Joe Rogan smack talking TMA's like kung fu

[Hanzou]

He had control only of the guy that he was fighting. The other people around him could have easily attacked him with no problem and he should be thankful that they didn't. Even the Gracies did a break down of this fight and they said the same thing about the guy doing BJJ. Sometimes when you are in a fight, it's not the person that you are fighting that is the main concern. Sometimes it's is friends that are around you.

I can tell you without a doubt, that if I was in the position that the guy in the red shirt was in. My friends would have pulled on the BJJ arms as they were in the video and then they would have stomped his face in.

If that fight remained 1 on 1 then he may have won which means what he was doing was effective. It became ineffective when his the other guys friends jumped in and started hitting him. As far as common sense goes if all a person know is BJJ to fight with then that's what they are going to fall back on and use in a fight. When it comes to a fight people use what they have in their skill set.

Honestly, the topic of the street effectiveness of Bjj is better reserved for a different thread. Feel free to copy and paste this in a new thread, and I'll be more than happy to respond.

Until then....

I only blame the ones who don't train to fight using the techniques of traditional Kung Fu and assume that just because they can do the form that they can apply it in a real fight. The other reasons kung fu gets a bad name is because people look at bad martial arts and assume that they are looking at a good representation of martial arts. No one takes video from an awful display of boxing talent and use it to claim that all boxing sucks. But people are more willing to do that to Kung Fu, maybe all of those Kung Fu movies from the 70's caused some damage too.

Yes Sanda is awesome and it is a good representation of basic kung fu, meaning that many of the things that are found in Sanda can be found in other CMAs, but those moves don't define the style.

So which Kung Fu Style uses boxing?

Im hoping to be able to enter a Lei Tai fight next year so that I can be a good representative of Jow Ga kung fu in a sparring competition. My goal is not only to win, but to fight in a way that clearly uses Jow Ga techniques. I want people to be able to look at my fighting and be able to spot the style of kung fu.

You should do amateur MMA. People would love to see a traditional Kung Fu guy using traditional techniques. If you win, you'd be quite famous. If you lose, you'll be another TMA guy on the Bullshido highlight reel.

 

[JowGaWolf]

So which Kung Fu Style uses boxing?

Non-uses boxing (that I know of) because the boxing stances don't allow for kicking or rooting after a punch is thrown. Jow Ga throws hooks, jabs, uppercuts, and crosses but we throw them from a different stances, like horse, cross, and bow stances.

You should do amateur MMA.

I have thought of this as well. Even at the age of 43 I think I still can hang in with some of the younger guys. The only way I'll do amateur MMA is if I can put the necessary training and conditioning in. Right now I'm in no condition to physically to compete at that level. I'm also still learning how to use various Jow Ga techniques in an actual fight. I'm not worried about the grappling, my biggest weakness would be muay thai kicks to the legs. If I were to start today, I would need about a year or 2 just to increase my bone density in my legs and arms.

Some of the MMA guys that I spar with tell me that they never have fought someone from my style of fighting and that they didn't know how to deal with the types of attacks that I use because no one has attack them using real kung fu before. Will it's possible that I could be on the list of failures, it's my job to seriously train in my style for the purpose of actually using my kung fu to hurt someone, and because I would take it that seriously, I don't think I would be a disappointment.

If I win then I won't be famous, people will call it a fluke, or claim that I had a background in something that I don't. The fights would be less about who is going to beat me, but who is going to try to make me look bad so that they can talk down on kung fu and raise MMA. So if I were to do this at my age then I'll be playing for keeps.

 

[drop bear]

You should do amateur MMA. People would love to see a traditional Kung Fu guy using traditional techniques. If you win, you'd be quite famous. If you lose, you'll be another TMA guy on the Bullshido highlight reel.

 

[drop bear]

If I win then I won't be famous, people will call it a fluke, or claim that I had a background in something that I don't. The fights would be less about who is going to beat me, but who is going to try to make me look bad so that they can talk down on kung fu and raise MMA. So if I were to do this at my age then I'll be playing for keeps.

Tma,s and their egos. If you do it. Then you have done it. That is all you get and it is enough.

 

[kuniggety]

You do realize that the term effective is only relative to the sport MMA and not Self-Defense. Here's an example: Look how open the BJJ guy is. Had the guy he was fighting with had another friend then the BJJ guy would have easily been injured.

You do realize that all of the throws you find in judo (that you referenced later in the same post) are in BJJ too right? I've seen that video before. This guy made the mistake of going right to the ground but he handled it very well once he went down. Your argument of "if he had friends" goes the exact same as if he kept the fight standing up. People argue left and right how it's a fail of grappling of not being able to defend yourself from multiple opponents but the same thing goes for a street fight with strikes. This isn't TKD (or any other TMA) class with people taking turns sparring with you; this is one person throwing punches at you with another person rushing up from behind and either striking you too or tackling you to the ground. A person should always train grappling if they want to be able to defend themselves properly.

