Brazilian Juijitsu?

[Kraen]

Why does it seem like more often than not-- no matter WHAT the topic is, or what style it's under, someone brings up BJJ?

whatever happened to 'it's not the style, but the fighter that decides the outcome' an' all that?

And what does BJJ have to do with, 'what does -HAPKIDO- favor in the clinch?' or any other example you can think of.

Secondly, I wonder if the BJJ forums have to deal with people talking about how, "if it was Hapkido, I would just rough him up a bit then throw him into a STANDING jointlock.
:woo::woo::woo::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: :evil::evil::evil:"

Any thoughts?

[Omicron]

Well, Mr. Five Posts, assuming you aren't just a troll, BJJ often gets mentioned because of its generally superior training methodology. Training against full resistance almost all the time tends to produce fighters who are very competent at what they do. Saying that it's the fighter and not the style may be generally true, but it's also true that certain styles have a higher concentration of competency amongst their practitioners than others do. BJJ is often mentioned because of this.

Add to that the fact that many martial arts do not include much ground work, and you have BJJ'ers chiming in calling into question the practicality of any self-defense system that fails to acknowledge the necessity of at least a passing familiarity with ground fighting.

Really though, if you don't want people from other styles to enter your discussions, then MAP probably isn't what you're looking for...there are a lot of different people representing a lot of different styles here. If you want to have your own insular discussions where others can't voice their opinions, go start your own Hapkido-only forum and ban people who say things that make you feel uncomfortable.

[Moi]

I think it does help that in a 1 on 1 situation, which might arguably be the best test of a martial art, then a BJJer only has to do one thing to win, that being getting you to the ground. Once there he's won.
How much this relates to self defence is another arguable point but you certainly need to know enough grappling to know a little of what to do once you find yourself on the ground. BJJ or judo supplies that.

[Kraen]

Well, Mr. Five Posts, assuming you aren't just a troll...

First off Omicron, I would like to thank you for insulting me. Much appreciated! :(

For the record one POSSIBLE reason for me only having 5 posts is... I JUST REGISTERED. Please consider this.

Really though, if you don't want people from other styles to enter your discussions, then MAP probably isn't what you're looking for...there are a lot of different people representing a lot of different styles here. If you want to have your own insular discussions where others can't voice their opinions, go start your own Hapkido-only forum and ban people who say things that make you feel uncomfortable.

Secondly, I would like you to quote the part where I said, 'I don't like these people coming here and adding to our discussions with their non-hapkido views. They are making me feel uncomfortable and I don't like it at all' In my original post.

Now we got that out of the way..

...BJJ often gets mentioned because of its generally superior training methodology. Training against full resistance almost all the time tends to produce fighters who are very competent at what they do. Saying that it's the fighter and not the style may be generally true, but it's also true that certain styles have a higher concentration of competency amongst their practitioners than others do. BJJ is often mentioned because of this.

Add to that the fact that many martial arts do not include much ground work, and you have BJJ'ers chiming in calling into question the practicality of any self-defense system that fails to acknowledge the necessity of at least a passing familiarity with ground fighting.

Ah, I see. Thank you for your post. I figured that BJJ'ers would give Hapkido at least some credit. And I can see it when they step it up with 'in a Judo setting' for example.

Now for the part I think you missed... I was asking about the 'trolls' that spew BJJ, not the actual people that contribute something CONSTRUCTIVE to conversations. If you look at my first post you should be able to see all of the 'smilies' quoted along with the 'Hapkido Troll', indicating this.



I think it does help that in a 1 on 1 situation, which might arguably be the best test of a martial art, then a BJJer only has to do one thing to win, that being getting you to the ground. Once there he's won.
How much this relates to self defence is another arguable point but you certainly need to know enough grappling to know a little of what to do once you find yourself on the ground. BJJ or judo supplies that.

I see. Thank you for your post Martial Dad.

-Kraen

[BSR]

Why does it seem like more often than not-- no matter WHAT the topic is, or what style it's under, someone brings up BJJ?



Maybe you should answer the question yourself, seeing as you just started a thread in the Hapkido forum titled "Brazilian Jujitsu."

[Kraen]

Maybe you should answer the question yourself, seeing as you just started a thread in the Hapkido forum titled "Brazilian Jujitsu."

Please note that it ends with a question mark and not a period. And the questions posted are valid. BJJ is not something I know of beyond what anyone could tell from watching a few UFC matches. I do appreciate the REAL answers I have received.

The reason I posted it under the 'Hapkido' Forum is because I wanted to hear what people who study Hapkido have to say. I'm confident that if I were to ask this under the BJJ forum I would get some very biased answers favoring the '90% of fights end up on the ground' view. Here I can get a few more answers that explain it in a little more cut & dry manner that I can trust like Omicron and Martial Dad did.

-Kraen

[Custom Volusia]

I think you may have been able to pose your question better if you are serious. You should probably take another shot at it.

Something like: In regards to the BJJ trolls that believe that BJJ is all that is MA...why do they always bring it up?

Which is what you are really asking...but then you answer your own question!!! IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE TROLLS!!!!!!

[Moi]

Here I can get a few more answers that explain it in a little more cut & dry manner that I can trust like Martial Dad did.

-Kraen

It would be on my list of essentials. 2nd from the top.

[Southpaw535]

"biased views that 90% of fights end up on the ground" i doubt its 90% but i am willing to bet a lotof fights end up on the deck. yes i am an ex bjj artist :D

[Moi]

"biased views that 90% of fights end up on the ground"

I've only ever heard that from jujitsu instructors:hat:

[Southpaw535]

they're the only people ive heard say both people go to the ground but one person ending up on the ground at some point io can beleive even if its only for a few seconds.

[Su lin]

Various reasons :
a) bjj has proven itself to be highly effective in a competition context
b) the founders are highly respected worldwide
c) it's practised by more people worldwide I imagine ,so it's discussed a lot
d) majority of mma fighters use bjj and mma is popular so it's discussed a lot.

[Kraen]

I think you may have been able to pose your question better if you are serious. You should probably take another shot at it.

There are some subtleties in my original post. I agree that I probably could have worded it better. However I'm satisfied with the answers I have gotten so far as they have imparted actual knowledge onto me.. except for the ones that just say 'because they are trolls.'

Of course they are trolls. That part was a little more rhetorical than anything else.. unless if there ARE trolls in the BJJ forum! =O (no way!)

That said, thanks to those who answered the serious questions with serious answers.

-Kraen

[Southpaw535]

Secondly, I wonder if the BJJ forums have to deal with people talking about how, "if it was Hapkido, I would just rough him up a bit then throw him into a STANDING jointlock.

Any thoughts?

sorry i'll be serious for a sec on this one. No we dont because i think the ration of bjj practitioners to hapkido is very low, secondly bjj strangely enough is about groundfighting which isnt the main focus of hapkido. As for standing jointlocks i think you'd be surprised how well bjj transitions standing. my RNC is just as good standing.

[Giovanni]

do fights really end up on the ground 90% of the time? where does this stat come from? cause i don't see it. usually, if it ends up on the ground, it's cause three dudes are stomping another one. one on one? i don't see that happening as much as 90%. no way, not in the fights i've personally ever witnessed.

[Southpaw535]

thats the point people are making mate. check out any major bjj site and they'll throw a figure like that out

[Bruce W Sims]

warning---warning---warning---warning

The following comment may not be suitable for people of differing opinions!

warning---warning---warning---warning

It is the avowed purpose of advertising to stimulate excitement or emotion regarding the item being marketed. IME the overwhelming number of discussions across a range of INTERNET sites are little more than "free advertising" for either/or BJJ or MMA. These "discussions" include such non-starters as "I've been thinking of "starting/leaving/taking/adding" BJJ/MMA/??? to my MA career....." There is also the ubiquitous "comparison" discussion (could this guy beat that guy) as well as the famous "what is the best technique for..."- discussions. The whole idea of these is to keep the identified activity being questioned before the public eye but not have to spend money on advertising as such. (see: John Graden).

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Custom Volusia]

If someone says 90% of fights end on the ground I tell them that 100% start on their feet!

[BSR]

As for standing jointlocks i think you'd be surprised how well bjj transitions standing. my RNC is just as good standing.

But do you ever actually train them standing?

Sounds similar to what I've heard Hapkido people say, that many of our standing techniques can be transitioned to the ground even though most HKD schools spend a very minimal amount of time on groundwork. Just because I can apply an armbar from a standing position doesn't mean I'm going to be equally good using them in groundfighting.

But I'm sure you knew that, I'm just thinking out loud really.

On another note, I've browsed through Royce Gracie's self-defense book and several of the techniques in there look like Hapkido.

So, maybe the answer to the original question is HKD=BJJ!11!!1!1

Or not...

[Su lin]

Or more importantly "does it matter if it works?" I think not.

[Southpaw535]

no ive never trained anything stand up except takedowns. but so long as it works who cares? i wouldnt be surprised if gracie took some stuff from other arts its something to be proud of if anything

[Giovanni]

i have a good story re: bjj always being mentioned. i'm at my dermatologist. i had what ended up being dry skin on my foot. i went to him because i thought maybe it was athlete's foot or whatever. long story short...it comes out i do hapkido. he suddenly starts telling me that i should do bjj, blah blah blah, because it's the best. is it just a bjj thing? because i don't go around telling everyone that hapkido is the best or whatever.

[Yohan]

warning---warning---warning---warning

The following comment may not be suitable for people of differing opinions!

warning---warning---warning---warning

It is the avowed purpose of advertising to stimulate excitement or emotion regarding the item being marketed. IME the overwhelming number of discussions across a range of INTERNET sites are little more than "free advertising" for either/or BJJ or MMA. These "discussions" include such non-starters as "I've been thinking of "starting/leaving/taking/adding" BJJ/MMA/??? to my MA career....." There is also the ubiquitous "comparison" discussion (could this guy beat that guy) as well as the famous "what is the best technique for..."- discussions. The whole idea of these is to keep the identified activity being questioned before the public eye but not have to spend money on advertising as such. (see: John Graden).

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Bruce,

I'm not sure that it's a matter of opinion whether or not people are using anonymous posters to plug their stuff. Obviously, there will be instances where people will post a thread asking, "What do you folks think of this school?" But I would really doubt it if there were people just plugging BJJ and MMA in general for advertising. I would assume that most of those people genuinely believe in what they are saying.

Obviously, you and I have been on opposite ends of that discussion and I am not advertising for MMA/BJJ in general. I just train in it and believe in what I do.

Regards,
Yohan

[Yohan]

Kraen,

It's pretty obvious that you are largely unaware of the biggest current Martial Arts fad "Brazilian Jiu Jitsu," so I'll clue you in. Here's a short history on the art: Japanese dude takes Judo to Japan, he teaches it to the Gracie family, the small sickly Gracie son learns it by watching and goes on to found Gracie Jiu Jitsu/Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

It's a grappling art based around the traditions of Judo - safe techniques trained at a higher level of resistance. This gives you a good base of how to set up things and apply things on people who don't want you to. Many people (myself included) find this to be a superior training philosophy.

So that's the art and now for the fad:

The Gracie's popularized Brazilian Jiu Jitsu by promoting the first UFC's, and (arguably) stacking the odds in favor of competitors from their family, allowing them to win, and "prove" once and for all that Jiu Jitsu is a superior Martial Art to any other. I personally don't think that's the case, but that perception has remained in the public eye ever since. As MMA has become more popular, that perception has lingered and even increased, so now there are plenty of wieners who don't even train but will wax poetic about how "BJJ is the greatest Martial Art there is, and Royce Gracie has never lost a fight (totally not true)" etc etc.

So when you talk to people about BJJ, you have to understand the difference between the art and the fad. The art is awesome, simple, and effective, and inspires camaraderie amongst men and women across the world. The fad is a dumb epidemic that spawns losers who wear tapout hats 2 sizes to large sideways, and strip mall krotty versions of Jiu Jitsu schools.

Regards,
Yohan

[BSR]

i wouldnt be surprised if gracie took some stuff from other arts its something to be proud of if anything

Actually I think the similarity probaby lies with the fact that BJJ and HKD are actually distant cousins, both arts having their roots ultimately in Japanese Jujutusu.

[Kraen]

Yohan, I know that it exists (hard to find anyone in MA who doesn't.) however I have only seen it on TV and online. There is no BJJ school anywhere near where I live so it would be rare to find someone who actually knows what they're talking about regarding it. The closest BJJ school to me is about 10 hours away in the Vancouver Area or Calgary. With that, it's seemingly impossible for me to see for myself what a scheduled class would look like.

-Kraen

[Southpaw535]

so as such doesnt that mean your not really in a position to complain about people recommending it?

[Kraen]

so as such doesnt that mean your not really in a position to complain about people recommending it?

You seem to completely misunderstand me at every turn.

I'm asking questions about it, not saying 'people shouldn't recommend BJJ' or anything of the like.

Question marks generally indicate that there's a question to be had.

-Kraen

[Southpaw535]

okay first of all try not being rude and maybe i'd treat your posts with a bit more respect. Looking back i did misundertand what you wrote but from what i gather your ticked off that bjj is brought up on an hapkido forum. fair enough i can see that would be annoying but if you cant get access to first hand experiance then you can't really know wether they're right or not in the same way if you told me hapkido would be better for such and such reason i couldnt disagree 100%.

[47MartialMan]

"biased views that 90% of fights end up on the ground" i doubt its 90% but i am willing to bet a lotof fights end up on the deck. yes i am an ex bjj artist :D

From my past observations and experiences, not too many ended on the deck.

[Southpaw535]

most of mine have so thats here my view comes form. mind you i never had any really before i started bjj so its probably a case of me taking them to the floor if i can.

[47MartialMan]

most of mine have so thats here my view comes form. mind you i never had any really before i started bjj so its probably a case of me taking them to the floor if i can.

I will leave you with this thought; It depends on the place and/or situation. The best thing to be is versitile.

[Kraen]

okay first of all try not being rude and maybe i'd treat your posts with a bit more respect.

Please site the times where I initiated rude behavior.

Looking back i did misundertand what you wrote but from what i gather your ticked off that bjj is brought up on an hapkido forum.

Then you gather differently than I do.

fair enough i can see that would be annoying but if you cant get access to first hand experiance then you can't really know wether they're right or not in the same way if you told me hapkido would be better for such and such reason i couldnt disagree 100%.

I think you're missing what's going on here.

On top of that, I am quite pleased to see this has turned into an interesting discussion and has remained civil. Honestly when I first posted I suspected it would inevitably attract 'Trolls'

Kudos to everyone who has posted!

-Kraen

[Omicron]

First off Omicron, I would like to thank you for insulting me. Much appreciated! :(

For the record one POSSIBLE reason for me only having 5 posts is... I JUST REGISTERED. Please consider this.

Sorry if you felt insulted by my post. I just found it a little hard to take you seriously when you said:

Why does it seem like more often than not-- no matter WHAT the topic is, or what style it's under, someone brings up BJJ?

...but only had a handful of posts here on the forum. Clearly with only five posts you couldn't have THAT much experience with BJJ'ers butting in on your discussions. Again though, I wasn't being insulting on purpose, and I apologize if that's the way you feel.

Secondly, I would like you to quote the part where I said, 'I don't like these people coming here and adding to our discussions with their non-hapkido views. They are making me feel uncomfortable and I don't like it at all' In my original post.

Well, you did say this:

what does BJJ have to do with, 'what does -HAPKIDO- favor in the clinch?' or any other example you can think of.

...which comes awfully close.

I figured that BJJ'ers would give Hapkido at least some credit. And I can see it when they step it up with 'in a Judo setting' for example.

When did I not give Hapkido any credit? I have nothing against Hapkido. In fact, one of the instructors at our BJJ school also has a black belt in Hapkido. I was simply trying to answer your question as to why people place a lot of emphasis on ground fighting and live sparring. That doesn't at all take away from the practicality that Hapkido or any other martial art may happen to have. BJJ itself is only one of many examples of a martial art that incorporates lots of sparring with partners, and is conscious of the fact that ground fighting is one major aspect of martial arts and self defense training. That's why many people, trolls and not-trolls, use it as a yardstick to measure the training that goes on in other arts. Most of us aren't saying that all other martial arts are a waste of time or are totally useless...in fact, it's been my experience that many BJJ'ers have extensive backgrounds in other martial arts as well. What we ARE saying, at least those of us who aren't trolling, is that if martial art X trains against live opponents with full resistance, and martial art Y does not, those people who practice martial art X are training more effectively and more realistically. That's all.

By the way, whereabouts are you located? I didn't realize that we're almost neighbours. It's too bad that the nearest BJJ school is so far away from you...I'm sure it would be fun for you to at least try a class out. If you're ever in the Vancouver area and you're interested in dropping in on some BJJ, definitely send me a pm! :)

[koyo]

As a long time crosstrainer I have absolutely no problem with BJJ or ANY art being brought up.I have confidence in my own ability to fight if neccesary and welcome ANY input that shall be of value to me.

Plus I am old enough in the tooth to say yeah yeah :rolleyes:when someone mentions he trains in the ultimate marial art..whichever art that may be.

regards koyo

Which art is this? Hapkido,Aikido,judo,jujtsu, BJJ.....His leg is being swept and he had blocked a punch to the mouth..karate? before being pinned.

If it works for me..who cares?

[Omicron]

Plus I am old enough in the tooth to say yeah yeah :rolleyes:when someone mentions he trains in the ultimate marial art..whichever art that may be.


Amen to that. Hopefully, anyone who isn't a blatant troll would never say anything of the sort. No single martial art has the status of being "the best." They are all different, and apply to different situations in different ways. Some people prefer some, while other people prefer others. As long as they are making educated, informed decisions regarding the martial art(s) they choose to practice, then people are doing nothing but good, if you ask me.

[koyo]

If I ask you? Bloody right I will ask you and anybody that will teach me something.

I feel a joke coming up.

There was a fool who locked himself in a telephone box and laughed cos' everyone else was locked out.

regards koyo

[Kraen]

When did I not give Hapkido any credit? I have nothing against Hapkido.

by "I figured that BJJ'ers would give Hapkido at least some credit. And I can see it when they step it up with 'in a Judo setting' for example."

I meant BJJ DOES give hapkido SOME credit, otherwise something along the lines of 'being completely defenseless on the ground like a fish out of water' would have been mentioned.

By the way, whereabouts are you located? I didn't realize that we're almost neighbours. It's too bad that the nearest BJJ school is so far away from you...I'm sure it would be fun for you to at least try a class out. If you're ever in the Vancouver area and you're interested in dropping in on some BJJ, definitely send me a pm! :)

I'm from Prince George, BC. As long as the training time doesn't interfere with the Hapkido club down there that's run by one of my master's students at UBC. ;)

-Kraen

[Omicron]

I'm from Prince George, BC. As long as the training time doesn't interfere with the Hapkido club down there that's run by one of my master's students at UBC. ;)

Sounds like you need to plan a trip to Vancouver in the near future :cool:

[Kraen]

I'm sure if I could afford it. Fresh outta School with no future an' all that.

[Omicron]

You and me both, my friend. You and me both.

[Bruce W Sims]

Fwiw, the Hapkido community generally advocates staying off the floor and regaining one's feet as quickly as possible if knocked down. Putting sport to oneside, experience in civilian situations supports the idea that going to the ground or being knocked to the ground is the favored strategy in street-fights. It limits the movement of the person on the ground while allowing for greater opportunity for multiple attackers to use more powerful kicking versus hand techniques as well as cold weapons from multiple angles.

As an adjunct to modern Judo I applaud BJJ as an option for safeguarding mat-work which was stripped from Olympic and National competitions. However, as a form of common self-defense it is limited in imortant ways.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Omicron]

As an adjunct to modern Judo I applaud BJJ as an option for safeguarding mat-work which was stripped from Olympic and National competitions. However, as a form of common self-defense it is limited in imortant ways.

And I think you'd have a hard time finding any BJJ practitioner who would argue otherwise. Ground fighting only makes up a single part of an overall self-defense skill set. It's a very important part, and one that shouldn't be ignored any more than say, stand-up striking, but it's still only just a part. :cool:

[47MartialMan]

Can we all come to a common agreement and say that anything trained, could be applied in the right situation?

[Omicron]

Can we all come to a common agreement and say that anything trained, could be applied in the right situation?

Anything trained effectively. Absolutely!

[47MartialMan]

Who yeah...effectively......

[CatWise]

Hey Karaen,

So, how are you enjoying this fiery topic? You would think that people that practice Martial Arts now "control" a little bit better and didn't jump all other ones back, especially a new member.

But, I have to say I do enjoy this post and there is a lot of good points made.

Now, in my opinion, as someone already mentioned. BJJ is simply the new black in MA. It’s a today fade. Basically, if you look at the UFC and MMA, when it first came out, and there was this great family that was the first one to take people down to the ground and win. (Sorry I am terrible with the names) This started the trend. Anyone who wanted to get in the ring would do BJJ, and a lot of top fighters are BJJ trained. So, anyone who watches TV and MMA is exposed to that.

I also have a feeling, that there are a lot of members out there that joined this forum but don't really practice MA. They based their remarks and their comments just on what they see of hear on TV or think its "right". So, again, most of what they see and hear on TV would be BJJ and thus more BJJ comments.

As to the ground work, well in MY hapkido school, we do have a lot of self-defense moves from the ground and that is part of our regular curriculum. Do, I think that most fights end on the ground? Well, I have been in quite a few fights but I have ended up on the ground only once (and that’s because I tripped). Mind you I have never fought a BJJ fighter, over wise I probably would have to end up on the ground much more often.

I do have to say, that I find this attitude of "only in BJJ we train at full contact and resistance" tiring and OLD. How do you know what over schools are teaching and how they are practicing? Doesn't that depend on an instructor? I get plenty of REAL LIFE practice and application. Do I want to fight every single time to the point of tap out and cranking my wrist or elbows back? No! I have a JOB to go to in the morning, and I need my hands and finger. Plus I lecture and travel across the country, a black eye wouldn't look very good as you speak in front of 50+ professionals.

