# RBSD And TMAs:  Does One Prepare You Better Than The Other?



## MJS (Aug 7, 2008)

The question is right in the title of this thread!:ultracool  

Do you feel that the Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA?  For reference purposes, the RBSD arts would fall into the category of folks like Tony Blauer, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" MacYoung, and arts such as Krav Maga.  Your TMAs are: TKD, Kenpo, Shotokan, etc.

We have a great mixture of people here on Martial Talk, so I'm hoping we'll get some good debating!


----------



## newGuy12 (Aug 7, 2008)

I know if the Aikidoka gets too "real", someone is going to get their arm ripped off.  Some martial arts don't lend themselves very well too full out fighting (in practice), too many people would get hurt too bad.  You can't very well practice it as one would practice, say, krav-maga.  Even if you put on the "red man suit", someone STILL gets their arm ripped out of socket.


----------



## KenpoTex (Aug 7, 2008)

MJS said:


> The question is right in the title of this thread!:ultracool
> 
> Do you feel that the Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA? For reference purposes, the RBSD arts would fall into the category of folks like Tony Blauer, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" MacYoung, and arts such as Krav Maga. Your TMAs are: TKD, Kenpo, Shotokan, etc.
> 
> We have a great mixture of people here on Martial Talk, so I'm hoping we'll get some good debating!


 
There is no doubt in my mind that the RBSD styles/programs do a better job of preparing someone for a "real life" fight (obviously, even within the RBSD realm, some are better than others). 



Several reasons for this are:

It seems that RBSD practicioners typically train with a higher level of resistance and less "cooperative energy" than the TMAs.
They also tend to focus on a handful of simple, gross motor-skill strikes instead of complex, task specific tools.
They tend to promote the idea of "one tool for many jobs" (for example: Blauer's SPEAR, etc.) as opposed to "a tool for _each_ job"
There is usually less bias against the use of modern weapons unlike TMAs where there is still a lot of "these are my weapons, my empty hands" crap (as if carrying weapons and/or using the best tool for the job is somehow unfair or dishonorable  ).
For the most part, the weapons defense material is more tactically sound and designed against attack-energy that is more "true to life" than much of the weapons defense found in TMAs (for example, AFAIC, the gun and knife defenses in the Kenpo system range from overly-optimistic to suicidal).
Mindset, this is the big one for me. The RBSD programs tend to focus more on the combative or warrior mindset...the "get the job as quickly and efficiently as possible no matter what it takes" kind of attitude. They also seem to spend more time focusing on pre-fight (threat recognition, avoidance, unknown-contact management, etc.) and post fight (procedures for dealing with the aftermath, legal issues, etc.) than many of the TMA programs.
I think Kelly McCann sumarized it best when he said: "Martial-arts is something you do _with_ someone, combatives is something you do _to_ someone."

Just my $0.02


----------



## bowser666 (Aug 7, 2008)

I do not think that one has an advantage over the other.  it all depends on the student and the level of training they get.  The point of any style, or RBSD is to make the responses instinctive.  That can happen in either system.  SO you can't say that one is better than the other as I have seen ( and currently practice) a CMA that encourages resistance as real as someone on the street would give.  No point in doing things half speed because that is not going to happen in the street.  

Even though that seems to be the claim to fame for almost all RBSD systems  ( We have elimnated the cumbersome TMA techniques that don't work  blah blah blah )   You all know what I am talknig about.    TMA  have been aroudn for along time and have been effective for a long time, RSBD are typically jsut diluted TMA  anyways. Not knocking them , but don't knock TMA either as they have been proven effective. RBSD  are the ones that have something to prove.


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 7, 2008)

bowser666 said:


> I do not think that one has an advantage over the other.  it all depends on the student and the level of training they get.  The point of any style, or RBSD is to make the responses instinctive.  That can happen in either system.  SO you can't say that one is better than the other as I have seen ( and currently practice) a CMA that encourages resistance as real as someone on the street would give.  No point in doing things half speed because that is not going to happen in the street.
> 
> Even though that seems to be the claim to fame for almost all RBSD systems  ( We have elimnated the cumbersome TMA techniques that don't work  blah blah blah )   You all know what I am talknig about.    TMA  have been aroudn for along time and have been effective for a long time, RSBD are typically jsut diluted TMA  anyways. Not knocking them , but don't knock TMA either as they have been proven effective. RBSD  are the ones that have something to prove.


It's not what you train -- but how you train.

With that said -- many of the current RBSD approaches will give you effective self defense skills more rapidly, and include stress innoculation/scenario type training that will prepare you better to use the skills you're learning than the first year or more of more traditional training.  What they lack is the depth and systemization of more traditional arts.

The best approach in my opinion is to balance reality based training with other training.  Incorporate resistant partners, scenarios, and other aspects of reality based training while learning the more in-depth principles and elements that will let you be more efficient.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Aug 7, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> It's not what you train -- but how you train.
> 
> With that said -- many of the current RBSD approaches will give you effective self defense skills more rapidly, and include stress innoculation/scenario type training that will prepare you better to use the skills you're learning than the first year or more of more traditional training.  What they lack is the depth and systemization of more traditional arts.
> 
> The best approach in my opinion is to balance reality based training with other training.  Incorporate resistant partners, scenarios, and other aspects of reality based training while learning the more in-depth principles and elements that will let you be more efficient.



Great point jks9199 and I could not agree more.


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Aug 7, 2008)

bowser666 said:


> Even though that seems to be the claim to fame for almost all RBSD systems ( We have elimnated the cumbersome TMA techniques that don't work blah blah blah ) You all know what I am talknig about. TMA have been aroudn for along time and have been effective for a long time, RSBD are typically jsut diluted TMA anyways. Not knocking them , but don't knock TMA either as they have been proven effective. RBSD are the ones that have something to prove.


 
To be honest, I don't really think that carries much weight as a defence of TMA. Im not knocking TMA here, Ive seen them used quite effectively when trained well. However claiming that because they were effective at one point in time they should also be effective today seems flawed to me. It relies on the assumption that the modern student is training in the same methods, environment, atmosphere and level of instruction as the older student was. Which quite frankly, we know off the bat isn;t true with alot of places. How many modern karate dojo's with point sparring and musical kata bear a resemblance to training under Funakoshi in Okinawa?
How many traditional jujitsu dojos students are going out on the battlefield near constantly?
How many ninjitsu students have actually worked as spies or assasins?


----------



## bowser666 (Aug 7, 2008)

Shotgun Buddha said:


> To be honest, I don't really think that carries much weight as a defence of TMA. Im not knocking TMA here, Ive seen them used quite effectively when trained well. However claiming that because they were effective at one point in time they should also be effective today seems flawed to me. It relies on the assumption that the modern student is training in the same methods, environment, atmosphere and level of instruction as the older student was. Which quite frankly, we know off the bat isn;t true with alot of places. How many modern karate dojo's with point sparring and musical kata bear a resemblance to training under Funakoshi in Okinawa?
> How many traditional jujitsu dojos students are going out on the battlefield near constantly?
> How many ninjitsu students have actually worked as spies or assasins?



The point i am maknig is that it seems that all RBSD systems today do nothing but knock TMA , and call them useless and archaic.  Its all basically branding for them,  thats what they want you to think. Thus buy their product  etc......   Nowadays there is a big push for RSBD and there are so many of them that are coming out now.  In another few years there is going to be so many Mc RSBD's   that your head is gonna spin. RSBD wouldn't exist without TMA.  That is all I am saying.  and Like somoene mentioned before it is not what you train it is how you train.  One isn't better than the other. It is just IMO that RSBD lack teh system and structure of TMA and those are needed in training. It is part of the journey. RSBD systems make it sound almost like the Matrix.  You plug in and within hours you are capable of defending yourself which is a crock.  


You needs years of training to make it a instinctive response and that isn't going to happen in any style in 6 months. RBSD , TMA or not. Why do you think TMA's have been aroudn for so long.  RBSD are just a flash in the pan.  Sorry if I seem vehement but I obviously am a TMA supporter. Those guys in RBSD are not re-inventing the wheel as much as they think they are.


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 7, 2008)

bowser666 said:


> The point i am maknig is that it seems that all RBSD systems today do nothing but knock TMA , and call them useless and archaic.  Its all basically branding for them,  thats what they want you to think. Thus buy their product  etc......   Nowadays there is a big push for RSBD and there are so many of them that are coming out now.  In another few years there is going to be so many Mc RSBD's   that your head is gonna spin. RSBD would exist with TMA.  That is all I am saying.  and Like somoene mentioned before it is not what you train it is how you train.  One isn't better than the other. It is just IMO that RSBD lack teh system and structure of TMA and those are needed in training. It is part of the journey. RSBD systems make it sound almost like the Matrix.  You plug in and within hours you are capable of defending yourself which is a crock.
> 
> 
> You needs years of training to make it a instinctive response and that isn't going to happen in any style in 6 months. RBSD , TMA or not. Why do you think TMA's have been aroudn for so long.  RBSD are just a flash in the pan.  Sorry if I seem vehement but I obviously am a TMA supporter. Those guys in RBSD are not re-inventing the wheel as much as they think they are.


That's unfair to Peyton Quinn, at the very least.  He's never knocked traditional martial arts, only presented a method of training that incorporates adrenal stress.


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Aug 7, 2008)

bowser666 said:


> The point i am maknig is that it seems that all RBSD systems today do nothing but knock TMA , and call them useless and archaic. Its all basically branding for them, thats what they want you to think. Thus buy their product etc...... Nowadays there is a big push for RSBD and there are so many of them that are coming out now. In another few years there is going to be so many Mc RSBD's that your head is gonna spin. RSBD would exist with TMA. That is all I am saying. and Like somoene mentioned before it is not what you train it is how you train. One isn't better than the other. It is just IMO that RSBD lack teh system and structure of TMA and those are needed in training. It is part of the journey. RSBD systems make it sound almost like the Matrix. You plug in and within hours you are capable of defending yourself which is a crock.
> 
> 
> You needs years of training to make it a instinctive response and that isn't going to happen in any style in 6 months. RBSD , TMA or not. Why do you think TMA's have been aroudn for so long. RBSD are just a flash in the pan. Sorry if I seem vehement but I obviously am a TMA supporter. Those guys in RBSD are not re-inventing the wheel as much as they think they are.


 
Oh I know what you mean about about the marketing, and to be honest all marketing within martial arts makes me a little nauseous. Im just objecting to the point of TMA being proved effective simply by the passage of time. I think martial arts require a little bit more pressure testing than that 
And Im aware of quite a few TMA practioners that hold up perfectly fine under pressure testing. Im only objecting to the point regarding TMA effective based on time. I consider it to be a type of marketing as well


----------



## Jenna (Aug 7, 2008)

MJS said:


> The question is right in the title of this thread!:ultracool
> 
> Do you feel that the Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA?  For reference purposes, the RBSD arts would fall into the category of folks like Tony Blauer, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" MacYoung, and arts such as Krav Maga.  Your TMAs are: TKD, Kenpo, Shotokan, etc.
> 
> We have a great mixture of people here on Martial Talk, so I'm hoping we'll get some good debating!


I think any "new system" practitioner who is in any way snobbish or presents a condescending disposition towards the traditional arts is looking at their own defence in too insular a fashion.  The same I might say goes for the TMA practitioners who believe tried-and-tested = infallible..  I think, as in most things, balance is key.

In my own group (we are all aikidoka) we have adopted extra techniques and train as many "real" scenarios as we can think.  We are not strict TMA but TMA with extra sprinkles maybe.  I think there is a great deal more to the TMAs than new systems often give credit for.  And to disregard years of wisdom for a one-shot kill I think suggests a lack of understanding.  Personally I feel that reality based systems can offer a fantastic programme for personal defence.  I think however that TMAs offer a fantastic set of principles for living.  I like reality systems as an evolution of a TMA and not as it's supposed successor.  I also like to add extra value to my Aikido so I know it will work off-script 

Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna


----------



## bowser666 (Aug 7, 2008)

Shotgun Buddha said:


> Oh I know what you mean about about the marketing, and to be honest all marketing within martial arts makes me a little nauseous. Im just objecting to the point of TMA being proved effective simply by the passage of time. I think martial arts require a little bit more pressure testing than that
> And Im aware of quite a few TMA practioners that hold up perfectly fine under pressure testing. Im only objecting to the point regarding TMA effective based on time. I consider it to be a type of marketing as well



I hear what you are saying about pressure testing. All I can say is look into the history of soem TMA's  , Kung Fu and Tae Kwon do for example.  Many of these styles were created solely for the purpose of self defense against invading governments etc.......  They were created because there lives depended on it.  TO me that is the most extreme of pressure testing LOL.  I do see your point though about marketing. 