I've mentioned here numerous times that I'm a military guy. I've taught a couple of grappling sessions to my coworkers. These are all relatively fit guys, some of them 20+ lbs heavier than me, but I still submit them all in under 30 seconds whether I take them down or I let them take me down first. I'm not even that good at BJJ. Is my first instinct going to drop onto my back if I get into a fight with someone? No, but if someone tackles me to the ground then you can bet your *** that I'm glad that I know what the hell I'm doing there.

 

[renc]

That general culture of the 1870s wouldn't have persisted into the 1920s

Based on what?
Someone in this thread mentioned the well known 'Sugong' by Nick Hurst, it's a good read and corroborates the travelers' account over the time period you're interested in.

The main point though is that the reasons given from that Sanda organization about why they don't do ground fighting is mostly nonsense.

'Nonsense' is an empty assertion. They've painted a credible theory which is supported by some evidence. Calling it 'nonsense' or a 'silly excuse' is not persuasive.

Boxing predates Bjj and Judo newaza. They also don't have a silly excuse as to why they don't incorporate it into their sport.

So what is their 'excuse'? Should Western Boxing incorporate groundwork?

 

[drop bear]

So what is their 'excuse'? Should Western Boxing incorporate groundwork?

They don't have an excuse. That is the difference. Their solution to ground work is do bjj.

 

[Tez3]

They don't have an excuse. That is the difference. Their solution to ground work is do bjj.

Or train Judo with Neil Adams.....Fighting at Forty: Neil Adams No Gi Seminar - A Review

 

[renc]

I disagree. There are Kung Fu styles that don't spar, or have competitions. In both of those methods you would weed out stuff that is ineffective and inefficient. Bjj (which Rogan has practiced for decades) has MMA, Sport Bjj, and a heavy tradition of sparring to keep it on its toes.

Joe Rogan claimed that 'Kung Fu' doesn't have sparring.
That statement is easily demonstrated to be ignorant.
That is a fact.
Changing that statement to 'there are some Kung Fu arts which don't spar' does not change that fact.
All the Chinese martial arts I've encountered incorporate sparring. If there are arts which do not do sparring, ever, they are unrepresentative of CMA as a whole. With that in mind, which Chinese martial arts do not incorporate sparring?

Rogan's point in that regard is backed both by the feelings of the Chinese themselves in the articles posted by myself and Jow, and the fact that Sanda uses boxing hand techniques instead of Kung Fu based hand techniques.

I demonstrated that Rogan is ignorant of how 'traditional' Chinese martial arts are applied.
That is a fact.
I demonstrated that Joe Rogan's statements are not logical from a purely martial, completely style agnostic point of view.
That is a fact.
That one martial art incorporates certain punches does not change those facts.
That some Chinese feel that traditional styles are ineffective does not change those facts. I said 'some', when you say 'the feelings of the Chinese' and 'the younger generation of Chinese view' you're overgeneralizing. 'Some' Chinese train in 'traditional' arts, 'some' buy into MMA marketing tropes, 'some' believe conspiracy theories etc.

I think the success of competitive sport methods in various self defense situations doesn't support your argument.

Then you're not understanding my argument. I did not say that sport martial arts cannot be applied effectively in self defense, I wrote the opposite.
I'm saying that if someone applies a sport martial art in the same manner as they would in a competition, against opponent(s) who are competent at fighting in a street fighting context, then that person is liable to lose. Distance, timing, shot selection, chaining, motivation, target areas, angles, are all different. I am saying that sports fighting *competitions* are not a reliable metric for effectiveness in self defense.

 

[Hanzou]

Based on what?

Based on the Sino-Japanese war, intensified western imperialism in the region after the boxer rebellion, the birth of nationalist and communist movements, the fall of the Qing dynasty, the westernization of Chinese society and its military, and China becoming a modern nationalist state.

All of that occurred in that period you're talking about.

Someone in this thread mentioned the well known 'Sugong' by Nick Hurst, it's a good read and corroborates the travelers' account over the time period you're interested in.

The period I'm interested in is the 1920s, not the 1870s. That is two very different periods in Chinese history.

'Nonsense' is an empty assertion. They've painted a credible theory which is supported by some evidence. Calling it 'nonsense' or a 'silly excuse' is not persuasive.

Saying that your style doesn't have ground fighting because landing on the ground, and being on the ground is dangerous (yet the style in question has takedowns and throws where you end up on the ground anyway), is nonsense.

