Martial arts style v style rant

[marques]

Master Wong is great doing YouTube videos and very confident. But instead of showing it works against his (collaborative) students in boxing gloves (and he did a lot videos regarding boxers) I would like to watch something more honest as that:

In this video, no one is very skilled, it is just a drill, but he demonstrated is point. Honestly.
I would like to see (watch on YouTube) that level of confidence in all non-competitive styles... (Not saying competitive styles are better. Just that they already have their moment of truth.)
(Style X does not use gloves and it would be unsafe. Always the same. But a drill, like this, would stil be possible...)

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Master Wong is great doing YouTube videos and very confident. But instead of showing it works against his (collaborative) students in boxing gloves (and he did a lot videos regarding boxers) I would like to watch something more honest as that:

In this video, no one is very skilled, it is just a drill, but he demonstrated is point. Honestly.
I would like to see (watch on YouTube) that level of confidence in all non-competitive styles... (Not saying competitive styles are better. Just that they already have their moment of truth.)
(Style X does not use gloves and it would be unsafe. Always the same. But a drill, like this, would stil be possible...)

It demonstrates one thing: that he can make you miss his head if that's all you're aiming for, and he's not trying to do anything in return. It's impressive, and his movement suggests he'd be capable of defending even if they came with body shots, but the test is a bit misleading.

For all that, a nice display of both confidence and competence on his part. Well done.

 

[Hanzou]

You guys are getting the topic mixed up here. It isn't mcdojo teachings vs real instruction. It is style vs style. The problems you and drop bear bring up have nothing to do with a style problem, that is an instructor and training problem.

If you have bad training or have access to good training and just don't apply yourself. Then that is where you will end up with poor results. You also misunderstand adaptation for caring about people's opinions. People are practicing more take down and Clinch defense because they are more popular to come across now due to the popularity of mma, they don't do it for your or anyone elses approval.

There is no mix-up. Certain styles are simply more favorable to frauds and McDojos than other styles.

You don't run across too many phoney Judo black belts for example.

 

[Hanzou]

I think I know the point you're trying to make, and I think you mis-stated it. The chance of a woman being attacked by a skilled grappler aren't, I think, much higher than those of a man. The issue is that a woman is more likely to be taken to the ground (as opposed to beaten while standing), and will often be facing a larger and stronger opponent (where BJJ does a really good job).

Actually I do believe it's higher, because the sexual assault/rape aspect of self defense is an entire other side of possible violence that men never really have to deal with. Because women are more likely to be attacked by men, they're more likely to run across someone with martial skill.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Actually I do believe it's higher, because the sexual assault/rape aspect of self defense is an entire other side of possible violence that men never really have to deal with. Because women are more likely to be attacked by men, they're more likely to run across someone with martial skill.

Men are also more likely to be attacked by men.

Grappling is extra-important for women, but I don't think they're more likely than men to be attacked by someone who is trained.

 

[Kickboxer101]

There is no mix-up. Certain styles are simply more favorable to frauds and McDojos than other styles.

You don't run across too many phoney Judo black belts for example.

There are fake Bjj black belts around. Allow me to show you a video I posted a while ago

Here's a couple others

I know you're hugely biased towards grappling and think its the best ever but there are fakes out there whether you want to believe it it or not

 

[Steve]

I think context is a legitimate concern, but skills exist independent of context. If you're learning to punch someone who is actively trying to avoid being punched (and who is also actively trying to punch you back), you can adapt to different contexts pretty easily. But to apply a skill to a NEW context, you must first actually apply the skill in SOME context.

In other words. If your self defense context includes being able to punch, kick, grapple or what have you, and you're not applying the skills IN THAT CONTEXT, you'll never have success in a different context.

Simply put, the martial athlete will be able to negotiate the transition from the cage/ring/mat to the "street" because the skills being learned are actually being applied. They are really punching, really kicking and really grappling in context against fully committed opponents at full speed in un-choreographed competitions, and so the skills being developed are grounded in reality. At an individual level, that person has developed a skill or skills and has, as an individual, applied these skills in context. And because the skills are grounded, this transition to application in other contexts is pretty painless and is reliable. It's about adding to a skillset, not re-training.

However, the shift from self defense to a competitive context is seldom painless and tends to be very unreliable. Some do it, but only after fundamentally adapting their training methods to account for application.

The point is that context is important, sure. I agree complete. But not because it's a big deal. If the skills are well grounded and trained to application, learning additional context should be easy. And if it's not... that's a red flag.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

There are fake Bjj black belts around. Allow me to show you a video I posted a while ago

Here's a couple others

I know you're hugely biased towards grappling and think its the best ever but there are fakes out there whether you want to believe it it or not

That's kind of the point. Someone who falsely claims a black belt in BJJ* is very likely to be publicly confronted, shamed, and exposed to the world at large**. It probably won't take too long for it to happen either. Not so much in most other systems.

This sort of community self-policing will probably get harder to keep up once the number of BJJ practitioners gets past a certain point, but so far it's working pretty well.

