So what's a better "test" for martial arts other than MMA?

[Gerry Seymour]

Depends what your context is. You may for example need to engage in some risk to mitigate a greater risk. So if you were training for a life or death street attack. You may need to risk an injury in a safer environment to gain skills that will protect you in a more dangerous one.

If your context isnt fighting. Then you would train accordingly. Like I do pretty much. I dont take that extra step to become better because the cost of being better is too great.

I like pizza and sleep ins so I dont fight.

There's a certain level of injury I'm willing to routinely risk. A broken arm is far beyond that point. With a broken arm, my ability to defend myself becomes dramatically reduced for an extended period. That's entirely contrary to the point of my training. Of course, there's always some risk of that happening, anyway, during routine training, but it's much easier to mitigate if I'm not competing against a gorilla who doesn't care about my goals.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't even know if I would put it that way. The two are completely different mindsets. The person who trained as a warrior who walks into a competition will look like the guy who is willing to purposefully hurt another for the sake of a mere win bit in reality he was simply fighting because fighting (vs competing) is what he knows. It's why the only time I will compete (if I want to) will be in Full Contact Short Weapon Free Fighting at tournaments like Kuo Shu. The competitors have helmets and the weapons are padded (so they hurt but usually don't break anything) because when I am fighting, vs training, I really only have one speed. I can "disconnect" a little a school because I am friends with everybody there but in a competition with strangers? I don't have that connection so I just act.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

My frame of reference comes from other sports. There are people in soccer, for instance, who are absolutely willing to injure an opponent to help their team win. If those folks exist in sports like soccer, I'm certain they exist in martial arts competitions. In some competitions I'd consider the risk controllable. In others, it's much harder to stop someone from hurting you if they just get frustrated and decide your arm is no longer yours to keep.

The difference between these gorillas and the fighters who simply go all-out is really a matter of intent. If someone brings everything they have into a full-contact competition, they may well KO their opponent. If they are ethical, IMO, they will not attempt to take their opponent's knee out, especially if they know that opponent already has a problem with the knee. They'll probably try to get them to keep weight on it more to take advantage of the weakness and poorer mobility, but they won't aim for that long-term damage.

 

[drop bear]

I never said it took away from the understanding. But when approaching training with a limited calendar (most people I've trained with), you allocate your hours where they have the highest impact toward your objective. If I spend considerable training time learning to react properly for competition (to remove the stutter movements), then that's time I'm not actually preparing for the full range of self-defense options. It's a choice, and there are pro's and con's on both sides of the choice. The better fitted a given art is to the competition in question (in this case, MMA), the easier the choice likely would be. If the art contains a fair amount of stuff that's inappropriate or otherwise ill-suited to the competition, then it gets harder and harder to justify training to that competition while training that art.

Yeah. You can only train in one dimension. You will understand the art by route. But not how it pieces together as a concept.

I think this is why some people complain about the difficulty of transitioning from the gym to a staircase or a lift and i have rarely seen that as a big issue

 

[Juany118]

My frame of reference comes from other sports. There are people in soccer, for instance, who are absolutely willing to injure an opponent to help their team win. If those folks exist in sports like soccer, I'm certain they exist in martial arts competitions. In some competitions I'd consider the risk controllable. In others, it's much harder to stop someone from hurting you if they just get frustrated and decide your arm is no longer yours to keep.

The difference between these gorillas and the fighters who simply go all-out is really a matter of intent. If someone brings everything they have into a full-contact competition, they may well KO their opponent. If they are ethical, IMO, they will not attempt to take their opponent's knee out, especially if they know that opponent already has a problem with the knee. They'll probably try to get them to keep weight on it more to take advantage of the weakness and poorer mobility, but they won't aim for that long-term damage.

Makes sense. I dabbled in soccer but my main sport reference is track (440 hurdles and the 1/4 mile hard to attack people, we hurt ourselves ) and foil as well as sabre Olympic Fencing which is hard to hurt people directly in as well. As such I don't have the "cripple the other guy" in my personal calculus of sports.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. You can only train in one dimension. You will understand the art by route. But not how it pieces together as a concept.

