Style Vs Style debate [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

ReverendTim

05-31-2002, 10:21 AM

I always take it with a grain of salt when people say any ONE thing is definitely the ONLY way to go, whether it's in martial arts or anything else.

The NHB fights I've seen have been VERY educational. They made me address some serious weaknesses in my own training. I realized that my traditional background hadn't given me all the tools I neede and that I would have to study other stuff to make up the shortfall.

But that's me. There's no reason to believe that there aren't plenty of people out there across disciplines that have more natural ability, better training habits, and whatnot, who don't need to pick up the slack.

I had an acting coach once who overheard me and a buddy debating who was the best Hamlet, Mel Gibson or Lawrence Olivier. My coach pointed out that the best Hamlet ever performed was probably by some guy in an amateur production in some rinky town somewhere that no one ever heard of and never will.

I think that's true in martial arts. I don't care how good you are at BJJ. Right now, somewhere in this country, is a guy taking Tae Kwon Do that can whip your a$$. And someone who studies Shotokan. And someone who studies Ninjutsu. I'm not saying any one style is better than the other...that's my point. Why haven't they stepped up to the UFC? I don't know. Maybe they have jobs or college loans or something. I don't want to take away from the NHB fighters...they're in great shape, and oftentimes, brilliant martial artists to boot. But they're not the end-all, be-all, and history and common sense should tell you that.

Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make proud, and if you spend too much time crowing about the superiority of BJJ and mocking McDojos, then you're just DARING the universe to wipe you up with a guy who takes plain ol' karate.

--
Rev. Tim

Nevermind

05-31-2002, 11:08 AM

Hey, Rev. Tim, good post! I have nothing personal against MMA's. My belief is that if its what you want to do, go for it. But why put down other styles in the process? I mean, if you are secure about the effectiveness of your chosen discipline, why is that necessary? I don't believe that NHB competitors and MMA's are bad guys. I do believe, however, that those who bash traditional arts because they fair poorly in NHB competitions are the reason that the TMA's have such a negative opinion of this brand of martial artists. I have the utmost respect, personally, for the work ethic of NHB competitors. I think that we in the TMA's could stand to emulate a lot of their training methods. Note, I said "training". After all, the person with the best training methods is the one who will stand victorious. I don't make excuses for traditional martial artists who fair poorly in NHB. If it is because the rules work against them, how about gearing your training towards those rules? After all, that is what the MMA's are doing. It makes sense that they have the most success. By the same token, it is unfair to put down the TMA's because the majority of them are not interested in NHB competition. Bottom line, I respect anyone who busts their tail at their chosen discipline. However, I find it hard to respect those who feel the need to put down those who choose a different path. Ok, I'm done ranting. Peace.

Merryprankster

05-31-2002, 11:22 AM

Actually, most of us don't.

We take issue with:

1. 'The ring is not the street.' True. Neither is the kwoon.
2. 'Ring training will not prepare you for a real fight because
you'll get bad habits.' I fail to see how learning to put
somebody's lights out is a bad habit. I might not think to knee
them in the groin, but a knee to the head works wonders
as well.
3. Anybody that thinks they can be prepared for physical
altercations without full contact, limited rules sparring of some
kind.
4. Anybody who thinks that rudimentary groundfighting isn't a
worthwhile pursuit. Do I want to be there? Nope, but there
are now very few people who can KEEP me there under their
terms if I don't want to be.
5. Anybody who thinks that 'training for the average joe,' is
acceptable. Train like the guy who wants to fight you knows
what he's doing. That block against the roundhouse bar brawl
punch? Learn to deal with hook, and that's nothing.

Essentially, it's just a training issue, as you surmised. I have no problem with TMA. Send me to a school that beats the crap out of each other regularly, and I'm as happy as can be. Good is good, and bad is bad, in MMA and TMA. Good training looks like good training no matter where you are.

red5angel

05-31-2002, 11:26 AM

I think it has everything to do with the way you train. For instance, Knightsabre, you say that your school regularly enters NHB type tourneys, so my guess is your training is pretty hard core right?
Now you take a traditional guy that goes to a 'traditional' school. most traditional schools arent. A good portion of those suck anyway.
As for rules MP, I wouldnt say they are a crutch by any means, but most traditional guys are training for two reasons, to look good or to hurt people. For instance I train to defend myself as quickly and efficiently as possible, for me that means I dont mind using eye gouges or breaks to stop someone from doing somehting I dont want them to do. The way I train is not appropriate for the ring, but I am interested in fighting in the ring and so have begun to shift my focus to things that are more appropriate for tourneys.

old jong

05-31-2002, 11:30 AM

Simply said!...Take any average guy in any style of kung Fu and make him train like a maniac against the most common strategies of MMA's for a few months. Make him develop his strikes into potent weapons and let him go for it! Ther could be some surprising results!;)

red5angel

05-31-2002, 11:33 AM

After thinking about it a little more I have come to the conclusion that I would lay money that MMA guys would win as many fights as TMA guys if they trained similarly. Say if we had a KFO tourney and we all trained to fight in one I think we would come to find the numbers are petty well rounded and that if you were to look at those who won, similar attributes would be depth of knowledge, and will to win, and not necessarily style.

Merryprankster

05-31-2002, 11:38 AM

Red,

I won't mind using eye-gouges and breaks either, but to me, those are add-ons, not staples. Things you learn in addition to getting the good basics of kicking, punching, throwing, etc down. You won't go wrong with those basics, in or out of the ring.

I know good training has that. What I'm saying is that 'bad training,' places too much emphasis on these "disabling moves," instead of on fighting.

Nevermind

05-31-2002, 11:41 AM

What's up, MP! Actually, the posts of yours that I have read are pretty good. I think you do a good job of focusing on training issues and avoiding the "style vs. style" stuff. I actually, agree with everything in your post wholeheartedly. My goal is to some day combine those training methods with my traditional training. After all, my heart is with the TMA's and I have no desire to leave them. It is not that I plan to do any NHB competition although I think they are cool. I just want to ensure that my chosen discipline will work for me. Like I said before, its all in the training. Ok, I gotta get back to work. Peace. (o:

red5angel

05-31-2002, 11:47 AM

MP- Absolutely agreed. you definitely need the basics, and in a confrontation I will probably use those first to try to de-escalate the situation. But my training is spread out pretty evenly. If I were to focus more on the basics, the things I could use in eth ring, then my chances would improve.

Besides I am absolutely convinced that if you got someone into the ring you could probably argue them into submitting! :D

Dark Knight

05-31-2002, 12:16 PM

If you want to compete and win in any competition you must train specifically for it. A Kung Fu guy can win in Olympic TKD if he changes his training to fight like and against Olympic TKD. If you want to win in NHB, train specifically for NHB.

BJJ, Sambo and MMA styles are training for that type of fighting.

Big Deal

If that is what you are looking for go to that kind of school.

If you are looking to be effective in the street then things change. Also not everyone can make BJJ work, just like not everyone can make Kung Fu, Karate or TKD work. It all depends on the person.

How many of us train in weapons that will never be used outside of the school or competition. We do it because we enjoy it.

Effectivness of a style is based on how you will use it. I know plenty of people who are effective fighters but will not win in NHB. What about boxers, Melton Bowen, a heavy weight champion showed up at a UFC and lost. Does that mean boxing sucks?

Dark Knight

05-31-2002, 12:20 PM

"Take any average guy in any style of kung Fu and make him train like a maniac against the most common strategies of MMA's for a few months. "

Here is my thought, If you train and learn to counter what a MMA fighter is doing to you, then have you become a MMA fighter?

Merryprankster

05-31-2002, 12:46 PM

Ralek

05-31-2002, 12:51 PM

There are many possibilities for kung fu's poor performance in real fights. It's not the rules becuase in NHB you are allowed to do anything you want except for Biting and eyegouging, although some tournments have more rules than others.

A kung fu person theoretically shouldn't have to do special training for NHB since NHB allows all techniuques. Keith Hackney repeatedly punched JoeSon in the balls in UFC#4 to win the fight. If you like to grab the balls then enter an NHB tourament that allows it. SuperBrawl is a good one. They have the oringial UFC rules with legal ball grabs and people have had their head stomped on and they went unconscious.

So since there aren't any restrictions on kung fu techniques, the rules cannot be the reason for kung fu's poor performance. Granted you are not allowed to do biting or eyegouging but the same restriction is also placed on your opponent. NHB is the most rules free place to fight besides the street. NHB has fewer rules than san shou, muay thai, kickboxing, or anyother martial arts tournament. And there are even NHB tounaments in brazil that are truly No-Rules and eye poking and biting is legal.

