FMAT: What works and what doesn't...

[Clark Kent]

What works and what doesn't...
By geezer - 04-18-2009 02:48 PM
Originally Posted at: FMATalk
====================

I've been fortunate enough to catch a glimpse of several very different approaches to FMAs over the last year or so. And, for that I owe a debt of gratitude to FMA Talk member Michael JB. He has organized several well attended FMA "gatherings" in our area in which skilled proponents from a variety of FMA systems shared their arts with the public...for free! Cool, huh? Anyway, based on my brief encounters at the "Gatherings" and elsewhere, I noticed that some arts (or at least their proponents) stress very simple, practical techniques. Others teach complicated, multi-step sequences that encompass blocks and counter-strikes leading into joint-locks, disarms, and a variety of submission moves.

I come from a background that stresses simplicty (and I still get it wrong a lot of times!), so I really enjoyed having the opportunity to play with some of the more complicated sequences from these other systems. Still, if I had to defend myself agains an actual attack in real-time, I'd stick to the simple stuff. I'm convinced that the complicated stuff could really backfire. Masters can pull this stuff off on a compliant student of vastly inferior skill. But I'd bet that even they would be wise to knock someone silly first, before taking the chance to try this fancy stuff on the streeet. Any thoughts?


Read More...


------------------------------------
FMATalk.com Post Bot - FMA Feed

 

[kaizasosei]

Good points. Too true. It takes quite a bit of experience to know what works and what doesn't. Trick is also to know what will work or not work in a given situation because mostly all moves have some constructive application in a certain situation.

j