# Another wake up for Chinese Martial Arts



## JowGaWolf

Here we go again. Good thing is that it won't be a big news item.


----------



## Flying Crane

No, it isn't.


----------



## Martial D

It's the man, not the style. Here's a Kung Fu guy beating *** in the ring.

Can I go back to sleep now?


----------



## JowGaWolf

Martial D said:


> It's the man, not the style. Here's a Kung Fu guy beating *** in the ring.
> 
> Can I go back to sleep now?


He always represents well. That's the difference between someone who trains to fight and someone who doesn't.  He doesn't let people hit him solid in the face like that anymore.  He had to learn that lesson the hard way. lol.


----------



## JR 137

For the most part, I don't think it's the art itself.  I think it's the training methods and implementation of the techniques of the art.  Look at a knockdown fighter from Kyokushin vs a point fighter.  Both are training karate.  Both are using more or less the same punches and kicks.  Put one of each with similar length of time/hours of training and skill in their respective style of fighting in the ring like above, and which one will prevail?  The start/stop game of tag guy, or the guy who's trained to take a shot or two and counter it with hard strikes?

Take a Wing Chun guy who spars hard and accepts and is willing to take a hit or three to execute his counter and put him against a Wing Chun guy who does nothing but forms, push hands and sticky hands (sorry if I'm butchering the terms) without ever actually forcefully hitting anything nor getting hit forcefully.  Who'll typically be the last man standing?

The ones who accept they'll get hit and train to get hit and keep going will usually prevail.  The ones who actually hit something like a punching bag and don't stop and get a point once contact is made will typically win.  It's not rocket science, nor is it the art itself; it's how the person trains.

Thinking you'll never get hit and training like every hit you give is a killing blow is delusional.  Training without someone ever throwing anything with any realistic intent at you is absurd.  This is true of any art.


----------



## JowGaWolf

JR 137 said:


> For the most part, I don't think it's the art itself. I think it's the training methods and implementation of the techniques of the art.


 Totally agree. 



JR 137 said:


> Thinking you'll never get hit and training like every hit you give is a killing blow is delusional. Training without someone ever throwing anything with any realistic intent at you is absurd. This is true of any art.


Totally agree.  This is something that I'm really big on.  Just recently a student told another student that felt like she could defend herself if someone broke into her house.  I cringed because this lady doesn't train in the sparring class and nothing about her training should give her this assumption.  Now that she has it, I'll need to bring her down a little with a self-defense class and then maybe have her train on sparring days.

Kung fu has a lot of dangerous techniques, but the problem is being able to successfully land the technique and that's not easy at all.


----------



## Martial D

JowGaWolf said:


> Kung fu has a lot of dangerous techniques, but the problem is being able to successfully land the technique and that's not easy at all.



I find the opposite is true of a lot of Wing Chun(sorry, it's my only frame of reference vis a vis cma). Lots seem to train for contact but use only arm power. The way I was trained is all explosive hip power .


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Martial D said:


> I find the opposite is true of a lot of Wing Chun(sorry, it's my only frame of reference vis a vis cma). Lots seem to train for contact but use only arm power. The way I was trained is all explosive hip power .


_If you

- don't fight full contact, you may never be able to find out that "only arm power" is not enough to knock your opponent down. 
- do fight full contact, you will never train "only arm power".

So the issue is "full contact" training vs. "light contact" training._


----------



## Headhunter

Yawn


----------



## JR 137

Kung Fu Wang said:


> _If you
> 
> - don't fight full contact, you may never be able to find out that "only arm power" is not enough to knock your opponent down.
> - do fight full contact, you will never train "only arm power".
> 
> So the issue is "full contact" training vs. "light contact" training._



I'm not thoroughly convinced you have to fight full contact to recognize the difference.  Pro fighters don't typically fight full contact (the ones who have a career beyond one or two fights anyway) in training and they have no problem delivering full power strikes when needed.  Don't get me wrong, comparing pro fighters to everyday people training in a local school is a bit of a stretch.  

I think it's more of punching the air and focus mitts instead of hitting a heavy bag for power.  People who've hit something full power routinely feel the difference and adjust their technique.  People who don't have no true frame of reference.  The only way to be able to hit hard is to actually hit things hard, be it a person (which doesn't last very long), a bag, or like Rocky hitting the hanging cow carcasses in the butcher shop.


----------



## Martial D

JR 137 said:


> I'm not thoroughly convinced you have to fight full contact to recognize the difference.  Pro fighters don't typically fight full contact (the ones who have a career beyond one or two fights anyway) in training and they have no problem delivering full power strikes when needed.  Don't get me wrong, comparing pro fighters to everyday people training in a local school is a bit of a stretch.
> 
> I think it's more of punching the air and focus mitts instead of hitting a heavy bag for power.  People who've hit something full power routinely feel the difference and adjust their technique.  People who don't have no true frame of reference.  The only way to be able to hit hard is to actually hit things hard, be it a person (which doesn't last very long), a bag, or like Rocky hitting the hanging cow carcasses in the butcher shop.


Did you mean to say pro fighters don't _train_ full contact? Because they certainly fight full contact 

You're right though. Powerful striking comes from lots of repetition and practice you just can't get without...powerful contact.


----------



## JR 137

Martial D said:


> Did you mean to say pro fighters don't _train_ full contact? Because they certainly fight full contact
> 
> You're right though. Powerful striking comes from lots of repetition and practice you just can't get without...powerful contact.


Yes, I meant TRAIN/SPAR full contact.  "I'm pretty sure pros don't fight full contact during TRAINING..."  Some of that was separated by parentheses.  If a fighter is going all out in training, their career isn't going to last very long IMO.  I'm quite sure they get very technical in sparring rather than all out fighting during training camp.


----------



## Martial D

JR 137 said:


> Yes, I meant TRAIN/SPAR full contact.  "I'm pretty sure pros don't fight full contact during TRAINING..."  Some of that was separated by parentheses.  If a fighter is going all out in training, their career isn't going to last very long IMO.  I'm quite sure they get very technical in sparring rather than all out fighting during training camp.


Indeed. AKA is known for sparring too hard, and for frequent injuries and missed fights. No coincidence.


----------



## JP3

JR 137 said:


> Thinking you'll never get hit and training like every hit you give is a killing blow is delusional.  Training without someone ever throwing anything with any realistic intent at you is absurd.  This is true of any art.



Man, I love this. In my opinion, if you think you're going to ever really "need" your art to defend yourself in any way... dead on target.


----------



## hoshin1600

Headhunter said:


> Yawn


 indeed

its not a lack in the art usually.   its heart, intent, intensity, attitude and the correct mind set.  you need to foster these things in your training. if not then you will crumble when it matters.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

If you are so obsessed with being the best warrior, then go be a Spartan, who were arguably the best warriors in the world. How did they do it? On the back of slavery and extreme child abuse, and that's if you even survived being born since newly born Spartans were closely inspected and if they had any defects at all, they were discarded and left to die in the wilderness. 

My point is, there is a hell of a lot more to life than being the best fighter, and quite frankly there is no need in this day and age to be the best fighter.


----------



## DanT

This isn't a wake up for Chinese Martial Arts.

This is a wake up for Crappy Chinese Martial Artists. 

If you listen to me playing the piano, you'd say the piano is a terrible instrument.

If you listen to Mozart playing the piano, you'd say it's a beautiful instrument.

If you watch someone who's terrible at Gong Fu fight, you'd say Gong Fu is terrible for fighting.

If you watch someone who is amazing at Gong Fu fight, you'd say Gong Fu is amazing for fighting.


----------



## DanT

JowGaWolf said:


> Here we go again. Good thing is that it won't be a big news item.


Jow, I've seen thousands of Gong Fu people, and I truly believe, based on your videos, that you are one of the remaining few who can actually use Gong Fu in a fight. It's sad, but it's true. Traditional Gong Fu is dying. It's up to the few of us who stay true to our techniques to keep it alive.