The reason Kung fu has lost is becuase it doesnt' work. Kung fu is just a bunch of forms and prearagned drills. This makes good looking forms and drills but it doesn't create any fighitng ability. In fact kung fu actually HINDERS your fighting ability. You fight how you train and when you train to be in funny stances and throw ineffective techniques you will lose. It's been proven time and time again that you are better off just fighitng like a drunk and throwing haymakers than using kung fu.

BJJ, Muay thai, wrestling. These 3 styles consitantly win. BJJ doens't win becuase of size becuase Royce Gracie is outwieghed by an average of 50 pounds throughout his career. So BJJ success can't be of atheltics becuase many succesful BJJ fighters like Royce, DelaRiva, ect. are very weak people. Yet they still beat bigger stronger people. Some styles are effective and some are not.

True there are many styles that work. BJJ is not the only style. Wrestling does wonders for grappling standing up. Muay thai is a very effective striking system. But it's just as naive to say that all styles work as it is to say that all styles suck.

Do all styles suck? No.
Do all styles work? No.
Do some styles work? Yes.

Styles that work = BJJ, Wrestling, Muay thai, kickboxing, Sambo, boxing

When some styles consistanly win it can only be assumed that they work. When certain styles loose repeatedly even when they have the superior athelete then it can only be assumed that they truly don't work.

Don't let opinions get in the way. Look to the results of actual fights.

Dark Knight

05-31-2002, 12:56 PM

"Styles that work = BJJ, Wrestling, Muay thai, kickboxing, Sambo, boxing '

Melton Bowen was the IBF heavy weight champion. He lost at UFC in a little over a minute. Does that mean boxing is inefective? Or does it mean it is inefective because he lost so easily.

If you can say boxing is effective, whats the differentce between a boxer and a WC guy that hits incredibly hard?

Shooter

05-31-2002, 01:11 PM

If you train and learn to counter what a MMA fighter is doing to you, then have you become a MMA fighter?

No.

On one level or another, it's all Tai Chi. It has nothing to do with perception. It's the Way...The Tao.

Le nOObi

05-31-2002, 01:36 PM

Originally posted by Dark Knight
"Take any average guy in any style of kung Fu and make him train like a maniac against the most common strategies of MMA's for a few months. "

Here is my thought, If you train and learn to counter what a MMA fighter is doing to you, then have you become a MMA fighter?
Only if the counter you develop contradicts the principles of your style. The movements in forms are not the only moves in a style they simply illustrate the execution of moves according to a style.

Ralek

05-31-2002, 01:41 PM

Dark Night. BJJ has lost. Muay thai has lost. Wrestlers have been KO'd. Sambo player got his neck snapped by Wrestler Mark Kerr in the Pride Grand Prix. Boxer Melton Bowen got hip tossed then pummled on the ground. Professional Muay thai fighter Anthony Macias got supplexed by Wrestler Dan severn.

But these style consistantly win. The don't consistantly lose. And of course when you put 2 different effective styles agaisnt each other then one has to win.

Boxing also has had some very impressive victories in NHB. Former olympic Boxer Vitor Belfort has pummled people left and right and beat Tank abbot in under a minute. Vitor is also a BJJ black belt but he uses boxing very good and has won many fights very quickly by KO.

Kung fu people have learned to stay home and that real fighting is not their forte. That's ok as long as the practioners of kung fu realize that their style is not going to help them in a real fight. Many people do things for artistic and cultural reasons. Some people are into ballet but as long as they realize it won't help them fight that's OK if they do ballet, kung fu, tai chi, ect.

Braden

05-31-2002, 01:43 PM

"We've never lost to any traditional school."

Have you ever competed in a tourney or circuit which [whatever you count as] traditional artists routinely join?

NorthernMantis

05-31-2002, 01:44 PM

The reason Kung fu has lost is becuase it doesnt' work. Kung fu is just a bunch of forms and prearagned drills

Ralek, need I remind you and the rest of the world ,for the millionth time, that I have sparred and done well againts styles that you claimed to be superior to kung fu, such as boxing or highschool wrestling.

This weekend I will also spar a judoka who happens to be a good friend of mine's.You need to stop making stupid statements that you know nothing about.

I also had a classmate of mine's who took judo and jiujitsu and he left because he didn't like it. Now he's taking my style.

The main reason why a lot of kung fu practitioners might not do well is because they do not know how to use their kung fu plus they don't train as intensively or sparr as much as they should. However there are some who have fought and done well. I will keep my friend's name out of this but he's a hardcore traditionalist who's had to use his kung fu in real life.

It saddens me that you have so little knowledge and frankly I feel embarrassed for you:( :o

Le nOObi

05-31-2002, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by KnightSabre

I hate the Style Vs Style Debate,but here goes

Unlike most people who hate the style vs. style debate you seem to like starting arguements on the subject t

On the mantis forum you posted that the difference between BJJ and JJ is that a BJJ bluebelt can defeat a JJ blackbelt.EIther you love the style vs style debate or you think that you can openly call one stlye superior to another without a response .

P .S. i wrote the post that this is a reply to so youhave me to thank for this stupid thread . Also my keyboard is broken which is why mypost looksfunn y!

Shaolindynasty

05-31-2002, 02:09 PM

Let's think on this a minute, if in MMA you use the combination of Muay thai, wrestleing and BJJ. You have what aspects covered? Punches, kicks, takedowns and joint locks. CMA guys know this as Ti, Da, Shuai, Na. It's the same thing. Really it's just people who are imature to the martial arts that think you really need a seperate style for each aspect. It's actually more important that you can blend then together and have each aspect support the other, that's how you become a complete fighter, MMA or not.

Le nOObi

05-31-2002, 02:17 PM

Originally posted by Ralek
. Some people are into ballet but as long as they realize it won't help them fight that's OK if they do ballet, kung fu, tai chi, ect.
WOW ! YOUR AN IDIOT! http://www.mixedmartialarts.ca/HTML/Rumble5/09JeremiahJason.htm
thats a link to a fight where taichi actually BEAT KICKBOXING and dont pretend i searched the internet for that either.The guy who won that fight posts here under the name beautifulvalley.
This is just one example. Kungfu isnt all prearranged drills and forms. I think you are a little confused. there is something called modern wushu which has forms which were designed to look good. You may have seen modern wushu forms competitions and think this is what all kung fu is . Most kungfu was designed for killing .

In another post you stated that kungfu people wouldnt need to train for nhb because all the moves are legal. thats not how they would train for nhb you idiot. they would train for NHB by sparring against BJJ /Muay thai

Black Jack

05-31-2002, 02:30 PM

Shaolin,

No you don't need a seperate system for every combative range but some systems do focus very well on certain elements, that is there bread and butter so to speak, though your statement that everything should blend together and support each other is right on the money.

IMHO styles don't really mean much from a overhead viewpoint, thats why I am not so hung up on the term martial art, in fact I believe a lot of the abstract philosophy and style pride gets in the way of personal combative development, of course that is based only if you are looking for self defense as a goal of one's martial arts training.

Set styles based on culture and historic mythos do have a warm place though in the heart of the player, personal selection based on "how it feels to them", straight out love of the systems training, and academic research are a few examples.

red5angel

05-31-2002, 02:49 PM

All I know is my style will defeat any of your MOTHERS in the ring, and if you dont believe me you name the time and place and I will DESTROY your MOM.

norther practitioner

05-31-2002, 02:59 PM

Most martial arts are much more complete than what they are made out to be. The only thing that a lot really lack is ground work. This can be fixed by examining striking and throws sometimes. Rolling around on the ground can be a dangerous proposition.... but should not be avoided at all costs, do it sometimes....see what you can learn, how to avoid being mounted and pummled. I think a lot of you will find that there are techniques that when slightly modified will work on the ground as well.

Shooter

05-31-2002, 03:21 PM

Le n00bi, first of all, never feed a troll. His/her e-silence was very conspicuous while J was on here looking for an opponent. That silence spoke volumes.

Secondly, don't support your arguments on J's legs. His self-promotion is going nicely without the help of anyone. :p

The Northern Lights Tai Chi players are very confident and secure in our practice. Nothing to prove. Nothing to gain. Nothing to lose.

Xebsball

05-31-2002, 03:45 PM

Style or Person?

Style NO
Person NO
Person + Style YES

Its 50/50 mkay
Quite simple.

