Are you bound by tradition?

[Gerry Seymour]

I had someone challenged me arm wrestling in the public. You can always turn down the challenge. But you may not feel good about yourself for the rest of your life.

Meh. A challenge in something I'm not particularly good at doesn't appeal. I have no need to prove myself in most things. A challenge to a chess match by someone who actually plays would bore me - I haven't played in about 30 years. Turning down a challenge that doesn't interest me leaves me with no regrets.

It's different if the challenge is something that I might learn from, in an area I am particularly interested in, etc. But even then, if it's someone who should be able to dominate me (say, sparring with a highly skilled boxer), I'm uninterested if they're actually challenging me. It's different if it's a friendly game where I'd expect them to hold back and have fun with it and still beat me.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Meh. A challenge in something I'm not particularly good at doesn't appeal. I have no need to prove myself in most things. A challenge to a chess match by someone who actually plays would bore me - I haven't played in about 30 years. Turning down a challenge that doesn't interest me leaves me with no regrets.

It's different if the challenge is something that I might learn from, in an area I am particularly interested in, etc. But even then, if it's someone who should be able to dominate me (say, sparring with a highly skilled boxer), I'm uninterested if they're actually challenging me. It's different if it's a friendly game where I'd expect them to hold back and have fun with it and still beat me.

What if I challenge you to chess? I used to play, but probably played something like 10 matches in the last 10 years (excluding a failed attempt to teach my wife).

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Meh. A challenge in something I'm not particularly good at doesn't appeal. I have no need to prove myself in most things.

One of my Chinese co-worker behaviors truly amaze me. One day he played spelling game with his American friend, and he got beaten badly. My Chinese friend spent 1 years learning all the short words from a dictionary. A year later he and his American friend had the 2nd match in the spelling game. This time my friend won. My friend then had the 3rd match and he won again. My friend told his American friend, "Now, I'm 1 game ahead of you."

I admire my Chinese friend who spent 1 years learning short words from dictionary just trying to get even with his American friend in a game he was not good at. Not everybody will have that strong motivation to do so.

Later on, my Chinese friend became the IBM vice-president.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

What if I challenge you to chess? I used to play, but probably played something like 10 matches in the last 10 years (excluding a failed attempt to teach my wife).

That would be more likely to interest me. Once upon a time I was an above-average defensive player (I'd get behind, but hold out long enough to occasionally win against better players). Against someone who doesn't play much, I might manage to make the match interesting enough.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

One of my Chinese co-worker's behaviors truly amaze me. One day he played spelling game with his American friend, and he got beaten badly. My Chinese friend spent 1 years learning all the short words from a dictionary. A year later he and his American friend had the 2nd match in the spelling game. This time my friend won. My friend told his American friend, "Now, I'm 1 game ahead of you."

I admire my Chinese friend who spent 1 years learning short words from dictionary just try to get even with his American friend. Not everybody will have that strong motivation to do so.

Yeah, I'm only competitive in areas where the activity interests me, or is somehow tied to a priority. So at work, I'm pretty competitive about being among the fastest. Spelling is something I've always been reasonably good at, but never had a real interest in, so I wouldn't be interested in a competition, even if I expected to win.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

That would be more likely to interest me. Once upon a time I was an above-average defensive player (I'd get behind, but hold out long enough to occasionally win against better players). Against someone who doesn't play much, I might manage to make the match interesting enough.

That's about my thought process. I won't play someone overwhelmingly better, not because I know I'll lose, but it just won't be fun (and I'm not trying to learn anything). Back when I did play regularly, I played a pro a lot-lost every match but still played because I was learning from those losses.

Similarly, I'm not going to arm wrestle someone clearly stronger than me. But if a judo black belt asks me for some randori, I'll accept each time, as I'm learning. All depends on what the motivation is for the challenge.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

One of my Chinese co-worker behaviors truly amaze me. One day he played spelling game with his American friend, and he got beaten badly. My Chinese friend spent 1 years learning all the short words from a dictionary. A year later he and his American friend had the 2nd match in the spelling game. This time my friend won. My friend then had the 3rd match and he won again. My friend told his American friend, "Now, I'm 1 game ahead of you."

I admire my Chinese friend who spent 1 years learning short words from dictionary just trying to get even with his American friend in a game he was not good at. Not everybody will have that strong motivation to do so.

Later on, my Chinese friend became the IBM vice-president.

