MMA vs TMA

[RTKDCMB]

How is it complete rubbish?

Think about it; which is less likely to be a fraud, a boxing club, or some exotic sounding JJJ or Kung Fu school that you've never heard of before?

There are a great many boxing clubs I have never heard off before - must be all frauds then?

Only if its full contact and no ones pulling punches. Sort of like old school Kyokushin where you had to fight through 30 black belts full contact to get your black belt. Here's a video of a Kyokushin belt exam. It's not for the squeamish, because they beat the hell out of each other.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=naq30Oak978

Stuff like this is why Kyokushin is respected in MMA circles, despite its semi-traditional slant (and some Kyokushin schools have gone soft).

Of course, Kyokushin isn't TMA.

1) There is no such thing as 'full contact' except for actual fighting.
2) Full contact, semi-contact, non-contact, none of these equal aliveness.
3) Although good, they are hardly beating the hell out of each other, they are not punching to the head or trying to incapacitate or knock out their training partners (if they were then there would not be adults sparring children).
4) It would be extremely difficult for BJJ to do anything that did not have full contact since combat cuddling requires actual touching. You cannot mount or choke someone without touching them
5) Full contact in grappling and full contact in striking have vastly different meanings.
6) How do you define 'pulling punches'? To me it suggests that you do not contact by not finishing your punch.
7) YOU HAVE STILL TO POST A VIDEO OF YOUR TRAINING TO SHOW EVERYONE YOUR SUPERIOR TRAINING METHODS AS YOU SEE THEM.

 

[Chris Parker]

Still? This'll be fun...

Again, that's a matter of opinion. I believe that making Jujutsu safer, applying modern principles, spreading martial arts to children, etc. is a modernization of the art. Afterall, Judo emerged during the period of Japanese modernization. It wouldn't have survived and flourished if it was "just another Jujutsu school".

Right. What "modern principles"? If you're talking about things like sparring, you do realize that I've already pointed out the usage of that as a training tool for centuries, yeah? Training on mats? Again, I've already shown that to be quite traditional. Looking for marketing opportunities? So old as to be railed against by Musashi in the Gorin no Sho. Targeting your teaching at an educational position? Heard of Yagyu Shinkage Ryu? Ono-ha Itto Ryu? Shinto Muso Ryu? Any of a hundred other traditional arts? Do you know what an Otome Ryu was/is? Applying what you refer to as "scientific principles"? Again, common, in a number of senses of the term (we'll come back to this). Teaching children? Seriously old-school. And just because Judo is a modern system doesn't mean that it was "modernized", it just means that it's a modern system. It's survival and flourishment was largely due to (one more time, now) Kano's lobbying of the education department... nothing to do with modernizing anything in the art itself. And, when all's said and done, it really is "just another jujutsu school".... it's just an incredibly successful one.

You really don't know what you're dealing with here.

The source of that quote was this; Kanō, Jigorō (2006) [2005]. "A BRIEF HISTORY OF JUJUTSU". In Murata, Naoki. Mind over muscle: writings from the founder of Judo.

I guess you now know more about Jujutsu than Jigoro Kano. :lol2:

You know, I love context... it puts things in position so that their meaning and importance can be easily gleaned.... the only part of Kano's writings that was quoted there was "Jujutsu developed among the samurai of fuedal Japan as a method for defeating an armed and armoured opponent in which one uses no weapon, or only a short weapon". The rest of your quote was not part of the reference. And the point was not the quote.... it was the entire wiki article as a whole. But, for the record, that quote (just the Kano one) oversimplifies things to the point of removing accuracy as a statement. Even Kano would agree with that, I feel.

Oh, but, for the record, what do you think of sword defences? Modern? Part of a modernization? Something that was necessary after the Haitorei Edict of 1876 that banned the wearing of swords?

Do you know the Kime no Kata?

What do you think of the Koshiki no Kata? Modern?

These are demonstrations of kata from Judo. But, of course, they can't be Judo, as this isn't what randori looks like, right?

Oh, and the point is that I know a hell of a lot more about Jujutsu than you do.

You do understand that the scientific method in Japan c. 1500-1599 is far different and less accurate than the scientific method applied in Japan during the Meiji restoration when the Japanese had access to western technology. I mean, Issac Newton, the father of modern physics wasn't even born until 1642.

Wow, that's a wonderfully narrow view of things... "Scientific" only means modern, Western science? Really? I suppose music only means current American bands, too... and art is only Europeans.... post Warhol, of course...

