steve said there are no con's to eating ones vegatables?

On the contrary if you over eat or eat a certain vegatable in excess it could cause some health defects. Everything must have a balance. Too much meat is bad for you,Too much sugar and yes sir too much vegatables. A we Now know too much water is bad for you. Like the woman who died from drinking too much water in one day. Her body literally drowned. But to qualify my statement. In college when I studied a Biology I saw a chart of foods which dealth will excess and deficent quanties of certain vegatables and fruits. They also had a name of disorders if you get too much or too little of specific Fruit of Veggie. 

Giving to charity can also be detremental to your life. There are people who believe everyword their pastors says. In other words certain churches have people give their whole pay check to church. Some pastor say if you give me your all the creator will rain down on you hundred times as much as you give. These people faith be so strong they give away the mortage money, light bill, gas money and even sometimes life savings. When they are on the street with nothing to show for it but a ticket at the soup kitchen they blame the creator for their mishaps. If they had not given their money in the first place they would have been cool. But too much or excess can be bad in this case too. I had a buddy who made seven hundred dollars a week. He would give the church seventy dollars or more each week. He was faithful with his tithed. When he lost his job...Did the church honor all that giving he gave for two whole years. Did the church help him with his light bill. No, He eventually got evicted when he couldn't find work. So there you go a down side to everything. That Seventy Dollars could have been saved for a rainy day. Like the light bill..

Anyway somepeople give all their money to feed the homeless or feed the poor. But if they give all their money away to the poor then what are they going to live off of. In fact the bible says if you want to be perfect go an sell all your worldly possessions and give the money to the poor. So sell your house,jewlery,applicances,car,stocks,goodly clothing, furniture,stereo equipment, Xbox360 and Wii along with your plasma television and give it all to the poor. Do you think there is not a con there? Or is it all good?

You said something about no Pro's to smoking crack? 

What if your dying a painful death and the only pain killers you can get your hands on is crack. Wouldn't that be a con to make your death an easier one. Don't forget if you go to doctor for pain and if its serious enough what do they give you? Morphine. What is cocain anyway? Cocain or coca is just a pain killer. Plus some people say cocain has short time posistive effects. Its just the long term use causes issues. If your arm is cut off. Wouldn't sniffing some cocain numb the pain? 

As for tooth paste three times daily...Well a person who brushes their teeth ten times a day is most certiantly at a greater risk for disease and death than a person who brushes his teeth twice daily. Because for one their is Fluoride in Tooth paste...Not good at all for the human body. Plus I have relatives and friends who are doctors or becoming doctors. So these people share with me that posions inside tooth paste. Thats why some people use different types of toothpaste like the organic kind. 

Also sometimes cancer patients are advise to use organic toothpaste and organic deordant. So they can live longer with the cancer. The average joe doesn't know about the carnigeons in toothpaste unless they get a disease or have relative who got cancer and told them everything the doctor said...Plus in college we studied some of these vary same topics.

So in conclusion there are pro's and con's to everything. Even studying a martial art. The main problem is you choose not see one. So what I will say in your opinion you can see no pro's and con's you only see the good. Nothing more and nothing less...

Well share a con about studing Wing Chun?

*If you study WC you may become a very good fighter causing thugs or criminals who **** you beat so badly to come back an shoot you seventy times in the chest out of revenge for the **** beating you gave them. 

*The con to not studing WC would be those same thugs who would have killed you for beating them now beats you to death because they don't like the color you got on. Since you didn't study WC the con would be you got beat to death!

Those are possible con's for instance this one little boys father will not take him to a karate school to learn karate. This boy express interest in learning a Martial Art. But his father is afraid he might get hurt. So Pro's and Con's are already drawn for this guy's father...Why can't anyone else own up to their pro's and con's out side the magnificient Xue and Paulus?


Great Post Paulus you hit it on the nail!!!!

Time and confliction of specialization which could lead to possible confusion or mixing or fusion of principals....





stevebjj said:


> Yoshi, I think that MJS, Jarrod and everyone else who has tried to approach this discussion seriously, has been careful to qualify their statements appropriately and to be clear.
> 
> To try and answer your question... or more accurately, to rebut your assertion that there is always a pro and a con, there are many situations in which there is either no pro or no con. Eating one's vegetables is, for most people who have no specific allergies, a definitively positive act with no perceivable downside. You only get healthier by eating well.
> 
> ...


----------



## Steve (Jan 11, 2009)

Yoshi, with respect, this is where I bow out.  But I'll share an anecdote first that will, if notihng else, maybe give you some insight into where I'm coming from.    

First, backhanded insinuations about my education are uncalled for.  I've also been to college and do enjoy study on my own as well.  I would guess that we're among many others who are much the same.  I try to presume that the people with whom I'm chatting are at least as smart, if not smarter, than me.  It's often true, although i'm happy to allow them to prove otherwise.  I would encourage you to do the same.  

Okay, the anecdote.  My son is approaching teenager-dom.  I couldn't be prouder.  He's also quite smart.  Very smart.  While I'm certainly biased, I can say without hyperbole that my two oldest kids are among the top 5% in their schools for practical intelligence and IQ.  I only bring this up because it's relevant.

A few years back, there was a kid that my son just didn't get along with.  They flat out didn't like each other.  What really disturbed me is that my son was working within the rules in such a way that, while he was at least partially to blame for each incident through his actions (and likely engineered each one entirely), the OTHER kid was the one getting into all of the trouble.  My son thought he was being clever, laying intellectual and emotional traps for this other kid, creating situations in which the other kid would react poorly.   I was very disappointed.

At about this same time, my son was starting to give us problems around the house.  I'd ask him to do something and he would do only that and no more.  Clean the kitchen would become an argument in which he would try to "define clean."  This general attitude was manifesting in many ways.  While we called him on it around the house, he was having a lot more success playing these games at school.  

The discussion that I had with my son was about a type of person I refer to as a "rules lawyer."  These are the people who ignore the spirit of a rule and break the rules by finding the loopholes.  They're the people who are the reason we have disclaimers on every advertisement.  These are the people who will scrutinize their pizza to find something wrong so that they can demand to be comped.  They're people who don't enter into conversations in good faith, who are more interested in showing how clever they are than actually thinking and discussing the matters at hand.  I told my son that I didn't want him to be a "rules lawyer."  These are the people who, for sport or revenge or whatever reason, use their intelligence to manipulate other people.  I choose as a general rule not to associate with them in my day to day life.  I don't like them.  And I certainly don't want my son to be one of them.  Fortunately, he took the lesson to heart.

Ultimately, I don't believe, even after considering your post, that there is a downside to eating one's vegetables.  My position is that the spirit of the example is sound: eating healthy is good.  No cons.  I will also submit that there is no pro to smoking crack.  Again, the spirit of the example is, in my opinion, sound.  My intent was not to describe to you absolutes.  It was to draw a reliable generalization.  

In that spirit, there is no downside to crosstraining.  I have provided some simple caveats in various posts earlier, including intent/desired outcome, aptitude and time, as well as training methods.  

I hope this clears things up.  At this point, while I'll keep up with the thread and respond to posts that might take the thread in a new direction, I hope this is sufficient to put at least my own position on the topic of whether there is are cons to crosstraining to bed.


----------



## jarrod (Jan 11, 2009)

this thread has turned into a perfect example of what i call paralysis by analysis.  of course there are pros & cons to everything but they are so subjective that in cases such as whether or not to crosstrain they really don't warrant a 5 page thread.  it is also so obvious that it is barely worth discussing.  did it really take us this long to arrive at "well, one con is that it takes time"?  well of course.  i think some of us assumed that was a given.    

jf


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 11, 2009)

Hey Stevebjj is your son for hire ? 
I need a good " Rules Lawyer " he can argue the case to my wife about me not wanting to take the garbage out each week .  :lol:


----------



## Steve (Jan 11, 2009)

mook jong man said:


> Hey Stevebjj is your son for hire ?
> I need a good " Rules Lawyer " he can argue the case to my wife about me not wanting to take the garbage out each week .  :lol:



LOL. I sincerely hope not!!! But if you want my advice, volunteer for all of the jobs you don't mind and then imply that she's the one not pulling her weight.  I used that in my first marriage and... well... Okay.  It led to divorce.   But it might work better for you.


----------



## paulus (Jan 12, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Steve said there are no con's to eating ones vegatables?
> 
> On the contrary if you over eat or eat a certain vegatable in excess it could cause some health defects.


But then it's *excess* that is detrimental, not the eating of vegetables itself. I think this is true of most of the other examples you gave. It's being excessive that is the problem, not the actual action (giving to charity, drinking water etc).

Whether it's cross training or eating, it's _how _you do it that makes it good/bad/neutral.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 12, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Once again you prove my point...To everything you just said I find con's and pro's
> 
> You may not see them. But thanks to College and studing on my own I see them...
> 
> ...



WOW!

Really, all I can say at this point is "WOW!  I give up."


----------



## MJS (Jan 12, 2009)

dungeonworks said:


> WOW!
> 
> Really, all I can say at this point is "WOW! I give up."


 
I have one thing to say...strawman.  That is really all Yosi is doing at this point...creating a strawman arugment.  This thread needs to die...a quick and painless death.  In the end, like I've said, if you want to train, fine, if you don't, fine.  I mean, taking this to the point of arguing that eating too many veggies is bad...come on.  

Yes dungeonworks, you said it best....WOW!!!


----------



## profesormental (Jan 12, 2009)

stevebjj said:
			
		

> But if you want my advice, volunteer for all of the jobs you don't mind and then imply that she's the one not pulling her weight. I used that in my first marriage and... well... Okay. It led to divorce. But it might work better for you.



HAHAHAHAAA!!!!

That was funny!!!

Anyway, about this topic. I refer to my good friend Sun Tzu;

"The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand."

"If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles."

_"Know the enemy and know yourself. Your victory will be painless._"

i.e. If you have avoided self-deception and accurately    interpreted the motivations (_to know_) behind your opponent's moves _   (your enemy)_, you can find a place _(yourself)_ where you will invest    much less in winning a dominant position _(victory)_ than the position is    worth in terms of its tangible rewards (painless)."

"Now the reason the enlightened prince and the wise general conquer the enemy whenever they move and their achievements surpass those of ordinary men is foreknowledge."


This one is the basic principle in formulating technique sequences in my training:

"The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy. "

"The opportunity to secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself."

From this, what do you think is my position on "cross training" (whatever that means...)

Hope that helps.

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 12, 2009)

Yoshiyahu

I truly mean no offense here but after multiple discussions with you in multiple posts I find that I am beginning to believe that it would be so much easier if you would just tell us exactly what answers you would and save us all a lot of time. 

And in closing I am not a magnificient anything, I am an old beatup CMA a guy as far as MT is concerned and that is all.


----------



## hkfuie (Jan 12, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Great Post Paulus you hit it on the nail!!!!


 
Yes!  Paulus hit it right on the nail!!!!  Unfortunately, it was the SIDE of the nail.  

Reading and posting on this forum detracts from my primary art way more than my crosstraining does.:flushed:

I should be practicing now...I'll go.  Tchiao!


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 12, 2009)

Yes, Excess can be harmful. So if you don't have a based art an you study like ten arts at one time with all different principals you may find it hard to progress in either of them. You will lack profeciency in any one of them...

As for Stevebjj...I didn't give you a back hand educational smite. I simply said in college I studied that access of Veggies and fruits do cause problems. You being a college boy your self should already know this. Also if you are educated or have incredibly smart son should also know every thing has pro's and con's yes everything. For instance Time and Money could be a con or pro. Depending on the situtation. 


As for Xue Sheng the answers are simple. I want to hear from those who say they are no con's that are both Pro's and Con's...I honestly stated the benefits of cross training along with disadvatanges. Some make think thats contradicting....But there are pro's and con's to everything. I shared the Pros so you will know I am not just against all out cross training because it is useful if you a foundational art already. But What I wanted Steve and another guy to share is both the Pro's and Con's...I want them to own up to atleast one disadvantage along with one advantage of cross training...

Its simple SteveBjj

1.An Advantage to cross training is......
2.A Disadvantage to cross training is....





paulus said:


> But then it's *excess* that is detrimental, not the eating of vegetables itself. I think this is true of most of the other examples you gave. It's being excessive that is the problem, not the actual action (giving to charity, drinking water etc).
> 
> Whether it's cross training or eating, it's _how _you do it that makes it good/bad/neutral.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Jan 12, 2009)

I think what Yoshi is basicly trying to tell us is that he agrees with the Yin/Yang theory.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 12, 2009)

Yes there are negatives and posistives everything. Light and darkness. Advantages and Disadvantages?


To re asked the Question:

1.Whats one advantage of Cross training as beginner to Martial Arts?

2.What One disadvantage to Cross training many arts oppose to Mastering in one Art?



			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1102832 said:
			
		

> I think what Yoshi is basicly trying to tell us is that he agrees with the Yin/Yang theory.