----------



## JowGaWolf

DanT said:


> Jow, I've seen thousands of Gong Fu people, and I truly believe, based on your videos, that you are one of the remaining few who can actually use Gong Fu in a fight. It's sad, but it's true. Traditional Gong Fu is dying. It's up to the few of us who stay true to our techniques to keep it alive.


I agree it's dying even within the lineage that I'm in.  There are very few people who actually want to be able to use Kung Fu as a fighting skill and that's where the problem begins.  A person can't have a good understanding of their martial art if they don't actually use it.   I can lecture and drill a person on how to use a computer, but that person won't have a good understanding of the computer until they actually spend time using the computer.  Kung Fu is like that.

We can't understand what we don't use.  It's just a shame that other people don't understand that and as a result a lot of traditional martial arts are going to die.  But there is an upside to this.  People like us can charge a premium for knowing how to actually use the techniques.

I like the Miyamoto Musashi quotes below because those 2 quotes cover exactly what you are talking about.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

JowGaWolf said:


> There are very few people who actually want to be able to use Kung Fu as a fighting skill and that's where the problem begins.


Many people want to talk about fighting but they don't want to get into fighting themselves.

You love women but you don't want to touch women. It makes no sense to me.


----------



## drop bear

DanT said:


> This isn't a wake up for Chinese Martial Arts.
> 
> This is a wake up for Crappy Chinese Martial Artists.
> 
> If you listen to me playing the piano, you'd say the piano is a terrible instrument.
> 
> If you listen to Mozart playing the piano, you'd say it's a beautiful instrument.
> 
> If you watch someone who's terrible at Gong Fu fight, you'd say Gong Fu is terrible for fighting.
> 
> If you watch someone who is amazing at Gong Fu fight, you'd say Gong Fu is amazing for fighting.



There are terrible pianos though.

Just because the individual and the training is a factor does not mean the system isn't a factor.

If I train the wrong technique diligently. That does not make it the right technique.


----------



## JowGaWolf

drop bear said:


> If I train the wrong technique diligently. That does not make it the right technique.


To add to this.  If I train the system for entertainment then it longer becomes a fighting system.  Extreme Martial arts and TKD tricking are perfect examples of how a fighting system morphed into a none-fighting system as the result of how people were training the techniques.  As a result, the new systems that born are useless for fighting.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

DanT said:


> Jow, I've seen thousands of Gong Fu people, and I truly believe, based on your videos, that you are one of the remaining few who can actually use Gong Fu in a fight. It's sad, but it's true. Traditional Gong Fu is dying. It's up to the few of us who stay true to our techniques to keep it alive.



The fighting aspect of traditional gong fu is dieing. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of perspective. My question is, do we need the fighting aspect anymore?


----------



## DanT

Midnight-shadow said:


> The fighting aspect of traditional gong fu is dieing. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of perspective. My question is, do we need the fighting aspect anymore?


Yes, depending on your lifestyle, and where you live, and what you do.


----------



## Headhunter

Midnight-shadow said:


> The fighting aspect of traditional gong fu is dieing. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of perspective. My question is, do we need the fighting aspect anymore?


Some will some wont. Lets be honest here most smart adults won't ever be needing to know how to fight.


----------



## Paul_D

Women certainly don't need to know how to fight, as


DanT said:


> Yes, depending on your lifestyle, and where you live, and what you do.


And your sex, as apparently SD consists exclusively of men getting into street fights with each other.   So women are safe


----------



## JowGaWolf

Midnight-shadow said:


> The fighting aspect of traditional gong fu is dieing. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of perspective. My question is, do we need the fighting aspect anymore?


Yes you need it, because without it you aren't understanding Martial arts.   You just can't understand kung fu without the fighting aspect.  You might as well just read a book a book about a martial art and join an exercise gym, because you'll get that same level of understanding that you'll get by not training the fighting aspect.


----------



## DanT

Paul_D said:


> Women certainly don't need to know how to fight, as
> 
> And your sex, as apparently SD consists exclusively of men getting into street fights with each other.   So women are safe


What? I didn't say women didn't need to.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Headhunter said:


> Some will some wont. Lets be honest here most smart adults won't ever be needing to know how to fight.


Lets be honest.  Most healthy adults here won't ever be needing open heart surgery so lets just tell the medical profession that there's no need to to bother with learning how to do it.  Tell them to just read the book and and not to practice what is in the book.


----------



## Martial D

Midnight-shadow said:


> The fighting aspect of traditional gong fu is dieing. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of perspective. My question is, do we need the fighting aspect anymore?



If it's dying, it is this sort of thinking is that is killing it.

It's like a cook, stirring a pot of random ingredients, never understanding that it's all useless if you can't eat it.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

JowGaWolf said:


> Yes you need it, because without it you aren't understanding Martial arts.   You just can't understand kung fu without the fighting aspect.  You might as well just read a book a book about a martial art and join an exercise gym, because you'll get that same level of understanding that you'll get by not training the fighting aspect.



So, the follow-up question to that is, if we need the fighting aspect of kungfu what needs to happen to get it back? Should we abolish points sparring and only do full contact?


----------



## Headhunter

Midnight-shadow said:


> So, the follow-up question to that is, if we need the fighting aspect of kungfu what needs to happen to get it back? Should we abolish points sparring and only do full contact?


Absolutely not if you do that that'll make it die even quicker because it will only attract people who want to fight as opposed to some who don't want to do that and will be put off by full contact


----------



## Martial D

Midnight-shadow said:


> So, the follow-up question to that is, if we need the fighting aspect of kungfu what needs to happen to get it back? Should we abolish points sparring and only do full contact?


No. I don't think so.

Point fighting is more of a sporting aspect, and there's nothing wrong with that on it's face. People like sports.

If there is a problem, it's one of self honestly. Many schools act as if, and of those many honestly believe, that they are teaching a combat ready system when their training does not reflect that at all.

If you are training to point fight, point fight.

If you are training to do katas, do katas.

If you are training for fitness or mental wellness, fine. Great. I think Tai chi is fantastic for both of those reasons.(I'm seriously thinking of signing up for a beginner class myself) *take it easy TC guys, I'm not saying you can't train tc for combat too

If you are training to alive combat, then and only then can you be prepared for alive combat.


----------



## Flying Crane

Midnight-shadow said:


> So, the follow-up question to that is, if we need the fighting aspect of kungfu what needs to happen to get it back? Should we abolish points sparring and only do full contact?


Don't worry about it.  It isn't lost.  But not everyone is good at it.  This is no surprise.  This is simply life.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Just for clarification purposes..... and the fact I like posting this every now and then..... when one says Chinese Martial arts, Kung Fu or Wushu they are talking about a cultural container of multiple styles and this is a partial list of what that terminology covers

Bafaquan
Baguazhang
Bajiquan
Bak Mei
Black Tiger Kung Fu
Chaquan
Changquan
Chuo Jiao
Choy Gar
Choy Li Fut
Dachengquan
Ditangquan
Do Pi
Lung Ying
Duan Quan
Emeiquan
Fanziquan
Five Ancestors
Five Animals
Fujian White Crane
Fu Jow Pai
Fut Gar
Gouquan
Hakka Kuen
Hong Cha
Hop Gar
Houquan
Drunken Monkey
Heihuquan:
Huaquan
Hung Fut
Hung Gar
Jing Wu Men
Jing Quan Do
Jow-Ga
Kuntao
Lau Gar
Lai Tung Pai
Lama Pai
Leopard Kung Fu
Li Gar
Liuhebafa Chuan
Luohan Quan
Mei Hua Quan
Mian Quan
Mizongyi
Mok Gar
Nam Pai Chuan
Nan Quan
Ng Mui Pai
Northern Praying Mantis
Northern Shaolin
Pai Long
Paochui
Piguaquan
Praying Mantis(??) - Free Fighting
Shaolin Quan
Shequan
Shuaijiao
Southern Praying Mantis
Chow Gar
Taijiquan
Tantui
Tibetan White Crane
Tien Shan Pai
Tongbeiquan
White Crane:
Wing Chun
Wudangquan
Xingyiquan
Yau Kung Mun
Yingzhaoquan
Yuejiaquan
Yiquan
Zi Ran Men


And with in these styles there can be multiple styles. Taijiquan: Chen, Yang, Wu, Wu/Hao, Sun, etc. Xingyiquan: Shanxi, Hebei, Hunan, etc, Baguazhang: Cheng, Yin, Gao, Jiang, etc. Wing Chun: also has variations, Yip Man being only one of those.


