Hybrid Arts

[drop bear]

There are nuances. The biggest blurring I have is between Kali and WC since my current teacher teaches both in a manner where the transition from standing WC to using Kali to avoid going to ground is pretty seemless. The main point was though, once on the ground, Wing Chun is lost because it has nothing.

In terms of unarmed and armed TWC and the Kali I study are very close so the swap to unarmed vs weapon doesn't take a lot. It's more a mind set change. WC tends to be singularly "tight" in its thought and movement. Kali "widens" out a bit naturally because of a different mindset. WC has weapons but the main focus is on the open hand. Kali is actually an MMA in and of itself but it assumes people are armed or can quickly arm themselves and thus it widens but that is more of a mental switch than a technique based one.

Studying those two arts side by side actually made me notice something. Physically they are very similar however the mindset changes. So if unarmed I think "check" near the elbow is a punch is coming in. If the other guy is armed my body uses the exact same "check" but my brain/instinct tells me to do it closer to the wrist with wider footwork because of the knife. So sometimes the same movement, with a different trained mindset mindset making a small alteration is all it takes.

I treat them all as a lock I am trying to pick. If I get the right sequences I dismantle the other guys defences. And the other guy will have a bad day. Mindset for me doesnt change.

It is just learning the basic rules of the situation.

 

[drop bear]

-------------------------------------- Simple-
I dont import other systems into my wing chun.
Nota condemnation of others who do.

You need a lot of influences to practice an art. It does not exist in a vacuum.

There is a thought process where you identify what is by exploring what isnt.

So you can work out why the world is round by looking at the world if it was donut shaped and comparing the differences.

 

[Vajramusti]

You need a lot of influences to practice an art. It does not exist in a vacuum.

There is a thought process where you identify what is by exploring what isnt.

So you can work out why the world is round by looking at the world if it was donut shaped and comparing the differences.

-----------------------------------------------
I understand that. I never said that one shouldnt explore that.You can do that by confronting people from other styles.

 

[Juany118]

-----------------------------------------------
I understand that. I never said that one shouldnt explore that.You can do that by confronting people from other styles.

I think this is one of the things people miss. TMAs that have been around for centuries worked in real conflict. Otherwise they would not have lasted for centuries. The problem rises in that one of the reasons they worked was not just because they were pressure tested BUT because they were very often pressure tested against other styles. Without challenging other styles you can end up on the short end if you suddenly find yourself forced into such an encounter.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think this is one of the things people miss. TMAs that have been around for centuries worked in real conflict. Otherwise they would not have lasted for centuries. The problem rises in that one of the reasons they worked was not just because they were pressure tested BUT because they were very often pressure tested against other styles. Without challenging other styles you can end up on the short end if you suddenly find yourself forced into such an encounter.

They were also developed for the period they were in. While the body mechanics don't change, the types of attacks they'll face do. And the art - if being used for combat effectiveness - should continue to do what it did in the beginning: explore what does and doesn't work against what it's most likely to face. Even as new as NGA is, if I ignored the changing landscape of our culture, I'd keep NGA exactly as it was when Morita Shodo assembled it, rather than continually looking at what else is available to better refine it. I have access to things Morita didn't have access to (because of YouTube and our more mobile society, and the fact that I live in the US rather than an island in Asia). I do what the founder of NGA would have done if he were developing the art today.

 

[drop bear]

They were also developed for the period they were in. While the body mechanics don't change, the types of attacks they'll face do. And the art - if being used for combat effectiveness - should continue to do what it did in the beginning: explore what does and doesn't work against what it's most likely to face. Even as new as NGA is, if I ignored the changing landscape of our culture, I'd keep NGA exactly as it was when Morita Shodo assembled it, rather than continually looking at what else is available to better refine it. I have access to things Morita didn't have access to (because of YouTube and our more mobile society, and the fact that I live in the US rather than an island in Asia). I do what the founder of NGA would have done if he were developing the art today.

By the way. On that note of time tested by centuries of whatever. That vibravision stuff would qualify.

I think the methods of testing are a bit stricter these days as well.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

By the way. On that note of time tested by centuries of whatever. That vibravision stuff would qualify.

I think the methods of testing are a bit stricter these days as well.

I can't speak to what the validation was back in those times. When I read Funakoshi's accounts of what his training was like (with no supporting evidence, so have to be skeptical), it certainly sounds like they went at it pretty hard in his time. I remember reading accounts (perhaps apocryphal, never had a need to research it further) of Japanese warriors using captured enemies to try out techniques. If that kind of stuff is true, they were pretty thorough back then. If not, they may have been pretty lax. I just don't personally have any solid evidence they were any more consistent, softer, or harder than we are today.