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 12, 2009)

> 1.Whats one advantage of Cross training as beginner to Martial Arts?
> 
> 2.What One disadvantage to Cross training many arts oppose to Mastering in one Art?


 The problem with this is it is a loaded question.

It depends on the teacher and the student and the ability to grasp and utilize the teaching. The questions you are asking is a blanket statement.

Cross training and sticking to one art are the same.

Both are trying to achieve the same goal.

Yin and Yang and all duality are one.


----------



## Steve (Jan 12, 2009)

JadecloudAlchemist said:


> The problem with this is it is a loaded question.


It's also a logical fallacy completely ignoring the possibility that there are alternatives other than the two he suggests.  I used this tactic on my kids when they were toddlers.  It's also used often by politicians and used car salesmen.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 12, 2009)

I give up...I will never received a reasonable answer to this Question. I give up. I take it as you don't won't to answer the fact that crosstraining any two arts, BJJ not included, Could be a negative as well as posistive.


----------



## Steve (Jan 12, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> I give up...I will never received a reasonable answer to this Question. I give up. I take it as you don't won't to answer the fact that crosstraining any two arts, BJJ not included, Could be a negative as well as posistive.


Yoshi, do you know what a logical fallacy is?  I'm asking seriously.  Not everyone has taken any philosophy or debate classes.  

There are questions that are inherently disengenuous and don't warrant an answer.   Take the questions, "Are there pros and cons to crosstraining?  What do you think?"  That's a legit question and one that many people have tried to answer honestly and in good faith.  The question: "What are the pros and what are the cons of crosstraining, you are required to come up with at least one of each?" is bogus.  Can you see the difference?  

Honestly, I don't know why I'm still trying.  I guess I'm hoping against all hope that you'll come to the light and understand.  No one's telling you that you can't argue pros and cons to crosstraining or even assert that there are both.  Honestly.  At this point, I'm not in any way trying to influence your opinion.  I'm just saying that you can't force anyone to agree with you by coercing us into answering a contrived false dichotomy.  The way to convince people is to present an argument (the philosophical kind, not the bickering with your older sibling kind) that is rational and compelling and then to defend that position in a reasonable way.  

And sometimes, there's no resolution and people just disagree.  It's okay.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 12, 2009)

I have taken Philospy not debate classes though. I do not heed to european philopies I see them as skewed...

But as for Strawman argument
Fallacies
and Premises...

I am familiar with the terms.

A fallacy is a false statment 

My Statement is everything has a pro and con. In business one con would be the time it takes to do item A takes away time to do item B. Also another thing is finacial investment. 

But in either case you feel training two arts is the same as training just one art? Am I correct?

You feel there is no disadvantage to training two arts?

But I feel everything has a advantages over the other!


Next Question?

What is the advantage to not cross training? What would be the advantage to studing lets say Baguazhang exclusively with out adding Muay Thai or Karate?





stevebjj said:


> Yoshi, do you know what a logical fallacy is? I'm asking seriously. Not everyone has taken any philosophy or debate classes.
> 
> There are questions that are inherently disengenuous and don't warrant an answer. Take the questions, "Are there pros and cons to crosstraining? What do you think?" That's a legit question and one that many people have tried to answer honestly and in good faith. The question: "What are the pros and what are the cons of crosstraining, you are required to come up with at least one of each?" is bogus. Can you see the difference?
> 
> ...


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 12, 2009)

Ok. Obviously there is a con that is bugging you and which no one has taken up for a discussion. Since you know what it is, and want to have a discussion, instead of an argument, throw it on the table and let's discuss it. What do you think it is?


----------



## Steve (Jan 12, 2009)

Yoshi, it is clear that, while you may have read some philosophy, you haven't studied it.  I mean studied like we study martial arts, with a competent teacher.  The stuff I'm talking about is white belt level philosophy. Fundamental.  Just dismissing it doesn't work.  We are talking about schools of thought that are older than wing chun.  Battle tested, so to speak.   

Take hand swords advice and speak plainly.  This double talk just drags things out.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 12, 2009)

Oh I reject Western thought. I more of Eastern thought kinda of guy. I knew when I started learning about the greek philophers and hearing about the crap of the realm of forms and ideas...Western thought aint for me. I sticl to Eastern thought it is more logical. But as for studying well I did my part to get an High B in the class. Due to registrations problems I missed the beginning date of the class an it was an accelerated course so I was unable to move up to an "A" But I did maintain a "B" In that forsaken class. I also studied Art of old world. We have extensive studies in greek and roman culture. We learn all about Doric and Ionic and Corithian pillars. But either way I count it all as dung to teachings of East!

But thats not to insult your beliefs,religion or values. I am sorry I don't mean to offend?

As for plainly stating my thoughts. I am simply saying Stevebjj I wish you would be honest and share a possible disadvantage no matter how insignificant it is to you. There has to be one disadvantage to cross training in your brillant mind.







stevebjj said:


> Yoshi, it is clear that, while you may have read some philosophy, you haven't studied it. I mean studied like we study martial arts, with a competent teacher. The stuff I'm talking about is white belt level philosophy. Fundamental. Just dismissing it doesn't work. We are talking about schools of thought that are older than wing chun. Battle tested, so to speak.
> 
> Take hand swords advice and speak plainly. This double talk just drags things out.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 13, 2009)

What are the disadvantages that are bugging you? Why keep this going back and fourth? What are they?


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 13, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> It's also a logical fallacy completely ignoring the possibility that there are alternatives other than the two he suggests.  I used this tactic on my kids when they were toddlers.  It's also used often by politicians and used car salesmen.



...and New Talk Radio as well.


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 13, 2009)

> What is the advantage to not cross training? What would be the advantage to studing lets say Baguazhang exclusively with out adding Muay Thai or Karate?


 
Hai-chuan Tung the founder of Bagua picked students who already trained in other martial arts. Also alot of the Bagua people CROSSTRAINED in other styles like Hsing yi or Tai chi. Sun Lutang studied Bagua,Hsing yi and Taichi chuan and because of his CROSSTRAINING creatived Sun style Tai chi. Sun style you can see the Bagua movements in the form.


----------



## Steve (Jan 13, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Oh I reject Western thought.


Ok.  I guess that's it then.  It's the fingers in the ears saying "nanana, I can't hear you" approach to a discussion.  





> As for plainly stating my thoughts. I am simply saying Stevebjj I wish you would be honest and share a possible disadvantage no matter how insignificant it is to you. There has to be one disadvantage to cross training in your brillant mind.


Yoshi, whether in the East or the West, this is not plain speaking.  You say you're plainly stating your thoughts, but then share no thoughts.  Instead, you rehash your leading question, this time disguised as statement.  This time getting a little snarky and instead of insulting my education, you decide to go after my integrity.  Nice.

Why don't you just say what you're going to say?  Get it off your chest.  You have taken ahold of this flawed question of yours and are holding onto it for dear life.  Answer it yourself.  You obviously have something in mind.  State your own opinions, stop trying to lead the discussion and try participating in it, instead.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 13, 2009)

JadecloudAlchemist said:


> Hai-chuan Tung the founder of Bagua picked students who already trained in other martial arts. Also alot of the Bagua people CROSSTRAINED in other styles like Hsing yi or Tai chi. Sun Lutang studied Bagua,Hsing yi and Taichi chuan and because of his CROSSTRAINING creatived Sun style Tai chi. Sun style you can see the Bagua movements in the form.


 
Exactly

In the 21st century in MA we tend to think that Bruce Lee was the only one that cross trained and came up with a new style and we tend to forget people like Sun Lutang and Wang Xiangzhai. I am not trying to take anything from Bruce Lee, he was very talented and very skilled, but he was by far not the first to cross train a CMA and certainly not the first to cross train and come up with another style. Hell Sanda is a product of cross training. It is also been speculated that Yang Luchan trained Changquan before Chen and he founded Yang Style. 

Throughout Chinese martial arts history you will find multiple martial artists that trained multiple styles. Wang Xiangzhai's main style was Xingyiquan but he traveled around and learned a lot from other styles and eventually that gave us Yiquan. A multitude of Xingyiquan people have also trained Baguazhang as well as Baguazhang people training Xingyiquan. Ji Jike trained Xinyi but prior to that trained another style and from that we get Xingyiquan. The founder of Hao style trained more than one style. And for that matter since the founder of Wu style was a palace guard before learning Yang he too learned more than one style. My sifu&#8217;s sifu trained Hao style and Yang Style.

There are a lot of ICMA people that came from styles like Changquan but there are a lot of CMA people that trained more than one style. And there are MAist in China today that look at training like we do college. You start with a teacher that teaches you what he knows and you graduate to a teacher that can teach you more and that is not necessarily the same style.

So to be 100% honest here cross training in MA has been around for centuries and it has worked just fine so I just don't understand how now in the 21st century it has gotten detrimental to Life when in the past in many cases that is what saved a few lives.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 13, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Oh I reject Western thought. I more of Eastern thought kinda of guy.


 
Sorry I missed this in my last post.

If you are in fact an Eastern thought kind of guy I suggest you read my above post about Eastern History, specifically Chinese history as it applies to MA.

And in fact Eastern thought does not compartmentalize and cross training different styles is still training... not good not bad just training. It is Eastern thought that devised a multitude of Martial arts styles for various reasons, from the founder of a style felt he had a better idea all the way to those that had to change the style a bit so they could change the name to make money. And as previously stated many style founders cross trained and at times looked at with great respect as previously mentioned Sun Lutang was thought of as a rather formidable fighter and he trained 3 styles and then designed a 4th. But then it was not all that uncommon in old China to find a guy that trained Xingyiquan and Baguazhang and possibly Taiji as well or any other combination of styles

Shaolin is considered Buddhist which is a rather eastern way of thinking and if you are looking at Shaolin and all the various styles and forms that were taught there that would, IMO, be a good example of cross training. Taoists, also rather eastern thinking (Specifically Chinese) Train multiple styles of Wudangquan: Taiji, Xingyi, Bagua and a few others plus various forms of Qigong and they have been training this way for centuries. 

So where is cross training not eastern thought?


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 13, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> Sorry I missed this in my last post.
> 
> If you are in fact an Eastern thought kind of guy I suggest you read my above post about Eastern History, specifically Chinese history as it applies to MA.
> 
> ...



Great post!  

I wonder how many styles have been changed by founders, not because the original way was flawed so much as a better way for techniques fitting differing sets of attributes.  For example, a karate teacher shortening stances or making movements shorter and more efficient?

I see martial arts as very individualized, no matter the style.  One must tune things a bit to make them work no matter the style.  I think now, and always have thought that staying in one proverbial box limits you potential, be it sticking with parts of one style that you are good at or taking from various martial arts.  There is no downside or negative impact to cross training.


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 13, 2009)

I find Eastern thought and Eastern religion to be more mixture and influenced by each other than anything.

To Quote Dr.Irit Averbuch "It is not uncommon to encounter on stage a Shinto deity wearing the Taoist charm of Kuji while performing Buddhist mudras".  This from her works concerning Shugendo.

Taoism as a religion was greatly influenced by Buddhist religion and even absorbed some of its practices such as Karma into its belief system.

So now we have Eastern thought as I already mentioned Sun Lutang approach Xue offered Wang Xiangzhai who interesting enough taught Wang shu jin. In the Japanese side Yoseikan Aikido has cross training or mixing of Judo and Karate. Nakakura Kiyoshi trained in Aikido and Kendo.

Kano Jigoro met with many Budo masters and according to Neil Ohlenkamp
Kata Guruma was taken from wrestling to defeat Fukushima. The list goes on and on.


----------



## bs10927 (Jan 13, 2009)

jarrod said:


> some people really over-analyze this issue.  i like to make candles.  i don't make candles to fill the gaps in my hobby of playing guitar.  i just like to play guitar & make candles.
> 
> jf



i know i'm late but.....I play guitar too!


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 13, 2009)

I would still like yoshiyahu to give an answer to my question. What is/are the con(s) that he is thinking about which is what he wants the "pro-people" to admit to. If a reason is given, maybe a real discussion can come about.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 13, 2009)

I don't mean Chinese Eastern thought...He stated something pertaining the Greek and Roman Thought...I am more of Hebrew mind set...Not Greek or hellenized mind set...Let me clarify what I mean by Eastern thought...

Also to qualify the statement...Westen thought was not pretaining to Crosstraining or Martial Arts...I was speaking of Fallacy. Be it Westernize thinking. The word Fallacy, Premise and other Philopiscal terms I suggested were Western ideology that I do not engage in. That why I didn't respond to it. But when on to question I was asking. 

But as for cross training....Eastern and Western thought don't really say its bad...In fact I think Cross training is beneficial...I cross train now.

But I also think there is also a con to cross training. An I wanted those who think Cross training is better than training one style to admit that there are also pro's and con's to cross training.





Xue Sheng said:


> Sorry I missed this in my last post.
> 
> If you are in fact an Eastern thought kind of guy I suggest you read my above post about Eastern History, specifically Chinese history as it applies to MA.
> 
> ...