Mantis9

05-31-2002, 05:01 PM

the mantis vs BJJ thread wasn't an attempt to discredit either mantis or BJJ. It was attempt to examine how a mantis exponent would approach a BJJ exponent in a hypothetical fight.

It was a great thread. We looked at our stereotypes of BJJ, whether they were accurate or not, and attempted to work around those problems that presented themselves by following PM concepts and principles. As a PM exponent, I would enourage this as a beginning step to become a better martial artist, fighter, and representative of your style or martial philosophy.

If evidence is to the contrary that PM or CMA are affective, that doesn't worry me. What worries me is that I'm not making it effective myself. Application, hard work, and dedication to a style is what will make you a good fighter, not what style or aspect of a style a successful fighter is using. However, educating yourself about them is good.

Have a good weekend all.

Gabriel

05-31-2002, 07:42 PM

I am so freakin tired of this stupid line of thought. Blah blah...this style lost in ufc or nhb..blah blah, that makes this style better.

First off..Nhb and Ufc aren't the end all tests for a style's effectiveness.

Secondly, there are highly evolved fighters in any system worth its salt, kung fu included, I do not deny that BJJ and MT pump out great fighters, so why do you people insist on dragging my art through the mud?

Thirdly, does nhb and ufc allow arm breaks, shin breaks, knee breaks, elbow breaks, finger breaks, toe breaks, gouging, clawing, chops to the throat, pulling hair, rending, ripping, tearing, or stomping? What about dislocation? do they allow dislocation of the elbow, knee, or shoulders? What about neck breaks? can we do those? Groin shots? And dare I mention pressure points? And, Ill say that you assume too much if you think these techniques are not an integral part of my art and application. Not just "added" on.

Fourth, I've yet to see a really good trad fighter in any of these blasted ring matches. You base your superiority on winning against mediocre fighters.

Fifth, most kung fu guys wouldn't be caught dead in a ufc or nhb ring. Because we realize fighting isn't a game, not an exhibition. Fighting is serious. When fighting, we must be prepared to hurt, maim, or even kill. In fact, we try to avoid fights. So ring combat or whatever is against our ideology which is this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Move rather than block
Block rather than strike
Strike rather than break
Break rather than maim
Maim rather than kill
Kill rather than be killed

Listen as a deer, poised and alert,
Stand as a lion, muscled and ready,
See as an eagle, clear and from afar,
Think as a snake, deadly and unblinking,
Kill as a mongoose, swift and silent,
Die like a man.

For all life is precious,
Nor can any be replaced.

Never misuse what you learn
---------------------------------------------------------------
We do not take fighting lightly.

Stop watching fight club 3 times a day! And please cease from slandering arts you know next to nothing about.

Gabriel

omegapoint

06-01-2002, 12:54 AM

Originally posted by Ralek

The reason Kung fu has lost is becuase it doesnt' work. Kung fu is just a bunch of forms and prearagned drills. This makes good looking forms and drills but it doesn't create any fighitng ability. In fact kung fu actually HINDERS your fighting ability. You fight how you train and when you train to be in funny stances and throw ineffective techniques you will lose. It's been proven time and time again that you are better off just fighitng like a drunk and throwing haymakers than using kung fu.

BJJ, Muay thai, wrestling. These 3 styles consitantly win. Some styles are effective and some are not.

But it's just as naive to say that all styles work as it is to say that all styles suck.

Do all styles suck? No.
Do all styles work? No.
Do some styles work? Yes.

Styles that work = BJJ, Wrestling, Muay thai, kickboxing, Sambo, boxing

Don't let opinions get in the way. Look to the results of actual fights.

Wow. I guess that covers all of reality fighting. You've won the argument, now we can move on to the next assanine post. BTW, did you guys know that Rorion Gracie sponsored and selected the "Martial Artists" that fought in those initial UFCs? UFC was really a debut of GJJ in America (although it had been here for many years). Over the years many people had drifted from the less-flashy grappling-based arts and were training in the striking arts. Rorion wanted respect for his father's style. Oh, and BTW that Heavyweight champ was really a Cruiser Weight ex-Champ (WBO?). Prior to UFC, I had never heard of those "champions" and BBs that fought in it. I guess if UFC and its promotions staff says that they were champs then that makes it so. Just like Raleks opinion. Think about it.

Ralek/Rolls claims that the grappling sports and striking sports are the most effective in these matches. With the quality of strikers that have been a part of MMAs in the past, I wouldn't brag about success rates. Hell, Royce has been training since he was an embryo. He was a true master technician of his artform. Those other cats were scrubs, and wanna-be tough guys. There were some exceptions though.

The strikers with real skill like Maurice Smith, Keith Hackney and Chuck Lidell (who is still awesome) came from a very strong kickboxing or Kenpo Karate background. To think that a kickboxer is different than a traditionalist who is good at full-contact kumite, is just naive. Most good karate guys are good at forms AND kickboxing. That's just the facts. Anyway, Kenpo isn't the most feared style amongst classical practitioners. They are no better or worse than a good traditional Chuan Fa or Karate Black Sash/Belt. They just train for NHB events differently, and part of that training is to become acclimated to standing and ground grappling (if they already aren't).

When it comes to opinions about what actual fights are or aren't then we may have a disagreement there. I've seen lots of real life fights since I was young, and they are NOTHING like the controlled adrenalin-rush of a confrontation that is not life-or-death. The key here is "life-or-death". If you're an adult knucklehead who wants to fight me for some ill-conceived reason, then you gotta know (or maybe you won't have a clue) I'm asking for no quarter 'cause, definitely, none will be given. You gotta understand that the way some folks approach training is like that. Nothing else. Ever. They trust in their own judgement, and the teachings of their instructor(s). They don't give a flying frick what some uninitiated fool wants reality to be. That is something the individual practitoners figure out for themselves.

Donn Draeger was a very accomplished Judoka. He did Judo when it was a lot like what you see in NHB events now. Newaza heavy. His knowledge of the various fighting arts of Asia and the world was astounding. He was the only non-Japanese to hold the rank of Budo Kyoshi (Master of the Warriors Way). He was the first non-Japanese Judo instructor at the famous Kodokan in Tokyo. He held several BBs in numerous systems. He was an accomplished Western Boxer. He was a real Gaijin Samurai if there is such a thing. He was good friends with John Bluming and Kimura (who beat Helio Gracie). He was respected highly by all who trained, sparred or came in contact with him. Although he admired the raw destructiveness of Kodokan Judo and the Samurai traditions, he also understood the fighting acumen of TCMA great Wang Shujin (Neijia). A friend of Draeger, Wang would often visit him in Japan and put on demonstrations where he would take on all challengers regardless of style. He was never defeated. While staying with Don he would often use the support posts of the hosts house as a kind of Makiwara. He would shake the house at its foundations, and often guests would stare in awe at his strength and technique. His knowledge of Tai Chi was extraordinary, and he knew how to use it for real self-protection. Draeger and Bluming would often challenge blow-hards and MAs "experts". They would often be denied. Sometimes they sparred the cat and whupped him real good. Don never, ever even considered challenging Wang and other Chinese martial artists like him. Mr. Draeger would remark that it would probably be the last challenge he would or could ever make.

He also co-wrote a book called "Shaolin Lohan Kung Fu". He writes on page 162.... (Regarding the Okinawan, Japanese and Korean karate-like arts) "Another salient difference between Shaolin and the karate-like arts of Korea, Okinawa and Japan is that in shaolin there is no emphasis placed on any kind of combative contact practice. There is no free-exercise kind of approach to the use of technique for the purpose of testing the relative skills of the exponents,either in training or sporting competition. No really conclusive test is possible between exponents of shaolin except that which is made in a real fight, for shaolin techniques are inherently dangerous ones and do not easily lend themselves to control measures such as may be applied through expedients such as contest rules or the use of protective body armor. Shaolin, in its orthodox form, is not a game to be played for the entertainment of an audience or the whims of sports-minded exponents..."

According to Draeger, who wrote this book after his lifelong study in many combat related arts, forms, two-man application drills, body-hardening and other supplemental training made the shaolin practitioners very deadly and effective fighters. No MMAs training required.

Food for thought.

Merryprankster

06-01-2002, 06:48 AM

Food for thought... let me tell you how bored I am of this topic :)

Ok--to the guy that talked about fighting being serious business--give me a BREAK. Unless you are part of an armed service or a cop or maybe (a stretch--a bouncer) we do this for fun. It's like those who think Football is REALLY important.

Black Jack

06-01-2002, 08:56 AM

Don Drager was NOT the first non-japenese judo instructor.