I think this is why some people complain about the difficulty of transitioning from the gym to a staircase or a lift and i have rarely seen that as a big issue

Not sure I understand that last part, mate. As for the limited understand, I'll just disagree. We don't examine just a single dimension of the art, nor of the techniques we use. Just because I don't compete doesn't mean I take a narrow view of what I do. That's your internal script.

 

[Juany118]

Not sure I understand that last part, mate. As for the limited understand, I'll just disagree. We don't examine just a single dimension of the art, nor of the techniques we use. Just because I don't compete doesn't mean I take a narrow view of what I do. That's your internal script.

Tbh I see competition as a narrow view. It's only in a "real" no holds barred fight where the eyes are truly open. I remember fencing, even in my martial arts class now and the past thinking "this is fun." I also remember saying "oh **** I have to choke this SOB out or I am going to die" (no exaggeration). The two are so different.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[drop bear]

Not sure I understand that last part, mate. As for the limited understand, I'll just disagree. We don't examine just a single dimension of the art, nor of the techniques we use. Just because I don't compete doesn't mean I take a narrow view of what I do. That's your internal script.

It is pretty complicated. And hard to explain.


It is not whether or not you compete but whether you can use the concepts of your system to function in a new environment. You say cant compete because you cannot use your entire skill set. Basically if you had to change invent or adapt on the fly you get stuck.

Basically your big issue is that you will get iinto a situation where you could go for an arm destruction and then not be able to work around that. And that is not very likley to even come up. let alone shift the fight.

lets compare an issue like that which is pretty minor to say a MMA fighter who competes and does not use his whole grappling arsenal. By in this case doing Muay Thai.

Which is pretty common.

Now we have had raised in this thread that some people struggle if they have not been trained specifically to fight on stairs or in a lift and so on.

That minor change to the unfamiliar snuffs them.

And i believe the reason someone hits this issue they are focused too much on the specifics. They get into an arm destruction opportunity and have to stall because they have practiced whatever and cant do that movement. It is an indication of training by route.

I have never encountered somone who has been winning a fight untill it gets to stairs and then loose due to some sort of shift. (And i have seen a lot of fights on stairs. and even some elevators)

So you have this issue. with arm destructions and whether or not you can choose them or another option. But it is not you alone who has this it. it is a trend I have noticed. people have to train in the gear they fight in. Or struggle to do 2 styles at once.

And I think it comes down to how you internalize your martial arts.

 

[drop bear]

Tbh I see competition as a narrow view. It's only in a "real" no holds barred fight where the eyes are truly open. I remember fencing, even in my martial arts class now and the past thinking "this is fun." I also remember saying "oh **** I have to choke this SOB out or I am going to die" (no exaggeration). The two are so different.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Not a lot of self defence guys clamouring to engage in real NHB fights though.

Mabye that is a competition you could start.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is pretty complicated. And hard to explain.


It is not whether or not you compete but whether you can use the concepts of your system to function in a new environment. You say cant compete because you cannot use your entire skill set. Basically if you had to change invent or adapt on the fly you get stuck.

Basically your big issue is that you will get iinto a situation where you could go for an arm destruction and then not be able to work around that. And that is not very likley to even come up. let alone shift the fight.

lets compare an issue like that which is pretty minor to say a MMA fighter who competes and does not use his whole grappling arsenal. By in this case doing Muay Thai.

Which is pretty common.

Now we have had raised in this thread that some people struggle if they have not been trained specifically to fight on stairs or in a lift and so on.

That minor change to the unfamiliar snuffs them.

And i believe the reason someone hits this issue they are focused too much on the specifics. They get into an arm destruction opportunity and have to stall because they have practiced whatever and cant do that movement. It is an indication of training by route.

I have never encountered somone who has been winning a fight untill it gets to stairs and then loose due to some sort of shift. (And i have seen a lot of fights on stairs. and even some elevators)

So you have this issue. with arm destructions and whether or not you can choose them or another option. But it is not you alone who has this it. it is a trend I have noticed. people have to train in the gear they fight in. Or struggle to do 2 styles at once.

