Watering Down The Arts

[kaizasosei]

boxing is a good martial art i believe. if you want to learn how to fight, take boxing or some hardcore karate or mma. - so then the quetion would be, how fast can a human being be? physically speaking. how much endurance, resistance to pain or stress, how strong can the body become? technique also plays a large role in whatever martial art you are practicing because it is unavoidable. why do we need names for techniques even. mostly just because it helps us to learn and remember new things.


if one wants to try to learn some kind of mindcontrol or exercising of spiritual power, then take nlp, reiki(concentrating on various religions thereof) or practice chigung or yoga?
questions are, how strong can a persons willpower become? can one truly develop ones aura? how sensitive can a person become for both physical and psychological influences? the most internal of all things is the place where the external is coming from? i think this is really logic. if one were to directly focus on that aspect and know how, also through ones own movement, it translates or ocilates back to the physical.
ultimately, it becomes a study of strategy and a study of weakness as much as it is a study of power.

the question really is, to what great hights is the human being capable of reaching if they put their mind to it???
spiritualy speaking, one could even include all kinds of things like health, socialskills, illness or accidents as part of the scheme of internal/external totality.

j

 

[jks9199]

Well, I would say that. It's the "Compared to" that makes me say that. That's not to say that combat SPORTS are bad or ineffective or not sufficient to your needs depending on what those are. It's not saying that a neophyte in boxing will have the same understanding of that combat sport that a Muhamed Ali or Ray Robinson will. But it IS saying that the TMAs are deeper than combat sports. In fact, that's usually the argument AGAINST the TMAs, i.e., "Who needs all that mumbo jumbo?"

Combat sports are to the TMAs what a battle-axe is to a rapier. A battle-axe is a much simpler cutting device. It takes much less time to master and will suit many people's combat needs. If you're young and strong, it will do the job nicely. Now a days folks would probably rather watch two guys fighting it out with axes than rapiers. However, people would be foolish to think that chopping with an axe is as "deep" a discipline as fencing.

I like that analogy.

For example? I'm around that 20 year mark too, I've yet to see anything beyond "cleaned up" brawling. Although part of cleaning up your brawling involves understanding those hows and whys.

So I guess what I would like to know is what depth you see in traditional arts that cannot be found in arts that focus on fighting?

I think you're locking in on the word "deeper" and finding a meaning I didn't intend. I don't personally seek spiritual development from martial arts, other than spirit in the sense of confidence and drive to overcome challenges, which you can learn in almost any sport as well. But there's a difference in simply focusing on the bare needs of fighting and martial arts. It's the difference, I guess, between a headline, a news summary, and an investigative report. Each is delving deeper into the subject; the headline is simply slugging it out. The news summary tells a little more about what's going on, like a DT class or self-defense course. The investigative report gets into the details, and corresponds to "martial arts training."

There's gotta be something that's keeping you training after 20 years...

 

[Andrew Green]

COnsider it a pet peeve, I'm not sure this is what you are saying, but I do get tired of having traditional stylists claim that combat sports, such as wrestling or MMA are shallow and lack depth, being only about strength and athleticism with basic technique.

That is definately not the case, in my mind they are just as deep as any other art can be, it's a personal issue as to how deep into it you go. Yes, there are fighters that perhaps have a shallow understanding of things and rely heavily on athleticism, but then there are also traditional stylists that have been training for years and lack any depth of understanding to the motions in their forms as well.

It's not a one has depth and the other doesn't, Boxing, for as simple of system as it appears on face value, has a ton of depth too it that most people will never see, but it is there.

I've heard the claim many times now that something like MMA lacks important pieces that traditional styles have in terms of depth of understanding to the techniques. That it develops fighters fast, but can't take them to "the next level", yet I've never come across anyone that could justify that claim. Just some that couldn't see any depth when they watched it on tv, and assumed there was none.

 

[kaizasosei]

just the same, most people would not believe what power(physical included) can be achieved through internal arts.

 

[Monadnock]

What are the highest levels, deepest depths one can achieve in the MMA? It is a sport, correct?

 

[Blindside]

What are the highest levels, deepest depths one can achieve in the MMA? It is a sport, correct?

Can you give some examples of what the "martial arts" offer at the highest levels or deepest depths? Just so we have some point of comparison.

Lamont

 

[kaizasosei]

i think it would be a little pointless if mma became a mere sport. it's too close to reality for that. however, the same could be said for boxing and it is a sport but i think it is also an art.
although outsiders from different more traditional ma, look at the mma as fighters more than artists, i think this is not the case.

it is natural that any fighter from any system will rely more on internal forces and principles as he gains experience and knowledge. so, i would assume that if the mma are practiced enough, eventually someone might take it there.



i

 

[Flying Crane]

Astute and well stated observations, as usual sir.

thank you sir.

 

[Flying Crane]

Here's a question for you Andrew, and this isn't in response to anything specific that you have said, but rather I would like to see your viewpoint on this. For someone who trains and actively competes in hardcore things like MMA competitions, how long do you think they will last in this endeavor. It seems to me that the focus on competition, with the pounding and beating that I suspect the body takes both in training, and in the ring, at some point there will be an accumulation of injuries that makes one consider retirement as a real option. Maybe at this point he can still practice for fun, and/or coach others, but his own involvement may be drastically reduced. What do you think of these thoughts?