The first foreign pupil of Proffessor Kano was an American Engilsh teacher and ex-heavyweight wrestler by the name of Dr. Fiau Eastlake in 1885.

There was also the Captian Allan Smith who taught h2h at Camp Benning, he recieved his first dan on January 9th, 1916 at the Kodokan in Kodokan Ju Jitsu (Judo).

Captain W.E. Fairbairn had his Nidansha (2nd Dan) signed by Kano I also believe in 1926.

LiteBlu

06-01-2002, 11:31 AM

LOL at Gabriel!

That's why people compete. To fight for fun and money and prestige.

I fight for fun.

And to answer your question about NHB rules... yes, some Vale Tudo events in Brazil have only two rules (as well as the earlier PrideFC's and UFC's), which were 1. no eye gouging and 2. no biting. So almost all the techniques that you mentioned are allowed.

And it's not the style that is superior. It's the training methods.

Condition the body to full contact. 100% resistance in your training partner.

omegapoint

06-01-2002, 05:28 PM

Originally posted by Black Jack
Don Drager was NOT the first non-japenese judo instructor.

BJ: Get it straight. I said that he was the first non-Japanese KODOKAN JUDO SENSEI!!!

Don't try and school me about anything martial. Please!

MP: If you think fighting is fun then you have a neurotic condition called, Sado-Masochism. Sex ain't always involved with that deal! In other words you find hurting others enjoyable and you get a rise out of being hurt too! Must be the mutant albino killer african gene manifesting itself again!

I've been in numerous real fights, both in the military and civilian. It was never fun, especially for the person receiving a royal beatdown.

You wouldn't think fighting was fun if you didn't grow up in merry old Limeyton (J/K). You guys not only worship SOCCER you friggin' start riots over the most boring sport in the world! Go figure!

What's up with people seeing reality for what it is? I guess the human race is doomed, and we just might deserve it!

Merryprankster

06-01-2002, 05:35 PM

To clarify--I like sport-fighting in a reasonably controlled environment.

I don't particularly like fighting now that I'm an adult. Too aware of the consequences both legally and getting shanked, etc... but I had a bit of a temper back in the day.....

reemul

06-01-2002, 05:43 PM

First of all to be the best, you have to show up.

What if, the so called "Trads" in your particualar area aren't that good. Then all you have done is prove that you can beat Trads that suck.

BJJ may be the dominant fighting art in your neck of the woods but until you have every Trad school show up to your events you'll never now and the slippery slope goes on.

I'm sure in other areas of the world BJJ is not the dominant art in the area and that other art is claiming to be superior.

I think its all a big ego trip myself. I used too be that way, then I got tired of beating peoples a$$e$. HAHAHAHa

Merryprankster

06-01-2002, 05:45 PM

What you're really saying then is that it was an ego trip for YOU.

I just compete because I like to. I don't limit myself to the small or the big tourneys---I compete every opportunity I can, that I'm prepared for. I enjoy it an awful lot.

reemul

06-01-2002, 05:51 PM

Hey I don't care one way or the other if anybody competes, however, the majority of people who compete got something to prove. It was a braod generalization not aimed at the few people who are actually warriors.

Merryprankster

06-01-2002, 06:02 PM

Define the difference.

I'm not chastizing--genuinely curious.

chokeyouout

06-01-2002, 06:08 PM

Pressure points?

Why dosen't a traditionialist just enter a NHB fight and use his/her traditional techniques.

I mean enter and win;not just enter...

That would end this stupid debate.

reemul

06-01-2002, 06:11 PM

I take it you mean the difference between a Warrior and Pit fighter.

Well the definition is relative. But what I've come to know of the differences is that a Warrior trains for knowledge health and fights out of necessity, not for show, pride, wealth.

Merryprankster

06-01-2002, 06:13 PM

So the fact that I compete for fun instead of necessity makes me which of those?

reemul

06-01-2002, 06:19 PM

Well going by the parameter you gave me "fun", I would say Pit fighter.

Now had you said you compete as for the purpose of training and gaining knowledge. It would have went the other way.

But ya gave it up to "fun" so I declare you "A PIT FIGHTER"

carry on.

Xebsball

06-01-2002, 06:27 PM

there was a game called Pit Fighter or Pit Fighting, it was fun

rogue

06-01-2002, 06:34 PM

There seems to be an assumtion that if an art isn't in NHB than it won't work on the street. I have one instructor that used Okinawan karate not just on the streets but in various lonely places around the world. This guy is as traditional as they come but he's still down right lethal. Now in support of MP and Omegapoints points, he's also a helluva kickboxer. Could he beat Chuck Liddell in a UFC contest? Maybe yes, maybe no. But could Randy Coutre or Chuck or Matt Thorton take out someone who's got an AK-74 pointed at their head?

Ryu

06-01-2002, 07:09 PM

From all of Merry's posts I think it's safe to assume he competes for the love of the art, and the knowledge and enjoyment of of that said art. That's hardly a "barbarian" ........

Just because somebody fights in a ring doesn't make them some kind of sadomasichist (I hate that word :D )

Just because someone DOESN'T fight in a ring doesn't make him a coward or some fluffy fraud.

Learn to train. Enjoy your training time. There's time for solo training and time for hardcore sparring. There's time for a lot of things. Bottom line is that you should train. You should train all you can. Prepare yourself realistically for what's out there. Thing evolve. It's okay.

I practice Japanese swordsmanship myself. Does that make me a phony? I really am starting to love ninpo philosophy. Does that make me unable to train newaza and contact grappling?

I take time to spar hard, grapple hard, and condition my body hard. Does that make me a barbarian?

:)
To be honest, I bet you a lot of styles will begin to evolve.

NorthernMantis

06-01-2002, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by chokeyouout
Pressure points?

Why dosen't a traditionialist just enter a NHB fight and use his/her traditional techniques.

I mean enter and win;not just enter...

That would end this stupid debate.

Well.. someone already has! Check these links out.

http://www.mixedmartialarts.ca/HTML/Rumble5/09JeremiahJason.htm

http://www.mixedmartialarts.ca

"Name Style Weight Height
Jeremiah Cram Tai Chi 191 6'

(When there is more than one weight listed, the first weight is for the first fight...)

Jeremiah fought Jason Sagal and Won (Split Decision) at Roadhouse Rumble V on 23-Feb-02. "

Oh and by the way it seems that the kickboxer got a busted mouth. I suggest that you shut your ignorant mouth and start being more respectful.

Unmatchable

06-01-2002, 08:45 PM

Well some martial arts really aren't sports. They things were made for the battlefield and for the streets(back in the day), some adopt sport formats, but that isn't the original intention. And some adapted better than others or were changed for the sport format.

David Jamieson

06-01-2002, 08:58 PM

tradition-

1.n - the passing on of customs or beliefs from generation to generation. 2 a long established custom or belief passed on in this way. 3 a method or style established by an artist, writer or movement, and followed by others.

There, now you are all magically "traditionalists". Unless of course you have created your own martial art from gazing at some phenomenon for days on end. :D

I still contend that you can have Kung Fu in Jujutsu.

peace

Braden

06-02-2002, 12:26 AM

KnightSabre

You: "We've never lost to any traditional school."

Me: Have you ever competed in a tourney or circuit which [whatever you count as] traditional artists routinely join?

In case you missed it.

chokeyouout

You: "Why dosen't a traditionialist just enter a NHB fight and use his/her traditional techniques."

NorthernMantis: "Well.. someone already has! Check these links out. http://www.mixedmartialarts.ca/HTML/Rumble5/09JeremiahJason.htm"

In case you missed it.

NorthernMantis

06-02-2002, 06:49 AM

Thanks Braden.

None of the unbelievers have responded to that or to my thread about it. What a coincidence huh? They go off blabbing their mouths off about how kung fu is innefftective but when I give them an example that proves them wrong they shut up.I'm going to keep posting it until people get sick of it because I'm sick of the style vs style debates.

That taiji guy isn't the only one. This kid from the old 8step mantis website won a mma tournament, not a match but atournament.

Joel Sutton who used to study 8step won using 8step mantis on UFC 6 and another wich I forgot.

That's a total of four. I also have a good friend of mine's who's a hardcore cma and used to compete in Pancrase and did well also but I don't like to bring him in into these conversations.

