# The perils of cross training



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Some martial artists feel the need to cross train for various reasons,  usually its because they want to be as well rounded as they can in  order to compensate for the incompleteness of some of the arts. Some  arts only focus mainly on grappling (BJJ, Judo etc.) whilst some arts  only focus on striking (Kickboxing, Muay Thai etc.) Some arts focus only  on hands (e.g. boxing) whilst some arts are predominately kicking (e.g.  Olympic TKD). So these martial artists mix and match from these styles  in order to develop a complete range of skills. This is more prevalent  in the competitive martial arts, especially in the UFC. When doing this  fighters will work on a specific set of skills, one at a time, in  different parts of their training regimen and then put them all together  when they compete.

Other martial artists will study more than one art at a time whilst  others will learn one art for a while and then change to something else  with the aim to get as many black belts as they can. When studying 2  arts that have similar techniques it is even more difficult as you would  have to keep changing the way you do them after each time you change  between classes. Each of these approaches carries with them their own  set of limitations. The classical approach is to choose one martial art  and stick with that for life. The main problem in doing this is it can  often be difficult to find a complete martial art. No martial art can be  absolutely complete, if they were then there would be no need to evolve  the art or improve the techniques.

The problem with mixing and matching different styles instead of  concentrating on just one art is that it is much more difficult to  develop a reliable set of skills; you just get an average of many skills  (jack of all trades, master of none). Just consider this; if you  required brain surgery would you rather have the surgeon operating on  you to have 20 years of experience consisting of 5 years as a heart  surgeon, 5 years as an optometrist, 5 years as an orthopedic surgeon and  5 years as a brain surgeon or would you rather the surgeon have 20  years of experience only as a brain surgeon.

The problem with changing martial arts every time you get a black belt  to gain black belts in as many styles as possible is that you will only  get to learn the basics of any martial art. It would be like only  reading the first chapter of every book, sure you will get a lot of  reading done but you will never get the full story. The true essence of a  martial art only begins after you get to black belt. This is where you  get to start to perfect your technique and learn the advanced concepts.  This does not show much loyalty to the martial art, the instructors or  the masters in that school. It is also a selfish attitude, when you earn  your black belt you do not do it on your own. A lot of time, effort and  patience on the part of your instructors go into teaching you the art  in the hope that you can learn and stay with the school and make the art  stronger. If you decide that the art is not for you at some point and  leave then that is one thing but to have the secret intention right from  the start to leave after black belt then that can be like a slap in the  face to your instructor. That would be like getting a job for the sole  purpose of learning the equipment and procedures and leaving as soon as  you are finished and working for the competition.

It is perfectly fine to mix and match martial arts if that is what you  want to do, it does not mean that you will not be effective or  successful in the martial arts. MMA fighters do this very well but it is  not the only way to become well rounded. By choosing the right martial  art for you that is as complete as possible you can learn the most  advanced concepts and adopt the art as a way of life. When making a  lifelong commitment to a martial art there is nothing wrong with  learning specific techniques from other martial arts that you see and  getting different perspectives. For beginners this must be in  consultation with your instructor. If your instructor tells you that the  technique is inadequate then the technique must be discarded. If your  instructor tells you that the technique is useful then the technique can  then be incorporated into the art. You must do this because your  instructor will have more knowledge and experience than you. If you were  previously from another martial art and know more about martial arts  than your instructor then he or she will still know more about their art  than you. For black belts and instructors who have a lot of experience  then you can usually judge for yourself the value of any technique you  can use.

I was fortunate to have picked a martial art that that is a complete art  headed by one of the 12 original masters of Tae Kwon Do who personally  conducts every black belt grading and I see every 3 months. There are  also his brothers, one a 9th dan grandmaster and the other is a 7th dan  who is also one of the 12 original masters. I feel no need to cross  train because my art includes hands and feet (~40-60% hands), ground  defence, joint locks and defence against multiple attackers and weapons  and trains to defend against other martial arts and not just itself. But  that is not to say that I do not learn techniques from other martial  arts that I see here and there. Personally I still use many of the  techniques I learned in Hap Ki Do, such as the break falls and joint  locks and at least one kick. I once saw a Karate demonstration and saw a  defence against a headlock that I have incorporated into my repertoire  as well as a defence against a hip throw that I saw in a Judo video.

So if cross training is your thing and it works well for you then go for  it but also be aware of its limitations. If you choose to concentrate  on only one martial art for a lifelong commitment then do not be afraid  to seek a wider perspective.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 25, 2013)

*Sigh* another mixed vs. non-mixed MA thread...I will say this much...you've provided no proof of what you're lecturing here, not all cross-trainers do it for competition or to 'collect belts' and whatever style you are in, I honestly don't believe it is a 'complete style', especially since you said yourself you've incorporated tihngs from other styles. If it was complete, why would you need anything else?


----------



## Blindside (Jan 25, 2013)

My personal experience is that is that you can beat specialists by taking them out of their field and putting them into unfamiliar ranges.  I don't play with Olympic TKD guys at kicking range, that would be stupid, close to clinch, takedown, ground and pound.  

It should also be noted that most historical martial arts, used by warriors and soldiers who actually used these things we study on battlefields, had a full complement of training, unarmed grappling, unarmed striking, armed grappling, armed striking, armed vs unarmed and unarmed vs armed training, I am sure they would appreciate the warning about the limitations of their approach.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> *Sigh* another mixed vs. non-mixed MA thread...I will say this much...you've provided no proof of what you're lecturing here, not all cross-trainers do it for competition or to 'collect belts' and whatever style you are in, I honestly don't believe it is a 'complete style', especially since you said yourself you've incorporated tihngs from other styles. If it was complete, why would you need anything else?



Just because something is complete it doesn't mean you can't add to it, if it did then martial arts would remain unchanged and never grow. I incorporated some individual techniques not an entire training philosophy. I can get along just fine without using any of these things I have incorporated from other martial arts.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 25, 2013)

It depends on why youre training. There is no problem or peril of cross training, otherwise there wouldnt be people who have success with it. Not all brain surgeons start out medical school aspiring to be brain surgeons. They specialise later on, despite needing to maintain a skillset in other areas of medicine to get there, and possibly after that point as well.

I suppose it doesnt help that i dont hold martial arts in as high a regard as some people do. Sure, there may be downsides in terms of martial arts training in changing every time you get a black belt. But the person stands only to gain - Their proficiency in the system they left is what suffers. If your focus is on proficiency in a particular system, then cross training becomes poison. If not, then it can only benefit you if its something youre interested in.

Tell me though - Did you form this opinion on your own, or did you build on it from what others have told you? Most people who discredit cross training do it based on the opinions of people passing on opinions. In fact, ive never actually seen an example of someone coming to that conclusion all on their own without ever being told by someone else at some point. It would be a first.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

Within Goju, Chojun Miyagi's successor, Eiichi Miyazato was also 8th dan in Judo. One of his top students, Masaji Taira, is 4th dan Judo. One of my good friends is not only highly ranked in Goju but Nidan in aikido and black belt in BJJ ( no mean feat). He is also qualified as an instructor in Krav and Systema. Another Goju friend has extensively studied Tai Chi. These are very highly ranked practitioners and they have all incorporated the principles they learned into their primary art.

I have trained Aikido for the past six years and this has given me great insight into my karate and there are a number of my karate friends also training aikido and/or BJJ.  

To suggest than any style of martial art is 'complete' reminds me the old story ...