TMA is in the background in regards to mainstream America, with MMA holding the spotlight currently. The sad part is though that people are slowly forgetting the roots of MA. It is up to us that love TMA  to keep them alive. Not to let them get diluted and dissolved into multiple aspects of a hundred different RBSD systems.  As populations and cultures become more intermingled this is a by product of that interaction.  Condensing will always occur.


----------



## mook jong man (Aug 7, 2008)

We were outside the training hall attacking each other in the dark amongst the parked cars with multiple opponents , weapons and stuff years before these rbsd were even heard of.


----------



## Shotgun Buddha (Aug 7, 2008)

bowser666 said:


> I hear what you are saying about pressure testing. All I can say is look into the history of soem TMA's , Kung Fu and Tae Kwon do for example. Many of these styles were created solely for the purpose of self defense against invading governments etc....... They were created because there lives depended on it. TO me that is the most extreme of pressure testing LOL. I do see your point though about marketing.
> 
> TMA is in the background in regards to mainstream America, with MMA holding the spotlight currently. The sad part is though that people are slowly forgetting the roots of MA. It is up to us that love TMA to keep them alive. Not to let them get diluted and dissolved into multiple aspects of a hundred different RBSD systems. As populations and cultures become more intermingled this is a by product of that interaction. Condensing will always occur.


 
There also remains the problem of there TMA being highly fractured. Its very much a catch-all term that has very different interpretations to different people, and accordingly thoroughly different marketing. That lack of a clear message means that prospective students are far more likely to be swayed by the shock marketing tactics common in RBSD. Alot of what might be advertised might be dubious and questionable, but its advertised louder and clearer than alot of the TMA community.


----------



## thardey (Aug 7, 2008)

MJS said:


> The question is right in the title of this thread!:ultracool
> 
> Do you feel that the Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA?  For reference purposes, the RBSD arts would fall into the category of folks like Tony Blauer, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" MacYoung, and arts such as Krav Maga.  Your TMAs are: TKD, Kenpo, Shotokan, etc.
> 
> We have a great mixture of people here on Martial Talk, so I'm hoping we'll get some good debating!



I figure that throughout history, there have been RDSD, which makes in traditional, and that TMA was designed for fighting at the time, which makes it reality-based. I'm sorry if that's not helpful, but I needed to make that point before I go on.

Since this debate is not a new one, but one that goes back for mostly all of history, I think it's fair to compare old thinking about this stuff.

In European swordfighting, there are different classes of fight training. These styles are still being studied and re-born today. At the basic, you have the "Vulgate" style of fighting. Tranlsated, that means the "Common," or "Base" style of fighting. It relies on simple, easy-to replicate, gross motor skill moves that succeed by doing the moves faster than your opponent. Most Soldiers have been taught this throughout history. Especially when you consider that most armies were made up of people from other life-styles that fought for short periods of time. This type of "common soldier" needed to learn quickly how to instinctively perform the correct actions needed to survive. 

It is very effective, and is useful for what it is intended.

Then you get into the higher levels of training - for instance, cavalry. Being able to keep your seat during a fight takes a bit of subtlety. It takes longer to learn to fight from a horse, but you can learn the fine-motor skills to ride and fight to a point where it is instinctive. It's got a slower learning curve, but more potential.

It is very effective, and is useful for what it is intended. 

Then, there are the highest classes of training. These are represented by fencing masters who dedicated their life to exploring the "science" of fighting. What they teach cannot be used effectively for quite some time, several years if starting from scratch. Until then, it's pretty much useless. However, once the basics are mastered, the sky's the limit as far as potential effectiveness. Very few people through history have pursued this to the end in various fighting styles, but they have an almost mythical status.

It is very effective, and is useful . . .

A good army, will have people from all classes of fighting. It would be stupid to only limit yourself to the elite, because if one gets killed, it would take years to replace him. On the other hand, an army of only common soldiers won't be able to fully use the strength of their numbers.

It's like investing -- you need to have short-term, liquid assets, medium-term, higher-yield, perhaps a bit riskier assets, and long-term, slowly maturing but high-return assets to be successful.

RBSD through TMA is a continuum, not two separate groups. Basic RBSD is the stuff you learn to survive on the playground, where styles with complicated joint-locks or heavy reliance on pressure-points would be at the other end of the spectrum. Everything else falls in-between somewhere. Then you add in the branches of weapon-work, and it gets even more muddled. There's a continuum for knife-work, one for gunfighting, one for improvised weapons, etc. 

For instance, I am on the "vulgar" end of knife work and other short-range weapons (but not a total commoner) - slightly more detailed on Gun-fighting, a little more so on empty hand fighting (mostly gross motor skills, but some technical aspects included), and pursuing the "highest class" for swordfighting. (Specific to rapier, that is.) Each one of those fits where I want to be!

People will naturally stick with the place on the continuum that fits their personality most naturally. It depends on how much patience you have for a useful result, and how much you're willing to work for it. When you find a system that gives you the appropriate result for the amount you want to invest - go with it, and stick to it!

That's why the "Best" art is typically the one you are in!

Within that, of course, you have individual training methods. Adrenalin can be produced in different ways, and should be a part of your training, whatever you're doing. Some who pursue the technical arts never stick with it long enough to find the real potential, but stop at a sport level, giving others a mis-representation of the true art. Stuff like that makes it hard to pick a certain style to put in a certain category. A lot of it does depend on the practitioner.


----------



## zen4me (Aug 7, 2008)

newGuy12 said:


> I know if the Aikidoka gets too "real", someone is going to get their arm ripped off.  Some martial arts don't lend themselves very well too full out fighting (in practice), too many people would get hurt too bad.  You can't very well practice it as one would practice, say, krav-maga.  Even if you put on the "red man suit", someone STILL gets their arm ripped out of socket.



I have to take exception to this as Krav doesn't lend it self very well to full out fighting "in practice". As you stated regarding Aikodoka, if it gets too "real" someone is going to get their arm ripped off. Though in the case of Krav, its more likely someone is going to wind up with their balls in their throat, a broken collarbone and perhaps a stomp or two to the head if the chips land that way.

We may pull our strikes in Krav, while training, but we don't pull the intensity and power with which we practice those strikes and techniques.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 7, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> It's not what you train -- but how you train.


 

That about covers it


----------



## shihansmurf (Aug 7, 2008)

I think that in the short term that the RBSD's are much, much more effective at producing effective fighters. A great deal of this is due to the emphasis on physical fitness training inherent in that type of training, as well as the typical focus on basic techniques. I have long held to the idea that the most effective skill set that any striking TMA teaches is contained in the first couple of belt levels. Everything after that is mostly for show.



> I figure that throughout history, there have been RDSD, which makes in traditional, and that TMA was designed for fighting at the time



Interesting point, yet most of what is considered a TMA in the Japanese systems are around 100 to 120 years old. TKD in its current form can only be reliably dated to the 1950's. Kenpo/Kempo has a history that can only be indisputably traced to William Chow, after that the events seem to change based on what senior is talking. Given that many military combative systems developed concurrently with them, I would think that the TMA/RBSD dichotomy is not a recent phenomenon. Since most of the modern, and widely practiced, Japanese/Okinawan arts are from the Meiji period or later with the emphasis on the do aspect of the arts versus the jutsu ideology I think a valid argument could be made that most of the "TMA's" were not so much designed for fighting but rather as a sport or artistic pursuit. I can't speak to the CMA side of the house as the only CMA I have ever done is JKD and that is debatable as to weather it is CMA at all.

Just my view
Mark


----------



## Hawke (Aug 7, 2008)

Reality Based Self Defense VS  Traditional Martial Arts

The instructor will be a factor.

How you train another factor.

What about Kali?  Silat?  I see them both as being effective on the streets.

I have seen Kenpo (EPAK) studios incorporate scenario based training.  Does this make it RBSD or still TMA?  The Kenpoists I have met in real life and online talk about the evolution of Kenpo.  

If you put a TMA in a RBSD setting would you still call it TMA?

For me TMA is learning the art.

RBSD is the application of the art.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Aug 7, 2008)

History is a continuum.  At this point in time we see a snapshot of a flowing river.  The dichotomy of TMA/RBSD and TMA/MMA is because we see systems in the snapshot that are in flux and change and think they are static and always have been and always will be as they are now and therefore think the distinctions matter.  But as time flows, those who see Martial Art as Art will maintain the traditions of the Art and those that see Martial Arts as Sport will further refine the rules of the Sport for entertainment and competition and those that see Martial Arts as Martial will incorporate those ideas and techniques that work effectively as the world around them changes and the threats and challenges change as well.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 11, 2008)

I think they both have there applications and time. Also the situation you are put in. But I have seen this though, training in anything has to lead or develope a sense of attributes and self awareness as well as situational awareness and what is possible and or usefull to pull off.
Example: I had a friend of mine in H.S. who his father was the owner head instructor to the local TWD schools. One evening at a school party the whole football team walked up on him cause he had danced with one of the "popular" girls. That ofcourse made all the no minded jocks get there panties up in a bunch.
When confronted he tried to make it a one on one fight, not going to happen!
Now here is were his heart was right, but the training was wrong!

He jumped up in the air and kicked the 1st fool so hard he went flying back, now when he landed back on his feet he postered to set up and got demolished by all the jocks.

So right mentality, wrong insert of art and wrong mentality when dealing with mass attack.

So there is no better this or that! There is just who's better prepared for all situations and who has more tricks from the bolsa de gato!


----------



## tshadowchaser (Aug 11, 2008)

> Do you feel that the Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA?


A more effective manner to what end?  
If I need to learn to fight to kill  in a set period of time I want some reality based training ( this includes the military). If I want to learn an art then the TMA is where I am going to go because I have the time to learn much more then dismantling a person.
Each has its own area within the martial arts.  Some people want to learn more than how to do something , they want to know the history  behind what they are learning and are interested in learning many different aspects of that art.  Some want to concentrate on only the street value of and those need a more reality based system today.
Both can show you how to survive and how to inflect pain or worse  upon your opponent one just focuses more upon street ( survival) and perhaps more modern weopons and less on other things. So it is all a matter of what you are looking for at the moment


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2008)

I have been thinking about this and I started to wonder based on a qinna class I was one in where a female student got extremely upset when she asked the question what do I do after I get him in a lock and the answer came back for the Sifu kill him. She actually argued with the sifu about that to which he said these were made for war and you are not going to leave an enemy behind you to come back and kill you. That sound pretty RBSD to me and Qinna is rather old.

Whether or not Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA is really not all that important. It may or may not but the student would have to be able to take it to where it is meant to go if necessary and if they are not all the training in the world is useless same goes for TMA by the way. Which comes back to it is not what you train but how you train.

Kind of like if I go out and train to become the most deadly master the sword fighting world has ever seen and there is no one that can beat me in a dual in any school or competition anywhere on the planet. But I find myself one day actually up against someone that is going to kill me if I do not kill or at least maim them. I got to tell you I am not 100% sure I could stab or intentionally cut anyone so I may have the skill to be deadly but I do not have the mindset to be deadly.


This also leads me to define reality for a martial art and its training?


----------



## morph4me (Aug 11, 2008)

As has been stated before, it all depends on how you train. I like the way that RBSD helps give you the feel of a real situation, the adreneline rush, the kowledge of what it's like to actually hit someone, etc., but just as in TMA you know that nobody is actually trying to hurt you, you're training in a relatively safe environment.  I like the discipline, balance, focus and technique of TMA, but if you never hit anyone, and never have to worry about being hit, if the techniques are too complicated to use when the adreneline rush hits and you're fine motor skills aren't accessible to you, all your skills will be useless in a real situation. I think that, ideally, you have to train the tools that both have to offer.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2008)

morph4me said:


> but just as in TMA you know that nobody is actually trying to hurt you, you're training in a relatively safe environment.