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 06:52 AM

Well, if pit fighter is what I am, then I will be the happiest pit fighter you ever met :)

Brad Souders

06-02-2002, 07:28 AM

Ok i suppose i would fall under the MMA non effective in the street catagory. But the schools in this debate are the ones like what i train at and i know Merry's is like.
Yes i train 50% of the time for MMA. (Side note: To call it NHB is just plain wrong if it where NHB it won't have rules call it what it is MMA)
But the other 50% I'm training with knives,sticks,baseball bats,more than one attacker situations,and just plain old street tactics. My first instinct in the ring is hit then clinch. In the street its eye jab then clinch. Then go for the groin or throat then disengage. To call this MMA training or Traditional is stupid. I'm what you would consider a style jumper :) but it makes me ready for tons of situations. I first thing i look for when i enter somewhere is where the exits are just in case.
The style vs style debate is stupid and way old. IF you thing traditional arts are going to save you in the street GOOD LUCK, if you think training MMA is going to save you in the street GOOD LUCK! I for one know my training has limitations but i also train three swat teams members who have told first hand that the training with us has got them out of some tight "real life" problems. So who ever said mixing is bad is my best friend cause the person just saved my life on the street if i ever met then in a fight :p

DelicateSound

06-02-2002, 07:46 AM

IF you thing traditional arts are going to save you in the street GOOD LUCK, if you think training MMA is going to save you in the street GOOD LUCK!

"Traditional" training can save you on the street.
"MMA" training can save you on the street.

However, training for the street is the best way to survive on the street.

Archangel

06-02-2002, 08:15 AM

I'll answer your questions,

The Taji guy,

I haven't seen his fight yet. I'd like to see highlights and unedited video clips to make a better judgement. Does anyone have any?

8 step guy,

That guy was also trained in Japanese Aikido, so he knew his locks and understood the principles of grappling. That combined with realistic training would make a decent fighter. He was by no means PURELY a CMA guy.

Joel Sutton,

Here's another example of a cross trainer. I can get Joel's stats over the net if you like but he was a former wrestler and trained alot of BJJ ground positioning for his fights.

And by the way that's 3 not 4.

Le nOObi

06-02-2002, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by Archangel
I'll answer your questions,

8 step guy,

That guy was also trained in Japanese Aikido, so he knew his locks and understood the principles of grappling. That combined with realistic training would make a decent fighter. He was by no means PURELY a CMA guy.

Actually mantis has a lot of stand up grappling so im sure that knowing aikido helped him in the fight you cant say that he did mantis for striking and aikido for grappling.

NorthernMantis

06-02-2002, 10:25 AM

No one ever said that mma is non effective. We just wish that ignorant people would get off our backs about not being effective and leave us alone. However I see what you mean though.

Archangel-

I think there are clips on the website. If you look at the pics ,also, you can see the kickboxer has a busted mouth so it goes to show that taiji guys aren't as soft as people might think.

Like I said about Joel, he used to do praying mantis but left.

The other guy might have known Aikido but didn't he compete as a mantis practtioner?

Archangel

06-02-2002, 12:12 PM

"I think there are clips on the website. If you look at the pics ,also, you can see the kickboxer has a busted mouth so it goes to show that taiji guys aren't as soft as people might think."

There is no doubt in my mind that J. Cram is a tough and talented fighter. I just want to see the clips and see the techniques he used.

"Like I said about Joel, he used to do praying mantis but left"

Well you erroneously stated that Joel used pure praying mantis to win his fights, which he did not. He used alot of wrestling and what looked like a brazilian guard. Why did he leave 8 step?

"The other guy might have known Aikido but didn't he compete as a mantis practtioner?"

He didn't just know Aikido, from what I heard he was fairly proficient at it. Never the less he was a cross trainer and not a pure CMA guy.

chokeyouout

06-02-2002, 01:21 PM

Thats great, they listed their style.Those pics show looping punches and clinches.Is that Praying Mantis tech's?Killer that they entered, that itself is monumental.

Braden

06-02-2002, 01:47 PM

This is hilarious. Because one guy uses guard, he must be using BJJ? Because one guy used a hook, he must be using boxing?

Do you really believe the styles YOU practice somehow "own" techniques? What exactly can people do in a ring if punching and grappling doesn't count?

The taiji guy trained entirely in taiji. Both he and his trainer have been posting here (and elsewhere, including the UG) routinely since he began training, with sometimes quite long posts about their methods. And alot of the time they were laughed at.

Well, their taiji training methods gave him the sensitivity and power to defeat people bigger and more experienced in what you call MMA. There's no decision to be made in the matter. That is pure and simple fact.

The exact same as Mike Patterson's xingyi trained fighters I have posted about every other time you guys brought up this question. Which you ignored. The exact same as Tim Cartmell cleaning up BJJ tourney's. Which you ignored. The exact same as the other half dozen examples I have posted when you guys bring this up.

But you guys keep the blinders on.

Because these new guys used hooks and the guard, they must be doing BJJ and boxing!? LOL You guys sound like the wierdos here going on about how all jiujitsu is really kungfu. Because Tim trains in BJJ, his neijia training doesn't count? Sorry - boolsheet. The skills you have come from your training. If a man has skills, you can't suddenly discount what he's done for the VAST MAJORITY of his training just because he's done a bit of what you'd like to believe is uber-art (especially when the man himself talks about the immense contributions of the other training, and demonstrates it on public free videos). Martial skill is firstly about power and sensitivity, and secondly about techniques. This isn't a chinese belief, it's everywhere. Go read Roy Harris's BJJ experiences for example. More and more, we're finding people trained in what you call traditional arts getting more power and more sensitivity, and using it to defeat what you call MMA styles - at their own game.

There's nothing to decide about in this matter, except whether or not you're going to keep those blinders on. I think we all allready know the answer though.

[/rant]

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 02:04 PM

Braden---

Lovely rant but, I believe, generally misdirected.

The real thing I took away from Archangel's post about this wasn't "Kung Fu doesn't help," but rather "they had to crosstrain too."

Tim Cartmel has been successful, as have Mike Patterson's guys--but they have crosstrained, yes? Done something OTHER than a CMA for the ringfight?

The guys from Shooters' gym are an interesting exception to this, I must admit, however, the more I listen to what he says, the more it seems he is finding tai chi in everything. That's not meant as a disparaging remark. Analogy is the easiest way to learn anything, and the easiest way to teach it.

Would other Tai Chi instructors find his fighters to be "very tai chi"-y in their style of fighting? Again, not a disparaging remark, a question only. It's not even posed to find out "who's tai chi is right and who's is wrong," but rather as an abstract supposition--would OTHER Tai Chi people look at his fighters and say "yep, that's Tai Chi?"

Your point, of course, is well taken. If I have to answer "what style are you," I'm a BJJer, but I do a little boxing and I used to wrestle. I'm sure that somebody under Patterson who has done some guardwork and groundfighting would probably say they did "xingyi and a little 'x'" No?

Just curious.

Braden

06-02-2002, 02:09 PM

MP - I've been reading what these two specifically have said on this topic for ages now. Maybe I've jumped the gun and they've opened their eyes. We'll see when they respond, eh? I'll be eager to apologize for being presumptious if this is the case.

In fact, I'll apologize now. You're right. I did jump the gun a bit. I shouldn't have. I'm sorry.

FWIW, I was reacting to AA's remark that JS used 'the guard' and 'wrestling' (I assume in the general sense, rather than wrestling proper, as the name of a specific martial art) as evidence that he wasn't using 'traditional arts.' Which, of course, is ridiculous. And CYO's remark that JC used 'the clinch' and 'hooks' as example that he wasn't doing taiji. Which, of course, is ridiculous. Except for my tangent to past arguments (ie. MP and TC) on this topic, this IS what I [tried to] address in the post. So it was only slightly misdirected. ;) I actually took out a humorous reference to Kalaripayat as the ultimate art to make it stay more on topic. ;p

Do many of these examples cross-train to be successfull? Yes. And so do wrestlers, muay thai-ists, BJJ guys, and everyone else. So these 'traditional' arts are in the exact same boat as every other art. Wow, what a surprising conclusion. ;)

This conclusion is all I have ever argued for. I have argued against both [what I would call] the silly MMAists saying CMAs are lesser, and [what I would call] the silly TMAists saying what they do is uber (eg. the eye-gouge thread). Every art really is, more or less, in the same boat.