----------



## Steve

Martial D said:


> If it's dying, it is this sort of thinking is that is killing it.
> 
> It's like a cook, stirring a pot of random ingredients, never understanding that it's all useless if you can't eat it.


Useless is relative.  It's a change of intent.  It's like using food to power your flux capacitor vs using food to eat. 

Martial arts that aren't great at producing effective fighters isn't a big deal, IMO.  If you want to train for other reasons, go for it.  If you're looking to lose weight, and you do, awesome.  If you're looking for flexibility and get that, great. 

the problem is when you think you're learning to fight, but are not.  That's a problem.


----------



## Paul_D

DanT said:


> What? I didn't say women didn't need to.


Joke dude, hence the smiley to indicate as such.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

Martial D said:


> No. I don't think so.
> 
> Point fighting is more of a sporting aspect, and there's nothing wrong with that on it's face. People like sports.
> 
> If there is a problem, it's one of self honestly. Many schools act as if, and of those many honestly believe, that they are teaching a combat ready system when their training does not reflect that at all.
> 
> If you are training to point fight, point fight.
> 
> If you are training to do katas, do katas.
> 
> If you are training for fitness or mental wellness, fine. Great. I think Tai chi is fantastic for both of those reasons.(I'm seriously thinking of signing up for a beginner class myself) *take it easy TC guys, I'm not saying you can't train tc for combat too
> 
> If you are training to alive combat, then and only then can you be prepared for alive combat.



So how does a person train for "alive combat"? This is the biggest problem, in that no matter the training, there will always be a difference between sparring and a "real fight". We can close the gap but there is still a big difference. We have a similar problem when it comes to training first aid. You can practice CPR on a dummy all you like but you will never know what it's truly like to do CPR properly until you do it on a real person.


----------



## Martial D

Midnight-shadow said:


> So how does a person train for "alive combat"? This is the biggest problem, in that no matter the training, there will always be a difference between sparring and a "real fight". We can close the gap but there is still a big difference. We have a similar problem when it comes to training first aid. You can practice CPR on a dummy all you like but you will never know what it's truly like to do CPR properly until you do it on a real person.


By doing it on a real person. Look at mma, those guys train to fight, so they are good at fighting. Sure, the level of risk of personal injury elevates as the training approaches realistic, but nothing in life comes without sacrifice.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

Martial D said:


> By doing it on a real person. Look at mma, those guys train to fight, so they are good at fighting. Sure, the level of risk of personal injury elevates as the training approaches realistic, but nothing in life comes without sacrifice.



As close as MMA comes to a real fight, there is still a gap. MMA doesn't train you to fight multiple opponents, or getting jumped on from behind, or being faced with weapons. You think someone on the street isn't going to kick you in the balls or gouge your eyes just because you're an MMA fighter? You think they aren't going to kick your head in when you're on the ground?


----------



## Paul_D

Midnight-shadow said:


> As close as MMA comes to a real fight, there is still a gap. MMA doesn't train you to fight multiple opponents, or getting jumped on from behind, or being faced with weapons. You think someone on the street isn't going to kick you in the balls or gouge your eyes just because you're an MMA fighter? You think they aren't going to kick your head in when you're on the ground?


Or sucker punched


----------



## Steve

Midnight-shadow said:


> So how does a person train for "alive combat"? This is the biggest problem, in that no matter the training, there will always be a difference between sparring and a "real fight". We can close the gap but there is still a big difference. We have a similar problem when it comes to training first aid. You can practice CPR on a dummy all you like but you will never know what it's truly like to do CPR properly until you do it on a real person.


Yes!!!  The key is to understand that you cannot train for something you can't do.  You can't replace experience with more training.  You can, however, train for things that will help, provided you are self aware.


----------



## DanT

Paul_D said:


> Joke dude, hence the smiley to indicate as such.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> By doing it on a real person. Look at mma, those guys train to fight, so they are good at fighting. Sure, the level of risk of personal injury elevates as the training approaches realistic, but nothing in life comes without sacrifice.


well no, that's not a logical conclusion, some of them are very good, some are terrible,are after getting knocked about for a few weeks give it up. There is no proof that getting punched a lot makes you a better fighter, a fighter with brain damage perhaps, but not better


----------



## jobo

Steve said:


> Yes!!!  The key is to understand that you cannot train for something you can't do.  You can't replace experience with more training.  You can, however, train for things that will help, provided you are self aware.


yes you can they do it all the time, they don't let paramedics' practice on real people, they don't set fire an,aircraft so they can practise evacuation, nor do they have a real riot to train officers or a real war to train troops


----------



## Midnight-shadow

jobo said:


> yes you can they do it all the time, they don't let paramedics' practice on real people, they don't set fire an,aircraft so they can practise evacuation, nor do they have a real riot to train officers or a real war to train troops



Ask any paramedic you like, and they will tell you that there was a big difference between training and having to do CPR on a real person for the first time. No amount of training can fully prepare you for the real thing. Yes, the training dummies they use are very sophisticated but they still don't come close to the real thing. This is not just about the physical actions, but the mental aspect too. Being placed into a real life situation for the first time can play havoc on your mind, and a lot of people freeze up or at the very least don't act optimally the first time, no matter how much training they have had.

As someone who has performed CPR on a person in a real life situation, I can tell you this for a fact. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME AS TRAINING.


----------



## drop bear

Midnight-shadow said:


> So, the follow-up question to that is, if we need the fighting aspect of kungfu what needs to happen to get it back? Should we abolish points sparring and only do full contact?



There needs to be a vehicle for fighters to get opportunities to fight.  Otherwise they will just go do boxing or something.


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> well no, that's not a logical conclusion, some of them are very good, some are terrible,are after getting knocked about for a few weeks give it up. There is no proof that getting punched a lot makes you a better fighter, a fighter with brain damage perhaps, but not better



The point is at least you know who is good and who isn't.


----------



## jobo

Midnight-shadow said:


> Ask any paramedic you like, and they will tell you that there was a big difference between training and having to do CPR on a real person for the first time. No amount of training can fully prepare you for the real thing. Yes, the training dummies they use are very sophisticated but they still don't come close to the real thing. This is not just about the physical actions, but the mental aspect too. Being placed into a real life situation for the first time can play havoc on your mind, and a lot of people freeze up or at the very least don't act optimally the first time, no matter how much training they have had.
> 
> As someone who has performed CPR on a person in a real life situation, I can tell you this for a fact. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME AS TRAINING.


and that's why they train by repeating it over and over again until it become instinctive, some 22 years after giving up kung fu, I was attacked by a guy 30 years younger than me, the training kicked in and I hit the heal of my hand under his chin , snapping his head back and launching him across the room, I was amazed, I didn't know i remembered that, an action I had never done other than in slow motion , yet there it was programmed in just for such an emergency


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> The point is at least you know who is good and who isn't.


well yea, you know if your good or not, but how does it help the ones who are not good to become good fighter, which is what was claimed, it doesn't does it, other wise every kid who has been beaten up would be a good fighter


----------



## Midnight-shadow

jobo said:


> and that's why they train by repeating it over and over again until it become instinctive, some 22 years after giving up kung fu, I was attacked by a guy 30 years younger than me, the training kicked in and I hit the heal of my hand under his chin , snapping his head back and launching him across the room, I was amazed, I didn't know i remembered that, an action I had never done other than in slow motion , yet there it was programmed in just for such an emergency



I'm just going to leave this clip up here to demonstrate my point:






and this one too:


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> well yea, you know if your good or not, but how does it help the ones who are not good to become good fighter, which is what was claimed, it doesn't does it, other wise every kid who has been beaten up would be a good fighter



They can find a good fighter to go train with. And In the same method that made them a good fighter.

