What is really the difference between TMA and MMA? False Dichotomy...

[donnaTKD]

that's why they were wearing chainmail suits

 

[Hanzou]

So you don't think traditional martial arts do shadow sparring and bag/pad work?:idunno:

Where did I say that?

I said the emphasis is on katas/forms over shadow sparring and bag/pad work. That doesn't mean that all TMAs don't practice the latter two.

 

[Hanzou]

Could it possibly be because those MAs aren't interested in competition?

More like those MAs don't want to lose their unique identity, which is fine.

Whether it's practical or not, we don't train it at all so why would you say that. Even the Japanese Goju fighting stance is almost the same as a boxer's.

Which begs the question; If there's one fighting stance, why train several of them?

And, you derogatory comment on kata demonstrates your total ignorance of what kata is.

You keep saying this, yet you avoid the direct point that I'm making. If the goal is to fight, why waste time learning stances and techniques you're never going to use in a fight?

How do you define traditional? If something is quite different from where it began, like Shotokan for instance, how is that different to BJJ?

Because Bjj constantly incorporates new techniques into its syllabus if its found to be effective. Shotokan retains antiquated techniques regardless of their effectiveness in the name of tradition.

So by this definition Kyokushin karate and Shotokan karate are where?

They're both traditional styles, despite Kyokushin's competitive side.

Perhaps you should drop into a traditional dojo some time. And by the way, our prearranged routine is very similar to your drill, if it is taught correctly.

Bjj drills are filled with techniques that a practitioner uses constantly. I have yet to see a kata/form practitioner breaking out into kata when they're fightning someone. They don't even do it when they're sparring in class.

Kyokushin Sparring;

Kyokushin Kata:

Big difference. Are you going to argue that those guys sparring weren't taught correctly?

EDIT: Nidan (2nd degree BB) Goju Ryu Sparring;

Goju Ryu Kata:

Again, big difference.

 

[jezr74]

Nope. steel I believe.

that's why they were wearing chainmail suits

Spring steel, nice and flexible. Thought it would be way too dangerous to use anything more tempered.

http://www.sword-buyers-guide.com/sword-steels.html

 

[K-man]

More like those MAs don't want to lose their unique identity, which is fine.

You know very little of TMAs if you think that is the primary difference.

Which begs the question; If there's one fighting stance, why train several of them?

Mainly because the stances are used in grappling, not in competitive sparring.

You keep saying this, yet you avoid the direct point that I'm making. If the goal is to fight, why waste time learning stances and techniques you're never going to use in a fight?

Every stance and every technique we train we use in fighting so the time spent training them is not wasted.

Because Bjj constantly incorporates new techniques into its syllabus if its found to be effective. Shotokan retains antiquated techniques regardless of their effectiveness in the name of tradition.

Shotokan had changed markedly over time and is probably the biggest and most dynamic karate style out there. It has evolved with time and I'm not sure that it had any 'antiquated' techniques. You just don't understand the training.

Their both traditional styles, despite Kyokushin's competitive side.

Well I would argue that Kyokushin maybe as it is pretty much as Mas Oyama left it. Shotokan is nothing like the system Funakoshi left.

Bjj drills are filled with techniques that a practitioner uses constantly, like "shrimping" for example. I have yet to see a kata/form practitioner breaking out into kata when their fightning someone. They don't even do it when they're sparring in class.

Kyokushin Sparring;

Kyokushin Kata:

Big difference.

So basically you are saying that kata is training for competition sparring. Because of your bias and your ignorance of traditional karate you don't even see that they are two totally different things. Kata taught properly is for life and death fighting. Sparring is for sport. Some styles such as Kyokushin keep the kata because without kata it wouldn't be karate. But like most Japanese karate that is focused on competition they don't teach the kata application.

Here is some of our kata training ...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zCKsvOrjuEE

 

[jezr74]

You know very little of TMAs if you think that is the primary difference.

Mainly because the stances are used in grappling, not in competitive sparring.

Every stance and every technique we train we use in fighting so the time spent training them is not wasted.