> Have you heard the story of the Buddhist scholar who went to visit an old and respected monk to discuss Buddhism? The monk invited the scholar in and they sat down. While the monk prepared tea the scholar immediately began to expound upon all he had learned about Buddhism at the university. On and on he went while the old monk quietly listened and prepared the tea.
> When the tea was ready, the scholar continued to speak even as the old monk poured the tea. Suddenly, the scholar stopped and jumped up as he realized that tea was pouring down onto his leg. The old monk had filled the scholar&#8217;s cup and was continuing to pour tea into his already full cup.
> The scholar shouted, &#8220;You old fool. What are you thinking?&#8221;
> The old monk calmly replied, &#8220;A cup that is already full has no room to receive.&#8221;


You are indeed fortunate if your training in one system covers all aspects of the martial arts.    :asian:


----------



## SacredCoconut (Jan 25, 2013)

That story seems to have lot of different versions. I have at least heard/read 2 other ones.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 25, 2013)

If you're happy with your style fine, if you want to cross train fine. I don't see the need to disparage those who decide they want to train outside their style. Each to their own, along as they aren't harming anyone else what's the point in saying they are wrong?


----------



## Uncle (Jan 25, 2013)

There is an issue with cross training. It's when people who are beginners or have no real foundation come and say they want to train boxing, and krav Maga, and bjj, and muay Thai, and jujitsu. It's too much. It's information overload on similar wavelengths. Now a beginner can much more easily pick up two dissimilar arts like BJJ and Muay Thai but it's still genially better to have a basis in one system so your coordination is better and your learning goes faster.

Besides that exception training outside of your system can do nothing but improve your skillset. 

When I was training aikido 6 days a week I took two years off to go train at a bjj/mma gym. Within six months I was holding fairly even with a lot of the brown belts. The instructor wanted me to grade but I was there for training my skillset and it was an amazingly beneficial experience.

There's no complete system and there's always another art that specializes at something different. Get off your high horse and go do some learning.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Just because something is complete it doesn't mean you can't add to it,



Actually, it kinda does. That's sort of what "complete" means, you know...


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 25, 2013)

I have no problem with anyone who chooses to study the same martial art their whole life or with anyone who studies different martial arts sequentially or concurrently.  There are advantages and disadvantages to all these approaches.

I do have a problem with the following (not uncommon) attitude:



RTKDCMB said:


> This does not show much loyalty to the martial art, the instructors or  the masters in that school. It is also a selfish attitude, when you earn  your black belt you do not do it on your own. A lot of time, effort and  patience on the part of your instructors go into teaching you the art  in the hope that you can learn and stay with the school and make the art  stronger. If you decide that the art is not for you at some point and  leave then that is one thing but to have the secret intention right from  the start to leave after black belt then that can be like a slap in the  face to your instructor. That would be like getting a job for the sole  purpose of learning the equipment and procedures and leaving as soon as  you are finished and working for the competition.



A martial art is a tool created to serve the needs of human beings.  Human beings were not created to serve the "needs" of a martial art.

If you spend time learning how to use a hammer well, is it a slap in the face to your carpentry instructor when you pick up a crescent wrench?
If you spend time learning how to rock out on an electric guitar, is it selfish when you go next door to learn how to play a tender ballad on the celtic harp?
After getting a degree in graphic arts, is it a betrayal of your teachers if you go take some business classes in an attempt to become financially sucessful with your skills?

If your martial arts instructor does a good job of teaching you, then you owe them gratitude and respect.  You do not have an obligation to stay on their "team" and keep training with them for the rest of your life.  Suppose you had a spectacularly good math teacher in high school or a really great chemistry professor in college.  Do you suppose those teachers would want you to spend the rest of your life studying just that one subject with just them?  Of course not!  What makes them happy and proud is when you take what they've given you and use it to go on and be successful in new things.

I also don't think much of the idea that different martial arts are "the competition."  My primary art has been BJJ for the last 8 years or so, but I don't think of Wing Chun or TKD practitioners as being on some opposed team.  If a Kempo practitioner came to me for 6 months just to learn the basics of how to defend himself on the ground so that he could get back to his feet and apply his main art, I wouldn't regard it as stealing secrets or take it as an insult that he didn't want to spend years mastering BJJ.  I'd just be happy that I was able to offer him something useful.

Personally, I think that instructors who make a big deal out of "loyalty" in the sense of the above quote are more concerned about the needs of their own egos than the needs of their students.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Uncle said:


> Get off your high horse and go do some learning.



My horse is pretty short.


----------



## Uncle (Jan 25, 2013)

Then it should be a short step down.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 25, 2013)

K-man said:


> Within Goju, Chojun Miyagi's successor, Eiichi Miyazato was also 8th dan in Judo. One of his top students, Masaji Taira, is 4th dan Judo. One of my good friends is not only highly ranked in Goju but Nidan in aikido and black belt in BJJ ( no mean feat). He is also qualified as an instructor in Krav and Systema. Another Goju friend has extensively studied Tai Chi. These are very highly ranked practitioners and they have all incorporated the principles they learned into their primary art.
> 
> I have trained Aikido for the past six years and this has given me great insight into my karate and there are a number of my karate friends also training aikido and/or BJJ.
> 
> ...



My Grand Master was 8th dan in Hapkido, his primary art.  He was also 5th dan in TKD, and 1st dan in Kumdo.  The only reason he wasn't 1st dan in Judo was because just before the was to test, he broke his shoulder.  

In Korea. when a person reaches 3rd dan in their art, yhey are often encouraged to obtain at least a 1st dan in another art.  Both for their own edification, and to ensure their primary art is the one they really wish to continue in.

Also, FWIW, I also don't agree that any one MA has all the techniques/answers.  And I suspect whether or not it would be harmful to a student, would have to be evaluated on a student by student basis.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> If you're happy with your style fine, if you want to cross train fine. I don't see the need to disparage those who decide they want to train outside their style. Each to their own, along as they aren't harming anyone else what's the point in saying they are wrong?



To be clear I am not disparaging anyone nor saying that anyone is right or wrong. I attempted to present a balanced argument.


----------



## Uncle (Jan 25, 2013)

Actually if you read what you wrote you'll find you mistakenly bashed cross training and then tooted your own horn about how awesome your style was.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> To be clear I am not disparaging anyone nor saying that anyone is right or wrong. I attempted to present a balanced argument.



Then you failed, miserably. Nothing "balanced" about your post. It comes across as pretty much pure bashing of those who choose to study more than one art, with a little bit of patting yourself on the back thrown in.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 25, 2013)

Dirty Dog said:


> Then you failed, miserably. Nothing "balanced" about your post. It comes across as pretty much pure bashing of those who choose to study more than one art, with a little bit of patting yourself on the back thrown in.



T'is true.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> If you spend time learning how to use a hammer well, is it a slap in the face to your carpentry instructor when you pick up a crescent wrench?
> If you spend time learning how to rock out on an electric guitar, is it selfish when you go next door to learn how to play a tender ballad on the celtic harp?
> After getting a degree in graphic arts, is it a betrayal of your teachers if you go take some business classes in an attempt to become financially sucessful with your skills?
> I think that instructors who make a big deal out of "loyalty" in the sense of the above quote are more concerned about the needs of their own egos than the needs of their students.



After getting married is it a betrayal of your wife if you go out and have sex with another woman?

For some instructors perhaps. For some people its all about them, they  just want to get what they can get out of it and never even think of  sticking around and helping anyone else.

I just discovered the multi quote.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> T'is true.



MAybe you should read it more carefully.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> MAybe you should read it more carefully.



Bollocks.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> To be clear I am not disparaging anyone nor saying that anyone is right or wrong. I attempted to present a balanced argument.





> No martial art can be absolutely complete, if they were then there would be no need to evolve the art or improve the techniques.





> I was fortunate to have picked a martial art that that is a complete art


Recognise these quotes .... out of the same post?

If what you are saying is that a MA should include training in all areas, such as different distance, stand up grappling, ground fighting etc. then I doubt you will find a lot of disagreement. 