 
Apparently you have never been to a xingyiquan or qinna class :EG: :uhyeah:


----------



## FearlessFreep (Aug 11, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> I have been thinking about this and I started to wonder based on a qinna class I was one in where a female student got extremely upset when she asked the question what do I do after I get him in a lock and the answer came back for the Sifu kill him. She actually argued with the sifu about that to which he said these were made for war and you are not going to leave an enemy behind you to come back and kill you. That sound pretty RBSD to me and Qinna is rather old.




My ex-Hapkido instructor was also a cop and Air Force para-rescue (in other words, he had been in situations where it mattered).  He used to say that in a fight that his adversary would go "either to the hospital or the morgue, and I get to choose which one"


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2008)

FearlessFreep said:


> My ex-Hapkido instructor was also a cop and Air Force para-rescue (in other words, he had been in situations where it mattered). He used to say that in a fight that his adversary would go "either to the hospital or the morgue, and I get to choose which one"


 
And more MA (TMA or RBSD) instructors should make that clear to thier students they need to be told how serious a fight can be.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 11, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> I have been thinking about this and I started to wonder based on a qinna class I was one in where a female student got extremely upset when she asked the question what do I do after I get him in a lock and the answer came back for the Sifu kill him. She actually argued with the sifu about that to which he said these were made for war and you are not going to leave an enemy behind you to come back and kill you. That sound pretty RBSD to me and Qinna is rather old.
> 
> Whether or not Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA is really not all that important. It may or may not but the student would have to be able to take it to where it is meant to go if necessary and if they are not all the training in the world is useless same goes for TMA by the way. Which comes back to it is not what you train but how you train.
> 
> ...



The definition of the term "Reality-Based" is, training and survival skills based on modern conflict situations that the practitioner is likely to encounter in their environment (their "reality").

*"In the long history of  HUMANITY, the instinct to  follow and imitate seems to be inherent in most      PEOPLE, TEACHERS, and students  alike." -Bruce Lee*

*
"Are you bad mouthing traditional martial art and M.M.A.? My traditional martial art is self-defense and reality-based too!" *

Here is where I stand on Traditional Martial Arts and M.M.A.
                 All are advantageous to learn and train in, they have several health and spiritual benefits, they help get you into shape, they improve discipline, and they are great for kids. I, personally, love traditional martial arts and M.M.A. In fact, hat is my back ground and it will always be. HOWEVER, there are Instructors out there that claim their style is a complete system. Beware of false claims. Make sure that their training will give you TRUE REALITY-BASED trainig that can save your life and protect your loved ones! Otherwise, RUN... They will get you hurt or killed! This not just my belief. Many others such as The Self Defense Company, Close Combat Comany, P.F.S., Jimmy Wagner, etc. all state the same thing.
                 What we teach will enhance any art you already study. I do not intend to replace what you have learned. That is not the reason or purpose Of D.G.C.F.S. It is to give you additional tools for a street altercation and let you look outside of your style or system to enhance your fighting ability. 
                  So dont get mad at us. 
Ask yourself... 

Can you protect your family with traditional martial arts / M.M.A.?* POSSIBLY*
Can you protect yourself if a weapon is used, "knife, stick, gun? * POSSIBLY*
Can you protect yourself if you are stabbed or shot? *POSSIBLY*
Can you protect yourself if your strong arm or leg is hurt? *POSSIBLY*
Can you protect yourself if there are multiple attackers? *POSSIBLY*
 Is "Possibly" a good enough answer?
This is taken from my website

http://www.darkgiftcombat.com

It will get MOST of you MAD AT ME but Thats my beleave and  my journey of discovery, It does not make it right or wrong just the way I see IT.
I *BOW* with humblness and respect.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2008)

D.C.G.F.S.

Could have done without the bold large letters (which gets interpreted as yelling in the wonderful world of the web) that really did not apply to my question and I could have done without the sales pitch

 but...ummm...thanks...I guess.:idunno:


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 11, 2008)

sorry I did not mean to be disrespectful.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 11, 2008)

D.G.C.F.S. said:


> sorry I did not mean to be disrespectful.



Well bro you are alot nicer than I am! But then again you know me..lol


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> Well bro you are alot nicer than I am! But then again you know me..lol


 
:shrug: whatever


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 11, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> :shrug: whatever



Not ment in a mean way at all, I just read what he wrote and you come back and tell him off for the caps which okay I understand but went further and did the hole sales pitch thing.. not deserved,, hey my 2cents


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2008)

see previous post


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 11, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> see previous post



I did, but like I you will defend yourself and your point of view, Respected.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Aug 11, 2008)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, return to the original topic.

-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Super Moderator-*


----------



## Kacey (Aug 11, 2008)

And any of the last several posts relate to the topic of the thread....  how?  Please return to the topic at hand; if you wish to discuss something else, please do so in an appropriate location.  If you feel someone has behaved inappropriately, please click on the RTM button 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 rather than debating behavior in-thread.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 11, 2008)

MJS said:


> The question is right in the title of this thread!:ultracool
> 
> Do you feel that the Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA?


Yes.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 11, 2008)

hmmm... Reality Based Martial Art... as opposed to what?  FANTASY Based Martial Art?  Is there such a thing?

There is no distinction, unless an art is specifically meant for performance or non-contact competition.  Performance Modern Wushu and XMA performance style arts I would categorize as perhaps a Fantasy Based Martial Art, but that's kind of the end of it.  Altho these people can be elite level athletes.

Even a sporting art can be useful for self defense, such as boxing or wrestling.  There is a certain amount of common ground between combative sporting competition and real fighting, and skills can carry over from one field to the other.

Anything else, if it is designed for fighting application, is based on a perception of reality and what works.  The difference is just in intensity and realism of how it is practiced and trained, and that is something that can vary widely from school to school and person to person, even within the same system.  Any art can be practiced for reality.  Likewise, any art can be practiced poorly, and not prepare one for reality.

Those who want to make a distinction between Reality Based Arts and Traditional Arts are just pushing their own fantasy.  There are too many elements that come into the mix to make such an easy distinction.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 11, 2008)

There are too many elements that come into the mix to make such an easy distinction.[/QUOTE]

Yes true a .45!


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 11, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> There are too many elements that come into the mix to make such an easy distinction.


 
Yes true a .45![/quote]


that could certainly be one element.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> hmmm... Reality Based Martial Art... as opposed to what? FANTASY Based Martial Art? Is there such a thing?



I train Taiji, I train Xingyi and I train Sanda, all seem pretty based in reality to me and none are based in fantasy... but then maybe that is just me. 


But with that said I can see where you are more effective with Sanda in a shorter period of time but then that is what it was designed for. But take the time and train Xingyiquan and you are again very effective. Take more time and train Taiji and you are again very effective. 

It is a function of what is required of the training; both Xingyi and Taiji are internal and take more time. But on the other side of this which will stay effective longer, meaning as we age. I am guessing it is a reverse order then, but then it also depends on many things one of those simply being genetics.

But back to the point of the post as to which trains better, well that depends on the person being trained as well. Some will not like Sanda training and many do not like Xingyiquan training but they might like Taiji of bagua. Which means that they will not train an RBSD so it is not effective at all for them but they might like a TCMA like bagua and it will be incredibly effective for them.

To make a blanket statement that one way is better than the other is only looking at it form one side or from a basis of a personal opinion or even a like group that trains said styles opinion and to be honest it is just another variation of the old "lets beat a dead horse" MMA vs. TMA post.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> hmmm... Reality Based Martial Art... as opposed to what?  FANTASY Based Martial Art?  Is there such a thing?
> 
> There is no distinction, unless an art is specifically meant for performance or non-contact competition.  Performance Modern Wushu and XMA performance style arts I would categorize as perhaps a Fantasy Based Martial Art, but that's kind of the end of it.  Altho these people can be elite level athletes.
> 
> ...






here is my 0.02 cents

*The 3 Categories of Martial Arts*

*"When the mind is tethered to a center, naturally it is  not FREE; it can move only within the LIMITS of that center." -Br*uce Lee. 
TRADITIONAL MARTIAL ARTS vs. M.M.A.SPORT vs. REALITY-BASED  MARTIAL ARTS
                 Martial arts can be divided into 3 categories: Traditional Martial Arts, Mixed Martial Arts, Reality-Based Martial Arts. The problem is that, thanks to movies, TV, Internet, You Tube, Instructors, ect., there is no actual proof of any one method of fighting being completely dominant in all situations. Martial Artists have blurred it to the point of non-existence. While all have many overlapping elements, it is important for you to understand that each category is _*distinctively different*_ and must *be treated as such.*
TRADITIONAL MARTIAL ARTS                 Traditional martial arts contain every style from traditional Karate, Hapkido, Kenpo, Escrima, Aikido, and kung fu, to the countless other cultural traditional martial arts that have been developed throughout history. Some traditional martial arts systems originate from military combat experience and self defense needs for people. These systems have been tested and proven under realistic conditions back in the 500 CE era, when they FOUGHT with HONOR, but has not been PROVEN in MODEREN DAY. Things have changed in this world we live in but, none the less, all of these arets are fun to do, help get you into shape, instill discipline, and are great for kids. They can all be very interesting and provide an education in world culture and martial arts theory. However, no cultural fighting art has any proof of dominant effectiveness in the modern world. That means that Aikido, Karate,Tae-Kwon-Do, Kung Fu, and countless other cultural traditional martial arts, even including Israel's "Krav Maga", are not proven effective in combat or street application. Nor does it even classify as proven effective in combative sport such as U.F.C. and cage fighting. So, without an abundance of proof, it is only martial theory, not fact. Even with their pretty forms, they have no place in self protection. Dont get me wrong, all of these styles can *POSSIBLY* help you out of a tough jam because a scientific way of combat is better than NO way of combat. However, traditional martial arts instructors give there student a false sense of security. Traditional martial arts DO NOT TEACH the necessary reality-Based Scenarios or resistance training in order to prepare you for the stress of a real life situation.
MIXED MARTIAL ARTS & COMBATIVE SPORT                 M.M.A. & Combative Sports include Olympic judo, Brazilian Jiu-jitsu, Muay Thai kickboxing, all forms of wrestling, western boxing, and M.M.A., which has been popularized by events such as the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC). In combative sport, you are forced to prove the effectiveness of your methods and skill in live combat. There is no guesswork nor debate. It either works and you win, or it doesn't work and you lose. Everybody in the world saw Combat Sport Brazilian Jiu-jujitsu stylist Royce Gracie easily pick apart the cultural fighting art practitioners in the first few Ultimate Fighting Championships. If you watch Olympic Judo, you'll see the highest caliber athletes in the world competing in a sport that is symbolic of combat in that the entire basis is to establish a dominant position. Combative Sport is a very, very important component of testing the validity and effectiveness of a martial art. HOWEVER, it too is not reality-based martial arts or combat driven. It is only a training and conditioning method for self-defense. Combative sport is what you use to train yourself to make sure that your self-defense works under sport conditions. A great example is, simply, that that the rules, regulations, and referees that are required in combative sport are NOT going to be there when someone is trying mug you, rape you, trying to hurt a family member, or trying to kill you in a dark alley._* Therefore, NO*_, even today's most popular training methods: Brazilian jiu-jitsu, Muay Thai, Wrestling, Judo, Boxing, Mixed Martial Arts, etc. are not methods of reality-based martial arts either. 