So what is their 'excuse'?

Their excuse:

Ground fighting was never introduced at this time as they believed that most self defense situations are initiated from a standing position. Furthermore, being on the ground for long periods makes you more venerable to attack and the surface itself could present numerous dangers especially when falling. Therefore Sanshou was developed to avoid confrontation on the ground focusing on skills in striking, kicking, wrestling, throwing and takedowns as well as joint locking and seizing. The idea was to stay on your feet the most effective way possible.

It is better to just say that ground fighting is outside your sport's rules.

Should Western Boxing incorporate groundwork?

No, because Boxing says that grappling isn't part of their ruleset. They don't make up excuses to try to say that ground fighting is an ineffective range of fighting.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Based on the Sino-Japanese war, intensified western imperialism in the region after the boxer rebellion, the birth of nationalist and communist movements, the fall of the Qing dynasty, the westernization of Chinese society and its military, and China becoming a modern nationalist state.

All of that occurred in that period you're talking about.

The period I'm interested in is the 1920s, not the 1870s. That is two very different periods in Chinese history.

Please, I would be interested in what you are referring to when you are saying "different periods in Chinese history"

And as far as martial arts in that period, since you mentioned the " Sino-Japanese war" do you know what martial arts the Chinese trained their military with during that period?


and exactly what are you referring to in renc's post as being form 1870?

 

[Hanzou]

Please, I would be interested in what you are referring to when you are saying "different periods in Chinese history"

1870s China is different from 1920s China. Why is that so difficult to understand? The same would apply to every country on the planet.

And as far as martial arts in that period, since you mentioned the " Sino-Japanese war" do you know what martial arts the Chinese trained their military with during that period?

I'm talking about the first Sino-Japanese war (1894-1895), so I don't see how what martial art the military practiced would be relevant. There were also martial artists involved in the boxer rebellion. That fact is also irrelevant to the present conversation. We're talking about the lack of ground fighting in Sanda.

and exactly what are you referring to in renc's post as being form 1870?

Renc quoted a traveler's account of life in 1870s China and tried to use it as a possible reason as to why Sanda didn't contain ground fighting. Sanda wasn't developed for another half century after those accounts.

 

[Xue Sheng]

1870s China is different from 1920s China. Why is that so difficult to understand? The same would apply to every country on the planet.

Not hard at all to understand, also real easy to say, with no actual knowledge of the subject required. I am trying to asses what your actual knowledge on the topic is, since you mentioned it, that makes it relevant to the conversation

I'm talking about the first Sino-Japanese war (1894-1895), so I don't see how what martial art the military practiced would be relevant. There were also martial artists involved in the boxer rebellion. That fact is also irrelevant to the present conversation. We're talking about the lack of ground fighting in Sanda.

Your they one that brought it into the conversation, again trying to see if you actually know what you are talking about. You made it relevant by your post and this was not an answer to my the question.

You also never answered my questions way back in post #145

Renc quoted a traveler's account of life in 1870s China and tried to use it as a possible excuse as to why Sanda didn't contain ground fighting. Sandra wasn't developed for another half century.

OK, that is an asnswer and a justification for your post, thank you for this one

 

[Hanzou]

Joe Rogan claimed that 'Kung Fu' doesn't have sparring.
That statement is easily demonstrated to be ignorant.
That is a fact.
Changing that statement to 'there are some Kung Fu arts which don't spar' does not change that fact.
All the Chinese martial arts I've encountered incorporate sparring. If there are arts which do not do sparring, ever, they are unrepresentative of CMA as a whole. With that in mind, which Chinese martial arts do not incorporate sparring?

First you need to show me the comment in question, then we can better understand the context in question.

And yes, we both know that there are TMAs that don't spar. There's no need for me to go through the web and link you to various TMA schools that don't practice it, we both know that that is a true statement.

I demonstrated that Rogan is ignorant of how 'traditional' Chinese martial arts are applied.
That is a fact.
I demonstrated that Joe Rogan's statements are not logical from a purely martial, completely style agnostic point of view.
That is a fact.

It's logical from his viewpoint which is based on MMA and combat sports. From his vantage point it is strange that Kung Fu styles haven't made a bigger impact in MMA, whereas other styles have. Further, his PoV is supported by what's currently occurring within China itself.

That one martial art incorporates certain punches does not change those facts.

You miss the point here; Instead of incorporating traditional kung fu hand techniques, Sanda incorporated western boxing. Why would they do that? Why were the concepts of diverse KF styles like Choy Li Fut, Praying Mantis, Wing Chun, and various other popular styles not good enough to be a part of Sanda?