If you say that any particular form of MA is so complete that there is no need for additional training, then I think many would disagree. 

We tend to look at it, the more you know, the less you know ... and just when you think you have it all, something else shows up to prove you don't.  You can have a complete syllabus, but there it always the option for someone to further their knowledge in the direction they see as a need or indeed as an interest.  Either way it doesn't reflect badly on their instructor.

You used the analogy of the brain surgeon. His first 'art' was general medicine and that was 'complete' as it included a level of general surgery. But fortunately for you, he left his first teachers and went elsewhere to further his skills in his area of interest. Now, who are you going to choose to do your brain surgery? The guy who stayed true to his initial training, the GP, or the guy who 'cross trained'?   :asian:


----------



## Uncle (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> After getting married is it a betrayal of your wife if you go out and have sex with another woman?
> 
> For some instructors perhaps. For some people its all about them, they  just want to get what they can get out of it and never even think of  sticking around and helping anyone else.
> 
> I just discovered the multi quote.


You're not married to your system and it is not a person.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Dirty Dog said:


> Actually, it kinda does. That's sort of what "complete" means, you know...



If you are involved in the 100m sprint in the Olympic games and "complete" the event but then decide to keep running for another 50m does that mean that the race was not long enough, or did you complete the race and just add to it?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 25, 2013)

K-man said:


> Recognise these quotes .... out of the same post?
> 
> if what you are saying is that a MA should include training in all areas, such as different distance, stand up grappling, ground fighting etc. then I doubt you will find a lot of disagreement.
> 
> ...




Nice one.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> Bollocks.


You have such a way with words!


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 25, 2013)

There are perils to cross training, depending on what you are doing and why you are doing it.

It is also possible to cross train or train in multiple systems without experiencing any problems.  Again, it depends on what you are doing and why you are doing it.

Make your own decisions for yourself.  Make sure you find some enjoyment in what you are doing.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> After getting married is it a betrayal of your wife if you go out and have sex with another woman?
> 
> For some instructors perhaps. For some people its all about them, they just want to get what they can get out of it and never even think of sticking around and helping anyone else.
> 
> ...



In a maraige I would consider it betrayal, but ...



Uncle said:


> You're not married to your system and it is not a person.



So I don't see them as the same.



RTKDCMB said:


> If you are involved in the 100m sprint in the Olympic games and "complete" the event but then decide to keep running for another 50m does that mean that the race was not long enough, or did you complete the race and just add to it?



There is very little to be gained by the above, and even so, you are sort of in the same race. But regardless, I have to agree that your OP sounded biased against cross training, except for you.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> After getting married is it a betrayal of your wife if you go out and have sex with another woman



Ridiculous analogy. If my instructor asked for anything resembling the marriage vows, I'd run for the door.

If he were asking for sex, I'd run backwards...



RTKDCMB said:


> If you are involved in the 100m sprint in the Olympic games and "complete" the event but then decide to keep running for another 50m does that mean that the race was not long enough, or did you complete the race and just add to it?



I'd say it meant I was something of a moron, really, especially since MA training doesn't have a finish line. At least, not as I see it.

A more accurate analogy would be running the same 100m again, but with different shoes. Or a different breakfast. Or after a Red Bull (tm). You know. Trying different things to see if they're helpful. Sort of like crosstraining in martial arts...

You're not really good at analogies, perhaps some other method of supporting your position would be a better choice?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 25, 2013)

K-man said:


> You have such a way with words!



Ta!


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 25, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> There are perils to cross training, depending on what you are doing and why you are doing it.
> 
> It is also possible to cross train or train in multiple systems without experiencing any problems. Again, it depends on what you are doing and why you are doing it.
> 
> Make your own decisions for yourself. Make sure you find some enjoyment in what you are doing.



And to go further Cross Training can improve your 1st or Main style. Goju Pairs wonderfully with Aikido or Judo for example.
Ive pulled more meaning and understanding out of my Goju by learing other arts


----------



## Uncle (Jan 25, 2013)

And actually I improved a lot of my aikido by examining certain mechanics from tai chi.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 25, 2013)

I think the issue may revolve around *how* an art is taught, in regards to how _*complete*_ it is...or isn't.  I'll use TKD, again, as an example.  The majority perception of the art of TKD is that it is a _striking_ art...predominately a _kicking_ art.  Also that it is in large part a _sport_ martial art.  And in many venues this would be a spot on description of the art.  Nothing wrong with that at all if this is what is desired for the student.  I think we could all readily agree that it isn't a complete art in regards to what other arts offer i.e. grappling, ground etc.  

However

TKD, just like its Karate uncle can also be taught as a grappling art, a ground defense art, and edged weapon art, a baton art, a locking art, a throwing art etc.  I do it all the time, I just use the term Kong Soo Do instead of TKD.  I'm one of those instructors who believe that kata (forms) contain a wealth of information in regards to practical fighting (read self-defense) that cover all of the above in addition to striking and kicking.  Now not everyone wants this in their training and certainly many practice the arts for different reasons than self-defense.  But for those that wish a fighting art (again read self-defense) TKD or Karate or a plethora of other arts can be taught as a very complete art.  It depends upon the knowledge base of the instructor(s) and the goals of the school/student base.


----------



## Uncle (Jan 25, 2013)

And complete is also a bit of a misnomer. It's a bit easier to talk about specialization (as in who is better at what). For example tkd may have punches but nowhere near the level of boxing. It may have elbows and knees but nowhere near Muay Thai. It may do some grappling but its clinch is not as specialized as muay Thai or wrestling, its takedowns as specialized as judo or wrestling, its ground game as specialized as judo or bjj.

Every art has their speciality and really if you actually want to learn to cover grapple you're better off going to a grappling art than half assing it in another art.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 25, 2013)

Here is a simple test to see whether your style is "complete" or not.

- Your opponent gets behind you. 
- Both of his hands surround your waist. 
- He pulls you back down with his body weight.
- His back is on the ground. Your back is on his chest.
- His legs are wrapping around your waist.
- His arms are choking on your neck.

What will you do at that moment? How do you prevent that from happening?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 25, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here is a simple test to see whether your style is "complete" or not.
> 
> - Your opponent gets behind you.
> - Both of his hands surround your waist.
> ...



I think there are different definitions of "complete".


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 25, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here is a simple test to see whether your style is "complete" or not.
> 
> - Your opponent gets behind you.
> - Both of his hands surround your waist.
> ...


This doesn't really test "completeness". Now, if you had a set of these scenarios designed to test you from every style of attack (each range, each side, faster/slower opponent, bigger/smaller opponent, etc.) that MAY be a good test of it, depending on how you define complete.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 25, 2013)

Was going to come on after practice to respond again, only to see the entire thread had blown up, and people had already said what I meant to say. So..."What they said :idunno:"


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 25, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> if you had a set of these scenarios designed to test you from every style of attack (each range, each side, faster/slower opponent, bigger/smaller opponent, etc.) that MAY be a good test of it, depending on how you define complete.


My definition of "complete" is to be able to handle all situations. That's just one of many valid tests. It just proves that "complete" system does not exist on this planet.

If you can drag your opponent down but you can't handle a punch to the head, your style is not complete either.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 25, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> Was going to come on after practice to respond again, only to see the entire thread had blown up, and *people had already said what I meant to say. So..."What they said* :idunno:"



Ditto!


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 25, 2013)

Uncle said:


> And complete is also a bit of a misnomer. It's a bit easier to talk about specialization (as in who is better at what). For example tkd may have punches but nowhere near the level of boxing. It may have elbows and knees but nowhere near Muay Thai. It may do some grappling but its clinch is not as specialized as muay Thai or wrestling, its takedowns as specialized as judo or wrestling, its ground game as specialized as judo or bjj.
> 
> Every art has their speciality and really if you actually want to learn to cover grapple you're better off going to a grappling art than half assing it in another art.



