Traditional vs Modern MAs

I practice a TMA. It's pretty low impact, but heavier than other places I've been to. We actually take hits (just hard enough to be useful) to the solar plexis, ribs, etc-just no head shots. The joint manipulation and grappling takedowns are full impact. Very little sparring. Just the mild kumite stuff when kumite contests are coming up. Asi I understand, TMAs like karate were designed for self defense and teachability for the masses. In my experience seems that you really need to go into an MA designed for full impact to get good practice in it.

 

Be careful with that. We had a local kid turn up to try out our gym, and his only previous experience of sparring was in a "christian boxing gym" that stipulated no headshots, body-shots only in sparring. He was really good at blocking body shots, but that didn't help him too much because we just hit him in the head. He had developed some really really bad habits as a result of no-headshot sparring. Needless to say, he didn't come back.

 

I totally agree. If I really wanted to learn to fight competitively, I would find a dojo/gym that practiced full contact. I just do it for fun/exercise/hobby/self defense purposes. My dojo does drill blocks/counters against headshots, but not at full intensity-just enough to practice a given technique. We do kumite, but that's basically tag. Not a good way to learn to fight, IMO. I don't even bother with the kumite stuff anymore because it's not that challenging and they don't allow grappling and limit the legal strikes way too much to be of use outside of karate tourneys. :bang:

ETA: The kid you menitioned went to a "boxing" gym that didn't allow headshots? It's not really boxing then, is it? What's the point?

 

It is a boxing gym, but it also runs these weird bodyshot-only classes (obviously trying to target those who are concerned about head trauma). It is run by a local prosperity-gospel type church (or so I was told).

 

Unfortunately not. The latest class I've joined has huge amounts of partner work and sparring, but no pad work at all. It's one of the reasons I'm enjoying kick boxing as much as I do.

The class before sparred almost every session (unless you were female, when it was optional) but it was 1 or 2 rounds of 2 minutes at most of what should have been "medium contact" freestyle. But because of the fact that people would whinge if you actually hit them, 99% of the time the striking was light - no contact, with grappling being the only thing that was hard contact (but which wasn't taught properly, so you made it up as you went). He actually had kick shields and pads but we could go for months on end without using them. And he let us spar and do pad work more than a lot of dojos I have heard of and seen.

They also tend to be the kind of guys that will happily tell you that "X will make you strong" and say that using weights with training is "nothing to do with TMA", but have no clue that the vast majority of TMA'ers in olden days used a huge array of supplementary training tools.

This is a fair point actually. This bugs me a great deal with training. It should be about personal development, improvement and training and other such similar factors, not "can you tick 'X' off your list".

There's also (from what I have seen) a much bigger syllabus in TMA's than in a lot of combat sports which does make a big difference.

I don't see a difference between the two you mentioned except for the fact that - I admit I've seen this first hand - often an instructor might show you a self defence move/technique for you to do a couple of weeks before the grading so it's fresh in your mind, then is not really addressed again until the next grading. For me, that is just plain wrong. At least from what I've seen of combat sports, the techniques you do are regularly pressure tested. There is no reason why the techniques shouldn't be usable except they're not always drilled as much as they should be.

Exactly! It's madness.

 

I wouldn't have understood, I mean really understood how much of an enormous impact that full contact, no armour, full-on, full-intensity engagement has on things unless I'd seen it first hand.

Going from a twice a week, 1 hour class where sparring was part of the curriculum - an important part, but a part nevertheless to a 2 hour 3 times ( a 4th class optional ) a week event where "sparring" is the curriculum has been enlightening. Painfully enlightening.

Bagwork, padwork are there to condition and reinforce - not a lot of emphasis is placed on them. Now I know why.

Punching is so different when there is someone in front of you. Likewise, movement. One can fancy themselves learning footwork, but until they step into the ring/cage/pit, your movement is wooden and dead. It has no meaning, no purpose, and you are unable to draw from it because that involves thinking and if one needs to think to remember, its already over.

He closes in so fast just when your mind is screaming for things to slow down. You need some space to think about what you're supposed to do and you start backing up - big mistake - 'cause you are against the ropes in no time and backing into the ropes surprises you and you instinctively raise your head... just enough for him to :fight1: BAM!!!

Your mind is no longer screamin...its no longer doing anything at all :zzz: - but oddly you hear some part of you somewhere that is apparently fully awake - trying desperately to jump start your brain. ~FUZZ~FUZZ - that's all the brain does - a ball of fuzzy white cotton - :fight1: BAMM! AGAIN. Hurt my feelings that time!

At the time when you really need your mind to come up with a better game-plan, all it can do is warn you about a loud tea-kettle going off nearby...

Something, somewhere forcibly seizes control of you and you find yourself turning, against your will, and motioning for the instructor that you've had enough.

Crawl through the ropes not feeling too studly.

"You slow, slow white boy" LOL!

But its not too bad 'cause we'll get a chance to get back in another 3 times before its done and in between the boxing, the foot-work and movement drills start to come alive in ways you'd not known if you'd not had the opportunity to get hammered - because getting hit changes everything.

I used to think that one trained by training...you hit the bags, you murdah the bags and then you go in and hit the bloke like you hit the bags...no, no, no, no! Wrong!

I've found that it takes a fair amount of boxing - its no longer sparring, is it? -before one is able to hit the bags or pads properly; because being hammered by someone, someone that moves where you don't want them to when you don't want them to - changes everything.

Did I mention that getting hit changes everything?

 

IMHO nothing wrong with a rigid curriculum if it's a good curriculum, covers all the bases and has something for everyone.
The problem comes when the rigid curriculum has loads of redundant filler, stuff that's in for the sake of tradition that no one knows how to use, mindless repetition and "learn this for your next grade".

