Martial Arts and Cooking

[Taff]

Interesting article.

Jean Ribiere describes himself as a master of the Culinary Arts. He's got thousands of dollars worth of cooking utensils, neatly organized in his kitchen. He has several aprons and chef's hats which he displays on his wall in cases when he's not wearing them. Jean also has a custom spice rack with over 120 different spices.

Every other day, he puts on his chef's hat and apron and goes into the kitchen. He takes out his knives and sharpens them. He makes sure the jars of spice are full and the cabinets are stocked with flour, sugar, and other essentials.

But Jean has never cooked a single dish; he's never even turned on his oven.

Granted, this scenario is pretty tough to believe and is even more unlikely to happen in the world of the Culinary Arts.

So why is it so common in the Martial Arts? If dressing up as a Chef and decking yourself out with all the accoutrements of Chefdom without actually cooking is asinine, why isn't dressing up as Martial Artists and practicing punching and kicking without ever trying it out on a resisting opponent? Unfortunately, thousands upon thousands of "Martial" Artists do just this.

The only explanation I can fathom is that many people are enamored with the idea of being a Martial Artist but aren't so keen on the part where you get your ass kicked along the way. These people don't want to do much more than learn to imitate fighting techniques, dress up in uniforms, and maybe even splinter some lumber. All of these things, to the uninitiated layman, appear to demonstrate fighting prowess. The progressive cheapening of the rank of black belt in Martial Arts, well known to Martial Artists, is generally unknown by "regular" people. Combine this with Hollywood's constant portrayal of Martial Arts experts as nearly (or sometimes even actually) superhuman, and you've got a recipe for attracting pretenders, poseurs, and roleplaying types.

What's the solution to this problem?

Well in a perfect world, I'd like to see everyone who attains the equivalent rank of black belt in an art be required to demonstrate their proficiency by actually fighting someone. No, I'm not advocating people run out and pick fights on the street, we already have an acceptable method for testing Martial Arts skills: Mixed Martial Arts competition.

I realize this will never happen, but it's what needs to happen, to fend off all the idiots who claim fighting prowess without having any idea what their skill level really is because they've never tested themselves. MMA rules, while not the best system to test unarmed fighting skill, are the best we have. Arguments to the need for including "girl fighting" techniques such as biting/scratching/etc are negated simply because there are no styles that I'm aware of that advocate their use to such an extent that they are the primary weapons in those styles.

Fighting, as most people with their heads screwed on correctly know, breaks down simply into two aspects: Striking and Grappling. You're either doing one, the other, or both in an unarmed fight with someone else. So fighting skill can be tested fairly easily given a ruleset which is designed to facilitate striking and grappling and place them on an even playing field. MMA, despite still evolving as a sport, is the best way of doing this testing.

But let's go back to Jean, who's now all decked out in his Chef's attire with his shiny pots and knives. What is the first thing a reasonable person would ask of Jean, if they encountered him in this state?

I don't know about you, but I'd want to try some of his cooking.

http://www.bullshido.net/modules.php...article&id=203

[philp]

While it makes for an interesting read the comparison is fundamentally flawed.

The euqivalent to the chef with the equipment, who has never cooked is actually the equivalent of someone having bought a dobok / gi and never having attended a martial arts lesson. no? Reason being they have not done what they bought the equipment intended to be used for.

Someone who has the equipment, but has been doing MA for any length of time, has used the equipment for its intended purpose. IMO anyway.

Also, if you think about it in a bit more depth, it makes less sense. The whole point of MMA is that it's mixed martial arts, it's the very name of itself. Consequently how can you grade someone's Karate (example) skills if most of the time in an MMA format, theyre not even using Karate. Lets face it, the majority (please note I have not said all) of people that enter UFC or K1 that come from a Karate / TKD / Other primarily stand up striking arts (aside from Muay Thai and Kickboxing) have not faired too well. Even the ones that have added something else to their game (as well as their stand up striking). The occasional one does but it's always the guys that have studied a grappling / wrestling art on top of their primary MA that seem to do well in these events.

What it's actually advocating is that MMA is the way to go for everyone / thing if you want to prove that you're good at fighting. To be perfectly honest that is NOT the reason why me and many others got into our styles of MA (whatever they may be) in the first place. I think alot of people will happily keep hold of their blackbelts. The only reason they're getting easier to obtain in some peoples eyes is due to McDojo's / Belt factories and generally just an increase in the popularity of MA's. With regards to the McDojo's and Belt factories, the best thing we can do is to educate people to watch out for them and let education be the primary weapon.

Throwing yourself into an MMA competition to prove that you are worthy of a black belt in your martial art is just not a good idea.

[Taff]

Firstly, let me say you have the best avatar on MAP (just shading BeWaterMyFriend).

Originally Posted by philp

While it makes for an interesting read the comparison is fundamentally flawed.
Hmm, "fundamentally"? I disagree. Doesn't mean I agree with the article though.

