just to make sure I understand, are you saying that you can't draw a conclusion or have an opinion about something unless you have first hand experience? If so, I completely disagree.
You can certainly have an opinion or draw some conclusions on a topic based just on second-hand sources. It's just a good idea to keep those conclusions tentative and express those opinions with humility, since you may be missing important perspective which you might have gained through more first hand experience. I'd say this is particularly true in the martial arts since, as you pointed out earlier, there is a difference between academic knowledge and physical experience of an art.
I agree heartily with the sentiment, Brian. Some of my best learning has come from attending other schools, going to seminars, etc. Heck, some of my most important learning about my primary art happened during seminars and training in other arts/styles. Sometimes an instructor simply tells me something I should have heard from my primary instructor years ago. Usually, I realize he had been saying it for years, and I just hadn't understood him. It sounds absolutist, but I'd be hard pressed not to say that a lack of cross-training is a lack of complete training. My experience shouts that cross-training is almost necessary for complete learning.
I can't speak to anything else in this post, Hanzou, since I have zero experience in or with Ninjutsu, but I don't see the flawed groundwork as an indicator that Ninjutsu is incompatible with the learning goals of a BJJ practitioner. It make it likely that Ninjutsu is more useful if paired with BJJ (or some other ground-fighting-intensive art), but since a good cross-training option for BJJ would be standing work (in fact, that's what most of the BJJ folks I know cross-train for), we'd have to see what the Ninjutsu standing work looks like to make that judgement.
Muay Thai and boxing are pretty much just strikes. "MMA standup" will vary depending upon who is coaching it. It really depends what the person is looking for in their cross-training. If they only want to add striking, then yes, those are good choices (so would be some of the TMA that focus on striking). If they want to add standing grappling (which most of the BJJ schools I've seen don't do much of - it's why they excel on the ground), they'll have to look broader for an answer. Of course, that doesn't mean they can't also get some striking from MT or boxing.
Hmm...looks like more omissions by some schools I've visited, or I just happen to show up on days when they aren't doing standing work. (Or are these the secret techniques they're hiding from us non-BJJ'ers?
)
Hmm...looks like more omissions by some schools I've visited, or I just happen to show up on days when they aren't doing standing work. (Or are these the secret techniques they're hiding from us non-BJJ'ers?
I can't remember if you have Judo background - is the BJJ standing work likely similar to what I remember from my Judo days? (My students still don't like it when I decide to "go Judo" with a technique - I throw harder then.)