Would other taiji-ists call what JC did taiji? Does it matter? JC trained the taiji way. He entered a contest. The results were seen. Use results to evaluate method of training. Isn't this the cherished MMA formula? I'm not a taiji man, so I shouldn't/can't really comment, but _my understanding is_ most (all?) taiji-ists would agree that the fundamental of the arts (4 cardinal directions and 4 corners) are templates to understand energy relations (not in the esoteric sense) between two people, and to use a peculiar body mechanic to provide excellent power and sensitivity along these 'axes' - the whole of which can be interpreted in a very wide spectrum of ways. If you examine the other postures in the taiji form (as others have posted), you will find all sorts of techniques - hooks, clinches, and all sorts of other stuff. Classically (again, this is all in my very limited understanding of the art - and I encourage someone to clarify or correct), teachers would emphasize (ie. spend alot of time training out) a subset of the _techniques_ they personally felt appropriate, all within the template of the 4 directions and 4 corners. So in this sense, what JC and his teacher are doing definitely fits the traditional mold, even in a conservative interpretation. (recap - so it seems to fit both MMA and traditional taiji interpretations of a valid training regime)

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 02:15 PM

Right--and that's exactly Archangel's point, unless I've missed it--it hasn't just been CMA--it's been "CMA AND 'x'".

There isn't a successful fighter out there in the top echelons that hasn't cross trained in something else. Mark Kerr throws some decent Thai style roundkicks, so he's obviously crosstrained since they don't have those in freestyle wrestling :)

We've come a long way from the Royce Gracie fake front stomp kick dive for the legs strategy... I think....

w/regard to "Shooter's brand of Tai Chi," :). I personally don't care if what he's doing is or isn't Tai Chi. It makes no difference to me. It's successful, and that's what counts. That IS the MMA philosophy, and I'm just fine with it.

I'm not even suggesting that what he's doing ISN'T Tai Chi. What I'm wondering is if 'most' Tai Chi guys would look at it and say "this is Tai Chi." I can watch Renzo Gracie fight and what he's using is CLEARLY BJJ as the base--he does other stuff, don't get me wrong. It's got that BJJ feel to it and the set-ups, and positioning, etc, all have that BJJ look. Sakuraba, on the other hand, while grappling and using subs, really does NOT look like BJJ. That doesn't make it better or worse, but it's clearly not BJJ.

What if you went to a Wing Chun place that had turned out some successful ring fighters, and when you got there, everything they were doing looked exactly like western boxing, down to hand positioning, stance and weighting, and training philosophy. Are they a WC place?

That's more what I'm getting at. I personally have no basis of comparison, and further, I'm really not interested in what other people think of his gym or his tai chi--he's producing successful fighters, and that's good enough for me.

Does any of the above make sense? Again--not trying to cast disparaging remarks--just trying to throw out what might be termed "a thought experiment." I don't believe it requires an answer, but it is something to be cognizant of.

Braden

06-02-2002, 02:50 PM

Taiji circles are ridiculous. No matter what you're doing, there will be other taiji guys saying it's not taiji. You really can't draw conclusions from that. Alot of it is just general martial arts circle nonsense. But some of it also is:

You're right, there are indicators of good taiji, as opposed to just good martial, training. However, they're not really in what techniques are used. Remember when I pointed out to you the odd way those two chinese guys stood? It's stuff like that. And hands-on stuff like the infamous 'teacher test.'

Maybe this is similar to your comment about Sak. If so, I guess what causes the problems here is that you really have to develop an eye for these kinds of things. I certainly can't look at Sak and say "See, right there, you can see he's trained such-and-such." I _have_ noted that he moves differently from alot of other guys in the same tournies doing the same things. In fact, I've always loved the way he moved. But I can't quantify it, or associate it with any kind of training. In my arrogance, I've always just associated it with skill. ;)

Le nOObi

06-02-2002, 02:52 PM

Originally posted by chokeyouout
Thats great, they listed their style.Those pics show looping punches and clinches.Is that Praying Mantis tech's?Killer that they entered, that itself is monumental.

Wow great post on so many levels.First of all those pictures are not of someone who even claims to do praying mantis they are of someone doing taichi. You said that if someone used traditional techniques and entered a tournament and won this would put an end to this stupid debate. Well they have. Then you make a comment like this!

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 02:57 PM

Braden, exactly my point. If you go to a BJJ school, and the supposed instructor tells you that there's no such thing as open guard, or can't fight at all from his back, then you need to move along.

Good Tai Chi training will likely have certain hallmarks, just like good BJJ training will. And a good tai chi man should be able to identify those hallmarks in a tai chi fighter.

Still frame photos are rotten ways to try that, of course.

Sak's skilled alright :) But whatever he does, it ain't BJJ. He might have trained "in it/with it," but it's clearly not his base. And good skill is good skill, period. But being skilled in WC probably doesn't look like being skilled in Judo....

Archangel

06-02-2002, 03:59 PM

Ya, what Merry Prankster said......

I really don't see where the point of contention was. I never once said that Joel wasn't a CMA guy anymore; I said that he wasn't a PURE CMA guy anymore. When I see him execute a nice double leg or a good sprawl and I KNOW FOR A FACT that he was a wrestler in the past. It's only logical for me to think that Hmmmm... maybe his wrestling training had something to do with that.

When Joel busted open Geza Kalman Jr. it was obvious to me that it was his Mantis training that had alot to do with it. See Braden it works both ways :)

Braden

06-02-2002, 04:55 PM

Sounds great to me.

The point of contention is that, purposefully or not, this is not the attitude you have portrayed. When someone wins a tourney with BJJ, you don't see a series of replies saying "Yeah, but he trained in wrestling." You have also started threads saying specifically that muay thai, wrestling, and BJJ have all been proven, whereas traditional arts have not. But by the logic shown here, MT is in the exact same boat as praying mantis.

I thinking largely the problem stems from the fact that you guys simply haven't the faintest clue what praying mantis, taiji, xingyi, etc training actually consists of. This makes you draw some pretty peculiar conclusions. A good example of this is your comment that his aikido training gave him a foundation in grappling.

There is alot, ALOT of grappling in many (most?) chinese martial styles. Here are some examples drawn directly and purely from traditional chinese arts:

Movies:

http://homepage.mac.com/mancheta/iMovieTheater1.html (xingyi throw)
http://homepage.mac.com/mancheta/iMovieTheater2.html (bagua throw)
http://homepage.mac.com/mancheta/iMovieTheater5.html (taiji throw)
http://www.hsing-i.com/pics/WChinNaLv.mpg (neijia joint lock techniques) *
http://www.brainsalad.com/mov/clip02.mov (not sure what style - throwing and takedown techniques)
http://www.hsing-i.com/pics/WPKP2App.mpg (bagua throw) *

Pictures:

http://www.shenwu.com/bgtchnq.htm (bagua throw)
http://www.shenwu.com/b3_techq.htm (bagua throw)
http://www.shenwu.com/bg4tchnq.htm (bagua throw)
http://www.shenwu.com/yangtchnq.htm (taiji throw)

* These may not work as links for some reason. Typing in the link in a fresh IE window seems to work. Or go through the host site.

Braden

06-02-2002, 05:12 PM

Out of curiosity, is Sak's way of moving characteristic of a style, that you can say?

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 05:14 PM

Braden,

With the exception of a few of those throws, I will not give you my opinion of them--I will instead say that there are more things than just the ones that I am aware of, so my opinion means little. I am sure that with the right training and a proper understanding, I would be less um, feeling the way I feel about them :)

No knock on anybody, again--I just don't understand a lot of them. I'm usually able to translate things over, but I saw a lot of wierd stuff. I would have to be on the receiving end, I guess :D

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 05:18 PM

Sak has a very "catch," type mentality, in that he tends to hit locks from anywhere, anytime from any wierd position he wants. BJJers tend to focus on avoiding positions considered "bad," and focus on submission attempts only once in a spot that's "safe." That of course, is relative to the individual, and doesn't preclude an offensive game.

Different things for different people :)

Braden

06-02-2002, 05:21 PM

I'm not sure which ones you're talking about. However, I didn't say I necessarily liked all of them myself. They are simply examples of how, regardless of whether you like it, the chinese arts train grappling. One of the good things, however, about those specific people is that, with the exception of the old black and white clip, those people have all 'proven their stuff in the ring.' It's worth noting that it's pretty hard to judge stuff from demos anyway, where the reciever will yield to the force dramatically to avoid injury as best as possible, and the technique is out of place from the flow of combat. Wrestling and BJJ techniques, shown in isolation like that, also tend to look kind of sketchy. You can probably imagine my impression the first time I saw an "isolation demo" of the flying armbar.

Braden

06-02-2002, 05:23 PM

To me, Sak just always seems very in control of his center, as opposed to most of the fighters in those events which (for better or worse) really throw their center around. He seems to change direction very quickly because of this.

