So an interesting thing happened to me today...

[Gerry Seymour]

For me a low percentage technique is one that has a very small chance of being successful period. Me kicking my opponent in the face while doing a backflip would be something that is low percentage no matter the skill level of the opponent.
Stuff like this. Low Percentage.

We can agree on that part, for sure. My original point was simply that percentages go down on everything when the opponent is more skilled. My jab is a higher-percentage move against an unskilled person than someone who has developed sparring skill.

 

[drop bear]

There's that side, too. But, for instance, if you look at high-level Judo competition (the Olympics, for instance), you'll see them attempt several throws and have to abandon them immediately. They thought the throw might be available, but it wasn't. That's what I mean by a lower %. The difference between your statement and mine is a matter of whether you count only the times it is actually attempted, or all the times it might have been. With a beginning student, at any given moment, my chances of landing a punch (or a throw/takedown) is much higher than if, for instance, I was sparring you, Tony, DB, etc. One measure of my skill is how often I recognize that and make a better choice (including waiting for something useful to be available).

Exept. Nope. We dont have to go off an individual fighter vs another individual fighter. We can look at the highest percentage in a comp. Or through a fighters career.

The Top Scoring Judo Techniques for Olympic Judo - Kokakids - Junior Judo Magazine

Which would give a much more realistic concept of high percentage than just saying. "I guess we will never know"

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Exept. Nope. We dont have to go off an individual fighter vs another individual fighter. We can look at the highest percentage in a comp. Or through a fighters career.

The Top Scoring Judo Techniques for Olympic Judo - Kokakids - Junior Judo Magazine

Which would give a much more realistic concept of high percentage than just saying. "I guess we will never know"

That doesn't change my point, so I'm not sure what you intend to refute. The percentage for a technique goes down when the other guy's skill goes up.

 

[drop bear]

That doesn't change my point, so I'm not sure what you intend to refute. The percentage for a technique goes down when the other guy's skill goes up.

Maybe individually. But not as a group. As much.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Someone recently admitted that they wanted to fight me, to prove that TMA can't beat MMA. He wanted to do a video like the MMA vs Tai Chi video. Long story short. I told him that if he wants to fight me because he truly believes that I don't know how to fight, then that makes him a bully. I asked him why would he beat up someone who he believed couldn't defend themselves. My question pretty much silenced him.

So if anyone tells you that TMA can't fight, and they want to fight you. Then simply ask that person why would he/she beat on someone they believe couldn't defend themselves. Then call him/her a bully. This puts the person into jam as he/she would have to either admit that they are a Bully for trying to fight someone they believed couldn't fight back, or they have to acknowledge that you can fight and that you do TMA. At this point you can just sit back and grin as it kills any TMA vs MMA argument as the person will be conflicted between being a bully or admitting you can fight as his /her equal lol.

My wife says that I have a talent for killing conversations lol.

 

[jobo]

For me a low percentage technique is one that has a very small chance of being successful period. Me kicking my opponent in the face while doing a backflip would be something that is low percentage no matter the skill level of the opponent.
Stuff like this. Low Percentage.

that re enforces the point i made earlier. Not only is that unlikely to come off, but it leaves you in a very vulrable position if there isn't a ref to stop it

flash moves that don't come off are one thing, flash moves that dont come off and that leave you lay on the floor are quite another

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Maybe individually. But not as a group. As much.

Why do you say that? It is my experience that for everyone, assuming they can execute their core techniques readily, they have higher percentages against folks who are significantly less skilled than them, lower percentages against folks around their own skill level, and much lower percentages against folks well above their skill level.

 

[JowGaWolf]

that re enforces the point i made earlier. Not only is that unlikely to come off, but it leaves you in a very vulrable position if there isn't a ref to stop it

flash moves that don't come off are one thing, flash moves that dont come off and that leave you lay on the floor are quite another

If your kata looks plain and boring in comparison to other martial arts then there's a good chance that the majority or all of that kata has functional and practical use. From there the percentage will vary with the interpretation of the technique. Sometimes an instructor will get it wrong, complicate, or fail to say when is the best time to use the technique because they don't know. The chances that someone will get the technique correct without sparring is very small. The instructor may know what it's for and how it's used, but will lack the knowledge of when to use it and what to use it against. There is a high chance that the technique will fail if any of those 2 things are wrong. Keep in mind that it's not uncommon to have an instructor that knows his stuff but lacks the ability to use it in free sparring.