Let's put it this way, the application of a scientific approach is pretty simple... it's a repeatable and testable hypothesis or theory. Which fits, well, pretty much all martial arts. If you're thinking only of a set of rules based on leverage, anatomy, vectors, physics etc, again, you're way off... as I mentioned, Kashima Shinryu has applied such things since the 16th Century. The study of anatomy was more advanced in the East than it was in the West at the time, you realize? Or do you think that there was no understanding of such things until Newton came around? If you do? Uh.... no. Wrong. Again. Still.

Aren't there more Judo dojos in Japan than Jujutsu dojos?

So what? Aren't there more McDonalds than 5 star restaurants? I mean, did you notice where I said that most schools only have one location, in many cases only one teacher at a time? The prevalence of one school doesn't mean the supplanting of the others, you realize.

Actually more than likely a Brazilian Jujutsu school. Bjj is very popular in Japan.

It's getting there... the UFC and similar have helped a lot there. But BJJ is BJJ, and Jujutsu is Jujutsu... the only way they get confused is when people don't know the difference.

Considering that most JJJ here in the states is more than likely a scam created by a guy who combined Judo with Karate in the hopes of roping in gullible people, "insure" works just fine in this context.

So you're in the states.... and you know how Japanese people will respond to a question on Jujutsu how? And, while there are a large number of gendai (modern), commonly Western systems using the name Jujutsu (or it's less accurate spellings), that doesn't make them "scams" unless they are claiming to be old Japanese traditions (I know a number who do, but it's hardly all of them). Personally, I feel your assessment is inaccurate, to say the least. You're attributing motives where there isn't any reason to suggest it, and you're trying to tar all schools with the same biased brush... it just doesn't work that way.

No, but it makes every Jjj school suspect, because like many TMA styles its legitimacy is wrapped up in dusty old history books, and not on its effectiveness. Unlike Judo, Bjj, Boxing, and other styles that are pressure tested by every wanna-be MMA guy or meathead that pops in, TMA instructors can sit back and peddle bullcrap upon their students for decades and no one will question it.

I don't know where you get your misinformation from but that is complete rubbish.

How is it complete rubbish?

Think about it; which is less likely to be a fraud, a boxing club, or some exotic sounding JJJ or Kung Fu school that you've never heard of before?

[/QUOTE]

It's complete rubbish as it's unsubstantiated drivel, with nothing other than bias and prejudice, combined with a deep lack of understanding, respect, knowledge, or education on the topic. Besides which, the idea that you've never heard of something doesn't mean it's not genuine... ever heard of Unkou Ryu? Shosho Ryu? Higo Shinkage Ryu? Owari-kan Ryu? Toda-ha Buko Ryu? Shojitsu Kenri Kataichi Ryu? Ogasawara Ryu? Kanshin Ryu? Kanemaki Ryu? Morishige Ryu? Yo Ryu? Shin Muso Hayashizaki Ryu? Masaki Ryu? Shingyoto Ryu? Maniwa-Nen Ryu? Shibukawa Ryu? Ryushin Shochi Ryu? Hozoin Ryu? I haven't even gotten to the rare ones yet....

K man, I hate to ask this, but if traditional Goju schools don't do free sparring and only pre arranged, how do they actually pressure test any of there skills? Pre arranged sparring of any flavor does not help the student deal with unexpected attacks, it only helps them read a script. My feeling is script reading does not equal martial arts fighting.

Now if im mistaken, and have misread what you posted please help me clear up the confusion.

Hi Kframe, considering your recent change in your martial system, perhaps I can help here as well.

The majority of what you do will be "scripted". However, it should be understood that that approach has been the norm (and continues to be the norm) for anyone wanting to deal with actual violence, not sparring. Why? Because it's much easier to teach methods of movement, tactics, principles, and so on that way. You learn to do things the way that the tried and tested system has learnt is the best. The problem is when people stop at the "do this slow so you can remember the whole sequence" level... that's the absolute beginning, and is actually something you do before you begin actually training the art. When these "scripted" actions (Japanese kata... paired) are done properly, it should be at an speed, power, intensity, and range/distance of an actual fight... and it should be done at a level where you can't "remember" what the next step is... you simply do it instinctively. That's the real aim of kata training here. And, when you get it wrong, you get hit. Hard. Properly. For real.

Tell you what, here's a few examples:

This is Araki Ryu, performed by Ellis Amdur. One aim of this Ryu, and it's training methods, are to constantly pressure test by taking the kata to the extreme... in this demonstration (which isn't that far removed from the intensity they train with), one of the weapons breaks... it goes "off script"... but the sequence continues. Without proper kata training, that doesn't happen.

