Too Intellectual????

[ShotoNoob]

I think you're saying more about yourself than about Matt Thornton.

|
I would say that is exactly the dynamic of your reply..... my friend....

 

[ShotoNoob]

I think you're saying more about yourself than about Matt Thornton.

|
Personally, I think it's both interesting & beneficial to explore Matt Thorton's approach. It's specifically tailored to MMA, according to Matt & his group.

 

[drop bear]

|
it's a blog post. Yet based on principles....


|
It's your turn to make the point............s.

Based on principles you mean because reasons?

Ok. Being punched hard in the face can make you fall over. Reading too much into that fight might be seen as being too intellectual.

 

[K-man]

Competition and conflict as a matter of course. I get the impression that you take dissent a bit personally and treat it as disrespect. Where for me it is a normal training setting.

Otherwise I haven't seen how you train so I am not sure at what level of argy bargy you engage in.

Nah, not at all. It's how things are discussed. The way some people challenge things is disrespectful, full stop. I am happy to discuss something, put my point of view, agree to disagree and move on. When some one with no understanding tells me I don't train a particular way because he has never seen it done that way so it wouldn't work anyway etc, then I get a bit annoyed (and here I am not talking about you).

There are many posts put on MT outside my area of practise that have comments that are at odds with my experience. I let them go, I don't jump in and tell the guys discussing it that their style sucks and what they are talking about won't work. There was a WC post yesterday with a video demonstrating power generation. I just commented that it was the exact same way of training it that I teach simply to say from my POV, great work. There are bits of WC that don't work for me but you won't find comments from me on those anywhere here on MT.

Now as to argy bargy ... pretty much anything anyone wants to try out is fair game. My classes are informal so as long as what people want to do is safe, in control and within their capability they can go as hard as they like. For example, if you did come to train, knowing your area of expertise, I would pretty much give you the floor for a big part of the night to play with ground work and for most of that I would be your partner so I could judge how my skills matched someone with more expertise than me. You might submit me every time, but I would be testing you and make you work for it.

 

[drop bear]

Nah, not at all. It's how things are discussed. The way some people challenge things is disrespectful, full stop. I am happy to discuss something, put my point of view, agree to disagree and move on. When some one with no understanding tells me I don't train a particular way because he has never seen it done that way so it wouldn't work anyway etc, then I get a bit annoyed (and here I am not talking about you).

There are many posts put on MT outside my area of practise that have comments that are at odds with my experience. I let them go, I don't jump in and tell the guys discussing it that their style sucks and what they are talking about won't work. There was a WC post yesterday with a video demonstrating power generation. I just commented that it was the exact same way of training it that I teach simply to say from my POV, great work. There are bits of WC that don't work for me but you won't find comments from me on those anywhere here on MT.

Now as to argy bargy ... pretty much anything anyone wants to try out is fair game. My classes are informal so as long as what people want to do is safe, in control and within their capability they can go as hard as they like. For example, if you did come to train, knowing your area of expertise, I would pretty much give you the floor for a big part of the night to play with ground work and for most of that I would be your partner so I could judge how my skills matched someone with more expertise than me. You might submit me every time, but I would be testing you and make you work for it.

The last bit but with conversation.

One of these days you are going to have to find out what I actually do regarding training methodology.

But different thread.

 

[ShotoNoob]

Based on principles you mean because reasons?

Ok. Being punched hard in the face can make you fall over. Reading too much into that fight might be seen as being too intellectual.

|
You know I was just reading the interchange between Matt Bryers & Chris Parker (Combat Jui-Jitsu T). My take was that Chris was bringing in some very precise & exact determinations regarding how Matt B defined his style. Matt B, on the other hand was covering a broader base of describing what his art was about and how he got where he was. Kinda of an Apples & Oranges discussion from an understanding what was in each participants head.
|
I also thought both participants made a good effort to resolve the discussion which unfortunately didn't pan out.
|
Regardless of whether Matt B answered Chris Parker's question, I took a look at Matt's presentation for the benefits he can offer.....