The euqivalent to the chef with the equipment, who has never cooked is actually the equivalent of someone having bought a dobok / gi and never having attended a martial arts lesson. no? Reason being they have not done what they bought the equipment intended to be used for.
I think it's supposed to be an indictment on what people do in their martial arts classes.

Someone who has the equipment, but has been doing MA for any length of time, has used the equipment for its intended purpose. IMO anyway.

Also, if you think about it in a bit more depth, it makes less sense. The whole point of MMA is that it's mixed martial arts, it's the very name of itself. Consequently how can you grade someone's Karate (example) skills if most of the time in an MMA format, theyre not even using Karate. Lets face it, the majority (please note I have not said all) of people that enter UFC or K1 that come from a Karate / TKD / Other primarily stand up striking arts (aside from Muay Thai and Kickboxing) have not faired too well. Even the ones that have added something else to their game (as well as their stand up striking). The occasional one does but it's always the guys that have studied a grappling / wrestling art on top of their primary MA that seem to do well in these events.
Well, I don't see what your point is here.

What it's actually advocating is that MMA is the way to go for everyone / thing if you want to prove that you're good at fighting. To be perfectly honest that is NOT the reason why me and many others got into our styles of MA (whatever they may be) in the first place. I think alot of people will happily keep hold of their blackbelts. The only reason they're getting easier to obtain in some peoples eyes is due to McDojo's / Belt factories and generally just an increase in the popularity of MA's. With regards to the McDojo's and Belt factories, the best thing we can do is to educate people to watch out for them and let education be the primary weapon.
The article is trying to say that if you didn't get into martial arts to better yourself as a fighter then what are you doing in it?

Throwing yourself into an MMA competition to prove that you are worthy of a black belt in your martial art is just not a good idea.
Actually, I don't think it's a bad idea. It's not a great one, but MMA is the "best thing we have" for judging fighting ability.

I agree with some parts of the article. But overall, IMO, it vastly oversimplifies what is a complex issue. I just don't think it is this black and white.

[Bil Gee]

Some people think that all fights are similar to MMA fights, I don't. I've no interest in training for that environment.There are people at the top of every style who are very good fighters, you just need to make sure that you find a good teacher with a good school who trains you in the style that you want to fight.

[philp]

Originally Posted by Taff

Firstly, let me say you have the best avatar on MAP (just shading BeWaterMyFriend).

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Taff

I agree with some parts of the article. But overall, IMO, it vastly oversimplifies what is a complex issue. I just don't think it is this black and white.

Yeah, I actually now disagree with a few of the points I raised myself, I keep arguing for and against them within my own head (should I be worried about that )

I think the main point I was trying to make is that it would be very difficult to grade people (for belts) by making them take part in MMA since most of the time they would not be using the art that they were grading for. (if that makes sense)

Alot of people do Taekwondo (just an example) because they want to be good at Taekwondo, not because they want to mix it up in an MMA competition.

I do however still believe that some people start martial arts (including internal MA's) to feel better about themselves, get fit and generally condition their bodies better, the fact that it might help them in a fight as an added bonus (for some). Agreed, most probably do do it to better themselves as fighters.

[Taff]

Originally Posted by Bil Gee

Some people think that all fights are similar to MMA fights, I don't. I've no interest in training for that environment.There are people at the top of every style who are very good fighters, you just need to make sure that you find a good teacher with a good school who trains you in the style that you want to fight.

Well my thoughts are that MMA is the closest you can get. When I posted the videos of the "real fights" a while back, I can honestly say that they look pretty much no different to almost every fight I've seen in my life. Now, you've seen more fights than me as you are older and because of some of your working environments. But at least, IME, there is no difference really between MMA and a "real fight".
Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, for example I've never seen an MMA fight where 5 blokes were kicking a guy on the floor all over. But then no training can save you in that situation. It's foetus time.

[Bil Gee]

Originally Posted by Taff

Well my thoughts are that MMA is the closest you can get. When I posted the videos of the "real fights" a while back, I can honestly say that they look pretty much no different to almost every fight I've seen in my life. Now, you've seen more fights than me as you are older and because of some of your working environments. But at least, IME, there is no difference really between MMA and a "real fight".
Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, for example I've never seen an MMA fight where 5 blokes were kicking a guy on the floor all over. But then no training can save you in that situation. It's foetus time.

Some of the things that are significantly different in my opinion are:
1) In UFC going to ground is often a winnning strategy, in SD it can be a suicidal one.

2) Fights often don't start with two people squared up to each other, anyone with an ounce of common sense isn't going to attack head on when you're ready for it, they are going to attack from the side or from behind when you've let your guard down.

3) Fights rarely seem to consist of just two people, in the real fights that we've seen recently in videos posted on MAP there is often one or more spectators who slowly build up the courage to get involved.

4) Three minute rounds followed by a two minute rest isn't something that is going to happen in a street fight, street fights are usually decided in the first few seconds, the pace is completely different.