 

[drop bear]

Why do you say that? It is my experience that for everyone, assuming they can execute their core techniques readily, they have higher percentages against folks who are significantly less skilled than them, lower percentages against folks around their own skill level, and much lower percentages against folks well above their skill level.

Because that is not how high percentage moves are worked out. They are high percentage across the board. Not really high percentage as compare to the other guys defence.

Look at mma. The most successful takedown is still the double leg.
Fight Stats: Double Leg Is The Most Common MMA Takedown, Nurmagomedov Most Successful Takedown Artist

And it is also the takedown people spend the most of their time defending.

So double leg becomes high percentage.

It does not have as much to do with the skill of the oponant as just the basic effectiveness of the move.

High percentage because you fight gumbies is a pretty usless statistic.

Execution of their core technique is a bit dependant on the defence of the other guy. GSP pretty much only uses core techniques.

This is a trick I picked up watching a guy street fight. A dude I used to bounce with routinely used to knock guys out in their fives and tens. And looking at how he did it, he wasn't using any technique I wasn't doing or didn't know.

He was just really good at high percentage basics.

Found him. Clay in the orange red shorts.

Didn't know this. He got shot after some issue with bikers.(No really they are not gangsters. They are just a social riding club)

, Clay Auimatagi security - Google Search:

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Because that is not how high percentage moves are worked out. They are high percentage across the board. Not really high percentage as compare to the other guys defence.

Look at mma. The most successful takedown is still the double leg.
Fight Stats: Double Leg Is The Most Common MMA Takedown, Nurmagomedov Most Successful Takedown Artist

And it is also the takedown people spend the most of their time defending.

So double leg becomes high percentage.

It does not have as much to do with the skill of the oponant as just the basic effectiveness of the move.

High percentage because you fight gumbies is a pretty usless statistic.

Execution of their core technique is a bit dependant on the defence of the other guy. GSP pretty much only uses core techniques.

This is a trick I picked up watching a guy street fight. A dude I used to bounce with routinely used to knock guys out in their fives and tens. And looking at how he did it, he wasn't using any technique I wasn't doing or didn't know.

He was just really good at high percentage basics.

Found him. Clay in the orange red shorts.

Didn't know this. He got shot after some issue with bikers.(No really they are not gangsters. They are just a social riding club)

, Clay Auimatagi security - Google Search:

Okay, I take your point. I use the term differently, apparently.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Okay, I take your point. I use the term differently, apparently.

Not sure if you notice in the video, but the low kick was a high percentage technique vs the circular punch which is considered a "low percentage" technique because it's slower. Yet he was able to use the technique effectively, which brings into question "Is the circular punch" really a low percentage technique? Or was the kick actually a low percentage technique? I watch one of his other fights where his opponent tried the same kicks. The outcome was different as the other guy understood that he couldn't just kick first. He thew punch combos and ended the combo with the same kick. This made the kick more effective. 2 different fights with 2 different fighters using the same kick and having the same problem. The only real difference is that one understood why the kick was being countered and made the adjustment. This is the fight that I'm referring to. The first 2 minutes he threw the kick first. You can see him work it out. The he realized that he had to use a punch combination before the kick. There is no skill level involved between throwing a kick first and throwing a punch before the kick, and tying a kick at the end of a punch combination. The approach is what changes and not the effectiveness of the technique.

I think the way you think of it is based more on the person's ability than the technique. How effective is a technique based on a person's skill level and not if the technique alone is effective. I think this is the most common way that people determine if a technique is a high percentage or a low percentage, by basing it on the person's skill level and ability to do it. So in this light we get things like "Tai Chi Master" who we just assume has the skill level and the ability to use the techniques. So when the "Tai Chi Master" loses, people think that Tai Chi techniques are not effective but no one ever questions if the "Tai Chi Master" actually have the skill level and ability to use the technique. It doesn't necessarily mean the technique is ineffective or low percentage, but it definitely means that the "Tai Chi Master" couldn't use them.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not sure if you notice in the video, but the low kick was a high percentage technique vs the circular punch which is considered a "low percentage" technique because it's slower. Yet he was able to use the technique effectively, which brings into question "Is the circular punch" really a low percentage technique? Or was the kick actually a low percentage technique? I watch one of his other fights where his opponent tried the same kicks. The outcome was different as the other guy understood that he couldn't just kick first. He thew punch combos and ended the combo with the same kick. This made the kick more effective. 2 different fights with 2 different fighters using the same kick and having the same problem. The only real difference is that one understood why the kick was being countered and made the adjustment. This is the fight that I'm referring to. The first 2 minutes he threw the kick first. You can see him work it out. The he realized that he had to use a punch combination before the kick. There is no skill level involved between throwing a kick first and throwing a punch before the kick, and tying a kick at the end of a punch combination. The approach is what changes and not the effectiveness of the technique.