REALITY-BASED MARTIAL ARTS                 The definition of the term "Reality-Based" is, training and survival skills based on modern conflict situations that the practitioner is likely to encounter in their environment (their "reality").
                 Sounds simple right? The real issue is that there are a million-and-one different ways you can be attacked. Everything from a drunk tackling you at the local bar to an armed mugging on your way home from work, a carjacking, or being caught in the middle of a military or terrorist operation. Therefore, Reality-Based Martial Arts have one purpose, and one purpose only; To survive. What we mean is that no sane person, soldiers, professional fighters, or trained martial artists truly want to hurt or kill a human being. But when it comes to bodily injury or a "kill or be killed" situation, your natural survival instinct WILL take over and do whatever it can to save your life so you can go home to your family. Learning to properly defend yourself is much more than just avoiding injury, humiliation, or even death. Our greatest enemy of all is : _*Fear & Incorrect  Training*_. There IS no 100% answer to anything, but when it comes to matters of bodily injury, life and death, or protecting loved ones, the smart thing to do is stack the odds in your favor. 
*
*


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

bowser666 said:


> The point i am maknig is that it seems that all RBSD systems today do nothing but knock TMA , and call them useless and archaic.  Its all basically branding for them,  thats what they want you to think. Thus buy their product  etc......   Nowadays there is a big push for RSBD and there are so many of them that are coming out now.  In another few years there is going to be so many Mc RSBD's   that your head is gonna spin. RSBD wouldn't exist without TMA.  That is all I am saying.  and Like somoene mentioned before it is not what you train it is how you train.  One isn't better than the other. It is just IMO that RSBD lack teh system and structure of TMA and those are needed in training. It is part of the journey. RSBD systems make it sound almost like the Matrix.  You plug in and within hours you are capable of defending yourself which is a crock.
> 
> 
> You needs years of training to make it a instinctive response and that isn't going to happen in any style in 6 months. RBSD , TMA or not. Why do you think TMA's have been aroudn for so long.  RBSD are just a flash in the pan.  Sorry if I seem vehement but I obviously am a TMA supporter. Those guys in RBSD are not re-inventing the wheel as much as they think they are.




Hello I am a R.B.M.A. Instructor  you have to understand what actually happens to your body during a true combative or life-or-death situation. Depending on your physical fitness level, your heart typically beats at _60-80 beats per minute_. This is known as a resting heart rate and everything in your sympathetic nervous system is performing normally. However, when frightened, your heart rate jumps to 115 beats per minute, sometimes more, and your fine motor skills deteriorate. The ability to put a key in a car door or even tie your shoes becomes increasingly difficult. Why? You panic. Interestingly enough, this 115 to 145 beats per minute is the optimal survival and combat performance level for complex motor skills, visual reaction time, and cognitive thinking. Complex motor skills that are multi-muscle involved movements as found in all martial arts. Reverse punch, front kick, wrist lock, arm bar, hip throw, etc. This is the highest heart rate of most professional athletes and fighters. They are able to stay at this rate because they know that no one is trying to _*kill them*_. If you are able to train your body to respond appropriately to fear-induced stress under competitive conditions, you will be better able to survive during battle. At 145 beats per minute, your complex motor skills immediately begin to deteriorate and at 175, you can't think straight, you lose peripheral vision, your hearing excludes everything not in that tunnel vision, and vasocon striction sets in as a natural way to reduce bleeding from any wounds you're about to suffer.  Finally, above 175 is where irrational fight or flight sets in, as well as natural submissive behavior, also known as combat freezing.
I have to ask, do you train with a plastic gun to disarm? We do not we train with airsoft Guns that shoot 350 to 450 fps, Why If you make a mistake YOU KNOW!! 
Do you train with a RUBBER KNIFE or a WOOD ONE?
We do not, we train with a SHOCK knife that SHOCKS you WHEN it touches the body. 
Do you train in an elevator size room?
We do for close quarter combat.
I have been ask to train MILITARY all around the world my sifu also has train Navy Seals S.F.Teams.
I guess the U.S.Military SEES something you do not.......
But then who am I to say what I am saying...
I only train master, T.M.A. Instructors S.F. Teams ect...
I do not hate or dislike T.M.A. that is my back ground for the most part..
BUT I do know that there is a BIG difference  between T.M.A. M.M.A. R.B.M.A.
I *bow*
with respect


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

People seem to confuse "effective" arts with "preservationist" arts and "sport" arts. They then go off and "reinvent" things, trying to "improve" them and "modernize" them.
I've found that usually means they never actually understood things.
"Wheel Reinvention" is a common problem in the martial arts.
Most of those doing it aren't worth wasting time with when you have perfectly good, time honed systems already in existence. All that is lacking are instructors who really understand their art, and students who have the mind to see things properly.

Of course, I like wooden trainers, rattan mats, and the occasional folding chair. Save the "high tech" crap, super foam floors and AC for the hobbyists.

Ok, back to reading all the infomercials and mindless blather that seem to be flooding the site lately. Buy some ad space and stop being leaches already, geeze.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

Spoken like a true mindless blather that seem to be flooding the site lately. 
Go back to the dojo and train


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

Look Leech,  How much have you and your spamvertizing buddy there really contributed here again? I've at least sent in a fiver now and again. Seems you guys are Johnny-Come-Lately's getting alot of milage pushing this "new" system that's months away from actually being able to "put up". I read alot of opinion, rehash and "videos coming someday". IMO, you're just another wannabe-retread art missing the boat on a few hundred years of real experience. Drop a dime, or put up some actual content rather than more spamvertising.  

Ya gotta love firgins.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

I looked at your profile...Oh wait you do not have ONE!!! I wonder why? OH you are a wanna be... I have a school... I instructor... YOU? I have been in Martial arts since the age of 5 years old, YOU? Oh wait NO INFO on YOU.. Why? OH none to give.....
I was W.K.F. Champion you? where are you credentials? LEECH!!! HACK PAPER DRAGON!!! YOU are the one with DISRESPECT, just cause you know how to type a few word GET A LIFE and train in a real DOJO.... IF you have the GUTS... BOY


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

OH by the way....
here is my website do you have one? or are you training in your garage? 
The Last Legionary yea RIGHT!!!!

http://www.darkgiftcombat.com


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

D.G.C.F.S. said:


> OH by the way....
> here is my website do you have one? or are you training in your garage?
> The Last Legionary yea RIGHT!!!!
> 
> http://www.darkgiftcombat.com


First kid, "Dojo" is a Japanese term. I don't train in a "Do Jo" since I don't train in a Japanese style, system or art. I train in a "Training Hall". See, this is that "steal the foreign term" crap too many hacks do to screw the sheeple out of their cash.

Secondly, so you were a champion in what again? WKF, is that like the WWF but not as well known? 

My credentials? They were posted along time ago. Go fish.  

So you trained the US military huh? Big deal. Who hasn't? Really. Every one of these new hack systems is run by someone who trained the military. Post up some contract numbers that I can verify with the brass, and if they check out, I might actually have some respect for you.

You have a school? Again, big ****ing deal. Half the people here do too.  You want to impress me? Show proof that it's your full time job, that it comfortably supports you and your family, and that your net-income is significantly over poverty. Anyone can run a school part time in a run down strip plaza, while holding a day job and living in a singlewide shantytown. Show me da monay! :rofl:

You might also want to read the site rules again. I mean, you did read them right?


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

RBSD is better suited for real practical application.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> RBSD is better suited for real practical application.


In what way? Yes, I could read and search, but make it easy. 
By that I mean, simple and short please.
What do you eliminate that is in traditional, or add that is missing.
For example, an old art might train with a long sword. Outdated.
But a machette is cheap at Wallimart.
A technique that worked in 1970 on a revolver, won't work on a modern automatic. What do you change to "bring it up to date"?
A technique designed for full armor is out of date, but do you drop it or modify it to work with modern body armors?
Follow?
This is where I find most "new" systems fail. They drop what is "old" because it is "old" and because they fail to see the connections.


----------



## Cirdan (Aug 12, 2008)

D.G.C.F.S. said:


> TRADITIONAL MARTIAL ARTS Traditional martial arts contain every style from traditional Karate, Hapkido, Kenpo, Escrima, Aikido, and kung fu, to the countless other cultural traditional martial arts that have been developed throughout history. Some traditional martial arts systems originate from military combat experience and self defense needs for people. These systems have been tested and proven under realistic conditions back in the 500 CE era, when they FOUGHT with HONOR, but has not been PROVEN in MODEREN DAY. Things have changed in this world we live in but, none the less, all of these arets are fun to do, help get you into shape, instill discipline, and are great for kids. They can all be very interesting and provide an education in world culture and martial arts theory. However, no cultural fighting art has any proof of dominant effectiveness in the modern world. That means that Aikido, Karate,Tae-Kwon-Do, Kung Fu, and countless other cultural traditional martial arts, even including Israel's "Krav Maga", are not proven effective in combat or street application. Nor does it even classify as proven effective in combative sport such as U.F.C. and cage fighting. So, without an abundance of proof, it is only martial theory, not fact. Even with their pretty forms, they have no place in self protection. Dont get me wrong, all of these styles can *POSSIBLY* help you out of a tough jam because a scientific way of combat is better than NO way of combat. However, traditional martial arts instructors give there student a false sense of security. Traditional martial arts DO NOT TEACH the necessary reality-Based Scenarios or resistance training in order to prepare you for the stress of a real life situation.


 
Dark One, I think you POSSIBLY have a lot to learn about the history of Traditional Arts as well as how they are taught today. 
I would try to enlighten you but alas I have to go practice my pretty form.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

Cirdan said:


> Dark One, I think you POSSIBLY have a lot to learn about the history of Traditional Arts as well as how they are taught today.
> I would try to enlighten you but alas I have to go practice my pretty form.



Hey I know this response was towards him, but just to let you know, He came from TMA! Until I countered him when I began training him and opened his eyes to the same thing I learned prior.. So ya he don't know ****.... Lol if you only knew..


----------



## Cirdan (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> Hey I know this response was towards him, but just to let you know, He came from TMA! Until I countered him when I began training him and opened his eyes to the same thing I learned prior.. So ya he don't know shhiii.... Lol if you only knew..


 
Did you teach him the art of typing too?


----------



## Ravioli-Z (Aug 12, 2008)

The Last Legionary said:


> First kid, "Dojo" is a Japanese term. I don't train in a "Do Jo" since I don't train in a Japanese style, system or art. I train in a "Training Hall". See, this is that "steal the foreign term" crap too many hacks do to screw the sheeple out of their cash.
> 
> Secondly, so you were a champion in what again? WKF, is that like the WWF but not as well known?
> 
> ...



Wow, thank you, sir, for all your oh so great wisdom and putting all us common folk in our place.  Considering he didn't know your credentials, and "dojo" is a commonly accepted term throughout most arts, his use of the term would have been acceptable to the less pompous.  WKF could stand for both "World Kickboxing Federation" and "World Karate Federation" both of which are known and respected world-wide and have been around since the 1970's.  You seem to be so knowledgable in the arts.  I figured you would have heard of them.  It must have just slipped your mind. Oh, and since you seem to be an individual worthy of such demanding respect I should probably let you know that his military credentials are respectable, documented, verifiable, and attainable. "Go Fish."  Do you slam all former service members now teaching martial arts or just the ones that teach "reality based systems"?  You also wanted proof that he teaches full time and makes a good living at it.  Again, that is also documented and verifiable (affirmative on both).  If you want it so bad... "go fish."  Why are you so insistant on seeing all this proof anyway?  It's just a forum.  Oh, and speaking of the forum... you should go re-read the rules as well... although based on your post... I'm sure your hypocracy knows no bounds.  I'm sure you will no doubt want the last word here oh wise one but I'll go ahead and let you know that I will neither dignify anymore posts from you with a response nor will I return back to this thread.  Good day to you all.  May you live and train well.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

Cirdan said:


> Did you teach him the art of typing too?



You totally understood it, Oh and your so witty..wow did you think of that one all by your lonesome?


----------



## thetruth (Aug 12, 2008)

I think that the quality of instructor has more to do with preparation than the type of art it is whether it be tma or rbsd.   I think the fact that the newbies in here get so offended and defensive shows that they have a lot to learn as far as humility goes (something tma teaches).