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 05:23 PM

I still consider the flying armbar a low percentage move :) Good for surprise occasionally, I guess...

I agree--it's hard to show things from a demo. Some things rely on a sense of timing that is subtle and impossible to demonstrate in a compliant drill.

It's funny you should discuss the old black and white one... I was least skeptical of that one :D But like I said--my opinion means little because I have no experience there.

He does change directions quickly. He's very acrobatic.

Braden

06-02-2002, 05:26 PM

Yeah, I've seen SO MANY matches won with flying armbar though. It always surprises me, since I was under the impression most people considered it low percentage.

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 05:32 PM

Well, it's one of those things that happens often enough to be useful. I'll probably never do it. :)

Braden

06-02-2002, 05:35 PM

I didn't think you'd react THAT strongly against them though. ;p Although the entries might be wierd to you, the second and third pictoral throws are also basics in judo, aren't they? And the fourth in wrestling? The first movie throw (xingyi) looks alot like judo, albeit with a different entry and a bit 'looser'. I've been told the second movie (bagua) is in judo, although I've never been able to find any evidence of this; but it DOES show clinching, and the throw itself is very similar to puter kepala from silat. The fifth movie (not sure what style) has single leg variation (with the hip fold) and a hip throw counter to rear bearhug - both of which I've seen essentially exactly like that in judo. The fourth movie (neijia joint lock) I chose because many of the techniques reminded me of aikido (which AA brought up).

Archangel

06-02-2002, 05:41 PM

Braden,

When a cross trainer wins a fight with say an armbar (typical BJJ manouver), it's already understood that he trains in other arts; we don't have to say it. It's an open book in the MMA world, we all crosstrain in other arts to compliment our own. What I saw in this thread was Northen Mantis stating that Joel Sutton won with pure Mantis which was incorrect.

I have tried on many occasions to find out more about the arts you mentioned. I asked a praying mantis guy to provide me with links about low mantis groundfighting and he was unable or unwilling. Then there was shooter with his "It's all Tai chi" BS. You've been the only one whos given any info about some of these arts.

Shooter

06-02-2002, 05:42 PM

Common qualities of good combat athletes:

Peng; No one can see peng in a picture or video. They can only feel it. If you see the absence of ground-path, you'll erroneously assume the absence of peng as a quality of one's internal dynamic. Tai Chi is a study of peng, and refines it to a very high-level in short order if its principles are understood and applied...in this case to the context of combat athletics.

Positional and Spacial Awareness; Another intangible component which is observable on one level, but pictures and video don't convey the interplay of awareness and sensitivity exchanged between combatants.

Tactical and Strategic Apllication; As dictated by the format, these are retro-actively understood. Not something readily apparent prior to their manifesting.

Circular Movement; Hooking, wrapping, winding, and attacking the center are all skills which are common attributes. Tai Chi's useage is very similar to street-fighting as I understand it currently. I believe the sport of MMA is moving toward this type of movement more and more as the sport evolves.

Unique qualities of Tai Chi ring-fighting:

5 Steps; These are the foundation of Tai Chi's positional strategies which are mysterious in their application when understood and applied by a Tai Chi player who's matched against a non-player. The 5 Steps are what gave J the tools he needed to dismantle his opponent's game plan. No luck was involved, nor was it needed. All he had to do was stick with Tai Chi's positional game-plan. We've modified the 5 Steps to apply to the MMA format which isn't much different than that of a real violent encounter. This is easy as MMA is a very basic format for studying 5 Steps. Nothing different than how I introduce these ideas in our regular training.

8 Gates; These are not only tactical, but internal concepts of transforming so-called "jing" into effective energy management. They are as reliant on the mental and emotional component of one's dynamic as they are on the ability to physically relax, and adapt one's structure to change from moment to moment. 8 Gates are myserious on another level in terms of a non-initiate trying to appreciate its use. Especially when they haven't had the prior knowledge of 8 Gates and can only feel blindly as they try to organize the details of a Tai Chi player's unique method of body usage. 10 minutes in a full-contact exchange isn't nearly enough time for someone to determine how 8 Gates will emerge.

No-mind; This is the single most important factor in good Tai Chi usage. 'Nuff said.

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 05:47 PM

Shooter--please trust me when I tell you I believe first that you are using pure tai chi in the ring, and also that your vision of what tai chi IS works just fine. :) What I proposed was nothing more than a thought experiment, and has no import beyond that.

I'd rather not start down the path of a disagreement in rhetoric which has nothing to do with anything useful, by presenting what I say/have said in a manner which is misunderstood.

Braden

06-02-2002, 05:51 PM

"When a cross trainer wins a fight with say an armbar (typical BJJ manouver), it's already understood that he trains in other arts; we don't have to say it."

People were armbarring hundreds of years before BJJ existed. It's present in almost every martial art, to my knowledge.

"I asked a praying mantis guy to provide me with links about low mantis groundfighting and he was unable or unwilling."

FWIW I have also never seen any evidence of much groundfighting in any kungfu style, despite many people's claims; unless you include basic transitioning into a jointlock or pin from standing grappling or a throw.

"You've been the only one whos given any info about some of these arts."

I know, and it's unfortunate. I'm really not qualified to be having these discussions. It's good though that we have people like Tim Cartmell and Mike Patterson, and now Shooter (despite the aforementioned wierdness), who are working hard to show the world that the neijia (a subset of the chinese martial arts) contain wonderful martial training methods in any context.

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 05:59 PM

I think Braden, that they are all just things I am not used to seeing, and I would have to experience them to give a useful opinion--until then, it looks so odd that even though I can see the principles used, I cannot see the necessary control established that causes them to work :)

Shooter

06-02-2002, 06:01 PM

(despite the aforementioned wierdness)

Braden, what wierdness? :)

It's all Tai Chi. It has nothing to do with perception. It's The Way...The Tao.

Braden

06-02-2002, 06:04 PM

Which ones?

I understand though. The neijia are all about controlling someone's structure as quickly as possible. Alot of people have commented that the remarkable talent of such skilled individuals is what started rumours of things like no-touch knockouts.

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 06:04 PM

It's all Tai Chi. It has nothing to do with perception. It's The Way...The Tao.

Sigh... I know Shooter, I know :D

Braden

06-02-2002, 06:04 PM

Telling them it's all taiji, man. ;)

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 06:05 PM

Specifically.... almost all of them :) ALMOST, mind you, not all of them :)

Specifically, the Bagua one gives me the MOST headaches.

Shooter

06-02-2002, 06:22 PM

Merryprankster, I wasn't attempting to draw you into anything with what I posted above. Just wanted to show how Tai Chi contains the common attributes found in all combat athletics from a Tai Chi perspective, and to outline the things which make our training uniquely "Tai Chi" as we apply it to the MMA format. :)

Merryprankster

06-02-2002, 06:24 PM

I didn't think you were. I just wanted to make clear that I wasn't trying to start the "It's all Tai Chi,"argument again. :D

Have you posted that particular little Tai Chi explanation of what makes YOUR MMA training Tai Chi on the internal forum? Or is that worth your time?

Braden

06-02-2002, 06:41 PM

Movie #6 (bagua): This one IS pretty nuts. If you can get your leg tight behind the other guy's leg the way he has, you can take their balance really easily by sinking that leg slightly to press their hip, knee, and ankle. The other people doing this I've seen have the leg tighter, to put more pressure on the ankle. As far as what to do with this, I've also never seen anyone else do that wierd spiralled sweep. Usually, from that position, you simply take their structure in order to do general badness with your elbows to the guy's upper body. If he tries to shift into that leg to solidify, that's when you sweep - although again, other people doing this I've seen sweep more conventionally. If he tries to empty that leg and lift it up to step out, you can give it a little bump up with the trapping leg to offbalance and keep the other leg solid a bit longer, and as your leg descends from giving him that bump, descend it violently against his supporting leg's knee or shin. Otherwise, you can also simply sink dramatically into that trapping leg to get him to his knee with your body partly behind his. So again, the sweep he does looks wierd to me as well. But the position itself is, I think, quite useful in general for establishing control. We (and most others) also do it with a tighter stance, to facilitate shifting OUR weight, in order to empty or solidify the trapping leg (for sinking vs sweeping, etc). That said, I've never played with 'hugging' the guy from behind in that position, like he does - he could be getting some power from that which I'm not familiar with. Here's someone using the posture more like we use it: http://www.blacktaoist.com/graphics/applications/DarrenandRandall.html

I dunno what you're not seeing in the others. The first pictoral one is a violent irimnage, the second is a seoinage, the third is like a koshinage (tsuri komi maybe?). In each, he's entering pretty dramatically. The first movie is like puter kepala as seen here: http://www.dogbrothers.com/bytes.htm and like how he starts to go for here: http://www.dogbrothers.com/bytes3.htm , only with a feinted lead to get him resisting in the wrong direction, and more power derived from the step that rotates the whole body.