I think the way you think of it is based more on the person's ability than the technique. How effective is a technique based on a person's skill level and not if the technique alone is effective. I think this is the most common way that people determine if a technique is a high percentage or a low percentage, by basing it on the person's skill level and ability to do it. So in this light we get things like "Tai Chi Master" who we just assume has the skill level and the ability to use the techniques. So when the "Tai Chi Master" loses, people think that Tai Chi techniques are not effective but no one ever questions if the "Tai Chi Master" actually have the skill level and ability to use the technique. It doesn't necessarily mean the technique is ineffective or low percentage, but it definitely means that the "Tai Chi Master" couldn't use them.

I'm not referring to the ability to do the technique, but the ability of the opponent to prevent it. My single-leg is a higher-percentage technique against a striker than against a wrestler.

 

[oftheherd1]

Someone recently admitted that they wanted to fight me, to prove that TMA can't beat MMA. He wanted to do a video like the MMA vs Tai Chi video. Long story short. I told him that if he wants to fight me because he truly believes that I don't know how to fight, then that makes him a bully. I asked him why would he beat up someone who he believed couldn't defend themselves. My question pretty much silenced him.

Well done!

So if anyone tells you that TMA can't fight, and they want to fight you. Then simply ask that person why would he/she beat on someone they believe couldn't defend themselves. Then call him/her a bully. This puts the person into jam as he/she would have to either admit that they are a Bully for trying to fight someone they believed couldn't fight back, or they have to acknowledge that you can fight and that you do TMA. At this point you can just sit back and grin as it kills any TMA vs MMA argument as the person will be conflicted between being a bully or admitting you can fight as his /her equal lol.

My wife says that I have a talent for killing conversations lol.

A good response.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm not referring to the ability to do the technique, but the ability of the opponent to prevent it. My single-leg is a higher-percentage technique against a striker than against a wrestler.

But if you are looking at it that way, then aren't you looking at the ability of the opponent to do their technique? So in that light you aren't looking at your ability to use a technique, you are looking at your opponent's ability to use a technique. So in a way it's the same thing, it's just that you aren't measuring your ability but your opponent's ability. If this is correct then my statement would still hold true.

 

[JowGaWolf]

A good response.

It worked better than I thought it would. I haven't heard anything from him since I've told him that. I haven't seen him bully other TMA artists in the group either.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

But if you are looking at it that way, then aren't you looking at the ability of the opponent to do their technique? So in that light you aren't looking at your ability to use a technique, you are looking at your opponent's ability to use a technique. So in a way it's the same thing, it's just that you aren't measuring your ability but your opponent's ability. If this is correct then my statement would still hold true.

If you include counters as techniques, then yes. I'm specifically NOT talking about my own ability to do my technique - that is a static point in both instances. But it's not really the same thing. Someone who knows how to sprawl to avoid a single-leg makes the single-leg less likely to be successful than if they didn't know that. Their skill matters.

 

[Balrog]

I was told that my by this person that my opinion of martial art had no value because I have never competed as a Professional Fight or MMA fight.

I've actually been told something similar.

My response was that one of the fundamentals of self-defense was to control your environment and never place yourself in a situation where someone else could hurt you. MMA doesn't follow that fundamental, and because of that, I was far more successful in defending myself than they were.

It was amusing watching his reaction.

 

[oftheherd1]

It worked better than I thought it would. I haven't heard anything from him since I've told him that. I haven't seen him bully other TMA artists in the group either.

Great! I hope I never have to use that, but if the opportunity should arise, I will gleefully steal that.

 

[drop bear]

I've actually been told something similar.

My response was that one of the fundamentals of self-defense was to control your environment and never place yourself in a situation where someone else could hurt you. MMA doesn't follow that fundamental, and because of that, I was far more successful in defending myself than they were.

It was amusing watching his reaction.

So the best martial artist are the guys who never turn up.

 

[Balrog]

So the best martial artist are the guys who never turn up.

I firmly believe that old Sun Tzu nailed it:

• For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.