Shotokan had changed markedly over time and is probably the biggest and most dynamic karate style out there. It has evolved with time and I'm not sure that it had any 'antiquated' techniques. You just don't understand the training.

Well I would argue that Kyokushin maybe as it is pretty much as Mas Oyama left it. Shotokan is nothing like the system Funakoshi left.

So basically you are saying that kata is training for competition sparring. Because of your bias and your ignorance of traditional karate you don't even see that they are two totally different things. Kata taught properly is for life and death fighting. Sparring is for sport. Some styles such as Kyokushin keep the kata because without kata it wouldn't be karate. But like most Japanese karate that is focused on competition they don't teach the kata application.

Here is some of our kata training ...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zCKsvOrjuEE

Nice clip.

 

[Hanzou]

Mainly because the stances are used in grappling, not in competitive sparring.

Except that grappling side isn't displayed even within dojo sparring. So how do you practice it? Is it only during kata?

As a grappler, I find that argument quite dubious.

Every stance and every technique we train we use in fighting so the time spent training them is not wasted.

And yet when you're fighting you look like kickboxers. Those Goju Nidans were throwing boxing punches and basic kicks from a general fighting stance you see throughout martial arts. Then you see the kata and its filled with elegant, exotic hand movements and stances. Again, were those Nidans simply trained poorly?

Shotokan had changed markedly over time and is probably the biggest and most dynamic karate style out there. It has evolved with time and I'm not sure that it had any 'antiquated' techniques. You just don't understand the training.

Shotokan suffers from the same issues that many traditional karate styles suffer from; Baggage. You could dump dozens of traditional Shotokan techniques, and still end up looking like this when you fight;

So basically you are saying that kata is training for competition sparring. Because of your bias and your ignorance of traditional karate you don't even see that they are two totally different things. Kata taught properly is for life and death fighting. Sparring is for sport. Some styles such as Kyokushin keep the kata because without kata it wouldn't be karate. But like most Japanese karate that is focused on competition they don't teach the kata application.

Here is some of our kata training ...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zCKsvOrjuEE

Any videos of two Goju stylists using this in dojo sparring/randori? This stuff looks great on a compliant, non resisting target, but where's the practice on a resisting, non-compliant target?

 

[K-man]

Except that grappling side isn't displayed even within dojo sparring. So how do you practice it? Is it only during kata?

As a grappler, I find that argument quite dubious.

You really have no idea yet you keep burrowing in. Dojo sparring is something that is practised by sport based styles. Okinawan Goju for example doesn't have that sort of sparring. The basic kata you see is not what you use for fighting. I posted one of Taira Sensei's clips for you and there are many others if you care to look. I'm not going to spend a lot of time telling you how we use kata when in reality you couldn't give a damn. You are in your own little world taking shots at the way TMAs train, yet you have never seen that type of training.


What is grappling? If you are talking of ground fighting, we do very little. Kata is all about stand up grappling. It only applies to close contact fighting. We don't want to go to the ground if that can be avoided.

And yet when you're fighting you look like kickboxers. Those Goju Nidans were throwing boxing punches and basic kicks from a general fighting stance you see throughout martial arts. Then you see the kata and its filled with elegant, exotic hand movements and stances. Again, were those Nidans simply trained poorly?

Any videos of two Goju stylists using this in dojo sparring/randori? This stuff looks great on a compliant, non resisting target, but where's the practice on a resisting, non-compliant target?

You have never seen TMAs fighting like kickboxers because we don't have that type of sparring in Okinawan Goju. So the guys you are referring to are most like Japanese Goju. At this time I can't access videos so I'm not sure what exactly you are referring to, but if it is what I think, then no, they are not poorly trained. They are probably training for competition.

As to the put down in your last sentence .. we have been there, done that, in recent discussions. You can go find it if you like but I wouldn't waste my time going over it again for someone who is just out to bag TMAs. Suffice to say we train against full resistance, non-compliance, just not in the ring. There is no video of such sparring as we do not train that way. The video I posted is showing training, not full speed application.

 

[RTKDCMB]

More like those MAs don't want to lose their unique identity, which is fine.

No it.s more like those MA's aren't interested in competition!

