Hybrid Arts

[Gerry Seymour]

My point was to say there are ways to argue against a poor argument without ad hominem, no more, no less.

Actually, calling it a "dumb analogy" isn't an ad hominem attack. Saying "you're dumb so the analogy is worthless" would be an ad hominem attack. Calling the analogy dumb is perhaps not the most polite way to word a refutation, but it is an attack on the argument, not the person.

 

[drop bear]

---Nothing wrong with this. But the two have a different biomechanic. Shifting back and forth between 2 different biomechanics can be confusing. It may not be instinctive enough when the pressure is own and you really need to use it. Go from a standing art to a ground-fighting/grappling art is an easy transition because they don't mix biomechanical methods....as would two different standing/striking arts.

So fighting combining ground and stand up is shifting between two different biomechanics?

Because people seem to be able to manage that.

 

[drop bear]

Actually, calling it a "dumb analogy" isn't an ad hominem attack. Saying "you're dumb so the analogy is worthless" would be an ad hominem attack. Calling the analogy dumb is perhaps not the most polite way to word a refutation, but it is an attack on the argument, not the person.

Dumb argument.

 

[Juany118]

Actually, calling it a "dumb analogy" isn't an ad hominem attack. Saying "you're dumb so the analogy is worthless" would be an ad hominem attack. Calling the analogy dumb is perhaps not the most polite way to word a refutation, but it is an attack on the argument, not the person.

You are actually correct. Perhaps I should have simply said "rude" response and "more polite" ways to address the issue. Thank you for the correction.

 

[geezer]

So fighting combining ground and stand up is shifting between two different biomechanics? ...Because people seem to be able to manage that.

Yep. And actually that's exactly what KPM said:

the two have a different biomechanic. Shifting back and forth between 2 different biomechanics can be confusing. It may not be instinctive enough when the pressure is own and you really need to use it. Go from a standing art to a ground-fighting/grappling art is an easy transition because they don't mix biomechanical methods....as would two different standing/striking arts.

I think he makes a very good point here. I don't find that grappling conflicts with my stand-up art of WC at all. My PCE/Latosa Escrima also works well with my WC, but some other FMAs I've trained did not. Two very different striking arts that have conflicting methods can be a problem. As KPM said, you don't want to have to decide between too many different ways of doing things when the pressure is on.

 

[Juany118]

Yep. And actually that's exactly what KPM said:



I think he makes a very good point here. I don't find that grappling conflicts with my stand-up art of WC at all. My PCE/Latosa Escrima also works well with my WC, but some other FMAs I've trained did not. Two very different striking arts that have conflicting methods can be a problem. As KPM said, you don't want to have to decide between too many different ways of doing things when the pressure is on.

I agree with the last bit, my issue was with the first bit.

Nothing wrong with this. But the two have a different biomechanic. Shifting back and forth between 2 different biomechanics can be confusing...

KPM appeared to assume, and I may have misread, that FMA was in a way universal and that part of that was a biomechanical incompatibility in terms of stand up striking. In my experience, it is quite easily to flow between L-I Kali and WC, they are very complimentary. Now I think part of this may come from the fact that, in reality, there are at least as many, if not more, styles of FMA than there are CMA. I have also found, from talking to more than a few Wing Chun Practitioners, that while my circumstance is uncommon (both taught in the same 90+ minute class) that studying and mixing both is not uncommon in the least.

In my experience I see a lot of similarities, at least with my Kali. While Kali may emphasize checking/tapping more than trapping, Kali still has a fair amount of trapping, the methods between the two are very similar, it's simply a matter of prioritization. I would even perhaps call hubud a "poor" man's chi sau, in some ways as well as it is trying to train some of the same concepts.

The only difference of real substance that I find is the footwork in Kali can be a lot more dynamic, but that really only comes forth full force when you are training with weapons in largo (well you need to step more if a sword or stick is coming at your head ) but the footwork itself changes as you pass back and forth between largo, medio and corto. So once you are in corto it isn't much different than my WC, it's small steps trying to get out of my opponent's centerline of attack so I can attack his center from a blindside/flank.