It all depends upon the focus of the art.  You mentioned TKD vs. boxing for punching, vs. Muay Thai for elbows and knees and vs. wrestling for takedowns.  If we're talking about TKD as a sport then we can compare it with boxing, muay thai and wrestling as they are all sports as well.  Each of those sport arts are indeed specialized and therefore not _complete_ in that they don't cover elements of other arts.  If the focus of the art is on SD however, it is a very different ball game.  One can train in TKD or Karate or Kong Soo Do or whatever label one chooses and have a very complete art that covers all the bases i.e. stand up, ground, weapons, throwing, locking etc.  This doesn't mean that a student or even an instructor is going to become a ninja master in each and every area.  We all gravitate towards segments of the arts that work best for us.  I honestly could not tell you how many uses-of-force I've had over the years.  I stopped counting at three hundred and that was a decade ago.  In all that time I've never kicked anyone.  Not even a low kick.  I've knee spiked the crap out of people...literally.  I've punched (soft body targets).  I've used elbows, forearms and edge-of-hand strikes.  And I've used locks and throws far more often than any of the above.  Locking is my personal specialty.  But the point is that the art, if taught in this manner, can offer a full venue for the practitioner to learn and then specialize within the art itself.  I can teach realistic kicking for self-defense even if I don't use it myself.  I know the technique(s), I know the SD types of kicks.  I know the targets and targets of opportunity.  I just don't kick people in a real fight.  If the art isn't taught this way, then one would need to go outside the art to fill in the gaps that they perceive exist.

Kinda funny really, I could just as easily use the term TKD instead of KSD...yet I fight like I'm inside a phone booth


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> After getting married is it a betrayal of your wife if you go out and have sex with another woman?
> 
> For some instructors perhaps. For some people its all about them, they  just want to get what they can get out of it and never even think of  sticking around and helping anyone else.
> 
> I just discovered the multi quote.



And for some instructors, its all about _them_.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> And for some instructors, its all about _them_.



I agree with you there.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here is a simple test to see whether your style is "complete" or not.
> 
> - Your opponent gets behind you.
> - Both of his hands surround your waist.
> ...



There are simple answers to most of these, here are only some:

*- Your opponent gets behind you. *
Turn around and/or strike

*- Both of his hands surround your waist.* 
Backward elbow, Kick back with the heel and break the knee (my instructor did that to someone that grabbed him from behind in a car park, stopped the guy in his tracks) or any one of a dozen or more self defence techniques that any decent TMA teahces every day.

*- He pulls you back down with his body weight.*
Things would have to have been starting to go wrong at this point. Drop your body weight further, reach between your legs and grab one of his grab , go into a forward stance (may not work in the direction of the front leg but will force them to change tactics slightly and delay them enough) or a combination of these, I will explore this further in a future training session, thanks for giving me an idea.
*
- His back is on the ground. Your back is on his chest.*
If you were unsuccessful with the above you have the groin grab, elbow, turn over or sit up before he grabs you, if you can reach his foot, break his ankle, backwards headbutt.  
*- His legs are wrapping around your waist.*
Block his attempts to do this with your legs and/or put your legs over his and keep them on the ground.

*- His arms are choking on your neck.*
It's almost over if you get to this point but you can still grab and break his fingers or wrist. By pulling down on the arm into your chest that's across you neck you can give yourself just enough to breath, the arm pushing down on your head negates this a bit.

It is much easier thinking of these things when you are physically doing them than when you are just thinking about them.

These last 3 points go together, a defence against a hold does not start at the hold itself it starts at the attempt. This little test is not a test of completeness it is only a test of defending against this particular hold.

When I say a complete art I am refering to an art that has a full range of techniques for different scenarios not one that has every technique you could possibly ever use, that would be quite impossible.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 25, 2013)

Dirty Dog said:


> Ridiculous analogy. If my instructor asked for anything resembling the marriage vows, I'd run for the door.
> 
> If he were asking for sex, I'd run backwards...
> 
> You're not really good at analogies, perhaps some other method of supporting your position would be a better choice?



I'd run too.

*If you spend time learning how to use a hammer well, is it a slap in the  face to your carpentry instructor when you pick up a crescent wrench?
If you spend time learning how to rock out on an electric guitar, is it  selfish when you go next door to learn how to play a tender ballad on  the celtic harp?
After getting a degree in graphic arts, is it a betrayal of your  teachers if you go take some business classes in an attempt to become  financially sucessful with your skills? *

These analogies are not that good either.
If you use a crescent wrench to bang in nails or a hammer to turn a bolt there's something wrong.
I find musical instruments don't usually care what you do.
Graphic arts and business classes are as different as martial arts and basketball


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> There are simple answers to most of these,



Here is a bit different situation:

- Your opponent gets behind you. 
- One of his hands surrounds your waist. 
- Another of his hands grabs below your knee joint. 
- He picks you up.
- He throws you over his head and behind him.

Both situations will require some training in:

- How to move behind your opponent's back.
- How to prevent your opponent from moving to your back.

In the previous example, some ground skill will be needed. In this example, some skill that prevent your opponent from picking you up will be needed. Also some safe landing skill will be needed.

Examples like these can easily examine whether certain training in certain system is emphasized enough or not.


----------



## chinto (Jan 25, 2013)

ok here is my take on this. for what it is worth, and that provably is not even the value of 2 one cent peace US.   before you go and train in something else, I would suggest you achieve at least a high brown belt or better yet a shodan or so in your primary art.  then continue to train in your primary art, and add the new ones training.  you should NOT figure a shodan (first dan black belt ) is a goal, it is just where you will really start to learn.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I'd run too.
> 
> *If you spend time learning how to use a hammer well, is it a slap in the  face to your carpentry instructor when you pick up a crescent wrench?
> If you spend time learning how to rock out on an electric guitar, is it  selfish when you go next door to learn how to play a tender ballad on  the celtic harp?
> ...



And as different as martial arts and your analogies.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> There are simple answers to most of these, here are only some:
> 
> *- Your opponent gets behind you. *
> Turn around and/or strike.
> ...


I took it that this was a sequence, not individual scenarios. I think *Kung fu Wang* was very clever in his choice of scenario.   :asian:


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 25, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> I'd run too.
> 
> *If you spend time learning how to use a hammer well, is it a slap in the  face to your carpentry instructor when you pick up a crescent wrench?
> If you spend time learning how to rock out on an electric guitar, is it  selfish when you go next door to learn how to play a tender ballad on  the celtic harp?
> ...




Thank you very much for helping to make my point.

Yes, if you use a wrench to bang nails or a hammer to turn a bolt then something is wrong.  Likewise if you use Kali to address a problem best handled by BJJ or vice versa.

Musical instruments don't care what you do.  Neither do martial arts.  If you were to quit TKD tomorrow and take up Tai Chi, the art of TKD would not shed a single tear.

Graphic arts and business classes are about as different as traditional kenjutsu and Olympic TKD.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 25, 2013)

K-man said:


> I took it that this was a sequence, not individual scenarios. I think *Kung fu Wang* was very clever in his choice of scenario.   :asian:



I think you are correct.  That whole sequence is one attack and it takes only a second or two from start to finish.  If the attacker is skilled, then the suggested defenses are unlikely to work.


----------



## sopraisso (Jan 26, 2013)

I showed up late and people have already said what I wanted to... but at least I seem to have discovered the funny part of MT. 

Enviado de meu GT-I9300 usando o Tapatalk 2


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 26, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I think you are correct.  That whole sequence is one attack and it takes only a second or two from start to finish.  If the attacker is skilled, then the suggested defenses are unlikely to work.