 

[drop bear]

|
You know I was just reading the interchange between Matt Bryers & Chris Parker (Combat Jui-Jitsu T). My take was that Chris was bringing in some very precise & exact determinations regarding how Matt B defined his style. Matt B, on the other hand was covering a broader base of describing what his art was about and how he got where he was. Kinda of an Apples & Oranges discussion from an understanding what was in each participants head.
|
I also thought both participants made a good effort to resolve the discussion which unfortunately didn't pan out.
|
Regardless of whether Matt B answered Chris Parker's question, I took a look at Matt's presentation for the benefits he can offer.....

Matt did answer the question in that it is not traditional in the sense that Chris wanted it to be because it was better.

Just he was being nice about trying to say it.

But I am not sure how that is relevant to this thread.

 

[Buka]

Mariusz Pudzianowski is a pretty strong guy. (ya think?) I'd hate to get clocked by that shot.

 

[drop bear]

Mariusz Pudzianowski is a pretty strong guy. (ya think?) I'd hate to get clocked by that shot.

That was fast as well. I have mentioned why wild swingy punches become high percentage. That is a good example. I mean if you have to fight while constantly worrying about eating that. It stops your ability to employ a lot of your own techniques because you just cant close on a guy and risk getting nailed.

 

[ShotoNoob]

Matt did answer the question in that it is not traditional in the sense that Chris wanted it to be because it was better.

Just he was being nice about trying to say it.

But I am not sure how that is relevant to this thread.

|
I was affirming that which was the point of the post. The moral was obviously lost on your reply.....
|
Furthermore, for all of Matt Bryers accomplishments, he was very open to discussion from the MT audience on that T..
|
Moreover, he responded to the question in detail & substance. Just not to the exactingly precise in terms & intricately detained definition that Chris Parker was coming from....

 

[ShotoNoob]

OK fighting and intellectual pursuits.

|
I think there is some confusion with intellectual meaning over-thinking instead of good thinking.

You are competing physically and mentally against other people. That is the game of fighting. The monkey stomping only happens after you have worked your way though the other guys defence and tactics and prevented him from getting through yours.

|
Very direct & too the point. Yet by isolating out Kenpo technique, you have omitted the part of Kenpo curriculum that addresses your competent point.

This is a system that is over engendered and over complicated. The more you delve into the tactics and techniques of fighting the more you realise that the system itself has these endless depths of intellectual pursuit.

|
Right, this is why I choose to practice a simpler form of karate. Yet you have K-MAN who engages in a karate style with more advanced technique, kata. So practitioners are matching the level of challenge to their personal style. And time constraints, etc.

Eg. Not many techniques.

I don't know I agree with that. Doesn't having a hoard of techniques complicating?

Here is 51 guard sweeps. Now for self defence you could get away with one guard sweep. I know and practice around three at my level. And get away with that. At the top of their game 51 guard sweeps.

|
So here we have complexity in number or variations of guard sweeps (51), which according to you are NOT really necessary & practical. So some kenpo stylists concentrate on a handful of monkey stop gambits, etc. instead of what someone said, 150. Same concept of presenting alternatives....

The reason is the other guy is not coming at you after having spent time on his tough face. He has been practising guard sweep defences. So now you need an option when your primary sweep does not work.

I would say that's the point of all the fighting combos presented in Kenpo. Presenting ideas for different comebacks on the part of the opponent.
|
I think the BJJ popularity is it's more physical than mental. It's on physically having toolbox that you can put on with quick reactions that befuddle & out fox the opponent.
|
And I wouldn't call the mechanics of ground fighting by BJJ absent complexity. I've seen the time standard to reach a black-belt under the Gracie system around 7 years. The same kind of time standard we see in the TMA systems.....

 

[ShotoNoob]

Kenpo is not popular in my local.
|
The two kenpo stylists I know personally (American Kenpo) are very bright guys, much better than me on complicated technique.
|
Kenpo suits the aptitude of this kind of practitioner. These guys are very quick to think about the possibilities when they are fighting. Key word, think.

 

[ShotoNoob]

One lesson of my "Chris Parker-related reply" is that level of sophistication inherent in a martial art style or the study of martial arts, is going to winnow the numbers.
|
The OP poses a great decision-tree facing martial artists. Simpler may be better for you, not better against a non-simple opponent.