*By "claim", I mean someone who's actually in a martial arts school teaching, or wearing a black belt or advertising themselves as a BJJ black belt. Obviously nothing can really be done (other than roll your eyes) about your coworker who mentions in casual conversation that he's a BJJ black belt as well as a former Navy Seal and a MMA champion, even though he never steps foot in a gym.

** In decades past the confrontation and shaming might typically be more ... physical in nature.

 

[drop bear]

But the posts you quoted were about another situation not the McDojo's issue. It was a side issue, not about stye vs style, it was a case of fraud, and your post was a tad bit misleading by using those posts in answer to the OP post, but so be it, I suppose that is to be expected from some.

So there is some sort of undefined difference that makes it ok when you do it.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Getting back to the original post - I think a lot of the "style vs style" stuff gets posted and argued about because people often invest a lot of ego into whatever art they are practicing and want the validation of thinking that it gives them the ability to beat others - especially others who are also trained fighters.

At this point in my development, I don't really care. There are some styles that I prefer over others, based on how their curriculums or their training methodology or their cultures align with my own goals and preferences and opinions. However I'm pretty certain that in any martial art which contains a large enough population of practitioners, you can find someone (or many someones) who can thoroughly kick my ***. Heck, there are almost certainly guys out there who have never formally trained in any martial art who can kick my ***. No matter how long or hard I train, it's never going to turn me into an invincible superhero.

When I look at other arts these days, I'm not doing it to figure out how or if my art can beat theirs. I'm looking to see if these other systems contain something - a training methodology, a tactical perspective, a physical principle, anything, that can help me become better at what I do. For example, Wing Tsun will probably never by my primary style, but in less than a year of training I've picked up a few ideas and perspectives which have helped me to make some subtle refinements to my boxing and jiu-jitsu.

 

[drop bear]

Agreed. I am often confused by self-defense-oriented TMA instructors who think they could step into an MMA octagon and kick butt. It's not what they're trained for, and shouldn't expect to excel there unless they raise their intensity level a lot and train for that context.

It's like a discussion I was involved in about 10 years ago. I was talking with a friend who had been a competitive MMA fighter for a while. He and I were basically swapping training war stories (mostly stupid mistakes we made). Another co-worker listening in asked which of us would win if we fought. I pointed at my friend and said, "If he knows I'm coming, I'm probably toast. He trains a lot harder than I do, and he specializes in beating martial artists up." My friend said, "Maybe. I'm not sure I'd want to find out."

He was being nice, IMO. I might get lucky, since he's not used to fighting against my type of art - maybe confuse him with how I move long enough to manage something. But he's trained to deal with martial artists, so I'd put money on him. At the same time, he preferred some of our techniques for self-defense. He had a more limited arsenal, and had started cross-training in some new arts (he was a dabble-and-add guy like me, except he didn't have a primary art at that point) to expand what he had available to him, since he wasn't competing any more.

The thing there is you went to this context bit again.

If you cant beat a guy in the ring. You probably cant beat that guy anywhere.

Now there is some additions to that. So you may be able to take a boxer to the deck and finish him there. But that is a pretty major stylistic addition to the context.

If you stood and traded hands with him in the street. You would be relying on some really minor additions. Like the surface could be a bit wonky. Or you have a few extra striking tricks.

And you are betting that against this big deal that he has better hands. And then taking that to an environment where a fight can be won and lost in seconds

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That's kind of the point. Someone who falsely claims a black belt in BJJ* is very likely to be publicly confronted, shamed, and exposed to the world at large**. It probably won't take too long for it to happen either. Not so much in most other systems.

This sort of community self-policing will probably get harder to keep up once the number of BJJ practitioners gets past a certain point, but so far it's working pretty well.

*By "claim", I mean someone who's actually in a martial arts school teaching, or wearing a black belt or advertising themselves as a BJJ black belt. Obviously nothing can really be done (other than roll your eyes) about your coworker who mentions in casual conversation that he's a BJJ black belt as well as a former Navy Seal and a MMA champion, even though he never steps foot in a gym.

** In decades past the confrontation and shaming might typically be more ... physical in nature.

Most likely, it'll be fragmenting of the groups that'll make it hardest to police. If someone with legitimate BJJ chops starts a new organization and changes ranking (maybe moving BB closer to what it is in many TMA), that's going to open the door for others, including some who don't have the chops, to claim BB.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

When I look at other arts these days, I'm not doing it to figure out how or if my art can beat theirs. I'm looking to see if these other systems contain something - a training methodology, a tactical perspective, a physical principle, anything, that can help me become better at what I do. For example, Wing Tsun will probably never by my primary style, but in less than a year of training I've picked up a few ideas and perspectives which have helped me to make some subtle refinements to my boxing and jiu-jitsu.

This. I'll add to your list that I also sometimes just pursue something out of intellectual curiosity. It's something new to learn and understand, and doing that often leads me to some better understanding of my primary art, or maybe just why I suck at something.

 

[drop bear]

This. I'll add to your list that I also sometimes just pursue something out of intellectual curiosity. It's something new to learn and understand, and doing that often leads me to some better understanding of my primary art, or maybe just why I suck at something.

Easier to be sensible about it if you move outside your own style though.