And I think it comes down to how you internalize your martial arts.

You're once again re-drawing my argument to suit you. What I said was that there's enough of what I do that doesn't fit with MMA competition that I'd have to either 1) spend a lot of time training specifically for that competition (which, by the way, is what the Muay Thai guys are probably doing in your example), or 2) deal with having a lot of my go-to techniques that aren't available, leaving me with those stutter-movements, giving a distinct advantage to my opponent.

Your comment doesn't, in any way, clarify or refute mine. I could - just like the Muay Thai guys - take the time to train to that difference. But that'd take me away from my training objective, rather than toward it. That's not a useful approach for me. If I was interested in competing, I could spend that extra time and adapt what I do to the rules (like most, I'd need cross-training, too). But why would I?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not a lot of self defence guys clamouring to engage in real NHB fights though.

Mabye that is a competition you could start.

Most "self defense guys" I know aren't really interested in competition.

 

[drop bear]

You're once again re-drawing my argument to suit you. What I said was that there's enough of what I do that doesn't fit with MMA competition that I'd have to either 1) spend a lot of time training specifically for that competition (which, by the way, is what the Muay Thai guys are probably doing in your example), or 2) deal with having a lot of my go-to techniques that aren't available, leaving me with those stutter-movements, giving a distinct advantage to my opponent.

Your comment doesn't, in any way, clarify or refute mine. I could - just like the Muay Thai guys - take the time to train to that difference. But that'd take me away from my training objective, rather than toward it. That's not a useful approach for me. If I was interested in competing, I could spend that extra time and adapt what I do to the rules (like most, I'd need cross-training, too). But why would I?

If you train to adapt to the rules. You are training to adapt..

Might fix that issue you have stalling at certain points.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you train to adapt to the rules. You are training to adapt..

Might fix that issue you have stalling at certain points.

Just because I don't train to adapt to those rules, that doesn't mean I don't train to adapt. Again, your internal script.

Training to adapt can happen in other ways that don't include leaving out part of the core of the art.

 

[drop bear]

Just because I don't train to adapt to those rules, that doesn't mean I don't train to adapt. Again, your internal script.

Training to adapt can happen in other ways that don't include leaving out part of the core of the art.

Like?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Like?

No need to justify my training to you, but I'll humor you with a few examples:

• Low-light training
• Training in street clothes
• Training outside
• Training without mats
• Defending from the knees
• Defending from a chair
• Training with one arm stuck in obi
• Defending entirely inside a square
• Defending with nothing but feet (no hands, only movement, kicks, etc.)
• Training entirely off-handed
• Training with people from other styles
• Training in other styles

And many more.

 

[Juany118]

No need to justify my training to you, but I'll humor you with a few examples:

• Low-light training
• Training in street clothes
• Training outside
• Training without mats
• Defending from the knees
• Defending from a chair
• Training with one arm stuck in obi
• Defending entirely inside a square
• Defending with nothing but feet (no hands, only movement, kicks, etc.)
• Training entirely off-handed
• Training with people from other styles
• Training in other styles

And many more.

Yeah training to fit into the rules from the jump is something I have no problem with. A full featured MA with competition rules can still be effective. However training without those rules and then trying to adapt to them I think can be problematic as it violates, imo, the "train like you fight" method. Think of just normal muscle memory. As an example, in Wing Chun we have a hand technique used to block low attacks or pin a hand temporarily to create an opening called gum sau. It should just be a cupping hand, not a grab. I had a problem though, since I had spent so many years training to grab the wrist, to transition either into a lock or take down, if I had a drill where I was supposed to perform a gum sau, I either would instinctively lap sau (grab) or stutter as I caught myself mid grab. I think, if I wanted to go into some sort of professional competition, that I would have to seriously modify my training regime in order to have the muscle memory that conformed to the new rule set.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Steve]

A heel hook represents a real risk of

You're once again re-drawing my argument to suit you. What I said was that there's enough of what I do that doesn't fit with MMA competition that I'd have to either 1) spend a lot of time training specifically for that competition (which, by the way, is what the Muay Thai guys are probably doing in your example), or 2) deal with having a lot of my go-to techniques that aren't available, leaving me with those stutter-movements, giving a distinct advantage to my opponent.