 

[Hanzou]

You really have no idea yet you keep burrowing in. Dojo sparring is something that is practised by sport based styles. Okinawan Goju for example doesn't have that sort of sparring. The basic kata you see is not what you use for fighting. I posted one of Taira Sensei's clips for you and there are many others if you care to look. I'm not going to spend a lot of time telling you how we use kata when in reality you couldn't give a damn. You are in your own little world taking shots at the way TMAs train, yet you have never seen that type of training.

Instead of telling me, you could simply show me.

And you are correct; I have never seen that type of training. The training I've seen and experienced during my time in karate is reinforced by the videos I've posted. When we engaged in sparring (kumite), we looked like those people in the videos I've posted. When we had a grandmaster come in for a seminar, he or she looked like that video of Taira Sensei you posted. When we did kata, it looked like that video of Antonio Diaz I posted.

The only piece missing here is the video of karate stylists (ANY karate stylist) performing the movements of Taira Sensei (or something similar) on a non compliant target. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Now you're telling me that you guys don't spar (kumite) in the dojo at all? How do you practice your techniques then? How do you know what you're learning even works on a non-compliant, moving target?

What is grappling? If you are talking of ground fighting, we do very little. Kata is all about stand up grappling. It only applies to close contact fighting. We don't want to go to the ground if that can be avoided.

Judo, wrestling, Bjj, etc. I find the argument dubious because in my experience you can't practice grappling via solo kata. You need to practice with a resisting, non compliant partner (randori) or you're wasting your time.

You have never seen TMAs fighting like kickboxers because we don't have that type of sparring in Okinawan Goju. So the guys you are referring to are most like Japanese Goju. At this time I can't access videos so I'm not sure what exactly you are referring to, but if it is what I think, then no, they are not poorly trained. They are probably training for competition.

This isn't competition;

That is a test for sandan. Again, I find it interesting that during a test for a rank above instructor level, the practitioner isn't displaying many of the techniques you discuss, or displayed within kata.

Then, again, these guys are probably just Japanese style Goju right?

As to the put down in your last sentence .. we have been there, done that, in recent discussions. You can go find it if you like but I wouldn't waste my time going over it again for someone who is just out to bag TMAs. Suffice to say we train against full resistance, non-compliance, just not in the ring. There is no video of such sparring as we do not train that way. The video I posted is showing training, not full speed application.

There is no put down in that last sentence.

Full speed application is part of training. The video you showed is a demonstration. Both of which encompass training. Demonstrate, practice, apply.

Example; My instructor demonstrates a choke to the class. The class practices the choke. During rolling/randori/sparring the class applies the choke at full speed against a resisting partner.

The issue here is that the application doesn't match the other two parts in traditional Karate. Why is that?

 

[Hanzou]

No it.s more like those MA's aren't interested in competition!

Competition has little to do with it. If karatekas trained the way they fight (or they appear to fight in every instance I've seen or experienced), they wouldn't be much different than kickboxers.

I can understand the desire not to become kickboxers.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Well, yes. Those who practice TMAs tend to be far more concerned about historical and cultural reenactment or preservation over martial proficiency. Look at how many TMA practitioners scoff at Mixed Martial Arts or Bjj for example. Nevermind that both MMA and Bjj have proven their effectiveness over and over again in several venues, which is partly why they're inching out many TMA schools around the world.

Its the same attitude that many traditional Jujitsu schools had towards Judo, ignoring the fact that Judo proved its effectiveness in several venues while many Jujitsu styles hid in the shadows and pointed fingers. I didn't see too many Jujitsu schools step up and take on a boxer like Gene Lebelle did back in the day. I didn't see too many Jujitsu schools step up and participate in NHB competitions like Vale Tudo like the Gracies did. No, its not about martial arts, its about retaining those ancient, mystical Asian practices because people think they're "magical".

Keep in mind; It isn't always about age, its also about the mindset. Aikido is a pretty young art, but I would still label it a traditional MA because it has all the trappings of a TMA. Some Karate styles, Okinawan, Japanese, and Korean, would fall under that umbrella as well. Numerous older Jj styles would definitely fall under that label, especially the ones that revolve around weaponry. Iado is another one. Numerous CMA styles would definitely be considered TMA, and so forth.