So, what ever is right for you is right for you. Assuming that you are not a good fighter just because you don't fight for blood every training session is not in your best interested. I am a damn good fighter, I've had plenty of opportunities to prove it, but that doesn't mean that I go out looking for excuses to fight. I don't need to prove that to anyone. After all the best self defense is not to be in the bad situation in the first place, right?

The beauty of this forum and all the people that contribute to it, is that you do end up learning a lot and even though some BJJ comments get tiring, you can ignore what you don't want to hear and take what you do find of value.

[Omicron]

I do have to say, that I find this attitude of "only in BJJ we train at full contact and resistance" tiring and OLD.

Ugh. I feel like a broken record here, but I'll say it again: not many people claim that BJJ has a monopoly on effective training methods. It just often gets used as a convenient example of these methods because they are an integral part of the art itself, and probably close to 100% of BJJ schools practice the way you describe. That doesn't mean that other martial arts don't, and it doesn't mean that BJJ is automatically "better". It DOES make BJJ a good and often-used example of a martial art that trains properly and effectively. That's all.

[CatWise]

Omicron,

I am in COMPLETE agreement with you and my comment wasn't directed completely at what you said, but more in a broad generalization of the "usual" comments you see. This is most likely why Karaen has started this threat (again my opinion and interpretation). It simply feels at times when you are discussing Hapkido or other techniques and the way you train etc. when a BJJ comment comes up about how their "full contact training that is ONLY done in BJJ is the best etc." Again, that is not to say that BJJ isn't good technique and this type of training its good, just in some comments the arrogance put into the comment by the poster gets tiresome.

I agree, this type of training has its uses, and BJJ is good and effective (as shown in the UFC use and popularity). As someone who cross trains I would NEVER disrespect another technique in any way. I only wish I could spend all my days training and learning MA, but I am currently training 3 techniques, so no room for more.

[Omicron]

It simply feels at times when you are discussing Hapkido or other techniques and the way you train etc. when a BJJ comment comes up about how their "full contact training that is ONLY done in BJJ is the best etc."

Anyone who says something like that is obviously trolling, or just ignorant. Either way, you can pretty much just ignore them. I feel I should add though, that as I said before people often use BJJ as an example of a martial art that practices well, and they use it to compare and contrast with the training that goes on in other arts. That shouldn't be mistaken for people mindlessly thinking that BJJ is simply better for no substantial reason...an emphasis on partner work and live training DOES count for a lot, and sometimes it IS true that BJJ (or insert any other live-training style) is actually better at producing results than the style or technique in question. There's a difference between that and saying "BJJ is better because it's BJJ", or because it's in the UFC, or because it focuses on ground work, etc., etc. One is backed up by substantiated fact, the other is just mindless praise for BJJ.

[EternalRage]

BJJ gets brought up because it's the "industry standard" for grappling. Part of this has to do with what was mentioned before - the whole thing about the early UFCs, Royce, stacking fights in favor of BJJ, etc. Had it been wrestling or sambo, this would be a thread titled "wrestling?" or "sambo?"

The other part of it has to do with what Omicron said - the majority of BJJ schools train their grappling live and against resistance. If you're at a non-BJJ/sambo/wrestling/combat sport grappling school, and you have resistance in your training, great. Doesn't excuse the rest of your peers, if your system is filled with choreography and compliant partners.

It's the same reasons why Muay Thai is brought up in conversations about standup striking. It's popular, efficient within the scope of it's intended use, and it is trained well.

The 90% statistic is just a marketing tool, I highly doubt someone actually went around and did a correct sampling of fights and figured out the percentage using legit statistics. The only thing I've read about was some study done out in California with a bunch of police precints that observed fights and where they ended up, but I don't know where the link is or who did the study. In any case it doesn't matter one bit - the point is that grappling is an important part of self defense, and without it you have a hole in your repetoire. Just like any other range of combat.

Any time you see the words "BJJ" and "best" in the same sentence, it's usually either Gracie propaganda, or a minority of BJJ/MMA fanboys/noob nutriders making the rest of us look like closed minded retards.

[Kraen]

Hey Karaen,

So, how are you enjoying this fiery topic?

I'm enjoying it with a nice cold cup of milk in one hand and music in the background, thanks for asking :hat:


The beauty of this forum and all the people that contribute to it, is that you do end up learning a lot and even though some BJJ comments get tiring, you can ignore what you don't want to hear and take what you do find of value.

Well my MAIN reason for starting this thread was to find out about something that I don't know about. Seems reasonable, right? Lucky me, everyone who's posted sounds like they've personally spent at least one day on the mats. :evil:

I feel I should add though, that as I said before people often use BJJ as an example of a martial art that practices well, and they use it to compare and contrast with the training that goes on in other arts. That shouldn't be mistaken for people mindlessly thinking that BJJ is simply better for no substantial reason...

I personally would figure that people would only feel the need mention 100% effective training like how it's done in BJJ if we were wondering why nothing seems to be getting through to any of us when we train. That is, unless if people think us idiots or something.:evil:

At this point I feel I should put up a disclaimer for this post as it's not meant to be insulting to anyone.. except trolls and the like, that is. :eek:

I would also like to take this moment to mention that the basic idea of Hapkido isn't to fight full-force. Or fight at all, for that matter.

(not to be confused with not putting any energy or effort into what you're doing.)

It's about letting the other guy fight. And winning without having to fight.

-Kraen

[Omicron]

I personally would figure that people would only feel the need mention 100% effective training like how it's done in BJJ if we were wondering why nothing seems to be getting through to any of us when we train. That is, unless if people think us idiots or something.:evil:

Heh, yeah. Except the problem as a lot of people see it is that people don't always realize that their training is ineffective. It's not that you might not be learning something, but that the way in which you're learning it, or the conditions you practice it under, do not adequately prepare you for a real-life situation.

Again, I'm not picking on anyone or any art in particular. I'm just trying to summarize a lot of the discussions of this type that seem to go on around here :)

I would also like to take this moment to mention that the basic idea of Hapkido isn't to fight full-force. Or fight at all, for that matter.

(not to be confused with not putting any energy or effort into what you're doing.)

It's about letting the other guy fight. And winning without having to fight.

This is all well and good, and it's not exclusive to Hapkido. A lot of martial arts have a similar mentality. Heck, the entire reason we train in self defense is precisely so that we have a reserve of useful techniques and experience to draw from if needed, and that in turn allows us to be in control of a situation without feeling the need to result to brute force. But brute force shouldn't be confused with live training and full contact sparring, which are simply training tools that allow us to understand how to apply the techniques we study in a situation that's as close to real life as possible. We don't train the way we do because we want to fight, or because we believe in fighting full force all the time, but because the best way to learn anything is by applying and using your knowledge in a realistic way. That way we can be certain that we know how to use our skills and techniques under less than ideal conditions, because we've done it countless times before when rolling with our training partners.

[koyo]

Ah to hell with it..I shall cut to the chase..as a crosstrainer in japanese martial arts I think the negative attitude shown when BJJ is mentioned is mainly from mystics and passengers who feel threatened because they DO NOT train hard and effective in their own arts.

Do NOT question the arts but constantly question your OWN abilities.

regards koyo

[Kraen]

That's something I've never understood.

Why train in a MA if you're going to train half-assedly? (on purpose)

Is it for your own ego? something to do once every few days? Even then, wouldn't that be reason enough to give it your all? If not, why bother? That's like having a PhD in Tom-Foolery which you acquired through questionable means from a shady website.

Or am I just talking out of my ass?

-Kraen

[koyo]

Because it's cool. Like learning three chords on a guitar and pretending to be Eric Clapton.

regards koyo

[Giovanni]

oh, the old straw man argument. "those people, they don't train hard enough"

the only people i see dogging it are kids who are being forced to go by their parents. but other than that, i like to think that most adults who are paying to do martial arts are actually trying. i have to think that as long as someone is putting in the effort and coming, even once a week, that's better than nothing. you have to remember that people are in different stages of age and shape and motivation. and hopefully at even one day per week, people will get a toolbox of things they can do in an ambiguous situation.

[CatWise]

oh, the old straw man argument. "those people, they don't train hard enough"

the only people i see dogging it are kids who are being forced to go by their parents. but other than that, i like to think that most adults who are paying to do martial arts are actually trying. i have to think that as long as someone is putting in the effort and coming, even once a week, that's better than nothing. you have to remember that people are in different stages of age and shape and motivation. and hopefully at even one day per week, people will get a toolbox of things they can do in an ambiguous situation.

Oh, how I wish that it was true! I have to say that MAJORITY of adults that train, do train hard, however I do know of some that show up to class very "when ever" and do couple of this and that and are done, only to later BRAG about how hard they train and how tough they are. In my school, which is small, fortunately there are only 2 individuals like that.

Also, the very first time I went to a tournament couple of years ago, I was REALLY surprised to see the caliber of adults that trained and came to then "Demonstrate" their abilities. I have won several categories in my first tournament, and I have to say that I didn't even feel proud because it felt like I was taking candy from the baby. It was THAT MUCH of a joke with my competition, especially when it came to the self defense.

Now, that is not too say that there were not impressive skills displayed in other classes, but for my level at that time (which was beginners and over 30) it was not pretty.

[Giovanni]

yes, i agree. the majority do train hard. although i'm not around the losers that don't train hard then brag about how hard they train. there is this guy at my gym who's in his mid-forties that doesn't do jack, dances around like a capoeira jack rabbit and obviously thinks he's doing some awesome martial arts practice. who am i to judge? it's pretty funny, fwiw.

catwise, i started hapkido the second time when i was over thirty--33 actually. maybe people like you or me are a little crazier than others, but i think that sometimes people are either out of shape or are actually trying as hard as they can, it just doesn't seem that they're trying very hard because they're out of shape or have other physical issues (joint pain, etc). yes, there are a couple that are dogging it, but hey, if it makes them feel better to just go every once in awhile and not really try, then more power to them. at the very least, their dues are helping to keep the gym open.

you have to also understand that people have jobs and families and other commitments. so i always think that hey, at least people are going once a week, or once a month, to do something. even if they're dogging it, at least it gets them out of the house or out of their job or whatever.

[CatWise]

Giovanni,

I knew I liked you :)
I started for the FIRST time in my 30ties too. When you are talking about being out of shape that was me. 70lbs overweight, knee problems, hip problems, elbow problems and let’s not forget the BACK! But, I have a BIG competitive nature, so now, I am in better shape when most 20 years old (I know, because I spar with them and they can't keep up with me). All my body aches are pretty much handled and mainly thanks to the Hapkido training.

I also have commitments. I am a senior executive in a company and that is well over 40 hours a week plus travel all over the US. And, my TOP priority is my son, who is only 7 and blue with black strip in Hapkido (can you tell that I'm one proud mom?)

It’s like Ronnie Coleman said: "Everybody wanna be a bodybuilder, but don't nobody want to lift no heavy!@# weight!" Same with MA. Everyone wants to be the next Bruce Lee or Jet Lee or who ever, but they don't want to work for it!

In my class we have an older gentleman - 60+ who is a sheriff and can't bend his knees and well, his body will not let him do a lot of things, and his job doesn't let him come to class as much as he would like, but when he IS in class, he gives it his all. I respect people like that.

Getting way of topic here....

[Connovar]

Just 2 cents from an old geezer.

I started MA in 1969 before Bruce Lee popularity etc, through the Kung Fu craze, the MT craze, the ever present popularity of TKD, the ninjitsu craze, the MMA craze etc. I did hapkido for a year and enjoyed it,but then moved to another city.

Fighting changes over time. In the early 70's training was harder. No pads, lots of hard contact, No women or kids belts, just hard earned belts in poor marked dojos over bars etc.

Karate at that time was feared. Throw a hard side kick,knock them down and most got up and ran away because they were afraid of the "killer" martial arts. Kicking no longer is feared and no longer are the martial arts feared like they were in the past. On the other hand, the difference btw a side, front or round kick from a bare foot in the ring is a whole lot different than one delivered while wearing a cowboy boot!etc

That being said point fighting is easier and training tends to be softer and the quality of what makes a black belt has dropped precipitously. Thus a rank in the TMA doesnt necessarily mean much. It also can breed false confidence.

Also grappling like it or not is very popular (prior to this only your prior competitive wrestlers or judoka were around) and the number of people training in a grappling related art is exploding. Hence IMO you are much more likely for someone to run into someone with some experience now versus 30 years ago.

All of the street fights in my life always ended up with someone on the ground. Half of them ended up with us both on the ground.

I have always loved striking over grappling. Prior to suffering a disc herniation in the neck that limits heavy striking I preferred boxing for fun and a combination of street boxing and Karate style kicking for the street, backed up by a 1st Dan in jiu-jitsu and a competitive wrestling background.

Now almost 54, I like BJJ (GI) because of its complexity, its forcing me to stay in condition and it allows me to go full on without getting injured which I think is important to continously experience to remain as good a fighter as I can be. That being said BJJ lacks striking and in some schools has little or no standup (my prior Alliance BJJ affiliation had little stand up, but my current Pedro Sauer affiliation is better on standup and self defense). BJJ is not complete, but then no system is whether BJJ, Hapkido, ninjitsu etc,. Cross training is the key along with "aliveness".

My training days with boxing are over. So now my standup striking is against my poor BOB etc. I still love the rhythm and flow of the combinations

First of all do what you love first. Make it effective by training it "alive". Then cross train. Above all enjoy, life is to short to spend time in the gym doing something you dont like. Unless you are military, LE or live in a ghetto your not likely to be attacked., Being courteous to others and keeping an eye out for potential trouble is the best self defense. Enjoy life!!!:)

[Omicron]

i like to think that most adults who are paying to do martial arts are actually trying.

Most adults might THINK they are actually trying and are studying properly, but sadly the rapid growth of the McDojo phenomenon proves how easy it is for adults to be deluded. Nobody goes and pays hundreds of dollars to one of these schools KNOWING that they are being ripped off....they are simply fooled by the instructor because they don't know any better.

i have to think that as long as someone is putting in the effort and coming, even once a week, that's better than nothing. you have to remember that people are in different stages of age and shape and motivation. and hopefully at even one day per week, people will get a toolbox of things they can do in an ambiguous situation.

I generally agree with you that getting out and doing SOMETHING is better than nothing. However, when that something is martial arts, and you're essentially paying money for someone to teach you how to defend yourself, that person had better be training you properly. Receiving substandard training in most things is harmless enough-- the worst thing that can happen to you by having a bad football coach or dance instructor is that you just don't reach your full potential in those fields. But when it comes to self-defense, there is a great potential for someone to be seriously injured in a real-life self defense situation because of a false sense of security from their martial arts training. That's why it's important for people to be careful about what kind of training they choose to do. Unfortunately it's often those "once a week" type students who are most easily sucked in to martial arts scams.

[Giovanni]

ah yes, the dreaded "mcdojo".

[47MartialMan]

Well Connovar, I like you, am up there in age and seen the fads/crazes. From my expereinces and observations, most fights didnt end up on the ground, let alone the time to roll.

[Omicron]

The moral of the story is, who cares where fights end up? If you're interested in self defense, you should train in as many different situations and for as many different eventualities as possible. That way, you're more likely to be prepared for whatever actually happens, rather than for where fights "usually end up".

[47MartialMan]

You beat me to my next post about being versitile is the key to martial art practice. martial arts had been changing and evolving for centuries to suit a current era.

[Hyung]

I'm a hapkidoist, learning to sprawl.
It works.

[Mr Hatfield]

I'm a hapkidoist, learning to sprawl

Sprawling does help most good BJJ are not very good at takedowns since they dont center on that fact. I asked My BJJ instructor what happens when you get thrown? He is like, "well just relax and wait till it hits the ground then he is in your world." I always knew this was not the right answer since try blind folding yourself turn around and around and then run as fast as you can into a wall then turn around and fight. If your a good thrower you throw hard enough to crush people, you know if you step back and dont turn into the the throw you can place the person on his head. Many Arts have holes in them, I feel you need to fix this issue and then your in better shape. The reason BJJ is talked about is because like people say it is a very good ground Art to understand. I have to say it also has holes in it. I have trained for 18 years in Ju-Jitsu Im sure I might know what im talking about.

[Omicron]

Ah yes. THIS thread again. I thought it had finally rolled over and died.

Well, here we go then.

The reason BJJ is talked about is because like people say it is a very good ground Art to understand. I have to say it also has holes in it.

Of course BJJ has holes in it. Nobody sane pretends otherwise. It's a martial art that spends 100% of its time either on the ground or working on getting to the ground. No striking. No standing techniques. Those are huge holes. Criticizing BJJ for that is like criticizing basketball players for being lousy at football. There is no overlap, and nobody says there should be. A lot of people train BJJ to complement other standup training they have, and others train it simply because they enjoy it as a martial art/sport.

Like it or not, BJJ has caused a change in our understanding of what a complete self defense system is. BJJ does not claim to be one, but it has shown the world that to be a well-rounded martial artist you need at least a passing familiarity with ground fighting. This has caused a backlash against it, because a lot of traditional martial artists whose systems do not contain any ground work feel threatened. BJJ practitioners do not claim to be superior martial artists or to study a superior system. It's just a very, very good system for ground fighting that uses very good pedagogical methods for getting things across to students. It is, by its very nature, a limited martial art. Anyone who claims otherwise is just trolling. People need to get over the fact that not all us BJJ'ers are out to get you and prove that your martial art is worthless.

[Mr Hatfield]

Criticizing BJJ for that is like criticizing basketball players for being lousy at football. There is no overlap, and nobody says there should be. A lot of people train BJJ to complement other standup training they have, and others train it simply because they enjoy it as a martial art/sport.

I hope you did not feel I was really getting on BJJ your singing to the choir I really love and respect BJJ and feel it is the best Ground Fighting Art. I have to say it is not the only thing like you say for sure that is true.

[47MartialMan]

Ah yes. THIS thread again. I thought it had finally rolled over and died.

Well, here we go then.



Of course BJJ has holes in it. Nobody sane pretends otherwise. It's a martial art that spends 100% of its time either on the ground or working on getting to the ground. No striking. No standing techniques. Those are huge holes. Criticizing BJJ for that is like criticizing basketball players for being lousy at football. There is no overlap, and nobody says there should be. A lot of people train BJJ to complement other standup training they have, and others train it simply because they enjoy it as a martial art/sport.

Like it or not, BJJ has caused a change in our understanding of what a complete self defense system is. BJJ does not claim to be one, but it has shown the world that to be a well-rounded martial artist you need at least a passing familiarity with ground fighting. This has caused a backlash against it, because a lot of traditional martial artists whose systems do not contain any ground work feel threatened. BJJ practitioners do not claim to be superior martial artists or to study a superior system. It's just a very, very good system for ground fighting that uses very good pedagogical methods for getting things across to students. It is, by its very nature, a limited martial art. Anyone who claims otherwise is just trolling. People need to get over the fact that not all us BJJ'ers are out to get you and prove that your martial art is worthless.

KUDOS! Nice post.

But this will not stop the same rhetorical discussions with the same rhetorical for or against responses.

This subject, like many, are the same over and over, from forum to forum.

We can call it "The Never-Ending Story". Wait, wasnt that a movie title?

[righty]

Like it or not, BJJ has caused a change in our understanding of what a complete self defense system is. BJJ does not claim to be one, but it has shown the world that to be a well-rounded martial artist you need at least a passing familiarity with ground fighting. This has caused a backlash against it, because a lot of traditional martial artists whose systems do not contain any ground work feel threatened. BJJ practitioners do not claim to be superior martial artists or to study a superior system. It's just a very, very good system for ground fighting that uses very good pedagogical methods for getting things across to students. It is, by its very nature, a limited martial art. Anyone who claims otherwise is just trolling. People need to get over the fact that not all us BJJ'ers are out to get you and prove that your martial art is worthless.

*cough cough*

Taken from the very first paragraph of the official competition rules of the International Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Federation.

"Jiu-jitsu is the most ancient martial art and is the most complete art of self defense. Its origin being quite controversial, it was first attributed to India, then China, Japan, and Brazil—where it became superior to all other styles of jiu-jitsu, making Brazil the world’s center of this precious art. The sport of jiu-jitsu brings out a competitive side where the athlete demonstrates his physical & psychological conditions, techniques, and abilities with the objective of rendering his opponent into submission."

[Omicron]

*cough cough*

Taken from the very first paragraph of the official competition rules of the International Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Federation.

"Jiu-jitsu is the most ancient martial art and is the most complete art of self defense. Its origin being quite controversial, it was first attributed to India, then China, Japan, and Brazil—where it became superior to all other styles of jiu-jitsu, making Brazil the world’s center of this precious art. The sport of jiu-jitsu brings out a competitive side where the athlete demonstrates his physical & psychological conditions, techniques, and abilities with the objective of rendering his opponent into submission."

LOL. Well, I did say nobody sane would argue that. It's statements like this that give martial arts a bad name. It's probably done for marketing and/or an ego boost. Either way, it's not true. Again, I think you'll find that opinion to be in the minority of most BJJ schools. At least I hope so :confused:

[Kurtka Jerker]

Most adults might THINK they are actually trying and are studying properly, but sadly the rapid growth of the McDojo phenomenon proves how easy it is for adults to be deluded. Nobody goes and pays hundreds of dollars to one of these schools KNOWING that they are being ripped off....they are simply fooled by the instructor because they don't know any better.

I just have to repost this because I think it's really the key to most noncompetition arts's problems. It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to feel legitimate without actually becoming so at heart. If they don't have to work as hard as "those other guys" because of their particular style's "secrets", even better.

[Kraen]

I was sure this thread came to it's full conclusion and saw no need for it to be resurrected. Everyone was in agreement. So why agree some more? Why not just use the post-thanks system?

-Kraen

[TKDTraditional]

I'm sorry if I'm digging this up after too long a time. I mainly want to add something about the "90% myth". I read in a magazine--Black Belt or the like--about a year ago, at a Krav Maga school of all things, an article about how many fights end up on the ground. I wish I could recall more details but as a study it was quite interesting.