 

[Juany118]

I can't speak to what the validation was back in those times. When I read Funakoshi's accounts of what his training was like (with no supporting evidence, so have to be skeptical), it certainly sounds like they went at it pretty hard in his time. I remember reading accounts (perhaps apocryphal, never had a need to research it further) of Japanese warriors using captured enemies to try out techniques. If that kind of stuff is true, they were pretty thorough back then. If not, they may have been pretty lax. I just don't personally have any solid evidence they were any more consistent, softer, or harder than we are today.

And then you can go to the HK roof top fights where it was pretty much make up the rules as you go. I THINK @drop bear may have been talking about a standardization of sorts that we have now in competitive martial arts. Thing is more than a couple TMAs were actually Military TMAs so they were standardized by necessity as well.

If he is talking about just pressure testing in general being better... When a National Government (China) in the early 20th century has to outlaw Lei Tai because too many people are dying. Yeah that's pressure testing. The Lei Tai of today is not of that leading into the 20th century. It was often literally no holds barred then and in those cases it is not a myth death waivers were required.

 

[wayfaring]

My viewpoint on this topic has changed over time. My primary art is wing chun. My secondary art is BJJ or submission grappling. I used to try and find the universal concepts both and cross-apply them. It rarely worked. Once I had solid fundamentals down in each, there are a few situations to cross apply concepts. But very few compared to the many where the fundamentals from one don't work in the other.

Currently I appreciate each art for what it is. I enjoy both. People say "what about when you spar? Aren't you confused? How do you put them together/"

Basically, I don't put them together. Wing chun is a close quarter striking art. BJJ is a close quarter grappling art. They have different goals and aims. For sparring of a striking, or MMA nature, I approach with my primary art, until the point where I find myself in a situation that my application of my primary art isn't working, then I may drop back to my secondary art. And in BJJ you spar every class, so I learned to do that too.

In a self defense situation, my natural reaction will be my primary art. I will stick to that until it doesn't work for me or I'm outside of it's context (i.e. I get taken down). Then the secondary kicks in.

 

[drop bear]

I can't speak to what the validation was back in those times. When I read Funakoshi's accounts of what his training was like (with no supporting evidence, so have to be skeptical), it certainly sounds like they went at it pretty hard in his time. I remember reading accounts (perhaps apocryphal, never had a need to research it further) of Japanese warriors using captured enemies to try out techniques. If that kind of stuff is true, they were pretty thorough back then. If not, they may have been pretty lax. I just don't personally have any solid evidence they were any more consistent, softer, or harder than we are today.

You look at some of those cultures they are still using magic charms. That have also battlefield tested.

So i tend to take that reasoning with a grain of salt.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

My viewpoint on this topic has changed over time. My primary art is wing chun. My secondary art is BJJ or submission grappling. I used to try and find the universal concepts both and cross-apply them. It rarely worked. Once I had solid fundamentals down in each, there are a few situations to cross apply concepts. But very few compared to the many where the fundamentals from one don't work in the other.

Currently I appreciate each art for what it is. I enjoy both. People say "what about when you spar? Aren't you confused? How do you put them together/"

Basically, I don't put them together. Wing chun is a close quarter striking art. BJJ is a close quarter grappling art. They have different goals and aims. For sparring of a striking, or MMA nature, I approach with my primary art, until the point where I find myself in a situation that my application of my primary art isn't working, then I may drop back to my secondary art. And in BJJ you spar every class, so I learned to do that too.

In a self defense situation, my natural reaction will be my primary art. I will stick to that until it doesn't work for me or I'm outside of it's context (i.e. I get taken down). Then the secondary kicks in.

I think the reason you couldn't find common principles is that you were looking at striking vs. grappling. Within NGA, there aren't common principles between the striking side and the grappling side. There are, however, principles that bridge. An example is breaking the attacker's structure. In striking, I want to drive his body off the spine (by driving the head back, perhaps). In grappling, I want to do the same, perhaps by drawing his arm forward to bring his shoulder forward and down.

There are principles that cross many (most?, all?) fighting systems. Hybrid arts are built on those principles, using techniques from various sources that link together and bridge easily. WC striking looks to me like a good fit for linking with a grappling art.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You look at some of those cultures they are still using magic charms. That have also battlefield tested.