Which has got to help them in some way.

We have turned bad fighters at least into some sort of fighter. Hard contact played a role in that.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Midnight-shadow said:


> So, the follow-up question to that is, if we need the fighting aspect of kungfu what needs to happen to get it back? Should we abolish points sparring and only do full contact?


you don't have to do full contact, but the contact has to be enough where strikes can be interrupted.  A tap on my head will not prevent my strike from landing. However a good kick to my head will.  The solution is more about intensity of the contact. It has to be hard enough to affect your opponent but not so hard where doctor visits are needed.


----------



## JR 137

drop bear said:


> There are terrible pianos though.
> 
> Just because the individual and the training is a factor does not mean the system isn't a factor.
> 
> If I train the wrong technique diligently. That does not make it the right technique.



If you're training the wrong technique diligently under realistic pressure, you'll realize pretty quickly that it's the wrong technique.

For example... Let's say I train the jab diligently.  I throw a ton of them at a heavy bag everyday.  Once I have someone who actually knows how to shoot a double leg takedown shoot in, and I throw that jab, I find out pretty quickly that that jab doesn't counter an honest double leg takedown very well.  It works quite well at other things, but not that thing.

Then I think my diligently trained knee strike will be an effective counter.  Same guy shoots in, and on my back I go.

The problem isn't the techniques.  The problem is a lack of effective sparring.  That lack of effective sparring turns into a hypothetical strategy that sounds great on paper - a quick and hard knee to the head that's already coming at your knees sounds like a no brainer - but just flat out sucks.

It's the poor training methods and lack of realistic strategy/application that sinks a system, not the actual techniques.  This assumes that the system isn't doing stuff that's so far out there.  I'm sure there are some that do completely asinine techniques, but they're really the exception.


----------



## Steve

jobo said:


> yes you can they do it all the time, they don't let paramedics' practice on real people, they don't set fire an,aircraft so they can practise evacuation, nor do they have a real riot to train officers or a real war to train troops


Paramedics do eventually perform cpr on real people.  Fire fighter do eventually fight fires.  Training gets you to the edge of competence.  But you can't train to expertise, unless training is itself the skill you're trying to learn.


----------



## drop bear

JR 137 said:


> If you're training the wrong technique diligently under realistic pressure, you'll realize pretty quickly that it's the wrong technique.
> 
> For example... Let's say I train the jab diligently.  I throw a ton of them at a heavy bag everyday.  Once I have someone who actually knows how to shoot a double leg takedown shoot in, and I throw that jab, I find out pretty quickly that that jab doesn't counter an honest double leg takedown very well.  It works quite well at other things, but not that thing.
> 
> Then I think my diligently trained knee strike will be an effective counter.  Same guy shoots in, and on my back I go.
> 
> The problem isn't the techniques.  The problem is a lack of effective sparring.  That lack of effective sparring turns into a hypothetical strategy that sounds great on paper - a quick and hard knee to the head that's already coming at your knees sounds like a no brainer - but just flat out sucks.
> 
> It's the poor training methods and lack of realistic strategy/application that sinks a system, not the actual techniques.  This assumes that the system isn't doing stuff that's so far out there.  I'm sure there are some that do completely asinine stuff, but they're really the exception.



There is a lot more to the dynamic than that.  

Capoeira is a good example. Not so realistic techniques applied in a realistic way.  But if everyone is doing it...........


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

JR 137 said:


> If you're training the wrong technique diligently under realistic pressure, you'll realize pretty quickly that it's the wrong technique.
> 
> For example... Let's say I train the jab diligently.  I throw a ton of them at a heavy bag everyday.  Once I have someone who actually knows how to shoot a double leg takedown shoot in, and I throw that jab, I find out pretty quickly that that jab doesn't counter an honest double leg takedown very well.  It works quite well at other things, but not that thing.
> 
> Then I think my diligently trained knee strike will be an effective counter.  Same guy shoots in, and on my back I go.
> 
> The problem isn't the techniques.  The problem is a lack of effective sparring.  That lack of effective sparring turns into a hypothetical strategy that sounds great on paper - a quick and hard knee to the head that's already coming at your knees sounds like a no brainer - but just flat out sucks.
> 
> It's the poor training methods and lack of realistic strategy/application that sinks a system, not the actual techniques.  This assumes that the system isn't doing stuff that's so far out there.  I'm sure there are some that do completely asinine techniques, but they're really the exception.


Not necessarily. If the people around you are doing the same bad technique, you may still assume it's good technique. And even if this works, there can be a lot of guess and check, which can waste time.

A huge example of this is collegiate fencing. Incredibly competitive, people fencing 2+ hours a day within their school, and on weekends against other schools. Still saw a ton of people who had bad technique. They would be told by their coach that the technique itself is fine, they just weren't applying it properly...no, it was directly bad technique. Plenty of them never learned the lesson, and those that did would scramble on their own to get better, because the coach was incapable of teaching them properly.


----------



## jobo

Steve said:


> Paramedics do eventually perform cpr on real people.  Fire fighter do eventually fight fires.  Training gets you to the edge of competence.  But you can't train to expertise, unless training is itself the skill you're trying to learn.


moving the goal posts, the claim was you cant train people to deal extremely stressful, even life or death situation and you can. The training may not be,successful or it may, but in employment situations the selection process should have got rid of the flappers


----------



## Steve

jobo said:


> moving the goal posts, the claim was you cant train people to deal extremely stressful, even life or death situation and you can. The training may not be,successful or it may, but in employment situations the selection process should have got rid of the flappers


I didn't claim that.  I claimed you can't train to expertise.   Training only gets you so far.  Some want desperately to believe that martial arts training is different from every other human activity in this regard.

I've read a lot of books and web material on how to distill liquor and make whiskey.  Intellectually, I understand the process.   But in order to go past "well educated novice" I will at some point need a still and some practical experience.   No amount of training will replace actual experience.

I roast coffee.   I know more about roasting coffee than anyone who has never done it.  I know what it smells like and tastes like, and I know several ways to screw it up that aren't in the books.   And the more I do it, the better I'll get.   training got me out of the gate, but nothing replaces doing.

Except when it comes to self defense.  That's special.


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> well no, that's not a logical conclusion, some of them are very good, some are terrible,are after getting knocked about for a few weeks give it up. There is no proof that getting punched a lot makes you a better fighter, a fighter with brain damage perhaps, but not better


The proof is that people without fighting experience always lose against those that do have it. I don't care how many years someone has been perfecting their forms or kata, they won't know a thing about fighting if they've never been in that situation.

There are a lot of factors to deal with. Fear, adrenaline, apprehension, pain, knowing how to feint, how and when  to land those strikes you have been practicing so dillegently against someone that is doing literally everything they can to stop you..Just a few off the top of my head.

If you believe you are trained to fight but have never actually used it in  hard sparring or a fight, you are actually more vulnerable to the world than if you have never trained at all.


----------



## Martial D

Midnight-shadow said:


> As close as MMA comes to a real fight, there is still a gap. MMA doesn't train you to fight multiple opponents, or getting jumped on from behind, or being faced with weapons. You think someone on the street isn't going to kick you in the balls or gouge your eyes just because you're an MMA fighter? You think they aren't going to kick your head in when you're on the ground?



They train to that specific sort of fighting, yes, but the overlap is huge.

