Teach / Train to beat other styles?

[James Kovacich]

I think that you summed up my thoughts with what you posted in post #5 James. While it may apply more to sport applications, vs SD applications, I think that its still important to teach how other arts function. I mean, if someone is going to teach a defense and a student is going to assume that said defense is going to actually work or have the impression that it'll work, then IMHO, the teacher as well as the student should have at least a basic understanding of how things work. Ex: In Kenpo we have various techs to defend against takedowns. Nothing wrong with this in and of itself, however, if the person has no idea how a grappler operates, the student could be in for quite a surprise.

Granted, in the real world, the badguy may not be a world class wrestler, but instead some punk who just rushes you and does a half *** takedown attempt, but IMO, I'd rather be over prepared, than under. But thats just me.

I was hoping you would jump in as I like reading your rational. I think maybe for some the title implies fighting style against style but what it really leads to using your opponents own style to neutralize them before or while using our specific art.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

 

[James Kovacich]

I thought the training was to be able to fight no matter who or what?
At lest thats what I was taught.

I think a lot of styles believe that and teach that philosophy. But especially today, I think it's more of a belief than an actuality. We could take the same examples I used about a grappler and substitute the word grappler with the word boxer. A boxer has a handful of weapons whichs he hones for years. I think it would be a big mistake to think a streetfighters strikes or even a kickboxers strikes are as effective as boxers. It's a big plus to look at the specialties within differant styles rather that assume our systems "cover it."

 

[DennisBreene]

I suspect personal style and capability has as much to do with one's individual capacity to survive a fight as the parameters of one's formal style. The level of skill and talent accross the board is so variable among practitioners (including the skill of street fighters) that I suspect 90% of altercations would be decided based on the relative personal capabilities of the combatents regardless of the formal styles of the cambatents. Simply; a good stand up karateka is likely to beat a poor grapler and vice versa. Please take this with a grain of salt. While I have formally studied multiple styles, I expect I will depart this mortal coil without being tested in a street confrontation. Probably the only practitioners who can comment with real insight are those who have had occasion to be in real fights and are willing to critically assess their performence without a lot of chest thumping.

 

[oftheherd1]

We (Goju) train with a seriously gifted TKD teacher, and I have to say, it makes me wonder where other Goju stylists ever came up with the idea of 'catching the kick'....

If you mean to just reach out and grab a foot as if counting coup, maybe not a good idea. So sorry, I have to ask what you mean by catching a foot? And always remember, you said a gifted TKD teacher, by which I take it to mean a very good TKD practitioner. Years ago, I studied under Jhoon Goo Rhee. He was fast. I had an occassion to see Henry Cho from New York. He was faster. He was also younger. But techniques I learned in Hapkido would have caused them problems, assuming their speed didn't defeat my speed, which could very well have happened. So it may just mean that you need to adjust your response if you see someone super fast attacking you.

 

[oftheherd1]

As to the original question; to my knowledge, Aikido, and my style, Hapkido are both mostly defensive (I didn't know, but apparently also Kenpo). In Hapkido, we learn to defend against punches, kicks, grabs, throws, being on the ground, swords, knives, etc. To a great extent then, we train against other martial arts. It would of course be foolish to assume there may not be individual techniques in other MA that we might have difficulty with. But not that many I think. And of course, I only trained to 3rd Belt level. I don't know what may be taught at higher levels.

I am not sure that is what is being asked. At no time was I ever told this is a TKD kick attack, do this. We did learn defenses against high, side, and low kicks. In the style I learned, it followed the pattern of blocks, block/punch, block/lock, block/throw.

In Hapkido, we tend to move into an attack. That means one must always be very fast and very accurate. In answer to my post to harlan, I think that may be what he was aluding to, a very fast kicker. That has to be taken in to account. But if you can side-step, deflect, or move inside the attack, you may take away the opponent's speed advantage.

 

[James Kovacich]

As to the original question; to my knowledge, Aikido, and my style, Hapkido are both mostly defensive (I didn't know, but apparently also Kenpo). In Hapkido, we learn to defend against punches, kicks, grabs, throws, being on the ground, swords, knives, etc. To a great extent then, we train against other martial arts. It would of course be foolish to assume there may not be individual techniques in other MA that we might have difficulty with. But not that many I think. And of course, I only trained to 3rd Belt level. I don't know what may be taught at higher levels.

I am not sure that is what is being asked. At no time was I ever told this is a TKD kick attack, do this. We did learn defenses against high, side, and low kicks. In the style I learned, it followed the pattern of blocks, block/punch, block/lock, block/throw.

In Hapkido, we tend to move into an attack. That means one must always be very fast and very accurate. In answer to my post to harlan, I think that may be what he was aluding to, a very fast kicker. That has to be taken in to account. But if you can side-step, deflect, or move inside the attack, you may take away the opponent's speed advantage.

I too step into an attacker more than I step back. It causes many people problems but it is more risky but still my preferance.