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 13, 2009)

This is now a fourth attempt for an answer. yoshiyahu, are you going to answer the question that I've posed 3 past times or just keep the arguing going? I think, that your just arguing to argue and don't really have any "cons" to put up for a discussion. I hope that you are more than a troll, you seem sensible, so please show it. :idunno:


----------



## Steve (Jan 13, 2009)

If it helps move things along, I'd like to go on record as reminding yoshi that I haven't ever said crosstraining is better than training one style.  I don't think anyone else did, either.  

But I'd still like to hear these cons.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 13, 2009)

Simple Answer

*Pros to cross Training*
1.Multiple styles to draw from
2.Additional drills
3.Additional Strength Drills
4.Additional Offense tactics
5.Additional Defense tactics



*Cons to Cross Training*
1.Time Lost that could spent on one art
2.Won't Specialize in one art
3.Will not Be Master in one Art
4.May Cause confusion
5.Longer Time to learn

Well I have posted both con's and pro's before. An others have too but I was waiting for Steve to also share his opinions?


*My Opinions*:



> Okay. So in other words you want me to share my personal experiences on why I feel Cross training is determental? Is that what your saying? My opinion is different. But I am more bias to reason for cross training. But let me say this. I don't think cross training will make you a better fighter. It may give you an edge over some people but not all. To become a better fighter you have to fight alot. You need to fight people of all skill levels and you need fight people of other styles An learn from your experiences not other people words or martial arts systems or principals. You learn ten different styles with 10 different principals each. That won't make you a better figther than Mr. Chung Wong the Tiger Claw Fighter who has been fighting and sparring people of different styles for twenty years. Chong Wong is a totally ficticous charater so no need to google him...lol...My point is this if your cross training to fill the gaps of your style....you may be doing it for the wrong reasons.


 





> I did agree with one point...let me share.....
> Someone said something about taking the stretches from like TKD and using them to become more flexible. This is probably what my Sifu did. Because he taught me strecthes from my head to my toes. But these same streches I also see in Phyiscal education and even in many Shaolin and Gung fu books. Also many of streches bruce lee did are also from Shaolin and Gung Fu books. I see track runners and other atheletes using the same streches as Tae Kwon Do. But I think the best Stecthing formula would come from Ballet in my humble opion. Because they are most limber I have ever seen. Of course the streching regiment of Karate would come next and then after that would be Tae Kwn Do. But either way. If you practice TKD Kicks, Some Judo throws,Some Aikido arm Locks. In my opinion your still doing Wing Chun. Wing Chun doesn't kick above the waist that often. But that doesn't mean Wing Chun can not kick High. It just usually tries to choose the most direct path. But their are always exceptions to rule in actual fight and in training. For one When you train Wing Chun you need to be able to throw High kicks in order to do partner drills where you can defend against high round house kicks to head. You need to work on joint locks and throws so you know how to apply them in Wing Chun. Wing Chun uses grappling and Chin Na. So you have Judo and Aikido also with in the WC system.
> 
> Wing Chun fights inside mostly. But Wing Chun can fight outside too. Wing Chun doesn't usually throw long punches but it does in demostration to show defenses.
> ...


 



> Excellent Post Jarrod and Hand Sword. I enjoy how you show to posistive aspects to crosstraining. But we must realize all things have pro's and con's. You did a great job of sharing the Pro's. Now let me ask you what would be draw backs, weaknesses and hindering effects of cross training?
> 
> Please share the down side to cross training. What do you think would be the down side of cross training in contrast to all the wounderful posistives you share. I am saying negate all the great pro's but please share some of the con's you see as well?


 


Hand Sword said:


> This is now a fourth attempt for an answer. yoshiyahu, are you going to answer the question that I've posed 3 past times or just keep the arguing going? I think, that your just arguing to argue and don't really have any "cons" to put up for a discussion. I hope that you are more than a troll, you seem sensible, so please show it. :idunno:


----------



## seasoned (Jan 13, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> Exactly
> 
> In the 21st century in MA we tend to think that Bruce Lee was the only one that cross trained and came up with a new style and we tend to forget people like Sun Lutang and Wang Xiangzhai. I am not trying to take anything from Bruce Lee, he was very talented and very skilled, but he was by far not the first to cross train a CMA and certainly not the first to cross train and come up with another style. Hell Sanda is a product of cross training. It is also been speculated that Yang Luchan trained Changquan before Chen and he founded Yang Style.
> 
> ...


 
With all the cross training over so many years, hasnt a total art emerge yet ?


----------



## Steve (Jan 13, 2009)

From post #19 in the thread:
_"I would say that it depends entirely upon four things: the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the desired outcome. 

Once again, and I know I sound like a broken record, my belief is that it's not often the techniques involved, but how they're trained that makes the difference. If the techniques are poorly integrated, it would have more to do with how the person trains than what they're training. Poorly integrated technique occurs all the time even in one style as a result of poor training. Crosstraining has little to do with it.

The intent seems to be to conclude that it's either bad or good to crosstrain, or that one should only crosstrain if the moons are in alignment or the timing is otherwise right. I disagree with any hard and fast conclusion. It all depends on the person, the styles involved, the desired outcome and how the person trains."

_From post #37_
"I won't argue against having a primary style, but I would say that it really depends. For some, I'm sure you're right. But I can learn to play two things at once. Most people can. While it certainly does depend upon the person, I think you're selling most people short."

_post 45
_"I would say that aikido taught by a competent aikido instructor is aikido. Just as Judo taught by a competent Judo instructor is Judo.

As a blue belt in BJJ, I am learning BJJ from a competent BJJ instructor, and have been for a few years now. I am not, however, competent myself to TEACH BJJ. So, while what I'm learning is teh r34l BJJ, I wouldn't then go to a Karate school and presume to uke for them with the idea that if they can beat me, they can defeat "a grappler." Make sense?"

_The rest of my posts were mostly elaborating or attempting to clarify these posts which, I believe, outline my opinion pretty well.  I haven't been evasive.  I've simply not played your childish game.


----------



## Steve (Jan 13, 2009)

seasoned said:


> With all the cross training over so many years, hasn&#8217;t a total art emerge yet ?


I would personally attribute this to the four things I mentioned in my first post in this thread: _the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the desired outcome. 


_


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 13, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Simple Answer
> 
> *Pros to cross Training*
> 1.Multiple styles to draw from
> ...


 

     Thank you. My response to the cons are: 1. No time is lost as you start to cross train once you've gained enough knowledge and comfort with your current system, say Black Belt level, where the basics are pretty well covered by you. Also, the cross training art is simply supplementive to your skills in your system. Just add ons. 

     So that applies to your fears in point #2 as well. Your still specializing, just adding a few things here and there. Plus, those things added are already apart of most styles,so all your doing is adding a twist or a better way for you to do it.

     Point #3 is covered still too, your still training in the higher levels of your art, the cross training is with specific things usually, like a buffet. 

     Point #4- There's no confusion. For one, usually it's an opposite style like grappling to a stand up style that is addressed. Otherwise, it's just methods by those that specialize in a specific area that you are using to enhance an area you might have familiarity or weakness in.

     As for point 5-- a longer time? You spoke of being a master in point #3. That is probably a lifetime committment already or at least a good amount of years. So, there is plenty of time at hand either way.

Overall, considering the pros and cons you are worried about, there is no danger of your life threatened. If your gaining more insight and sharpening and polishing your skills overall, how can that be detrimental? I would think being limited would be detrimental to your life and something you should fear more. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





:asian:


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> *Cons to Cross Training*
> 1.Time Lost that could spent on one art
> 2.Won't Specialize in one art
> 3.Will not Be Master in one Art
> ...


 
1) As I've said many times, IMO, the crosstraining should not start until you have a solid base first.  Additionally, you're not giving up on the original art, you're still training it.  Only difference is that you're now splitting up time between the arts.

2) See #1.  You're not giving up, you're still continuing the learning.  I have not stopped Kenpo.  

3) See #1 & #2.  

4) I gave an example to use when you're doing techs.  The attack starts as a punch, then goes to something else, which causes you to adapt to that change.  That is the goal...to be able to flow from one to the next.  I get the impression that you're not there yet in your training.

5) Whats the rush?  Who cares how long it takes.  The goal should be to learn, not worry about the time frame between one rank and the next.


----------



## paulus (Jan 14, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> From post #19 in the thread:
> _"I would say that it depends entirely upon four things: the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the *desired outcome*._


(bolding mine) I think this is the point that is being missed. Success can only be measured in relation to your objective. Whether something is a pro or a con depends on what your desired outcome is.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 14, 2009)

seasoned said:


> With all the cross training over so many years, hasn&#8217;t a total art emerge yet ?


 
It depends on how you want to define total. If you are defining it as an art that is perfect for all people for all situation then no because no 2 people are alike. My sifu does his Yang style similar to but not the same as his sifu Tung Ying Chieh. Tung Ying Chieh's oldest son Tung Hu Ling does the form quite different form both of them. However all were/are rather accomplished martial artists and taiji practitioners.

But then it is also yes because frankly, IMO, all the styles of Bagua are total arts as are the styles of Taiji that I know most about as is Xingyiquan in all its variations as is Changquan and tongbie and any of these. 

It is really all a matter of what the person training the art is after and what his sifu taught him. It has been discussed as to Ji Jike, Xinyiquan and Xingyiquan that the Dai family did not teach him the full Dai Xinyiquan form, even though his teacher knew it the Dai family did not approve so Ji Jike was taught something similar and went from there based on what he knew and what he was taught Xingyiquan immerged.

Others and this is only my opinion, like Yang Luchan (who was a highly skilled MAist) could not make any money teaching Chen style taijiquan since he was not Chen family so he changed it to his own style Yang style. This of course also showed he had a high level of understanding of the art and the Chen family approved. Also I have no doubt considering the time he lived in China he had to prove his skill more than once. 

Any CMA can be and IMO is complete but there are also combinations that were highly sought after for body guards and caravan guard and military teachers. Combinations like Xingyiquan and Baguazhang. Both are, IMO, rather complete but together, if someone could master both systems, they were hard to beat. 

Reasons for cross training were many but not all cross trained and some rather impressive fighters trained only 1 style but then some rather impressive fighters trained more than one style as well.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 14, 2009)

seasoned said:


> With all the cross training over so many years, hasnt a total art emerge yet ?


 
Because, we are all built differently and have different attributes.  If you are better at one aspect and have attributes that support that then you willl emphasize that.  This is how "styles" first started.  The founder found that this set of strategy, tactics, and techniques (supporting those first two) worked best for him in combat.

This leads me to what I think the heart of the article is.  I don't think that Cross training is bad, per se....BUT, it has to be something that CAN be integrated into a flawless approach.

To give an example.  Let's say that A's approach is to create distance to use kicks.  Everything is based on this approach.  All upper body movements are designed to either knock your opponent back so you can kick him, or to create time so you can move back to kick him.  Now, let's say that B is designed to enter into in-fighting range.  It is designed to eliminate the long kicks and stay inside the person's power range.  Everything is designed to keep your opponent close while in, and to bridge the gap quickly to get in close.

These are two VASTLY different approaches, if you are a beginner or low rank and try to train both of these at the same time, you are going to be lost when it comes to knowing how to apply it because you are getting two different conflicting paradigms to view fighting.  But, let's say you train in A for a very long time and REALLY understand your art and it's strengths and weaknesses, you can start to add alittle bit of B to the mix for those times when you KNOW you can't utilize your base.

If you look at MMA that everyone likes to talk about, this is the approach that these guys use.  Most of them came from either a striking background or a grappling background.  Chuck Liddell for example added grappling to be able to get back to his feet to implement his striking.  Randy Couture added striking to close the distance and get into grappling range safely.  There are very few MMA fighters who are equally good at both striking and grappling, usually the one supports the other.  There are a couple out there that can, but again they are not the norm.

So I don't think that cross training is completely a bad idea, but you MUST know what you are trying to mix together and have some type of strategic reasoning behind it to fill in gaps of your training.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 14, 2009)

punisher73 said:


> ...If you look at MMA that everyone likes to talk about, this is the approach that these guys use.  Most of them came from either a striking background or a grappling background.  Chuck Liddell for example added grappling to be able to get back to his feet to implement his striking.  Randy Couture added striking to close the distance and get into grappling range safely.  There are very few MMA fighters who are equally good at both striking and grappling, usually the one supports the other.  There are a couple out there that can, but again they are not the norm...



Liddell was a Koei-Kan-Karate-Do stylist before switching to John Hackleman's Hawaiian Kempo and Kickboxing, while a division I wrestler Cal Poly State.  That is what he credits as his grappling escape abilitiy.  He had college wrestling before MMA.  He trained BJJ with John Lewis in the begginning of his MMA career.