Anyway, if you think any system is going to realistically prepare you for armed/multiple opponents, you should probably rethink that before it gets you hurt or killed. The only solution to those two situations is either gun-fu or run-fu.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> The proof is that people without fighting experience always lose against those that do have it. I don't care how many years someone has been perfecting their forms or kata, they won't know a thing about fighting if they've never been in that situation.
> 
> There are a lot of factors to deal with. Fear, adrenaline, apprehension, pain, knowing how to feint, how and when  to land those strikes you have been practicing so dillegently against someone that is doing literally everything they can to stop you..Just a few off the top of my head.
> 
> If you believe you are trained to fight but have never actually used it in  hard sparring or a fight, you are actually more vulnerable to the world than if you have never trained at all.


well that's not true either, unless you can actually prove that people who have never had a fight before all way loosecto those that have. I won my very first fight against an experienced fighter, I was 7 and he had beaten up every other kid in the class, before he started on me


----------



## Midnight-shadow

Martial D said:


> They train to that specific sort of fighting, yes, but the overlap is huge.
> 
> Anyway, if you think any system is going to realistically prepare you for armed/multiple opponents, you should probably rethink that before it gets you hurt or killed. The only solution to those two situations is either gun-fu or run-fu.



That's exactly what you were implying when you said that MMA prepares you for "real world" fighting, unless I completely misread what you put.


----------



## Martial D

All I can say is that if you have beliefs you haven't tested, especially as it regards your personal safety, you also have an exploitable weakness, and perhaps..as 'Master Wong' might say - "Beeg  Problem" in the future.


----------



## drop bear

JowGaWolf said:


> you don't have to do full contact, but the contact has to be enough where strikes can be interrupted.  A tap on my head will not prevent my strike from landing. However a good kick to my head will.  The solution is more about intensity of the contact. It has to be hard enough to affect your opponent but not so hard where doctor visits are needed.



There are elements that are missed if you don't train full contact though.  Energy management is one (although you could swap that for wrestling)

Learning to punch hard with timing is one. 

The balance changes a bit. 

And some techniques are better full contact. Like head kicks which are pretty useless if you can brush them off with one hand.  But pretty good if they put the guy in danger of a broken skull.


----------



## Martial D

Midnight-shadow said:


> That's exactly what you were implying when you said that MMA prepares you for "real world" fighting, unless I completely misread what you put.


Mma training prepares you for mma, which is a pretty close aproximation of 1 v 1 fighting, and I dare say prepares you for your multiple/armed scenario as much as anything else will, aside from maybe  a firearms course.

Now this isn't because those systems..mostly mt boxing and BJJ are the only viable systems..because I don't believe that at all. It's because they train for the job they intend to do.


----------



## drop bear

Midnight-shadow said:


> That's exactly what you were implying when you said that MMA prepares you for "real world" fighting, unless I completely misread what you put.



No. That is an implication made by people who have never been gang bashed.  

There is no training that will make it safe to go up against a bunch of guys.


----------



## Steve

Martial D said:


> Mma training prepares you for mma, which is a pretty close aproximation of 1 v 1 fighting, and I dare say prepares you for your multiple/armed scenario as much as anything else will, aside from maybe  a firearms course.
> 
> Now this isn't because those systems..mostly mt boxing and BJJ are the only viable systems..because I don't believe that at all. It's because they train for the job they intend to do.


I think this is a pretty solid summation.  I appreciate that you acknowledge what MMA is and isn't.  What it does teach and where it stops.  Both are very important things to know.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

drop bear said:


> No. That is an implication made by people who have never been gang bashed.
> 
> There is no training that will make it safe to go up against a bunch of guys.



And this is precisely the problem. A lot of people seem to have to impression that training for MMA ring fights is the same as preparing for "real world" fighting when this is far from the truth. I always find it amusing whenever someone says things like "x isn't real, they should do MMA instead" as if MMA is a true example of "real world" fighting.

Who's more delusional in all of this? The TMA practitioners who think that waving their arms around constitutes fighting, or the MMA guys who think they can take on the world just because they won a fight 1v1 where there were rules and a referee in place?


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> All I can say is that if you have beliefs you haven't tested, especially as it regards your personal safety, you also have an exploitable weakness, and perhaps..as 'Master Wong' might say - "Beeg  Problem" in the future.


if you were putting forward an argument that a good level mma fighter would beat most other martial artist, you may have a point, but your stance that other martial are useless against attack is something of a mute point, it rather depends who is attacking you, how big strong they are and if they have friends and how drunk anyone is


----------



## Steve

Midnight-shadow said:


> And this is precisely the problem. A lot of people seem to have to impression that training for MMA ring fights is the same as preparing for "real world" fighting when this is far from the truth. I always find it amusing whenever someone says things like "x isn't real, they should do MMA instead" as if MMA is a true example of "real world" fighting.
> 
> Who's more delusional in all of this? The TMA practitioners who think that waving their arms around constitutes fighting, or the MMA guys who think they can take on the world just because they won a fight 1v1 where there were rules and a referee in place?


It's a moment of clarity when folks realize that none of it is "real."  It's all different pieces of a giant puzzle working from the edges to the middle.  Cops have a piece.  Bouncers have a piece.  MMAists have a piece.  Some pieces are larger than others, but no one has it all.  And if someone claims to, run away very quickly. 

It's just as amusing to me when people say they teach real world self defense because it (whatever "it" is) works for cops.


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> but your stance that other martial are useless against attack


Who's stance? I said no such thing. In fact, I explicitly stated that I do not believe that.

Come again?


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> Mma training prepares you for mma, which is a pretty close aproximation of 1 v 1 fighting, and I dare say prepares you for your multiple/armed scenario as much as anything else will, aside from maybe  a firearms course.
> 
> Now this isn't because those systems..mostly mt boxing and BJJ are the only viable systems..because I don't believe that at all. It's because they train for the job they intend to do.


real world fights, really, do you train fighting with broken bottles. Most of my real world fights have involved one or both having an improvised weapon, I like to see you take someone to the floor whilst your having your spine lacerated


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> Who's stance? I said no such thing. In fact, I explicitly stated that I do not believe that.
> 
> Come again?


ok arts that don't do live fighting are useless, that is your point isn't it. If not then I have no idea what you are tattling on about


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> real world fights, really, do you train fighting with broken bottles. Most of my real world fights have involved one or both having an improvised weapon, I like to see you take someone to the floor whilst your having your spine lacerated



This isn't a good argument though. Introduce weapons, all things being equal, the guy with viable training still wins.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

Steve said:


> It's a moment of clarity when folks realize that none of it is "real."  It's all different pieces of a giant puzzle working from the edges to the middle.  Cops have a piece.  Bouncers have a piece.  MMAists have a piece.  Some pieces are larger than others, but no one has it all.  And if someone claims to, run away very quickly.
> 
> It's just as amusing to me when people say they teach real world self defense because it (whatever "it" is) works for cops.



It's amazing how people's perceptions change when faced with the real thing as opposed to training or a simulation. As a lifeguard I have to do monthly training to keep my skills up to scratch, and I train with a lot of other people, many of whom have never had to use their skills in a real situation before. There was 1 person in particular who was very confident in their abilities, and excelled in training. Then 1 day we had a real incident where a young girl swam out of her depth and couldn't stay afloat. The confident lifeguard jumped in to save them, and got smacked in the face for their trouble while trying to save this kid. It was quite the reality check for them let me tell you and from then on they made sure to pay more attention during the training sessions.


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> ok arts that don't do live fighting are useless, that is your point isn't it. If not then I have no idea what you are tattling on about


I said schools,  not arts. While not all arts, or styles, are equally viable, more important is how they are trained.


----------



## drop bear

Midnight-shadow said:


> And this is precisely the problem. A lot of people seem to have to impression that training for MMA ring fights is the same as preparing for "real world" fighting when this is far from the truth. I always find it amusing whenever someone says things like "x isn't real, they should do MMA instead" as if MMA is a true example of "real world" fighting.
> 
> Who's more delusional in all of this? The TMA practitioners who think that waving their arms around constitutes fighting, or the MMA guys who think they can take on the world just because they won a fight 1v1 where there were rules and a referee in place?