Cheers
Sam:asian:


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

thetruth said:


> I think that the quality of instructor has more to do with preparation than the type of art it is whether it be tma or rbsd.   I think the fact that the newbies in here get so offended and defensive shows that they have a lot to learn as far as humility goes (something tma teaches).
> 
> Cheers
> Sam:asian:



If you paid attention it was the long standing members demanding info to the quickest as if you were some master **** and attacked. Now you turn it around..please please please!


----------



## thetruth (Aug 12, 2008)

D.G.C.F.S. said:


> Spoken like a true mindless blather that seem to be flooding the site lately.
> Go back to the dojo and train



No offense mate but given you have been a member here for less than 2 weeks, perhaps you may be a contributor to the mindless blather to which you refer.  

It seems strange that all of a sudden there are 3 or 4 people on this forum that seem to all be related to you in some way.  Something fishy is going on here.

Cheers
Sam:asian:


----------



## thetruth (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> If you paid attention it was the long standing members demanding info to the quickest as if you were some master shii..s and attacked. Now you turn it around..please please please!



No actually you are wrong this all started in the PURE thread. As soon as people asked questions you are the ones who got defensive.  No one was demanding info they were asking questions which is what forums like this are about are they not??   

Cheers
Sam:asian:


----------



## thetruth (Aug 12, 2008)

Ravioli-Z said:


> Wow, thank you, sir, for all your oh so great wisdom and putting all us common folk in our place.  Considering he didn't know your credentials, and "dojo" is a commonly accepted term throughout most arts, his use of the term would have been acceptable to the less pompous.  WKF could stand for both "World Kickboxing Federation" and "World Karate Federation" both of which are known and respected world-wide and have been around since the 1970's.  You seem to be so knowledgable in the arts.  I figured you would have heard of them.  It must have just slipped your mind. Oh, and since you seem to be an individual worthy of such demanding respect I should probably let you know that his military credentials are respectable, documented, verifiable, and attainable. "Go Fish."  Do you slam all former service members now teaching martial arts or just the ones that teach "reality based systems"?  You also wanted proof that he teaches full time and makes a good living at it.  Again, that is also documented and verifiable (affirmative on both).  If you want it so bad... "go fish."  Why are you so insistant on seeing all this proof anyway?  It's just a forum.  Oh, and speaking of the forum... you should go re-read the rules as well... although based on your post... I'm sure your hypocracy knows no bounds.  I'm sure you will no doubt want the last word here oh wise one but I'll go ahead and let you know that I will neither dignify anymore posts from you with a response nor will I return back to this thread.  Good day to you all.  May you live and train well.



Wow your first post is to jump to this guys defense.  Coincidence?????  I think not.  You are probably the same guy

Cheers
Sam:asian:


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

thetruth said:


> No actually you are wrong this all started in the PURE thread. As soon as people asked questions you are the ones who got defensive.  No one was demanding info they were asking questions which is what forums like this are about are they not??
> 
> Cheers
> Sam:asian:



I responded with I would put a Youtube Vid up, but that is not good enough and I was attacked. So if your going to talk , see it for what it is. A bunch of guys p.oed cause the bib wasn't put on you and you not being spoon fed.


----------



## Cirdan (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> You totally understood it, Oh and your so witty..wow did you think of that one all by your lonesome?


 
Perhaps you should call it a day now?


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

Cirdan said:


> Perhaps you should call it a day now?



I keep trying but alas people still want to flame the fire..


----------



## thetruth (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> I responded with I would put a Youtube Vid up, but that is not good enough and I was attacked. So if your going to talk , see it for what it is. A bunch of guys p.oed cause the bib wasn't put on you and you not being spoon fed.



You informing people of your 'art' is not spoon feeding. What is there to protect?

Cheers
Sam:asian:


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

thetruth said:


> You informing people of your 'art' is not spoon feeding. What is there to protect?
> 
> Cheers
> Sam:asian:



nothing to protect, I have a few projects on my plate and thought the video would have made more sense and would give people visual and verbal stimulation as well I being able to articulate myself better than has been done here.


----------



## thetruth (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> nothing to protect, I have a few projects on my plate and thought the video would have made more sense and would give people visual and verbal stimulation as well I being able to articulate myself better than has been done here.



If you say so


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

thetruth said:


> If you say so



see no matter what , the answer is never good enough from me.. oh well


----------



## thetruth (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> see no matter what , the answer is never good enough from me.. oh well



Just post your video on you tube dude. Clearly you are not going to explain yourself here

Cheers
Sam:asian:


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

Before I comment on some posts in this thread, I'd like to say a few things.  First off, my apologies for not replying sooner.  I started this thread, and didn't want to give the impression I forgot about it.   Second, this thread has gone on for 5 pages.  It looks like we have a good thread with various thoughts on the OP.  However, please, before this thread gets locked, can we all do our best to keep things civil.  Taking personal shots at one another is going to do nothing but get this thread locked and people removed from the forum.  I hate to see locked threads, especially ones that I start,   so come on guys, lets tone it down a bit.


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

Going back to page 1, I think KT made some great points.  I'm going to also play devils advocate for a moment as well. 

Now, IMHO, alot of what is taught in the RBSD systems is really nothing new.  Don't get me wrong, there are some things that I've seen that I don't see in a TMA, so in my mind, I take that as new.  Example. Tony Blauer and his spear.  I havent seen many TMAs using that entry method.  As far as whats taught...a punch is a punch, kick is a kick, etc., but alot of it comes down to the delivery method and way of training.  Scenario training is big with RBSD, and something that I don't see many TMAs doing.  

I've heard and read things such as, "A TMA can't prepare you the way RBSD can!"  The TMA folks will usually say that their art has won battles many years ago and still is successful today.  I mean really, are the RBSD guys actually saying that nobody who trains in Kenpo, Kajukenbo, TKD, etc., can defend themselves?  

IMHO, alot of things come down to the way you train, plain and simple.  You could say Kenpo is a TMA, however, I've borrowed many things from other arts, and added them to my own personal training.  This has included but is not limited to, ground work, weapons work, methods of applying various techniques, aliveness, resistance, padded suit training, etc.  

So, does one need to train in a RBSD art in order to do well in a real world fight?  IMO no, however, I'm a big advocate of keeping up with the times.  I feel that you can still maintain some traditional roots to your art, but still make subtle changes, add things in, etc.


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

bowser666 said:


> The point i am maknig is that it seems that all RBSD systems today do nothing but knock TMA , and call them useless and archaic. Its all basically branding for them, thats what they want you to think. Thus buy their product etc...... Nowadays there is a big push for RSBD and there are so many of them that are coming out now. In another few years there is going to be so many Mc RSBD's that your head is gonna spin. RSBD wouldn't exist without TMA. That is all I am saying. and Like somoene mentioned before it is not what you train it is how you train. One isn't better than the other. It is just IMO that RSBD lack teh system and structure of TMA and those are needed in training. It is part of the journey. RSBD systems make it sound almost like the Matrix. You plug in and within hours you are capable of defending yourself which is a crock.
> 
> 
> You needs years of training to make it a instinctive response and that isn't going to happen in any style in 6 months. RBSD , TMA or not. Why do you think TMA's have been aroudn for so long. RBSD are just a flash in the pan. Sorry if I seem vehement but I obviously am a TMA supporter. Those guys in RBSD are not re-inventing the wheel as much as they think they are.


 
Well, with all due respect, the same can be said of the TMAs.  I've been training long enough to have heard and seen various training methods of the TMAs.  I've seen some weapon defense that if applied against someone with intent, would get the defender killed, and I've seen defenses done against static attacks, when in reality, people dont attack that way.

I don't disagree that it does take time to get good at things, however, I don't believe that someone should have to train for 10 or more years before their art will work.  Lets look at Krav Maga and their choke defenses.  While the strikes and method of execution will vary, the initial defense, the removal of the hands from the neck, is the same, regardless if the attack is from the front, rear or side.  The reason, as they say, is to make it easier to think in the heat of the battle.  You get grabbed, and the person will probably think, Ok, is this from the front, back or side? Ok, its from the rear, ok, now which of my 10 defenses will I pick from?  With the KM method, it doesnt matter how you begin because its all the same.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Aug 12, 2008)

> However, please, before this thread gets locked, can we all do our best to keep things civil.



There have been some on-topic posts interleaved within the noise.

Anyway...on your original question.  I think you have set up a false dichotomy.  The scope of what constitutes TMA is quite wide and in one sense his hard to define.  Everything  from old people doing Tai-Chi in slow motion for fitness to US Marines doing H2H for combat training.  Some would argue that at either end you are not really doing TMA and I'm not going to quibble on the definition.  People have a lot of reasons for studying MA: sport, art, self-defense, fitness, whatever.  Most people do some combination.

RBSD, I think, is orthogonal.  It's a training method and a mindset.  As such, I think the training approach can be incorporated into a self-defense training regime that would be based on TMA.  In other words, you can do your Tae Kwon Do for Sport, or you can do your Tae Kwon Do for combat (or both), but if you are doing Tae Kwon Do for combat, then you can incorporate RNSD training methods and approaches into learning to practically apply your Tae Kwon Do techniques to real world scenarios.  

I don't think it's a TMA versus RBSD issue.  I think the study of Martial Arts is a very complex, multi-dimensional pursuit that everyone approaches in their own way for their own goals.  RBSD is something  that can fit within the training goals and methods of some for which those sorts of scenarios and tactics are important


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

D.G.C.F.S. said:


> here is my 0.02 cents
> 
> *The 3 Categories of Martial Arts*
> 
> ...


 

A few questions for you:

1) Regarding the first part on TMA.  You say that there is no proof that these have worked in real fights in the present.  How do you know this?  This sir, sounds like the usual comments from the BJJ nutriders that you see on certain forums, that defend BJJ and Royce tooth and nail.  If its not on tape, blah, blah, blah.  I don't know about you, but I don't walk around with a camcorder.  So again, I ask, how do you know?

2) Regarding MMA.  I do not doubt that these guys are tough, however, they're fighting in a controlled setting, with rules, no restrictive clothing, gloves, can't target certain areas, a padded mat, no weapons, no interference from bystanders.  

3) RBSD.  Is there proof that RBSD has worked in the present?  And please don't say what the MMA/Gracie nutriders say, that BJJ is taught to the Military, so if thats the case, it must be good, blah, blah.  If I had a dime for everyone that said they taught the militray, I'd be a multi millionare.  

No disrespect intended, and you and I have had some good discussion on here on another thread and I thank you for that.   As I have said, I enjoy MMA, I enjoy TMA, and I enjoy RBSD.  Everyone can and should be learning from each other as everyone will benefit.


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

FearlessFreep said:


> There have been some on-topic posts interleaved within the noise.


 
Yes, I agree.  I wasnt talking about the on topic ones, I was talking about the off topic, personal slams and outright rude posts, that some people have been making.  Its those posts that are the ants at the picnic. 



> Anyway...on your original question. I think you have set up a false dichotomy. The scope of what constitutes TMA is quite wide and in one sense his hard to define. Everything from old people doing Tai-Chi in slow motion for fitness to US Marines doing H2H for combat training. Some would argue that at either end you are not really doing TMA and I'm not going to quibble on the definition. People have a lot of reasons for studying MA: sport, art, self-defense, fitness, whatever. Most people do some combination.


 
For the purpose of this thread, anything that does not fall into the RBSD category could be deemed traditional.  But you are correct, the scope can be pretty wide. 




> RBSD, I think, is orthogonal. It's a training method and a mindset. As such, I think the training approach can be incorporated into a self-defense training regime that would be based on TMA. In other words, you can do your Tae Kwon Do for Sport, or you can do your Tae Kwon Do for combat (or both), but if you are doing Tae Kwon Do for combat, then you can incorporate RNSD training methods and approaches into learning to practically apply your Tae Kwon Do techniques to real world scenarios.


 
Agreed.  IMHO, if someone is really serious about SD, it wouldn't be a bad idea to incorporate some of those methods.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

MJS said:


> A few questions for you:
> 
> 1) Regarding the first part on TMA.  You say that there is no proof that these have worked in real fights in the present.  How do you know this?  This sir, sounds like the usual comments from the BJJ nutriders that you see on certain forums, that defend BJJ and Royce tooth and nail.  If its not on tape, blah, blah, blah.  I don't know about you, but I don't walk around with a camcorder.  So again, I ask, how do you know?
> 
> ...