As I recall, well less than half of fights went to the ground. One definition focused on whether or not the fight went to the ground or just one or more fighters! I believe it also discussed how long the fight took, both standing up and on the ground. I also recall some discussions about how many times a fighter was knocked down by a kick. All in all, there's a lot of "stories" out there but this article seemed to add some real substance. I'm sorry I can't quote you the actual source! Perhaps others with extensive MA libraries can find it.

[Omicron]

LOL! This thread certainly has a knack for coming back from the dead.

Kraen, I just realized I was really mean to you with my first post in this thread! Haha sorry. Must have been a bad day.

At any rate...

I'm sorry if I'm digging this up after too long a time. I mainly want to add something about the "90% myth". I read in a magazine--Black Belt or the like--about a year ago, at a Krav Maga school of all things, an article about how many fights end up on the ground. I wish I could recall more details but as a study it was quite interesting.

As I recall, well less than half of fights went to the ground. One definition focused on whether or not the fight went to the ground or just one or more fighters! I believe it also discussed how long the fight took, both standing up and on the ground. I also recall some discussions about how many times a fighter was knocked down by a kick. All in all, there's a lot of "stories" out there but this article seemed to add some real substance. I'm sorry I can't quote you the actual source! Perhaps others with extensive MA libraries can find it.

The fact that there is even a possibility of a fight ending up on the ground is reason enough for me to work on my ground fighting skills. After spending years doing only standup, it certainly began to feel like I was missing something in my martial arts arsenal.

[YouKnowWho]

started a thread in the Hapkido forum titled "Brazilian Jujitsu."
Even if you don't watch FOX news, when you watched CNN or MSNBC, Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly face will still appear on your TV screen. You should blame this on CNN or MSNBC.

[Kraen]

I was ground fighting with a brown belt in Judo/black in Hapkido just the other week, When I was still up in PG. Still fair game when someone goes to the ground. ;)

-Kraen

[blanker]

the reason you get alot of bjj comments is that its a revalution to alot of people. the guys who are spouting the Superiority of bjj now are normally new converts from other martial arts, these are the guys who were banging on about karate being better then kungfu or whatever before royce gracie or whoever it is these days blew there tiny little minds.

[Bruce W Sims]

IIRC in an exchange on another forum a practitioner of Gracie JJ stated that the original statistic of 90% of fights wind up on the ground was attributed to one of the Gracie sons. I mayt be mistaken but apparently the quote was one of those cases where context is everything and the circumstances required a rationale for the Gracie approach to competition. I was not left with the idea that the statistic was intended to be a definitive statistic concerning street combat. That said, let me add a bit from my own limited experience.

Given an encounter between two individuals, it is not all-together uncommon for one or both to close with the other in an attempt to get inside of the opponents range and crowd that person. However, once accomplished there is little more for an unskilled stiker to do than fall to tussling, resulting in the fight going to the ground. This raises three very important variables.

a.) An accomplished striker will not be undone by having a novice close with him but will simply shorten his range. The fight will not go to the ground.

b.) A hapkido person who is taken to the ground has no intention of staying there as to do so would be to fight the opponents fight. The Hapkido person will regain his feet and damage the opponent as much as possible doing it.

c.) Experienced Street-fighters will NEVER go to the ground and will not stay there if someone tries to take them down. While an interesting form of competition, BJJ is not a combat art and if involved in a street-fight, the LAST place you want to be is on the ground!

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Omicron]

So much is up in the air in a street fight. It's really impossible to say what will happen by sitting here commenting on a forum. The best you can do is train in as many different ways as possible, to prepare yourself for as many different situations as possible.


Given an encounter between two individuals, it is not all-together uncommon for one or both to close with the other in an attempt to get inside of the opponents range and crowd that person. However, once accomplished there is little more for an unskilled stiker to do than fall to tussling, resulting in the fight going to the ground. This raises three very important variables.

a.) An accomplished striker will not be undone by having a novice close with him but will simply shorten his range. The fight will not go to the ground.


Perhaps. An accomplished striker may still be just a novice grappler though, and when two novices grapple, things do often end up on the ground.

b.) A hapkido person who is taken to the ground has no intention of staying there as to do so would be to fight the opponents fight. The Hapkido person will regain his feet and damage the opponent as much as possible doing it.

Hapkido or not, a person may TRY to regain his feet, but there is no certainty that that'll happen.

c.) Experienced Street-fighters will NEVER go to the ground and will not stay there if someone tries to take them down. While an interesting form of competition, BJJ is not a combat art and if involved in a street-fight, the LAST place you want to be is on the ground!

Who says street fighters won't go to the ground?

As I said though, this is pretty much all just pointless speculation.

[Bruce W Sims]

Well, yes and no, Omni.

Perhaps we can take a note or two from watching the real thing, yes? May I suggest that you go to YOU TUBE and search out various prison melees. There is quite a bit to be learned watching people fight other people with murderous intent, yes? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Stevebjj]

for information on the origin of this statistic, this website has a lot of great information:

http://ejmas.com/jnc/2007jnc/jncart_Leblanc_0701.html

Regardless of the statistics, if you train in MA for self defense, but never train ground fighting in a competent, practical manner, you will be helpless if the fight goes to the ground. Ultimately, regardless of statistics, if you're in one fight and in that fight you're taken to the ground, will you care whether the stats were misquoted or not? Or said in another way, if self defense is your goal, you should train as effectively as possible at every range of combat.

[Omicron]

Well, yes and no, Omni.

Perhaps we can take a note or two from watching the real thing, yes? May I suggest that you go to YOU TUBE and search out various prison melees. There is quite a bit to be learned watching people fight other people with murderous intent, yes? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Prison fights aren't necessarily representative of what happens in every street fight, though. There are SO many variables, that it's hard to say. There are a lot of reasons a fight COULD end up on the ground, so for self-defense purposes it's good to be prepared. Intoxication could be involved for one or more people involved, so loss of balance/falling is more likely. The terrain could be varied or uneven, and someone could fall. There could be furniture to trip over, if it happens indoors. The list could go on pretty much to infinity. All I'm arguing is that saying "fights don't go to the ground, so ground training is useless" is just as bad as saying "all fights end up on the ground, so you should all learn BJJ." Like Stevebjj said, If your reason for doing martial arts is for self defense, then trying to be prepared for as many situations as possible is best.

[Bruce W Sims]

And herein lies the rub.......at least with discussion like this.

There is the matter of Opinion. People can argue fact against opinion and opinion against fact and it goes round and round, yes?

There is the matter of definition where one person's idea of a "streetfight" is not the same as another person's.

There is the matter of lethal force, whether it can be used and to what extent if at all.

There is the matter of truth as pit against self-interest.

And underneath it all is the "ground-of-being": to wit: "no I didn't mean that, what I really meant was this."

I have reached a place where, when the letters MMA and BJJ come up in a conversation I can feel a migraine start at the very base of my skull and sweep forward to my eyes like a Saharan sandstorm. Thats why my original thought was that these are simply ways of keeping the subject "talked-up" and infront of MA faces and not honest attempts to discuss and resolve anything. FWIW.

BTW: Just a little side note, because this always seems to come up in these discussion. Contrary to popular belief the Hapkido arts DO have groundfighting techniques. They are few and crop up about 3rd DAN in hand with Cane techniques. Don't expect an exhaustive catalog of ground-fighting material. The traditional curriculum has little enough. However, with the recent interest in ground-fighting material it has become fashionable for Hapkido schools to steal techniques and then represent that they "had that technique all the time."

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Fusen]

Well, yes and no, Omni.

Perhaps we can take a note or two from watching the real thing, yes? May I suggest that you go to YOU TUBE and search out various prison melees. There is quite a bit to be learned watching people fight other people with murderous intent, yes? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

How about in warfare, guns knives, suicide bombs striking and groundwork:

http://news.soc.mil/releases/News%20Archive/2008/September/080927-01.html

The Important bit:

While clearing the field, Gibson stepped on a terrorist hiding in a ditch under some grass.

“I really didn’t think it was a person that I stepped on because I thought it was just another part of the ground, maybe some trash or something,” said Gibson.

Initially, Gibson continued for a few more steps past the terrorist. Following his gut instinct, Gibson turned around investigate what he stepped on.

The terrorist moved to kill Gibson and the Rangers.

“He didn’t say anything other than giving his war cry,” explained Gibson. “He had an advantage on me. I didn’t have a chance to get my weapon ready and I knew he was gonna shoot me, so I dived on him.”

Gibson grabbed the muzzle of the terrorist’s rifle as the terrorist began to fire. Gibson wrestled the terrorist to the ground and gained positional control. He struggled and later stripped the terrorist of his weapon.

After stripping the terrorist of the weapon, the terrorist gripped Gibson’s rifle. Without the ability to use a firearm, Gibson engaged the enemy with his hands.

“Then he ripped off my helmet and all my (night vision) optics, so I couldn’t see all that well,” recalled Gibson.

The terrorist then began to reach for something hiding in his clothing.

“I stopped him ‘cause I thought maybe he was grabbing a knife to attack me with,” said Gibson.

The terrorist was reaching for the detonator to his suicide vest. The terrorist screamed “bomb!” in English.

“I thought at that moment that I was probably going to die,” explained Gibson.

As Gibson worked to stop the terrorist from detonating his vest, the terrorist had maneuvered into a position that was cutting off Gibson’s circulation.

Gibson, in an effort to save himself, began to hit the terrorist as hard as he could. His blows rendered the terrorist unconscious.

“I got my weapon into his stomach and fired,” said Gibson. “And he came back to conscious after that, I knew I got him. I stood up and neutralized him.”

[Omicron]

And herein lies the rub.......at least with discussion like this.

There is the matter of Opinion. People can argue fact against opinion and opinion against fact and it goes round and round, yes?

There is the matter of definition where one person's idea of a "streetfight" is not the same as another person's.

There is the matter of lethal force, whether it can be used and to what extent if at all.

There is the matter of truth as pit against self-interest.

And underneath it all is the "ground-of-being": to wit: "no I didn't mean that, what I really meant was this."

I have reached a place where, when the letters MMA and BJJ come up in a conversation I can feel a migraine start at the very base of my skull and sweep forward to my eyes like a Saharan sandstorm. Thats why my original thought was that these are simply ways of keeping the subject "talked-up" and infront of MA faces and not honest attempts to discuss and resolve anything. FWIW.

BTW: Just a little side note, because this always seems to come up in these discussion. Contrary to popular belief the Hapkido arts DO have groundfighting techniques. They are few and crop up about 3rd DAN in hand with Cane techniques. Don't expect an exhaustive catalog of ground-fighting material. The traditional curriculum has little enough. However, with the recent interest in ground-fighting material it has become fashionable for Hapkido schools to steal techniques and then represent that they "had that technique all the time."

Best Wishes,

Bruce

I'm sorry you feel that way when discussing MMA and BJJ. If you want to argue that a street fight is NEVER going end up on the ground for a length of time that would make ground-based training useful, then that's fine. I'm not here to argue with you. I'm just saying, why limit yourself? Why not be competent in as many ranges as possible? Surely that couldn't hurt.

[Kraen]

Ground fighting techniques 'start' at red belt at my club. That, however doesn't mean I've never done any there before. Less than any BJJ club by far. But enough to 'survive.'

If I run into a 'bad guys' who knows Judo and we both end up on the ground will I be in a difficult spot? Yes. Will I have no idea what to do? Definitely not.

-Kraen

[Bruce W Sims]

I'm sorry you feel that way when discussing MMA and BJJ. If you want to argue that a street fight is NEVER going end up on the ground for a length of time that would make ground-based training useful, then that's fine. I'm not here to argue with you. I'm just saying, why limit yourself? Why not be competent in as many ranges as possible? Surely that couldn't hurt.

I agree most whole-heartedly. I just never experience the typical MMA or BJJ person presenting things in that light.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Fusen]

I agree most whole-heartedly. I just never experience the typical MMA or BJJ person presenting things in that light.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

You do know that MMA includes, striking, clinchwork and groundwork right?
In addition most BJJ comps start standing up.


ps 1990 called and asked for their thread back.

[Doublejab]

Ha, Hapkido, the pragmatic and practical form of self defence that emphasises high kicks.

[Kraen]

Ha, Hapkido, the pragmatic and practical form of self defence that emphasises high kicks.

"why limit yourself?" - (see post #90)

Also: we emphasize standing joint-locks (the kind where one of us ends up on the ground while the other is still standing as opposed to both of us being on the ground) far more than high kicks. We also have 'specialty' kicks that can ONLY be done low. High kicks just tend to degrade the fastest if you're not actively stretching. Oh, and low roundhouse tends to get REALLY easy once you can do it well at a high height. We train both and even the in-between and a few variations like ball-of-foot, instep and shin for the record. Because after all, why limit yourself?

-Kraen

[Bruce W Sims]

Ha, Hapkido, the pragmatic and practical form of self defence that emphasises high kicks.

I was going to comment something like, "you don't seem to be very well-informed about Hapkido", until I saw your age. To tell the truth, its really very hard for me to give BJJ and MMA a fair hearing in these venues with uninformed contributions such as yours cluttering up the thread. Give it a rest, why doncha?

[Sandy]

A Hapkido black belt (Patrick Smith) romped through his competitors to reach the final of UFC 2. Pat had black belts in Hapkido, Tang Soo Do and TKD. Having watched UFC 1 and 2, I reckon it was his Hapkido that really helped him, as it meant he had some grappling skills (albeit not as specialised as BJJ) as a 'support system' for his awesome striking. He won the semi-final of UFC 2 via a standing choke (perhaps from Hapkido?).

www.sherdog.com/fighter/Patrick-Smith-21

However, our Hapkido man lost to Ken Shamrock in UFC 1 and, in the final of UFC 2, to Hoyce Gracie because their grappling outclassed Pat's more limited Hapkido grappling.

MMA has made it crystal clear that you need skills in the three ranges of striking, clinch and ground.

Royce Gracie won whilst people were unfamiliar with the ground. Then the wrestlers came in and showed that controlling the clinch let you decide if the fight went to the ground or not.

Strikers needed to learn to control the clinch, in order to remain standing. That remains true in today's MMA.

[Doublejab]

"why limit yourself?" - (see post #90)

Also: we emphasize standing joint-locks (the kind where one of us ends up on the ground while the other is still standing as opposed to both of us being on the ground) far more than high kicks. We also have 'specialty' kicks that can ONLY be done low. High kicks just tend to degrade the fastest if you're not actively stretching. Oh, and low roundhouse tends to get REALLY easy once you can do it well at a high height. We train both and even the in-between and a few variations like ball-of-foot, instep and shin for the record. Because after all, why limit yourself?

-Kraen

Good post, I completely agree. I was just posting in responce to other posters critising BJJers for 'always taking the fight to the ground'. Which is like saying a Hapkido guy would 'always kick an opponent in the head'.

[Doublejab]

I was going to comment something like, "you don't seem to be very well-informed about Hapkido", until I saw your age. To tell the truth, its really very hard for me to give BJJ and MMA a fair hearing in these venues with uninformed contributions such as yours cluttering up the thread. Give it a rest, why doncha?

lol, you believe that: ''a.) An accomplished striker will not be undone by having a novice close with him but will simply shorten his range. The fight will not go to the ground.''

I don't think you're in a position to call anyone uninformed.

[Bruce W Sims]

lol, you believe that: ''a.) An accomplished striker will not be undone by having a novice close with him but will simply shorten his range. The fight will not go to the ground.''

I don't think you're in a position to call anyone uninformed.

Yes, and I have seen that. I suggested that you go to YOU TUBE and take a look at the clips of the prison riots there. Apparently you didn't do that.

Now, my Uninformed Friend, before this goes to where I know its going to go, please clarify if you are taking the view of discussing a circumstance in which one, both or all participants care about the welfare of the participant or not. I am not interested in getting half-way to a point and have you defend your position by stating, "...well the fact is that's not really what I was talking about; it was this thing over here."

[Fusen]

Yes, and I have seen that. I suggested that you go to YOU TUBE and take a look at the clips of the prison riots there. Apparently you didn't do that.
."

YouTube- Prison Riots

First clip, in the first fight, all four of the participants go to the floor.
The rest of the fights all seem to start with wild swinging, some standing clinch, one falls down, the other is dragged or follows to keep on hitting.
apart from the 'shiv' clips which seem to involve sewing machine stabs, mixed with a grip/clinch to control them and stop them from running away.

Lots of standup, clinch and ground, no high kicks or wristlocks though, maybe its only sport martial artists who go to jail?

What was your point again?

[Sandy]

Hi Bruce,

Firstly, let me say how much I enjoy your posts for their eloquence and wonderful turn of phrase. (This is a genuine compliment, before anyone misinterprets things.)

I have reached a place where, when the letters MMA and BJJ come up in a conversation I can feel a migraine start at the very base of my skull and sweep forward to my eyes like a Saharan sandstorm.


Could you explain the issue with MMA and BJJ?

[Sandy]

Lots of standup, clinch and ground, no high kicks or wristlocks though, maybe its only sport martial artists who go to jail?


... which is remarkably similar to the early fights in UFC. Even when two strikers were pitched aginst each other, the fights often ended up in a clinch before falling to the ground:

www.amazon.co.uk/UFC-Ultimate-Fighting-Championship-DVD/dp/B00095L92Y/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1266181419&sr=1-1

I'd encourage any martial artist to watch these.

[Bruce W Sims]

Look at the fights again, FUSEN. These people are NOT "going to the ground". They are doing their best to stay on their feet, or run away. People who are on the ground are quickly circled by multiple attackers and kicked and punched. The people who finally DO wind up on the ground do so as a result of a clinch where one person seeks to get "inside" of another person's range. This is the result of "clinching" or "tussling" and not because someone is making the free choice to "take someone down".

YouTube- Hardest Bad Ass Jail Fights and Riots

Take a close look there are people who are slipping and sliding around but most are trying to get up, are being pulled-off, are being circled by multiple attackers. Nobody is grabbing anyone and trying to pull them to the ground to submit them. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

Hi Bruce,

Firstly, let me say how much I enjoy your posts for their eloquence and wonderful turn of phrase. (This is a genuine compliment, before anyone misinterprets things.)

Could you explain the issue with MMA and BJJ?

In all possibly honesty, Sandy, I feel as though I have been waiting forever to be involved in an intelligent discussion about MMA or BJJ or any of the other new forms that are cropping up. As far as I can tell, the MMA and BJJ have been around for a little while and it would seem that folks could begin to put together optimal training table imperatives, a sequenced approach to the proper balance of striking versus grappling, optimal conditioning and so forth. However, the level of discussion regarding these pursuits as structured activities invariably falls to "your-stuff-sucks"-kinds of exchanges. I'm afraid that after quite a few years of this sort of thing the first impulse that crosses my mind is to head for another thread. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Fusen]

In all possibly honesty, Sandy, I feel as though I have been waiting forever to be involved in an intelligent discussion about MMA or BJJ or any of the other new forms that are cropping up. As far as I can tell, the MMA and BJJ have been around for a little while

Bruce

Bruce, I sorry to hear that that is your experience.

But I must correct you on something,

The first Hapkido's first dojang (dojang called the Korean Yu Kwan Sool Hapki)was set up around 1951, is that correct?

Whilst Carlos Gracie opened the first BJJ academy in around 1925?

So really BJJ is not anything new, its just newly popular, well the first american UFC was in 1993 so 17 years ago newly popular.

So going back to the prison riots, and ignoring my video and using your cosen video, there were people getting held down, but the main ones seemed to show that if you are knocked down you need to learn to protect yourself and to get back up again.

Circumstances will always dictate tactics, you seem to be confusing competition tactics will self defense tactics.

If I may ask, how would approach that environment? going toe to toe will not work, and a trained athelete has more chance of outrunning them?

[Doublejab]

Yes, and I have seen that. I suggested that you go to YOU TUBE and take a look at the clips of the prison riots there. Apparently you didn't do that.

Did you? When? Or was that someone else you were talking to? I totally agree that going to the ground would be a bad idea in a prison riot, but thats not always the case in other r/l incidents. I think boxing is your best bet for a situation like that.

Now, my Uninformed Friend, before this goes to where I know its going to go, please clarify if you are taking the view of discussing a circumstance in which one, both or all participants care about the welfare of the participant or not. I am not interested in getting half-way to a point and have you defend your position by stating, "...well the fact is that's not really what I was talking about; it was this thing over here."

Do you always try to patronize people? Its an unattractive and juvenile habit you should try to grow out of. And I'm sorry but I have no idea what that paragraph means. It doesn't make any sense. And thats not because I'm 'uninformed', it really doesn't make any sense.

[Fusen]

Bruce what do you think about this form of Hapkido?

YouTube- (20)Amazing Gongkwon yusul (Korea jiu jitsu Hapkido)

[spidersfrommars]

Would you happen to have any vids of those guys doing a bit of sparring? Looked around the videos inked to that one and didn't find any, I'm curious to see how it would end up looking under pressure.

[Sandy]

Hi Bruce,

The whole MMA/BJJ thing seems quite simple to me. If you're an MMA competitor, nowadays you need to be competent in all the ranges (striking, clinch and ground). Numerous MMA books highlight this, e.g. Gracie and Danaher's Mastering Jujitsu.

If it's self-defence, you need an excellent preemptive strike and boxing skills, supported by adequate knowledge of grappling in case of emergency (i.e. you want to avoid the ground, but know what to do if you end up there). Again, some great books have highlighted this, e.g. Peter Consterdine's Streetwise and Geoff Thompson's Dead or Alive.

If Hapkido's your chosen art, then great. It's got striking, joint manipulations, etc. Is it perfect? No. Is any art perfect? No.

[Fusen]

Would you happen to have any vids of those guys doing a bit of sparring? Looked around the videos inked to that one and didn't find any, I'm curious to see how it would end up looking under pressure.

Theres a few, its looks like kyokushin, judo and some hapkido put together, seems pretty rounded.

