Joe Rogan smack talking TMA's like kung fu

[drop bear]

As for your litmus test… come along to my school. Pit your MMA/BJJ methods against what I do… er… your sword defence is good in your MMA, yeah? I mean… your art must be crap if you can't defend against mine, right?

My sword defence is crap. That would be a perfect example.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Yeah, sounds like an excuse for having a massive hole in their style. I would love to see more Sanda guys transition to MMA, but the lack of ground fighting skills really hold them back

It didn't hold Cung Le back

 

[drop bear]

I'll put it this way… if I ask what you do in your gym, are you your own source there, or do I have to demand a website and a whole bunch of videos of you doing exactly what you say before I can accept it? If I ask you what your favourite meal is, are you your own source, or do I have to see photos of you eating it on multiple occasions before I can take it as read?

That's what is meant. If you can't follow that… honestly, I have no hope of your "philosopher friend" being able to help… as, well, it's not philosophy… it's the nature of evidence (first hand, second hand, tertiary, eye-witness, fallibility, and so on…).

Not sure I have asked what you do at your gym or your favourite meal. But in those two instances you would probably be correct.

 

[Chris Parker]

My sword defence is crap. That would be a perfect example.

A perfect example of what? That your martial art is crap? Or that your martial art, while good, is simply not suited to, or designed for a particular context (sword defence)? If the latter, then it denies your concept of "all martial arts are either good or crap"… depending on who they can "work" against. If the former… then all martial arts will be found to be "crap" in your head.

 

[Chris Parker]

Not sure I have asked what you do at your gym or your favourite meal. But in those two instances you would probably be correct.

That's the form of argument, though. That's what you've failed to recognise in the previous discussions.

 

[drop bear]

A perfect example of what? That your martial art is crap? Or that your martial art, while good, is simply not suited to, or designed for a particular context (sword defence)? If the latter, then it denies your concept of "all martial arts are either good or crap"… depending on who they can "work" against. If the former… then all martial arts will be found to be "crap" in your head.

If you want to put it that way. You could say the martial art has merit but if you are bashed by a boxer it is not designed for a particular context (being punched)

Seems like a bit of a mouthful though.

 

[drop bear]

That's the form of argument, though. That's what you've failed to recognise in the previous discussions.

No still pretty sure those topics didn't really come up.

 

[Chris Parker]

Here, I'll give you a simple way to remember it: Everything in it's context. Boxing is great for boxing, but rather useless in a judo tournament. Judo is great, but doesn't help your Iai. Iai's fun, but doesn't have much to do with your BJJ.

 

[Chris Parker]

No still pretty sure those topics didn't really come up.

Dude, it's not about the topics, it's about how the nature of evidence works… honestly, I was trying to dumb it down to the point that you could follow it… you weren't meant to take the topics literally… they were simple examples. Kay?

 

[drop bear]

Dude, it's not about the topics, it's about how the nature of evidence works… honestly, I was trying to dumb it down to the point that you could follow it… you weren't meant to take the topics literally… they were simple examples. Kay?

I thought you were discussing the history of bjj or something. Hardly anything you have experienced first hand.

 

[Chris Parker]

It was largely to do with the training methodologies of traditional arts… arts that I train in… and training methods that I engage in. Similar to the hypothetical of asking about your training in your gym. That, of course, is still besides the point… the point is the nature of evidence… as I've said, what, 4 times now?

 

[drop bear]

It was largely to do with the training methodologies of traditional arts… arts that I train in… and training methods that I engage in. Similar to the hypothetical of asking about your training in your gym. That, of course, is still besides the point… the point is the nature of evidence… as I've said, what, 4 times now?

So the you were commenting on how you train?

 

[Chris Parker]

On the training methodologies of traditional Japanese arts, and similar. On methods that don't fit into the preconceived views you held (and continue to hold).

 

[drop bear]

On the training methodologies of traditional Japanese arts, and similar. On methods that don't fit into the preconceived views you held (and continue to hold).

So not at all like how you train or what you had for lunch. But in more general terms.

 

[Chris Parker]

Are you seriously wanting to revisit (yet again) the actual, exact topics where you were unable to grasp the nature of evidence (which I note you're still doing in the "efficacy of kata" thread)?!?

Yes, how I train. How traditional arts train. From my own experience. That was the damn point then, it's the point now, and having to repeat it half a dozen times is really getting boring. The topics weren't the issue. I heartily suggest you let this go, as you're simply not getting it.

 

[drop bear]

Are you seriously wanting to revisit (yet again) the actual, exact topics where you were unable to grasp the nature of evidence (which I note you're still doing in the "efficacy of kata" thread)?!?

Yes, how I train. How traditional arts train. From my own experience. That was the damn point then, it's the point now, and having to repeat it half a dozen times is really getting boring. The topics weren't the issue. I heartily suggest you let this go, as you're simply not getting it.

Just had a read back and it looked like you were discussing one big boring history lesson. Which I assume you were not part of.

So as I have stated many times. Nothing like you describing what you had for lunch. Or how you train.

Which is fine what you post is opinion.

 

[Tez3]

You accused Chris of being credible. I disagreed. Two opinions.

Not sure what the issue is.

I accused him?

 

[Drose427]

I know exactly what kung fu means. However, there's a clear difference between traditional Kung fu with weapons and forms, and Sanda with kickboxing and wrestling.



The dictionary definition.

For decades Bjj has absorbed techniques from Catch Wrestling, freestyle wrestling, Luta Livre, street fighting, Judo, and other sources and still considered all of it Bjj. That would be the definition of eclectic.



Yes, spawn new arts, not retain the original art with new techniques added.



Well if that's the case, why not simply bring in outside methods? When Gracie JJ got stomped by Fadda Bjj via leglocks, they didn't come up with nonsensical counters to leglocks, they simply learned Fadda leglocks. The same occurred when Judo was defeated by a ground fighter. Judo simply made the guy they lost to an instructor in the Kodakan and absorbed his tactics.

That's the better route to take.



Yeah, it was the latter. I meant to type "wouldn't" instead of would.



Yeah, again you can't trust everything that comes out of the mouth of a Gracie. They're just people, not gods. While their fighting skills are impressive, they're bravdo and machoism can often times get the best of them.



So are we really going to pretend that Sanda is a traditional Chinese martial art, and not a modern hybrid sport style?

But by your usual logic

If one big name in a style i.e. Royce, doesnt believe in cross training, despises it, we can assume all BJJ instructors are like that.

 

[Hanzou]

But by your usual logic

If one big name in a style i.e. Royce, doesnt believe in cross training, despises it, we can assume all BJJ instructors are like that.

Why would you believe that when he has actively cross trained in the past, and his schools offer training in martial arts outside of Bjj?

 

[Hanzou]

It didn't hold Cung Le back

Actually it did. If you watch him fight in the UFC vs him fighting in Kickboxing matches, he couldn't do his takedowns the same because it would have opened up for a variety of ground submissions.

Also, unless I'm mistaken, I don't remember Cung Le winning any championships in the UFC.