I don't train for competition. I'm just not interested in it, and I am sure I would not do well in it, especially something hardcore like MMA. Instead, I train for self defense, and more strongly, just because I enjoy it. The pounding that my body takes in training is probably much much less than an actively competing MMA guy. But I am confident of the self-defense skills that I have, so I'm not interested in comparing myself to an MMA guy. I recognize that for the duration of their active careers, they are tough dudes, but I also don't believe that the average hooligan out there who might try to mug me is a highly trained MMA guy in the prime of his career. I just don't believe that is the kind of guy I need to worry about defending myself against.

But I also believe that I will be able to be active in my arts well into old age, if I so chose, because I expect to avoid most of the chronic and acute injuries that I suspect an MMA guy experiences. So in this way, I see a TMA as a better choice for long-term, and a perfectly reasonable choice for self-defense provided it is taught by a competent instructor.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this. thanks.

 

[Monadnock]

Can you give some examples of what the "martial arts" offer at the highest levels or deepest depths? Just so we have some point of comparison.

Lamont

I'm still waiting...

 

[kaizasosei]

i consider these skills right up there. for example, to be able to evade attacks or even everyday dangers, by feel alone.
to be able to psychologically overwhelm an opponent with either motion or stillness, to the point of freezing them.
the strengthening of ones own nervous system. teachings exist on the varying methods of understanding the energy and essence within the human body' the benifits of flexibilty and range of motion is areas of training.
no contact knockout only relying on certain things like kiai(not necessariy very loud) and disruption to the targets system through projection of one energy to special areas.
to be able to communicate with people or animals from medium/long/short distances through body language. the ability to sense what is about to happen, be it sensing of anothers intention or the actual premonition of external events.
to be able to act justly or exercise some kind of spiritual influence even in the most violent and inhumane situation. the ability to be fearless, through understanding of self and others. so that fear is only there when it is needed.

i know there are way more possibilies, but these are some that i consider right up there and i focus mainly on polishing or attaining although it probably would require some more training to speed things up.

j

 

[Andrew Green]

But I also believe that I will be able to be active in my arts well into old age, if I so chose, because I expect to avoid most of the chronic and acute injuries that I suspect an MMA guy experiences. So in this way, I see a TMA as a better choice for long-term, and a perfectly reasonable choice for self-defense provided it is taught by a competent instructor.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this. thanks.

Competing full contact in any martial art will eventually lead to many accumulated injuries. Judo, TKD, full contact karate, full contact stick fighting, etc. Only so long you can really do any of those before age will start effecting you.

But like all other systems training in MMA does not require you to get in a cage. Most people that train probably will never get in a cage and fight.

MMA is no different then other styles in how long you can train, but like all those other arts the way you can train at 20 will be different then the way you can train at 60.

 

[Flying Crane]

Competing full contact in any martial art will eventually lead to many accumulated injuries. Judo, TKD, full contact karate, full contact stick fighting, etc. Only so long you can really do any of those before age will start effecting you.

But like all other systems training in MMA does not require you to get in a cage. Most people that train probably will never get in a cage and fight.

MMA is no different then other styles in how long you can train, but like all those other arts the way you can train at 20 will be different then the way you can train at 60.

Fair enough observations. Thanks.

 

[kaizasosei]

posted by flying crane :

But I am confident of the self-defense skills that I have, so I'm not interested in comparing myself to an MMA guy.

if you are confident then it's definately a very positive thing. i still think that it might make you even tougher.

although i also agree that there is a higher chance for injury.

 

[Blindside]

I'm still waiting...

Actually, so am I.

I don't know what "martial arts" offers that "martial sports" do not. So I am asking for an example of what "martial arts" offer as you said "at the highest levels or deepest depths," presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it.

Lamont

 

[Monadnock]

Actually, so am I.

I don't know what "martial arts" offers that "martial sports" do not. So I am asking for an example of what "martial arts" offer as you said "at the highest levels or deepest depths," presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it.

Lamont

I was asking about what these high levels and deep depths were because of this post:

COnsider it a pet peeve, I'm not sure this is what you are saying, but I do get tired of having traditional stylists claim that combat sports, such as wrestling or MMA are shallow and lack depth, being only about strength and athleticism with basic technique.

That is definately not the case, in my mind they are just as deep as any other art can be, it's a personal issue as to how deep into it you go.

So I am wondering what makes the MMA deep. Please clarify on how I "presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it." I haven't described them at all. I'm still waiting...

 

[Andrew Green]

So I am wondering what makes the MMA deep. Please clarify on how I "presumably you view MMA as "shallow" or "low" given the terminology that you use to describe it." I haven't described them at all. I'm still waiting...

Technically complex, to the point where there is always more too learn.

 

[Flying Crane]

posted by flying crane :

if you are confident then it's definately a very positive thing. i still think that it might make you even tougher.

although i also agree that there is a higher chance for injury.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that if I train like an MMA guy, it will make me tougher?

 

[Andrew Green]

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that if I train like an MMA guy, it will make me tougher?

Nah, that just depends on how you define tough and who you train with. There are definitely some traditional schools with really frightening exercises.

I also wouldn't say there is a higher chance of injury, that just depends on how you train.

 

[Monadnock]

Technically complex, to the point where there is always more too learn.

And that is a good point. I think that some MMA's are more technical than some TMA's.

But I think that the physical is only one layer of an art. When I think of depth, generally I think of mental/spiritual aspects of a TMA, not MMA. (I'm not directing this to Andrew or anyone in particular, just laying out some thoughts...)