Wide stances and ending your forms on the same spot

[Gerry Seymour]

just limits technique s doesn5 get you their faster, if you limit them to one, they will learn it quickly, buts its combat efficiency will be somewhat limit. you clearly have to have sufficient technique to fight and that's going to be in the order of 10 to 20 no matter what you learn

I don't think 10-20 is necessary. As far as offensive techinques, you can be competent with a jab, cross, and uppercut. There's nothing in the grappling realm that is as versatile as those three punches, and little that is as easy to become competent with as the first two (the uppercut takes a bit more). Add a hook, and you're still only up to 4 techniques. Learn to cover (let's count that as a technique) and one basic approach to footwork (let's call that one) and now you're up to 8, counting generously. And you can do a lot with just that. Will it cover everything? No. But it can get the job done.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I know a guy who trained hip throw only for 2 years. He won the champion in the national tournament.

I had forced myself to use just "single leg" for 6 months. In one Chicago tournament, I used that technique to win 7 rounds in a role.

When you force yourself to use just 1 technique, you have to force yourself to set up your technique from all different situations.

If he truly trained ONLY that throw, he'd have lost the second match (assuming he got lucky and the first guy offered that immediately). As you've said before, when you say "train only X", what you mean is "train around X". Assuming you mean the same thing here, you're talking about training that hip throw, the entries to it, how to use other techniques to set it up, how to transition into and out of it with other techniques, and how to defend against the counters...plus how to defend against myriad other techniques to buy time to get to that throw (assuming he's not going to take the other openings that present).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm talking about training method. I'm not talking about individual difference.

If you want to learn

- throwing skill, you will need to throw your opponent over and over.
- punching skill, you will need to punch on your opponent over and over. The issue is this is difficult to do.

The throwing art training has natural advantage over the striking art training.

It does have that advantage. It also has the disadvantage of being a more complex skill set. Basic competence in a throw is harder to acquire than basic competence in a punch, on average (hook is harder than the simplest single-leg, maybe, but that's an outlier).

 

[Flying Crane]

Hurting someone is not difficult. Any untrained person who is athletically inclined and has an aggressive attitude can be an effective fighter, without a sophisticated martial method.

If that same person has some rudimentary, but quality training, he can be downright fearsome. It does not take years of training and mastery of a sophisticated martial system to be a good fighter.

 

[jobo]

I don't think 10-20 is necessary. As far as offensive techinques, you can be competent with a jab, cross, and uppercut. There's nothing in the grappling realm that is as versatile as those three punches, and little that is as easy to become competent with as the first two (the uppercut takes a bit more). Add a hook, and you're still only up to 4 techniques. Learn to cover (let's count that as a technique) and one basic approach to footwork (let's call that one) and now you're up to 8, counting generously. And you can do a lot with just that. Will it cover everything? No. But it can get the job done.

you've obviously not done boxing, but ok let's make it really simplistic, . so that's 4 punches with each hand that's 8, forward footwork, backward foot work and two lots of side wards foot work, that's 12 plus cover that's 13, then of course you need to combine those punches, and footwork. which is where you start to become competent

 

[Gerry Seymour]

you've obviously not done boxing, but ok let's make it really simplistic, . so that's 4 punches with each hand that's 8, forward footwork, backward foot work and two lots of side wards foot work, that's 12 plus cover that's 13, then of course you need to combine those punches, and footwork. which is where you start to become competent

You're inflating your numbers (which I already did by including the hook, which I wouldn't, as it's harder to use well). No, combinations aren't techniques (that's why they're called combinations). And forward/backward footwork isn't separate techniques, that's the movement with the technique (the punch, alone, isn't the full technique). Will that win boxing matches? No. But it will produce useful fighting skill, which was the point. You're arguing really hard about the number of things, which is well beside the point. Complexity is more the point.

But let's play the numbers, and account for complexity with it. Single-leg, same side. Single-leg, opposite side. Single-leg, same side, front. Single-leg, same side, back. We're at 6, just accounting for the obvious variations in a single technique for grappling. And every one of those is a more complex movement than the jab.

 

[jobo]

You're inflating your numbers (which I already did by including the hook, which I wouldn't, as it's harder to use well). No, combinations aren't techniques (that's why they're called combinations). And forward/backward footwork isn't separate techniques, that's the movement with the technique (the punch, alone, isn't the full technique). Will that win boxing matches? No. But it will produce useful fighting skill, which was the point. You're arguing really hard about the number of things, which is well beside the point. Complexity is more the point.

But let's play the numbers, and account for complexity with it. Single-leg, same side. Single-leg, opposite side. Single-leg, same side, front. Single-leg, same side, back. We're at 6, just accounting for the obvious variations in a single technique for grappling. And every one of those is a more complex movement than the jab.

of course forward and backwards are different techniques, most people can run forwards, very few can run backwards you would have to learn that, therefor it's a different technique

and most people circle to their dominant side, right usually you would then have to learn the technique of circling to your left

and combinations are the technique of using your movements in combination, which needs to be learnt

 

[Gerry Seymour]

of course forward and backwards are different techniques, most people can run forwards, very few can run backwards you would have to learn that, therefor it's a different technique

and most people circle to their dominant side, right usually you would then have to learn the technique of circling to your left

You're trying to make a boxer. That's not the point. To be able to use the punching skills against most folks doesn't require circling. And I'd still argue the basic footwork is part of the punch (just as I would argue stances in TMA are not separate techniques - they are part of the techniques).