Plus, its a very simple attack that isnt the result of a skillset. Its basic stuff.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 26, 2013)

K-man said:


> I took it that this was a sequence, not individual scenarios. I think *Kung fu Wang* was very clever in his choice of scenario.   :asian:



I also took it as a sequence, you can defend at the first stage but if you are not quick enough you might have to start when he drops his body weight or when he get you to the ground afterthe other options are no longer viable.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 26, 2013)

Personally, I would be trying to stomp on the foot  but a lot of thugs wear steel caps.) Shin rake? Possibly. Groin grab or  strike? You have to be quick and it depends if the arms are pinned.  Head butt? Maybe, but I would be expecting that. Elbow strike? Depends  how you are held.

The foot stomp and shin rake are some of the options I would use as well, if they are wearing steel caps then you could still stomp on their instep. Grabbing the groin only works if they are not wearing tight jeans, if they are wearing loose shorts you can grab, squeeze and pull. You can still produce a fair amount of impact on the groin using a knife hand strike with your arms pinned. For a head butt his head has to be at the right height and position. Another option is to wrap one of your legs behind his and get your hip behind his, lift your arms up as high as you can and rapidly twist your hips. It takes them completely off balance and is quite easy to do quickly.

I see this 'reach between the legs' often. It just  doesn't work against a determined attacker, especially if he is pulling  you back and down. It also won't even be an option if your arms are  pinned. 
To do this you sometimes have to distract them first with a head butt or groin strike. If your arms are pinned you can still grab his leg if it is close, if you go into a deep squat you can reach the ground and reach behind you a good 30-40cm which can be enough to reach the leg.

Reaching his foot? Do you have arms that long? 
That's for if you can break his grip around your waist and sit up.

Have you ever tried to grab someone's fingers in  this situation? I have you in a rear naked choke and you have 3 seconds.  My hands are behind you. You must get one hand up to relieve the  pressure on the arteries and that leaves you just one hand to use real  quick. At this stage I would suggest it's 'goodnight Irene'.   (And,  from that position you will never break anyone's wrist.)

Fingers are a target of opportunity, just grab the first one you can get a hold of if you have time and they are exposed. I'd probably mainly use that during standing holds Breaking the wrist would require a fair bit of strength, leverage and a short sharp movement. You would do it after getting one hand up to relieve the pressure near the end of the forearm rotating his arm down towards your chest, grab the thumb with the other hand, continue to rotate his arm and push back with your palm quickly (this is if his wrist is across your throat). For the rear naked choke (also called a sleeper hold I believe) you would probably have to use your free hand and grab his thumb to break his grip. If he has a good hold on you it would be because you have failed to prevent him from applying it and you would be wishing Irene to have a good night.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 26, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Plus, its a very simple attack that isnt the result of a skillset. Its basic stuff.


That was why I said it wasnt the best choice. It only tests if you know one specific basic thing, and doesnt test other attacks not in the sequence, or anything more advanced.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 26, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Personally, I would be trying to stomp on the foot but a lot of thugs wear steel caps.) Shin rake? Possibly. Groin grab or strike? You have to be quick and it depends if the arms are pinned. Head butt? Maybe, but I would be expecting that. Elbow strike? Depends how you are held.
> 
> The foot stomp and shin rake are some of the options I would use as well, if they are wearing steel caps then you could still stomp on their instep. Grabbing the groin only works if they are not wearing tight jeans, if they are wearing loose shorts you can grab, squeeze and pull. You can still produce a fair amount of impact on the groin using a knife hand strike with your arms pinned. For a head butt his head has to be at the right height and position. Another option is to wrap one of your legs behind his and get your hip behind his, lift your arms up as high as you can and rapidly twist your hips. It takes them completely off balance and is quite easy to do quickly.
> 
> ...



That's very kind of you, I always have good nights.


----------



## Blindside (Jan 26, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yes, if you use a wrench to bang nails or a hammer to turn a bolt then something is wrong.  Likewise if you use Kali to address a problem best handled by BJJ or vice versa.



Heh, I thought about answering this earlier with the "Kali answer" to the rear naked with hooks in as: "draw knife, stab into his femoral, transfer hands, stab into other femoral, bet that his bleed out is faster than your choke out."  

Wanna hear what the answer to a single leg is?  Stand there with a knife out and say "really?"  
See, Kali is a complete system.  

The above is an exaggeration of course, though admittedly when you talk kali and tools, "knife" comes up a lot.


----------



## K-man (Jan 26, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Personally, I would be trying to stomp on the foot  but a lot of thugs wear steel caps.) Shin rake? Possibly. Groin grab or  strike? You have to be quick and it depends if the arms are pinned.  Head butt? Maybe, but I would be expecting that. Elbow strike? Depends  how you are held.
> 
> The foot stomp and shin rake are some of the options I would use as well, if they are wearing steel caps then you could still stomp on their instep. Grabbing the groin only works if they are not wearing tight jeans, if they are wearing loose shorts you can grab, squeeze and pull. You can still produce a fair amount of impact on the groin using a knife hand strike with your arms pinned. For a head butt his head has to be at the right height and position.
> 
> ...


I'm a bit worried about your understanding of reality based self defence.  :asian:


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 26, 2013)

K-man said:


> I'm a bit worried about your understanding of reality based self defence. :asian:



Yep. There are ways you can break a RNC by grabbing the foot but not in this scenerio, it's more used in BJJ as no attacker is going to sit with his legs wrapped around you! You aren't going to break a RNC choke by grabbing a finger, there's ways out of it, they have to be done quickly but they work. This isn't one of them.

So, goodnight me!!


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 26, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I think the issue may revolve around *how* an art is taught, in regards to how _*complete*_ it is...or isn't.  I'll use TKD, again, as an example.  The majority perception of the art of TKD is that it is a _striking_ art...predominately a _kicking_ art.  Also that it is in large part a _sport_ martial art.  And in many venues this would be a spot on description of the art.  Nothing wrong with that at all if this is what is desired for the student.  I think we could all readily agree that it isn't a complete art in regards to what other arts offer i.e. grappling, ground etc.
> 
> However
> 
> TKD, just like its Karate uncle can also be taught as a grappling art, a ground defense art, and edged weapon art, a baton art, a locking art, a throwing art etc.  I do it all the time, I just use the term Kong Soo Do instead of TKD. * I'm one of those instructors who believe that kata (forms) contain a wealth of information in regards to practical fighting (read self-defense) that cover all of the above in addition to striking and kicking.*  Now not everyone wants this in their training and certainly many practice the arts for different reasons than self-defense.  But for those that wish a fighting art (again read self-defense) TKD or Karate or a plethora of other arts can be taught as a very complete art.  It depends upon the knowledge base of the instructor(s) and the goals of the school/student base.



I totally agree with the bolded/underlined text.  I always thought it strange that I wasn't taught that when I took TKD.  Some things that seemed strange, or of no practical effect, were often explained as something for art.  I wasn't even told that forms are also often to learn multiple attacker defense.

What always amazes me is how many teachers don't know that.  No wonder so many students scoff at the idea.


----------



## chinto (Jan 26, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> Yep. There are ways you can break a RNC by grabbing the foot but not in this scenerio, it's more used in BJJ as no attacker is going to sit with his legs wrapped around you! You aren't going to break a RNC choke by grabbing a finger, there's ways out of it, they have to be done quickly but they work. This isn't one of them.
> 
> So, goodnight me!!