----------



## Steve (Jan 14, 2009)

Just to add quickly that as more and more people train MMA, the "style" of MMA becomes better synthesized and more integrated.  Stand up, clinch, takedowns, ground game all being used to support the others.  While it's not uncommon to see fighters working from a base, we're also seeing more and more fighters who are training all ranges equally and are as comfortable and dangerous on the ground as they are on their feet.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 14, 2009)

Excellent Post Hand Sword and MJS

But what are the pro's and con's to someone who has no base art. Who is just beginning martail Arts?

Also can you guys think of any more pro's and con's I have not mention to cross training?


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Excellent Post Hand Sword and MJS
> 
> But what are the pro's and con's to someone who has no base art. Who is just beginning martail Arts?
> 
> Also can you guys think of any more pro's and con's I have not mention to cross training?


 

Someone should have an art to start with.  What the person needs to do, is sit down and figure out what their goals are.  What do they want to get out of their training.  From that point, they should research arts out there that address those goals.  

For example.  Lets say they want a stand up art and something that is weapon oriented.  Well, there're many standup arts to pick from.  Which one they pick will depend on what they like after watching or trying out a class.  Lets say they pick Kenpo.  So, now, they have an art that addresses stand up, which includes punches, kicks, grabs, and weapons.  They train in that art for 5-8 years.  By that time, they should be in the upper ranks, if not a BB.  Now would be the time to work with a weapon based art, if they choose to.  If they don't want to, thats fine.  If they want to get a better understanding of the knife, they should look at Kali, Arnis, Sayoc, etc.


----------



## Steve (Jan 14, 2009)

MJS said:


> Someone should have an art to start with. What the person needs to do, is sit down and figure out what their goals are. What do they want to get out of their training. From that point, they should research arts out there that address those goals.
> 
> For example. Lets say they want a stand up art and something that is weapon oriented. Well, there're many standup arts to pick from. Which one they pick will depend on what they like after watching or trying out a class. Lets say they pick Kenpo. So, now, they have an art that addresses stand up, which includes punches, kicks, grabs, and weapons. They train in that art for 5-8 years. By that time, they should be in the upper ranks, if not a BB. Now would be the time to work with a weapon based art, if they choose to. If they don't want to, thats fine. If they want to get a better understanding of the knife, they should look at Kali, Arnis, Sayoc, etc.


MJS, I disagree.  What is the difference between someone training 3 days per week in BJJ and 3 days per week in, say, TKD and someone training 5 or 6 days per week in Kajukenbo or Krav Maga?  

In both, he would be learning multiple ranges.  While I'm not saying that having a base art is bad, I'm not sure I buy into the necessity of it.  Unless becoming as adept at the base art as possible in the shortest period of time is the goal.

Yoshi, instead of posting more questions, why don't you offer some of your own thoughts?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 14, 2009)

*Stevebjj* said"_Yoshi, instead of posting more questions, why don't you offer some of your own thoughts?_ "

*Steve I have done so...But My questions were advoided! Still waiting for you to pose one little con to training two arts at the same time with no base art to fall back on!


----------



## seasoned (Jan 14, 2009)

Paragraph taken from Dr. Yang, Jwing-mings book entitled, The Essence of Shaolin White Crane. *It is well known in China that in order to compete and survive in a battle against other martial styles, each martial style must contain four basic categories of fighting techniques. They are: hand striking, kicking, wrestling and Qin na (seizing and controlling techniques). When these techniques were exported to Japan, they splintered over time to become many styles. For example, punching and kicking became Karate, wrestling became Judo, and Qin Na became Jujitsu.
*This paragraph of Dr.Yang above, makes sense to me, in the respect that arts of old needed to contain all aspects of battle, or they would be useless. It also makes sense that when these traditional arts modernized, they lost some of there original intent, to win in battle, at all cost. Now in these modern times, traditional arts, seem to some, to be, the old antiquated way, with there stick in the mud robotic, and seemingly boring useless techniques. I did these useless kata, for many years, along with the many drills, because they were promotion requirements. It wasnt until I began to cross train and share ideas with friends from other arts, that I discovered that my original base art, of Okinawan GoJu contained a vast storehouse of knowledge, as shown to me by friends from other arts, when they would say, hey that looks like the way we do this or that. It was this cross training that pointed me back to my first love, GoJu. Is cross training detrimental to your life? I guess I would have to say No, because the techniques I had been doing for many years, when looked at from another view points, took on a whole new life. Some of you are younger then I, and have different view points, and that is ok. At my age , if need be, I have to act fast and decisive, because if I break something it will take forever to heal. So if I can get everything I need for my purpose, in one art, and it happens to be the one I have done all my life, I guess it works for me. J      :asian:*
*


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 15, 2009)

This is almost pointless as the fears of cross training which were bothering the mind (s) have been addressed adequately. However, yet another question appears to carry on the argument. Here would be a con for someone with no base art that cross trains. How about gaining a preference for one style over another and spending more time and practice to it than the others. Now, you getting good at one manner of defense but not as much with the others.

However, this will lead one to the ways already discussed, where your favored way becomes your base art, then the additions come here and there. So it's not a problem, or life threatening in the long run, though maybe so in the beginning, as all the skills are not developed enough. However that can also be agrued for ALL STYLES being trained by begginers. So, ultimately that, as it universally applies to ALL, should end this debate IMHO. 
:asian:


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 15, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> From post #19 in the thread:
> _"I would say that it depends entirely upon four things: the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the desired outcome.
> 
> Once again, and I know I sound like a broken record, my belief is that it's not often the techniques involved, but how they're trained that makes the difference. If the techniques are poorly integrated, it would have more to do with how the person trains than what they're training. Poorly integrated technique occurs all the time even in one style as a result of poor training. Crosstraining has little to do with it.
> ...





stevebjj said:


> I would personally attribute this to the four things I mentioned in my first post in this thread: _the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the desired outcome.
> 
> 
> _





stevebjj said:


> Just to add quickly that as more and more people train MMA, the "style" of MMA becomes better synthesized and more integrated.  Stand up, clinch, takedowns, ground game all being used to support the others.  While it's not uncommon to see fighters working from a base, we're also seeing more and more fighters who are training all ranges equally and are as comfortable and dangerous on the ground as they are on their feet.



It looks like there is none in Steve's opinion, which I totally agree.



Yoshiyahu said:


> *Stevebjj* said"_Yoshi, instead of posting more questions, why don't you offer some of your own thoughts?_ "
> 
> *Steve I have done so...But My questions were advoided! Still waiting for you to pose one little con to training two arts at the same time with no base art to fall back on!



I think you will be waiting a looooong time.  The question posted is one of opinion, and we all have one.  

I still do not understand why you think cross training is detrimental to your life???  You don't need to be a martial artist to know how to fight.  I know heaps of untrained guys that hold there own quite well.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 15, 2009)

seasoned said:


> Paragraph taken from Dr. Yang, Jwing-ming&#8217;s book entitled, &#8220;The Essence of Shaolin White Crane&#8221;. *It is well known in China that in order to compete and survive in a battle against other martial styles, each martial style must contain four basic categories of fighting techniques. They are: hand striking, kicking, wrestling and Qin na (seizing and controlling techniques). When these techniques were exported to Japan, they splintered over time to become many styles. For example, punching and kicking became Karate, wrestling became Judo, and Qin Na became Jujitsu.*
> This paragraph of Dr.Yang above, makes sense to me, in the respect that arts of old needed to contain all aspects of battle, or they would be useless. It also makes sense that when these traditional arts modernized, they lost some of there original intent, &#8220;to win in battle, at all cost&#8220;. Now in these modern times, traditional arts, seem to some, to be, the old antiquated way, with there stick in the mud robotic, and seemingly boring useless techniques. I did these useless kata, for many years, along with the many drills, because they were promotion requirements. It wasn&#8217;t until I began to cross train and share ideas with friends from other arts, that I discovered that my original base art, of Okinawan GoJu contained a vast storehouse of knowledge, as shown to me by friends from other arts, when they would say, hey that looks like the way we do this or that. It was this cross training that pointed me back to my first love, GoJu. &#8220;Is cross training detrimental to your life&#8221;? I guess I would have to say No, because the techniques I had been doing for many years, when looked at from another view points, took on a whole new life. Some of you are younger then I, and have different view points, and that is ok. At my age , if need be, I have to act fast and decisive, because if I break something it will take forever to heal. So if I can get everything I need for my purpose, in one art, and it happens to be the one I have done all my life, I guess it works for me. J :asian:


 
Absolulty 100% agree

I learned volumes about Taiji and Xingyiquan way back when I use to be part of a group of people form multiple styles (JMA, KMA and CMA) that got together and spared. Got my butt kicked by a Southern Praying Mantis guy back then and it was so very cool too :EG:

If you look deeply at just about any CMA style you will find hand striking, kicking, wrestling and Qinna. However I am betting (and I only bet on sure things) that at least 85% of the taiji people out there today know nothing about any of it.... It is just for health after all  Sadly, in my area I see Bagua going the same route. However it seems as if Xingyiquan is not, but then Xingyi is not pretty to look at and it is fairly easy to see it is for fighting. But then that just means Xingyi dies another death because people are afraid of it... it is just to violent looking... and what the hell is the deal with all that painful stance training :EG:. But I am now heading down the road to off topic.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2009)

dungeonworks said:


> It looks like there is none in Steve's opinion, which I totally agree.
> 
> I think you will be waiting a looooong time. The question posted is one of opinion, and we all have one.
> 
> I still do not understand why you think cross training is detrimental to your life??? You don't need to be a martial artist to know how to fight. I know heaps of untrained guys that hold there own quite well.


Or you could look at is as I've already posted pros and cons.  


			
				Yoshi said:
			
		

> *Steve I have done so...But My questions were advoided! Still waiting for you to pose one little con to training two arts at the same time with no base art to fall back on!


Yoshi, I haven't avoided your questions.  My position is that your questions are disengenuous, and also that they have already been answered.  You just seem to me to want other people to do all of the heavy lifting in this thread.  

I'm not sure how much more clear it can get this this: "_I would say that it depends entirely upon four things: the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the desired outcome."_  But maybe if I say it in another way, you will understand.

Crosstraining can be counterproductive if one is not physically, mentally or emotionally capable of it, if the styles are inherently contradictory, if one doesn't train in an effective manner, or if one's desired outcome is mastery of a single style in the most efficient manner.

I'll say it in another way, just to be clear:  Crosstraining is particularly effective and valuable if the person involved is physically, mentally and emotionally capable of it, if the styles are complimentary, if one trains diligently and effectively and if it suits one's goals.

So, I have taken my original position, which I still think is very straightforward, and reworded it so that it addresses the negative and the positive.  I just want to make it very clear that all three statements represent the same position.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> Absolulty 100% agree
> 
> I learned volumes about Taiji and Xingyiquan way back when I use to be part of a group of people form multiple styles (JMA, KMA and CMA) that got together and spared. Got my butt kicked by a Southern Praying Mantis guy back then and it was so very cool too :EG:
> 
> If you look deeply at just about any CMA style you will find hand striking, kicking, wrestling and Qinna. However I am betting (and I only bet on sure things) that at least 85% of the taiji people out there today know nothing about any of it.... It is just for health after all  Sadly, in my area I see Bagua going the same route. However it seems as if Xingyiquan is not, but then Xingyi is not pretty to look at and it is fairly easy to see it is for fighting. But then that just means Xingyi dies another death because people are afraid of it... it is just to violent looking... and what the hell is the deal with all that painful stance training :EG:. But I am now heading down the road to off topic.


I just want to say that it's very interesting reading about the different forms of CMA and crosstraining.  I don't know a lot about the specific styles, so I appreciate the dialogue.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 15, 2009)

Would it be bad to train two styles that are contradictory? 

Especially after you have specialize in one style Like Boxing or Karate...What would be wrong to supplement your boxing with a style that is contradictory and learn how to switch from one to the other. 






stevebjj said:


> Or you could look at is as I've already posted pros and cons.
> Yoshi, I haven't avoided your questions. My position is that your questions are disengenuous, and also that they have already been answered. You just seem to me to want other people to do all of the heavy lifting in this thread.
> 
> I'm not sure how much more clear it can get this this: "_I would say that it depends entirely upon four things: the person, the styles involved, HOW the person is training and the desired outcome."_ But maybe if I say it in another way, you will understand.
> ...


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 15, 2009)

> Would it be bad to train two styles that are contradictory?
> 
> Especially after you have specialize in one style Like Boxing or Karate...What would be wrong to supplement your boxing with a style that is contradictory and learn how to switch from one to the other.


 

No. Because as humans we are thinkers it would be modified to fit your needs. The modification might be to not use the chamber that Karate uses but instead use the boxing type punches. Instead of a boxing stance you might use a cat stance. To quote Bruce Lee "Absorb what is useful"


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Would it be bad to train two styles that are contradictory?
> 
> Especially after you have specialize in one style Like Boxing or Karate...What would be wrong to supplement your boxing with a style that is contradictory and learn how to switch from one to the other.