Very old footage of Katori Shinto Ryu... which is here for the moment when one of the swordsmen doesn't quite get his bokken (wooden sword) up in time... and gets a nasty whack to the head! That's the reality of kata, when done well... you have to get it right... but you don't have time to remember.

 

[ballen0351]

Yes, we go full contact until someone submits. There's no reason to continue to go full blast if someone submits to you.

So what your saying is because I don't shatter my training partners jaw my art is not effective but there is no reason for you to shatter your partners elbow.

Ummmmmm yeah ok

 

[Hanzou]

. What part of "traditional Okinawan Goju Ryu karate does not spar and does not train for competition" are you having such trouble comprehending. I put it to my four year old grandson, whom I am already teaching traditional karate, and he understands perfectly.

But I suppose I should say thank you for acknowledging that they were 'great demonstrations'. That's a big step from TMA is crap which was your start point.

Ah, you never said that your school never spars. Thank you for that information. Now it all makes perfect sense, and it explains why we have so much footage of Goju Karatekas fighting like kick boxers.

If you're not sparring, how do you know what you are learning actually works? Doing line drills and kata isn't an effective method of testing your techniques. Even mid-speed sparring is better than NO sparring at all.

 

[Chris Parker]

You do realize, of course, that sparring only tests that you can apply things in sparring... not actual combat. It's different in a whole world of ways.

 

[Hanzou]

1) There is no such thing as 'full contact' except for actual fighting.

Thats not the definition of full contact. This is;

A (full) contact sport is any sport for which significant physical impact force on players, either deliberate or incidental, is allowed for within the rules of the game.Contact actions include tackling, blocking and a whole range of other moves that can differ substantially in their rules and degree of application.


Examples of contact sports are Australian rules football, lacrosse, rugby league, Rugby Union, Roller Derby, American football, water polo, wrestling, sumo, team handball, slamball and ice hockey. Full-contact martial arts include boxing, mixed martial arts, jujutsu, Muay Thai, judo, and various forms of full contact karate. Also, kickboxing, in the early 1970s in the United States, was born and introduced a controlled version of full contact to martial arts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-contact#Full-contact

2) Full contact, semi-contact, non-contact, none of these equal aliveness.

Full contact does.

3) Although good, they are hardly beating the hell out of each other, they are not punching to the head or trying to incapacitate or knock out their training partners (if they were then there would not be adults sparring children).

People getting knocked out during Kyokushin belt testing isn't unheard of. Obviously they're not going to be blasting children with full power attacks, but adults are a different story.

4) It would be extremely difficult for BJJ to do anything that did not have full contact since combat cuddling requires actual touching. You cannot mount or choke someone without touching them

Which is why grapplers tend to have an advantage in fights over strikers.

6) How do you define 'pulling punches'? To me it suggests that you do not contact by not finishing your punch.

Thats exactly what it means.

7) YOU HAVE STILL TO POST A VIDEO OF YOUR TRAINING TO SHOW EVERYONE YOUR SUPERIOR TRAINING METHODS AS YOU SEE THEM.

Look up any video showing Bjj training. Unlike others in this thread I don't train in some secret form of martial arts.

 

[Hanzou]

You do realize, of course, that sparring only tests that you can apply things in sparring... not actual combat. It's different in a whole world of ways.

How do you think Mohammed Ali learned how to evade punches, knock out people, and to take a punch?

It came from sparring.

 

[Chris Parker]

Really? That's what you come up with? Ali?

No, his evasions, punching power, etc, came from drills... on people, on pads and bags, and so on. His ability to fight in the ring came from sparring. I can give you a pretty mean knockout strike without ever sparring it, you understand... and get you to apply it in a real situation. A boxing ring? Maybe, maybe not... depends how good you are, and how well you take to the drills. You do them properly, especially in the scenario training I'd give you, and you can apply it "for real" pretty damn well. Just not necessarily in a sporting context.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Thats not the definition of full contact. This is;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-contact#Full-contact

You missed the point entirely.

Full contact does.

So if you stand still and let someone knock you out without trying to stop them, that's aliveness is it?

People getting knocked out during Kyokushin belt testing isn't unheard of. Obviously they're not going to be blasting children with full power attacks, but adults are a different story.

But not being shown in that video.

Which is why grapplers tend to have an advantage in fights over strikers.

In the UFC and other competitions mainly.

Thats exactly what it means.

You can train semi-contact and non-contact without pulling punches you know.

Look up any video showing Bjj training. Unlike others in this thread I don't train in some secret form of martial arts.