Now as I said, not all FMA's are the same. Mine is admittedly a hybrid and while it's takes checking and trapping from FMA and Silat, it also takes a more linear path to these goals, I suspect due to the influence of Kuntao which has it's origins in Southern CMA (Silat tends to be more circular). To illustrate the difference there is actually a video from back in the 70's, that i sadly lost. It showed Suro Mike Inay and Guro Dan Inosanto flow sparring with empty hands. Guro Dan was very linear and direct where as Suro Mike used more oblique attacks. Both were clearly effective, but Guro Dan's was also clearly more compatible with WC.

So, tl;dr, @KPM I totally agree with your last point, as to the first point, mileage may vary due to the plethora of FMA styles, both born in the Home Country and then compounded by some of the styles that were developed/refined in the States.

 

[KPM]

So fighting combining ground and stand up is shifting between two different biomechanics?

Because people seem to be able to manage that.

Yes it is. And people manage it quite well! But my point was that they are so different that your responses don't confuse them. At least not as likely as you might if, say, you go to counter and punch and suddenly your mind says "should I do a Kali 'brush, grab, sweep' motion while angling off-line or a Wing chun 'Tan Da' motion while driving up the center?"

 

[KPM]

KPM appeared to assume, and I may have misread, that FMA was in a way universal and that part of that was a biomechanical incompatibility in terms of stand up striking. In my experience, it is quite easily to flow between L-I Kali and WC, they are very complimentary.

---I was speaking in a general sense, not about any specific art. But if your L-I Kali and WC are so similar, when you get in the flow of things how do you distinguish between the two? And if you can't distinguish between the two, have you not then created a "hybrid" version of both?


So once you are in corto it isn't much different than my WC, it's small steps trying to get out of my opponent's centerline of attack so I can attack his center from a blindside/flank.

---So if you are doing empty-hand and moving smoothly from corto with Wing Chun to medio or largo with Kali, is that not a hybrid method?

 

[Juany118]

KPM appeared to assume, and I may have misread, that FMA was in a way universal and that part of that was a biomechanical incompatibility in terms of stand up striking. In my experience, it is quite easily to flow between L-I Kali and WC, they are very complimentary.

---I was speaking in a general sense, not about any specific art. But if your L-I Kali and WC are so similar, when you get in the flow of things how do you distinguish between the two? And if you can't distinguish between the two, have you not then created a "hybrid" version of both?


So once you are in corto it isn't much different than my WC, it's small steps trying to get out of my opponent's centerline of attack so I can attack his center from a blindside/flank.

---So if you are doing empty-hand and moving smoothly from corto with Wing Chun to medio or largo with Kali, is that not a hybrid method?

I would say not necessarily because, as I said, at its Hart what I do is Kali. Do I use some WC techniques in Corto? Yep. But does WC do gunting? Nope. A hybrid, imo, is like breeding a Lion with a Tiger (when has happened btw). We don't do that, we train WC and Kali separately, and only have some bleed over in a fight/sparing scenario, because as I said many of the techniques between the two arts (depending on you FMA school) are damn similar.

You can simply Google search how many people find specific FMA styles to share methodology (not dogma) with WC. Is it due to biomechanics? Is it due to the constant flow, historically of people and ideas from India and China to South Asia and the Archipelagos? No clue. The point is, if you study WC next to the right "other" MA (I can't imagine FMA is alone) you would be surprised at, while WC has some uniqueness to it no doubt, just how much it shares with other arts as well.

Then you add in what @Tony Dismukes said. The techniques he adds to his technique is built on NGA, the techniques added from WC are built on Kali, and tbh the techniques aren't that many that are unique. The "forms" we use to practice maybe, but the practical application, not so much.