But if you do i dont think you can eliminate style vs style.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The thing there is you went to this context bit again.

If you cant beat a guy in the ring. You probably cant beat that guy anywhere.

Now there is some additions to that. So you may be able to take a boxer to the deck and finish him there. But that is a pretty major stylistic addition to the context.

If you stood and traded hands with him in the street. You would be relying on some really minor additions. Like the surface could be a bit wonky. Or you have a few extra striking tricks.

And you are betting that against this big deal that he has better hands. And then taking that to an environment where a fight can be won and lost in seconds

Why would I stand and trade hands with someone on the street? If they seem to want to punch, I prefer to grapple. If they seem to want to grapple, I prefer to hit them.

And the context does matter. As someone just pointed out (Steve, maybe), folks who compete (at least in intense, combative competitions like MMA, boxing) will be able to make the adjustment to the context of the street - but I can still monopolize on any openings I can see that their training has created. With MMA, that's often not going to be much help. With boxing, however, his legs are likely relatively unprotected.

But that wasn't ever my point, anyway. My training isn't really centered around trying to take down a competitive badass. That's a fight I'm likely to lose because of differences in fitness level and the fact that he's used to taking a beating, more than because of the techniques used. You see, you keep coming back to the "if you can't beat a guy" concept. That's a competitive view.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Easier to be sensible about it if you move outside your own style though.

But if you do i dont think you can eliminate style vs style.

I don't spend any time comparing styles to see which is better. I do pull ideas and refinements from every style I touch. Most of the groundwork I teach is adapted from BJJ. Some of my arm and body control come from Judo and western wrestling. I picked up some movements refinements from FMA. I picked up some understandings of principles from Daito-ryu and Yanagi-ryu. I borrowed some transmission principles from Krav Maga. I'm working on some new falls adapted from other aikido arts.

In every case, I looked at whatever I was studying at the time to see how I could improve what I do and teach. My primary art is NGA, so all of those adaptations and refinements inform and improve my approach to NGA.

 

[Ironbear24]

There is no mix-up. Certain styles are simply more favorable to frauds and McDojos than other styles.


You don't run across too many phoney Judo black belts for example.

It isn't difficult to go online and buy a black belt, they run for about 5 bucks. Rent a cheap place in a mall and push some people around. It won't fool experienced people but it will fool the inexperienced which is where they get their money from.

 

[drop bear]

Why would I stand and trade hands with someone on the street? If they seem to want to punch, I prefer to grapple. If they seem to want to grapple, I prefer to hit them.

And the context does matter. As someone just pointed out (Steve, maybe), folks who compete (at least in intense, combative competitions like MMA, boxing) will be able to make the adjustment to the context of the street - but I can still monopolize on any openings I can see that their training has created. With MMA, that's often not going to be much help. With boxing, however, his legs are likely relatively unprotected.

But that wasn't ever my point, anyway. My training isn't really centered around trying to take down a competitive badass. That's a fight I'm likely to lose because of differences in fitness level and the fact that he's used to taking a beating, more than because of the techniques used. You see, you keep coming back to the "if you can't beat a guy" concept. That's a competitive view.

The competitive view is a pretty robust concept for self defence. To misquote the watchmen. You dont want to be locked in there with him. You want him to be locked in there with you.

Part of this is understanding the mechanics of fighting. You really only need to spend a few seconds in the element of the guy you are fighting to have that fight go against you. So you need to be employing your tactical approach pretty bloody quickly.

Otherwise full contact has different focus on different techniques. If you are being beat up by a guy when you step up the pace. You cant really hide behind technical. A lot of martial artists fall into that trap. And is the transition from technical expert to fighter.

 

[drop bear]

I don't spend any time comparing styles to see which is better. I do pull ideas and refinements from every style I touch. Most of the groundwork I teach is adapted from BJJ. Some of my arm and body control come from Judo and western wrestling. I picked up some movements refinements from FMA. I picked up some understandings of principles from Daito-ryu and Yanagi-ryu. I borrowed some transmission principles from Krav Maga. I'm working on some new falls adapted from other aikido arts.

In every case, I looked at whatever I was studying at the time to see how I could improve what I do and teach. My primary art is NGA, so all of those adaptations and refinements inform and improve my approach to NGA.

So those refinements were not better?

 

[Ironbear24]

There are fake Bjj black belts around. Allow me to show you a video I posted a while ago

Here's a couple others

I know you're hugely biased towards grappling and think its the best ever but there are fakes out there whether you want to believe it it or not

I don't think you will find anyone else more biased but anyway. The same thing that happened to karate and Tae Kwon do and various kung fury arts will happen to bjj. The reason these arts had lots of frauds and still do is because there is a high demand for it, it has a high demand because it is popular.

More specifically mma is popular and you rarely ever find a bjj place that is only that, you find mma clubs or mma gyms. These are usually where the "mcdojos" in bjj lay. It doesn't take an expert to throw on some shorts and gloves and do nothing but shoot for takedowns until eventually one does land.

Not saying this is what mma does but the shitty ones sure do. And there is no denying that you haven't seen mcdojos mma gyms. To day that you would have to be biased or blind.