I would say it depends upon the person and what he or she hopes or expects to gain.

What do you think?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 15, 2009)

Okay what if some one practice both arts to where they could comfortably switch or mix the two. Meaning one minute they fighting a guy Using Karate. The guy is adjust to their Karate attacks and is able to defend against them So all the sudden the guy changes to Leopard Kung Fu. An starts attacking High and Low. Which totally throws off his opponent and now he has to reaccess his strategy to defend. Because now the Karate guys movements,stances and foot work have changed to Leopard. An he is attacking as a leopard fighter would oppose to Karate.


Are another instance would be. On minute your fighting. Your using boxing. The guy your fighting adjust an is now able to land a couple of hits to your face. Your bobbing and weaving cease to work. An he is skilled enough to evade or deflect your boxing punches. So you switch styles to lets say Tae Kwon Do or Long Fist. He will have a hard time adapting now you switch. He will have to reaccess your movements and re-adapt. The small time will be what you need to destroy him. While his mind is in temporary shock an his guards tend to be easier to infiltrate then you can switch back to boxing an hit him with good ole two piece on his chin. Put your hip into it. 




JadecloudAlchemist said:


> No. Because as humans we are thinkers it would be modified to fit your needs. The modification might be to not use the chamber that Karate uses but instead use the boxing type punches. Instead of a boxing stance you might use a cat stance. To quote Bruce Lee "Absorb what is useful"


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 15, 2009)

Yoshiyahu it doesn't really work like that.

I was saying in training the styles you will adapt and modify.

In a real fight situation you are not going to be thinking one sec I will use Karate and next sec I will use another style. It becomes see an opening take an opening create an opening. Real fights are fast.

As Wang shu jin says"a fight should take 3 strikes any more is sloppy"

I cross train and I never think ok I will use Bagua here and Hsing yi here and oh jujutsu here. It becomes opening-strike another opening-strike.

Meaning based on the fight techniques and tactics come out of it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 15, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Would it be bad to train two styles that are contradictory?
> 
> Especially after you have specialize in one style Like Boxing or Karate...What would be wrong to supplement your boxing with a style that is contradictory and learn how to switch from one to the other.


 

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by contradictory styles


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 15, 2009)

Well in your opinion...What two styles would not supplement one another. Name two styles that are totally the opposite?





Xue Sheng said:


> I'm not exactly sure what you mean by contradictory styles


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 15, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Well in your opinion...What two styles would not supplement one another. Name two styles that are totally the opposite?


 
Maybe that is the problem; I don't see any styles as totally opposite.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay what if some one practice both arts to where they could comfortably switch or mix the two. Meaning one minute they fighting a guy Using Karate. The guy is adjust to their Karate attacks and is able to defend against them So all the sudden the guy changes to Leopard Kung Fu. An starts attacking High and Low. Which totally throws off his opponent and now he has to reaccess his strategy to defend. Because now the Karate guys movements,stances and foot work have changed to Leopard. An he is attacking as a leopard fighter would oppose to Karate.
> 
> Are another instance would be. On minute your fighting. Your using boxing. The guy your fighting adjust an is now able to land a couple of hits to your face. Your bobbing and weaving cease to work. An he is skilled enough to evade or deflect your boxing punches. So you switch styles to lets say Tae Kwon Do or Long Fist. He will have a hard time adapting now you switch. He will have to reaccess your movements and re-adapt. The small time will be what you need to destroy him. While his mind is in temporary shock an his guards tend to be easier to infiltrate then you can switch back to boxing an hit him with good ole two piece on his chin. Put your hip into it.



Wouldn't this be the antithesis of synthesis?  (forgive the bad rhyme).  I don't know why you would want to cross train and keep the styles distinct.  I'm sir it's possible, as people fight with multiple rulesets and do demonstrations and the like.  But for SD it doesn't seem the way to go. 

I guess it goes back to desired intent.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 15, 2009)

I watched a Paul Vunak video today...he mixed up a lot of stuff and put them to some Wing Chun principles.  It was about trapping.  Really good stuff Yoshi, I think you would have seen how many arts can be combined.  Some combine better than others.  If you get a chance to see Paul Vunak's JKD stuff it is really good, and a great example of self defense oriented MMA, not the sport variety.


----------



## MJS (Jan 15, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> MJS, I disagree. What is the difference between someone training 3 days per week in BJJ and 3 days per week in, say, TKD and someone training 5 or 6 days per week in Kajukenbo or Krav Maga?
> 
> In both, he would be learning multiple ranges. While I'm not saying that having a base art is bad, I'm not sure I buy into the necessity of it. Unless becoming as adept at the base art as possible in the shortest period of time is the goal.
> 
> Yoshi, instead of posting more questions, why don't you offer some of your own thoughts?


 
Hey Steve,

Yes, I see your point.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 15, 2009)

Some have said that certain stlyes are supplementary or go together.

So I was woundering what arts don't go together?




Xue Sheng said:


> Maybe that is the problem; I don't see any styles as totally opposite.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 15, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Some have said that certain stlyes are supplementary or go together.
> 
> So I was woundering what arts don't go together?


 
I guess this is my take on this.

I do believe that Xingyiquan and Baguazhang are great together but I do not think it is a good idea to learn them both at the same time. Pick one, train it for a few years and then work on the other. However a few years could be anywhere form 5 to 10 depending on the sifu and how much the student trains. I have always felt that Judo and Wing Chun would compliment each other quite well too. However again not at the same time. Learn one first and then work on the other. 

However I do not feel it is necessary to take both Xingyi and Bagua, either if trained properly and understood works rather well all by itself and the same goes for Wing Chun and Judo. 

At this point I do not see two styles that do not go together but you need to REALLY learn one before you move onto, or add another IMO.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 16, 2009)

I totally agree with you...one art should be your main art and you should be competent in one art first...Then add another...your are correct Xue!!!





Xue Sheng said:


> I guess this is my take on this.
> 
> I do believe that Xingyiquan and Baguazhang are great together but I do not think it is a good idea to learn them both at the same time. Pick one, train it for a few years and then work on the other. However a few years could be anywhere form 5 to 10 depending on the sifu and how much the student trains. I have always felt that Judo and Wing Chun would compliment each other quite well too. However again not at the same time. Learn one first and then work on the other.
> 
> ...


----------



## Steve (Jan 16, 2009)

I'd like to find out from you guys a little bit more about why you think that it's essential to have a base art prior to crosstraining.  I don't see it as being crucial.  Certainly a legitimate way to do things, but do you really think it's vital?  Why?


----------



## MJS (Jan 16, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Okay what if some one practice both arts to where they could comfortably switch or mix the two. Meaning one minute they fighting a guy Using Karate. The guy is adjust to their Karate attacks and is able to defend against them So all the sudden the guy changes to Leopard Kung Fu. An starts attacking High and Low. Which totally throws off his opponent and now he has to reaccess his strategy to defend. Because now the Karate guys movements,stances and foot work have changed to Leopard. An he is attacking as a leopard fighter would oppose to Karate.
> 
> 
> Are another instance would be. On minute your fighting. Your using boxing. The guy your fighting adjust an is now able to land a couple of hits to your face. Your bobbing and weaving cease to work. An he is skilled enough to evade or deflect your boxing punches. So you switch styles to lets say Tae Kwon Do or Long Fist. He will have a hard time adapting now you switch. He will have to reaccess your movements and re-adapt. The small time will be what you need to destroy him. While his mind is in temporary shock an his guards tend to be easier to infiltrate then you can switch back to boxing an hit him with good ole two piece on his chin. Put your hip into it.


 
I disagree.  As I've said many times, which you're obviously missing, this is the goal of training..to be able to adapt to whats presented to you.  People I train with do it all the time, BJJ people do it all the time...its not as difficult as you're making it seem.  IMHO, you are not there yet, due to you constantly asking this question.  This is why it seems to be so confusing for you.  Keep in mind, just because YOU can't do it, does not mean others can't.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 16, 2009)

Why is this still rumbling on?

It's simple, truly. If you want to be amongst the best of those that practise an art then only practise that art (assuming you have a talent for it).

If you want to quickly get 'rough' enough to be able to have a fight in the street against untrained people, then simultaneously train in different arts - just don't expect to particularly excellent in any of them.

As I said in my earlier post, I have seen from my own experience that multi-art training makes someone hard to spar with early on but easy to deal with later.

Other peoples milage may vary and there are a multitude of ifs-buts-and-maybes but that has been my experience.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 16, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> I'd like to find out from you guys a little bit more about why you think that it's essential to have a base art prior to crosstraining. I don't see it as being crucial. Certainly a legitimate way to do things, but do you really think it's vital? Why?


 
I don't feel it is essential to have a base art before you cross train

It all depends on your goal. 

If your goal (for example) is to be a Hung Ga person and if your goal is to understand Hung Ga you need to focus in Hung Ga and understand it and how it works and how it approaches SD before you go off and learn another style like Savate which would have a whole different take on fighting. If you train both and then go off and say I know Hung Ga and you are doing savate and hung ga together it is then neither Hung Ga or Savate it is something else, possible rather effective but it is neither style. However if your goal is to learn how to fight and you are not really interested in associating with any one art then train whatever you like cross train as much as you feel you need to. 


It all depends on what you are after and want to get out of training Martial arts.


----------



## Steve (Jan 16, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> Why is this still rumbling on?
> 
> It's simple, truly. If you want to be amongst the best of those that practise an art then only practise that art (assuming you have a talent for it).
> 
> ...


I just don't know that I buy it.  Quick early progress but you believe that crosstraining somehow stunts longterm growth in skill?  You say that this has been in your experience and I don't doubt that it's true.  What do you think leads to this?  Was it the crosstraining leading to problems long term, or was it the students?   The idea that most peoples can't learn two things simultaneously, whether they be related or not, just doesn't make sense to me.  It's counter to everything I know about how human beings, particularly adults learn. 

This is what I'm wondering from the group at large.  Many people have suggested that crosstraining without a base art is bad, or now that it's okay short term but not long term.  Can I ask for some more specifics on why you think this is so?  

Of course, there would need to be some structure and discipline, and a well defined curriculum would be necessary.  

It's similar to the question I asked earlier to MJS, whether there is a difference between learning two styles simultaneously and learning multiple ranges in one school.  Would learning grappling and striking within a single style, such as Kajukenbo, be better than learning grappling and striking seperately.  On the one hand, you have what is hopefully a fully synthesized system.  On the other, you have expert instruction from specialists, and the ability to synthesize the material yourself.

This holds true, in my opinion, for most styles.


----------



## MJS (Jan 16, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> Why is this still rumbling on?


 
I was asking myself the same thing, in addition to wondering why I was even still involved in the thread.  I think its time to pack my bags.  I'm tired, very tired of beating the dead horse.


----------



## Steve (Jan 17, 2009)

fair enough.   Forget I asked.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 17, 2009)

It wasn't an unreasonable question in and of itself,*Steve* and in another context I'd be more than happy to discuss where the fallacy has come from that you can learn more than one complex thing to the highest expertise.

As a precis, look at Decathlete records compared to those of discipline specific athletes as possibly the most accessable evidence that multi-discipline training will result in lower 'peaks' in skill level.  Or for a martial arts reference (and meaning no insult to my bretheren), the swordsmanship of someone who practises only iai will be more polished than someone who does katori - splitting the focus has consequences.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 17, 2009)

Excellent Post Sukerkin. I think you have summarize everything I been thinking all along but was unable to put into eloquent words suce as yours...I am greatful for your sharing!





Sukerkin said:


> It wasn't an unreasonable question in and of itself,*Steve* and in another context I'd be more than happy to discuss where the fallacy has come from that you can learn more than one complex thing to the highest expertise.
> 
> As a precis, look at Decathlete records compared to those of discipline specific athletes as possibly the most accessable evidence that multi-discipline training will result in lower 'peaks' in skill level. Or for a martial arts reference (and meaning no insult to my bretheren), the swordsmanship of someone who practises only iai will be more polished than someone who does katori - splitting the focus has consequences.


----------



## Steve (Jan 17, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> It wasn't an unreasonable question in and of itself,*Steve* and in another context I'd be more than happy to discuss where the fallacy has come from that you can learn more than one complex thing to the highest expertise.
> 
> As a precis, look at Decathlete records compared to those of discipline specific athletes as possibly the most accessable evidence that multi-discipline training will result in lower 'peaks' in skill level.  Or for a martial arts reference (and meaning no insult to my bretheren), the swordsmanship of someone who practises only iai will be more polished than someone who does katori - splitting the focus has consequences.


In the interest of allowing this thread to sleep peacefully, I think we can save the conversation for a later date.  Some things do occur to me on the subject.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 17, 2009)

Yea, Sukerin laid it down better than I could explain it to you!




stevebjj said:


> In the interest of allowing this thread to sleep peacefully, I think we can save the conversation for a later date. Some things do occur to me on the subject.


