Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That it doesn't just revolve around sports.
Ok so how are the basics of fighting in that style taught and how are the techniques that are used in fighting taught
You are basing everything you say on fight fight fight ......ok that may be some peoples goal but not everybody does MA to fight etc
@jobo made a good point in the real world all you need to be is better than the guy who attacks you ............now is every attacker going to be this highly trained BJJ or MMA etc fighter ?
This is where I go drown myself lol.
I never studied Kyokushin, so I don't know. However, I have practiced its parent system, and observed their sparring and the end results of their training. Despite their use of kata, the style produces some excellent fighters.
And Wing Chun guys don't get giddy about Ip Man movies...
So what if your attacker IS trained in MMA, Bjj, Boxing, Wrestling, etc? You just curl up and take your beating?
I'm quite sorry sir! That will not be allowed until you complete and successfully demonstrate the kata for drowning at least three times. And you will have to satisfy the judges that you had fun while you were doing it.
you are actually making me laugh ....now your on about movies
you state an art say blah blah blah about it then you say oops only studied it's parent art ....come on I really think enough is enough don't you
Some people with no training might also. I should have said, do you think they would perform well vs a control group of untrained people? I think any competitive training model would demonstrate clear skill development .Some might ....a year of training probably not
Remove the martial and you are left with only an 'art'. Much like ballet.You are basing everything you say on fight fight fight ......ok that may be some peoples goal but not everybody does MA to fight etc
@jobo made a good point in the real world all you need to be is better than the guy who attacks you ............now is every attacker going to be this highly trained BJJ or MMA etc fighter ?
And we have recently agreed that self defense and fighting are synonymous. So fighting skills are relevant.[
]
Remove the martial and you are left with only an 'art'. Much like ballet.
Would you rather have a Nerf hammer that will only work on wimps or an aluminum bat that works on everyone?
He can't as Kata don't teach you anything ....didn't ya get that memo from the OP .......lol
And we have recently agreed that self defense and fighting are synonymous. So fighting skills are relevant.
I think you've quoted the wrong post. I'm not sure what you're replying to.It was just a thought as to if you substitute the sword strike and say think bottle folks might be able to picture that coming as that is more likely than a sword.
Would you possibly agree that the tech or form in response is basically the same (ok the distance different but the response is the same)
Assume by getting "beat up", you mean losing - as in someone dominating in spite of their resistance (since actual beatings are rare in BJJ and Judo). And yeah, I'd agree that's part of it. Again, it's less a factor of the forms, though, than the overall approach to training.I would say that more folks stick it out in forms-intensive styles because they aren't getting beat up everyday. MMA, Judo, Bjj, Kyokushin, etc. beats their students up on a regular basis. When you aren't getting beat up, you begin to believe that you're better at fighting than what you really are, and your ego gets out of control. No one is there to sock you in the face and bring you back to reality.
That's more a question of whether training traditional weapons is useful, rather than whether forms are useful.Also if for example someone is out walking or hiking and has say a hiking pole or a shepherds crook as an aid with them them the same basic techs can be applied as that of the jo (ok maybe one or to transfers won't work) and the responses are the same be it a jo or a person coming at you with a stick ...I guess the hanbo the same both ways
That's more a question of whether training traditional weapons is useful, rather than whether forms are useful.
That's what I was getting at. There's a correlation, and we have to be careful about attributing the cause to what might seem most obvious.I think they're all disconnected . Kyokushin Karate has forms, fitness, and competition mindset.
Agreed. Those might help, and at worst probably won't interfere with the effectiveness of the training model.You touched on it in your earlier comment about correlation vs causation of dancing and boxing skill. The same is true for other elements of a training model . We can see results of the typical competition based training model. Results are virtually gauranteed.
So if you add yoga, forms, dancing, pilates or anything else, can you see gains? Maybe .
I agree. For those of us who aren't using competition as a training tool, we need to learn from competition training approach. We need to steal from you guys. It would help if we occasionally get some of you guys as training partners, too.But this all hinges on a presupposition that the training model is solid . in a competitive environment, that is easy to see . In a "traditional" training model, that remains a legit question. Can the average aikidoka fight? Can the average ninja fight? Can the average boxer fight? Can the average mmaist fight? I dont think the answer to all of the questions is yes. At best it's may be, may be, yes, yes . and that's being very generous to aikido and ninjutsu.
Assume by getting "beat up", you mean losing - as in someone dominating in spite of their resistance (since actual beatings are rare in BJJ and Judo). And yeah, I'd agree that's part of it. Again, it's less a factor of the forms, though, than the overall approach to training.
When I speak to providing context, it can be as simple as demonstrating the technique. It drives me nuts when people - including otherwise very good instructors - start a step-by-step walkthrough of a technique without first showing it at some moderate speed. This leaves the average learner trying to figure out what's coming next and why, rather than being able to pay attention to what's actually happening. Knowing that context (what the technique looks like in application) lets most learners do a better job of seeing what's important.On another note, it's not as simple as saying adults learn best when context is provided. As people become more expert in an area, they will overcome issues and through experience have context . Providing too much context for these people in training can actually delay skill development because the learner will need to reconcile the context you provide then with their own . Slows things down. This is another advantage of experiential learning and why arts that do not apply skills in a context are unreliable at building expertise. Said simply, everything remains academic, which we see in some of the self defense "experts" here who acknowledge having no practical experience.
But it doesn't work on every one, unless your an elite level fighter, otherwise you run much the same risk of just being out gunned by some big guy,[
]
Remove the martial and you are left with only an 'art'. Much like ballet.
Would you rather have a Nerf hammer that will only work on wimps or an aluminum bat that works on everyone?