I would like to point out that the " rear naked choke" is a sportorization of  the japanese strangle. done right it is the same except: the forearm is crushing the cricoid cartilage, and you kick the leg out from under and pull and press very hard and fast which will brake C1 or C2 or at least C3.  End result is almost instant death! this is taught as a sentry removal technique for a reason. ... also for legal reasons putting such a choke or strangle on any one is considered the initiation of DEADLY FORCE! in short at that point if his friend shoots you its legal!  I really get tired of the  just chock him out stuff.  at that point there is only one rule!!  SURVIVE and preferably make sure the one trying to choke or strangle you Does NOT survive.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 26, 2013)

K-man said:


> I'm a bit worried about your understanding of reality based self defence.  :asian:


Id also like to add that breaking fingers relies on them caring, and not just suddenly deciding to go from assault to attempted murder for... you know... trying to cripple their hands. Even if you fail.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 26, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Id also like to add that breaking fingers relies on them caring, and not just suddenly deciding to go from assault to attempted murder for... you know... trying to cripple their hands. Even if you fail.


Are you going to assume that they haven't decided to murder you from the beginning?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 26, 2013)

K-man said:


> As to "rotating his arm down towards your chest" ... that is physically impossible.



That was referring to the wrist being across the throat not the rear naked choke.
The original question was *"His arms are choking on your neck"* That could be any one of a number of holds

 If the guy has steel caps you will not have a real shot at the instep.

Steel caps only cover the toes.

Get you partner to grab you as described and  quickly pull you back and down. You just will not be able to do what you  are saying. 
If he starts pulling you down before you do this then it will not work, that's why you have to be quicker than him but it gets more difficult the lower down he pins your arms.


----------



## K-man (Jan 26, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Are you going to assume that they haven't decided to murder you from the beginning?


It probably doesn't matter.  If you wake up it was sleeper hold and if you don't you are dead. Quite simple really.


----------



## K-man (Jan 26, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Steel caps only cover the toes.


That's true although it does cover a bit up the foot. The problem is that you can't collapse the boot behind the cap as it will keep the front portion high. If you would chance your life on the instep under those circumstances, fine. I would probably try for the shin.  :asian:


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 26, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> *"His arms are choking on your neck"*



Someone in the other forum suggested this solution. If you can get one of your arms inside one of your opponent's arms to stop his chocking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deuGeiPexWY&list=UUnKut2uvb0Tcwq2BVdi8eTA&index=28


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 26, 2013)

Cross training really?  Martial practitioners have been cross training since the beginning!  Every martial practitioner that I know and I would imagine the origional posters own instructor has cross trained.  As a martial practitioner we have curiosity on how other people do things so it is natural to have them show us and get some good practice in!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 26, 2013)

If we know the "striking art" is better than the "grappling art", or the other way around, we won't need "cross training".


----------



## K-man (Jan 26, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Someone in the other forum suggested this solution. If you can get one of your arms inside one of your opponent's arms to stop his chocking:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deuGeiPexWY&list=UUnKut2uvb0Tcwq2BVdi8eTA&index=28


In the video the guys are already grappling on the floor and the guy on the bottom is trying to apply the choke. Certainly, at that stage there are several different actions you could take inside or outside the rules.  However in he scenario you posted, I would be applying the choke as soon as we hit the ground. In fact the first arm would be around the neck before we hit the ground. By the time it locks in with the second arm, it really is too late to do anything.   :asian:


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 26, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If we know the "striking art" is better than the "grappling art", or the other way around, we won't need "cross training".


And how can you know one is better (for you) then the other, without cross training in both?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 26, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> And how can you know one is better (for you) then the other, without cross training in both?


We truly don't.



K-man said:


> By the time it locks in with the second arm, it really is too late to do anything.   :asian:


Agree! Here is another example. When both of your feet are off the ground, it's too late.

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/7828/headlock.jpg


----------



## K-man (Jan 26, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> We truly don't.
> 
> 
> Agree! Here is another example. When both of your feet are off the ground, it's too late.
> ...


Looks like the guy in grey is just about to get away ... not!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 26, 2013)

K-man said:


> Looks like the guy in grey is just about to get away ... not!



Not when the feet are off the ground. Clips are always better than picture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huKsRN01qVY&feature=youtu.be

http://middleeasy.com/index.php?opt...-ever-see-in-your-life&catid=34:organizations


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 27, 2013)

Reaching his foot? Do you have arms that long? 
That's for if you can break his grip around your waist and sit up.

Unlikely.

Here is a clip of someone grabbing a foot; 





Have you ever tried to grab someone's fingers in   this situation? I have you in a rear naked choke and you have 3 seconds.   My hands are behind you. You must get one hand up to relieve the   pressure on the arteries and that leaves you just one hand to use real   quick. At this stage I would suggest it's 'goodnight Irene'.   (And,   from that position you will never break anyone's wrist.)

Here is a clip of someone grabbing the fingers;





They both seem to be getting along quite well.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 27, 2013)

K-man said:


> That's true although it does cover a bit up the foot. The problem is that you can't collapse the boot behind the cap as it will keep the front portion high. If you would chance your life on the instep under those circumstances, fine. I would probably try for the shin.  :asian:



Most steel caps that I have worn only come up to the top of the toes, unless there is another type I don't know about. You can still get up to the higher part of the instep, the shin is a good target and you could also go for the soft part between the instep and the shin in the front of the ankle.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 27, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Are you going to assume that they haven't decided to murder you from the beginning?


No. But if i was going to murder someone, i wouldnt bearhug them. Thats more along the lines of assault.


----------



## K-man (Jan 27, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Reaching his foot? Do you have arms that long?
> That's for if you can break his grip around your waist and sit up.
> 
> Unlikely.
> ...


In the scenario, as presented, the chances of you doing any of these things is very low. Is it impossible? No.  So, if you think you can do those things, that's great.  However, all your escapes seem to be relying on the scenario technique being applied incorrectly.  BTW the second clip was not grabbing fingers. It removed the hand. The choke I described is hand on hand, and that removal just isn't an option. Also the escape shown involved both hands. You ignore the choke and lift both hands behind the head on the off chance you can remove the hand? Mmm! In competition, worse case scenario, you pass out. On the street? I'd be looking for an eye gouge but even then, a determined attacker is not going to leave his head where you can do that.

When I get to a computer I will post a video on chokes but that will have to be a new thread as this one is way off topic.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 27, 2013)

How did we get from 'cross training is rubbish but I'm good' to discussing SD moves?


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 27, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> How did we get from 'cross training is rubbish but I'm good' to discussing SD moves?


Because training involves moves. Or something like that.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 27, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Because training involves moves. Or something like that.



Verry inter-resting but stoopid...dear me I bet you are all too young to remember Rowan and Martins Laugh In!!


----------



## K-man (Jan 27, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> Verry inter-resting but stoopid...dear me I bet you are all too young to remember Rowan and Martins Laugh In!!


Now that really takes me back to university days when we used to sit up studying half the night. They used to have the 'comedy spot' every hour for about  3 or 4 minutes.  Rowan and Martin were frequent visitors.  Always good for a laugh ... A little bit like some contributors to MT really.       :lfao:


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 27, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> How did we get from 'cross training is rubbish but I'm good' to discussing SD moves?


Because certain skill will be needed to handle certain situation. That "certain skill" will require "cross training".


----------



## MJS (Jan 27, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Some martial artists feel the need to cross train for various reasons, usually its because they want to be as well rounded as they can in order to compensate for the incompleteness of some of the arts. Some arts only focus mainly on grappling (BJJ, Judo etc.) whilst some arts only focus on striking (Kickboxing, Muay Thai etc.) Some arts focus only on hands (e.g. boxing) whilst some arts are predominately kicking (e.g. Olympic TKD). So these martial artists mix and match from these styles in order to develop a complete range of skills. This is more prevalent in the competitive martial arts, especially in the UFC. When doing this fighters will work on a specific set of skills, one at a time, in different parts of their training regimen and then put them all together when they compete.