Tell me which ones have YOU in them and I will.

 

[Hanzou]

So what your saying is because I don't shatter my training partners jaw my art is not effective but there is no reason for you to shatter your partners elbow.

Ummmmmm yeah ok

You don't need to shatter your partner's jaw. In boxing for example, you can knock your training partner out, knock them down repeatedly, or otherwise dominate them in the ring. In Bjj, if I choke out my partner, force them to tap from an armbar, wristlock, or leglock, or I pin them to the mat so that they can't get up, that shows superiority against a non compliant opponent.

The advantages of sparring versus non-sparring are innumerable. My school has entire sessions devoted to just rolling (sparring) everyday. I couldn't imagine not having that testing ground available to me to test what I've learned against bigger, faster, or smarter opponents.

Heck, you do Judo. Could you imagine Judo without sparring? Without getting slammed to the mat at full power, or the feeling you get when you pull off a perfect throw against an opponent trying to throw you or take you down? I couldn't even imagine.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Doing line drills and kata isn't an effective method of testing your techniques. Even mid-speed sparring is better than NO sparring at all.

Doing line drills and kata IS an effective method of learning, practicing and improving your techniques.

 

[Hanzou]

Really? That's what you come up with? Ali?

No, his evasions, punching power, etc, came from drills... on people, on pads and bags, and so on. His ability to fight in the ring came from sparring.

And when he sparred, he took the drills from people, pads, and bags, and APPLIED them. As Bruce Lee said " boards don't hit back". Ali learned boxing in the drills, and when he applied it during sparring, he developed his fighting method. Without that sparring portion of his training, he wouldn't have been nearly as effective in the ring.

I can give you a pretty mean knockout strike without ever sparring it, you understand... and get you to apply it in a real situation. A boxing ring? Maybe, maybe not... depends how good you are, and how well you take to the drills. You do them properly, especially in the scenario training I'd give you, and you can apply it "for real" pretty damn well. Just not necessarily in a sporting context.

How do you know of its a reliable knockout strike if you've never knocked someone out with it in a consistent manner? Mike Tyson had a knockout strike, because he consistently knocked people out with it.

 

[Hanzou]

Doing line drills and kata IS an effective method of learning, practicing and improving your techniques.

But not applying your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.

 

[RTKDCMB]

But not applying your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.

That's where the sparring and bag/pad work comes in.

 

[Chris Parker]

And when he sparred, he took the drills from people, pads, and bags, and APPLIED them. As Bruce Lee said " boards don't hit back". Ali learned boxing in the drills, and when he applied it during sparring, he developed his fighting method. Without that sparring portion of his training, he wouldn't have been nearly as effective in the ring.

Relevant portion highlighted for you.

If you want to get good for the ring, you have to practice for the ring... and that means sparring... no-one has argued against that. Same with any form of competition. But we're not talking about training for competition when we discuss TMA methods... so applying the same yardstick is completely irrelevant, and just shows how little you get this whole discussion, let alone anything else.

How do you know of its a reliable knockout strike if you've never knocked someone out with it in a consistent manner? Mike Tyson had a knockout strike, because he consistently knocked people out with it.

Son, who says I haven't? I've knocked people out in training, and in "the street"... and the times in training, I wasn't even aiming to. Hell, I knocked out one guy with another guy's head once... that was... amusing.

The point is that you're trying to argue from a position of ignorance, and, despite being corrected on it a number of times, you refuse to listen to those who have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, and washed the blood off it.

 

[Chris Parker]

But not applying your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.

I really don't think you get kata, as this is exactly what kata is for... it isn't for teaching techinques, it's for teaching applications of them... timing, distancing, angling, sequencing, targeting, and so on, in an easily repeatable and reliable fashion. It's probably more obvious in Japanese kata rather than Okinawan/Chinese/Korean forms, but the aim is the same.

Oh, and in Japanese (paired) kata? The opponent is definitely trying to hurt you... get it wrong, and they will.

 

[Hanzou]

That's where the sparring and bag/pad work comes in.

Exactly.

 

[Hanzou]

Relevant portion highlighted for you.

If you want to get good for the ring, you have to practice for the ring... and that means sparring... no-one has argued against that. Same with any form of competition. But we're not talking about training for competition when we discuss TMA methods... so applying the same yardstick is completely irrelevant, and just shows how little you get this whole discussion, let alone anything else.

So you think a boxer couldn't knock someone out on the street? I would argue that a boxer has a higher chance of knocking someone out than someone doing Asian martial arts.