----------



## Kenpo17 (Jan 19, 2009)

Yes, mastering all the Martial Arts you have learned, or being able to defend yourself with techniques from all the styles you have learned?  I think I would, no I definetly would rather know how to defend myself, even if I have not mastered all the arts I have taken.  Really, being knowledgable in a variety of Martial Arts is not a bad thing, and I am not trying to say that it is.  It is good to be "well rounded" when it comes to Martial Arts, but be realistic with yourself, if you were to be attacked on the street, would you just use your primary art?  I wouldn't think so, but maybe you would.  If I were to be attacked on the street I would be mixing everything I have learned to get that person away from me.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 19, 2009)

Let me speak presumptiously. But lets say I am 16 years old and never taking a martial arts. I decided I want to be more well rounded than anyone else. I have no base art so I decide to start learning several arts at the same time. My mom and dad are pretty well off finacially so they can afford for me to cross train. So I train six days a week after school for five hours a day on school days. After school I train from 4:00pm-9:00. On Saturday I train from 9pm-6pm. During the summer and spring break and Christmas break which is two weeks I train every day from 9pm-6pm Monday through Saturday. I am training in the following arts?

1.Boxing
2.Tae Kwon Do
3.Wrestling (High School)
4.Wu Shu
5.Choy Li Fut
6.Kick Boxing
7.Muay Thai
8.Judo
9.Tang So Do
10.Wu Dang Tai Chi

Now I have been training for six months. So do you think I would be a proficent fighter since I have so many different ranges for fighting? I mean cross training is better right so what about learning all these arts at once...Is that a good way to become a great fighter. Will I have a major advantage over someone taking only Muay Thai for six months? Or would a Muay Thai, Boxer or Choy Li Fut guy six months in whoop the floor with me?

Whats your opinion?





Kenpo17 said:


> Yes, mastering all the Martial Arts you have learned, or being able to defend yourself with techniques from all the styles you have learned? I think I would, no I definetly would rather know how to defend myself, even if I have not mastered all the arts I have taken. Really, being knowledgable in a variety of Martial Arts is not a bad thing, and I am not trying to say that it is. It is good to be "well rounded" when it comes to Martial Arts, but be realistic with yourself, if you were to be attacked on the street, would you just use your primary art? I wouldn't think so, but maybe you would. If I were to be attacked on the street I would be mixing everything I have learned to get that person away from me.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 20, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Let me speak presumptiously. But lets say I am 16 years old and never taking a martial arts. I decided I want to be more well rounded than anyone else. I have no base art so I decide to start learning several arts at the same time. My mom and dad are pretty well off finacially so they can afford for me to cross train. So I train six days a week after school for five hours a day on school days. After school I train from 4:00pm-9:00. On Saturday I train from 9pm-6pm. During the summer and spring break and Christmas break which is two weeks I train every day from 9pm-6pm Monday through Saturday. I am training in the following arts?
> 
> 1.Boxing
> 2.Tae Kwon Do
> ...



That's quite a fantastic spread of arts and impossible time frames!  I know of not one human being that trains ten martial arts at once...two, maybe three and it is usually a boxing/kickboxing style, wrestling, and a submission/jiujitsu style.

Now, in the scenario you presented, training all them hours a day and more on off days, I would say in 6 months you have a guy that has more kwoon/dojo.dojang/gym time put into his/her arts as someone does in 3-4 years of one style!  In otherwords, you are using a very unrealistic and far reaching example that is in no way relative to reality of nearly every single martial artist out there.


----------



## Steve (Jan 20, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Let me speak presumptiously. But lets say I am 16 years old and never taking a martial arts. I decided I want to be more well rounded than anyone else. I have no base art so I decide to start learning several arts at the same time. My mom and dad are pretty well off finacially so they can afford for me to cross train. So I train six days a week after school for five hours a day on school days. After school I train from 4:00pm-9:00. On Saturday I train from 9pm-6pm. During the summer and spring break and Christmas break which is two weeks I train every day from 9pm-6pm Monday through Saturday. I am training in the following arts?
> 
> 1.Boxing
> 2.Tae Kwon Do
> ...


I would say you have a kid who needs to get a life.    Honestly, I don't see this as being a realistic example or representative of what people mean by crosstraining.

If I can pare your example back a little, though, to say a grappling and a striking art and a more reasonable schedule I think there's something to discuss: 

How about a kid who is on the wrestling team, training 4 nights per week in wrestling but only for 5 months out of the year.  During wrestling season, he cross trains at a boxing gym 3 nights per week but mostly for cardio and technique, as his coach would kill him if he gets injured.  

The other 7 months out of the year he trains Boxing 3 days per week, but amps up the sparring, even working in a smoker or two.  He also adds Judo 3 days per week at the YMCA club, because the grappling is a different kind of cardio and he enjoys the takedowns.

Let's say the kid keeps going through college with this regime.  I think that the learning curve keeps going for most people and that this kid would be consistently more capable than, say, a similar kid who trains in only one art.  

At 1 year, 2 years, 5 years and 10 years, I would say that this kid has two major advantages over a single art practitioner.  First, he will have the advantage of exposure to multiple arts and a diverse group of training partners and styles.  Second, he will have the advantage of having learned how to learn.  What I mean is, he will be able to pick up other styles and techniques faster because he's actually trained on how to train.


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 20, 2009)

> I train every day from 9pm-6pm


 
You mean 9am-6pm?



> 1.Boxing
> 2.Tae Kwon Do
> 3.Wrestling (High School)
> 4.Wu Shu
> ...


 
First lets group them.
Tae Kwon Do,Kickboxing,Tang So Do, Muay Thai=Kicking arts
Boxing, Choy Li Fut=Punching arts
Wrestling,Judo=Grappling arts
Wu Taiji,Wu Shu=Extra

If the person spends 5hrs a day he should train it in a catagory.
IE. Kicking arts. Alot of the kicks will overlap. So the focus on the different types of kicks would be the objective.

At least twice a week he should be pressure testing his combined skills with sparing. This means practicing his kicks,punches and grappling in sparing. This will help him know ranges and how to combine the different techniques.



> that a good way to become a great fighter. Will I have a major advantage over someone taking only Muay Thai for six months? Or would a Muay Thai, Boxer or Choy Li Fut guy six months in whoop the floor with me?


 The person who can pull off his techniques the best wins.

If the Muay Thai fighter is taken to the ground and is unfamilar with that area well the guy who pressure tested grappling is going to win.

This reminds me of a story where one person only practiced Kata and the other only practiced Sparing.


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 20, 2009)

Wow! great thread! I'm been at school and missed alot!
From what I've seen when we've had people come to spar on open sparring day:
When sparring freestyle one of two things more commonly happen.
1. A practioner stays in "style" and technique to the primary art they train. They make mistakes, they get hits in and get hit just like any sparring match, But.. there is little to no hesitation.
2. When we've had students or practioners that come in to spar that have immediately cross-trained 2 or more arts from the beginning of their martial art learning: Hesitation and doubt riddle their sparring session. I've seen practitioners attempt to shoot in for a grappling takedown, stop in the middle of it and switch to striking making their entire movement a waste and usually end up getting overwhelmed by their opponent whom takes advantage of their hesitation and what I call "muscle memory confusion".

When you train any art you practice the techniques and postions over and over until your body responds the way you've trained without you having to think about what your doing.  This is what every MAist strives to achieve.
Action without Thought.
There is no time for thought of strategy, and technique when in the heat of sparring much less battle. You need to have your body trained to respond immediately before your mind can comprehend what is going on.
In the movie "The Last Samori", good old Tom Cruise is jumped in the street by three or four men with swords.  He has no sword. He stops to prepare himself to respond, in effect, stopping his mind from thinking, allowing his training and his body to react. When he was training the boy told him "NO MIND", that he was thinking too much in training and losing the sparring battles. Thinking too much will get you killed.
With "no mind" he defeats the attackers in seconds and afterwards his mind catches up to what just happened.

I love that scene, for that is exactly what happens in a fight. If you fill your mind with conflicting technique, principles, concepts, and approaces to fighting, your mind will interfere with the natural and trained "muscle memory" of your body.  If your muscle memory is confused in the same way, you will hesitate, you will have split seconds of confusion and you will be hurt, hit, or killed. 
Now, if one has a strong base in one art and it has become apart of them, of their muscle memory, then to cross train would only add to their arsenal of techniuqe. But not until those techniques have become muscle memory. And once those do, they most often supercede the old style. 
Ex. my strong foundation was in JJJ three years of training and muscle memory. Then I trained WC. The muscle memory from JJJ made my transition to WC concepts difficult and took longer to learn. But, once I did get a good grip on it (about 2-3 years in training) WC/WT muscle memory now supercedes the muscle training of my JJJ completely, to where I rarely, if ever use JJJ techniuqe anymore. It's just not a reflex any longer. My sparing was total caka until a year and a half into training in WC/WT, too much conflict between the two arts and mucles memory conflicted to make me hesitate and lose windows of opportunity to attack and defend.

Just my experiences, and observations of other stylists when they spar with us, and at other schools.  And by observing our students that never took other arts before we trained them WC/WT and how well they did against other MAists that took several styles for longer periods of time than our new students. They held their own against senior MAists using the very simple and even limited knowledge of WC/WT and fighting that they had because their mind was clear, and their reflexes were pure and without hesitation.


----------



## Steve (Jan 20, 2009)

Si-je brings up something that I think it important.  If a person does crosstrain and is interested in blending two discreet styles, he'll need to work specifically on synthesizing the styles to avoid what she calls "muscle memory confusion."  

This is seen in MMA, where a fighter progresses to the point where they are effectively blending ranges.  Guys start off and you can almost see the switches going off.  "Now I'm striking.  Now I'm grappling."  Over time, they begin to synthesize their techniques, using striking to set up a takedown, or changing levels to feint a takedown in order to set up a high roundhouse.  Etc.


----------



## Jonny Figgis (Jan 21, 2009)

Just to throw my two cents in...

I have cross trained in various martial arts including my core system of kempo...namely muay thai, various forms of RBSD and styles of kung fu and EPAK. I have found through trial and error that some of the styles or systems that I have trained in don't share the same principles as kempo and the instructors have tried to make me into, for example, a muay thai stylist or kenpo stylist. I've found that Geoff Thompson's concept of The Fence and other self protection techniques fit in nicely with kempo so I have kept up this training. It includes grappling and groundfighting; elements of which I bring back to the kempo training as I find these compatible with the core principles that I train in kempo. I have a self defence instructor qualification and this fits nicely with my kempo.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 22, 2009)

Okay what I am alluding to is. Someone training multiple arts at one time oppose to someone who trains three different arts over different time periods.




stevebjj said:


> I would say you have a kid who needs to get a life.  Honestly, I don't see this as being a realistic example or representative of what people mean by crosstraining.
> 
> If I can pare your example back a little, though, to say a grappling and a striking art and a more reasonable schedule I think there's something to discuss:
> 
> ...


----------



## Steve (Jan 22, 2009)

Isn't that what I said?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 22, 2009)

Personally I believe training various arts at different times will more beneficial than say a beginner to MA's starting off fresh with three arts.



stevebjj said:


> Isn't that what I said?


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 23, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Personally I believe training various arts at different times will more beneficial than say a beginner to MA's starting off fresh with three arts.



I can agree with that statement, even if it took 151 posts just to get confirmation on the intent of the original question! :ultracool

...but I have never met *anyone* that started off taking 3 arts as a begginner.  It's kind of common sense that it would be awful hard to study 3 styles of anything....cooking, dancing, knitting, airbrush....ect.  Barring MMA or JKD where ranges are taught instead of styles so to speak, I don't see where anyone has said they did train 3 arts as a green horn newbie.


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 23, 2009)

We had a kid training WC with us a couple of years back that was on the wrestling team in high school.  His coach told him not to drink any water to keep his weight up for the match that week.
Everytime he came to train with us he was getting faint and almost passing out.  We had to make him drink water. His training in wrestling and with us was conflicting to the point of being very unhealthy.  He had to stop training WC until wrestling season was over.
Just an example.  I have many.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Jan 23, 2009)

Wow didn't know that! I thought you should drink water when you want to gain weight. Bodybuilders drink alot. Especialy when you're eating Kreatin(don't know how to write it in English) you should drink alot becouse one of its functions is to make muscles absorb more water.


----------



## Steve (Jan 23, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> We had a kid training WC with us a couple of years back that was on the wrestling team in high school. His coach told him not to drink any water to keep his weight up for the match that week.
> Everytime he came to train with us he was getting faint and almost passing out. We had to make him drink water. His training in wrestling and with us was conflicting to the point of being very unhealthy. He had to stop training WC until wrestling season was over.
> Just an example. I have many.


If true, his coach was an idiot. Telling a kid to not drink water over an extended period of time is criminal and very dangerous.