I'll agree with part of this.  Speaking for myself, I cross train because, IMHO, while the various arts out there tend to touch on a number of areas, if one really wants to get better in a specific area or expand upon something, then yes, cross training is necessary.  I do it and I enjoy it.  I didn't start until I was a brown belt in Kenpo.  I started doing some BJJ.  IMO, while Kenpo addresses takedown attempts, I wanted to learn how to better defend myself, should I end up there.  Also, while Kenpo addresses weapons, I began Arnis, as the FMAs, are, IMO, second to none, when it comes to effective weapon work.  

As for the mixing and matching as you call it...perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but it seems to be you're hinting that one who cross trains, puts a bunch of things together and creates their own art.  While that may be the case with some, it is not the case with the vast majority.  



> Other martial artists will study more than one art at a time whilst others will learn one art for a while and then change to something else with the aim to get as many black belts as they can. When studying 2 arts that have similar techniques it is even more difficult as you would have to keep changing the way you do them after each time you change between classes. Each of these approaches carries with them their own set of limitations. The classical approach is to choose one martial art and stick with that for life. The main problem in doing this is it can often be difficult to find a complete martial art. No martial art can be absolutely complete, if they were then there would be no need to evolve the art or improve the techniques.



Painting everyone with the same brush I see.  Well, for me, I could give a **** less about rank.  Rank, IMO, is simply a way to show,visably, ones progress.  I've seen BBs who suck, so, the rank thing goes out the window!  I'm not now and never will be a belt collector.  In fact, given the arts I've trained in, I have 2 BBs...Kenpo and Arnis.  I really never had a desire to test for rank in BJJ.  Since leaving Kenpo, I've begun Kyokyshin, which I have a blue belt in.  Again, for ME, I'm interested in training, not collecting belts.  When my teachers feel I'm ready, they'll test me, but I don't ask for promotions.



> The problem with mixing and matching different styles instead of concentrating on just one art is that it is much more difficult to develop a reliable set of skills; you just get an average of many skills (jack of all trades, master of none). Just consider this; if you required brain surgery would you rather have the surgeon operating on you to have 20 years of experience consisting of 5 years as a heart surgeon, 5 years as an optometrist, 5 years as an orthopedic surgeon and 5 years as a brain surgeon or would you rather the surgeon have 20 years of experience only as a brain surgeon.



Perhaps that is the case with you, but not everyone!  In the years that I've been training, I've never had a problem with my skill set.  Again, I'm interested in training, not collecting belts.  I'm in no rush...the learning journey is endless.  And since you mention doctors, I take it you're against a specialist?  You know, the general docs have an understanding of the body, but if I went to my doc complaining of pains in my chest, odds are very high that he's going to send me to a cardiologist.  



> The problem with changing martial arts every time you get a black belt to gain black belts in as many styles as possible is that you will only get to learn the basics of any martial art. It would be like only reading the first chapter of every book, sure you will get a lot of reading done but you will never get the full story. The true essence of a martial art only begins after you get to black belt. This is where you get to start to perfect your technique and learn the advanced concepts. This does not show much loyalty to the martial art, the instructors or the masters in that school. It is also a selfish attitude, when you earn your black belt you do not do it on your own. A lot of time, effort and patience on the part of your instructors go into teaching you the art in the hope that you can learn and stay with the school and make the art stronger. If you decide that the art is not for you at some point and leave then that is one thing but to have the secret intention right from the start to leave after black belt then that can be like a slap in the face to your instructor. That would be like getting a job for the sole purpose of learning the equipment and procedures and leaving as soon as you are finished and working for the competition.



LOL!  This is your opinion, not the standard for all that crosstrain.  Just because I'm a BB in Arnis, doesnt mean that I've stopped training or stopped learning.  Yes, I still train with my teacher, and I'm always learning and improving.



> It is perfectly fine to mix and match martial arts if that is what you want to do, it does not mean that you will not be effective or successful in the martial arts. MMA fighters do this very well but it is not the only way to become well rounded. By choosing the right martial art for you that is as complete as possible you can learn the most advanced concepts and adopt the art as a way of life. When making a lifelong commitment to a martial art there is nothing wrong with learning specific techniques from other martial arts that you see and getting different perspectives. For beginners this must be in consultation with your instructor. If your instructor tells you that the technique is inadequate then the technique must be discarded. If your instructor tells you that the technique is useful then the technique can then be incorporated into the art. You must do this because your instructor will have more knowledge and experience than you. If you were previously from another martial art and know more about martial arts than your instructor then he or she will still know more about their art than you. For black belts and instructors who have a lot of experience then you can usually judge for yourself the value of any technique you can use.



Umm...ok...lol.



> I was fortunate to have picked a martial art that that is a complete art headed by one of the 12 original masters of Tae Kwon Do who personally conducts every black belt grading and I see every 3 months. There are also his brothers, one a 9th dan grandmaster and the other is a 7th dan who is also one of the 12 original masters. I feel no need to cross train because my art includes hands and feet (~40-60% hands), ground defence, joint locks and defence against multiple attackers and weapons and trains to defend against other martial arts and not just itself. But that is not to say that I do not learn techniques from other martial arts that I see here and there. Personally I still use many of the techniques I learned in Hap Ki Do, such as the break falls and joint locks and at least one kick. I once saw a Karate demonstration and saw a defence against a headlock that I have incorporated into my repertoire as well as a defence against a hip throw that I saw in a Judo video.
> 
> So if cross training is your thing and it works well for you then go for it but also be aware of its limitations. If you choose to concentrate on only one martial art for a lifelong commitment then do not be afraid to seek a wider perspective.



Yup, and as I said above, many arts cover alot...this isn't just limited to what you do.  But, as I said, if you want to expand in a certain area, looking outside the box is necessary.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 28, 2013)

Another option is to wrap one of your legs behind his and get your hip  behind his, lift your arms up as high as you can and rapidly twist your  hips. It takes them completely off balance and is quite easy to do  quickly.

Get you partner to grab you as described and  quickly pull you back and down. You just will not be able to do what you  are saying. 

This is the technique I was referring to, it seem to work for some of the commenters just fine.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


>


This clip belongs to "stand up grappling" that most styles have solution for it. Today the environment has changed. Peole won't pick you up any more. People will drag you down instead.

I came from "stand up grappling" background. The 1st time that my opponent dragged me down was a shocking experience to me. In "standing up grappling", if any 2 points of your body besides your feet touching the ground, that round is over. If I drag you down, I just give you a free round and nobody will be studpid enough to do that. Now the "sport" is still "spot", but the rules has changed. 

Today, we have to solve a different set of problems that may be different from what people had to deal with 50 years ago. Do we like the change? May be not! It's beyond our comfortable zone. Do we have to change? Of course we do. We just don't have choice.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 28, 2013)

'Stand up grappling' an ancient style here, it varies on which county you are in but this is the Cornish style.


----------



## K-man (Jan 28, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> 'Stand up grappling' an ancient style here, it varies on which county you are in but this is the Cornish style.



As you said above ... ver-ry inter-resting!    

Looks like a sport for gentlemen.     :asian:


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 28, 2013)

K-man said:


> As you said above ... ver-ry inter-resting!
> 
> Looks like a sport for gentlemen. :asian:




There's Devon, Cumberland and Northumbria as well as Scottish Backhold of this stand up style of grappling. While it is a sport I imagine that attacking any of these gentlemen would be a mistake!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2013)

Here is another stand up wrestling.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 28, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Because certain skill will be needed to handle certain situation. That "certain skill" will require "cross training".



sometimes, yes.  More often, no.  A whole lot of what might come at you can be handled with a very small body of material.  IF you really know your material.

If you believe you need something distinct for everything that might come at you, then I suggest you don't know your stuff very well.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 28, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> There's Devon, Cumberland and Northumbria as well as Scottish Backhold of this stand up style of grappling. While it is a sport I imagine that attacking any of these gentlemen would be a mistake!



but can I get a BELT in it???


