Rhee Taekwondo (The Australian one not the American one). I thought I had the details in my profile but I didn't.And which system, or art is that?
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.
Rhee Taekwondo (The Australian one not the American one). I thought I had the details in my profile but I didn't.And which system, or art is that?
Rhee Taekwondo (The Australian one not the American one). I thought I had the details in my profile but I didn't.
Silly phone never posts these right.
So JohnnyEnglish doesn't consider MMA to be a "real martial art", but if you look at Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which had a MASSIVE library of techniques, a system of standup fighting, and ground fighting, and kneeling fighting... armed and unarmed fighting.... You could go to Daitō and see this "traditional" martial art almost perfectly mirrors the curriculum of MMA.
Aiki spawned Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which is the artform that led to creation of arts like Sumo wrestling, Akido, Judo, many Japanese systems of Jujutsu, Kendo, Hapkido, Shorinji Kenpo (hybrid), Icho-ryū and Hakko-ryu draw many techniques from Daitō-ryū jujutsu, and even Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has everything you would need in an MMA cage... punches, kicks, takedowns, throws, standup fighting and groundfighting.
Why does this system get accepted as a valid martial art?
but MMA doesn't?
In the 1920, Carlos Gracie took out an ad in the paper saying "If you want to get your face beaten and well-smashed, and if you want broken arms, look for me at this address."
Chapters 3, 4 and 5 in the Encyclopedia show a number of ground techniques. We do not incorporate Sambo, BJJ or JJJ into our curriculum. Unless a particular instructor had previously trained in one of those systems then he/she will introduce some techniques here and there when they teach. We don't teach ground fighting, we teach ground self defence and self defence on the ground has been taught in Rhee TKD the whole time I have been there.As far as I am aware:
The ITFA teaches ITF-style Taekwon-Do which follows the syllabus laid down by the Founder, General Choi Hong Hi, in the Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia. The syllabus includes Patterns, Step-Sparring, Free Sparring, Destruction or breaking, Martial Art Terminology, Self-Defence and Moral Culture.
As far as I am aware, General Choi didn't have a groundfighting Curriculum. And headbutting, and gripfighting generally isn't taught in most TKD places.
Prior to the formation of the and the ITF, and the ITFA, Chong Chul Rhee was a Dan under the The Korea Taekwon-Do Association (KTA; 1959/1961) which also didn't have ground fighting like Sambo, JJJ or BJJ.
So I am curious as to how your school has integrated these into your Rhee TKD.
So let me ask Johnny again...
Tell me, which single art has formalized training curriculum and methods for fighting at the following ranges
1. Rifle, pistol, bow, slingshot etc. Ranges
2. Handheld long weapons
3. Kicking and short weapons
4. Punching
5. Trapping/throwing/tripping/Kido wrist locking and breaking
6. clinching/elbows/knees/
7. Headblows/shoulder striking.
8. Ground fighting
As far as I am aware... There is no single system teaching a full range spectrum, and fully handles transitions between ranges.
Something Johnny English is missing is that a pure art like
Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu had a library of like 3800 techniques, armed unarmed, standing and ground fighting.
Out Of this many other arts
So JohnnyEnglish doesn't consider MMA to be a "real martial art", but if you look at Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which had a MASSIVE library of techniques, a system of standup fighting, and ground fighting, and kneeling fighting... armed and unarmed fighting.... You could go to Daitō and see this "traditional" martial art almost perfectly mirrors the curriculum of MMA.
Aiki spawned Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which is the artform that led to creation of arts like Sumo wrestling, Akido, Judo, many Japanese systems of Jujutsu, Kendo, Hapkido, Shorinji Kenpo (hybrid), Icho-ryū and Hakko-ryu draw many techniques from Daitō-ryū jujutsu, and even Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has everything you would need in an MMA cage... punches, kicks, takedowns, throws, standup fighting and ground fighting.
Why does this system get accepted as a valid martial art?
but MMA doesn't?
The 100-year-old art of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu has punches and kicks. It is a traditional martial art. It may not have every single technique found in an MMA school, but odds are it can do just fine in an MMA rules fight.