Typically, if you're cutting a ton of weight, you drink loads of fluids all the way up to the 24 hours prior to the weigh ins.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 23, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> If true, his coach was an idiot. Telling a kid to not drink water over an extended period of time is criminal and very dangerous.
> 
> Typically, if you're cutting a ton of weight, you drink loads of fluids all the way up to the 24 hours prior to the weigh ins.




Keypoints:



If True.
Coach is an idiot.
Some people here really grasp hard to argue against cross training.


----------



## Steve (Jan 23, 2009)

The following is a quote from one of my favorite grappling websites, Grapplearts.   The parts emphasised are by me:



> *Fluid Restriction*
> The simplest and most effective way to begin the weight cutting process is to decrease or stop fluid intake. Your body is constantly losing fluid by breathing, sweating and urination. Every minute and hour that this goes by without replacing the fluid, you will lose weight. This process takes no extra energy from a fighter to complete, and you can lose up to 5-6 pounds in 24 hours without drinking.  *My athletes never go over 24 hours without fluid, and we usually start the fluid restriction exactly 24 hours before the weigh in.* Before beginning the fluid restriction, there are some tricks to losing the maximum amount of fluid over that 24 hours.
> 
> *For the fifth, fourth and third days before the weigh in, I have my athletes consume 2 gallons of water a day.* They carry the gallon jug around with them so they know how much fluid they are taking in. At this time, the athlete also can be more liberal with sodium in his diet (we don&#8217;t go heavy on the sodium, but a little increase can help later as you will see). This increased water intake triggers hormones in the body to excrete more urine than usual. This response will be essential in losing fluid the day before the weigh in. Two days before the weigh in, the fighter cuts the fluid intake to one gallon of water, and cuts out the sodium from the diet. Finally, the last day before the weigh in, the fighter takes in no fluids, no sodium, and only food that I will describe later. This process is effortless, and only requires a little discipline and tolerance of a dry mouth.


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 23, 2009)

Coach is telling him that drinking water will make him drop too much weight.
We told him, stay hydrated, eat more carbohydrates to keep weight. He still wouldn't drink water.
Alot of coaches do this.  Water trims you down, but you do retain water weight. But, it will trim you down and drinking alot will help you lose weight. 
Coach was old school.
I've seem them do weird stuff on the Ultimate Fighter reality show to lose weight in short amounts of time.  Scary, unhealthy stuff.  All to stay in a 10lb. range weight class for a fight.


----------



## Steve (Jan 23, 2009)

You're right, Si-Je, there are a lot of unhealthy ways to cut weight.  I'm not disagreeing with you there.  And I don't doubt that there are some dumbass coaches out there endangering kids with "old school" means of cutting weight (or in this case... gaining weight?).  

I did presume you were talking about cutting weight.  Usually, people WANT to be in the lightest weight class they can acheive.  It's never a bad thing to be the biggest guy in your weight class.  I can't even fathom dehydration as a means of maintaining or gaining weight.  That's ridiculous to me.

The best ways to cut weight usually take at least 2 months and involve very strict diets.  Often, the "fighter's diet" involves simple concepts like no carbs after noon, little to no sugar, no simple carbs, lots of light protein like chicken or fish and/or adherence to a dietary plan, such as the Zone diet.  Depending on who or for what purpose, supplements are used as well to help with recovery and the like.  

The main point being, only an idiot would suggest that dehydration is the best way to lose or gain weight.   The best way to lose weight is and will always be healthy diet and exercise.  The best ways to cut weight are a little different but don't involve dangerously dehydrating oneself.  And the best ways to gain weight involve adding lean muscle... or if you're a kid, just waiting until you hit your natural growth spurt and/or puberty, for christ's sake. 

Si-Je, I want to be clear, I'm not angry, upset or arguing in any way with what you said.  You just hit on a topic that irritates me, which is when people in a position of authority abuse that position, either intentionally or through gross incompetence.  Kids on steroids, kids doing permanent damage to their bodies and minds... because "coach" said it's the way to do it.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 23, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> We had a kid training WC with us a couple of years back that was on the wrestling team in high school.  His coach told him not to drink any water to keep his weight up for the match that week.
> Everytime he came to train with us he was getting faint and almost passing out.  We had to make him drink water. His training in wrestling and with us was conflicting to the point of being very unhealthy.  He had to stop training WC until wrestling season was over.
> Just an example.  I have many.


That wasn't a conflict in training -- it was lousy coaching on the part of the wrestling coach.  It's a pervasive problem (a very surprising number of wrestlers develop eating disorders) given the emphasis on making and maintaining weights to compete.  The martial arts training wasn't causing him problems, from what you've said.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 23, 2009)

The thing about losing weight for MMA is to go into the weigh in, which is preferably a day before weigh in, at a lighter weight than the weight group you are in or as close to under that weight then put back on as much weight as you can before the actual fight. many pro fighters are experts at cutting the weight then putting it back on in short time.
A 65kg fighter will weigh in lighter than that if he can then put on as much as he can after the weigh in so he'll be well over 65kg when he actually steps into the cage. I know people that can put  a great deal of weight on after a weigh in.
There's walk around weight, weigh in weights and fighting weights, all different for the same person.


----------



## Steve (Jan 23, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> The thing about losing weight for MMA is to go into the weigh in, which is preferably a day before weigh in, at a lighter weight than the weight group you are in or as close to under that weight then put back on as much weight as you can before the actual fight. many pro fighters are experts at cutting the weight then putting it back on in short time.
> A 65kg fighter will weigh in lighter than that if he can then put on as much as he can after the weigh in so he'll be well over 65kg when he actually steps into the cage. I know people that can put a great deal of weight on after a weigh in.
> There's walk around weight, weigh in weights and fighting weights, all different for the same person.


Some fighters do this to the extreme.  Thiago Alves, for example, brags about walking around at over 200 lbs and then cuts to 170 lbs.  That's extreme and I can't imagine he's doing his body any favors in the long term.  But... it's his job and he's one of (if not THE) biggest cat in the 170 lbs division.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2009)

stevebjj said:


> Some fighters do this to the extreme. Thiago Alves, for example, brags about walking around at over 200 lbs and then cuts to 170 lbs. That's extreme and I can't imagine he's doing his body any favors in the long term. But... it's his job and he's one of (if not THE) biggest cat in the 170 lbs division.


 

My daughter is a jockey, luckily a small one but a lot of the male jockeys cut weight to the extreme and have quite severe eating disorders. 
Many fighters here have got it down to a fine art, others I've seen cut weight and fight badly because they are weak and dehydrated. One of the biggest problems in boxing is dehydration, when the boxers don't drink, have saunas etc to cut weight the fluid around the brain is affected and is also lost so blows to the head have more impact than they would if the fighter was hydrated.
In MMA whatever weight class a fighter is in, they will make the weight then increase it after weigh in. The cutting then increasing I'm sure doesn't do much for you!


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 24, 2009)

jks9199 said:


> That wasn't a conflict in training -- it was lousy coaching on the part of the wrestling coach. It's a pervasive problem (a very surprising number of wrestlers develop eating disorders) given the emphasis on making and maintaining weights to compete. The martial arts training wasn't causing him problems, from what you've said.


 
Oh, I know we weren't the problem, we really tried to get him to drink water, made him drink it while in class.  But, that didn't help much because he was already very dehydrated. 
But, our training made him sweat and the cardio was continious and it just broke him down.


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 24, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> The thing about losing weight for MMA is to go into the weigh in, which is preferably a day before weigh in, at a lighter weight than the weight group you are in or as close to under that weight then put back on as much weight as you can before the actual fight. many pro fighters are experts at cutting the weight then putting it back on in short time.
> A 65kg fighter will weigh in lighter than that if he can then put on as much as he can after the weigh in so he'll be well over 65kg when he actually steps into the cage. I know people that can put a great deal of weight on after a weigh in.
> There's walk around weight, weigh in weights and fighting weights, all different for the same person.


 
My Husband is studying kinesiology, and works at a sports clinic and has found that to drastically drop and gain weight in such a short amount of time leads to Heart, kidney, and liver failure in the long term. Not to mention the dehydration and muscle weakness that results in the short term for when one does fight.
It's best to stay as close to your weight class withing 5-10lbs throughout your career.
Maintaining weight takes much more discpline, and is so much more healthy for the fighter/athlete.
I know many sports practice drastic weight loss and gain, but I feel it's very detrimental to the body, metabolism, and mental focus of the athlete.

But, it's a great example on how simoltaneously crosstraining two arts can immediately conflict with the training of both arts, health of the practitioner, and cause "muscle memory confusion" when a practitioner is developing "muscle memory" by repetitious training of two or more drastically different styles.

He was drilling wrestling techniques and habits all day every day (5 days a week) and then coming to train with us two days a week trying to fight his own body's, now natural reflex to respond with wrestling technique, and fighting that reflex to spar with strictly striking. = Big Hesitation in sparring.

When the WC training fully sunk in (The best thing going for him was that he hadn't taken another striking art before WC) he used his wrestling technique less and less. This happened because he started to come to class 3-5 days a week.

Then, the kicker was, when we taught him the anti-grappling.  
He kept getting into trouble with his coach in wrestling because he kept reverting to the anti-grappling techniques we taught him. He wasn't doing it on purpose to be a smart ***, it's just that he started training with us 5 days a week and that's what his body wanted to do.
It was easier and quicker technique, and more natural body movement than wrestling, and he was starting to prefer it. Mentally, and physically.

Moral is, when crosstraining the body will decide which art it likes best, and use it more. Possibly never using the other style in combat, ever. 
Or the body will get confused in sparring and hesitate constantly (what I call muscle memory confusion.)
Or the body will use both, but not to the maximum effenciency and skill level that it could in either art.

Cross-training can be good, if you spend the time to focus a strong foundation and application of the first art to the point it's almost like second nature. Then, adding another art would be easier and more beneficial to the martial artist. IMHO, based on my observations teaching and training MA myself.


----------



## Steve (Jan 24, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> My Husband is studying kinesiology, and works at a sports clinic and has found that to drastically drop and gain weight in such a short amount of time leads to Heart, kidney, and liver failure in the long term. Not to mention the dehydration and muscle weakness that results in the short term for when one does fight.


I think I'm being ignored, but what the heck.  I'll respond anyway.  





> It's best to stay as close to your weight class withing 5-10lbs throughout your career.


This is a little off topic, but I think it's more accurate to say that staying close to your weight class is healthiest... better or best is very subjective.  This is, unfortunately, a question of desired outcome.  It's easy for fans to be outraged at doping in, say, the MLB.  Guys like Barry Bonds taking human growth hormones and destroying decades old records... it's just not right.  It's unhealthy.  It's immoral.  But it's a living.  He's providing for himself and for his family... making millions.  

On a more practical level, guys who are on the bubble...  I will admit that if I were a AAA level baseball player, or a middle of the road guy making maybe a hair over league minimum and could, with a regular injection and some long term risk, make millions in the short term... it would be a tough choice.  Long term health in exchange for long term security for my wife and kids.  Honestly, people who smoke make that choice for nothing.





> Maintaining weight takes much more discpline, and is so much more healthy for the fighter/athlete.


Once again, I personally agree that it's healthier, but I don't know if I can agree that it takes more discipline.  The training MMA athletes do requires a great deal of discipline, and for the most serious among them, regardless of level, it's a science.  The goal is to be as big and strong as you can be while fighting in the lowest weight class.  

Heck... look at that first video you posted.  The guy was fighting at close to the weight he walked around.  He said in the pre-fight interview that he didn't have the discipline to lose enough weight to get down to 205... preferring to fight at 240.  He got killed.  





> Moral is, when crosstraining the body will decide which art it likes best, and use it more. Possibly never using the other style in combat, ever.
> Or the body will get confused in sparring and hesitate constantly (what I call muscle memory confusion.)
> Or the body will use both, but not to the maximum effenciency and skill level that it could in either art.
> 
> Cross-training can be good, if you spend the time to focus a strong foundation and application of the first art to the point it's almost like second nature. Then, adding another art would be easier and more beneficial to the martial artist. IMHO, based on my observations teaching and training MA myself.


Take BJJ or Catch Wrestling.  A perfect example of growth and synthesis in similar styles that, over time, result in strengthening the respective arts.  BJJ 20 years ago included few takedowns and who doesn't get tired of watching the gracies use that lazy front kick feint to diving in head first.  Wrestling, including catch wrestling and greco roman, not to mention a return to some fundamental Judo, has strengthened the art.   

Also, no-gi wasn't emphasized until there was a reason to do so.  Mother Necessity brought us Rubber Guard and other adaptations.

The general philosophy is that, if it's ground fighting and it works, then it's BJJ.  Of course, Josh Barnett will say that BJJ is just Catch Wrestling but more friendly.    Point being that it took time, but there is synthesis as a result of cross training and the cross pollination of multiple arts.


----------



## MJS (Jan 24, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> Moral is, when crosstraining the body will decide which art it likes best, and use it more. Possibly never using the other style in combat, ever.
> Or the body will get confused in sparring and hesitate constantly (what I call muscle memory confusion.)
> Or the body will use both, but not to the maximum effenciency and skill level that it could in either art.