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> If you believe you need something distinct for everything that might come at you, then I suggest you don't know your stuff very well.


I don't train different styles to learn different ways to throw the same punch. I train different styles because there are something that I want but I can't find in my current style.

In your opinion, how much is enough?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 28, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In your opinion, how much is enough?



if you really understand it, very little.

Scripted defenses for specific attacks are something that I do not see as necessary.  An understanding of how to harness the power of the full body will give you useful insights on how to deal with whatever comes your way.


----------



## frank raud (Jan 28, 2013)

So.........if I understand the OP correctly, the best way to cross-train is to have your instructor do it for you?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 28, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> but can I get a BELT in it???



A belt round the earhole I imagine...


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 29, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This clip belongs to "stand up grappling" *that most styles have solution for it.* Today the environment has changed. Peole won't pick you up any more. People will drag you down instead.
> 
> I came from "stand up grappling" background. The 1st time that my opponent dragged me down was a shocking experience to me. In "standing up grappling", if any 2 points of your body besides your feet touching the ground, that round is over. If I drag you down, I just give you a free round and nobody will be studpid enough to do that. Now the "sport" is still "spot", but the rules has changed.
> 
> Today, we have to solve a different set of problems that may be different from what people had to deal with 50 years ago. Do we like the change? May be not! It's beyond our comfortable zone. Do we have to change? Of course we do. We just don't have choice.



Could you describe the solution most styles have?  If you mean that people will normally drag you down, that would first mean you stood there and let them get the good grip they wanted, and second, that you just continue your defense on the ground.  One thing the video didn't emphacize was the lifting up on the victims arms.  That will usually also distract an opponent as they attempt to ensure or restore their hold.  That gives the victim more time to move, the victim moving suddenly to one side or the other again effects the balance of the attacker.

Is it a guarentee to work every time?  No more than any other technique I suppose.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 29, 2013)

frank raud said:


> So.........if I understand the OP correctly, the best way to cross-train is to have your instructor do it for you?


Actually...I would kind of agree with this statement. If someone else went through and combined what they would consider the 'best' of each style they trained, then taught that to you, you have both a quicker way to crosstrain, and an oppurtunity to refine their combination of arts. The only real downside is that what they consider the best of each style they trained may not be what you would have considered the best of each style, and you don't really get a choice int he styles that were crosstrained.


----------



## Guy Preston (Jan 29, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> My definition of "complete" is to be able to handle all situations. That's just one of many valid tests. It just proves that "complete" system does not exist on this planet.
> 
> If you can drag your opponent down but you can't handle a punch to the head, your style is not complete either.




I think using that definition of complete, will mislead you...

Each art is different, with different specialities, but also how you use the tools learned within your martial art will be different.

Looking at defending from a number of situations as you suggested, you could study purely strikes, nothing else, no throws, no chokes, no locks, just strikes.... I bet you could use or learn to use one of those strikes to deal with pretty much any attack that could be thrown at you....Is that a complete art?...


I think any art is complete, if it accomplishes what it's supposed to, this ultimately means that the test of completeness will change depending on the goals of the art.... does a swordsman need to learn kicks to the head to make his sword art complete? Likewise, does a kickboxer need to learn how to wield a katana for his art to be complete?

Within any art, when people criticise it for being _incomplete_, they often have an _incomplete _understanding of the system...


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 29, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> Actually...I would kind of agree with this statement. If someone else went through and combined what they would consider the 'best' of each style they trained, then taught that to you, you have both a quicker way to crosstrain, and an oppurtunity to refine their combination of arts. The only real downside is that what they consider the best of each style they trained may not be what you would have considered the best of each style, and you don't really get a choice int he styles that were crosstrained.



I disagree.  Often what makes someone good is having gone thru the complete training for each system.  If he condenses his selection down to a "streamlined" system comprised of what he feels is the "best" from several systems, and only teaches that, he is robbing his students of the experience of the full training.  When this happens, the guy who did the training and established the new system is often very good because he had the full training in each system, but every generation removed from him is worse and worse.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 29, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> Could you describe the solution most styles have?


If your opponent tries to lift you up (to remain stand up game) instead of drag you down (play ground game), there are many solution there. As long as you can "glue" your body on your opponent's body, he can't pick you up (he can't pick up his own body). The moment that he tries to put you down (in stand up game), you borrow his force and do your thing.

The dragging down is a complete different situation. the stand up game stop there and the ground game start.



Ninniku Dojo said:


> you could study purely strikes, nothing else, no throws, no chokes, no locks, just strikes.... I bet you could use or learn to use one of those strikes to deal with pretty much any attack that could be thrown at you....Is that a complete art?......


It will work until your opponent gets behind you, drag you down "by surprise". When your opponent's rear neck choke kill you, your lifetime striking training won't do you any good. It will go the other way too. If your punch can kill your opponent, his life long ground skill training won't do him any good either.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 29, 2013)

Ninniku Dojo said:


> when people criticise it for being _incomplete_, they often have an _incomplete _understanding of the system...



If you have a degree in computer science, you may get a job to work on database. Oneday you lose that job and there is no database job available but there is a Google search engine job available, if you have computer science degree, you should be able to take that Google search engine job without any problem.

MA training is like to obtain a "computer science" degree, you have to take classes in:

- computer achitecture
- computer programming
- database
- operating system
- automata theory
- numerical analysis
- web design
- internet search engine
- antivirus programming
- ...

before you can get your degree. If you are only good in database but nothing else, that's "incomplete".


----------



## Guy Preston (Jan 29, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you have a degree in computer science, you may get a job to work on database. Oneday you lose that job and there is no database job available but there is a Google search engine job available, if you have computer science degree, you should be able to take that Google search engine job without any problem.
> 
> MA training is like to obtain a "computer science" degree, you have to take classes in:
> 
> ...



Not a great analogy, unless your comparing the degree to a black belt??

Training in a martial art is not like getting a degree...the degree stage is no where near full understanding of a system.

Your analogy works if you took for example someone who had achieved 1st Dan, then comes up against an attack they can't deal with...

but it doesn't work with someone who's continued training way beyond that stage, developed their understanding of their art, and also an understanding of themselves within their art.... 

Following your analogy, if you stop when you get your black belt the rest is absolutely spot on, but if you don't stop, and you go on further within your art, learn all you can, experiment with your knowledge, re evaluate what you know, you could confidently deal with any situation just as you could walk into the other job.

So in fact, your analogy actually backs up my point, albeit not if you think a black belt constitutes the end of the path, rather than the beginning...


----------



## Guy Preston (Jan 29, 2013)

Some systems are also not supposed to be 'jack of all trades' as your analogy would suggest...

In boxing, kicks have no place...  boxers who want to compete have no need of them - in self defence, kicks aren't necessarily essential (although they are handy) - I don't think the lack of kicks makes that an incomplete system, as it has all required to do what it is supposed to... It may not make someone a total body fighter, but that's not the goal of boxing...

A boxer who has trained and trained, while they may only punch, is way more formidable and complete as a fighter than someone who has dabbled in a few things looking for completion...


----------



## Guy Preston (Jan 29, 2013)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It will work until your opponent gets behind you, drag you down "by surprise". When your opponent's rear neck choke kill you, your lifetime striking training won't do you any good. It will go the other way too. If your punch can kill your opponent, his life long ground skill training won't do him any good either.



depends on how and where they strike... There's no way to definitively prove which is better, I'm not personally a striker, but there are points within the arm that if struck take away strength, a choke or strangle isn't immediate, if the defender knew what they were doing, and struck the correct places, with the necessary power, also considering where they could kick, even if only a heel to the shin, or what they can also hit with their head - the example becomes far more vague - it can't be used as an absolute - this wont work....


----------