 

I look at like learning to swim. In an extreme view there are two ways to learn to swim.

(1) Learn in the shallow end to develop good form which underpins good technique.
(2) Get dropped in in the deep end and practice keeping your head above water.

Both approaches have pros and cons

Good form underpins good technique which makes technique more effective when you begin to learn to apply it in the deep end, this allows you to swim without expending too much energy so that you can swim faster for longer, it also gives you the skills to cope with particularly difficult waters.

But it takes longer to learn and if you happen to get dropped in the deep end too early and think too much about good form and not enough about keeping your head above water - you sink.

Learning to keep your head above water teaches you to apply technique from the start. But swimming without good form is inefficient and tiring, so you can not swim for any length of time, neither do you have the skills to cope with particularly difficult waters.

Over time you can change habits to improve form but it is easier to learn a habit correctly the first time than it is to un-learn something and re-learn it in a different way.

(1) Progress in application slowly, but using good form progressing at a steady pace.

(2) Progress in application quickly, but with poor form so that you reach a point where you must unlearn things to progress, hence slowing your progress.

 

i personally think how modern arts are trained is how traditional arts were learned in the past, and the slower more step by step approach game into being as these arts were taught to people who really didn’t want to learn a fighting art but trained fro health and other reasons and taught by people who had never really had a fight in their lifes
I mean does anyone really think that an art developed for either use in warfare, developed for use in guerrilla campaigns or against rival ideological or ethnic groups was learned slowly and without hard contact and tough physical training from the outset?

if you are learning an art to defend your village from bandits, or to try to kick out an invading army by waging a guerrilla ware in cities and towns are you really going to wait months and years before you actually test what you are learning? Would you really be interested in learning lots of forms, and learning lots of different moves to counter specific attacks Or is it more likely you are interested in learning a handful of techniques which really work in bare hand fighting and allow you to keep your distance so to not get too engaged with one opponent, a few weapons with simple attacks and defends, and trying them out on your class mates before you go off and try to kill your enermy?

I mean it cant be a coincidence that a lot of the old time masters were also master bone setters and herbalists can it? People skilled at fixing broken bones and getting rid of bruises and dealing with cuts and infection?

Just as most judo teachers know how to revive an unconscious student and set a dislocated shoulder, these guys had to have those skills because they actually had their students knock the stuffing out of each other on a regular occasion and thought it might be a good idea to know how to put them back together for their next training session.

 

This was exactly my initial analysis per my OP as well. I was afraid I might have come off as heavily favoring one method over the other, but it's more of a philosophical (partially historical) debate. And by including my own analysis on it, was hoping to round up some great answers (which this thread is full of so far).

I was recently discussing BJJ with a friend and though he had only trained for a couple months, he was explaining having already performed techniques like foot/ankle locks whereas with us in traditional Ju-jutsu were warmed up to techniques like that over a longer period of time. Interestingly, our discussion was over a photo which we both perceived differently. I was able to point out that the technique was slightly different than how he perceived and was even able to spot all the pressure points, whereas his understanding was a bit more general.

Granted, he was only in it for a few months versus my 1 year + few months, so that may have also been a factor. But then again, he mentioned having applied that in sparring sessions/drills.

I'm sure it's not always like that either. But I feel that traditional styles tend to focus more on a warrior-type lifestyle which includes training the mind, and since we live in a less war-like era (rather, where machines fight our wars) with stricter laws and rules, this train of thought tends to elude many people. And I feel that modern styles train more in accordance with today's laws and rules yet still manage to apply effective techniques/training.

I guess it really comes down to what an individual wants.

 

You will find that BJJ does not teach pressure points, in fact no competitive martial art that I am aware of does. The reason for this is that targeting pressure points does not work in a competitive environment, so they don't train it. Sure there are places where you can cause your opponent significant discomfort by digging in your chin or other part of your body, but significant discomfort is probably not going to have the desired effect in a tournament (let alone in a fight). In competitive arts the techniques that don't work either get discarded, or don't even get adopted in the first place. Pressure point techniques are firmly in the realm of non-competitive arts for a reason.

 

you should just repeat this over and over anytime some one tells you his/her art is too d34dly to spar or for competition. because clearly, that person has never been hit before.

i will never forget the first time i stepped into boxing against a 50 year old guy. i was thinking "i'm going to murder this old man"; then, i got hit.

 

BJJ teaches pressure points, just not in the way that silly systems do. Having a knee pressed into your solar plexus or having an elbow jammed into your arm pit is really unpleasant and does affect the way that most people respond. Sure, at an elite level, they'll grin and bear it, but most of us don't compete at an elite level.

 

I think we have to bear in mind, related to my previous comment, that the vast majority of people out there don't want or need a full contact environment and are simply using a branch of martial arts as a way to keep fit. Unfortunately too many are led to believe the can fight but that's another issue. We need different degrees of contact for different people

 

that's fine and i totally agree. but you've got store owners going out there saying their "art" is for "self-defense".

look, i love hapkido. i had a tremendous time doing it, got my black belt, made great friends, did help me get into shape. but the amount of times i heard from my friends, school proprietor, people on this forum, etc. that hapkido is "real self defense" that "can't be sparred" is mind-boggling in it's inanity.

whatever you're doing, if you're not adding pressure and don't test, you're not going to be able to use it when you really need to. it's true of software development, it's true of martial arts.

 

I think it's because we live in the 21st century and for most of us we'll never need to. Which is why, after many years, I have come to accept that it's a broad customer base which requires more than being able to destroy your enemies in combat

 

I may have used the wrong terminology when I said "pressure points", but Holdheadach did nail what I meant to say.