[Bruce W Sims]

Bruce what do you think about this form of Hapkido?

YouTube- (20)Amazing Gongkwon yusul (Korea jiu jitsu Hapkido) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vNlEsAY6og&feature=related)

I'm familiar with that take on Hapkido. Its becoming pretty popular. Absent the final submission locks on the ground its pretty much standard Hapkido fare. You are very right about the "KYOKUSHIN" flavor. There is a growing movement in TAEKWONDO circles to move away from the Olympic approach and to shape the art more along the lines of a kind of Korean Kick-boxing. IIRC, the KYOKUSHIN competitions were divided with one three-round segment for striking only and another allowing for grappling. I studied for a short-time and can report that its not for the typical hobbyist. Does this help?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

Fusen(clip)

So going back to the prison riots, and ignoring my video and using your chosen video, there were people getting held down, but the main ones seemed to show that if you are knocked down you need to learn to protect yourself and to get back up again.

Yes, and that is the take in the Hapkido arts, especially following JI Han Jae (Sin Mu Hapkido) or KIM Moo Woong (Shin Moo Kwan) which tend to represent the most "judo-esque" of the Hapkido arts. The idea is not to willingly go to the ground, but to get back up as soon as possible if it happens.

Circumstances will always dictate tactics, you seem to be confusing competition tactics will self defense tactics.

I certainly hope not. My only concern on that score, as I tried to communicate to SNOOP, was that we need to decide just what aspect of this activity the discussion is hoping to address. We can't start out talking about competition, move to S/D then shift back to training venues and hope to apply the same level of restraint (or damage) to the intended outcome.

If I may ask, how would approach that environment? going toe to toe will not work, and a trained athelete has more chance of outrunning them?

If you watch the video you will notice that the people who are least engaged are the ones who use a kind of "pin-ball" strategy. They are constantly in motion, almost "bouncing-off" various people who get in their way. Even the staff do not directly engage the perps, but use smoke and pepper spray to incapacitate first. If I had to characterize this sort of behavior in "boxing parlance" I would use the concept of "rope-a-dope" made famous by Ali. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Fusen]

I'm familiar with that take on Hapkido. Its becoming pretty popular. Absent the final submission locks on the ground its pretty much standard Hapkido fare.

You are very right about the "KYOKUSHIN" flavor. There is a growing movement in TAEKWONDO circles to move away from the Olympic approach and to shape the art more along the lines of a kind of Korean Kick-boxing.

IIRC, the KYOKUSHIN competitions were divided with one three-round segment for striking only and another allowing for grappling. I studied for a short-time and can report that its not for the typical hobbyist. Does this help?

Best Wishes,

Bruce


Thanks for the input, its looks much more Yudo based then all the hapkido I have seen and felt, but my direct experience with them is not massive.

Are you thinking of Daido Juku kudo, Shidokan or the enshin karate styles? Kyokushin runs from straight knockdown rules normally.

YouTube- Hl Daido Juku kudo (ex karate)

[Fusen]

Fusen(clip)

So going back to the prison riots, and ignoring my video and using your chosen video, there were people getting held down, but the main ones seemed to show that if you are knocked down you need to learn to protect yourself and to get back up again.

Yes, and that is the take in the Hapkido arts, especially following JI Han Jae (Sin Mu Hapkido) or KIM Moo Woong (Shin Moo Kwan) which tend to represent the most "judo-esque" of the Hapkido arts. The idea is not to willingly go to the ground, but to get back up as soon as possible if it happens.

Circumstances will always dictate tactics, you seem to be confusing competition tactics will self defense tactics.

I certainly hope not. My only concern on that score, as I tried to communicate to SNOOP, was that we need to decide just what aspect of this activity the discussion is hoping to address. We can't start out talking about competition, move to S/D then shift back to training venues and hope to apply the same level of restraint (or damage) to the intended outcome.

If I may ask, how would approach that environment? going toe to toe will not work, and a trained athelete has more chance of outrunning them?

If you watch the video you will notice that the people who are least engaged are the ones who use a kind of "pin-ball" strategy. They are constantly in motion, almost "bouncing-off" various people who get in their way. Even the staff do not directly engage the perps, but use smoke and pepper spray to incapacitate first. If I had to characterize this sort of behavior in "boxing parlance" I would use the concept of "rope-a-dope" made famous by Ali. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

I would say that prison riots are not your everyday self defense situation, and even if they were, the video I found (first one on the search) showed that it does happen, of course straight groundwork is not 100% applicable, noone is saying that, that why we have been talking about methods to get up off the floor safely, and the striking, clinch and ground trinity that is always taught in MMA.

Is MMA self defense? No but its a dam good basis for it,

Is straight BJJ self defense? No But when you can get up safely from the floor, and experience in standing takedowns your options are greatly increased.

Are all violent situations life and death struggles? No and the ability to control someone without hurting them (standing and ground) will aid not being taken to court and loosing your liberty.


Fun story for you:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/blog/cagewriter/post/Pit-bull-taps-out-from-a-nine-year-old-s-rear-na?urn=mma,132178

http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/37069754.html?video=YHI&t=a

''A Bakersfield, Calif. boy saved a friend and her dog after a pitbull tried to attack them. Did he do it by calmly coaxing the dog with a sweet voice, and then singing to it? Nope. He did it using a choke he learned in a jiu-jitsu class, which he held for 20 minutes until the police showed up.

Isn't it better that he was in this class instead of sitting on a couch, playing video games and eating Twinkies? The next time I hear MMA described with the words "human cockfighting," I will find this wonderful young man, who talks about the ordeal here, and have him choke out the idiot who said it.
''

[Kraen]

I would say that prison riots are not your everyday self defense situation, and even if they were, the video I found (first one on the search) showed that it does happen, of course straight groundwork is not 100% applicable, noone is saying that, that why we have been talking about methods to get up off the floor safely, and the striking, clinch and ground trinity that is always taught in MMA.

Is MMA self defense? No but its a dam good basis for it,

Is straight BJJ self defense? No But when you can get up safely from the floor, and experience in standing takedowns your options are greatly increased.

Are all violent situations life and death struggles? No and the ability to control someone without hurting them (standing and ground) will aid not being taken to court and loosing your liberty.


Fun story for you:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/blog/cagewriter/post/Pit-bull-taps-out-from-a-nine-year-old-s-rear-na?urn=mma,132178

http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/37069754.html?video=YHI&t=a

''A Bakersfield, Calif. boy saved a friend and her dog after a pitbull tried to attack them. Did he do it by calmly coaxing the dog with a sweet voice, and then singing to it? Nope. He did it using a choke he learned in a jiu-jitsu class, which he held for 20 minutes until the police showed up.

Isn't it better that he was in this class instead of sitting on a couch, playing video games and eating Twinkies? The next time I hear MMA described with the words "human cockfighting," I will find this wonderful young man, who talks about the ordeal here, and have him choke out the idiot who said it.
''

You seem to be missing the entire point.

Bruce isn't talking about basis's for self defense. He's talking about self defense. No matter how dire the situation. Anyone who can stop a man from killing you can surely stop a drunken friend. We don't HAVE to go "kill-death" on someone. However, regardless of the situation, we'll be able to things UP TO AND INCLUDING while they are trying to "kill-death" (or less) us. Or. Trying to drink and drive. How hard can they to be to subdue when we're use to people trying to stab us?

Y'know?

-Kraen

[Doublejab]

You seem to be missing the entire point.

Bruce isn't talking about basis's for self defense. He's talking about self defense. No matter how dire the situation. Anyone who can stop a man from killing you can surely stop a drunken friend. We don't HAVE to go "kill-death" on someone. However, regardless of the situation, we'll be able to things UP TO AND INCLUDING while they are trying to "kill-death" (or less) us. Or. Trying to drink and drive. How hard can they to be to subdue when we're use to people trying to stab us?

Y'know?

-Kraen

Thats the good thing about an RNC, you can use it for anything :cool:

[spidersfrommars]

YWe don't HAVE to go "kill-death" on someone. However, regardless of the situation, we'll be able to things UP TO AND INCLUDING while they are trying to "kill-death" (or less) us.

-Kraen

This is the bit that Im a bit skeptical of, how exactly do you effectively train for the "kill death" bit? I assume you haven't actually got a large unmarked grave out the back of the dojo so it seems like saying that one is really prepared for thing not just that they have a bit of a theoretical basis for it is a bit disingenuous.

[Bruce W Sims]

Gees.... are you guys hearing yourselves? Threads like this keep going 'round-'n-round.

The only point I was working to make is that there is a great big gaping difference between fighting like a lot of people imagine they are training to fight and doing the real g-d thing!!

I don't care what sort of stuff a person is training in, we ALL know that you can't train for lethal force. Its never been done (in modern times) and never WILL be done. All we can do is approximate. And this where people start with all this crap about how "OUR training is just a teensy-weensy bit more realistic than yours.....so spend you money with us." Sheesh.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Omicron]

Yup. And training against a fully resisting opponent is that teensy-weensy bit that you're talking about. Just sayin'.

[Doublejab]

Gees.... are you guys hearing yourselves? Threads like this keep going 'round-'n-round.

The only point I was working to make is that there is a great big gaping difference between fighting like a lot of people imagine they are training to fight and doing the real g-d thing!!

I don't care what sort of stuff a person is training in, we ALL know that you can't train for lethal force. Its never been done (in modern times) and never WILL be done. All we can do is approximate. And this where people start with all this crap about how "OUR training is just a teensy-weensy bit more realistic than yours.....so spend you money with us." Sheesh.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Whining can come across as insecurity, just saying :cool:

[Kraen]

This is the bit that Im a bit skeptical of, how exactly do you effectively train for the "kill death" bit? I assume you haven't actually got a large unmarked grave out the back of the dojo so it seems like saying that one is really prepared for thing not just that they have a bit of a theoretical basis for it is a bit disingenuous.

I quoted the words "kill-death" for the approximation of using techniques barred from modern organized sport matches. Things like eye-gouges, throat strikes, etc. They all have a not-so-damaging counterparts. Not claiming to be able to kill someone with just my pinky or something like that.

And I see exactly how Bruce means. We managed to come to a succinct agreement that everyone agreed with before this thread was rez'd. Right, Omicron?

-Kraen

[Fusen]

Whining can come across as insecurity, just saying :cool:

QFT

[Fusen]

You seem to be missing the entire point.

Anyone who can stop a man from killing you can surely stop a drunken friend.

How hard can they to be to subdue when we're use to people trying to stab us?

Y'know?

-Kraen

Do you really have people trying to stab you, or do you have someone do a 'safe' single attempt at a stab from a long distance away with no footwork, timing or energy to their attack?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IE9NHTWOH8

People are very hard to subdue when their angry and in the mood to kick off, and it will always be hard to deal with, please dont convince yourself otherwise your setting yourself up for failure.

It wont ever be this simple in real life:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmmMst22jwQ&feature=related

[Kraen]

Do you really have people trying to stab you, or do you have someone do a 'safe' single attempt at a stab from a long distance away with no footwork, timing or energy to their attack?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IE9NHTWOH8

People are very hard to subdue when their angry and in the mood to kick off, and it will always be hard to deal with, please dont convince yourself otherwise your setting yourself up for failure.

It wont ever be this simple in real life:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmmMst22jwQ&feature=related

You seem to misunderstand me.

I have people coming up to me and 'slitting' my throat while I'm talking to somebody else. Not a hint or clue that it's coming.

Right now one of my favorite exercises is for 1 person to stand in the middle of a circle, surrounded by everyone and have people attack however they feel like. Although depending on the class-mix we sometimes just have 2-on-1's.

Can't wait to get to the unarmed vs. (wooden) knife sparring.

-Kraen

p.s. My youtube isn't working right now. Will check 'em out once that problem's fixed.

[Fusen]

You seem to misunderstand me.

I have people coming up to me and 'slitting' my throat while I'm talking to somebody else. Not a hint or clue that it's coming.

Right now one of my favorite exercises is for 1 person to stand in the middle of a circle, surrounded by everyone and have people attack however they feel like. Although depending on the class-mix we sometimes just have 2-on-1's.

Can't wait to get to the unarmed vs. (wooden) knife sparring.

-Kraen

p.s. My youtube isn't working right now. Will check 'em out once that problem's fixed.

From the rear attack, If the attack is properly on, then you would be very lucky to survive 1 out of 10 times, if you are more successfull then that, then the're giving you the defense too easily.

Surviving a sharp weapon attack training should always start from a practical viewpoint:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqy95dWUFO8&feature=related

[7heTexanRebel]

WOW.....*stunned silence*
Never knew a knife could cut that well.

[otherbrother]

I would like to show you the REAL thing.

I got some pictures from a cop who waited just a little too long when a guy came at him with a knife.

What do I need to do to show you these pictures? Could you talk me through please?

OB

[otherbrother]

first try,

[otherbrother]

It's pretty brutal.

It's to show that you just don't underestimate the "power" of a knife.

OB

[Kraen]

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10607311&postcount=65

-Kraen

[Fusen]

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10607311&postcount=65

-Kraen

QFT - however you said

''Anyone who can stop a man from killing you can surely stop a drunken friend.

How hard can they to be to subdue when we're use to people trying to stab us?
''

YOUR NOT USED TO PEOPLE REALLY TRYING TO STAB YOU!
How hard can it be? I think the photos speak for themselves.

Just remember you dont have to outrun the attacker, just outrun the friend whos done some hapkido and thinks he can take on the crazy guy with the knife.

[Kraen]

QFT - however you said

''Anyone who can stop a man from killing you can surely stop a drunken friend.

How hard can they to be to subdue when we're use to people trying to stab us?
''

YOUR NOT USED TO PEOPLE REALLY TRYING TO STAB YOU!
How hard can it be? I think the photos speak for themselves.

Just remember you dont have to outrun the attacker, just outrun the friend whos done some hapkido and thinks he can take on the crazy guy with the knife.

I absolutely do NOT think I can take on some guy with a knife. Don't be ridiculous. The point of what I was saying was TRAIN HARD, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. Maybe try being less of a troll.

-Kraen

[Bruce W Sims]

Excuse me for saying it, Kraen, but I'm honestly beginning to believe "trolling" is what the forums are all about.

Work to make a discussion intelligent and its like pulling teeth. But blurt-out some provocative nonsense and watch how quickly people come to the feeding frenzy and attempt to identify the main course. Its not about being informed or wanting to BE informed as much as its about being right----or proving the other person wrong--- or both.

In the case of Korean traditional Hapkido---Pre-Occupation--- the idea was to survive under desperate circumstances so soldiers trained hard and played for keeps. Finding oneself on or near a battlefield meant knowing what the heck to do and realizing that there STILL was the chance of death from the "unexpected".

Now people talk about taking on a guy with a knife in a society that is conducted so that the chances are few and none. MA has become recreational and a hobby by most standards. Want to see the real thing? There are tapings of the SOWETO Riots in South Africa where people were attacked by machete-weilding thugs. The thugs closed on their victim, containing him within a triangle, and went to work on him, then on to the next victim. (Personally, I don't know what BJJ could have done for these unfortunates other than letting them die with a sense of failure at protecting themselves.)

The discussion seems a tad aimless since I don't hear of people training to deal with lethal force or to use lethal force and then seeking-out chances to use that training and prove that it is what the people represent it to be. All I am getting is "train hard and then maybe...." which is about all one can say of ANYTHING in Life.

If I am missing some other point in this discussion I sure wouldn't mind a bit of guidance.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Omicron]

Excuse me for saying it, Kraen, but I'm honestly beginning to believe "trolling" is what the forums are all about.

Work to make a discussion intelligent and its like pulling teeth. But blurt-out some provocative nonsense and watch how quickly people come to the feeding frenzy and attempt to identify the main course. Its not about being informed or wanting to BE informed as much as its about being right----or proving the other person wrong--- or both.

Provocative nonsense, eh? You mean like the following, right?


I have reached a place where, when the letters MMA and BJJ come up in a conversation I can feel a migraine start at the very base of my skull and sweep forward to my eyes like a Saharan sandstorm.

I feel as though I have been waiting forever to be involved in an intelligent discussion about MMA or BJJ or any of the other new forms that are cropping up.

However, the level of discussion regarding these pursuits as structured activities invariably falls to "your-stuff-sucks"-kinds of exchanges. I'm afraid that after quite a few years of this sort of thing the first impulse that crosses my mind is to head for another thread.

I think someone needs to make a Guide to Online Discussion or Fora for Dummies that explains right from the start that someone disagreeing with you doesn't automatically equal trolling. Seems to be a trend on MAP lately to yell "troll!" when people meet strong opposition to their ideas.

If you do want to be informed, as you claim Bruce, it's tough to take you seriously when you make sweeping negative generalizations about MMA and its practitioners. In addition to the examples above, here is another:

As far as I can tell, the MMA and BJJ have been around for a little while and it would seem that folks could begin to put together optimal training table imperatives, a sequenced approach to the proper balance of striking versus grappling, optimal conditioning and so forth.

Now, this statement in itself isn't particularly negative or pejorative, but it gives some context to your other statements. To put it bluntly, it shows that you lack a basic understanding of how MMA and BJJ are taught. There are curricula and systems developed for instruction, just as you describe. I'm not putting you down for lack of knowledge; I'd be happy to explain this point in greater detail. I'm just pointing out that your obvious lack of experience with the fundamental aspects of MMA and BJJ calls into question your sweeping generalizations about them.

Personally, I think this discussion has been very civil without much sign of trolling. It is starting to get a little old, though. The whole standup vs. ground debate has been thrown around countless times before, and I don't really feel like getting into it again. Like I said before, all we can do to be complete martial artists is to train for as many different situations as possible. As has been said in another thread (I can't remember who said this precisely; forgive my paraphrasing), if you can't fight in a ring against a trained MMA or BJJ guy, how is your training supposed to help you do any better in a real situation "on the street"? MMA and sport fighting in general pit you on a daily basis against someone who is trying his or her best to strike, throw, pin, choke, and otherwise harm you with 100% realism. That is why these methods produce superior fighters. These people are used to fighting. They fight often, and their training closely resembles a fight. Sure, it's under a specific set of rules, but it's impossible to realistically train for things like knife attacks or group beatings. People get hurt in these situations, and they get hurt very badly. For that reason we cannot really realistically practice defenses against them in the same we as we can against a single, unarmed opponent. In a nutshell, what MMA does is remove the aspects of training that cannot be safely practiced with full resistance, and focuses intensely on those that can.

This means that MMA practitioners are inherently limited in the types of techniques they learn. But, you'd be hard pressed to find an MMAist who doesn't realize this. The fact of the matter is, by removing certain select aspects of fighting, you end up training people who are extremely proficient and experienced in what they do train for. Many of us choose to take the MMA route because we believe this trade-off of a certain set of techniques for full resistance and realism in all others is worth it.

Want to see the real thing? There are tapings of the SOWETO Riots in South Africa where people were attacked by machete-weilding thugs. The thugs closed on their victim, containing him within a triangle, and went to work on him, then on to the next victim. (Personally, I don't know what BJJ could have done for these unfortunates other than letting them die with a sense of failure at protecting themselves.)

OK, so please explain why you have singled out BJJ here. How is YOUR training or martial art so much better that they would let you survive an attack against three coordinated, machete wielding opponents?

The discussion seems a tad aimless since I don't hear of people training to deal with lethal force or to use lethal force and then seeking-out chances to use that training and prove that it is what the people represent it to be. All I am getting is "train hard and then maybe...." which is about all one can say of ANYTHING in Life.

This is really the crux of the issue. It is impossible to use lethal force in our training, and it is foolish to seek it out to test your training. There isn't a martial art out there that can claim to do either of these things, unless you count being in the military. So, martial arts have taken two distinct paths to reaching this goal of "realism". The more traditional way is to incorporate dangerous/deadly techniques into the system, but to limit the ways in which they are used in training; for safety's sake, arts that contain these techniques are not practiced at a level of total realism or full resistance. The other approach, taken by MMA, is again to completely remove dangerous techniques, thereby allowing the remaining techniques to be trained with total realism and full resistance.

In other words, no system is complete. Any that claims to be so is either lying or misguided. Different systems have different ways of reaching for realistic methods of fighting and self defense. Personally, I feel that by engaging with a fully resisting opponent on a regular basis, you become best prepared for the realities of a real-life self-defense encounter. MMA is so far the best arena we have to carry out such training, and that's why I have chosen to practice in the way I do. Other people my have their own reasons and motivations for training, but I think it can't really be argued that MMA produces very capable and experienced fighters who would probably hold their own much better in a self-defense situation than the average TMAist would.

[spidersfrommars]

MA has become recreational and a hobby by most standards. Want to see the real thing? There are tapings of the SOWETO Riots in South Africa where people were attacked by machete-weilding thugs. The thugs closed on their victim, containing him within a triangle, and went to work on him, then on to the next victim. (Personally, I don't know what hapkido or anything else short of having a gun and/or at-least four machete wielding friends could have done for these unfortunates other than letting them die with a sense of failure at protecting themselves.)
:bang:

[Bruce W Sims]

Thanks, Omi....but don't you see.....you just did exactly what I have been commenting about.

You are exactly right....these damn threads ARE getting OLD.....very, very, very OLD.

Please allow me to describe an example using what I know rather than what I don't.

I teach YON MU KWAN Hapkido. I wish I had a nickel for every putz who came to a forum and advised me why YMK Hapkido "doesn't work". After getting sucked into a number of these thread over the years its just no longer worth my time to get mixed-up in them. However, when someone wants to know, for instance, HOW we train, why we train the way that we do, what are goals are, what the role of weight training is, etc etc etc, NOW we can have an informative discussion.

What I don't know about MMA and BJJ and NHB and all the rest of these newer incarnations would fill a small library. BUT there is no way in the world any of this actually gets talked about because the current thread is the quintessential kind of exchange that one winds up with.

If I may....please let me use your particular thread as an example.