5) Some attacks are banned in competition fights, there aren't any rules in SD, there aren't any illegal moves. I know this is a very contentious point, and can be used as an "excuse" for not testing skills, but it doesn't alter the fact that certain attacks are not allowed in competition because they can and would do permanent and serious harm. If they didn't they wouldn't be banned, lets face it, nobody has bothered to make striking dim mak points illegal because they just aren't effective enough to be a threat. Looking at the illegal techniques, they make up a range of very good strategies to use if you are fighting for your life.

6) The environment makes a big difference, lighting, obstacles, potential weapons etc, all make the self defence equation a lot more complex than the competition fighting equation.

7) Sometimes you may want to destroy your attacker, sometimes you may just want to stun them for long enough to make an exit, sometimes you may just want to disable and restrain them whilst you talk them down. Competition fighting doesn't have the same range of objectives.

8) Competition fighters typically compete when they in excellent health and at their prime. I think these are very significant factors in determining the best strategy to use, e.g. somebody in their 50s is not going to be able to muster the same stamina as someone in their 20s at the peak of fitness, they will need to end the fight in a much shorter period of time. I'm looking for a martial art that will work for me for the rest of my life, not one that will win competitions during a relatively short window period of opportunity.

A small change in competition fighting rules has a very significant effect on strategy, we don't have a world fighting champion, we have champions in different events, in different weight classes, with different rulesets. Relatively small changes between competition fighting rulesets favour different strategies, it is short sighted to believe that the very marked difference between competition fighting and possible self defence situations wouldn't result in an equally big difference in the optimal strategies.

[novitiate]

Bill, interesting points as to why MMA matches doesn't exactly match real life situations(little obivious but still excellent). Do you have any points though that would indicate that there is something "better" for "real fights".

[Bil Gee]

Originally Posted by novitiate

Bill, interesting points as to why MMA matches doesn't exactly match real life situations(little obivious but still excellent). Do you have any points though that would indicate that there is something "better" for "real fights".

No, I don't. All I can say is that based on my experiences of violence, my abilities, my physique and my attitudes, my preferences for training, of the martial arts that I looked at I found that Wing Chun was best suited to meet my needs. There isn't an "ultimate" martial art, the whole idea is a pulp fiction fantasy. There isn't a conclusive test that can be applied to differentiate between martial arts marking one out as superior. At the end of the day there is no science to it at all, it just boils down to your best educated guess.

If the whole world suddenly switched over to training that was focused on winning cage fights martial arts would in my opinion loose a lot in terms of depth and relevance to self defence.

[novitiate]

It's a little misleading that when you are presented with an argument such as

Originally Posted by Taff

but MMA is the "best thing we have" for judging fighting ability

or

Originally Posted by Taff

Well my thoughts are that MMA is the closest you can get.

you change the subject by stating why it's not the same as real life AND leaving out what you could do by replacing it.

It is one thing to say that so and so won't work in real life, and another to suggest there is something better.

Does that make sense to anyone other then me?

It's a little arrogant for you to have so much critism for one method when as I can understand, your experiences in martial arts does not include MMA. If you are really concerned about self-defense with MMA then don't look at it with just the perspective of the cage as a SPORT but the broad set of rules it has compared to other methods. I personally don't train in MMA but I think I have enough of an open mind to form an opinion of MMA beyond what I see on TV such as the UFC or any other SPORTING event.

[Bil Gee]

Originally Posted by novitiate

It's a little misleading that when you are presented with an argument such as

or

you change the subject by stating why it's not the same as real life AND leaving out what you could do by replacing it.

It is one thing to say that so and so won't work in real life, and another to suggest there is something better.

I've never said that MMA wouldn't work in a real fight, I just don't think it's the best strategy to adopt in most self defence situations. Anyone who has trained hard enough in any martial art will have a distinct advantage over someone who hasn't in a fight.

Does that make sense to anyone other then me?

It makes sense to me, and although I don't agree I see it as a valid enough point to make.

It's a little arrogant for you to have so much critism for one method when as I can understand, your experiences in martial arts does not include MMA. If you are really concerned about self-defense with MMA then don't look at it with just the perspective of the cage as a SPORT but the broad set of rules it has compared to other methods. I personally don't train in MMA but I think I have enough of an open mind to form an opinion of MMA beyond what I see on TV such as the UFC or any other SPORTING event.

Go back and check my 3,700 + previous posts if you want. I have never been critical of MMA. I have simply said that I don't believe it to be the best strategy for training for self defence, I've never said that I don't consider it to be a valid strategy. The thing that I'm critical of is the perception that cage fighting is a valid test of all styles, and failure to win in UFC is conclusive evidence of anything other than the style is not optimised for competition fights under that particular ruleset.

[Taff]

I don't believe there is a way to effectively prepare for multiple attackers. Yes, you can do multiple attacker drills, but essentially you are talking about basic awareness of surroundings, and putting the attackers down as quickly as possible then getting out of there. Personally, I believe that, let's say a Muay Thai guy, is equally aware of his surroundings (possibly moreso due to "ringcraft"), much better at putting people down (he hits people hard and regulardly in training) and I'd bet he's fit enough to get out of there also.

As for "blindside" attacks, no one can prepare for those. But if you've been hit plenty then you are better conditioned to survive it.