Maybe I see the distinction because we learn each separately before we do practical application. I do not exaggerate btw. One day a class will be 50/50 (meaning 45 minutes WC and then 45 minutes Kali), another day all Kali another day all WC, other days everything in between. If I test at my school I only test in Kali, if I want to test WC I have to drive a hour to our "mother school" that is how seperate we keep them BUT they seem siblings in practice, at worst 1st cousins. I don't know... My school is weird I will admit and so maybe it gives me a different perspective. To me a "hybrid" is a lion/tiger cross breed (yes they exist), these two arts, as I experience them are from the same family. /Shrug.

PS...this, again, doesn't universally apply to all FMA, I only know the FMA I study.

 

[geezer]

@KPM -- I believe my experience linking FMA to WC is similar Juany's. At largo, especially with a weapon I use larger, front-weighted escrima footwork. As I close, especially empty handed, I find myself flowing into WC stances and footwork. Both systems work off a triangular pattern. If you look at the FMA "male-triangle" for example, you see that the farther out from your opponent ( who's at the apex of the triangle) you are, the larger the movements. As you close towards your opponent's center, that is approaching the apex, the movements become very tight and efficient, like WC.

If you set up YGKYM near the apex of the triangle or stand in a longer stance toward the base of the triangle you will see what I mean. Does this make what I do a hybrid? I don't know. WC weapons also work at longer ranges and use similarly expanded stances as you increase your range.

So for now I'm not calling it a hybrid because a) I don't think I'm doing anything special that isn't already in the system ...more or less, and b) because I really don't think the world needs yet another "new" system when people don't grasp what's already there. Oh, and most of all because c) I don't want to give any more ammo to that "true believer" contingent (if they ever show up again) who like to say that everything we do is diluted, and isn't the "real WC"!

 

[drop bear]

Yes it is. And people manage it quite well! But my point was that they are so different that your responses don't confuse them. At least not as likely as you might if, say, you go to counter and punch and suddenly your mind says "should I do a Kali 'brush, grab, sweep' motion while angling off-line or a Wing chun 'Tan Da' motion while driving up the center?"

Switching between mechanics is like anything else. If you are unfamiliar doing it then it will be uncomfortable.

If you practice it. It becomes more natural.

 

[KPM]

I would say not necessarily because, as I said, at its Hart what I do is Kali. Do I use some WC techniques in Corto? Yep. But does WC do gunting? Nope. A hybrid, imo, is like breeding a Lion with a Tiger (when has happened btw). We don't do that, we train WC and Kali separately, and only have some bleed over in a fight/sparing scenario, because as I said many of the techniques between the two arts (depending on you FMA school) are damn similar.

.

Well, I am a big advocate of the idea that you should fight the way you train and train the way you fight. That is the most efficient way do things in terms of both time management and learning theory. So if you are finding your Kali and your Wing Chun merging when you are working on application in a fight/sparring scenario, then doesn't it make sense to specifically train what you find actually emerging under pressure? I would say that both you and Geezer are only about half a step away from a hybrid system.

 

[Juany118]

Well, I am a big advocate of the idea that you should fight the way you train and train the way you fight. That is the most efficient way do things in terms of both time management and learning theory. So if you are finding your Kali and your Wing Chun merging when you are working on application in a fight/sparring scenario, then doesn't it make sense to specifically train what you find actually emerging under pressure? I would say that both you and Geezer are only about half a step away from a hybrid system.

Well to the first part... I do indeed agree that you train how you fight, heck I have had that pounded into my head due to my career choices for 25 years to the point it is a way of life. The above system I explained to you actually makes that work though. Many times during class we will do a WC, of Kali technique and Sifu will point out that the same technique or principle exists in the other art. Now this isn't to say they aren't unique arts with unique techniques but the two are so similar that there really is no issue. We punch the same, palm strike the same, biu jee the same, kick the same. A "check" is the same a pak, the trapping is also the same, we just tend to check more in Kali because we focus more on "gunting" (limb destruction). Then, trapped into not being able to get a weapon (we do a lot of training on using open hand combat to provide an opening to draw a knife as an example, we use A LOT of elbows, either for further gunting or strikes, the elbows being little different to WC.