First Thank you for the respect you are showing me I *bow* with respect.
ok
1) but I don't walk around with a camcorder.  So again, I ask, how do you know?
I know this cause I teach Instructors from different  Styles  R.B.M.A. and SOME are on my website that have giving me their Testimonials. That what they have been training in was not practical or applicable for a street encounter. "BUT I DID NOT REPLACE WHAT LEARN" JUST add more tools to their box of GOODIES. these are INSTRUCTORS, not just black belts, but If you like on my website you will see Instructors under me with a wide range of credentials.

2) did not understand the question? it looks like you are agree with me.   



3)Is there proof that RBSD has worked in the present?
yes again my sifu Paul vunak has trained navy seals team 5 and on, I also have trained S.F. teams,officers, special agents and they have come from the field and STATED hey it WORKS... again it is on my website.

I do have credentials and IF any one here would go fish, they will see that I am not a wanna be or a paper DRAGON, and half of credentials are not even posted yet on my site "slow webmaster" lol
Thank you for this GREAT DEBATE 
I *bow* with respect


----------



## Kacey (Aug 12, 2008)

Something else to remember when comparing RBSD and TMA systems - different people are looking for different things when they start training.  I started TKD because the guy I was dating at the time talked me into it - and something in it just "clicked" and I never left; that was 21 years ago.  What I fell in love with was patterns, a mainstay of many TMAs.  Had he taken me to something else, without the patterns, I probably would not have stayed in.  

Do I have the same level of "street" training that I could get in a RBSD system?  Possibly, and possibly not - but what _do_ have is more than I would have without the training I have.  Ultimately, the wide range of styles should enthuse, rather than enrage, those who espouse their own style - because the wider the range of styles available, the more people who will be exposed to some type of self-defense system - whether it's the system you are involved in or not, whether the system is, in your opinion, the most effective or not.  There are styles I would love to add to what I have, and there are styles I have no interest in whatsoever - and I'm sure the same is true for most others here.  

But the way to interest people in the style you (any "you" out there) love is not to put down what they already do - that only makes people defensive.  The way to interest people in other styles is to engage in open discourse about pros and cons - and there is no system, no matter how good, that doesn't have cons of some type; claiming a system is "perfect" is a good way to drive people off.


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

D.G.C.F.S. said:


> First Thank you for the respect you are showing me I *bow* with respect.
> ok


 
See, this is what I like....a good discussion with civil debating.   I may not agree or disagree with everything that is said on these forums, but I always try, and yes, its hard at times, to stay somewhat civil.  Makes fora much nicer thread.




> 1) but I don't walk around with a camcorder. So again, I ask, how do you know?
> I know this cause I teach Instructors from different Styles R.B.M.A. and SOME are on my website that have giving me their Testimonials. That what they have been training in was not practical or applicable for a street encounter. "BUT I DID NOT REPLACE WHAT LEARN" JUST add more tools to their box of GOODIES. these are INSTRUCTORS, not just black belts, but If you like on my website you will see Instructors under me with a wide range of credentials.


 
Likewise, I didn't replace what I have learned either, just added some things in.  There are so many things out there, that to not look at everything is a dis-service to ones training.  Hey, I'm not ashamed to say that I took something from art X.  If it works for me and I can use it, hell yeah I'm going to take it.  

There are things in Kenpo that I'd probably never use if my life depended on it, but someone else may find value in it and be able to make it work.  Just because I don't care for it, let someone else decide if it'll work for them. Some may ask, "Well, if you know it wont work, why teach it?"  Like I said, if it didnt work for me, how do I know it wont for them. So, now we have this:  What worked 50yrs ago may not work today.  Some may find it odd that a defense that worked then, doesnt work now.  However, I wouldn't say that the past is no good in the present.  So take Kenpo or Kaju.  2 arts that have been around a while.  I'd be hard pressed to say that those folks today cant defend themselves.



> 2) did not understand the question? it looks like you are agree with me.


 
My bad.  I should've read further down, as I just read the first few lines and I misunderstood.  





> 3)Is there proof that RBSD has worked in the present?
> yes again my sifu Paul vunak has trained navy seals team 5 and on, I also have trained S.F. teams,officers, special agents and they have come from the field and STATED hey it WORKS... again it is on my website.
> 
> I do have credentials and IF any one here would go fish, they will see that I am not a wanna be or a paper DRAGON, and half of credentials are not even posted yet on my site "slow webmaster" lol
> ...


 
I don't believe I have said that you were a fake, a paper dragon or anything like that.   So, in addition to the folks you mention, are there civilians in your school, that say that it works for them?  Again, I'm looking to hear about the average person, not military.  So in a round about way, this goes back to question #1.  I don't know, but it seems to me, that unless it's taped, there're written statements or something on a site, then the word of someone is no good.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

thetruth said:


> No offense mate but given you have been a member here for less than 2 weeks, perhaps you may be a contributor to the mindless blather to which you refer.
> 
> It seems strange that all of a sudden there are 3 or 4 people on this forum that seem to all be related to you in some way.  Something fishy is going on here.
> 
> ...


this is what 

 The Last Legionary wrote:

People seem to confuse "effective" arts with "preservationist" arts and "sport" arts. They then go off and "reinvent" things, trying to "improve" them and "modernize" them.
I've found that usually means they never actually understood things.
"Wheel Reinvention" is a common problem in the martial arts.
Most of those doing it aren't worth wasting time with when you have perfectly good, time honed systems already in existence. All that is lacking are instructors who really understand their art, and students who have the mind to see things properly.

Of course, I like wooden trainers, rattan mats, and the occasional folding chair. Save the "high tech" crap, super foam floors and AC for the hobbyists.

 Ok, back to reading all the infomercials and mindless blather that seem to be flooding the site lately. Buy some ad space and stop being leaches already, geeze.
 		  		  		  		 		 			 				__________________
*nemo malus felix*​"Unless you do your best, the day will come when, tired and hungry, you will halt just short of the goal you were ordered to reach, and by halting you will make useless the efforts and deaths of thousands." - Gen. George S. Patton 

I just responded back, sorry you did not like:ultracool


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

MJS said:


> See, this is what I like....a good discussion with civil debating.   I may not agree or disagree with everything that is said on these forums, but I always try, and yes, its hard at times, to stay somewhat civil.  Makes fora much nicer thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Ok I see your point on the last one? video would be better than a written statement  even If it is from a police officer or military, Martial Arts Instructor. I will get video statement from them in the future.
Thank you for a GREAT DEBATE  SIR.


----------



## arnisador (Aug 12, 2008)

The Last Legionary said:


> Ok, back to reading all the infomercials and mindless blather that seem to be flooding the site lately. Buy some ad space and stop being leaches already, geeze.



Hey, it's getting people to discuss martial arts despite the unfortunate SNR. Don't knock it!

I think you can make almost anything effective if well-trained. It's not about the techniques as much as the training. Boxing works because_ it has to work_ or you get knocked out. I've seen people train Uechi-ryu like tai chi and I've seen people train it like Kyokushin. The RBSD movement is a good reminder to_ test it out_ in as real conditions as can be safely done. After that, I've seen people use monkey style kung fu very effectively despite the fact that it looks silly to me.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

Ravioli-Z said:


> Wow, thank you, sir, for all your oh so great wisdom and putting all us common folk in our place. Considering he didn't know your credentials, and "dojo" is a commonly accepted term throughout most arts, his use of the term would have been acceptable to the less pompous. WKF could stand for both "World Kickboxing Federation" and "World Karate Federation" both of which are known and respected world-wide and have been around since the 1970's. You seem to be so knowledgable in the arts. I figured you would have heard of them. It must have just slipped your mind. Oh, and since you seem to be an individual worthy of such demanding respect I should probably let you know that his military credentials are respectable, documented, verifiable, and attainable. "Go Fish." Do you slam all former service members now teaching martial arts or just the ones that teach "reality based systems"? You also wanted proof that he teaches full time and makes a good living at it. Again, that is also documented and verifiable (affirmative on both). If you want it so bad... "go fish." Why are you so insistant on seeing all this proof anyway? It's just a forum. Oh, and speaking of the forum... you should go re-read the rules as well... although based on your post... I'm sure your hypocracy knows no bounds. I'm sure you will no doubt want the last word here oh wise one but I'll go ahead and let you know that I will neither dignify anymore posts from you with a response nor will I return back to this thread. Good day to you all. May you live and train well.


 
Do I slam all former service members? No. Just the ******** artists. 

"The proof is posted on his website". Great. I'll go and build myself a website that says how I personally trained Jesus in resurection-fu. It'll be real because my website said so. Excuse me if I tend to not take a newb's opinion on anything.

I will however point out, you're a liar. You came back.

*Ravioli-Z*

Last Activity: Today 12:00 PM 
Current Activity: Viewing Thread RBSD And TMAs: Does One Prepare You Better Than The Other? ​ 
Yay. Another sockpuppet/mouthpiece.



thetruth said:


> No offense mate but given you have been a member here for less than 2 weeks, perhaps you may be a contributor to the mindless blather to which you refer.
> 
> It seems strange that all of a sudden there are 3 or 4 people on this forum that seem to all be related to you in some way. Something fishy is going on here.
> 
> ...


 
It's the usual. BSer comes in, posts about their hot, new ****, gets called on it, and a bunch of 1-post wonders sign up, tell us how great the thing is and how we're so ungrateful for it all, then vanish into the ether never to be hard from again.  Of course, this just proves it's all retreaded cow dung and not anything worth a spit.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

arnisador said:


> Hey, it's getting people to discuss martial arts despite the unfortunate SNR. Don't knock it!
> 
> I think you can make almost anything effective if well-trained. It's not about the techniques as much as the training. Boxing works because_ it has to work_ or you get knocked out. I've seen people train Uechi-ryu like tai chi and I've seen people train it like Kyokushin. The RBSD movement is a good reminder to_ test it out_ in as real conditions as can be safely done. After that, I've seen people use monkey style kung fu very effectively despite the fact that it looks silly to me.


I tend to disagree.  Only the "unproven" needs to be tested. I don't need to go find a street fight to get into to find out if my techniques work.  I also am smart enough to know that adding all this "safety gear" changes the equation.  A RedMan suit, padded weapons, and "do not hit" zones makes for a safe environment. It doesn't make for a "Real" environment. You can angle in towards "real", you can take it close, but you don't get real until it is real, and then it's too late. 

Also, I don't care what Vunak or Vlad or Voldimir can do, did do, might do, or have done, when === *They aren't the one doing the teaching* ===.

Having a couple of SF guys train with you is not the same thing as having an actual DOD contract. Hell, I've "trained cops" and "trained military" too. Sounds impressive, alot of it does, and it's all resume padding and "impress the mundanes" stuff.

As to monkey style, a couple of good Mexican beers can simulate the effects of years of training. Including the resulting headache and strange body pains. :rofl:
A better use of my money than the latest hot advert in Lack_Belt Magazine.

To answer the OP question, TMA is better, if trained under an experienced instructor who really understands the art, if trained with a mind able to really see it. Otherwise, it's just fancy dance steps with a monthly bill.


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

D.G.C.F.S. said:


> Ok I see your point on the last one? video would be better than a written statement even If it is from a police officer or military, Martial Arts Instructor. I will get video statement from them in the future.
> Thank you for a GREAT DEBATE SIR.


 
Just to clarify what I meant by this:

"I don't know, but it seems to me, that unless it's taped, there're written statements or something on a site, then the word of someone is no good."

I meant that this is what certain groups of people usually use as their basis as to whether or not something works or has worked or can work.  If I say, "Yeah, I was attacked and defended myself with a 360 degree jump spinning hook to the head! KOd that guy on the spot!"  some will flat out call me a liar and tell me that its impossible that that kick worked, and they'd demand proof of video.  