This seems silly to me. Was there something else he gained from spending a year learning dictionary words? Was he also trying to learn english and this was good motivation for him? If not, this seems like a waste of time, when he could spend that time doing something more enjoyable, or that helps him.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This seems silly to me. Was there something else he gained from spending a year learning dictionary words? Was he also trying to learn english and this was good motivation for him? If not, this seems like a waste of time, when he could spend that time doing something more enjoyable, or that helps him.

I believe not willing to accept defeat helped him to grow in his career. There is a good reason that he became IBM vice-president and I'm not. QAQ

 

[Tony Dismukes]

What I find much more productive is to learn enough about the other art to switch perspectives and ask "what would a practitioner of this other style see as flaws or weaknesses in my own training, and what can I do to address those potential problems?"

- A long fist guy can't do a hip throw.
- A Chinese wrestling guy can't do a roundhouse kick.
- A praying mantis guy is lacking knock down power.
- A Baji guy can't throw 4 punches within 1 second.

I'm the opposite. When I found out that

- TKD roundhouse kick training is better than my long fist roundhouse kick training, I immediately replaced it.
- MT roundhouse kick training is better than the TKD roundhouse kick training, I immediately replaced it again.

Just to clarify my original post, when I talk about trying to understand what a practitioner of another style would see as weaknesses in my system, I'm not talking necessarily talking about some technique they might do better. It's more a matter of getting that outside perspective on how something I do might create problems for me and then considering how I might best address those problems.

Some examples ...

Suppose I train in a system (such as boxing, TKD, or many others) which favors a bladed fighting stance in order to present a smaller target to the opponent. If I train with a Muay Thai fighter, they might point out that my lead leg will be a target for kicks and the bladed stance makes it harder for me to check those kicks. Assuming that I'm not just training for a sport which disallows low kicks, that's something that I should consider how to deal with.

Suppose I'm a Muay Thai fighter and I prefer a more squared up stance that makes it easier to check low kicks. A Krav Maga practitioner might point out that my groin appears to be a very tempting target. If I'm training for self defence, I should consider how to deal with that possibility.

Suppose I'm a BJJ practitioner and I love to take mount as a method for controlling an opponent. A Silat practitioner might point out that if I carry a weapon on my person, then top of mount is a sub-optimal position for weapon retention, because the bottom person might snatch my own weapon off my belt and use it against me. If I ever carry a weapon, I should take that into consideration.

Suppose I'm a Wing Chun practitioner and I have a whole system developed where I punch straight down the centerline and if my opponent blocks or parries then I use that contact to create a bridge that I can use against him and clear the way for additional punches using pak sao, lap sao, etc. A boxer might point out that he doesn't have to block, he can shoulder roll my punches while simultaneously pivoting off-line and catching me with a check hook as I punch. That's a new possibility that I won't have encountered in WC class that I have to think about how to handle.

None of this means that the boxer has to learn Muay Thai or the Thai Boxer has to learn Krav Maga or the BJJ practitioner has to learn Silat or the Wing Chun practitioner has to learn boxing. It's just that the outside perspective can give you ideas of questions you might want to explore within your own art.

(The same concept can be applied to training methods as well, not just techniques.)

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

A boxer might point out that he doesn't have to block, he can shoulder roll my punches while simultaneously pivoting off-line and catching me with a check hook as I punch. That's a new possibility that I won't have encountered in WC class that I have to think about how to handle.

No block -> no clinch

If you try to stay in the striking art area, boxing can help you WC. If you try to integrate striking art and throwing art, boxing cannot help you to achieve your goal.

IMO, the praying mantis "switch hands" is the best bridge for striking art and the throwing art integration.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I believe not willing to accept defeat helped him to grow in his career. There is a good reason that he became IBM vice-president and I'm not. QAQ

I'm not sure that's true. It's easy to find cases where people won out because they wouldn't accept defeat (confirmation bias), but it's also easy to find people who lost badly because they woudln't accept defeat when it was imminent. There are a great many factors that go into success in any area of life, and this kind of oversimlification doesn't do justice to the issue.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

It's easy to find cases where people won out because they wouldn't accept defeat (confirmation bias), but it's also easy to find people who lost badly because they woudln't accept defeat when it was imminent.

I was beaten up badly by Bill Gates. Even today I still cannot accept my failure.

- Bill Gates took Apple Lisa desktop technology and succeeded in his Microsoft Window project.
- I took Xerox Star desktop technology (Apple Lisa technology came from Xerox Star technology) and failed in my IBM ACE project. QAQ

Apple Lisa:

Xerox Star:

 

[marvin8]

No block -> no clinch

Punch without block -> clinch happens often with boxers and grapplers (trained in MMA). So, I do not understand the statement "no block, no clinch. "

If you try to stay in the striking art area, boxing can help you WC. If you try to integrate striking art and throwing art, boxing cannot help you to achieve your goal.