In the 1920, Carlos Gracie took out an ad in the paper saying "If you want to get your face beaten and well-smashed, and if you want broken arms, look for me at this address."
Carlos was taught jujutsu by Maeda, who also spiced it up with a few things Maeda learned from "catch" wrestlers (ones that he had dueled in England.)
Helio Gracie set the record straight, that Maeda did not teach any striking to the Gracies.
It was a little known fact that Maeda was a jujutsu-ka that had switched over to Kodokan Judo.
He said that Maeda was teaching not Kodokan Judo, but a Classical Jujutsu [often called "Kozen or Kosen Judo", by the Judoka, which is regular judo + higher teaching that incorporated from material in other branches of jujutsu, including techniques that were used in Ne-waza]
So clearly either Carlos Gracie was already a striker when he learned Jujutsu from Maeda, or learned striking after the fact.
Helio Gracie Sets Record Straight Maeda Was Teaching us Jiu-Jitsu Not Judo Bjj Eastern Europe
None the less, for over 95 years, since 1920 BJJ has been a grappling and striking art... and it definitely is a traditional martial art.
It is worth noting here that while the name ‘judo’ has become the accepted term for Dr. Jigoro Kano’s martial art, at the time many still referred to the style as ‘ju-jitsu’, or even ‘Kano ju-jitsu’. Maeda, like so many others, had come Kano's school having studied other ju-jitsu ryu previously.
While the more common Romanization is ‘jujitsu’, in Brazil the spelling ‘jiu-jitsu’ stuck, and has retained that extra ‘i’ ever since.
Tell me, which single art has formalized training curriculum and methods for fighting at the following ranges
1. Rifle, pistol, bow, slingshot etc. Ranges
2. Handheld long weapons
3. Kicking and short weapons
4. Punching
5. Trapping/throwing/tripping/Kido wrist locking and breaking
6. clinching/elbows/knees/
7. Headblows/shoulder striking.
8. Ground fighting
As far as I am aware... There is no single system teaching a full range spectrum, and fully handles transitions between ranges.
Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has everything you would need in an MMA cage... punches, kicks, take-downs, throws, stand-up fighting joint locks, breaks and ground-fighting.
So let me ask Johnny again...
Why does this traditional martial art system get accepted as a valid martial art but MMA doesn't?
Firstly, define "pure art" in regards to Daito Ryu. Secondly, please detail the ne-waza found in Daito Ryu, including the section(s) found.
Out of Daito Ryu, some arts. Aikido, Danzan Ryu, Hakko Ryu… maybe one or two others…
Er…. no. There is no ne-waza in Daito Ryu… it's syllabus is separated into three different forms… tachi waza (standing), idori waza (suwari gata - seated techniques), and hanza handachi (half seated, half standing… one partner stands, the other is seated). In fact, each technique is supposed to be done in each of these forms.
And, no, Daito Ryu does not "almost perfectly mirror the curriculum of MMA". At all. I hardly know what you're meaning when you say "you could go to Daito and see this…"… do you think "Daito" is a place?
"Aiki spawned Daito Ryu"? Er… huh? And are you seriously suggesting that Daito Ryu, in existence only since the late 19th Century, led to the creation of Sumo?!?! Kendo?? Judo?!? Shorinji Kempo?? BJJ?!?
Dude. No.
Again… no ground fighting… and, no. Daito Ryu doesn't have "everything you would need in an MMA cage"… namely, it doesn't have anything geared up for fighting in an MMA cage.
Er… who says MMA doesn't?
Er… okay.
Er… okay.
"Little known fact"?!? Really?