It can be about the individual techniques. But for me it's about figuring how to neutralize an opponent which learning how and what they do. That's what Ken Shamrock did in UFC 5 when he fought Royce Gracie for 36 minutes to a draw. The only thing missing for Ken was taking it one more step and imposing his will. But at that time, that draw was a big thing because Royces guard was that good.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

 

[MJS]

I was hoping you would jump in as I like reading your rational. I think maybe for some the title implies fighting style against style but what it really leads to using your opponents own style to neutralize them before or while using our specific art.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Thanks and I enjoy your posts as well.

 

[Buka]

If you were in a boxing gym you would learn to box. The instruction would be under the rules and training methods of boxing. If you were in a wrestling program, you would be wrestling, the training would be based of whatever form of competitive wrestling that gym was part of - or learned from. If you were in a Karate school you would learn to fight in whatever manner that school/style taught. It's all good, really.

To study/train against a particular style seems close minded at best. And absolutely reeks of politics. Screw politics.

 

[James Kovacich]

If you were in a boxing gym you would learn to box. The instruction would be under the rules and training methods of boxing. If you were in a wrestling program, you would be wrestling, the training would be based of whatever form of competitive wrestling that gym was part of - or learned from. If you were in a Karate school you would learn to fight in whatever manner that school/style taught. It's all good, really.

To study/train against a particular style seems close minded at best. And absolutely reeks of politics. Screw politics.

I think you didn't read the thread. I don't know where you got that last paragraph from. Since I started the thread, please read post #5.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

 

[harlan]

Sorry, just checked into the thread.

Sure, speed is part of it. But as fast as you can adapt...so can a good kicker. Anyone honestly think a good kicker is going to leave their leg out there to grab? And if you do...that other one will be in your face ASAP. The 'assumption' going into this 'style vs style' thing is that all things are equal. Always someone better/faster/meaner/knowledgable than one's self. 'Best defense...no be there.'

Frankly, I love to relay a story my teacher told me on this (style assumptions):

Someone from another style trained for awhile and insisted on free sparring. Hubris, 'my style vs your style', whatever the reason had this need to test his stuff from day one. One student finally had enough and it was on. Dropped him with an axe-kick. It didn't occur to him that just because Goju doesn't TRAIN axe-kicks doesn't mean no one can use them. LOL!

If you mean to just reach out and grab a foot as if counting coup, maybe not a good idea. So sorry, I have to ask what you mean by catching a foot? And always remember, you said a gifted TKD teacher, by which I take it to mean a very good TKD practitioner. Years ago, I studied under Jhoon Goo Rhee. He was fast. I had an occassion to see Henry Cho from New York. He was faster. He was also younger. But techniques I learned in Hapkido would have caused them problems, assuming their speed didn't defeat my speed, which could very well have happened. So it may just mean that you need to adjust your response if you see someone super fast attacking you.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This isn't about my style is better. It is a continual learning process...

In stand up grappling, whoever's body touches the ground first, that round is over. Nobody ever used "pull guard" in the stand up grappling. The 1st time someone used "pull guard" on me, it was a big surprise. After that, to prevent people from using it, it becomes part of my defense and counter. If I didn't test my skill outside of my comfortable zone, I would never develop that part of skills.

Most of my guys also test their skill in local MMA gyms. One MMA coach used my guy's grappling skill to train his next UFC. That MMA coach has very good MT clinch. When that coach applied MT clinch on my guy, my guy used his favor "head lock" to counter. His head lock not only locked his opponent's head but also jamed both of his opponent's arms between their body. Principles such as "If your opponent wants to bend his arm, you will help him to bend even more." will always work beyond "style boundary".

 

[oftheherd1]

Sorry, just checked into the thread.

Sure, speed is part of it. But as fast as you can adapt...so can a good kicker. Anyone honestly think a good kicker is going to leave their leg out there to grab? And if you do...that other one will be in your face ASAP. The 'assumption' going into this 'style vs style' thing is that all things are equal. Always someone better/faster/meaner/knowledgable than one's self. 'Best defense...no be there.'

Frankly, I love to relay a story my teacher told me on this (style assumptions):

Someone from another style trained for awhile and insisted on free sparring. Hubris, 'my style vs your style', whatever the reason had this need to test his stuff from day one. One student finally had enough and it was on. Dropped him with an axe-kick. It didn't occur to him that just because Goju doesn't TRAIN axe-kicks doesn't mean no one can use them. LOL!

Bolded1: I don't recall any kick defense I learned that taught me to reach out and attempt to grab an attacker's kick. We usually trapped the leg and/or struck the leg, dislocated a joint, or threw the opponent. Naturally it was done with the expectation the kicker would be attemping to withdraw the leg. Of course, as always, it depends on the skills of both the attacker and the defender, as you mentioned in the 2nd bolded sentance.

Interesting you mentioned the axe kick. I remember seeing the west asian games TKD matches some 20+ years ago. The west asian contestant was good, but he either had never seen an axe kick, or never learned to defend against it. I suspect the first since he was utterly powerless to defend against it, and lost the match. It really stuck in my mind as I had always considered the axe kick best only against someone having been thrown/grappled to the ground, thinking most people couldn't execute it fast enough. I learned something watching that. You might have thought the west asian would have learned from the first or second kick, but he seemed completely baffled. Gives more credence to what we called "outside" kicks, swinging from say, the right foot across, up, and then back into the head.