It's then interesting to then watch how from there the WC unique techniques flows naturally. If you check/pak and then punch, in Corto, if the opponent's other hand is coming, your punch naturally flows into a tan (as one example). With so much shared to begin with, and the way you easily flow between them, when you train in both as individual and complete systems you are really training as you fight. The thing is the mindset is Kali when we spar.

As for your last I will not deny that part of what makes what I learn not a hybrid is how we learn it. If Sifu simply filled in gaps in Kali with specific WC techniques then I would say "yep, hybrid" but even if the day is going to be 100% Kali, we always warm up with SLT.

Also, as geezer said, simply because what we put into practice may have at it's heart Kali, the WC we study is WC in its totality. I am sure you recall how much in the way of flack I caught on the one WC thread that the WC I study under GM Cheung isn't "real" WC to start with though and I don't want to provide even more ammo. I guess the easiest way for me to describe my current education is that "I learn WC and Kali as separate and complete arts but when I fight it is Kali because my Kali doesn't feel like a different species to WC, rather they feel like cousins.

 

[drop bear]

Well, I am a big advocate of the idea that you should fight the way you train and train the way you fight. That is the most efficient way do things in terms of both time management and learning theory. So if you are finding your Kali and your Wing Chun merging when you are working on application in a fight/sparring scenario, then doesn't it make sense to specifically train what you find actually emerging under pressure? I would say that both you and Geezer are only about half a step away from a hybrid system.

You would think. But it tends not to be the case. This comes up in mma a lot. When they do things like gi jujitsu. Which intuitively you really shouldn't bother with.

My best guess is that you are isolating skill sets and so forcing competency within a certain dynamic.

Then when you are free to move as you want you have developed better skills in which to pursue that.

It is the other concept of train hard fight easy.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

you should fight the way you train and train the way you fight.

I agree you should fight the way you train. But you should train "much harder" than the way you fight.

I used to believe in both until one day I felt that I didn't get tired enough by using this approach. If you train as you fight, you may not push your body to the maximum limitation.

For example, when you fight, if you throw 3 punches, because you want to throw as fast as you can, your body may not be twisted to the maximum. Before your body has extend to the maximum, you have already pull your body back and send out your next punch.

IMO, you should train "big" and fight "small".

 

[Juany118]

I agree you should fight the way you train. But you should train "much harder" than the way you fight.

I used to believe in both until one day I felt that I didn't get tired enough by using this approach. If you train as you fight, you may not push your body to the maximum limitation.

For example, when you fight, if you throw 3 punches, because you want to throw as fast as you can, your body may not be twisted to the maximum. Before your body has extend to the maximum, you have already pull your body back and send out your next punch.

IMO, you should train "big" and fight "small".

By definition though "train like you fight" means going all out though. Example, when we spar Sifu doesn't stand for people "dancing around." He may limit us to specific targets, such as limbs depending on the protection we are wearing because a thrust from a solid core foam covered stick, plastic sword or knife can still do serious damage. This isnt a big deal though because one of the main tactics of Kali is to focus on attacking the limbs, so it is still "training like you fight." Regardless he expects you to go all out. If you aren't completely smoked when you are done sparing you did something wrong.

The proof is also in the bruises and swelling that sometimes happens, even with the padding. More than once when I got home and was getting changed my wife has asked "how did that happen?" I tell her and her response is "I don't know if I like you doing this." She knows how much I love it though so she gets over it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

By definition though "train like you fight" means going all out though.

Here are some examples that you should train "harder" than you fight.