Once again, Kosen Judo (High School Judo) didn't come into being in JAPAN until 1914… Maeda left Japan by 1906… and Kosen Judo does not "incorporate material from other branches of jujutsu"… that's a statement that's flawed from every angle… including the fact that differing systems are not "branches" of jujutsu…
Well, honestly, I wouldn't put too much stock in the way that interview presents history… for one thing, there's an emphasis that Maeda wasn't teaching "judo", he was teaching "jiujitsu"… well, yeah… that's what the Kodokan was known for at the time… Kano-ha Jujutsu (jiujitsu). So no kidding. That said, the minimal amount of striking (and the lack of sophistication in what there is) doesn't really show that Carlos was "already a striker" at all… instead, it shows that in BJJ's development (through Vale Tudo and similar contests) it encountered strikers, and came up with methods to handle them (building on Maeda's methods).
Er… okay.
Okay… and…?
Yeah, you're really going to have to follow developments there… I mean… that romanization (jiu-jitsu) was common at the time… currently, it's considered an incorrect form (going by Hepburn romanization), although there are alternate forms (jyu-jutsu, jiu-jutsu, ju-jutu, jyujutu, and so on). In a real way, if you want to spell it correctly, there are two methods: 柔術, or じゅうじゅつ.
Come visit my schools.
1: Long range (projectile weapons) include archery, throwing spikes and stars, blowguns, and (in our modern approach) firearms and firearm defence.
2: Handheld long weapons include rokushaku bo, yonshaku jo, hanbo, katana, kodachi, yari, naginata, nagamaki, and so on.
3: Kicking and short weapons include, well, kicking, as well as tanto, jutte, tessen, bogyaku dori (te giri bo), kunai, (in our modern approach) baton, torch, tactical pen, and more.
4: Punching. Well, we have a lot more in our hand-striking methods than just punching… but… sure.
5: Trapping, throwing, tripping, locking (not gonna use the term "kido"… the very image is just, well, wrong… I mean, we're a Japanese jujutsu-centric system… it's kinda what we do.
6: Clinching, elbows, knees… yep, got them all. Clinching, to us, is kumiuchi, elbows are shukki-ken, knees are sokki ken…
7: Headblows/shoulders striking… yep. We call a head but a zu-tsuki (literally head thrust) or kikaku ken… shoulder strikes come under tai ken (body weapons)…
8: Ground fighting. And, again, yep. Although, as with many traditional Japanese systems, it's almost non-existent in the old material, and comes up in our modern approach.
This, by the way, is far from an exhaustive list… I mean, we haven't covered flexible weaponry, de-escalation, or many, many other areas we cover. So… your point is?
One more time, there is no ground fighting in Daito Ryu… but, far more importantly, do you seriously think that it's this vague grouping of technical approaches (devoid of any actual context that would ground your claims in reality) are what would make Daito Ryu suitable or not to an MMA match? Not in the slightest…
You won't get an answer from him, as he's no longer a member here.
Click the website in his signatureYou mentioned you have schools. May I inquire as to the name of your art?
Thank you Chris.
But I remember that you "corrected", me already on the Daito Ryu didn't lead to BJJ so much of this is a redundant correction.
Secondly, this is really old
This was written before you "corrected" me, of course I could be wrong with regard to which happened first.
But I feel pretty secure in saying so.
I expect you will come across more of the same at some point. Please dont repeat yourself on DRAJJ not being the Jujutsu that BJJ came from. I have heard you, clearly on this matter already.
While you and I may not agree on this matter, I am not advocating a position that I am right and you are wrong.
I am more agnostic about it. You feel my position is wrong.
That's fine.
You have told me so. And I have acknowledged that you have told me so. I am not yet persuaded on the matter, and I suspect that I won't be for a while.
Further discussion about this specific topic ideally should be held in a separate thread.
Thirdly, I am glad your schools are pretty well rounded,
And equip students to fight and to transition between ranges. Not that my happiness means anything at all, but it makes me happy to hear when schools dont send students ill-prepared, and with gapping holes in their skill set.
And yes conflict avoiding and deescalation are both pretty helpful self defense measures. Glad this is in your teaching.
Fourthly, re Hepburn and Romanization of jujutsu and jiu jitsu. It was correct to the Japanese people who were instructing the Brazilians, otherwise they would have told their students to correct the spelling.
And a hundred years of spelling it that way is barking up wrong tree, if you think they are going to change, for us or any one else.
Its fait accompli.