Son, who says I haven't? I've knocked people out in training, and in "the street"... and the times in training, I wasn't even aiming to. Hell, I knocked out one guy with another guy's head once... that was... amusing.

The point is that you're trying to argue from a position of ignorance, and, despite being corrected on it a number of times, you refuse to listen to those who have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, and washed the blood off it.

The only things I refuse to listen to is outright nonsense. If you tell me that you can knock out people without ever actually hit anyone, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you tossed a guy across the room with one hand, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you practice some secret Okinawan karate style that is so deadly that your dojo doesn't spar, that's nonsense too.

You can tell me anything about yourself, and I'll take it at face value, and we can discuss. However, if you're trying to peddle some BS and push it as fact, I gotta call you on it.

Remember, I'm just a guy who does Bjj, been in a few scraps, and fought some TMA guys, and wasn't impressed.

I really don't think you get kata, as this is exactly what kata is for... it isn't for teaching techinques, it's for teaching applications of them... timing, distancing, angling, sequencing, targeting, and so on, in an easily repeatable and reliable fashion. It's probably more obvious in Japanese kata rather than Okinawan/Chinese/Korean forms, but the aim is the same.


Oh, and in Japanese (paired) kata? The opponent is definitely trying to hurt you... get it wrong, and they will.

LoL! I get kata, and I'm sure there's some benefit to doing it. However, in my experience, a great kata doesn't translate into great fighting skills. As far as I can tell, Kata is largely used for belt purposes. In other words, you do kata A and kata B perfectly during your belt test, and you get your next belt.

 

[Chris Parker]

So you think a boxer couldn't knock someone out on the street? I would argue that a boxer has a higher chance of knocking someone out than someone doing Asian martial arts.

Please. I said it wasn't necessary to spar to be able to knock someone out, nothing at all about saying a boxer couldn't do it. Try harder.

The only things I refuse to listen to is outright nonsense. If you tell me that you can knock out people without ever actually hit anyone, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you tossed a guy across the room with one hand, that's nonsense. If you tell me that you practice some secret Okinawan karate style that is so deadly that your dojo doesn't spar, that's nonsense too.

You can tell me anything about yourself, and I'll take it at face value, and we can discuss. However, if you're trying to peddle some BS and push it as fact, I gotta call you on it.

Remember, I'm just a guy who does Bjj, been in a few scraps, and fought some TMA guys, and wasn't impressed.

You've been told a lot in this thread, and ignored all of it. But, to placate you, we were training group defence, I hit the guy in front, his head knocked back into the guy behind him and to his left, right on the jaw, and knocked the second guy out. Could I do that deliberately on command? Doubt it. A week or so later, we were doing a different defence, and a solid elbow to the side of the jaw knocked out another guy. Did I mean to? No. In fact, it was just because he asked if that was really the best target to choose... I aimed to rattle him a bit, nothing more. If you want to call that BS, but not actually come up with any answers as to your own experiences, go for it.

Oh, and no, in my schools we don't spar. Nothing to do with being "too deadly" (as that is patently absurd), it's because sparring (competitive forms) teaches a whole range of dangerous, bad habits that go directly against what we teach. To spar would be to undo the benefits of what we train, and how we train. We do, however, engage in scenario training, resistance training, free-form drills, and so on... but we don't spar.

LoL! I get kata, and I'm sure there's some benefit to doing it. However, in my experience, a great kata doesn't translate into great fighting skills. As far as I can tell, Kata is largely used for belt purposes. In other words, you do kata A and kata B perfectly during your belt test, and you get your next belt.

Then you don't get kata. Tell you what, have you watched the clips I put up earlier? They're kata... and nothing to do with getting any belt.

 

[seasoned]

But not applying your techniques. Application is the most important part. You can have the prettiest, most technical Kata in the world. However, it doesn't mean a whole hill of beans if you've never actually hit anything before, learned how to time your attacks, or went against an opponent who wants to hurt you.

All the above can be accomplished with the Makiwara for striking power, partner drills for timing, realistic drills with no nonsense partners.
It's never how hard one can hit but where the hit goes that counts anyway. (Eyes, neck and knee) from someone that trains for those hits daily.
A well trained boxer is a devastating weapon, but, up against a TMA that is likewise well trained in bare knuckle strikes and low kicks, would make for an interesting situation indeed.
Commercialized TMA dojo that train the masses are providing a much needed service to people that want and are willing to put the time in. But, as with hardcore boxing clubs, there are as many small TMA clubs that train in cellars and garages as close to the old ways as possible.