How can you become a good fighter if self-defense is your goal?

[dvcochran]

The only difference between a 'sport' art and a 'non sport' art is one of them is actually doing it.

Besides, TKD is also a 'sport' art, with the key difference that sport tkd no longer in any way resembles fighting, where as mma is the closest possible approximation.

Read my posts. I have been knocked out twice and broken ribs from my Olympic run. It is a fighting style, just like boxing, wrestling, Muay Thai, and yes MMA.
Until you know through experience what you are talking about you will come off sounding much smarter by saying nothing at all.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

lol.. If that's who is chasing me, then I don't want to hide. I want to know where that guys is at every moment. I want reduce my visibility while maintaining my visibility on where the threat is. If I couldn't do it visually then I would need to use sound to help keep track of where the danger is.

I definitely wouldn't hide in a cupboard. There's no escape once you do that. lol

that was more of a joke than a serious point.

lol don't make me break out my sparring videos. I've been doing kung fu for so long now that I don't remember how I used to fight before kung fu. With the exception of the karate stuff. Both Karate and Kung fu uses Kata / forms. I can actually use the things that are in my kung fu form. Not all of it but a lot of it. The stuff I'm not able to use is because I don't understand it in the correct context of application.

There are lots of things that I see in kata that are actually used in fighting. My opinion on using Kata or Form in fighting, is that you have to spar against a system that is different than what you train, and you have to get into the ring to spar so that you can understand the technique better. When it comes to using Kata and forms when fighting, you have to understand the timing that's required and the only way to do that is to spar.

Here's a Jow Ga instructor explaining the form.

You will find it really difficult to fight using the techniques found in kata or forms if this is the the limits of your training. You can't learn it without sparring and you'll learn it faster if you try to use it against someone outside of your system.

See now, this is a argument i can get behind. I dont dispute you can use varying amounts of it (pending style and how its taught). Its just unless you learn how it applies to actual fighting its useless to learn it. Spirtual forms without you beliving in the relgion or spirtual system being done is just a inferior form of exercise if compared to tradtional means of doing it. (running, pushups, squats etc) and some condtioning ones can be inferior to just having somone run 5km every week. That would caterorise it as fluff for this argument in my viewpoint as its usleess to learn by either inferiorty or has no relation to the goal of figthing or not enough of a direct impact of your ability to fight.

And as you can probbly bring up several whcih do kata or fluff and make good fighters, you ca bring up some that dont and do the same thing.

 

[JowGaWolf]

that was more of a joke than a serious point.

I know. The joke wasn't lost on me. I just know that some people would actually hide where there is no escape or do things like fight with there back against the wall thinking that it's a good choice, so that comment was more for their benefit than anything else. I try to keep in mind that other people read our comments and some may not understand certain risks that come with hiding.

 

[JowGaWolf]

that was more of a joke than a serious point.




See now, this is a argument i can get behind. I dont dispute you can use varying amounts of it (pending style and how its taught). Its just unless you learn how it applies to actual fighting its useless to learn it. Spirtual forms without you beliving in the relgion or spirtual system being done is just a inferior form of exercise if compared to tradtional means of doing it. (running, pushups, squats etc) and some condtioning ones can be inferior to just having somone run 5km every week. That would caterorise it as fluff for this argument in my viewpoint as its usleess to learn by either inferiorty or has no relation to the goal of figthing or not enough of a direct impact of your ability to fight.

And as you can probbly bring up several whcih do kata or fluff and make good fighters, you ca bring up some that dont and do the same thing.

I guess for me, fluff is anything that doesn't serve or contribute to a fighting function. Standing in horse stance contributes to a fighting function so that wouldn't be fluff to me even though you don't actually fight in horse the same way that one would stand in horse with fist chambered

 

[John Codero]

I train Five Animal Kung Fu in Cantonese Ng Ying Kung Fu. Our teacher sifu Patrick van Steen is teaching the art as follows:

- warming up, body conditioning, flexibility
- Shadow Boxing: Kicks and Punches
- Five Animal Kung Fu Forms and Weapons
- Five Animal Qin Na: Selfdefense techniques with a resisting partner
- Five Animal Kung Fu Sanda sparring

Students of our Ng Ying Kung Fu school participate in Form as Sparring Championships and some do kickboxing matches as well.