I don't know what experience you have in the practices I have named, but I was thinking that you could have said, "I practice Doo-Dah DO-style MMA and can give some training thoughts on how we approach conditioning. Where would you like to start?" Or, "we have given up using PLYOMETRICS in our training routine and here is why". NOW we have a discussion going.

What I am building a case for, Omi, is not against discussing the practices mentioned in this thread, but the tedious repetition of mindless rehashing of past hyperbole.

I just KNOW that we can use this venue better. I for one would love to have a discussion and learn more but I am just not willing to endure any more of this empty-headed contention. Is any of this making sense?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

BTW: Note to "OLDER BROTHER": As gross and shocking as the pictures are they do provide a graphic example of a recent report on Gladitorial diet from the period of the Roman Empire.

Examination of the diets of training gladitorial candidates reveals that their diet resulted in a heavy layer of body fat over the musculature. As you can see from the pictures of the knife victim, though the cuts appear severe, in fact, no major body structures, such as large blood vessels, tendons, ligaments, nerves and muscle mass were damaged. As a result, one could continue to fight despite sustaining these injuries. The same could not be said of a person who had minimal body fat as there would be little to shield the important structures of the body from violence.

No real point other than to make a historical observation.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Fusen]

I absolutely do NOT think I can take on some guy with a knife. Don't be ridiculous. The point of what I was saying was TRAIN HARD, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. Maybe try being less of a troll.

-Kraen

The point you were making was not clear. As long as your under no illusion about how hard surviving a sharp weapon attack is thats cool with me.

Id rather be accused (wrongly) of trolling a thousand times then let one person wrongly hold that belief, and then die from it.

[Fusen]

BTW: Note to "OLDER BROTHER": As gross and shocking as the pictures are they do provide a graphic example of a recent report on Gladitorial diet from the period of the Roman Empire.

Examination of the diets of training gladitorial candidates reveals that their diet resulted in a heavy layer of body fat over the musculature. As you can see from the pictures of the knife victim, though the cuts appear severe, in fact, no major body structures, such as large blood vessels, tendons, ligaments, nerves and muscle mass were damaged. As a result, one could continue to fight despite sustaining these injuries. The same could not be said of a person who had minimal body fat as there would be little to shield the important structures of the body from violence.

No real point other than to make a historical observation.

Best Wishes,

Bruce



Bruce Id be very interested in a copy or source for this ''Gladitorial diet'' infomation. I would also suggest that if that was the effect of the diet, then it was an accidental one rising primarily from the high protein based diet the atheletes would no doubt be on.

And in modern terms, becoming fat in todays society, so that one has more 'armour' is laughable at best.

[Fusen]

In the case of Korean traditional Hapkido---Pre-Occupation---

Wasnt hapkido founded by Choi Yong-Sool (born 1904 – died 1986)

or do you mean the the pre occupation korean combat arts, that would be unlikly to be called hapkido?

[Zen Warrior]

nevermind... not getting into a troll.

[Doublejab]

Wasnt hapkido founded by Choi Yong-Sool (born 1904 – died 1986)

or do you mean the the pre occupation korean combat arts, that would be unlikly to be called hapkido?

I'd be genuinely interested in hearing this answered?

[Bruce W Sims]

Bruce Id be very interested in a copy or source for this ''Gladitorial diet'' infomation. I would also suggest that if that was the effect of the diet, then it was an accidental one rising primarily from the high protein based diet the atheletes would no doubt be on.

And in modern terms, becoming fat in todays society, so that one has more 'armour' is laughable at best.

I don't know exactly how to respond to your post as I am not able to locate the program I was referencing. As far as a "high protein" diet I can't respond to that either as the focus of the meal seems to have been vegetable rather than animal and I cannot say for sure what balance was taken between protein and carbohydrate and fat.

For myself, I would be wary about assuming that the diet was "high protein" as the use of protein to the exclusion of fat and carbohydrates has its own peculiar risks. Despite the iconography and totemism of eating animals after the fashion of predatory beasts, the digestive system of the Human is actually more closely associated with the sort of tract one finds in grazing and foraging animals.

I'll continue to seekout the program I mentioned and perhaps you can locate a copy, watch it and draw your own conclusions then. FWIW.

In the meantime, here are articles regarding the same excavation in Turkey that the TV program was about.

http://www.archaeology.org/0811/abstracts/gladiator.html

http://www.murphsplace.com/gladiator/gladtimes.html

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

Wasnt hapkido founded by Choi Yong-Sool (born 1904 – died 1986)

or do you mean the the pre occupation korean combat arts, that would be unlikly to be called hapkido?

Unfortunately, no. There are any number of threads that have gone round and round about this but the answer breaks done this way.

a.) CHOI Yong Sul taught YAWARA, the precursor to what we know today as JIU JUTSU. We don't know a whole lot about his instruction, but it is known that he returned to Korean through PUSAN in 1946. He attempted to teach his material with little success until he crossed pathes with a Korean who was experienced in Judo, one SUH Bok Sub. Master Suh helped CHOI to develop an organized syllabus, introduced gradings and added various skills that rounded out Choi's curriculum. The art came to be known first as HAPKIYUSUL and later, with the addition of some kicking, HAPKIYUKWONSUL.

b.) JI Han Jae (SIN MU Hapkido) is generally identified as the first person to use the term "hapkido" and the term has since been applied to many varieties of Korean grapplings which include throws, joint-locks, kicks and strikes in varying degrees.

c.) The term "hapkido" has since come to be used to identify a host of arts which vary in the practices noted above as well and varying numbers of weapons.

d.) As far as using the term "hapkido" to identify practices prior to the Japanese Occupation, there are an entire range of terms that have been used, abandoned, adopted, modified and made-up. Even the current practitioners of HAPKIYUKWONSUL through both the JUNG KI KWAN and the YONG SUL KWAN are known to use the term "hapkido" even though technically one could make a case against using the term at all.

FWIW,

Bruce

[roninmaster]

Why does it seem like more often than not-- no matter WHAT the topic is, or what style it's under, someone brings up BJJ?

whatever happened to 'it's not the style, but the fighter that decides the outcome' an' all that?

And what does BJJ have to do with, 'what does -HAPKIDO- favor in the clinch?' or any other example you can think of.

Secondly, I wonder if the BJJ forums have to deal with people talking about how, "if it was Hapkido, I would just rough him up a bit then throw him into a STANDING jointlock.
:woo::woo::woo::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: :evil::evil::evil:"

Any thoughts?

haha wow, you may not know it but you remind me greatly of myself. I used to couldnt stand BJJ. I had nothing against the style itself, just hated how they gracie's marketed it as the "most effective style". now Im going for my BJJ blue belt.:) I even made a post on MAP sometime ago entitled "my problem with BJJ" just like you. I, like you, also new nothing really about the art.

you see much like yohan said its just the fanboys of it, who never train in it who elivate it to its god like status. However the reason its regarded so highly over other style is its training methodolgy. many schools (especially TKD's ive been at ) make you go through a whole color chain of belt systems. memorizing tons of techniques, katas, and unrealistic weapons, and have sparring as a secondary.

in BJJ fighting is the focus at all times. true its the fighter not the style but the way BJJ is set up it teaches you to fight through the simpliest way. "by fighting" the same way boxing, muay thai, and kyokushin karate does. (this is why i hate when people call them sport styles:mad:its not sport, its just smart)

it also capatlizes on an aspect of fighting severly looked over in most other martial arts to this day. Groundfighting. this is why you have guys who may be a green belt or blue belt in Karate and will get trounced by a 3 striped white belt when they spar. This is by no meens not to say that the karate or TKD guys are incapable of ever winning. i have seen BJJ guys get knocked out cold on multiple occations.

you are very hard press to find a Mcdojo BJJ school. compared to the treasure trove of karate, ninjutsu, and TKD's out there. It has proven itself time and time again, against practicioners from tons of other styles and has been more succesfull then many other arts. this is why its brough up so much. especially when talking about grappling. because this is what it speciallizes in. its the same as how guys bring up muay thai alot when refering to striking arts.

at the end of the day who cares. one thing MMA has taught us( by the way BJJ and MMA are different entirely. No offense, you probably new that, but people calling everything BJJ/MMA kinda is a pet peeve of mind) is to not focus so much on what this technique came from, or pledging to abstain from this style because i train in this other style. Everthing has its place and if its training you to be a more complete fighter who cares. I dont here alot of hapkido in the BJJ forums but if it works and you have something to add be my guest. And you should be the same.

[47MartialMan]

Unfortunately, no. There are any number of threads that have gone round and round about this but the answer breaks done this way.

a.) CHOI Yong Sul taught YAWARA, the precursor to what we know today as JIU JUTSU. We don't know a whole lot about his instruction, but it is known that he returned to Korean through PUSAN in 1946. He attempted to teach his material with little success until he crossed pathes with a Korean who was experienced in Judo, one SUH Bok Sub. Master Suh helped CHOI to develop an organized syllabus, introduced gradings and added various skills that rounded out Choi's curriculum. The art came to be known first as HAPKIYUSUL and later, with the addition of some kicking, HAPKIYUKWONSUL.

b.) JI Han Jae (SIN MU Hapkido) is generally identified as the first person to use the term "hapkido" and the term has since been applied to many varieties of Korean grapplings which include throws, joint-locks, kicks and strikes in varying degrees.

c.) The term "hapkido" has since come to be used to identify a host of arts which vary in the practices noted above as well and varying numbers of weapons.

d.) As far as using the term "hapkido" to identify practices prior to the Japanese Occupation, there are an entire range of terms that have been used, abandoned, adopted, modified and made-up. Even the current practitioners of HAPKIYUKWONSUL through both the JUNG KI KWAN and the YONG SUL KWAN are known to use the term "hapkido" even though technically one could make a case against using the term at all.

FWIW,

Bruce

Kudos! I really enjoyed reading your post. :cool:

[Fusen]

Kudos! I really enjoyed reading your post. :cool:

Me too, it was like a politican explaining that no, pre occupation arts were not called or directly related to hapkido.

[Bruce W Sims]

Me too, it was like a politican explaining that no, pre occupation arts were not called or directly related to hapkido.

While I can't quite put my finger on it, Fusen, the tone of your post suggests that you have some particular axe to grind or hold as particular view of things.
Were that the case I can share, right up front that its not my position to rain on your ideological parade.

What I have found is that the Koreans, themselves, have played pretty fast-and-loose with labels and terms and practices. A well-know example of this is the matter of TKD people attributing their practices to the same material that the HWARANG warriors practiced. Never mind that we don't know what the HWARANG warriors did, or why. Never mind that various historical researchers have disproved this theory. The myth continues to turn-up in TKD materials right along side of knocking people off of horses with jump kicks or breaking horses legs with spin-kicks. And, yes, contrary to your comment, all Korean practices are related to one another one way or another. The only place I find these standard facts coming under discussion is where someone-not-korean makes a statement about things Korean and gets called onto the carpet for it.

The fact is that people find it "fun" to believe in such nonsense and get annoyed at being reminded of the truth. In the case of your postings, there appears to be some note of annoyance that I would use the term "hapkido" to refer to pre-occupation practices. There does not seem to be much annoyance---- (knowlege of?)--- "hapkido" as a modern made-up word or its general acceptance as a generic MA term by Koreans and Westerners alike. The term itself remains undefined in any single universally accepted manner.

In my experience in the last 30 years I have identified at least 8 terms used to identify armed and unarmed Korean practices. The Koreans seem to be pretty liberal about their use. By comparison, Westerners seem to be committed to using select terms to denote specific practices. In my own personal experience, I have found that there is no pleasing all folks all of the time. If I use a term too liberally I will draw fire, and if I use a term too conservatively I will draw fire. And, there does not seem to be too much interest on these forums for finding Middle Grounds and agreement as there is no "fun" in that. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

haha wow, you may not know it but you remind me greatly of myself. I used to couldnt stand BJJ. I had nothing against the style itself, just hated how they gracie's marketed it as the "most effective style". now Im going for my BJJ blue belt.:) I even made a post on MAP sometime ago entitled "my problem with BJJ" just like you. I, like you, also new nothing really about the art.

you see much like yohan said its just the fanboys of it, who never train in it who elivate it to its god like status. However the reason its regarded so highly over other style is its training methodolgy. many schools (especially TKD's ive been at ) make you go through a whole color chain of belt systems. memorizing tons of techniques, katas, and unrealistic weapons, and have sparring as a secondary.

in BJJ fighting is the focus at all times. true its the fighter not the style but the way BJJ is set up it teaches you to fight through the simpliest way. "by fighting" the same way boxing, muay thai, and kyokushin karate does. (this is why i hate when people call them sport styles:mad:its not sport, its just smart)

it also capatlizes on an aspect of fighting severly looked over in most other martial arts to this day. Groundfighting. this is why you have guys who may be a green belt or blue belt in Karate and will get trounced by a 3 striped white belt when they spar. This is by no meens not to say that the karate or TKD guys are incapable of ever winning. i have seen BJJ guys get knocked out cold on multiple occations.

you are very hard press to find a Mcdojo BJJ school. compared to the treasure trove of karate, ninjutsu, and TKD's out there. It has proven itself time and time again, against practicioners from tons of other styles and has been more succesfull then many other arts. this is why its brough up so much. especially when talking about grappling. because this is what it speciallizes in. its the same as how guys bring up muay thai alot when refering to striking arts.

at the end of the day who cares. one thing MMA has taught us( by the way BJJ and MMA are different entirely. No offense, you probably new that, but people calling everything BJJ/MMA kinda is a pet peeve of mind) is to not focus so much on what this technique came from, or pledging to abstain from this style because i train in this other style. Everthing has its place and if its training you to be a more complete fighter who cares. I dont here alot of hapkido in the BJJ forums but if it works and you have something to add be my guest. And you should be the same.

I liked the balance in your post. Like you, I have more of a problem with marketing and attitudes than any of the technical aspects of the subject. The BJJ people need to at least be credited with conserving the groundwork formerly found in traditional Judo and enhancing it with practice and experimentation. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[47MartialMan]

I liked the balance in your post. Like you, I have more of a problem with marketing and attitudes than any of the technical aspects of the subject. The BJJ people need to at least be credited with conserving the groundwork formerly found in traditional Judo and enhancing it with practice and experimentation. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

:cool: That was also such a good post. Mr. Sims, I'll be paying more attention to you in a very positive manner.

[roninmaster]

:cool: That was also such a good post. Mr. Sims, I'll be paying more attention to you in a very positive manner.

awww, i gets no love for the post? sad face.:(

[47MartialMan]

awww, i gets no love for the post? sad face.:(

Ok...I wouldnt want "Bruce" to get "Lee" on me...
:hat:

[Bruce W Sims]

:cool: That was also such a good post. Mr. Sims, I'll be paying more attention to you in a very positive manner.

Thanks, but I also must admit to a kind of "hidden agenda" in that response.

As I mentioned, the BJJ people can be congratulated for conserving a good deal of the original groundwork, including pins and chokes that were removed with the coming of the "Olympic movement" that resulted in Judo being accepted into the Games. Rather than be distracted by posturing and attitudes, I would thoroughly enjoy a decent discussion of some of this material sans the modifications of the last ten years or so. Just a thought.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Fusen]

Rather than be distracted by posturing and attitudes,

I think one may be projecting a little.

also I have no hidden agenda, only a dislike of the obscuring of historical truth for political ends.

FWIW much of what makes any training programme worthwhile (which is what a martial art is) is not the actual techniques, but the methods by which they are trained.

[Omicron]

FWIW much of what makes any training programme worthwhile (which is what a martial art is) is not the actual techniques, but the methods by which they are trained.

OFT. Now if everyone could realize that, there would be a lot less BS in the martial arts world.

[Bruce W Sims]

OFT. Now if everyone could realize that, there would be a lot less BS in the martial arts world.

Agreed....but now how do we get people to understand this simple premise and to act on its behalf? As far as I can see the MAP forum is one of the better venues available and even here the bickering far out-weighs intelligent and productive exchange of views and information. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Omicron]

Agreed....but now how do we get people to understand this simple premise and to act on its behalf? As far as I can see the MAP forum is one of the better venues available and even here the bickering far out-weighs intelligent and productive exchange of views and information. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Well, a good first step would be to figure out just what "ideal" training methods are. It seems to be a concept that has eluded a lot of people out there.

[47MartialMan]

Well, a good first step would be to figure out just what "ideal" training methods are. It seems to be a concept that has eluded a lot of people out there.


You took the words out of my outh...er key strokes.

Ideal methods would be like discussing "ideal" cars, men, or women.

:)

[Omicron]

You took the words out of my outh...er key strokes.

Ideal methods would be like discussing "ideal" cars, men, or women.

:)

Actually, the subject of cars isn't that bad a parallel. People like different kinds of cars for different reasons: a classic collector would have a very different idea of the "ideal" car than would, say, a Nascar driver. To determine what the "ideal" car is, we must first define what purpose the car will serve. Just like everyone has slightly different purposes for their cars, so to do most of us have different purposes for our martial arts training.

Inasmuch as a martial encounter involves real, unrestrained physical violence, an ideal study of martial arts meant to prepare for such a situation should attempt to emulate it as much as possible. That's the philosophy behind the training in BJJ and MMA, and that's why these pursuits tend to produce superior martial artists.

[47MartialMan]

Actually, the subject of cars isn't that bad a parallel. People like different kinds of cars for different reasons: a classic collector would have a very different idea of the "ideal" car than would, say, a Nascar driver. To determine what the "ideal" car is, we must first define what purpose the car will serve. Just like everyone has slightly different purposes for their cars, so to do most of us have different purposes for our martial arts training.

Inasmuch as a martial encounter involves real, unrestrained physical violence, an ideal study of martial arts meant to prepare for such a situation should attempt to emulate it as much as possible. That's the philosophy behind the training in BJJ and MMA, and that's why these pursuits tend to produce superior martial artists.

Still the "ideal" car is subjective.

The "ideal" car amongst every day drivers, the "ideal" truck amongst truck owners, the "ideal" car, like manufacturer is NASCAR, are still with the confines of personal preference and not warranted in the sense of perfection or ultimate

[Omicron]

That's just what I was trying to say.

However, except for a few very specific exceptions, I think we can all agree that the ideal car should be able to drive down the road. In a similar way, we can probably all agree that, with few exceptions, we all expect martial arts training to prepare us for martial encounters.

[47MartialMan]

That's just what I was trying to say.

However, except for a few very specific exceptions, I think we can all agree that the ideal car should be able to drive down the road. In a similar way, we can probably all agree that, with few exceptions, we all expect martial arts training to prepare us for martial encounters.

Well we can become complacent and believe we are training in a ideal fashion, but this should not lead to close-mindedness.

After all, take Toyota for example. People had praised it for sometime overlooking or putting down other manufacturers.

Like anything, it is only a matter of time before something has to give, and the hope of it is that we learn from mistakes, furher hoping that such outcime is not too bad.

[Bruce W Sims]

Well, a good first step would be to figure out just what "ideal" training methods are. It seems to be a concept that has eluded a lot of people out there.

And I think that would be great first-step. Wher I have seen other threads go awry with this is in the matter of discerning exactly which goal one has for their practice. Overall, I see general pursuits for MA practice.

a.) Combat applications.
I usually characterize this as activities involved with "going into Harm's Way". Military and Para-military have enough on their plate without spending every extra second conditioning and training. Since they already have a "martial" culture, the need to invest in learning how to perceive the world through "martial eyes" is not high-up on their list. Demands of the job does not allow them to train to exhaustion every other night and expect to meet their responsibilities the next morning. A "middle of the road" approach to training will also require a "middle of the road" conditioning system.

b.) Competition applications
Though a lot of people don't give it credit, competition training is one of the trickiest balances to strike. The goal is to arrive at peak condition and peak competence at a very specific point in time and place. Train too hard and one arrives at their peak too soon and falls into "staleness" (aka: "over-trained"). Train too lightly and one risks not peaking close enough to the competition leaving the opponent to be in better condition.

c.) Hobbyist applications
Lay the responsibility for how hard one chooses to train in the hands of the individual. Characterization for this comes in terms of "I need to get back into shape" and "I need to lose a few pounds/inches". These sorts of vague intentions allow a person to exert effort without being held to an objective goal.

The way I see it, we can talk about optimal training approaches, but will need to accept that we are talking about three distinctly different goals. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Korpy]

I can say that have started my training in Hapkido, but now I'm a BJJ stylist, I will say BJJ is more effective.

I could never use HKD techniques against a resisting person, and I'm not talking about just the sport aspect. I've gotten into quite a few altercations in the street, and BJJ has always worked.

[Kraen]

haha wow, you may not know it but you remind me greatly of myself. I used to couldnt stand BJJ. I had nothing against the style itself, just hated how they gracie's marketed it as the "most effective style". now Im going for my BJJ blue belt.:) I even made a post on MAP sometime ago entitled "my problem with BJJ" just like you. I, like you, also new nothing really about the art.

you see much like yohan said its just the fanboys of it, who never train in it who elivate it to its god like status. However the reason its regarded so highly over other style is its training methodolgy. many schools (especially TKD's ive been at ) make you go through a whole color chain of belt systems. memorizing tons of techniques, katas, and unrealistic weapons, and have sparring as a secondary.

in BJJ fighting is the focus at all times. true its the fighter not the style but the way BJJ is set up it teaches you to fight through the simpliest way. "by fighting" the same way boxing, muay thai, and kyokushin karate does. (this is why i hate when people call them sport styles:mad:its not sport, its just smart)

it also capatlizes on an aspect of fighting severly looked over in most other martial arts to this day. Groundfighting. this is why you have guys who may be a green belt or blue belt in Karate and will get trounced by a 3 striped white belt when they spar. This is by no meens not to say that the karate or TKD guys are incapable of ever winning. i have seen BJJ guys get knocked out cold on multiple occations.

you are very hard press to find a Mcdojo BJJ school. compared to the treasure trove of karate, ninjutsu, and TKD's out there. It has proven itself time and time again, against practicioners from tons of other styles and has been more succesfull then many other arts. this is why its brough up so much. especially when talking about grappling. because this is what it speciallizes in. its the same as how guys bring up muay thai alot when refering to striking arts.

at the end of the day who cares. one thing MMA has taught us( by the way BJJ and MMA are different entirely. No offense, you probably new that, but people calling everything BJJ/MMA kinda is a pet peeve of mind) is to not focus so much on what this technique came from, or pledging to abstain from this style because i train in this other style. Everthing has its place and if its training you to be a more complete fighter who cares. I dont here alot of hapkido in the BJJ forums but if it works and you have something to add be my guest. And you should be the same.