That some Chinese feel that traditional styles are ineffective does not change those facts. I said 'some', when you say 'the feelings of the Chinese' and 'the younger generation of Chinese view' you're overgeneralizing. 'Some' Chinese train in 'traditional' arts, 'some' buy into MMA marketing tropes, 'some' believe conspiracy theories etc.

I'm simply repeating the reports from articles in China that are talking about the situation there. If a reporter in China is interviewing Kung Fu instructors and the Chinese youth and both are saying the same thing, who am I to argue?

Then you're not understanding my argument. I did not say that sport martial arts cannot be applied effectively in self defense, I wrote the opposite.
I'm saying that if someone applies a sport martial art in the same manner as they would in a competition, against opponent(s) who are competent at fighting in a street fighting context, then that person is liable to lose. Distance, timing, shot selection, chaining, motivation, target areas, angles, are all different. I am saying that sports fighting *competitions* are not a reliable metric for effectiveness in self defense.

Again I disagree. There's been plenty of cases where boxers applied their MA in a self defense situation just like they would in the ring. In fact, I would argue that the skills developed in a competitive/sport context better prepare you for a dangerous situation than doing a bunch of pointless forms and katas. After all who do you think would be more proficient at using their skill set; Mike Tyson in his prime, or some fat slob Kung Fu instructor who does pretty forms in silk pajamas?

 

[Hanzou]

Not hard at all to understand, also real easy to say, with no actual knowledge of the subject required. I am trying to asses what your actual knowledge on the topic is, since you mentioned it, that makes it relevant to the conversation

I did that to illustrate the amount of upheaval that took place in a 50 year block because the person I was quoting seemed incapable of recognizing that he was talking about two very different points in Chinese history.

Your they one that brought it into the conversation, again trying to see if you actually know what you are talking about. You made it relevant by your post and this was not an answer to my the question.

Trying to test my knowledge of the (first) Sino-Japanese war because you have an axe to grind isn't relevant to the topic.

You also never answered my questions way back in post #145

I didn't view it as worth responding to, since several others were asking pretty much the same question.

No offense.

OK, that is an asnswer and a justification for your post, thank you for this one

You're welcome, but you could have put that statement at the beginning of the post.

 

[Tez3]

because boxing is doing sooo well these days Mayweather-Pacquiao is over and boxing is dead, again

 

[drop bear]

Then you're not understanding my argument. I did not say that sport martial arts cannot be applied effectively in self defense, I wrote the opposite.
I'm saying that if someone applies a sport martial art in the same manner as they would in a competition, against opponent(s) who are competent at fighting in a street fighting context, then that person is liable to lose. Distance, timing, shot selection, chaining, motivation, target areas, angles, are all different. I am saying that sports fighting *competitions* are not a reliable metric for effectiveness in self defense.

a competent boxer with just boxing including gloves on he could still hold off your average attacker using street tactics.

You can knock someone unconscious using just the methods allowed in competition. Which is enough to deter most attackers.

 

[JowGaWolf]

if he kept the fight standing up

If he had kept the fight standing up then he would have been able to keep distance by moving

People argue left and right how it's a fail of grappling of not being able to defend yourself from multiple opponents but the same thing goes for a street fight with strikes.

There are many more videos out there. Strikers fighting multiple people in a street fight
Not a street fight but a professional one. 2 vs 1 MMA fight. When the 1 grapple at the end or choose to stay on his feet

Kid 5 vs 1

1 guy knocks out 4 guys

Team Fight

This isn't TKD (or any other TMA) class with people taking turns sparring with you; this is one person throwing punches at you with another person rushing up from behind and either striking you too or tackling you to the ground.

A lot of traditional art schools have 1 vs multiple attackers scenarios, unscripted. I know my school has it and I've seen other school do it. The purpose of the drill is survive, avoid being taken down, avoid being cornered, avoid being hit from solid attacks and strike when the opportunity presents itself.

The drills aren't full force because it becomes dangerous for the attackers once the defender reaches a certain skill ability because then it becomes dangerous. By this I mean that the attacker could be attacking one person and then suddenly launch an attack at someone who is behind them, which catches the attacker off guard. We had to actually tone down our scenarios because of this safety issue.

 

[JowGaWolf]

because boxing is doing sooo well these days Mayweather-Pacquiao is over and boxing is dead, again

Boxing has been dead for a while. my guess is that's part of the reason MMA came out.

 

[Tez3]

A lot of traditional art schools have 1 vs multiple attackers scenarios, unscripted. I know my school has it and I've seen other school do it. The purpose of the drill is survive, avoid being taken down, avoid being cornered, avoid being hit from solid attacks and strike when the opportunity presents itself.

This is something we do and something I've seen in a lot of places in various styles including TKD and JKD.