So i think it is really also the way a teacher is teaching the art.

 

[Steve]

Are you arguing that adding fitness training to fight skill training isn't going to improve fight capability?

I'm saying that tacking things onto something doesn't necessarily add value to that thing. A Honda Civic with a big fin has more, but is it a more complete race car? Fitness is a good thing whether or not you can fight. If you're learning to fight, sure it will help. If you're not learning to fight but think you are, fitness won't magically make the difference.

Same song, same tune.

you say this like it's a bad thing. Simple, reasonable, common sense points don't tend to shift much over time.

 

[Steve]

The only difference between a 'sport' art and a 'non sport' art is one of them is actually doing it.

Besides, TKD is also a 'sport' art, with the key difference that sport tkd no longer in any way resembles fighting, where as mma is the closest possible approximation.

The issue isn't that it's a sport. TKD is developing actual proficiency, just maybe not the skills you would prefer. if there is a problem with the ruleset, the answer isn't to abandon application.

 

[jobo]

I'm saying that tacking things onto something doesn't necessarily add value to that thing. A Honda Civic with a big fin has more, but is it a more complete race car? Fitness is a good thing whether or not you can fight. If you're learning to fight, sure it will help. If you're not learning to fight but think you are, fitness won't magically make the difference. you say this like it's a bad thing. Simple, reasonable, common sense points don't tend to shift much over time.

but thats completely wrong, fitness will make a much more of a difference than any fighting skill you develop, at least in the short term

you can go from basket case to extremely fit ( and strong) in 6 months, your fighting skills wont develop faster than that to the point you can deal with someone extremely fit and strong, if they are not fit and strong you dont need fighting skill anyway

much of this discussion is people ignoring the importance of physical conditioning to self defence or fighting in general.

if some out of condition guy or girl asked me about learning self defence i would direct them to the nearest gym and say come back in 6 months and we can talk.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm saying that tacking things onto something doesn't necessarily add value to that thing. A Honda Civic with a big fin has more, but is it a more complete race car? Fitness is a good thing whether or not you can fight. If you're learning to fight, sure it will help. If you're not learning to fight but think you are, fitness won't magically make the difference. you say this like it's a bad thing. Simple, reasonable, common sense points don't tend to shift much over time.

So, you're talking about something other than what you quoted. Got it.

 

[Steve]

So, you're talking about something other than what you quoted. Got it.

You're very snarky today. Drink some coffee and post when you're in a better mood.

 

[Martial D]

i was tkd kicked so hard that despite the pad i was holding i had seriously bruised ribs, it looked like a perfectly good fighting technique to me ?

Sure. TKD kicking technique is amazing.

But modern sport tkd is a whole different animal. It's a lot of tip tapping with no punching defence..as it's really not needed.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You're very snarky today. Drink some coffee and post when you're in a better mood.

You jumped in to make a point about non-fight training when I mentioned that fight training with fitness would be superior to fight training without it. Not sure what's snarky about pointing that out.

Basically, you appear to be taking every opportunity to try to point out that you think what someone around here teaches doesn't include fight training, even when that's not relevant to the point at hand.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sure. TKD kicking technique is amazing.

But modern sport tkd is a whole different animal. It's a lot of tip tapping with no punching defence..as it's really not needed.

Yeah, rulesets matter. What works in that type of TKD competition might (or might not) fail in other circumstances.

 

[Steve]

You jumped in to make a point about non-fight training when I mentioned that fight training with fitness would be superior to fight training without it. Not sure what's snarky about pointing that out.

Basically, you appear to be taking every opportunity to try to point out that you think what someone around here teaches doesn't include fight training, even when that's not relevant to the point at hand.