The only time I have an objection to the use of the spelling Jiu Jitsu by someone is if they are referring to something non-bjj. Like any Japanese Jujutsu.
Fiftly,
you are late in telling me Johhny is gone. I have been told about 6 times already. As this is an older post, it is understandable that this could happen. My last message to him was on the Sixth of Aug. You are telling me on the Twenty Fourth. But, I do appreciate you trying to let me know. That was thoughtful and generous on your part.
Lastly,
You mentioned you have schools. May I inquire as to the name of your art?
Thank you Chris.
But I remember that you "corrected", me already on the Daito Ryu didn't lead to BJJ so much of this is a redundant correction.
Secondly, this is really old
This was written before you "corrected" me, of course I could be wrong with regard to which happened first.
But I feel pretty secure in saying so.
I expect you will come across more of the same at some point. Please dont repeat yourself on DRAJJ not being the Jujutsu that BJJ came from. I have heard you, clearly on this matter already.
While you and I may not agree on this matter, I am not advocating a position that I am right and you are wrong.
I am more agnostic about it. You feel my position is wrong.
That's fine.
You have told me so. And I have acknowledged that you have told me so. I am not yet persuaded on the matter, and I suspect that I won't be for a while.
Wherever you got this information from, that BJJ comes from Daito ryu, is just wrong.
As are you.
I've got a great idea. Let's get the thread back on topic. The origins of BJJ are interesting, and the relationship between BJJ and the various threads of japanese jujutsu is loads of fun, but has no bearing on the topic at hand.
The point is completely bogus because it is not something I brought to bear in supporting my position. Namely that the art form that came to be known as DRAJJ had a role in the formation of what would come to be called BJJ.
Nowhere at anytime ever... Not even once have I ever said Maeda was a student of Takeda.
So if you would like to join in the discussion already in progress, and argue against my position, PLEASE argue against what was actually said by me, instead of things I NEVER said.
If you are willing to put words into TsdTexan's mouth, so you can defeat such an expressed view... We have no reasonable basis of conversation here on this topic.
I would like to enjoy friendly martial arts talk with you. But let us remain reasonable fellows and not put words in each others mouth like this... Please?
You're still wrong As in factually and fundamentally incorrect.
BJJ came from judo. Kano invented judo. Kano did not study Daito ryu. It's said that one throw-one-might have come to him through one of his students, much like he gleaned kata garuma, the fireman's carry, from wrestling. No daito ryu of any significance to be called "an influence, " though. We have a pretty fair record of what Kano studied, and daito ryu isn't in the mix.
Kanō Jigorō - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So, you're wrong.
Nothing "problematic" about that. It apparently happens all the time.
As far as I am aware:
The ITFA teaches ITF-style Taekwon-Do which follows the syllabus laid down by the Founder, General Choi Hong Hi, in the Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia. The syllabus includes Patterns, Step-Sparring, Free Sparring, Destruction or breaking, Martial Art Terminology, Self-Defence and Moral Culture.
As far as I am aware, General Choi didn't have a groundfighting Curriculum. And headbutting, and gripfighting generally isn't taught in most TKD places.
Prior to the formation of the and the ITF, and the ITFA, Chong Chul Rhee was a Dan under the The Korea Taekwon-Do Association (KTA; 1959/1961) which also didn't have ground fighting like Sambo, JJJ or BJJ.
So I am curious as to how your school has integrated these into your Rhee TKD.
I hear the silence... and the changing of the attack.
But, this is my last post re:drajj and bjj on this thread. In other words, you can have the last word about it, because I am not continuing to argue about the subject, I will listen to your answers to my questions without response. But try and stay on topic for the thread please. I know I am going to try to do so.
This very much depends on the school/association
Like yourself, my system is TSD. My KJN trained under Rhee for much of his life, and we've always done headbutts, Judo Style grappling in SD for color belts, starting at 1st dan Takedowns become a regular part of sparring.
That said, the floor in our new space is gonna make these things hurt a great bit more and increase the risk of injury so people are less inclined to do them since we;ve moved