I practice BJJ for the record. I was just annoyed at the time (over a year ago) when it seemed that NO MATTER what the discussion was about, BJJ was the answer.

Funny enough, a few people who have been a part of the all-JJ club that I'm attending longer than I have ask me questions regarding joint-locks whenever we do 'traditional stand-up' JJ. I realize this has bad grammar in it, but can't see a way to fix it within the next 10 seconds.

-Kraen

[Omicron]

I practice BJJ for the record. I was just annoyed at the time (over a year ago) when it seemed that NO MATTER what the discussion was about, BJJ was the answer.

You have found the truth. BJJ is always the answer! :evil:

[47MartialMan]

You have found the truth. BJJ is always the answer! :evil:

I am going to have to reply to any questions my spouse has about anything, with that...:)

[Bruce W Sims]

And I think that would be great first-step. Wher I have seen other threads go awry with this is in the matter of discerning exactly which goal one has for their practice. Overall, I see general pursuits for MA practice.

a.) Combat applications.
I usually characterize this as activities involved with "going into Harm's Way". Military and Para-military have enough on their plate without spending every extra second conditioning and training. Since they already have a "martial" culture, the need to invest in learning how to perceive the world through "martial eyes" is not high-up on their list. Demands of the job does not allow them to train to exhaustion every other night and expect to meet their responsibilities the next morning. A "middle of the road" approach to training will also require a "middle of the road" conditioning system.

b.) Competition applications
Though a lot of people don't give it credit, competition training is one of the trickiest balances to strike. The goal is to arrive at peak condition and peak competence at a very specific point in time and place. Train too hard and one arrives at their peak too soon and falls into "staleness" (aka: "over-trained"). Train too lightly and one risks not peaking close enough to the competition leaving the opponent to be in better condition.

c.) Hobbyist applications
Lay the responsibility for how hard one chooses to train in the hands of the individual. Characterization for this comes in terms of "I need to get back into shape" and "I need to lose a few pounds/inches". These sorts of vague intentions allow a person to exert effort without being held to an objective goal.

The way I see it, we can talk about optimal training approaches, but will need to accept that we are talking about three distinctly different goals. Thoughts?



Eh.....this was an honest attempt at getting a productive discussion going. Am I to understand that folks would rather chatter "about"---that is "around"--- BJJ or are there folks here who actually want an intelligent discussion of the art and its training approaches?

OTOH, if folks would rather use the forum as a Martial-arts-themed chatroom, I have no quibble with this. Its just not something I have much time for or interest in. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Omicron]

Geeze, Bruce. Sorry if this thread isn't going EXACTLY where you want it, and people aren't talking about EXACTLY what you want them to.

To be honest, I thought the content of your post was quite self-evident and I don't really have much to say about it. Of course there are different goals people have for their training, though I'd hazard a guess that there are many more than simply three.

If you really want to talk about BJJ and learn about BJJ, I'd suggest that hanging around on a DISCUSSION forum isn't the best place to do that. Go down and take some classes and roll with some experienced practitioners. You'll get a lot more info and experience that way than you ever will here, no matter how honest your attempts at starting discussion.

[Bruce W Sims]

Thanks, Omni. I hope you are hearing what I am saying in the spirit in which it is given. As I mentioned, I have no problem with people using this forum as they see fit. I can say, for myself, that I have had higher expectations for the INTERNET functions. However, it seems that we are encumbered by the Human nature that tends to reduce all things to their most pedestrian level. In this way, interpersonal relationships are about sexual politics, service to the community is about self-promotion and so forth. My own goal has been that if there is room for people reducing things to the most fundamental levels I would hope that some people would want to promote things to some higher level.

In the thread in point, we have more than enough folks who want to discuss BJJ, MMA and NHB in terms of how such practices are superior to other more traditional practices. We never quite get around to talking about the practices themselves but always discuss in terms of one practice against another. This reminds me very much of religious and political discussion where name calling and derision pass for intelligent discussion of the facts.

Put another way:

Yes...I know I can always go take some classes. But... I am talking about being able to discuss a subject on some level above Grade School playground altercations. Am I asking too much? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[spidersfrommars]

Thanks, Omni. I hope you are hearing what I am saying in the spirit in which it is given. As I mentioned, I have no problem with people using this forum as they see fit. I can say, for myself, that I have had higher expectations for the INTERNET functions. However, it seems that we are encumbered by the Human nature that tends to reduce all things to their most pedestrian level. In this way, interpersonal relationships are about sexual politics, service to the community is about self-promotion and so forth. My own goal has been that if there is room for people reducing things to the most fundamental levels I would hope that some people would want to promote things to some higher level.

In the thread in point, we have more than enough folks who want to discuss BJJ, MMA and NHB in terms of how such practices are superior to other more traditional practices. We never quite get around to talking about the practices themselves but always discuss in terms of one practice against another. This reminds me very much of religious and political discussion where name calling and derision pass for intelligent discussion of the facts.

Put another way:

Yes...I know I can always go take some classes. But... I am talking about being able to discuss a subject on some level above Grade School playground altercations. Am I asking too much? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

ok here you go, a thoughtful article about the practices of mma and bjj and why they are (in general) superior. I'd be interested to hear you thoughts on its content.
http://www.straightblastgym.com/aliveness101.html

[Omicron]

I have a question for you, Bruce. Up to now, this thread has asked the question, "why BJJ?", or "why MMA?". I'd like to ask you: why not? What reason could you possibly have not to adopt the methods of aliveness and full pressure testing found in these martial arts? Do you think, in your heart of hearts, that someone without that type of training could stand up to someone who did have it? I'm not saying that everyone out there on the street is a trained MMAist and we should all be ready to fight them at a moment's notice, but we ARE discussing ideal training methods here, and so I think the comparison is a valid one.

I remember, back in my TMA days, feeling very uneasy discussing the topic of BJJ, MMA, and other sport based martial arts. I had my TMA blinders on: I enjoyed my martial art very much, and I liked the sense of safety and self-confidence it gave me. However, whenever the topic came up, I always had my doubts about the effectiveness of my training versus that of someone who'd been doing BJJ or MMA for the same amount of time. Finally, through a series of eye-opening experiences both in person and online, I came to the cold, hard realization that traditional training methods simply are not as effective as modern alive methods.

That is what you're going to have to disprove here, if you want to argue against the effectiveness of the training methods found in BJJ, MMA, judo, etc.

[Kraen]

I have found that, after training in the 'bjj way,' my Hapkido training has served me well and is not all that different from the training I am receiving now. It has transferred very well over to the club I'm at right now. Obviously better to the 'traditional standup style self defense' class' than the 'ground game' class. I did receive comments like 'you have good survivability' in my first few classes in BJJ. I think it's apparent that my teacher taught me with 'aliveness' in mind. We never did any kata-type training because it is 'dead training' as the article so eloqently put it.

-kraen

[Giovanni]

i love the meme that bjj/mma practitioners always employ...i used to train tma, but because of some eye opening experience, i now train mma/bjj. there's always the not-so-subtle warning that tma sucks and that if you don't train in mma/bjj, you suck too. or at the very least, the tma is not tested in some supposed "real world".

"alive-ness" or whatever you want to call it is not new. aikido has it, judo (which of course is a bit more modern) also has it. when i trained in hapkido, we did not train in a static manner. karate also has a competitive aspect.

why would you want to train in a sport application when you're training for self-defense or combat? i'd rather take my chances with aikido, techniques come from battlefield applications than some sport "martial art". or hapkido, which was also developed from a combat perspective.

i've done judo. also, i'm obsessed with watching judo competitions, be it olympics or world champs or whatever. i'm sure that judo or bjj do provide some great benefits in self-defense. but if you watch any judo competition, the first thing you will notice is how many openings there are for non-judo attacks. seriously. like a quick stomp on the foot. or a quick knife-hand to the throat.

i also love watching ufc. but the first thing i always notice is how the competitors have to follow certain rules still, like not being able to hit in the back of the head, or the throat, or gouge the eyes or groin, or stomp on feet. or bite...

...or the best defense...run like mad!!!...run like **** over the octagon fence!!!

and for those of us who have actually had to use martial arts to defend ourselves...when i hear people say "well why wouldn't you want to train in ground fighting", i always cringe. the absolute worst thing you can do in a street fight is go to the ground. absolute worst thing imaginable!

sport is not self defense. get over it.

sorry for the winded message, but these "alive" dudes piss me off. i'm not sure what kind of tma these people were studying, but it must have been the crappy kind.

[spidersfrommars]

bah!

[Killa_Gorillas]

when i hear people say "well why wouldn't you want to train in ground fighting", i always cringe. the absolute worst thing you can do in a street fight is go to the ground. absolute worst thing imaginable!


The worst thing you can do is to train exclusively for one range of combat (in some cases very poorly), delude yourself into thinking its sufficient and then support this position with a load of old drivel.

I train grappling exclusively but at least I'm aware of its limitations. The rigor and nature of my training also keeps me 'honest' and rational in relation to the assessment my own skills. The shreds of my machismo get left on the mat...which means I have nothing to prove to myself so I'm less likely to start something I can't finish. That's an invaluable tool from a self defence perspective.

[Omicron]

i love the meme that bjj/mma practitioners always employ...i used to train tma, but because of some eye opening experience, i now train mma/bjj. there's always the not-so-subtle warning that tma sucks and that if you don't train in mma/bjj, you suck too. or at the very least, the tma is not tested in some supposed "real world".

"alive-ness" or whatever you want to call it is not new. aikido has it, judo (which of course is a bit more modern) also has it. when i trained in hapkido, we did not train in a static manner. karate also has a competitive aspect.

why would you want to train in a sport application when you're training for self-defense or combat? i'd rather take my chances with aikido, techniques come from battlefield applications than some sport "martial art". or hapkido, which was also developed from a combat perspective.

i've done judo. also, i'm obsessed with watching judo competitions, be it olympics or world champs or whatever. i'm sure that judo or bjj do provide some great benefits in self-defense. but if you watch any judo competition, the first thing you will notice is how many openings there are for non-judo attacks. seriously. like a quick stomp on the foot. or a quick knife-hand to the throat.

i also love watching ufc. but the first thing i always notice is how the competitors have to follow certain rules still, like not being able to hit in the back of the head, or the throat, or gouge the eyes or groin, or stomp on feet. or bite...

...or the best defense...run like mad!!!...run like **** over the octagon fence!!!

and for those of us who have actually had to use martial arts to defend ourselves...when i hear people say "well why wouldn't you want to train in ground fighting", i always cringe. the absolute worst thing you can do in a street fight is go to the ground. absolute worst thing imaginable!

sport is not self defense. get over it.

sorry for the winded message, but these "alive" dudes piss me off. i'm not sure what kind of tma these people were studying, but it must have been the crappy kind.

1992 called. They want their arguments back.

[Fusen]

i'd rather take my chances with aikido, techniques come from battlefield applications than some sport "martial art".

Ok Im going to pick all your points apart, one by one, when I have time over the next few days.

No1. aikido comes from a limited amount of daito ryu patterns, daito ryu is not, and has never been about the battlefield.

[Fusen]

but if you watch any judo competition, the first thing you will notice is how many openings there are for non-judo attacks. seriously. like a quick stomp on the foot. or a quick knife-hand to the throat.



If you cant control the grip fight, then you wont be able to have distance to 'judo chop' the throat, and / or then lifting your one leg up to stomp the foot is a sure way to end up on the ground.

If you saying that judo isnt full on fighting 'caus it aint no got striking then you would be correct, but judo is strong in the two out of three catagories of unarmed fighting, clinch and ground.

[Korpy]

Giovanni with his posts shows how sadly, TMA'ers still are ignorant and delusional.

[pauli]

the absolute worst thing you can do in a street fight is go to the ground. absolute worst thing imaginable!

that's why we train for it. some of us recognize that, you know, it's nice to have the skill and ability to disengage and stand up when brought to the ground against one's will.

[Giovanni]

Giovanni with his posts shows how sadly, TMA'ers still are ignorant and delusional.

actually, i think that these posts show how ignorant mma'ers can be. hey, you like doing bjj/mma. great, have fun. don't denigrate what i do because you're drinking the kool-aid.

as i mentioned, i've trained in hapkido, judo and now aikido. i do not think that static training is the way to go, which is why i mentioned other tma's that already have the concept of "live", which include aikido. no, i don't think that i'm a badass. but i also don't think that bjj or mma is the end all be all.

[Giovanni]

1992 called. They want their arguments back.

what a brilliant retort. do you have more?

it interesting that you mentioned 1992, because 1993 was the first year of the ufc. brilliant marketing move: create a competition with rules that favor ground fighting, stack the deck with a bunch of guys that have no idea how to ground fight, wait for your guy to win, declare your martial art the ultimate, open schools across the country. absolutely brilliant.

and finally...my favorite ufc player is chuck liddell. what i love the most about chuck is that when guys try to take him to the ground, he holds his ground and keeps the fight standing up, so that he can f*****' pummel them! you people realize chuck is a karate guy, right? karate...as in a tma.

[Killa_Gorillas]

what a brilliant retort. do you have more?

it interesting that you mentioned 1992, because 1993 was the first year of the ufc. brilliant marketing move: create a competition with rules that favor ground fighting, stack the deck with a bunch of guys that have no idea how to ground fight, wait for your guy to win, declare your martial art the ultimate, open schools across the country. absolutely brilliant.

and finally...my favorite ufc player is chuck liddell. what i love the most about chuck is that when guys try to take him to the ground, he holds his ground and keeps the fight standing up, so that he can f*****' pummel them! you people realize chuck is a karate guy, right? karate...as in a tma.

He is also a division one wrestler and BJJ purple belt... who trains for M.M.A.

[spidersfrommars]

could you post a vid of some of this alive training you are doing in your aikido/hapkido just to make sure that we're talking about the same thing?

[Giovanni]

could you post a vid of some of this alive training you are doing in your aikido/hapkido just to make sure that we're talking about the same thing?

don't need to post a video. it's not bjj or mma or judo sparring or competition. you already know that. the way my buddies and i train alive is to: take a knife, try your best to stab me; or, here's a stick, try to pummel me; or, i'm just standing here, try to kick my ass.

spider...you're interested in bjj or mma, right? well them i'm sure you've done some research on where all this came from correct? in my mind it's jigoro kano and judo that is the real progenitor of what we call mma, or more precisely "sport martial arts". and if you read jigoro kano's own writings, you'll realize that he took away many, many techniques out of his own jujutsu because they were unsafe in a sparring or competition situation. many of those techniques made it then into judo kata. so are you going to try to argue that judo kata sucks too? or that kata has no application? jigoro kano himself said that judo consists of randori, competition AND kata.

neither aikido or hapkido is sport...this is the whole point. self defense "not equal to" sport. there are things that you cannot do in sport that you can on the street.

[Herbo]

there are things that you cannot do in sport that you can on the street.

..but without testing them in a sporting or at least sparring setting, how can you ever hope to pull off your deadly moves if you've never been able to practise them on a resisting opponent.

Bottom line is you're not actually gouging the eyes out of your "buddies" otherwise they'd no longer be your buddies.

[Killa_Gorillas]

don't need to post a video. it's not bjj or mma or judo sparring or competition. you already know that. the way my buddies and i train alive is to: take a knife, try your best to stab me; or, here's a stick, try to pummel me; or, i'm just standing here, try to kick my ass.

spider...you're interested in bjj or mma, right? well them i'm sure you've done some research on where all this came from correct? in my mind it's jigoro kano and judo that is the real progenitor of what we call mma, or more precisely "sport martial arts". and if you read jigoro kano's own writings, you'll realize that he took away many, many techniques out of his own jujutsu because they were unsafe in a sparring or competition situation. many of those techniques made it then into judo kata. so are you going to try to argue that judo kata sucks too? or that kata has no application? jigoro kano himself said that judo consists of randori, competition AND kata.

neither aikido or hapkido is sport...this is the whole point. self defense "not equal to" sport. there are things that you cannot do in sport that you can on the street.

does your knife defence look more like this....

YouTube- Hapkido Knife Defense Demo

or this...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=439707796897158934#docid=439090498 8613454229

?

[Giovanni]

hello...

haven't watched the video, don't care to either. because you pulled out a video of some stooge doing hapkido, doesn't mean that hapkido isn't effective. i think we can all agree that no matter the art, some teachers are better than others.

best defense against a knife...run. second best defense, another knife. never..i repeat..never use an arm to block a knife attack. even if you're successful in blocking, all the attacker has to do to cut you is walk away. if you have to engage empty-handed, try your best to limit the damage so you can move in and finish them. probably don't have much time to do that though, especially if you've been cut.

since we're talking knife defense, you realize that aikido is based on samurai combat arts. you know the samurai? dudes with 3-foot blades in front of them. why wouldn't you want to learn aikido then? why aren't you cross-training in aikido since it makes sense to learn everything?

and since we're playing tit-for-tat...why the hell would anyone go to the ground in a self-defense situation anyway? i mean seriously. concrete is hard. there might be broken glass on the concrete too.

this is a fun conversation. lol. let's keep it going.

[Fusen]

i also love watching ufc. but the first thing i always notice is how the competitors have to follow certain rules still, like not being able to hit in the back of the head, or the throat, or gouge the eyes or groin, or stomp on feet. or bite...


no2. All training has rulesets, when was the last time you punched your fellow aikidoka square in the face? in addition none of the above are fight enders, all were allowed in the early UFC's and the foot stomping still is allowed.

[Fusen]

the throat, or gouge the eyes or groin, or stomp on feet. or bite...

...or the best defense...run like mad!!!...run like **** over the octagon fence!!!



Well MMA does teach disenguagment and defensive footwork, and i would be suprised if your in better cardiovascular shape then many of the amauter fighters nevermind the pro's

[Fusen]

and for those of us who have actually had to use martial arts to defend ourselves...when i hear people say "well why wouldn't you want to train in ground fighting", i always cringe. the absolute worst thing you can do in a street fight is go to the ground. absolute worst thing imaginable!


Thats exactly why it must be trained, for example ''the absolute worst thing you can do in a street fight is to get punched in the face'' thats why its important to put on gloves and learn what its really like to get punched in the face, so you can learn to overcome this. This is pretty obvious to most people, but for some reason the 'here come grab my wrist out of context' lot dont seem to get it.

[Fusen]

i love the meme that bjj/mma practitioners always employ...i used to train tma, but because of some eye opening experience, i now train mma/bjj. there's always the not-so-subtle warning that tma sucks and that if you don't train in mma/bjj, you suck too. or at the very least, the tma is not tested in some supposed "real world".

sport is not self defense. get over it.

sorry for the winded message, but these "alive" dudes piss me off. i'm not sure what kind of tma these people were studying, but it must have been the crappy kind.

People life own expereinces arnt a meme, a meme is something that gets passed on to another person, my own life expereince cant be a meme, untill a third person accepts it.


Sport isnt self defense, but it is 95% of the unarmed (or armed if thats how you roll) of the infight aspect, since the majority of what you incorrectly call TMA dont cover the pre and post issues then your point is redundent for the reasons your making it.

methinks your ego is the reason your getting emotional with your posts, if you cant maintain zanshin on a keyboard how are you going to manage in reallife tm?

[Giovanni]

i'm just going to make one more comment..

i hope i've been consistent in saying that i have nothing against bjj or mma. do i think it's a good idea to train hard, in a balanced manner, and not go through the paces? of course i do. and while i don't consider myself the ultimate badass (far, far from it), i have trained in hapkido, judo and now aikido. so i think i've had some breadth of experience. i'm actually thinking of going back to judo and doing that 2-3/month. it's really fun!

all i'm trying to say is this...sport martial arts are great...timing, application of techniques. but i think it's also important to understand sport is not reality. and in reality, there are many, many factors that go into the outcome of a situation. i think that other martial arts, non sport, are better at teaching defense to those other factors. as one of the previous posters mentioned, you cannot gouge your buddy's eye out in training. you just can't train for that. jigoro kano, morihei ueshiba and choi young sool understood that!

[Fusen]

create a competition with rules that favor ground fighting, stack the deck with a bunch of guys that have no idea how to ground fight, wait for your guy to win, declare your martial art the ultimate, open schools across the country. absolutely brilliant.



Semi true, apart from the rules that favour ground fighting? which rules were they, the ones the let you bite, gougeand headbut, or the ones that let you stamp on a groundend fighter?

[Giovanni]

Semi true, apart from the rules that favour ground fighting? which rules were they, the ones the let you bite, gougeand headbut, or the ones that let you stamp on a groundend fighter?

this confuses me? you're saying that ufc rules don't favor ground fighting? huh? and that ufc allows biting, headbutts, gouging? please explain.

[Fusen]

since we're talking knife defense, you realize that aikido is based on samurai combat arts. you know the samurai? dudes with 3-foot blades in front of them. why wouldn't you want to learn aikido then? why aren't you cross-training in aikido since it makes sense to learn everything?

.

No its not aikido is semi based on daito ryu which is the reformulated school of the Oshikiuchi (lit., “court self-defense art”) of the Aizu Clan, it was based on the ability to seize and control people in a formal setting, daito ryu first became popular once swords were banned in public and people realised that unarmed methods were more practical for use in that context.

Unfortunatly many (but not all Yoshinkan and Shodokan are still ok) schools of aikido have become weakened due to the reversal of the classical method of transmiting 'combat' principles via two man kata with the teacher recieving and correcting the waza of the student.

If you want to argue for historical arts, you should really know the history.