 
I agree/disagree with parts of this.  IMO, we will fall back on certain things that would fall into the 'bread and butter' moves.  I have a huge list of techniques to pick from for a punch.  I can draw from Kenpo and Arnis.  However, I have ones that I like, that I can apply easier than others, so those will most likely be the ones to come out.

As far as being confused...like I've said before, its up to the person to get to the point to be able to flow from one art or tech. to the next.  If I'm being grabbed, and begin a defense for that, but suddenly the person releases the grab and starts to punch, I need to be able to flow from one thing to the next.  This is something that needs to be trained, this is something that is, IMO, the goal of training...to be able to adapt.  I get the impression that you are making it sound like its going to be difficult.  Yes, it'll be difficult if its not trained, but for those who train it...its second nature.



> Cross-training can be good, if you spend the time to focus a strong foundation and application of the first art to the point it's almost like second nature. Then, adding another art would be easier and more beneficial to the martial artist. IMHO, based on my observations teaching and training MA myself.


 
Haven't I said this all along?


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 25, 2009)

Well, guys, I just wanted to explore the cons of cross training as well as the pros.
It seems that most here focus on only the benefits of cross training and don't consider or address the cons of crosstraining.
We cross train a bit, but the past 4 years I've focused solely on WC/WT training, and honestly still am. Yet we test it on different styles when we can.  I just haven't really found an art I want to cross train to add to my WC/WT yet.
I was thinking about Systema, or Zapota danse de Rue (but that friend/teacher is too far from me right now), I want an art that would complement the WC/WT I've focused on or otherwise I'll just stick to WC/WT.  Which is probably what will happen.


----------



## MJS (Jan 25, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> Well, guys, I just wanted to explore the cons of cross training as well as the pros.
> It seems that most here focus on only the benefits of cross training and don't consider or address the cons of crosstraining.
> We cross train a bit, but the past 4 years I've focused solely on WC/WT training, and honestly still am. Yet we test it on different styles when we can. I just haven't really found an art I want to cross train to add to my WC/WT yet.
> I was thinking about Systema, or Zapota danse de Rue (but that friend/teacher is too far from me right now), I want an art that would complement the WC/WT I've focused on or otherwise I'll just stick to WC/WT. Which is probably what will happen.


 
IIRC, the subject of the pros/cons has come up and has been addressed.  IMO, I can't really see any cons to it.  People make it sound like the other art(s) have to be learned fast.  I disagree.  I crosstrain for the sake of learning and expanding my knowledge.  For the length of time I've spent in Arnis, I just tested last year for my black belt.  I am in no rush, so when I'm at class or at a private, I take what the focus of the lesson is, and drill the hell out of it.  

As I've said many times already...if someone does not want to crosstrain, dont.  If you do, then do it.  Its that simple.  I don't know what all the fuss is about.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 26, 2009)

I agree with MJS 110%.  There are no con to cross training in my opinion and experience.  I have see many things, tried and trained them, and I discarded some because it didn't fit me or my athletic ability or interests so I simply ignored or discarded.  

It's been said on here before ad nauseum, a style doesn't make the fighter...and cross training has no negative side effects.  "Bad training" of one style or crossed styles, yes, but not cross training.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 26, 2009)

If you being grabed. You can defend an attack for instance Huen Sau to tan sau while punching with the free hand at the same time. Also You could pak sau the hand holding you while torqueing the arm upward followed with immediate chain punches. As for punches hooks apply bil sau. Straight jabs apply pak sau. upper cuts gan sau or jum sau.

All while punching the foes nose at the same time. Evade your opponents force or power. Redirect his energy while still maintaing a flow of constant attacks and defence at the same time.



MJS said:


> I agree/disagree with parts of this. IMO, we will fall back on certain things that would fall into the 'bread and butter' moves. I have a huge list of techniques to pick from for a punch. I can draw from Kenpo and Arnis. However, I have ones that I like, that I can apply easier than others, so those will most likely be the ones to come out.
> 
> As far as being confused...like I've said before, its up to the person to get to the point to be able to flow from one art or tech. to the next. If I'm being grabbed, and begin a defense for that, but suddenly the person releases the grab and starts to punch, I need to be able to flow from one thing to the next. This is something that needs to be trained, this is something that is, IMO, the goal of training...to be able to adapt. I get the impression that you are making it sound like its going to be difficult. Yes, it'll be difficult if its not trained, but for those who train it...its second nature.
> 
> ...


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 26, 2009)

OOOh OOH! I got one! 
Sifu taught me to get out of grabs by going "limp" and just "flopping" out a tan sau to bong sau to tan sau again. Works great!
He had a body builder about 255lbs of ridiclous muscle, guy grab my wrist with both his hands. now, first off, ouch, it hurt to just be grabbed that way by this guy. Left a mark and everything! lol!
Well, I went "limp" I couldn't possibly fight him using any of my strength. That would be just a lesson in futility!
and I just "flopped" out there a tan sau flowing immediately to bong sau and back to tan sau all with the same arm while stepping forward into him. He couldn't hang on. Really freaked him out! lol! He thought I was STRONG. ha!
anyways, you can apply this technique and principle to your anti-grappling on the ground too. Only you utilize the entire body in this fashion. The wrestlers work on core strength and stamina, that's great. But, this is easier, and doesn't require wicked strength in the core, arms, back, etc.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 26, 2009)

Well I got one for all of you regarding grabs and responses. take it or leave it. The truth about grabs is 1. They are usually bigger and stronger than you are and 2. Once you are grabbed (aggressively in a real life situation) you will be off balanced immediately. What does this mean? Any thoughts about striking and/or kicking will be impossible at that moment because you will be attempting to re-establish your base.


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 26, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> OOOh OOH! I got one!
> Sifu taught me to get out of grabs by going "limp" and just "flopping" out a tan sau to bong sau to tan sau again. Works great!
> He had a body builder about 255lbs of ridiclous muscle, guy grab my wrist with both his hands. now, first off, ouch, it hurt to just be grabbed that way by this guy. Left a mark and everything! lol!
> Well, I went "limp" I couldn't possibly fight him using any of my strength. That would be just a lesson in futility!
> ...


 
The reason it works is because when you have rotated your arm from Tan Sau to Bong Sau you place his grip in a awkward position and he can't apply any power . Also he is off balance and as long as you maintain the optimum angle in your arms you can easily move into him with your stance .

As Hand Sword has said you will be grabbed aggressively , and you will be pushed off balance . 
One exercise we used to do to get used to this is to preferably have a large partner grab your arms as tight as he can and have him manhandle you trying to push and pull your arms in different directions trying to take you off balance. 

You stay sunk down in your stance and moving forward and staying relaxed , experiment with all your different hand structures and couple them with pivoting to see the effect this has on his body structure . Particularly the rotating from Tan to Bong and Bong to Tan , or even cutting down with both your arms to attack the weakest part of his grip the thumb .

 Also use the double Lan Sau movement from Chum Kui with a pivot to throw him off to the side . The general rule is if he starts to resist one of your moves immediately flow into a different structure and change the direction of your force , eg - if he resists the double Lan Sau with pivot , immediately change it to a double cut down or vice versa , he can't possibly keep up with the changes in direction of force , also make sure you have forward force on at all times in case he lets go , your hands should immediately spring forward into strikes .


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 27, 2009)

Si-Je and Mook Jong Man well said...I too have done some of the very things you guys are speaking of. I got alot of practice from my Sidai who was big on weight lifting.




mook jong man said:


> The reason it works is because when you have rotated your arm from Tan Sau to Bong Sau you place his grip in a awkward position and he can't apply any power . Also he is off balance and as long as you maintain the optimum angle in your arms you can easily move into him with your stance .
> 
> As Hand Sword has said you will be grabbed aggressively , and you will be pushed off balance .
> One exercise we used to do to get used to this is to preferably have a large partner grab your arms as tight as he can and have him manhandle you trying to push and pull your arms in different directions trying to take you off balance.
> ...


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 27, 2009)

My Sifu is bigger stronger and more aggressive than me. lol!
Crazy Marine gets overly excited making sure I can do this stuff.  Hurts! lol!
Besides, everyone's bigger and stronger than me.   I've got no choice but to "roll with it".
Great stuff Mook Jong Man! forgot about the chum kiu move, he only showed me that one once.  We play around with this stuff at home alot, with kiddo between our feet.
That's the most distracting and unbalancing factor you could have in training.  Don't step on the kid! lol!
Usually, puts me offbalence right away.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 27, 2009)

You guys should get some six feet plum flower poles that way you can do chi sau on top of those and kid can watch mums and pops from the bottom...lol...





Si-Je said:


> My Sifu is bigger stronger and more aggressive than me. lol!
> Crazy Marine gets overly excited making sure I can do this stuff. Hurts! lol!
> Besides, everyone's bigger and stronger than me.  I've got no choice but to "roll with it".
> Great stuff Mook Jong Man! forgot about the chum kiu move, he only showed me that one once. We play around with this stuff at home alot, with kiddo between our feet.
> ...


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 28, 2009)

ROFL! That would be cool!
I have to stand on a chair sometimes and have him execute a technique he's trying to show me.  Well, he's taller than me and can easily reach over my shoulder and get the head to takedown or for some "chin na" stuff.  
Then I try the same thing on him, it no work for me!
He gets pissy and says I'm doing it wrong.

So, I jump on the chair and say, "okay, now you do it on me!"  With a big smile. 
He does a different technique.  (goes from WT to WC, is what we call that. lol!)
Then I do the other technique on him.  He forgets he's big, or something.  I forget sometimes that I'm tiny too.  (old timid as a pit bull Si-Je, lol!)  
This helps us both pair up the right application for the size difference.  And lets him work on technique off a taller attacker (like that will happen much! lol!) But, you never know.....


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 28, 2009)

do you guys ever practice chi sau sitting down with your legs cross indian style...




Si-Je said:


> ROFL! That would be cool!
> I have to stand on a chair sometimes and have him execute a technique he's trying to show me. Well, he's taller than me and can easily reach over my shoulder and get the head to takedown or for some "chin na" stuff.
> Then I try the same thing on him, it no work for me!
> He gets pissy and says I'm doing it wrong.
> ...


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 29, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> do you guys ever practice chi sau sitting down with your legs cross indian style...


 
Only when I'm eating a very hot curry , well you did say indian style .  :uhyeah:


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 29, 2009)

Whats the term for sitting like a child at an assembly in school you use...i am old school we called it sitting indian style..Now an days toddlers call it crisscross applesauce. But I don't think its approapaite for grown men?

what do you think.,...

Whats a better term?




mook jong man said:


> Only when I'm eating a very hot curry , well you did say indian style . :uhyeah:


----------



## Steve (Jan 29, 2009)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Whats the term for sitting like a child at an assembly in school you use...i am old school we called it sitting indian style..Now an days toddlers call it crisscross applesauce. But I don't think its approapaite for grown men?
> 
> what do you think.,...
> 
> Whats a better term?


We've always called it cross-legged, even as toddlers.


----------



## dungeonworks (Jan 29, 2009)

All my teachers in elementary called it Indian style (how Indians sat in most movies and such) and I always called it that until adulthood upon learning that some people could be offended by such things.  I call it cross-legged now.  Same thing with the word "Jap", which tons of people use but most don't realize is offensive.  I am not too lazy to say an entire or correct word, especially if it pisses someone off.

Just curious, what would the purpose of cross-legged chi-sau be?  Seems like it would be near impossible to maintain forward pressure, get other person off center, and then their is the structure issue.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jan 29, 2009)

Oh...well I worked with Native Americans. Alot of times I find them using the word Indian...I guess it just depends.

lol...

Okay. Well sitting Indian style on the floor. Is not so much trying to get the other persons balance. But its more of centering on body structure from the waist up. With out the use of your legs or stance. Learning how to rotate the hips and waist to generate power and learning to keep compusure even if your not on your feet. It could come in handy if your ever on the ground. I also like to do Chi sau on the knees,one leg,on a table,balance beam and other interesting places.


Change it up a little make things different. Preparation is everything.




dungeonworks said:


> All my teachers in elementary called it Indian style (how Indians sat in most movies and such) and I always called it that until adulthood upon learning that some people could be offended by such things. I call it cross-legged now. Same thing with the word "Jap", which tons of people use but most don't realize is offensive. I am not too lazy to say an entire or correct word, especially if it pisses someone off.
> 
> Just curious, what would the purpose of cross-legged chi-sau be? Seems like it would be near impossible to maintain forward pressure, get other person off center, and then their is the structure issue.


----------



## Si-Je (Jan 29, 2009)

Gives me ideas for anti-grappling drilling and training.  

Will tell Sifu.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 3, 2009)

This exercise helps you rely strickly on proper hand structure too. Thats one reason why I like it.



Si-Je said:


> Gives me ideas for anti-grappling drilling and training.
> 
> Will tell Sifu.


----------