I will tell you some things about the art I study, which is trained as a traditional martial art of self defence.

- We care nothing about historical and cultural reenactments.
- We have absolutely no interest in 'proving' anything in any kind of sporting venue. It gets 'proven' every time it gets used successfully in a self defence situation, and it has on many occasions.
- There is nothing mystical about it.
- We have some boxing like techniques.
- The emphasis is on technique (martial proficiency) in everything we do.
- We may use chambered punches from the hip in the basics and patterns but not in sparring or self defence, they are used from the guard. A close inspection of all of our hand techniques will show that there are actually very few that actually start from the hip.
- Our sparring does not look much like kickboxing.
- We practice drills and basics and sparring more than we do patterns.
- We do not do many fancy kicks. There is nothing pretty, it is a very straight forward, to the point martial art. Techniques and strategies being effective is much more important than looking pretty or being historical.
- We do not train weapons.
- Our techniques and training methods are not set in stone. Just about every action day (grading) Master Rhee changes something to improve the art, either the way to perform a technique better or a change in training method to make the art easier to teach. Just last year he showed us 101 uses for pool noodles in training.

The reverse punch is a prime example. Why train it over and over again? I've never seen anyone use it in a fight, and it simply isn't practical. Boxing/Kickboxing has given us far more practical and useful punches. If the goal is to train someone how to punch, why teach the reverse punch? Why not teach them general boxing techniques? By the same token, why are we wasting time learning katas when time would be better spent learning footwork and evasive techniques from boxing/kickboxing?

Why would you not train a simple, powerful hand strike over and over again? You train it over and over again to improve it, that's why. The reverse punch and the boxing straight punch are not all that different. I have used it in a fight and it certainly was practical.

 

[Hanzou]

I will tell you some things about the art I study, which is trained as a traditional martial art of self defence.

- We care nothing about historical and cultural reenactments.
- We have absolutely no interest in 'proving' anything in any kind of sporting venue. It gets 'proven' every time it gets used successfully in a self defence situation, and it has on many occasions.
- There is nothing mystical about it.
- We have some boxing like techniques.
- The emphasis is on technique (martial proficiency) in everything we do.
- We may use chambered punches from the hip in the basics and patterns but not in sparring or self defence, they are used from the guard. A close inspection of all of our hand techniques will show that there are actually very few that actually start from the hip.
- Our sparring does not look much like kickboxing.
- We practice drills and basics and sparring more than we do patterns.
- We do not do many fancy kicks. There is nothing pretty, it is a very straight forward, to the point martial art. Techniques and strategies being effective is much more important than looking pretty or being historical.
- We do not train weapons.
- Our techniques and training methods are not set in stone. Just about every action day (grading) Master Rhee changes something to improve the art, either the way to perform a technique better or a change in training method to make the art easier to teach. Just last year he showed us 101 uses for pool noodles in training.

Interesting...

Rhee Tae Kwon Do - Perth Western Australia

Is this your school?

Why would you not train a simple, powerful hand strike over and over again? You train it over and over again to improve it, that's why. The reverse punch and the boxing straight punch are not all that different. I have used it in a fight and it certainly was practical.

They're actually very different. The reverse punch begins at the hip, leaving your upper body wide open. The boxer's straight punch is performed from the shoulder, yet keeps the upper body protected, and comes out far more quickly, and is more applicable for combination strikes.

The result?

So the question is; If the goal is to perform a powerful straight punch, why not train like the boxer since it is the superior training method, and produces the superior results?

 

[Steve]

I will tell you some things about the art I study, which is trained as a traditional martial art of self defence.