My point is, I don't care about video.  I don't care if someone thinks my arts are garbage.  I like them, and I know what works/doesn't work for me.  If I used an eye jab and was able to get the hell away from the bad guy, that worked for me, yet certain people would again call my a liar and say that if it isn't done in the cage, then it doesnt work.  As long as I know it worked for me, thats all I care about.  If someone doesnt want to believe me because I have no tape, thats fine.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

MJS said:


> Just to clarify what I meant by this:
> 
> "I don't know, but it seems to me, that unless it's taped, there're written statements or something on a site, then the word of someone is no good."
> 
> ...




Yes Sir I agree with that statement. point is that no matter what we or any one else say it will always not satisfies every one what works for you may not work for me ect.... Thank you for the respect and conversation 
I*BOW*


----------



## terryl965 (Aug 12, 2008)

The Last Legionary said:


> I tend to disagree. Only the "unproven" needs to be tested. I don't need to go find a street fight to get into to find out if my techniques work. I also am smart enough to know that adding all this "safety gear" changes the equation. A RedMan suit, padded weapons, and "do not hit" zones makes for a safe environment. It doesn't make for a "Real" environment. You can angle in towards "real", you can take it close, but you don't get real until it is real, and then it's too late.
> 
> Also, I don't care what Vunak or Vlad or Voldimir can do, did do, might do, or have done, when === *They aren't the one doing the teaching* ===.
> 
> ...


 
Man take a pill and relax it is all good, remember we are all together in the arts as a whole. May the bottle never be empty so you can have another once in a while.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

TMA is great for kids and Adult's who have never tried anything and want to feel like part of the Martial World. TMA also teaches great values, respect for your self and other's, patience, and great fundimentals.
I think RBSD prepare's you for real world, advanced thinking killer types. So I think TMA is best to enter, but once you need life saving skills RBSD is the way to go. Speaking from someone who was into TMA for 10 years


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

Credential Check

"Malvin Traylor"
Google turns up 15 results.
Your website, a Youtube video, and some directories.
Nothing really of note.
No mention of any championships, or what, other than his own.
One would think a "big well known org" would you know, mention their champions. Hell, I can find Pro-Wrestling champions going back to the 1930's!

"Eric Bentzen"
Turns up a few thousand, mostly about someone who makes fonts and plays chess.
Refining this to "Eric Bentzen" and martial 
drops us to 11 results.
A blog, ebay, their own website, and some forum discussion here and at Defend.

For all the hype, that's the best that can be found out of an index of over a trillion pages going back 20 years.

I'm not impressed.


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 12, 2008)

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sho...d.php?p=427486. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

-Mark A. Beardmore
-MT Moderator-


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

The Last Legionary said:


> I tend to disagree.  Only the "unproven" needs to be tested. I don't need to go find a street fight to get into to find out if my techniques work.  I also am smart enough to know that adding all this "safety gear" changes the equation.  A RedMan suit, padded weapons, and "do not hit" zones makes for a safe environment. It doesn't make for a "Real" environment. You can angle in towards "real", you can take it close, but you don't get real until it is real, and then it's too late.
> 
> Also, I don't care what Vunak or Vlad or Voldimir can do, did do, might do, or have done, when === *They aren't the one doing the teaching* ===.
> 
> ...



Sir you have NO CLUE who I am or what I do.
Sir you are just  A PAPER DRAGON, I will no longer debate with you and your lack of understanding.
I simply stated what I think and have experience. So Sir go head and go to your Hall and work on your forms katas or what ever you prefer to call it .
I am not new to the Martial Arts world , you Sir live in a box and in that box I think "you think you are GOD" get a clue please Sir.
Also please build a website for yourself, That way at least there is INFO on you and your school you train at and who your instructors are, that way your credentials are more than 
GOLD KEY CLUB
SITE FAN
I*bow* out of embarrassment for you.


----------



## Kacey (Aug 12, 2008)

Dark Gift Concepts said:


> TMA is great for kids and Adult's who have never tried anything and want to feel like part of the Martial World. TMA also teaches great values, respect for your self and other's, patience, and great fundimentals.
> I think RBSD prepare's you for real world, advanced thinking killer types. So I think TMA is best to enter, but once you need life saving skills RBSD is the way to go. Speaking from someone who was into TMA for 10 years



And for those of us who don't think we need RBSD for "real world, advanced thinking killer types"?  I understand what you're saying - but TMAs work just fine; they certainly work fine for a friend of mine who tracks bail jumpers, and has been attacked by a fair number... and the bail jumpers have always lost.

There are only so many ways the body can move, and so many techniques that one will respond with when attacked - the key is _mindset_ - and that mindset can come from any style, TMA or RBSD, as long as the instructor knows what s/he's doing and how to teach it.   Also, there are people who would be scared off by such training - no matter how long they've spent in TMAs.  Different strokes for different folks.

Also - not everyone trains primarily for self-defense.  Some people train for health, for fitness, for motivation (if you work out alone and don't show up, no one notices... but if you have a training partner or class mates, who expect you, you're more likely to go), for mental stimulation - there are all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with self-defense.

Variety is the spice of life - why tell other people they must abide by your choice of flavor simply because you've found your favorite?


----------



## Grenadier (Aug 12, 2008)

_*ATTENTION ALL USERS:
*
_Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. 

Please review our sniping policy http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sho...d.php?p=427486. 

Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). 

Thank you.

-Ronald Shin
-MT Supermoderator


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

Sir I am trying, I hope you see what other are also doing.
it is a two way street Sir



Grenadier said:


> _*ATTENTION ALL USERS:
> *
> _Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level.
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 12, 2008)

I will this and only and then I hope the thread gets the lock it deserves

I have had many sifus over the years and I just say they are all CMA but I do suppose you could divide them in to TMA and RBSD since one is Police/Military Sanda. My taijiquan Sifu has been at taiji for over 50 years and anyone would be hard pressed to lay a hand on him of course that is not RBSD by the standards of some in this post so I guess they are convinced it is useless and if that is true that is incredibly sad because you would be missing the point and IMO pointing at some other style and belittling it in order to make yours look better since you are likely not 100% confident in what you are stating.

My Sanda Sifu is very good and very well trained and he has the greatest respect for the skill of someone like my Taiji Sifu and my Sanda Sifu is also rather impressed with Xingyiquan and Bagua too. All are in his opinion quite effective, if trained properly.

He has said of Sanda that it is not the most dangerous or most deadly MA (like I get the feeling some here are trying to say all RBSD is) he does say it is just a real quick and easy way to learn how to hurt someone very badly, which is why he teaches few. But then he is Chinese and maybe it is just a cultural thing that he respects other masters of other styles and has enough confidence in his own style to not feel the need to belittle others. 

I'm done, I leave this old over done &#8220;my art is better than your art&#8221; post to the sales pitch that it is and hopefully a lock.


----------



## Ravioli-Z (Aug 12, 2008)

The Last Legionary said:


> Do I slam all former service members? No. Just the ******** artists.
> 
> "The proof is posted on his website". Great. I'll go and build myself a website that says how I personally trained Jesus in resurection-fu. It'll be real because my website said so. Excuse me if I tend to not take a newb's opinion on anything.
> 
> ...



I will humor myself and go back on my word just for the sake of pointing out yet more flaws in your arrogant arguments.  You may be a great martial artist, and if you are, I congratulate you.  I don't care if you are or aren't.  I don't need proof nor do I care if you impress me or not.  You, however, have already dubbed me a liar and I have made no claims other than his credentials are documented (and I never said that the proof was "on the website."  Until you prove me wrong, sir, your name calling is just more arrogant and/or insecure rhetoric.  If you are using "Google" as your definitive argument then you are not only arrogant and possibly insecure... but ignorant as well.  I hold everyone in the martial arts community in the highest respect (every style)... until they prove me otherwise.  You, sir, have proven to be nothing but arrogant and condescending so far and the only thing you have proven to me is your own ignorance.  I don't care what rank you hold on this forum... that qualifies you as an expert in nothing and certainly puts you in no position to call anyone else a liar or a newbie when your supporting evidence is laughable at best.  Go ahead and scream that I am a newbie on this forum, go ahead and tell me that I haven't shown you MY credentials, go ahead and make any claims of me that you want and continue the pointless insults and attempted slander... the bottom line is... your attitude on this forum, from what I have seen on this thread, is completely contrary to what martial arts stand for.  No one here owes you a single shred of proof of anything and we certainly don't need your approval or respect... because you are a disgrace to the martial arts community.


----------



## MJS (Aug 12, 2008)

Ravioli-Z said:


> I will humor myself and go back on my word just for the sake of pointing out yet more flaws in your arrogant arguments. You may be a great martial artist, and if you are, I congratulate you. I don't care if you are or aren't. I don't need proof nor do I care if you impress me or not. You, however, have already dubbed me a liar and I have made no claims other than his credentials are documented (and I never said that the proof was "on the website." Until you prove me wrong, sir, your name calling is just more arrogant and/or insecure rhetoric. If you are using "Google" as your definitive argument then you are not only arrogant and possibly insecure... but ignorant as well. I hold everyone in the martial arts community in the highest respect (every style)... until they prove me otherwise. You, sir, have proven to be nothing but arrogant and condescending so far and the only thing you have proven to me is your own ignorance. I don't care what rank you hold on this forum... that qualifies you as an expert in nothing and certainly puts you in no position to call anyone else a liar or a newbie when your supporting evidence is laughable at best. Go ahead and scream that I am a newbie on this forum, go ahead and tell me that I haven't shown you MY credentials, go ahead and make any claims of me that you want and continue the pointless insults and attempted slander... the bottom line is... your attitude on this forum, from what I have seen on this thread, is completely contrary to what martial arts stand for. No one here owes you a single shred of proof of anything and we certainly don't need your approval or respect... because you are a disgrace to the martial arts community.


 
I am going to guess one of two things here.  Either you totally missed the last 2 mod notes in this thread, in which case I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, or you saw them, didn't care and had to post a reply like this.  

You see, you're new to this forum as well.  So like I have already pointed a few newbies out, I suggest you read the forum rules, and think a bit before you post.  I'm saying this as a member, NOT a mod, due to the fact that a mod can't moderate a thread they're involved in.  This is simply a member to member nudge, nothing more.

So, before comments like this, get this thread closed, perhaps you should reword some of your posts.

Mike


----------



## CoryKS (Aug 12, 2008)

So if someone, say a police officer, trains in a TMA and applies it to his job, and it works, doesn't that by definition make it an RBSD?  

RSVP, and do it ASAP because this thread is going to be KIA PDQ, IMO.


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

LOOK folks I am not here to start Sh%^$t, just voicing my opinion, nothing more, For the most part this is an awesome thread great debates and views..
BUT they are folks that are  MEAN, NASTY ECT... and I have not behaved in the best fashion ether, FOR THAT I AM SORRY, I should just walked away.... from those LOUD MOUTHES . SO lets have a GOOD day and bring the debates to the spirit of MARTIAL ARTS.:angel: "JUST KIDDING on been a angel"


----------



## D.G.C.F.S. (Aug 12, 2008)

CoryKS said:


> So if someone, say a police officer, trains in a TMA and applies it to his job, and it works, doesn't that by definition make it an RBSD?
> 
> RSVP, and do it ASAP because this thread is going to be KIA PDQ, IMO.



No SIR NO one said T.M.A. would not work that was not the thread, 
"Does One Prepare You Better Than The Other?"
and I said yes R.B.M.A. would prepare you better, NOT that T.M.A. was useless, so there it is..
train how you fight, fight like you train


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 12, 2008)

*This is coming from the cranky owner of the site.
Cut the ****, lose the attitudes, drop the sales pitches, unknot the panties, and pull the sticks out.
This applies to whomever it applies to. 
If shoe fit, wear it.*

I now go back to wading through the hundred or so complaints that have come in in the last day.


----------



## arnisador (Aug 12, 2008)

The Last Legionary said:


> Only the "unproven" needs to be tested. I don't need to go find a street fight to get into to find out if my techniques work.



There's techniques and there's the training of those techniques. I can throw a jab well at a bag, but my timing and sense of distance with it is not so great. The jab is an excellent _technique_--but I need to train mine better and with more liveliness. I found this out by having someone at class, in free-sparring, keep timing my jab, dodging it, and counter-punching me. (It was very frustrating. When I'm healthy again I intend to work on it.) Good technique, inadequate training.