My point is universal to all training. It isn't specific to fighting. Just the opposite. Point remains that adding more to something doesn't necessarily make it more complete. As I said before, sometimes more is just more. You took a general comment very personally.

And when you take every general comment personally, I'm not surprised you think it's personal.

 

[Steve]

You jumped in to make a point about non-fight training when I mentioned that fight training with fitness would be superior to fight training without it. Not sure what's snarky about pointing that out.

Basically, you appear to be taking every opportunity to try to point out that you think what someone around here teaches doesn't include fight training, even when that's not relevant to the point at hand.

Here's the thing I really don't think you understand. This is an academic discussion that you continue to personalize and then you take personally. This may shock you, but I really don't give to squats about your training. Sure, I don't think you're qualified to teach self defense, but I don't expect to change your mind and have said at least a couple times in this thread that we can just agree to disagree. But, you seem compelled to convince me not about self defense training in general, but that you specifically are qualified to teach self defense. And then you get butt hurt when I, miraculously, still don't agree. You say snarky things about how I'm singing the same song. Well, of course, man.

You're like a flat earther complaining that I'm just not coming around to agreeing that the earth is flat. Of course not. Why would a reasonable person come around to an unreasonable position? And yes, I think your position is unreasonable. You're trying to convince me that a person can not just learn something, but become qualified to teach something that they have no real experience doing. It's as simple as that.

In the end, this isn't about you. It's an academic discussion in which you keep using yourself, for some reason, as proof of something that isn't so. Which invites response, which you then take personally.

So, I would still suggest you get a nice cup of coffee, pet your cat, do something fun and return to the thread with just a little bit of perspective. It's not about you, unless you make it about you.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

to teach something that they have no real experience doing.

This issue bother me big time.

A: Today I'll teach you how to take/knock your opponent down.
B: Dear master! Have you ever taken/knock down your opponent?
A: Yes! I have taken/knocked down many opponents.

A: Today I'll teach you how to defend yourself.
B: Dear master! Have you ever defend yourself on the street?
A: No! I haven't.
B: What make you think that you are qualified to teach me the self-defense?

A: Today I'll teach you how to use a sword.
B: Dear master! Have you ever used your sword to hurt someone?
A: No! I haven't.
B: What make you think that you are qualified to teach me the sword fighting?

 

[Steve]

Sure. TKD kicking technique is amazing.

But modern sport tkd is a whole different animal. It's a lot of tip tapping with no punching defence..as it's really not needed.

I'd be very interested in an experiment where sport TKD guys and non-sport TKD guys get in a ring and with some reasonable rules just see what's what. By reasonable, I mean, safe, but full contact and favoring the TKD skill set. Try to keep the level of experience, size, etc as fair as possible. I think that would be very interesting.

My money is that, by a large margin, in a competition that tests TKD skills (kicking, punching, maybe take downs) the sport folks will adapt to full contact much faster than the non-sport guys. That's my theory.

 

[Dirty Dog]

My money is that, by a large margin, in a competition that tests TKD skills (kicking, punching, maybe take downs) the sport folks will adapt to full contact much faster than the non-sport guys. That's my theory.

You apparently assume that TKD schools that are not sport oriented do not do full contact sparring. Do you have a basis for that assumption? Because it certainly doesn't match my own experience.

 

[Martial D]

I'd be very interested in an experiment where sport TKD guys and non-sport TKD guys get in a ring and with some reasonable rules just see what's what. By reasonable, I mean, safe, but full contact and favoring the TKD skill set. Try to keep the level of experience, size, etc as fair as possible. I think that would be very interesting.

My money is that, by a large margin, in a competition that tests TKD skills (kicking, punching, maybe take downs) the sport folks will adapt to full contact much faster than the non-sport guys. That's my theory.

Well sure. All else being equal, one group will understand distance and timing, and the other will not.

 

[Steve]

You apparently assume that TKD schools that are not sport oriented do not do full contact sparring. Do you have a basis for that assumption? Because it certainly doesn't match my own experience.

Not assuming anything. I'm proposing what I think would be an interesting experiment and sharing my hypothesis.