The guy who actually fought someone. MMA is training for the real world to the level you can realistically expect one person to achieve.

The fantasy is the expectation that training for the real world includes training to handle 5 guys.

Why would you think any training should be expected to handle that?


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> real world fights, really, do you train fighting with broken bottles. Most of my real world fights have involved one or both having an improvised weapon, I like to see you take someone to the floor whilst your having your spine lacerated



Pretty sure having your spine lacerated is a counter to most defensive techniques up to and including shooting people.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> This isn't a good argument though. Introduce weapons, all things being equal, the guy with viable training still wins.


its a good argument round here, because its like that. Real world fight have weapons,


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> Pretty sure having your spine lacerated is a counter to most defensive techniques up to and including shooting people.


yes but particularly effective against bjj


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> its a good argument round here, because its like that. Real world fight have weapons,


You completely missed the point. Again.


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> Mma training prepares you for mma, which is a pretty close aproximation of 1 v 1 fighting, and I dare say prepares you for your multiple/armed scenario as much as anything else will, aside from maybe  a firearms course.
> 
> Now this isn't because those systems..mostly mt boxing and BJJ are the only viable systems..because I don't believe that at all. It's because they train for the job they intend to do.



Of course russia does things like multiple fighters obstical courses and all sorts of crazy stuff. 

Mabye the reality guys who specialize in that can have a crack. See how they fare in a real situation.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

drop bear said:


> The guy who actually fought someone. MMA is training for the real world to the level you can realistically expect one person to achieve.
> 
> The fantasy is the expectation that training for the real world includes training to handle 5 guys.
> 
> Why would you think any training should be expected to handle that?



It's at this point where I wish I knew how the different armed forces around the world trained. I know for example that some train in Krav Maga but I'm guessing there is a big difference between the Krav Maga that is taught to civilians and that which is taught to the armed forces.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> I said schools,  not arts. While not all arts, or styles, are equally viable, more important is how they are trained.


yes, and your insistance that arts / schools that don't do live fighting are no good for self defence. When that is totally dependent on who is attacking you and what with


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> yes but particularly effective against bjj



No. Pretty sure spine laceration is particularly effective against any style.


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> yes, and your insistance that arts / schools that don't do live fighting are no good for self defence. When that is totally dependent on who is attacking you and what with


Hello, wall.


----------



## jobo

Midnight-shadow said:


> It's at this point where I wish I knew how the different armed forces around the world trained. I know for example that some train in Krav Maga but I'm guessing there is a big difference between the Krav Maga that is taught to civilians and that which is taught to the armed forces.


why would it be different, besides from the fact that you probably won't be trying to take an ak 47 off them, unless its LA obviously


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> No. Pretty sure spine laceration is particularly effective against any style.


very difficult to do unless they turn their back on you


----------



## JowGaWolf

drop bear said:


> And some techniques are better full contact. Like head kicks which are pretty useless if you can brush them off with one hand.


Yeah kicks like that are no good.  If the kick has no effect on the opponents efforts then it's worthless. I should never feel as if I can just walk through attacks and have little care if it hits me or not. Strikes have enough force where I really can't afford them to land unchallenged


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> Hello, wall.


your arguments don't make any,sense outside your own head.


----------



## drop bear

Midnight-shadow said:


> It's at this point where I wish I knew how the different armed forces around the world trained. I know for example that some train in Krav Maga but I'm guessing there is a big difference between the Krav Maga that is taught to civilians and that which is taught to the armed forces.



My instructor trains with paul cale who sets up the Australian defence forces training.

There are differences in where you are going. So if you have a gun. You only have to get to that. Rather than say a submission. That sort of thing. You might sling a head butt or something.

The techniques are kind of fluid. MMA works fine as a vehicle for military training.  Meaning you dont have to scrap MMA you ajust it. And the better you are at MMA the better able you will be to apply reality systems.

So back to that gun. If you cant wrestle and I can. Chances are I will be able to shoot you first because I have a better vehicle to access the weapon.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> No. Pretty sure spine laceration is particularly effective against any style.


No no, the inexperienced person/person with no applicable training is somehow more likely to have and know how to use a weapon than someone that does have training(don't ask why! Just because!) therefore doing katas and chi sau is twice as effective as doing anything that resembles combat training if you want to beat up 5 armed attackers at once. Duh, don't you know anything? Logic man! I know it's true because I beat up a kid once when I was 10!


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> very difficult to do unless they turn their back on you



No i can just reach over their shoulder. Basically any clinch.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> No no, the inexperienced person/person with no applicable training is somehow more likely to have and know how to use a weapon than someone that does have training(don't ask why! Just because!) therefore doing katas and chi sau is twice as effective as doing anything that resembles combat training if you want to beat up 5 armed attackers at once. Duh, don't you know anything? Logic man!


that realy wasn't my point, but seems as you raise it, doing drills that involve your opponent have a weapon, gives you a better skill set, than doing mma with no weapons drill


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> No i can just reach over their shoulder. Basically any clinch.


The white guy has set himself up for a hip throw. Lucky it's boxing


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> No i can just reach over their shoulder. Basically any clinch.


that why you fight a distance if they are swinging a broken bottle about, but you cant do bbj at distance can you. That's a beeek problem


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> No no, the inexperienced person/person with no applicable training is somehow more likely to have and know how to use a weapon than someone that does have training(don't ask why! Just because!) therefore doing katas and chi sau is twice as effective as doing anything that resembles combat training if you want to beat up 5 armed attackers at once. Duh, don't you know anything? Logic man! I know it's true because I beat up a kid once when I was 10!


I forgot that everything is in the kata.


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> that why you fight a distance if they are swinging a broken bottle about, but you cant do bbj at distance can you. That's a beeek problem



At some point fighting will be inside his stabbing range. Or it is called running away.


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> The white guy has set himself up for a hip throw. Lucky it's boxing



A boxer on our last show. Did a brilliant takedown.

I finally got to yell "Jujitsu"


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> that why you fight a distance if they are swinging a broken bottle about, but you cant do bbj at distance can you. That's a beeek problem


Why do you keep bringing up BJJ? Since you keep doing so, I can't help but wonder if you actually believe someone that is trained in joint manipulation is somehow less prepared to deal with your broken bottle scenario than someone who does not have that training.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> You completely missed the point. Again.


that is because your point keep changing and you denie saying things, you said a few post earlier, why not pick a point of view and stick to it


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> A boxer on our last show. Did a brilliant takedown.
> 
> I finally got to yell "Jujitsu"


Show?


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> that is because your point keep changing and you denie saying things, you said a few post earlier, why not pick a point of view and stick to it


You are under 18 correct? Well under?


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> Why do you keep bringing up BJJ? Since you keep doing so, I can't help but wonder if you actually believe someone that is trained in joint manipulation is somehow less prepared to deal with your broken bottle scenario than someone who does not have that training.


to get the joint you have to get past the pointy bits, so yes, someone who  has been trained specifically in dealing with weapons is better prepared that someone who' isn't.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> You are under 18 correct? Well under?


thanks , I like to think so


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> Show?



No video. Dan Mclovin Mcormac was the guy. If it ever appears. I will put it up.


----------



## Martial D

@jobo

BJJ also has their disarms and sd, same as any other style. Mma isn't BJJ, and I'm not a BJJ guy, nor is anyone in this thread..so you continually bringing it up isn't furthering your case...whatever that is.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> No video. Dan Mclovin Mcormac was the guy. If it ever appears. I will put it up.


I look forward to it.


----------



## drop bear

Midnight-shadow said:


> It's at this point where I wish I knew how the different armed forces around the world trained. I know for example that some train in Krav Maga but I'm guessing there is a big difference between the Krav Maga that is taught to civilians and that which is taught to the armed forces.