So, in my opinion it's the training of the techniques that must be tested. There are better and worse choices of martial systems for various needs, but you can make a wide variety of things work for you if you actually test your training under circumstances involving a resisting opponent.




> I also am smart enough to know that adding all this "safety gear" changes the equation.  A RedMan suit, padded weapons, and "do not hit" zones makes for a safe environment. It doesn't make for a "Real" environment.




It _does _change the equation, but for the most part it's for the better. I think the Gracies, boxing, and Muay Thai have gone a long way toward settling the issue of what's more effective--a "safe" sport or a "deadly" art that a person can't fully train and test. Everyone who says "If I was mounted/put in the guard by someone I'd just bite him/gouge his eyes/break his fingers" needs to try that with a BJJ blue belt. It ain't that simple. But yes, you can still fool yourself.




> To answer the OP question, TMA is better, if trained under an experienced instructor who really understands the art, if trained with a mind able to really see it.



Well, it's not obvious to me either way. Most TMAs cover a wider range of possible scenarios but keep some questionable and untrainable/untestable moves. I like the greater depth of a TMA, personally, but have met RBSD-style people who can cover all reasonable situations fairly well.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 12, 2008)

A Swiss Army knife and a MultiTool are both great things to have, but I wouldn't want to have to build a house, repair a computer, or fix my car with one if I had a choice.
TMA/MMA/RBSD/etc all have their places in the tool box.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 12, 2008)

Bob Hubbard said:


> A Swiss Army knife and a MultiTool are both great things to have, but I wouldn't want to have to build a house, repair a computer, or fix my car with one if I had a choice.


 
MacGyver would


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 12, 2008)

Yeah, but he can build an anti aircraft battery out of a pen, a bike wheel, and underwear elastic. I'm not that good. Yet.


----------



## Dark Gift Concepts (Aug 12, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> MacGyver would



Now that show I miss..lol  He made the coolest stuff


----------



## The Last Legionary (Aug 12, 2008)

Out of respect the countless "will you shutup already" notes posted, I'll do that.

Last word - MacGyver Rocks!


----------



## godan (Sep 22, 2008)

Traditianal martial arts are no good in a steet encounter. 
For street encounters you need to practise aggainst attacks you will face in the street .
Both traditianal martial arts and R.B.S.D have there place. Only R.B S.D will prepare you better for the steet.


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2008)

godan said:


> Traditianal martial arts are no good in a steet encounter.
> For street encounters you need to practise aggainst attacks you will face in the street .
> Both traditianal martial arts and R.B.S.D have there place. Only R.B S.D will prepare you better for the steet.


 
While I don't necessarily disagree with you, I'd say that alot depends on how one gears their training.


----------



## Ninebird8 (Sep 22, 2008)

My opinion is short and sweet: the style does not matter, it depends upon the teacher and the student. I have had three teachers, all world known: one said he basically could show you techniques, but only real way to learn how to fight is to fight, and use the techniques in the situation. Second master, we would fight using our animal styles every day in full contact, with no pads, and use your style and technique against others with different movements and style. We also went through extreme Shaolin old style body training until we could barely make it to the car every day. My third teacher, believed that it was not what your opponent did, but what you failed to do that mattered, and would allow light contact until a certain level and then fight accordingly. In all instances, plus fighting many from other styles and full contact in Hong Kong, a couple of conclusions: 1) One must eventually fight, in a controlled and uncontrolled fashion, to understand true pressure and ability to react to changing conditions under adverse circumstances 2) The traditional martial arts are in some cases not so traditional. IF they are truly traditional, they will not kickbox, will not fight with pads, and the teacher will ensure that no one is harmed but at the same time bring some reality to it. Unfortunately, tournaments have made alot of fighting pitter pat and point fighting, so people get a false security, see Olympic tae kwon do fighters who will admit they might have an issue on the street. 3) As an example, though I am long time Kung fu and tai chi, the differences I see in tae kwon do as a sport in the US v. what I saw from Korea when I was in Hong kong is night and day. 4) No matter what the style, until one leaves the "technique" arena, stops training and starts practicing, and achieves naturalness in their movement, TMA will always be stuck. 5) What is neglected in both TMA and the RB arts are the foot movement and use of waist, as well as root. In both arenas, foot movement is usually never taught, and thus almost everyone can attack but few can defend simultaneously. I have yet to see one MMA or UFC fighter with a decent defense against attack. I do agree it is better to perfect three techniques well than 50 not so well. Too much to think about. 6) Lastly, will finish where I started.....it is up to the students, the teachers, the competitors, etc. to make the art realistic, applicable, and sustainable. The basis is there in the TMA, but has been lost. If the TMA were not reality based and tested, they would have not lasted this long...after all, whatever style still propagated today would not be here if not battle tested over time as humans have a tendency, especially in warfare, to evolve and use what works...to do otherwise, is to lose and die!!! My humble opinion.


----------



## kaizasosei (Sep 22, 2008)

sometimes yes, sometimes no.  i gather it depends on the instructors and their experience.

however, i  believe that at the end of the day, there is more knowledge to be gained from the various traditional martial arts than modern ones.  however, for every rule, there are exceptions.

Someone that completely ignores tma, may well be lacking in many basic skills.  

so the ones that do not endorse tma are simply displaying their fears and insecurities.  if you know every art, you can know most every enemy. but if you don't even check out what others can do, then i can understand having insecurities.  even though you say blue 'i don't care for that crap', when someone pulls that **** on you, things may turn too red too fast because the one that is upholding the mystery is the same one that is trying to debunk it.

not saying there's no mysteries.... i know of many mysteries in the martial arts...both traditional ancient and modern.  and i love learning all i can.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 22, 2008)

*Ninebird*, would you like to edit your post to put it into readable paragraphs?  I'm sure that there's a deal of cogent good sense there but people simply will not read it as it is.

*Godan*, that line of reasoning has been used many times and I've never been convinced by it.  What were what are now the TMA's developed for in the first place?  They were unarmed arts studied as an adjunct to the armed repertoire of soldiers.  

If it is the case that students of a style find that they cannot use it for self defence then they were taught incorrectly either in terms of technique or focus.  

Of course it does depend rather on the individual too.  Some people are born fighters and some are not (it tends to be about 5% of any students of an art, craft or science that are markedly 'better' than everyone else).


----------



## kaizasosei (Sep 23, 2008)

Just got back from my first freefighting training here in europe, as i have some experience from japan already. 

one thing i noticed is the raw power and extreme contact that one can experience in mma.  i think there's no way around training that intensely.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Sep 23, 2008)

MJS said:


> The question is right in the title of this thread!:ultracool
> 
> Do you feel that the Reality Based arts teach in a more effective manner than a TMA? For reference purposes, the RBSD arts would fall into the category of folks like Tony Blauer, Peyton Quinn, Marc "Animal" MacYoung, and arts such as Krav Maga. Your TMAs are: TKD, Kenpo, Shotokan, etc.
> 
> We have a great mixture of people here on Martial Talk, so I'm hoping we'll get some good debating!


Without reading all eight pages, I'll just jump in cold.  If you want to learn self defense quickly, yes, the RBA will get you there faster than the TMA.  As was mentioned on the first page, RBA focuses on simple, easy to master techniques that will work effectively in a self defense situation (by simple, I don't mean pedestrian, so much as more direct).  

TMA gives you a lot more techniques, but you have to pick out the ones that are best suited to you.  In an _honest and authentic_ traditional martial art, you will be prepared just as you would in reality based arts, but it will take longer.  A traditional martial art generally encompasses more than just self defense and is designed to last a lifetime, while and RDA is designed to give you immediate skills to preserve your life.

Plus, since Taekwondo was mentioned, I feel it necesary to say that if you train for sport only, you're not even in the conversation, as a sport only school won't train you to survive an encounter on the street, just as Krav Maga won't train you to win in competition.

One last comment: most TMA dojos are not really traditional.  Lets face it, McDojos dominate the TMA landscape, just as McDonalds and to a lesser extent, chain family restaurants (TGI Fridays, Applebees, Ruby Tuesdays, etc.) dominate the restaurant landscape.  If you practice your TMA at such a place, unless you take measures to address practical self defense, chances are you're getting a martial based fitness program that will not prepare you in any way for an SD scenario.

Just a few thoughts.

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Sep 23, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Of course it does depend rather on the individual too. Some people are born fighters and some are not (it tends to be about 5% of any students of an art, craft or science that are markedly 'better' than everyone else).


Ah how true.  We all want to be Yngwie Malmsteen, Chet Atkins, and Ritchie Blackmore, but most of us are lucky to be Ace Frehley and Mick Mars.

Daniel


----------



## Brian S (Sep 23, 2008)

godan said:


> Traditianal martial arts are no good in a steet encounter.
> For street encounters you need to practise aggainst attacks you will face in the street .
> Both traditianal martial arts and R.B.S.D have there place. Only R.B S.D will prepare you better for the steet.


 

Man, that depends on alot of things,but I can't wholely disagree with you.


----------



## Imua Kuntao (Sep 23, 2008)

If you cant use the old way, you dont have a good teacher


----------



## Cirdan (Sep 24, 2008)

Ninebird8 said:


> 5) What is neglected in both TMA and the RB arts are the foot movement and use of waist, as well as root.


 
This has certainly not been neglected at any school I have trained at, tho the focus of course varies. In what arts would you say this is missing?


----------



## kidswarrior (Sep 24, 2008)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Yeah, but he can build an anti aircraft battery out of a pen, a bike wheel, and underwear elastic. I'm not that good. Yet.


And yet look what you've done with this site. :mst: False modesty will get you nowhere. :lol:

And BTW, I for one like my panties knotted, thank you very much. :headbangin: :wink1:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 24, 2008)

kidswarrior said:


> And yet look what you've done with this site. :mst: False modesty will get you nowhere. :lol:


 
Yes Bob has done a great job with MT



kidswarrior said:


> And BTW, I for one like my panties knotted, thank you very much. :headbangin: :wink1:


 
ok NOW this is TOOOO much information and MUCH more than I needed to know :uhyeah:


----------



## Brian S (Sep 24, 2008)

Imua Kuntao said:


> If you cant use the old way, you dont have a good teacher


 

 What and who's old way? Do you really believe because it's old that it's better? I think the opposite.


----------



## chinto (Sep 24, 2008)

godan said:


> Traditianal martial arts are no good in a steet encounter.
> For street encounters you need to practise aggainst attacks you will face in the street .
> Both traditianal martial arts and R.B.S.D have there place. Only R.B S.D will prepare you better for the steet.




I disigree with you if your instructor teaches the traditional martial art such as Okinawan Karate or Kung fu or traditional Japanese Jujitsu or  Filipino Martial arts, or a myriad of other systems  as they have traditionaly been taught before the sport crap started. My instructor does not teach for tournement, you can learn the rules and how that is done though.   But if taught properly the traditional arts are extreamly effective on the street.

Where the heck do you think they were designed to be used? and they came about and were developed when cops were not available to come save you.


----------



## punisher73 (Sep 24, 2008)

godan said:


> Traditianal martial arts are no good in a steet encounter.
> For street encounters you need to practise aggainst attacks you will face in the street .
> Both traditianal martial arts and R.B.S.D have there place. Only R.B S.D will prepare you better for the steet.


 
*RBSD* is based on "traditional" karate and other traditional arts, Fairbairn, Applegate and others took their MA training and took out a few techniques that were very easy to learn and quick to teach and used those to give crash course lessons to the WW2 military guys. *RBSD* seems to forget that karate has all the same tools and more, it all comes down to how you are training those tools.

I have not yet seen a "street attack" that was not accounted for in okinawan karate (talking about unarmed at this point).  Many people make the mistake of lumping ALL TMA's into one category.  There are many different TMA's out there, some of them only focus on personal/spiritual development, some of them changed and focus on the sport aspect, and there are some that still focus on fighting.  
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/po...3223-4b1a82fbb2e7345175280a9af458ce628900e55b​


----------