Boxing and WC can help you get through the striking range to the clinch. Then, boxing would need to add takedowns.

IMO, the praying mantis "switch hands" is the best bridge for striking art and the throwing art integration.

The above sequence is three moves to one. This violates the action–reaction principle. Grabbing and pulling a jab is a low probability move.

The move below is one move. While Jeff's opponent steps to the right with her rear foot, he covers her guard (the opponent reacts by placing her weight on the back foot), sweeps and pushes into her weak angle—in one move.

https://imgur.com/BLZNe41

 

[Taiji Rebel]

A weakness in a system doesn't imply it's something those people need. Fencing has a very big weakness in the ground game. It's irrelevant to what fencers are working on, so it's irrelevant to fencers.

Same goes for distance running for most sprinters. It's an irrelevant weakness, unless you're interested in being able to run distance at times, in which case you'd want to get training in that skill.

So, if I decide to study TKD, any weakness in the system (such as a lack of ground game) isn't really relevant if I'm only interested in it for its own sake, or I want to compete in TKD competitions. But if I'm studying for overall fighting ability (or something like MMA competition), I'd need to know about that weakness in my training, so I can decide how (or, indeed, whether) to remediate it.

You are basically agreeing with my original point - all strengths and weaknesses are contextual - hence the example of the sprinter and marathoner using different training and nutrition to achieve their desired outcomes

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Punch without block -> clinch happens often with boxers and grapplers (trained in MMA). So, I do not understand the statement "no block, no clinch. "

Block - your arm contacts your opponent's arm.
Clinch - your arms tangle with (wrap around) your opponent's arms.

Without block, there will be no clinch.

The above sequence is three moves to one. This violates the action–reaction principle. Grabbing and pulling a jab is a low probability move.

I don't block a jab. I throw a fake punch, when my opponent blocks it, I pull his blocking arm.

The "switch hands" is 2 moves. When you pull your opponent's

- wrist, your other hand can punch him. If you are a striker, this is good enough.
- elbow and attack with other hand, it can be considered as 1 move.

If you can obtain a clinch, you have created punching opportunity. The other way around is not true. The throwing art is more complicate than the striking art.

 

[marvin8]

Block - your arm contacts your opponent's arm.
Clinch - your arms tangle with (wrap around) your opponent's arms.

Without block, there will be no clinch.

I still don't understand. Typical punch to clinch, without block.

I don't block a jab. I throw a fake punch, when my opponent blocks it, I pull his blocking arm.

The "switch hands" is 2 moves. When you pull your opponent's

- wrist, your other hand can punch him. If you are a striker, this is good enough.
- elbow and attack with other hand, it can be considered as 1 move.

If you can obtain a clinch, you have created punching opportunity. The other way around is not true. The throwing art is more complicate than the striking art.

Oh, got it. I've never seen anyone extend their arm exposing their face, while not moving their head to "block" a jab. Six ways to defend against a jab, no block.

You do three moves: 1) jab-grab 2) pull-step 3) switch hands, push, cut

 

[Taiji Rebel]

Cross-training is quite normal these days. From the responses, it is clear a lot of people are influenced by competition-fighting and sparring against other styles. This illustrates how the culture and environment alters the way we approach the martial arts. Western boxing is instrumental in a lot of training now - both the punching and the footwork. That makes sense because boxing has been around as a fighting-sport a lot longer than the modern martial arts tournaments.

 

[Steve]

..

 

[marvin8]

Oh, got it. I've never seen anyone extend their arm exposing their face, while not moving their head to "block" a jab. Six ways to defend against a jab, no block.

I meant to add that fighters may parry. catch, etc. jabs too. Some may just freeze with their guard covering their face. However, that is not advisable because the opponent could pull the guard down, grab and push, etc.

Here Usman pulls Masvidal's pull (step back) and parry, then KOs him.

Daniel Cormier enters clinch by controlling the hands, long guard, slipping, then head control to underhook (no block).

 

[Tony Dismukes]

If you try to integrate striking art and throwing art, boxing cannot help you to achieve your goal.

Boxing won't teach you how to throw, but it can absolutely help you get better at achieving a clinch from which to execute a throw. Becoming proficient at boxing has made me much better at getting the clinch against a striker.