So i tend to take that reasoning with a grain of salt.

Which reasoning? The part where I said I didn't have any significant evidence either way? The part where I said I couldn't speak to their validation methods?

 

[Juany118]

I think the reason you couldn't find common principles is that you were looking at striking vs. grappling. Within NGA, there aren't common principles between the striking side and the grappling side. There are, however, principles that bridge. An example is breaking the attacker's structure. In striking, I want to drive his body off the spine (by driving the head back, perhaps). In grappling, I want to do the same, perhaps by drawing his arm forward to bring his shoulder forward and down.

There are principles that cross many (most?, all?) fighting systems. Hybrid arts are built on those principles, using techniques from various sources that link together and bridge easily. WC striking looks to me like a good fit for linking with a grappling art.

I agree but there may be an issue. If you are referring to the video I posted as an example of WC striking, all Lineages aren't the same and some people may look at Sifu Keith doing that Jamming entry from which you can either continue to strike or transition to control/takedowns and say "that's supposed to be WC?" In some quarters TWC is seen as a red headed step child thanks to lineage politics. /Shrug

 

[Juany118]

You look at some of those cultures they are still using magic charms. That have also battlefield tested.

So i tend to take that reasoning with a grain of salt.

The magic charm thing is a non-sequitur. What was battle tested was the fighting techniques. The pagan charm is no different than a cop wearing a St. Michael the Archangel medallion. It will give the devout a psychological boost but the win is based on your method, skill in it and Murphy's law

 

[Transk53]

The magic charm thing is a non-sequitur. What was battle tested was the fighting techniques. The pagan charm is no different than a cop wearing a St. Michael the Archangel medallion. It will give the devout a psychological boost but the win is based on your method, skill in it and Murphy's law

Murphy's law. More applied to the opponent.

 

[Juany118]

Murphy's law. More applied to the opponent.

Oh I have found Murphy just sees people impartially lol.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I agree but there may be an issue. If you are referring to the video I posted as an example of WC striking, all Lineages aren't the same and some people may look at Sifu Keith doing that Jamming entry from which you can either continue to strike or transition to control/takedowns and say "that's supposed to be WC?" In some quarters TWC is seen as a red headed step child thanks to lineage politics. /Shrug

Every WC/VT I've looked at looks promising for its ability to set up for a transition to takedowns. There are some significant differences I see between the branches of the art (like comparing Shioda's Aikido to Kohei's), but they all look like a good pairing with my grappling. I've been watching videos, looking for concepts and approaches to borrow. Videos like that one you posted are among the best fits, and reflect principles I teach (like assuming the second hand is coming).

 

[Juany118]

Every WC/VT I've looked at looks promising for its ability to set up for a transition to takedowns. There are some significant differences I see between the branches of the art (like comparing Shioda's Aikido to Kohei's), but they all look like a good pairing with my grappling. I've been watching videos, looking for concepts and approaches to borrow. Videos like that one you posted are among the best fits, and reflect principles I teach (like assuming the second hand is coming).

It may be a difference in teaching method. As an example I studied WSL/GL-VT. In that system the official curriculum includes something that falls just short of full on Chin Na. I say it falls short because it isn't to control. It is a closing technique to open the way for striking. TWC uses similar techniques for that purpose BUT also teaches the "follow through" for full control though not really a ground game.

Sometimes trying to work out the follow through on you own, when you have different body structures for the styles, can just feel off.

 

[drop bear]

Which reasoning? The part where I said I didn't have any significant evidence either way? The part where I said I couldn't speak to their validation methods?

This reasoning.

TMAs that have been around for centuries worked in real conflict...

 

[drop bear]

The magic charm thing is a non-sequitur. What was battle tested was the fighting techniques. The pagan charm is no different than a cop wearing a St. Michael the Archangel medallion. It will give the devout a psychological boost but the win is based on your method, skill in it and Murphy's law

I think this is one of the things people miss. TMAs that have been around for centuries worked in real conflict. Otherwise they would not have lasted for centuries. The problem rises in that one of the reasons they worked was not just because they were pressure tested BUT because they were very often pressure tested against other styles. Without challenging other styles you can end up on the short end if you suddenly find yourself forced into such an encounter.

Ok pagan charms have been around for centuries and worked in real world conflicts. Otherwise they would not have lasted for centuries.

Considering both methods have been employed for about the same time with the same idea in mind. My guess battlefield use isnt a very good test.