Interestingly theres a big connection between sumo (or sumai) and the origins of daito ryu.


On my part there are many very good martial artists from all styles, however often they are not able to teach this ability reliabily, and in all liklihood have no direct experience in correct hard Tanren training for the body and mind.
For me combat sports do this, and they also lead me to a healthy, life afirming competative view on life, away from fantasies of 'dudes with 3-foot blades in front of them'.


ps Aikido is mostly based on control of the clinch portion of the fight, you should definatly do something that will test out your ability in that range.

[Killa_Gorillas]

hello...haven't watched the video, don't care to either. because you pulled out a video of some stooge doing hapkido, doesn't mean that hapkido isn't effective. i think we can all agree that no matter the art, some teachers are better than others.

I was asking which out of the two videos your knive training was closer to. Maybe you should just watch them?

best defense against a knife...run. second best defense, another knife. never..i repeat..never use an arm to block a knife attack. even if you're successful in blocking, all the attacker has to do to cut you is walk away. if you have to engage empty-handed, try your best to limit the damage so you can move in and finish them. probably don't have much time to do that though, especially if you've been cut.

Yes running is best if you can... again, maybe you could watch the vids I posted for you.


why wouldn't you want to learn aikido then? why aren't you cross-training in aikido since it makes sense to learn everything?

I have already stated that I recognise the limitations of my own training. I have studied zero legitimate knife defence (at least nothing I would call legitimate). This lack of knife exposure/training is not the problem... the problem would be not recognising the gap in my skillset.


since we're playing tit-for-tat...why the hell would anyone go to the ground in a self-defense situation anyway? i mean seriously. concrete is hard. there might be broken glass on the concrete too.

Whether or not you go to the ground in a fight is not always a factor that is within your control (this has been previously posted, but should be self evident).

[Killa_Gorillas]

this confuses me? you're saying that ufc rules don't favor ground fighting? huh? and that ufc allows biting, headbutts, gouging? please explain.

The ufc allowed headbutting, groin shots, stamping (not sure about gouging) during its initial inception. Other organisations such as 'pride fc' allowed stomping and soccer kicking the head (when pride was still going).

Vala Tudo is a sport with few rules.

modern fighters need to be versed in a multitude of disciplines (just look at Chuck)... the rules do not favour groundfighting in their current incarnation (if they ever did at all).

[Giovanni]

No its not aikido is semi based on daito ryu which is the reformulated school of the Oshikiuchi (lit., “court self-defense art”) of the Aizu Clan, it was based on the ability to seize and control people in a formal setting, daito ryu first became popular once swords were banned in public and people realised that unarmed methods were more practical for use in that context.

If you want to argue for historical arts, you should really know the history.

you're saying that that aizu were not samurai? huh?

[Fusen]

you're saying that that aizu were not samurai? huh?

No I'm saying the Oshikiuchi was not a battlefield art, that Daito Ryu was not a battlefield art and that aikido is certainly not a battlefield art.

[Giovanni]

methinks your ego is the reason your getting emotional with your posts, if you cant maintain zanshin on a keyboard how are you going to manage in reallife tm?

ego? because i disagree with you and the other bjj-ers? sorry if you got that from my posts. i've tried to maintain that i don't consider myself a badass. actually, i run...a lot! like 20 miles a week. i've been lucky in that i've only been in a couple confrontations that i couldn't run away from. usually, the only thing that most people see is my backside as i'm scurrying away!

[Fusen]

this confuses me? you're saying that ufc rules don't favor ground fighting? huh? and that ufc allows biting, headbutts, gouging? please explain.

The first UFCs rulesets allowed biting, headbutts, gouging, & Stamping, then later on they banned them to get accepted as a sport, around the world some MMA events still allow some of these, the fights generally look the same (apart from stamping which changes the dynamic and tactics)


Quite importantly id like to add this to the street discussion



''Martial Misconceptions: Civilian Use of Force

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addressing an issue that I see raise its head from time to time, including recently on several forums. It is also a topic of primary interest for the martial artists in the self protection classes I teach: in fact, I think that LE does much better understanding the articulation of use of force, and is not well versed in the technical abilities to do so, and "civilian" martial artists tend to have more technical ability with little idea of how and when and to what extent they can act.

The misconception:

"Civilian use of force does not have to follow the same standard that law enforcement does. Civilian use of force can always immediately go to more dangerous techniques and tactics because the idea is not “arrest and control” but rather “self defense.” Therefore, “unlike police,” civilians can immediately use more violent means to defend themselves and are not bound by the same restrictions police are."

The Fact of the Matter:

For the martial artist who has at least some inkling of using his or her art in self defense, I must warn you that this is NOT TRUE. While you as a civilian are not required to restrain criminals who are attempting to escape, you also cannot use any level of force you desire against a perceived assault. You – just like a police officer – can only use force which is reasonable for the threat you can articulate.

Except in some misguided department policies (not by any means a national standard), police officers are also not required to use the minimal amount of force, or “not to harm” a suspect. The officer can use that force which he can reasonably articulate is necessary in the circumstances he faces. That may be high, that may be low. It is totally situationally based, to include what the individual officer and the individual assailant brings to the encounter.

“Civilians” are bound by the same standard. You simply must measure your self defense response in light of what you can reasonably articulate. In some states, you as a citizen may also have a duty to retreat (if you are not in your own home). Regardless, if an aggressive transient pushes you, you cannot gouge his eye out or attack his throat with a shuto if you cannot also give valid reasons for why you needed to do so. You cannot simply say “he *might* have pulled a knife” or “he *might* have had buddies attempt to surprise attack me” unless you can articulate the other various factors that would lead another person (as in the Jury) to the same conclusion. You simply do not get a “free ride” because you are accosted in the street or anywhere else.

Unless you have some rather questionable personal habits or hang with the wrong crowd, the majority of self defense situations will be nowhere near that violent. They will be relatively minor “aggressive transient” situations, bad attitude squabbles, or will be altercations/issues that are either domestic or otherwise involving people you know. Certainly any of these situations *could* develop to a point, or erupt at a point, that a high level of violent response is necessary, but that has to be supported by what you can reasonably conclude is about to happen, not by throwing everything and the kitchen sink into your justification for force because it could happen. You have some leeway there, just as does police use of force against violent threat (NOT arrest and control), but you do not have carte blanche to do whatever you want, especially if you are in fact over-reacting to the actual level of threat. Once again, you will not be held to the standard that an experienced officer will, but you could very well be held liable – even criminally - if you are perceived as over- reacting to a situation that was not in fact what you made it out to be.

More than one person has gone to prison because they severely injured someone in a garden variety push-and-shove that turned deadly based on their actions.

Kit Leblanc

http://prevailtraining.wordpres.com/ ''

[Killa_Gorillas]

ego? because i disagree with you and the other bjj-ers? sorry if you got that from my posts. i've tried to maintain that i don't consider myself a badass. actually, i run...a lot! like 20 miles a week. i've been lucky in that i've only been in a couple confrontations that i couldn't run away from. usually, the only thing that most people see is my backside as i'm scurrying away!


I'm pretty sure that they were just messing with you.

you watched those vids yet?

[Fusen]

the rules do not favour groundfighting in their current incarnation (if they ever did at all).

Agreed, just look at the mixed results Demian Maia has had, and hes a freakin GOD on the mats!

[Killa_Gorillas]

Agreed, just look at the mixed results Demian Maia has had, and hes a freakin GOD on the mats!

Agreed. Dustin Hazelett not bad either.. he got beheaded in his last fight.

[Omicron]

what a brilliant retort. do you have more?

*Yawn*. I have lots more. But quite honestly, I'm tired of this kind of quasi-trolling. I don't know if I should take you seriously and feel sorry for your misconceptions, or pat you on the back and congratulate you for getting us all going with this little joke of yours.

it interesting that you mentioned 1992, because 1993 was the first year of the ufc.

Yeah, I'm smart like that. Glad you got the connection there.

brilliant marketing move: create a competition with rules that favor ground fighting, stack the deck with a bunch of guys that have no idea how to ground fight, wait for your guy to win, declare your martial art the ultimate, open schools across the country. absolutely brilliant.

So....karate schools that only spar with other karateka are better? Training insularly in aikido/hapkido/judo is better? Knock the ruleset all you want, but the UFC is a heck of a lot more like a real fight than anything you'll find in almost ANY martial arts class out there. And, just out of curiosity, how would you have designed the rules to make them more "fair" and "realistic", since you seem to have such a good idea of what those terms mean?

and finally...my favorite ufc player is chuck liddell. what i love the most about chuck is that when guys try to take him to the ground, he holds his ground and keeps the fight standing up, so that he can f*****' pummel them! you people realize chuck is a karate guy, right? karate...as in a tma.

But you just said the UFC rules favour ground fighting....and now a stand-up fighter is one of the greatest? The fact that fighters like Chuck can do so well specifically disproves your argument about a bias toward groundfighting.

[Giovanni]

*Yawn*. I have lots more. But quite honestly, I'm tired of this kind of quasi-trolling. I don't know if I should take you seriously and feel sorry for your misconceptions, or pat you on the back and congratulate you for getting us all going with this little joke of yours.

actually, it's this kind of denigrating of others that typically makes me so upset about the bjj holier-than-thou attitude. you feel sorry for my misconceptions? oh please, spare me your charity. i have actually cross-trained in different martial arts. have you? finally, who's the troll here? the guy who's actually done hapkido and contributed to this forum in a productive manner? or the guy who goes around telling hapkido people that his/her martial art is better?

So....karate schools that only spar with other karateka are better? Training insularly in aikido/hapkido/judo is better? Knock the ruleset all you want, but the UFC is a heck of a lot more like a real fight than anything you'll find in almost ANY martial arts class out there. And, just out of curiosity, how would you have designed the rules to make them more "fair" and "realistic", since you seem to have such a good idea of what those terms mean?

ufc has very little to do with a real fight. the moment you say that is the moment i can't take you seriously at all. i've maintained all along that while sport can be useful, it cannot replicate a real fight. period, end of story. look at some of the prison riot videos that bruce posted earlier. have you ever seen a real fight? i have seen many. they look nothing like the ufc, or wec, or strike force.

But you just said the UFC rules favour ground fighting....and now a stand-up fighter is one of the greatest? The fact that fighters like Chuck can do so well specifically disproves your argument about a bias toward groundfighting.

the point i was trying to make in separate posts is that yes, the rules do favor ground fighting, but liddell is able to overcome that because he keeps the fight in stand-up mode. sorry if that's not clear.

[Omicron]

actually, it's this kind of denigrating of others that typically makes me so upset about the bjj holier-than-thou attitude. you feel sorry for my misconceptions? oh please, spare me your charity. i have actually cross-trained in different martial arts. have you? finally, who's the troll here? the guy who's actually done hapkido and contributed to this forum in a productive manner? or the guy who goes around telling hapkido people that his/her martial art is better?

You only need to look at my profile to see what arts I've trained in. Also, please refer me to the part where I said my martial art is better than anyone else's. In fact, where did I say what "my" martial art is, anyway? As far as I can tell, you're the one who came into this thread with an ax to grind months after the debate had settled. You came in with guns blazing claiming BJJ's inferiority to your training style, and I simply disagreed with you. Never have I said that one art is better than another; all I've talked about is training methodology. And, just for the record, I've been around "contributing" to this forum a lot longer than you have, so please don't accuse me of trolling.

ufc has very little to do with a real fight. the moment you say that is the moment i can't take you seriously at all. i've maintained all along that while sport can be useful, it cannot replicate a real fight. period, end of story. look at some of the prison riot videos that bruce posted earlier. have you ever seen a real fight? i have seen many. they look nothing like the ufc, or wec, or strike force.

You're entitled to your opinion. Let me ask you the standard question, though: if we took two students of equal training experience, one an average TMA student, the other an average MMA student, and pitted them together in a fight with absolutely no rules, who would win? Do you really think the "average" level of TMA training is equal to that of "average" MMA training? Because I seriously doubt it. Again, not saying one art is necessarily better than another, but it is true to say that certain training methods are more effective than others.

the point i was trying to make in separate posts is that yes, the rules do favor ground fighting, but liddell is able to overcome that because he keeps the fight in stand-up mode. sorry if that's not clear.

Again, please elaborate on how the rules favour ground fighting. You still haven't answered my question on how they could be made more "fair", either.

[roninmaster]

wow i was gonna jump in a go to war on one of my favorite topics to argue, but it looks like omicron and fusen beat me too it. well let me state my few little sub facts. im fresh out of highschool. an inner city school for that matter. so believe me when i say i have seen more fights and most recently then more people here. most of which i was doing kungfu at the time. i can honestly say that i KNEW that there was something not right with what i was doing compared to the fights i was seeing. most fights end or to some degree look like this ( though out of self ignorrance giovanni most likely wont "lower" is samurai-esk code of standard to view it)

YouTube- Broadcast Yourself. ( my apologies for the course language)

early UFC allowed everything. any martial artist or brawler was allowed to join, thats why its so authentic and held to the degree it is. dont make up escuses for why you cant do something. that and video of what i just listed show how real fights look. and BJJ/MMA( though BJJ itself is more structerd then its sport Counter part) have proven to work. you want to argue that your aikido, wado ryu, yellow bamboo, hadoken etc work? then lets see the evidence.

i thought that the post i made from pat millitech's website proved the point but i guess your above reading that too. in short, he is a pro fight trainer, AND one of the worlds most sought after millitary, and police self-defense instructors. He has years and years of martial arts expiereince to boot. and what type of techniques does he teach to soldiers and law enforcement? the same stuff that fighters use. why? simple. it works. it has proven itself unlike the theoretically effective techniques so many TMA guys support.

you also mention that MMA and BJJ arts arent combat arts. because there used for a sport environment. This is one of those times where i wish foamy the squirrel could jump out and say all the things map wont allow me to.

(sigh) once again. these guys; though they dont kill eachother. fight very tough opponents, have to train in all ranges of combat, and most of all. have actual combat expiereinece against some one who was trying to hurt them. you say there not for the battle field. then why does the millitary use the gracie combatives program as base for all there training? you can quate me on thisany martial art that offers competition against a opponent trying to harm you, is superior to the ones that dont. end of story. how can you claim your martial art is suppose to be for a situation that is EVEN MORE dangerous and hardcore than a MMA match. yet to train for it you dont do anything that even resembles anything as realistic or diffcult as MMA, which you claim is of the lower level?

here ill put it to you like this? if you disturbed a bear and its cub, and it begins charging at you and seeing as bears travel much faster than humans, so you cant run. and you have a gun that can kill it. which would make more since to have. a model civil war gun, that may or may not still fire. plus shoots one to two bullets. Or a AK47 which shoots tons of bullets, still used in war to this day, and is proven and known to be highly effective?

i would take a quick effective body lock takedown over, over some small joint finger lock takedown attempt any day of the week.

[Omicron]

you can quate me on thisany martial art that offers competition against a opponent trying to harm you, is superior to the ones that dont.

I think I will quote you on that. If more people understood how to train in this way, we wouldn't end up debating it in thread after thread.

[roninmaster]

actually, it's this kind of denigrating of others that typically makes me so upset about the bjj holier-than-thou attitude. you feel sorry for my misconceptions? oh please, spare me your charity. i have actually cross-trained in different martial arts. have you? finally, who's the troll here? the guy who's actually done hapkido and contributed to this forum in a productive manner? or the guy who goes around telling hapkido people that his/her martial art is better?



ufc has very little to do with a real fight. the moment you say that is the moment i can't take you seriously at all. i've maintained all along that while sport can be useful, it cannot replicate a real fight. period, end of story. look at some of the prison riot videos that bruce posted earlier. have you ever seen a real fight? i have seen many. they look nothing like the ufc, or wec, or strike force.



the point i was trying to make in separate posts is that yes, the rules do favor ground fighting, but liddell is able to overcome that because he keeps the fight in stand-up mode. sorry if that's not clear.

oh my apologies i seem to have posted this article on yet another TMA vs MMA debate. my mistake.

the following is a open letter written by UFC fighter trainer, and police and millitary defense instructor pat millitech.
It has been brought to my attention that some private police and military training companies state that the skills needed to compete in a cage fight, better known as MMA, have no place in the police or military world. They make several uneducated statements and claims I feel compelled to discuss, which leads me to writing this article. The fact I have gained immense knowledge from others in both the fighting world and the LE/Military world over many years has led me to find this an easy subject to debate.

I become frustrated when reading certain articles that disrespect the fact that officers are learning these skills to help them survive the attack they hope will never happen. We must address the motives behind articles of this type. I have always been a believer that every system has something to offer, however small that something might be. This is the true essence of Mixed Martial Arts fighting. When an individual writes an article of this nature, I feel a sense of fear and lack of being open minded on their part. Perhaps more likely is they feel a little threatened as far as loss of business.


They also do not understand the years of experience and development that goes into bringing these two worlds (LE/Military and MMA) together to save lives. After all, are we not in this to gain knowledge that will save lives? The people who have truly done their homework in the two fields have come to an understanding of the mixed martial arts material that is appropriate and applicable in the LE/Military worlds.



As in the martial arts world, many traditional martial artists make ludicrous claims stating that they do not compete in MMA because they would kill someone with their one strike, one kill techniques. The other one I hear is that we are not martial artists. I find that hard to believe when I have black belts in Karate, two forms of Jiu-Jitsu, held a title in Muay-thai kickboxing, wrestled for 20 years, was unbeaten in pro boxing and held the world title in the UFC for 3 1/2 years. I have also been either lucky enough or good enough to train more pay-per-view and world champion fighters than anyone else in the game.



The previous statements about myself are not an attempt to toot my own horn, but rather to make a point. I do understand how to handle a human body. I also understand police use of force rules, lack of budgets and time for training officers, coupled with the unfortunate lack of enthusiasm by some officers to train enough to save their own skin in a tight spot.



My experience in training police and military has had a few mentors to which I paid very close attention. Although I have had many advise me, I have spent time learning from three individuals. Mark Hanssen is the first I will mention, as Mark and I have been steadfast friends for many years. Mark started me in the training world when he would bring me in to help train officers in our home state of Iowa. Mark is a police officer in Davenport, Iowa and also a very accomplished martial artist who was ranked in the top ten heavy weights in the world of MMA. He would correct me if I mistepped in teaching incorrectly in relation to use of force rules police had to follow.



The next two are Don Roberts and Tony Grano. Tony and Don are two of the most experienced I have seen in the industry and I greatly respect the knowledge they have passed on to me in the LE/Military training world.





Pat Miletich (center) at USMC Martial
Arts Center for Excellence in Quantico, VA


They explained that they wanted to tap into some of my knowledge in the fighting world to help officers learn how to move correctly when under stress in encounters with street savvy subjects as well as passive resisters.



The following are some of the misconceptions I see taking place in the police and military training world towards mixed martial arts being taught in the police and military world.

They assume the following things when attacking our way of thinking and teaching:



1) All involved in the MMA game are teaching police and military to perform submission holds.

ANSWER: This could not be further from the truth. After years of experience I have learned officers must be taught the fundamental basics of movement and control to survive an encounter with a passive resister and beyond. To teach officers submission holds does not apply to their line of work and is offending my intelligence to say I would even teach this as a goal to officers.

Could an officer use a submission hold? Of course, but it's not the goal!


2) MMA techniques are not useful in the police world because of use of force rules now implemented in law enforcement.


ANSWER: Quite the opposite is true. The fundamentals of controlling a subject taught in MMA are without a doubt the best we have available to us in the history of combat at whatever level. The sport of MMA fighting is simply a proving ground for these techniques. By using this arena we quickly find out what works and what does not work. These techniques can be used to gain compliance of a passive resister without injury, or can be escalated as needed if the subject escalates in level of force.


3) The skills needed in a cage fight cannot be used to defend oneself against multiple attackers.


ANSWER: Wrong!! The fundamentals of cage fighting can easily be used to survive multiple attackers. Don’t assume that I would take a fight on the street to the ground against even one opponent. And yes, I have been attacked by multiple attackers and things worked out quite nicely.


4) It would be easy to stick the barrel of my gun down the throat of a skilled fighter if he were to attack you.


ANSWER: Who are you kidding? You think that people announce when they are going to attack a police officer. When officers are attacked they are always surprised and very seldom ready to react. Don’t mislead officers by saying you would almost always win the fight because you are in possession of a firearm.


Imagine a street wise fighter attacking you when you’re not ready. He throws you on your head and begins to pound you in the face. You’re saying you would, while being punched in the face, remove your hand from protecting your head, reach down and pull out your gun and shove it down the attackers throat. Not likely. You'll be suprised how self preservation insticts take over in a real fight. Protecting your head from being caved in usually comes first.


If you have been trained how to first stop the takedown, then defend yourself on the ground if needed and escape back to your feet, you would then be able to pull your weapon and take care of business. I don't know about you, but I would rather understand how to survive the fight first and depend on the weapon as a last case scenario. Putting your faith in a weapon you might never have the chance to pull is odds I would never bet on. Officers have said to me that they would die for their families. I simply tell them to train hard so they can live for their families.



Officers who are trained in MMA fighting techniques are much more confident and less likely to panic under a stressful situation. Using common sense on how to stay relaxed in a verbal confrontation and the skills of controlling subjects used in MMA fighting helps save lives. This is our main goal, right?

[Bruce W Sims]

I think I will quote you on that. If more people understood how to train in this way, we wouldn't end up debating it in thread after thread.

Yes.....But these discussions ALWAYS COME TO THIS POINT. Every damn one of these discussions ALWAYS come to THIS POINT.

The Point is that NOONE can use debilitating or lethal force. which would be the only way to prove the point under discussion. As a result all we have are a bunch of advocates for their particular practice suggesting that their particular practice comes just a lil bit closer to that line across which lies lethal force than anyone else. The rules are always skewed in favor of the guy who makes the rules--pure and simple.