Your comment doesn't, in any way, clarify or refute mine. I could - just like the Muay Thai guys - take the time to train to that difference. But that'd take me away from my training objective, rather than toward it. That's not a useful approach for me. If I was interested in competing, I could spend that extra time and adapt what I do to the rules (like most, I'd need cross-training, too). But why would I?

I think because it will dramatically improve your facility with the techniques you do use and also help with many intangibles.

Guys who compete in Bjj often also compete in other rule sets, such as grappling, boxing and Muay Thai. And within grappling, there are many varying rule sets. You don't have to open up the full can of whupass every time. But you should be able to keep your brain engaged and show some critical thinking and sound decision making, even under pressure.

Mma guys don't find themselves punching guys in an IBJJF competition any more than guys just go nuts and take a guy down in a boxing match.

I genuinely question the entire presumption that muscle memory to the point where you crank to 11 in an encounter is good training. Maybe if you live on death planet five or are named snake plisken...

 

[Juany118]

A heel hook represents a real risk of

I think because it will dramatically improve your facility with the techniques you do use and also help with many intangibles.

Guys who compete in Bjj often also compete in other rule sets, such as grappling, boxing and Muay Thai. And within grappling, there are many varying rule sets. You don't have to open up the full can of whupass every time. But you should be able to keep your brain engaged and show some critical thinking and sound decision making, even under pressure.

Mma guys don't find themselves punching guys in an IBJJF competition any more than guys just go nuts and take a guy down in a boxing match.

I genuinely question the entire presumption that muscle memory to the point where you crank to 11 in an encounter is good training. Maybe if you live on death planet five or are named snake plisken...

From reading the previous posts of @gpseymour I believe his method of teaching, and training, self defense is that you don't go hands on unless the situation is cranked to 11.

It's similar to my situation. I need to keep techniques in boxes due to the UoF continuum. Now I don't necessarily have the opportunity to just walk away (which many typical self defense scenarios allow for) but as an example if I face "just" passive resistance I can only justify soft empty hand techniques. If the situation rises to the level where I can justify full on striking or my baton then the situation is 11. So when I train my "hard" control techniques, striking and stick work, I practice like it is 11.

 

[RTKDCMB]

If learning to add is a prerequisite for learning algebra, then the contrapositive is also true. Right? You can't learn algebra if you can't add.

If you have never learned simultaneous equations you will have a much less chance of being able to solve them even when you do learn algebra to solve single equations and how to add up.

Only way I can make sense of it is that you're suggesting that defending against a single person is completely unrelated to defending against multiple people. Is that what you're saying? is there some other way that your response makes sense?

They are not unrelated but there are variables that are in play with multiple attackers that are not present for a single attacker and there are tactics that are required to deal with them that need to be learned.

 

[RTKDCMB]

You win.

He wins the competition because breaking the arm is useful or he wins the argument with you on this forum?

 

[Steve]

From reading the previous posts of @gpseymour I believe his method of teaching, and training, self defense is that you don't go hands on unless the situation is cranked to 11.

It's similar to my situation. I need to keep techniques in boxes due to the UoF continuum. Now I don't necessarily have the opportunity to just walk away (which many typical self defense scenarios allow for) but as an example if I face "just" passive resistance I can only justify soft empty hand techniques. If the situation rises to the level where I can justify full on striking or my baton then the situation is 11. So when I train my "hard" control techniques, striking and stick work, I practice like it is 11.

i don't think that what I said is contrary to what you are saying. Maybe I don't understand, but what I'm suggesting is that competition is good for pressure testing appropriate techniques and tactics, and that this idea that one can't Scale back training for a non lethal context is bad juju.

Kind of the same thing you're saying. Right?