To train "how to break your opponent's elbow joint", you may need to go into the woods and break 1,000 tree branches. In fighting, you may never break your opponent's elbow joint in your life time (unless you want to go to jail for it).

On the wrestling mat, you may only need to deal with a 200 lb opponent. But in training, you will need to train with a 300 lb weight equipment.

When you throw your opponent, you may only need to bend your body this low.

But in training, you will need to bend your body much lower.

 

[Juany118]

Here are some examples that you should train "harder" than you fight.

To train "how to break your opponent's elbow joint", you may need to go into the woods and break 1,000 tree branches. In fighting, you may never break your opponent's elbow joint in your life time (unless you want to go to jail for it).

On the wrestling mat, you may only need to deal with a 200 lb opponent. But in training, you will need to train with a 300 lb weight equipment.

When you throw your opponent, you may only need to bend your body this low.

But in training, you will need to bend your body much lower.

Well first let me explain my training regimen. I also make sure I do lots of cardio (someone will always be stronger), heavy bag work (to be used to hitting something that may well move less than the "average" human etc. Beyond that though beyond going all out I dont think there is much you can do. If I don't have a 300 lbs person to practice armbands/locks and takedowns on, I can't train for that. All I can do is go all out on the 200lbs guy and know that since I went all in on 200lbs, it will work on a 300lbs person since I am not trying to lift them I am using leverage. The same goes for how far I may have to drop for a shorter opponent. With the techniques I am trained to use, simply bending down, even using a resistance band isn't going to help me because the dynamics of taking a person down using many of the techniques I study. Without the weight of a resisting subject it is almost impossible, imo, to be prepared to properly take a person down while still maintaining your own center of balance and control. The methods you note (the gon twisting and the last photo) I think are excellent for strength training, flexibility and balance, all of which are very important in the Martial Arts (another reason I like using a heavy bag and speed bag, to train generic strength, balance, speed and accuracy.) But in terms of a direct connection to properly performing techniques, at least for my arts I don't see the connection.

 

[drop bear]

Well first let me explain my training regimen. I also make sure I do lots of cardio (someone will always be stronger), heavy bag work (to be used to hitting something that may well move less than the "average" human etc. Beyond that though beyond going all out I dont think there is much you can do. If I don't have a 300 lbs person to practice armbands/locks and takedowns on, I can't train for that. All I can do is go all out on the 200lbs guy and know that since I went all in on 200lbs, it will work on a 300lbs person since I am not trying to lift them I am using leverage. The same goes for how far I may have to drop for a shorter opponent. With the techniques I am trained to use, simply bending down, even using a resistance band isn't going to help me because the dynamics of taking a person down using many of the techniques I study. Without the weight of a resisting subject it is almost impossible, imo, to be prepared to properly take a person down while still maintaining your own center of balance and control. The methods you note (the gon twisting and the last photo) I think are excellent for strength training, flexibility and balance, all of which are very important in the Martial Arts (another reason I like using a heavy bag and speed bag, to train generic strength, balance, speed and accuracy.) But in terms of a direct connection to properly performing techniques, at least for my arts I don't see the connection.

To perform a movement correctly takes more than just knowing the movement your body also has to be able to physically do that movement. And sometimes that will take some dedicated training.

Hence why people do things like stability,flexability and core training along with their strength and cardio.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

---So if you are doing empty-hand and moving smoothly from corto with Wing Chun to medio or largo with Kali, is that not a hybrid method?

I'd say not. It's just two arts with principles that mate well. I actually know an instructor here (Wally Jay lineage, IIRC) who combined Japanese Jujutsu with FMA in what he calls Integrated Martial Arts. His is a hybrid, but when I studied with him for a while, I wasn't hybridizing - the movements were close enough to things I already knew that I simply used those similar movements to execute the techniques. What I did was integrate the new techniques with what I already knew. What Brian did was create a hybrid of at least two arts. The difference is that I didn't systematize what he taught with what I teach. I simply picked up a few new ways to apply the principles.