__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=531781973697303


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> to get the joint you have to get past the pointy bits, so yes, someone who  has been trained specifically in dealing with weapons is better prepared that someone who' isn't.



Sort of. There is a concept called tacticool. Where specific pourpose does not automatically mean a better product.

So this is a zombie knife.






Now even though it is specifically designed for killing zombies. It is debatable as to whether it is actually any better than any other knife for the task.


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> At some point fighting will be inside his stabbing range. Or it is called running away.



have you ever fought some one with a knife or a broken bottle. I have long before I learned ma. I have 3stab wounds. Running way might be a lot more sensible than putting a bjj hold on him. If you going to fight its dependent on speed and moving in and out of range before they can get you.

we were doing a knife drill at class a few weeks ago and i kept getting stabbed in the arm but then im getting old


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> have you ever fought some one with a knife or a broken bottle. I have long before I learned ma. I have 3stab wounds. Running way might be a lot more sensible than putting a bjj hold on him. If you going to fight its dependent on speed and moving in and out of range before they can get you.
> 
> we were doing a knife drill at class a few weeks ago and i kept getting stabbed in the arm but then im getting old



Yes and yes. I never got stabbed. I used BJJ ish stuf for one of them. 

Unarmed vs knife mostly doesn't work very well. BJJ unarmed vs knife mostly doesnt work very well. kali unarmed vs knife mostly doesn't work very well.

Do you notice a trend?


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> Sort of. There is a concept called tacticool. Where specific pourpose does not automatically mean a better product.
> 
> So this is a zombie knife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now even though it is specifically designed for killing zombies. It is debatable as to whether it is actually any better than any other knife for the task.


if your not excepting that fight training for a specific purpose is better than not training for that purpose, then why do ma ay all. You could just do needle draft and be able to fight as well


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> Yes and yes. I never got stabbed. I used BJJ ish stuf for one of them.
> 
> Unarmed vs knife mostly doesn't work very well. BJJ unarmed vs knife mostly doesnt work very well. kali unarmed vs knife mostly doesn't work very well.
> 
> Do you notice a trend?


yes your at a,disadvantage, that why people use weapons to give them an edge. And those who train in weapons disarm are at less of a disadvantage than those who don't


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> if your not excepting that fight training for a specific purpose is better than not training for that purpose, then why do ma ay all. You could just do needle draft and be able to fight as well



 No I think quality basics create good martial arts. So the concept of specific training is less important than good training.

It is good to have both. But given a choice I will take good basics over situational trickery.


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> yes your at a,disadvantage, that why people use weapons to give them an edge. And those who train in weapons disarm are at less of a disadvantage than those who don't



Really?

How do you know?


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> No I think quality basics create good martial arts. So the concept of specific training is less important than good training.
> 
> It is good to have both. But given a choice I will take good basics over situational trickery.


so GOOD weapons training would be preferable to good basic training


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> Really?
> 
> How do you know?


the same reason I know that people who have learnt to ride a bike are better at ridding a bike than those who haven't
that and the fact they bother to teach police officers to disarm people. If it wern't so,they would say, no we won't bother teaching you how to disarm a knife man, just wing it


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> so GOOD weapons training would be preferable to good basic training



Correct. But good wepons training is not the same thing as specific weapons training.


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> the same reason I know that people who have learnt to ride a bike are better at ridding a bike than those who haven't
> that and the fact they bother to teach police officers to disarm people. If it wern't so,they would say, no we won't bother teaching you how to disarm a knife man, just wing it



Because you can ride bikes and see people riding bikes. You can make an assesment on what it takes to be a good bike rider.

You cant see what system makes people better at handling weapons.

And the poilice bit is silly. I train with three police officers who do BJJ.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> @jobo
> 
> BJJ also has their disarms and sd, same as any other style. Mma isn't BJJ, and I'm not a BJJ guy, nor is anyone in this thread..so you continually bringing it up isn't furthering your case...whatever that is.


well they don't do knife disarms in mma either.
I though mma was just bjj with a few punches thrown in. Same rubbish different name


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> well they don't do knife disarms in mma either.
> I though mma was just bjj with a few punches thrown in. Same rubbish different name


missed this one then.


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> Because you can ride bikes and see people riding bikes. You can make an assesment on what it takes to be a good bike rider.
> 
> You cant see what system makes people better at handling weapons.
> 
> And the poilice bit is silly. I train with three police officers who do BJJ.





drop bear said:


> Because you can ride bikes and see people riding bikes. You can make an assesment on what it takes to be a good bike rider.
> 
> You cant see what system makes people better at handling weapons.
> 
> And the poilice bit is silly. I train with three police officers who do BJJ.


yes and those officers will all have had specific training in disarming. That makes them better at,eer disarming than your average bjj bod


----------



## Flying Crane

Midnight-shadow said:


> It's at this point where I wish I knew how the different armed forces around the world trained. I know for example that some train in Krav Maga but I'm guessing there is a big difference between the Krav Maga that is taught to civilians and that which is taught to the armed forces.


I believe that typical armed forces hand-to-hand training, for a variety of legitimate reasons, is simple and fundamental, and not given a lot of time or energy.

Just because something is taught to some armed forces, is not a reason to assume it is especially effective or sophisticated.  Actually, it is often the opposite.

Is that what you were getting at?


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> missed this one then.


still looked like ground and pound to me


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> yes your at a,disadvantage, that why people use weapons to give them an edge. And those who train in weapons disarm are at less of a disadvantage than those who don't


I would say the opposite. If you have confidence in your 'knife drills' when someone tries to stab you, you are far more likely to see the inside of an ER than someone who holds no such(dangerous) belief.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> I would say the opposite. If you have confidence in your 'knife drills' when someone tries to stab you, you are far more likely to see the inside of an ER than someone who holds no such(dangerous) belief.


that would only be true if my confidence was misplaced. I'm only fighting a knife man if I have no,choice, unless I'm armed, so my confidence has little to do with it
someone pulled a BIG Knife on me once during a road rage incident, I backed away to my bike and came back with a claw hammer. He didn't think that a fair fight and jumped in his car and shot off


----------



## Martial D

jobo said:


> that would only be true if my confidence was misplaced.



I hope, sincerely, that nobody reading this takes you seriously and adopts these sorts of beliefs and gets maimed or killed as a result.

We are done here, and onto ignore you go.


----------



## jobo

Martial D said:


> I hope, sincerely, that nobody reading this takes you seriously and adopts these sorts of beliefs and gets maimed or killed as a result.
> 
> We are done here, and onto ignore you go.



what beliefs, that mma is rubbish or that getting weapons training is a good idea


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> yes and those officers will all have had specific training in disarming. That makes them better at,eer disarming than your average bjj bod



No your argument was.  If police do it it must be relevant. Or they wouldn't do it. 

An argument for knife disarms would have to stand on its own merits.


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> No your argument was.  If police do it it must be relevant. Or they wouldn't do it.
> 
> An argument for knife disarms would have to stand on its own merits.


your making rules up,


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> your making rules up,



No i think that is an actual rule.


----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> No i think that is an actual rule.


and where is this rule written?


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> and where is this rule written?



here is one.
Argument: The Basics


----------



## Xue Sheng




----------



## jobo

drop bear said:


> here is one.
> Argument: The Basics


those are American rules, we are debating under world rules


----------



## drop bear

jobo said:


> those are American rules, we are debating under world rules


----------



## JowGaWolf

drop bear said:


>


 I don't know what triggered this post but man, that picture is a perfect representation of how someone feels when something really stupid was said.  The anguish. lol


----------



## Headhunter

Martial D said:


> @jobo
> 
> BJJ also has their disarms and sd, same as any other style. Mma isn't BJJ, and I'm not a BJJ guy, nor is anyone in this thread..so you continually bringing it up isn't furthering your case...whatever that is.