- We care nothing about historical and cultural reenactments.
- We have absolutely no interest in 'proving' anything in any kind of sporting venue. It gets 'proven' every time it gets used successfully in a self defence situation, and it has on many occasions.
- There is nothing mystical about it.
- We have some boxing like techniques.
- The emphasis is on technique (martial proficiency) in everything we do.
- We may use chambered punches from the hip in the basics and patterns but not in sparring or self defence, they are used from the guard. A close inspection of all of our hand techniques will show that there are actually very few that actually start from the hip.
- Our sparring does not look much like kickboxing.
- We practice drills and basics and sparring more than we do patterns.
- We do not do many fancy kicks. There is nothing pretty, it is a very straight forward, to the point martial art. Techniques and strategies being effective is much more important than looking pretty or being historical.
- We do not train weapons.
- Our techniques and training methods are not set in stone. Just about every action day (grading) Master Rhee changes something to improve the art, either the way to perform a technique better or a change in training method to make the art easier to teach. Just last year he showed us 101 uses for pool noodles in training.



Why would you not train a simple, powerful hand strike over and over again? You train it over and over again to improve it, that's why. The reverse punch and the boxing straight punch are not all that different. I have used it in a fight and it certainly was practical.

It sounds to me like you're describing a style that many would not consider TMA. What, in your opinion, makes this a "traditional martial art of self defence" as opposed to a "non-traditional martial art of self defence." Can you give some examples of other styles you would consider traditional and non-traditional?

 

[RTKDCMB]

Interesting...

Rhee Tae Kwon Do - Perth Western Australia

Is this your school?

That is the region where I started out for the first 4 or 5 years until I stopped training for a while, then I moved south, did Hapkido for 14 months then came back to my original art in another region in the Perth southern suburbs;

Rhee Taekwondo Peel Region (the website needs a bit of work)

They're actually very different. The reverse punch begins at the hip, leaving your upper body wide open. The boxer's straight punch is performed from the shoulder, yet keeps the upper body protected, and comes out far more quickly, and is more applicable for combination strikes.

The result?

So the question is; If the goal is to perform a powerful straight punch, why not train like the boxer since it is the superior training method, and produces the superior results?

When practiced in the basics, line work and patterns the reverse punch is performed from the hip. In sparring and practical applications it is performed from the guard position at the shoulder, keeping the upper body protected, so how is that very different? There are many other techniques that permit fast combination strikes as well. Why not train like a boxer to throw a powerful punch? Because it is not the only way to train powerful punches and why should you limit yourself to just punching when there are many other powerful hand strikes that can be used as well.

 

[Hanzou]

When practiced in the basics, line work and patterns the reverse punch is performed from the hip. In sparring and practical applications it is performed from the guard position at the shoulder, keeping the upper body protected, so how is that very different?

Again, why would you practice it differently than how you're applying it? Isn't that kind of counter-intuitive?

There are many other techniques that permit fast combination strikes as well. Why not train like a boxer to throw a powerful punch? Because it is not the only way to train powerful punches and why should you limit yourself to just punching when there are many other powerful hand strikes that can be used as well.

Because as evidenced by karate sparring, you can't use those hand techniques in an efficient manner. At least not at the level necessary to apply it in a relatively stable, yet resisting environment. And I'm talking black belts not being able to use those techniques efficiently. So why train them at all? Just train the punches you're actually using while sparring; Jab, straight, hook, uppercut.

 

[RTKDCMB]

It sounds to me like you're describing a style that many would not consider TMA. What, in your opinion, makes this a "traditional martial art of self defence" as opposed to a "non-traditional martial art of self defence." Can you give some examples of other styles you would consider traditional and non-traditional?

It is never quite that simple, there are always traditional and non-traditional elements in most traditional marital arts It is not so much the individual techniques and training methods that make an art traditional but rather how it is taught and presented and some self defence arts also have some sporting elements to various degrees. I do not know enough about most other martial arts to quantitatively say which ones are more traditional than others but if I were to hazard to guess then I would say:

Traditional - Some varieties of Karate, Kung Fu, Taekwondo JJJ.
Non-Traditional - RSBD's

 

[RTKDCMB]

Again, why would you practice it differently than how you're applying it? Isn't that kind of counter-intuitive?

I like to think of it this way; The basic techniques (from the hip for example) are like full words, the sparring versions, abbreviations (or shorthand). If you want to speak efficiently you speak in abbreviations. Now there are two ways you can get to that point; you can either, a) start out learning just the abbreviations or b) learn the full words first and then abbreviate them later. Option a will get you to that point faster but option b will give you a better understanding of what the conversation is about in the long run.