 

[jobo]

You're trying to make a boxer. That's not the point. To be able to use the punching skills against most folks doesn't require circling. And I'd still argue the basic footwork is part of the punch (just as I would argue stances in TMA are not separate techniques - they are part of the techniques).

hang on, at some point you said " competent " your can 9nly be be judged competent at boxing if your up against another boxer or skilled fighter.any one vaguely able can throw a landing punch against against " most people" that takes no training at all

 

[Earl Weiss]

I have to disagree with both of you here. All my life, I have tried to find the "faster ways". If there is a faster way, I would like to learn it myself.

If you train this traditional art partner drill over 10,000 times, you will develop this skill. How and where can you find a "faster way" than this?

If you twist this sand container 10,000 times, you will develop strong twisting power used in wrestling. How and where can you find a "faster way" than this?

Please tell me if you can find any modern gym equipment that can help you to achieve this goal.

]

I think the issue is somewhat confused. The idea that you waste a lot of time learning a traditional MA if all you want to do is fight does not imply that every drill or exercise in a traditional MA is inefficient. Simply that there is a lot of stuff in many systems that are not structured solely for sparring or combat training.

 

[skribs]

I think the issue is somewhat confused. The idea that you waste a lot of time learning a traditional MA if all you want to do is fight does not imply that every drill or exercise in a traditional MA is inefficient. Simply that there is a lot of stuff in many systems that are not structured solely for sparring or combat training.

So what are they for?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The idea that you waste a lot of time learning a traditional MA if all you want to do is fight does not imply that every drill or exercise in a traditional MA is inefficient. Simply that there is a lot of stuff in many systems that are not structured solely for sparring or combat training.

In MA, not only you need to have a good technique, you also need to develop

- strength,
- speed,
- endurance,
- flexibility,
- balance,
- ...

For example, the following training may look like not related to fight. It develops balance, flexibility, leg strength, ...

If you don't train "leg lift" throw, that training may look like wasting your time.

 

[Earl Weiss]

EARL WEISS SAID: ↑
I think the issue is somewhat confused. The idea that you waste a lot of time learning a traditional MA if all you want to do is fight does not imply that every drill or exercise in a traditional MA is inefficient. Simply that there is a lot of stuff in many systems that are not structured solely for sparring or combat training.

So what are they for?

Depending on the system non combat objectives can include. Power breaking, specialty breaking, aesthetics. athletic achievement levels such as jumping for height or distance.

 

[skribs]

EARL WEISS SAID: ↑
I think the issue is somewhat confused. The idea that you waste a lot of time learning a traditional MA if all you want to do is fight does not imply that every drill or exercise in a traditional MA is inefficient. Simply that there is a lot of stuff in many systems that are not structured solely for sparring or combat training.


Depending on the system non combat objectives can include. Power breaking, specialty breaking, aesthetics. athletic achievement levels such as jumping for height or distance.

To be clear, I wasn't trying to argue with you. I just wanted to see the rest of your point!

 

[Earl Weiss]

you've clearly never been to old Trafford's, in the last couple of years. the teams been booed win draw or lose because of the lack of aesthetic, and that was as nothing to the booing that went on at everton last season.

Correct. Never been there. I expect this would be a newsworthy event.. The home crowd booing it's teams winning performance because it was not aesthetically pleasing. Are their links to any stories about this?

 

[jobo]

Correct. Never been there. I expect this would be a newsworthy event.. The home crowd booing it's teams winning performance because it was not aesthetically pleasing. Are their links to any stories about this?

try Google, , why would it be news worthy when 8t happens every other week .

 

[jobo]

EARL WEISS SAID: ↑
I think the issue is somewhat confused. The idea that you waste a lot of time learning a traditional MA if all you want to do is fight does not imply that every drill or exercise in a traditional MA is inefficient. Simply that there is a lot of stuff in many systems that are not structured solely for sparring or combat training.


Depending on the system non combat objectives can include. Power breaking, specialty breaking, aesthetics. athletic achievement levels such as jumping for height or distance.

really people practise long jump at the ma class, ? suppose ithe useful if your late for the ferry

 

[Gerry Seymour]

hang on, at some point you said " competent " your can 9nly be be judged competent at boxing if your up against another boxer or skilled fighter.any one vaguely able can throw a landing punch against against " most people" that takes no training at all

I didn't say "competitive". If we go to that measure, we'd have to judge competitive at what level (against another rank beginner or an experienced amateur). And then the level of competence needed is determined almost entirely by that of the opponent.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

really people practise long jump at the ma class, ? suppose ithe useful if your late for the ferry

In fact, some folks do. Because it's fun, mostly.

 

[Earl Weiss]

really people practise long jump at the ma class, ? suppose ithe useful if your late for the ferry

It seems you finally understand. Exactly as I was saying. Many Martial Art systems today encompass stuff that would not be considered an efficient way to train if all you want to do is fight. Of course we still have the difficulty of defining exactly what system is or is not "Martial Art" and also what is a :"Fight" i.e. competition or combat etc.