Wrong there aren't any disarms in bjj. Yes there's self defence aspects but there's no weapons involved at all.


----------



## Ironbear24

JR 137 said:


> Look at a knockdown fighter from Kyokushin vs a point fighter. Both are training karate. Both are using more or less the same punches and kicks.



No we aren't.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Ironbear24 said:


> No we aren't.


Ironbear if I ever catch you doing point sparring punches, then I'm going to personally come visit you and slap you until you come back to your senses.   By the way you'll need to pay for my plan ticket as well. lol.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

Ironbear24 said:


> No we aren't.



I'm sure you're using the same techniques, but in a different way with a different delivery. It reminds me of a story my instructor told me about how people fight the way they train. There was a points-based karate fighter, very well trained and successful in points karate competitions. Then one day some tough guy in a bar started giving him grief about doing points-based fighting, so the karate guy immediately turned around and fired off a load of techniques on the tough guy. Unfortunately for the karate guy, he did those techniques exactly as he was trained which was with pinpoint accuracy and no power at all. After being tapped by all those techniques, the tough guy threw 1 punch at the karate guy and knocked him down.


----------



## JR 137

Ironbear24 said:


> No we aren't.



Sure we are.  Both schools I've trained at are Kyokushin offshoots.  I've done a handful of point fighting tournaments, and a few knockdown tournaments.  A roundhouse is a roundhouse.  A front kick is a front kick.  A reverse punch is a reverse punch.

The difference in technique in knockdown is you're not tapping; you're  putting power behind it and following through (or at least you are if you want to have any chance at winning).

The techniques are the same, they way they're trained and applied is different.


----------



## Flying Crane

Midnight-shadow said:


> I'm sure you're using the same techniques, but in a different way with a different delivery. It reminds me of a story my instructor told me about how people fight the way they train. There was a points-based karate fighter, very well trained and successful in points karate competitions. Then one day some tough guy in a bar started giving him grief about doing points-based fighting, so the karate guy immediately turned around and fired off a load of techniques on the tough guy. Unfortunately for the karate guy, he did those techniques exactly as he was trained which was with pinpoint accuracy and no power at all. After being tapped by all those techniques, the tough guy threw 1 punch at the karate guy and knocked him down.


I first heard a similar story from my teacher in the mid 1980s and I've heard it a few times since then from different people.  I am sure that story, or some variant, has been floating around for a lot longer than that, and that makes me suspect it is a karate urban myth that never actually happened.  

I appreciate the lesson the story is meant to convey, but if the event that the story is supposedly based on never actually happened, then it suggests that people are really more adaptable than that.  People can train with some kind of control and restraint, and still be able to switch gears and put on the pressure when needed.

The lesson this myth is meant to convey is valid, but it becomes a problem when people use it to promote their own training methods over those of others.  We train effectively, and people who don't do it our way, simply suck.  Then it is just propaganda.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> I first heard a similar story from my teacher in the mid 1980s and I've heard it a few times since then from different people.  I am sure that story, or some variant, has been floating around for a lot longer than that, and that makes me suspect it is a karate urban myth that never actually happened.
> 
> I appreciate the lesson the story is meant to convey, but if the event that the story is supposedly based on never actually happened, then it suggests that people are really more adaptable than that.  People can train with some kind of control and restraint, and still be able to switch gears and put on the pressure when needed.
> 
> The lesson this myth is meant to convey is valid, but it becomes a problem when people use it to promote their own training methods over those of others.  We train effectively, and people who don't do it our way, simply suck.  Then it is just propaganda.



Reminds me of a story from way back in my TKD days.... and I was there so.... TKD was going to become an Olympic sport and some in class were very interested in that aspect. So they approached Mr. Kim about protective gear....he looked at them and laughed, saying "there is no protective gear in a fight". It took him awhile, but he finally gave in and got some chest protector from Korea. I tried it once, and only once. I got hit and it spread the pain over the entire body, frankly I would have rather gotten hit without the protector. Looking at it more closely I discovered it was basically bamboo staves covered with a bit of thin padding.


----------



## Midnight-shadow

Flying Crane said:


> I first heard a similar story from my teacher in the mid 1980s and I've heard it a few times since then from different people.  I am sure that story, or some variant, has been floating around for a lot longer than that, and that makes me suspect it is a karate urban myth that never actually happened.
> 
> I appreciate the lesson the story is meant to convey, but if the event that the story is supposedly based on never actually happened, then it suggests that people are really more adaptable than that.  People can train with some kind of control and restraint, and still be able to switch gears and put on the pressure when needed.
> 
> The lesson this myth is meant to convey is valid, but it becomes a problem when people use it to promote their own training methods over those of others.  We train effectively, and people who don't do it our way, simply suck.  Then it is just propaganda.



You're right that people can adapt to different situations, but I have a question. Let's say you have 2 people, person A and person B. Person A trains every day for full contact fighting where they aren't limited by how hard they can deliver their strikes. Person B on the other hand trains every day for points sparring where the emphasis is on delivering strikes as lightly as possible. If person A went into a points sparring match, and person B went into a full contact match, which one would be more successful. In other words, is it easier to increase your strength at a time of need, or decrease it?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Midnight-shadow said:


> You're right that people can adapt to different situations, but I have a question. Let's say you have 2 people, person A and person B. Person A trains every day for full contact fighting where they aren't limited by how hard they can deliver their strikes. Person B on the other hand trains every day for points sparring where the emphasis is on delivering strikes as lightly as possible. If person A went into a points sparring match, and person B went into a full contact match, which one would be more successful. In other words, is it easier to increase your strength at a time of need, or decrease it?


Against someone else who trains in that setting? I don't think either of them would be very successful. They don't know the techniques/tactics needed, while their opponent probably does.


----------



## Flying Crane

Midnight-shadow said:


> You're right that people can adapt to different situations, but I have a question. Let's say you have 2 people, person A and person B. Person A trains every day for full contact fighting where they aren't limited by how hard they can deliver their strikes. Person B on the other hand trains every day for points sparring where the emphasis is on delivering strikes as lightly as possible. If person A went into a points sparring match, and person B went into a full contact match, which one would be more successful. In other words, is it easier to increase your strength at a time of need, or decrease it?



Why does any of that matter?  People do what they are interested in doing.  

The karate urban myth is that a point fighter or someone who doesn't do much, or any, full contact fighting, cannot defend himself.  Switching up a competition setting as you describe here, is irrelevant.  It is an inappropriate yardstick.


----------



## drop bear

Flying Crane said:


> Why does any of that matter?  People do what they are interested in doing.
> 
> The karate urban myth is that a point fighter or someone who doesn't do much, or any, full contact fighting, cannot defend himself.  Switching up a competition setting as you describe here, is irrelevant.  It is an inappropriate yardstick.



Because if someone who hasn't been in a fight trains in karate. Asks his instructor If he will learn to defend himself and gets "Stuffed if I know. I haven't been in a fight either."

It could be pretty disheartening.

So it may be an inappropriate yard stick. But it is the best one we have.


----------



## Ironbear24

JowGaWolf said:


> Ironbear if I ever catch you doing point sparring punches, then I'm going to personally come visit you and slap you until you come back to your senses.   By the way you'll need to pay for my plan ticket as well. lol.



I would be honored to be brought back to reality . Though my wallet might be ko'd lol.


----------



## Ironbear24

Midnight-shadow said:


> I'm sure you're using the same techniques, but in a different way with a different delivery.



Then it isn't the same. When I punch for "real" I shoot in very close then deliver the punch, my body weight is going forward as it is thrown, I am aiming far behind the surface of the skin. Same goes for kicks too. 

If I am doing point sparring and I do these methods without putting power behind them, then I will get tapped a bunch of times on my in. For point sparring I have to use entirety different methods, more like using the full length of the limbs while keeping my body as furthest away possible.


----------