Because as evidenced by karate sparring, you can't use those hand techniques in an efficient manner. At least not at the level necessary to apply it in a relatively stable, yet resisting environment. And I'm talking black belts not being able to use those techniques efficiently. So why train them at all? Just train the punches you're actually using while sparring; Jab, straight, hook, uppercut.

The Karate sparring you have seen is not the only sparring around. Back fist, knife hand strike, reverse knife hand (ridge hand) strike etc, these are the the techniques we ARE actually using in sparring, along with the Jab, straight, hook, uppercut.

 

[Hanzou]

I like to think of it this way; The basic techniques (from the hip for example) are like full words, the sparring versions, abbreviations (or shorthand). If you want to speak efficiently you speak in abbreviations. Now there are two ways you can get to that point; you can either, a) start out learning just the abbreviations or b) learn the full words first and then abbreviate them later. Option a will get you to that point faster but option b will give you a better understanding of what the conversation is about in the long run.

And yet Boxers are incredibly proficient and powerful punchers, arguably far more proficient than any TKD stylist. However, they train from the "abbreviated" form, not from the "full word" form that you describe above. You even argued that your school embraces boxing concepts, indicating that even you accept this reality on some level.

Wouldn't that disprove everything you've said here? If boxers can become incredible punchers training the abbreviated form, shouldn't your school discard the less effective training method for the more effective training method?

Furthermore, I find it interesting that you on one hand admit that the reverse punch is inefficient for actual fighting, and then turn around and try to make it relevant as a training method only. We both know that the reverse punch was designed to be applied exactly as it was trained. The harsh reality is that western boxing simply had a superior method and application to the straight punch, but traditionalist refuse to let the inferior method (the reverse punch) go.

The Karate sparring you have seen is not the only sparring around.

Well again, please show me this other type of sparring I'm not seeing. The videos I've posted are pretty consistent from style to style karate-wise, and they come from dojos around the world. They also match up with my personal experiences with karate and similar arts (TKD, TSD). I'd be more than willing to be exposed to some hidden form of karate I'm just not seeing.

 

[RTKDCMB]

And yet Boxers are incredibly proficient and powerful punchers, arguably far more proficient than any TKD stylist. However, they train from the "abbreviated" form, not from the "full word" form that you describe above.

To push the analogy to its elastic limit; boxers have a limited vocabulary. Boxers are incredibly proficient and powerful punchers because that is primarily what they focus on, they are not very proficient at kicking. We have had many students from other martial arts train with us in the past, including kickboxing, and no one has shown us up yet.

You even argued that your school embraces boxing concepts, indicating that even you accept this reality on some level.

I believe the phrase was "We have some boxing like techniques"

Wouldn't that disprove everything you've said here? If boxers can become incredible punchers training the abbreviated form, shouldn't your school discard the less effective training method for the more effective training method?

If it aint broke don't fix it! There has never been any direct comparative tests between RTKD hand strikes and boxing punches, all I know is that we can hit pretty damn hard. I doubt there would be many people who could withstand a full power back fist to the temple, so why would we want to discard that?

Furthermore, I find it interesting that you on one hand admit that the reverse punch is inefficient for actual fighting, and then turn around and try to make it relevant as a training method only. We both know that the reverse punch was designed to be applied exactly as it was trained. The harsh reality is that western boxing simply had a superior method and application to the straight punch, but traditionalist refuse to let the inferior method (the reverse punch) go.

That is a strawman argument it is not what I said at all. It is the same punch but starting from a different position. There are many reasons to teach punching from the hip, if you search some of my posts on previous threads you will find where I have given several reasons.

Well again, please show me this other type of sparring I'm not seeing. The videos I've posted are pretty consistent from style to style karate-wise, and they come from dojos around the world. They also match up with my personal experiences with karate and similar arts (TKD, TSD). I'd be more than willing to be exposed to some hidden form of karate I'm just not seeing.

That is a hasty generalization. You have a very narrow view of karate, and martial arts in general from a limited sample size.