What I object to are the thinly-veiled suggestions that one person's practice is just a teensy-weensy bit more "real" (read also: "closer to the use of debilitating or lethal force") than the other guy. Nobody here is going to participate in an event where their know there is a significant risk of death or permanent impairment so the rest of this is just chest-thumping and marketing.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

oh my apologies i seem to have posted this article on yet another TMA vs MMA debate. my mistake.

(clip)



Sorry....but I really object to this. This is blatant advertising and I have seen this "letter" posted before. As far as I am concerned this confirms to me that these "discussions" are not discussions at all but marketing ploys used to circumvent paying for marketing and advertising.

Earlier I wanted to have the discussion move in a more technical vein and that effort was not reinforced. What we have now, is the typical bickering culminating in bombast. I have no problem if this is the best use you can make of this forum but I think its really a shame.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Blast]

I hate to jump into a troll wars, but I'm going to do it anyways. It'll be a new experience for me and when people refer to troll wars I have actually participated in one and know how it actually feels :).

First of all, I'm going to defend TMA a bit, since I have the impression you guys are bashing it.

The rules do favor grappling (let's just say BJJ) above striking (and some TMA techniques). You can't deny it. Groin attacks, biting,... A striker can't use his strongest weapons. Also, don't they wear some kind of gloves?

Also grapplers train against strikes and grappling, strikers only against strikes. This has changed now in MMA, not in TMA's that do striking only.
This means grapplers often have an advantage, especially BJJ, since even less styles consider(ed) ground fighting.

Small joint manipulation isn't allowed either, which leads to the:

i would take a quick effective body lock takedown over, over some small joint finger lock takedown attempt any day of the week.

Actually the small joint fingerlock takedown like you call it is not really a takedown if you don't want to. If performed very fast you dislocate or do whatever serious injury to the wrist if the receiver does not know what to do. We do a "takedown" because otherwise we could only train with the same person twice :evil:.

I also read in 1 of the above posts that aikido is mainly about clinch control. This is not true. There are techniques that can be used in a clinch though.

You guys don't know a lot about (real) aikido, no ki-fireball-aikido.

To comment on another problem: aikido derived from battlefield-tested techniques, aikido itself is not battlefield tested.

All in all, an MMA fight is the ultimate "test" for unarmed 1 on 1 fighting, no denying that and it's awesome.

But on the streets you might face multiple opponents and weapons like knives. This means BJJ is useless here.

The answer to all problems are:
- cross-training
- more training, less trolling

Now don't kill me lol. I think most things written here are facts and only little opinion.

Edit: wow, at least 2 posts were posted while I was writing this.

[Fusen]

Daito ryu isnt geared around the battlefield, so how do you come to the battlefield conclusion? Much of aikido is geared around standing contact geared around pushing and pulling hence the clinch, plus a little striking.

[Dudelove]

The rules do favor grappling (let's just say BJJ) above striking (and some TMA techniques). You can't deny it. Groin attacks, biting,... A striker can't use his strongest weapons. Also, don't they wear some kind of gloves?
.

You guys should check out the old Vale Tudo and the early UFC's pretty much all the thing you guys are talking about; groin striking, biting, ripping open cuts etc was allowed. The fights still looked very similar to PRIDE FC fights, it seemed to come down to whoever had the better positioning could use their tools.

In fact PRIDE FC didn't allow biting, eye gouging, etc but they did allow knees to a grounded opponent and, kicking or stomping a downed opponent (tell me that isn't favourable to strikers), yet the org wasn't dominated by strikers.

MMA is MMA no one skillset/range is dominant anymore.

[spidersfrommars]

The rules do favor grappling (let's just say BJJ) above striking (and some TMA techniques). You can't deny it. Groin attacks, biting,... A striker can't use his strongest weapons.

I don't think many strikers would say nut-bashing and biting are their strongest weapons I reckon that would be, you know, all that punchey/kickey stuff that they do.

[Herbo]

But on the streets you might face multiple opponents and weapons like knives. This means BJJ is useless here.


So you're attacked by multiple people and are knocked to the ground as is likely to happen. One or more may have a knife. Thus from this disadvantageous position you would require techniques which would allow you to disengage and get back to your feet.

Where would you find these techniques? .... grappling arts, perhaps?

[roninmaster]

look this is a video from the elitedefense system website. while i dont live there nor indorce there school. I understand they are a JKD school, and there method is specifically for self-defense. you will notice many similarities with what you might see in an octagon environment.YouTube- Adult Self-Defense Training at Elite Defense Systems

also. i do BJJ and i must say just because its used alot in MMA events. doesnt meen we dont train for other scenariors. we have multiple occations done seminars with the local police covering, gun, knife defense. as well subduing opponents stronger than you.

Simple= most effective. why train for decades to do the same thing that can take you half the time by taking out the middle man.

[roninmaster]

I hate to jump into a troll wars, but I'm going to do it anyways. It'll be a new experience for me and when people refer to troll wars I have actually participated in one and know how it actually feels :).

First of all, I'm going to defend TMA a bit, since I have the impression you guys are bashing it.

The rules do favor grappling (let's just say BJJ) above striking (and some TMA techniques). You can't deny it. Groin attacks, biting,... A striker can't use his strongest weapons. Also, don't they wear some kind of gloves?

Also grapplers train against strikes and grappling, strikers only against strikes. This has changed now in MMA, not in TMA's that do striking only.
This means grapplers often have an advantage, especially BJJ, since even less styles consider(ed) ground fighting.

Small joint manipulation isn't allowed either, which leads to the:


Actually the small joint fingerlock takedown like you call it is not really a takedown if you don't want to. If performed very fast you dislocate or do whatever serious injury to the wrist if the receiver does not know what to do. We do a "takedown" because otherwise we could only train with the same person twice :evil:.

I also read in 1 of the above posts that aikido is mainly about clinch control. This is not true. There are techniques that can be used in a clinch though.

You guys don't know a lot about (real) aikido, no ki-fireball-aikido.

To comment on another problem: aikido derived from battlefield-tested techniques, aikido itself is not battlefield tested.

All in all, an MMA fight is the ultimate "test" for unarmed 1 on 1 fighting, no denying that and it's awesome.

But on the streets you might face multiple opponents and weapons like knives. This means BJJ is useless here.

The answer to all problems are:
- cross-training
- more training, less trolling

Now don't kill me lol. I think most things written here are facts and only little opinion.

Edit: wow, at least 2 posts were posted while I was writing this.

thats another thing im sick off

every TMA guys who hates MMA always argues the Multiple oppenent crap. "that BJJ would suck against more than one person". the fact of the matter is so would TMA guysyour still at an extreme disadvantage fighting more than one person there for, no matter what style you do, you will still probably lose. or least get hit alot. but as stated before, its better to know how to regain your positon once knocked to the ground, then to not train for it at all.

[koyo]

Daito ryu isnt geared around the battlefield, so how do you come to the battlefield conclusion? Much of aikido is geared around standing contact geared around pushing and pulling hence the clinch, plus a little striking.

Like Blast says..you don't know much about real aikido.In a real fight 90% of aikido is atemi STRIKING.

If someone attempted to push or pull me I would simply thump him one.

Ronin master not every guy in TMA hates MMA since it is made up mainly of TMA techniques.Nor did blast even imply that he dislikes MMA.

For what it's worth if an experienced fighter no matter what style comes under an unexpected attack..the techniques used are basic and pragmatic to nearly every art I have seen and it is damn difficult to say what art was used. This is NOT based on training in the cage or the dojo but working for twenty odd years in deprived areas of Glasgow.

[Kurtka Jerker]

Pauli's spot on. The real monsters in any realm have always been the guys who can live in the worst situations. If going to the ground is the worst place to be, then those who become truly dangerous there will be like sharks. Noone else will be able to go into that realm and compete with them.
In fact, this is exactly what happened when striking met grappling at the beginning of the MMA boom.

If you want to talk about weapons, consider the fact that a great deal of MMA practicioners are or were involved in the military, or apply the same training methods to weapons training. (combat sambo or dog brothers, for example)

Also, people, stop crowing about "no rules". Brazilian Vale Tudo allows biting, groin strikes, eye gouges, hair pulling, strikes to the back of the head, all that. You know how the fights play out? More or less exactly like those in the cage. For examples, look up Rio Heroes.


Finally, if you want to talk about multiple opponents, what do you think is going to allow you to fight with them or escape? Has noone considered the skills developed in controlling the space within the cage?

The only glaring problem is awareness, and this isn't truly developed by MMA or TMA methods. It's developed by everyday life and personal mindset.

[Omicron]

Yes.....But these discussions ALWAYS COME TO THIS POINT. Every damn one of these discussions ALWAYS come to THIS POINT.

The Point is that NOONE can use debilitating or lethal force. which would be the only way to prove the point under discussion. As a result all we have are a bunch of advocates for their particular practice suggesting that their particular practice comes just a lil bit closer to that line across which lies lethal force than anyone else. The rules are always skewed in favor of the guy who makes the rules--pure and simple.

OK. Last time I ask this question:

What is closer to debilitating force? Getting into an MMA ring with an experienced fighter whose sole goal is to punch, kick, lock, and choke you into submission, or practicing compliant partner drills using techniques that are "too dangerous" to actually use in a realistic way?

Look, I'm the first to admit that some techniques are left out of MMA training due to the rule set of a sporting environment. But, that sporting environment allows the techniques that ARE included to be used in as realistic a fashion as possible. That kind of real-world experience and applicability is worth the trade-off.

What I object to are the thinly-veiled suggestions that one person's practice is just a teensy-weensy bit more "real" (read also: "closer to the use of debilitating or lethal force") than the other guy. Nobody here is going to participate in an event where their know there is a significant risk of death or permanent impairment so the rest of this is just chest-thumping and marketing.

I'm sorry, were my claims veiled? I didn't mean for them to be. I'm not afraid to quite blatantly state that some training methods are better than others. There is such a thing as the best way to do something. Until someone proves that "traditional" style training produces superior fighters, MMA is the place for me to be. I'm not interested in an environment that never offers me a chance to see that the skills I'm investing time and money into actually work.


Earlier I wanted to have the discussion move in a more technical vein and that effort was not reinforced. What we have now, is the typical bickering culminating in bombast. I have no problem if this is the best use you can make of this forum but I think its really a shame.

If you're not interested in the discussion, why not just ignore it, instead of periodically coming back and whining that it hasn't gone in the direction you want? I'm happy to engage you in a technical discussion, but any time someone disagrees with you, you clam up and say the thread isn't to your taste. Kinda makes it hard to have any meaningful discussion.

[Omicron]

Oh, and one other thing:

The rules are always skewed in favor of the guy who makes the rules--pure and simple.

Tell me then, under what kind of fighting ruleset would a fighter of your training methodology do better than an MMAist? Ask yourself, would those rules be more or less realistic?

[Blast]

thats another thing im sick off

every TMA guys who hates MMA always argues the Multiple oppenent crap. "that BJJ would suck against more than one person". the fact of the matter is so would TMA guysyour still at an extreme disadvantage fighting more than one person there for, no matter what style you do, you will still probably lose. or least get hit alot. but as stated before, its better to know how to regain your positon once knocked to the ground, then to not train for it at all.

Did you actually read my post? Didn't I post somewhere that MMA is awesome? I never showed any kind of disrespect towards MMA.

What I'm sick off is that every MMA guy bashes TMA because there are people that train serious in it. You seem to act like MMA is superior towards any other not MMA-oriented (or is it MMA-orientated?) martial art.

True, I'm at a disadvantage when faced multiple opponents, but at least I had some training for how to deal with it.

About the rules: I'm going to stop argueing about them since people tend to think the fights would be the same without the rules, which I don't understand.

Some people just don't want to understand that not everything can be done in the cage. outside the cage, fights happen unexpected, not something to prepare for. Those fights do not have the same mindset as you would have in a sport environment.

Just stop saying TMA is inferior, okay? Then we can all be friends and stop argueing online about why BJJ is brought up (the creator of this thread should've known this would end up in an all-out wars between MMA and everything else lol).

[koyo]

Hey Blast

Better to be thought inferior than to be feared. Then when all hell breaks loose..SURPRISE.they see no postures no warning only a 100% all out attack.

There are no strikes in aikido. There is no first attack???

AYE RIGHT!!

To anyone who thinks one single art is superior.

Who gives a damn which "art" is the best. The more difficult question is not CAN you fight but WILL you fight.

Get back to me when you have had to fight (often) when you did not wish to and can say from experience what worked for you.That goes for TMA MMA or whatever is out there.

rant over.

[Fusen]

Hey Blast

1) Better to be thought inferior than to be feared.

2) To anyone who thinks one single art is superior.

3) Who gives a damn which "art" is the best. The more difficult question is not CAN you fight but WILL you fight.
rant over.

1) People dont wear T shirts with their arts name on it in real life, so your not likily to be feared or thought inferior by anyone in day to day life, and personally I'd rather be the grey man in my day to day life.

2) We're talking about 'training programmes' and there are better and worse ways to train anything, what makes martial arts difficult is that there so subjective, one way to reduce this issue would be to make some sort of competition, maybe allowing whatever Mix of Martial Arts you would like to be used, although as always the context would be slightly removed from everyday violence.

3) The real question is can you teach someone who cant fight, how to, in a measurable and progressive safe way, if you cant then theres not much to sell your training programme to the people who really need it.


Completly calm, rational, non emotional, & full of zanshiny goodness, post over

[koyo]

Not into training programmes at all if it is self defence. Best to crosstrain to get an insight into as many arts as possible. Choose the one that works for you and still crosstrain.

As for wearing the T shirt I would rather let the guy think I was a take on (since you come from Glasgow you will know that saying)

There are too many "teachers" out there who have never been in a real fight in their lives.And a lot say they are teaching the baddass real thing.

[Omicron]

2) We're talking about 'training programmes' and there are better and worse ways to train anything, what makes martial arts difficult is that there so subjective, one way to reduce this issue would be to make some sort of competition, maybe allowing whatever Mix of Martial Arts you would like to be used, although as always the context would be slightly removed from everyday violence.

3) The real question is can you teach someone who cant fight, how to, in a measurable and progressive safe way, if you cant then theres not much to sell your training programme to the people who really need it.


I think these two points really bear repeating. At the centre of this debate should be a discussion of training methodologies, not that of individual arts. That's the big misunderstanding we're having here. Some of us are saying that generally speaking, the pedagogical methods used in the average MMA and BJJ school are better than those used in the average TMA school. Yes, there are MMA schools that are terrible and don't teach skills properly (especially now that the UFC has become popular) and there are TMA schools that spar regularly and pressure test in a fantastically real way. But we aren't talking about those. We're talking specifically about the advantages of one style of training over another.

16 pages ago, the OP asked why the topic of BJJ often comes up, and that's the answer that has been given; the rise of BJJ in the martial arts world has shed a lot of light on what it means to be an effective martial artist, regardless of the range you train in. BJJ was so successful early on not only because people were unprepared for ground fighting, but because they had not trained in an effective way. BJJ doesn't have a monopoly on effective training methods, either. Examples given so far in this thread (like Chuck Liddell) show other ways of being an effective fighter who does not necessarily specialize in BJJ or ground fighting. The reason Liddell is effective is not because he's trained in BJJ, but because he has used similar training methods; the issue here isn't what art you practice, but how you practice it.

[koyo]

My answer to that is CROSSTRAIN. Nothing opens your eyes and mind like getting out of your own environment.

My last dojo was in the Marine Commando Barracks where we shared the gym with Vadim a russian guy teaching MMA and sambo . We got on famously and my guys crosstrained with them and muhy thai and circuit training plus bagwork.

Incedently JMA constantly encouraged cross training usually in judo for the competition and ground work.

It is only today that so many people insist in putting their art in a box or on a pedestal missing out on the chance to learn from each other.

[Killa_Gorillas]

I think these two points really bear repeating. At the centre of this debate should be a discussion of training methodologies, not that of individual arts. That's the big misunderstanding we're having here. Some of us are saying that generally speaking, the pedagogical methods used in the average MMA and BJJ school are better than those used in the average TMA school. Yes, there are MMA schools that are terrible and don't teach skills properly (especially now that the UFC has become popular) and there are TMA schools that spar regularly and pressure test in a fantastically real way. But we aren't talking about those. We're talking specifically about the advantages of one style of training over another.

16 pages ago, the OP asked why the topic of BJJ often comes up, and that's the answer that has been given; the rise of BJJ in the martial arts world has shed a lot of light on what it means to be an effective martial artist, regardless of the range you train in. BJJ was so successful early on not only because people were unprepared for ground fighting, but because they had not trained in an effective way. BJJ doesn't have a monopoly on effective training methods, either. Examples given so far in this thread (like Chuck Liddell) show other ways of being an effective fighter who does not necessarily specialize in BJJ or ground fighting. The reason Liddell is effective is not because he's trained in BJJ, but because he has used similar training methods; the issue here isn't what art you practice, but how you practice it.

Agreed.

The reason Liddell is effective is not because he's trained in BJJ, but because he has used similar training methods; the issue here isn't what art you practice, but how you practice it.

It's worth mentioning again though, that although Chuck favours stiking he wouldn't be half as successfull at it in that arena if he wasn't also an accomplished grappler (division one wrestler/bjj purple belt). Just wanted to illustrate that he is not a pure striker, although he clearly favours that approach.

[Dudelove]

the issue here isn't what art you practice, but how you practice it.

Yep, the answer comes down to aliveness...

(aliveness is just a word given to the essential elements within functional martial arts training)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL05Es8LVAQ

[Killa_Gorillas]

My answer to that is CROSSTRAIN. Nothing opens your eyes and mind like getting out of your own environment.

My last dojo was in the Marine Commando Barracks where we shared the gym with Vadim a russian guy teaching MMA and sambo . We got on famously and my guys crosstrained with them and muhy thai and circuit training plus bagwork.

Incedently JMA constantly encouraged cross training usually in judo for the competition and ground work.

It is only today that so many people insist in putting their art in a box or on a pedestal missing out on the chance to learn from each other.

I don't think anyone would argue against the validity of crosstraining. It's not really about limiting yourself to one art/style its about choosing the best possible approach to training.

Judo is awesome. Not just for the competition and groundwork but for the methodology of its practice.

[Killa_Gorillas]

Yep, the answer comes down to aliveness...

(aliveness is just a word given to the essential elements within functional martial arts training)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL05Es8LVAQ

I always play this video when people express an interest in training martial arts... sadly posting anything by Matt Thornton on here is a sure fire way to get yourself labeled as a nut hugging mma zealot.

[spidersfrommars]

I always play this video when people express an interest in training martial arts... sadly posting anything by Matt Thornton on here is a sure fire way to get yourself labeled as a nut hugging mma zealot.

It's a label I wear proudly :P

[koyo]

I always play this video when people express an interest in training martial arts... sadly posting anything by Matt Thornton on here is a sure fire way to get yourself labeled as a nut hugging mma zealot.

By people who live in boxes and refuse/are afraid to crosstrain.

Or those who think that wisdom must come only from the East.

great video.

[Killa_Gorillas]

It's a label I wear proudly :P

Ha! I guess I must be in denial :)

[Omicron]

My answer to that is CROSSTRAIN. Nothing opens your eyes and mind like getting out of your own environment.

My last dojo was in the Marine Commando Barracks where we shared the gym with Vadim a russian guy teaching MMA and sambo . We got on famously and my guys crosstrained with them and muhy thai and circuit training plus bagwork.

Incedently JMA constantly encouraged cross training usually in judo for the competition and ground work.

It is only today that so many people insist in putting their art in a box or on a pedestal missing out on the chance to learn from each other.

I agree 100% that crosstraining is an invaluable part of martial arts practice. I just want to say again though, that how you practice is more important than what you practice. Crosstraining at a McDojo or other such school wouldn't help much at all, regardless of how different their style is from yours.

[koyo]

Too true guys from the makotokai have been "encouraged not to return" after a few high grades in aikido have had to face powerfull and accurate attacks.

All sorts of nonsense is out there about broken arms are common place in our dojo. truth being we train hard and against resistance. If the guys want competititon I have friends who are shihan in other arts and they are made most welcome.

Bottom line for me is I have seen guys from both sides (and the sides should not exist) who would not cause me to raise an eyebrow let alone a sweat and have friends who are lifelong practisioners.

The good news is that those at the top of their game could not care less about all the bickering.

Strong enough that they need not fear attack and mature enough that others need not fear them.

[Blast]

Seems like we all agree now :hat:. So the conclusion is cross-training, not in mcdojo's.

[Fusen]

Seems like we all agree now :hat:. So the conclusion is cross-training, not in mcdojo's.

I think the answer is always 'Aliveness' although Chris Tarrent may think otherwise. Once you experience timing, motion and pressure, no one can lie to you.

[Omicron]

I think the answer is always 'Aliveness'.

Agreed. I'd take aliveness in a limited range over compliant training in many different ranges any day of the week.

[Kraen]

The moral of the story is, who cares where fights end up? If you're interested in self defense, you should train in as many different situations and for as many different eventualities as possible. That way, you're more likely to be prepared for whatever actually happens, rather than for where fights "usually end up."

Seems like we all agree now . So the conclusion is cross-training, not in mcdojo's.

I think the answer is always 'Aliveness' although Chris Tarrent may think otherwise. Once you experience timing, motion and pressure, no one can lie to you.

Are we all good now? No one has anything else to add?

-Kraen

[Omicron]

The moral of the story is, who cares where fights end up? If you're interested in self defense, you should train in as many different situations and for as many different eventualities as possible. That way, you're more likely to be prepared for whatever actually happens, rather than for where fights "usually end up."

Seems like we all agree now . So the conclusion is cross-training, not in mcdojo's.

I think the answer is always 'Aliveness' although Chris Tarrent may think otherwise. Once you experience timing, motion and pressure, no one can lie to you.

Are we all good now? No one has anything else to add?

-Kraen

Yup!

/thread

[spidersfrommars]

HUZZA!

[Giovanni]

i like a few of the comments...

cross-train...check!

better to be thought inferior than feared...check!

ah yes, the dreaded mcdojo...don't train there...check!

don't denigrate others...check!