Shooter

06-02-2002, 07:25 PM

Braden, can't help myself when geniuses like AA are presuming to have the insights which would allow them to make a value "judgement" on a TCC player's usage of their system in the ring. :p

Merryprankster, not really worth it. Most people in Tai Chi circles don't even want to aknowledge that we exist let alone that we're accomplishing something worthwhile in our basic training. Understandable though. Much of what I write must seem very radical and so far outside of their own understanding. Also, since we're the only school doing this stuff with a strictly Tai Chi approach, it must frighten and upset quite a few of them. :p

Stacey

06-02-2002, 08:28 PM

yes that 8 step (Andy Lengefeld) did study aikido back in Japan. He says that he learned more joint locks in 8 step. Many of the applications are identical with only grip variations. He won because he trained hard. You can talk about hardcore training or you can practically live at your kung fu school, eat, sleep and drink pain and exhaustion.

There was another 8 step guy in Iowa that won a Tourney in Sioux City. He was a high school wrestler who learned groundfighting in 8 step. He beat a semi pro fighter quickly with a choke. The guy cursed at him, so this student (named Eric) got back into the cage and hurt the guy using power punches. Fight promoters offered to make him pro (IE Exploit him for chump change) but he told them where to stick it.

I would like to add that both of these gentlemen were Sifu Students. We have a couple at my school and I get to be the dummy. its no joke the stuff they are learning.

You can write it off all you want. 8 Step is a great system with hardcore training for serious students. We have the training, not just the techniques. I think this is what lends to the amount of competent fighters we have. There is criticism from outside people about learning too quickly or promoting too fast, but that only happens when people are learning to enjoy pain and hard work like a nice merlot. I like it and I can't wait to see more chinese martial art styles doing the same.

BTW....Never wrestled, but learned to sprawl and grapple in 8 step. Even outwrestled wrestlers and confused them with tai chi throwing., leaving them spinning.

Archangel, your not gonna find a web site about 8 step grappling. Its very indoor stuff because only the low level stuff is wrestling. Thats right. The higher level stuff is all about breaking necks from what I hear. Nasty if you ask me. But thats how praying mantises do it...the attack the back of the neck.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 12:24 AM

Originally posted by omegapoint

..... Although he admired the raw destructiveness of Kodokan Judo and the Samurai traditions, he also understood the fighting acumen of TCMA great Wang Shujin (Neijia). A friend of Draeger, Wang would often visit him in Japan and put on demonstrations where he would take on all challengers regardless of style. He was never defeated. While staying with Don he would often use the support posts of the hosts house as a kind of Makiwara. He would shake the house at its foundations, and often guests would stare in awe at his strength and technique. His knowledge of Tai Chi was extraordinary, and he knew how to use it for real self-protection. Draeger and Bluming would often challenge blow-hards and MAs "experts". They would often be denied. Sometimes they sparred the cat and whupped him real good. Don never, ever even considered challenging Wang and other Chinese martial artists like him. Mr. Draeger would remark that it would probably be the last challenge he would or could ever make.
.
GM Wang was my Xing-yi and Bagua Grandmaster. GM Wang has once met my ShuaiChiao GM Chang and Chang considered Wang has great force and Wang admire Chang over-all.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 12:55 AM

Originally posted by Shooter

Merryprankster, not really worth it. Most people in Tai Chi circles don't even want to aknowledge that we exist let alone that we're accomplishing something worthwhile in our basic training. Understandable though. Much of what I write must seem very radical and so far outside of their own understanding. Also, since we're the only school doing this stuff with a strictly Tai Chi approach, it must frighten and upset quite a few of them. :p
There are some reasons that the TaiChi people will questioned about just what I can see form the 6 pictures there. First, it is very clear that in the 5 steps you said you have followed, there will be no tilting forward, backward, left, nor right. In the pictrue, that was violated. Structurally, the spine form top of head to the bottom of torsel is not straight. Opened mouth is not correct way of breathing.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 01:12 AM

I would say styles does matter. You can annalize as how much energy you will spend to complete a purpose. How much risk as the counter moves may be applied by your opponent. How does it build fighting abilities in short terms and long terms. How does it help the life long benefits of mental and physical health.

The individual also matters. Each practicer has different reflections, different body type, different personality. They may be advantage in one style over another. Some styles are made to cover more different types of individuals and some will concentrate on certain types of it.

The Traditional CMA has tournaments differntly incompare to MMA: The ground/stage is not soft, no gloves, no cages nor rings(you fall off the ground/stage, you lose). (kind like in DragonBallZ) The TCMA are very clearly established in styles and if you using a style other than you claimed, in the old days, you will be put in shame.

There are one more factor TCAM considered in priority to power--the wells/courage to fight. If you look at the true stories of past masters of TCMA(not the fancy fictions), you can find that the old way of thinking and philosophy/value of life is very different then the MMA. We TCAM must justified our action of fight beyound just to put injors on the others to prove you have better art.

chokeyouout

06-03-2002, 01:18 AM

Thats great some guy fought and listed his "style" as tai chi.Did you see the fight?Where you there?If so did he use his tai chi technique?Or did you read something on the internet and assume he won with tai chi and in turn are running YOUR mouth.I know a little about MMA and I don't run my mouth.If you have a problem with that then Fukc you.

Braden

06-03-2002, 01:45 AM

CYO is probably right. A giant taiji conspiracy is a much more likely interpretation of the facts than to believe someone actually won a fight using taiji.

chokeyouout

06-03-2002, 01:53 AM

Braden-

Any style is capable of winning any mma tournament.That's a fact.Iv'e been studying MMA since 94, so for someone to whine about respect and competence when talking about this sport needs to check themselves.Style vs. style is pretty much dead in MMA.Thats unfortunate because americans love debate.A good CMA artist would boost MMA' popularity immensely.

Shooter

06-03-2002, 02:23 AM

Also, since we're the only school doing this stuff with a strictly Tai Chi approach, it must frighten and upset quite a few of them.

PaulLin, I rest my case.

What would you suggest we list our MA as when we enter the next MMA competition? If we're doing such a poor job of representing the system we claim, why don't you get in the ring and show us how it's done? Maybe put us to "shame."

J was 18 and still only a first-year player when he entered that event, so the Northern Lights Tai Chi players are going to be misrepresenting Tai Chi for a long time. I'd say all the "legit" players have their work cut out for them if they plan to undo all the damage we're about to unleash on its image. :)

Northern Lights Tai Chi was founded in 1986. All I've ever known it as is Northern Lights Tai Chi. Gee, it's gonna be hard to quit Tai Chi after all those years of study. :)

In all fairness to you, we are not strictly focused on MMA. It's a part of our regular training in basic skill-sets. We don't foster any delusions about crossing hands in a friendly competition and its relation whatever to real fighting. We cross hands like that all the time and continue to develop our skill within the school, but we also enjoy crossing hands with other MAs players to see how we stack up under pressure. Why is that a problem?

Thats great some guy fought and listed his "style" as tai chi.Did you see the fight?Where you there?If so did he use his tai chi technique?

Yes. Yes. And yes.

It seems that Tai Chi people aren't the only ones to be frightened and upset by the idea that Tai Chi players can cross hands in the ring. :p

joedoe

06-03-2002, 02:33 AM

I haven't bothered to read all of this thread, so I apologise if I repeat anything that anyone else has said.

It is true - it is not the style but the practitioner that wins the fight. However, the other important factor is the teacher. IMO the order of importance is:

The fighter.
The teacher (this includes the type of training done).
The style (given the circumstances).

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 03:44 AM

Originally posted by Shooter

PaulLin, I rest my case.

What would you suggest we list our MA as when we enter the next MMA competition? If we're doing such a poor job of representing the system we claim, why don't you get in the ring and show us how it's done? Maybe put us to "shame."

J was 18 and still only a first-year player when he entered that event, so the Northern Lights Tai Chi players are going to be misrepresenting Tai Chi for a long time. I'd say all the "legit" players have their work cut out for them if they plan to undo all the damage we're about to unleash on its image. :)

Northern Lights Tai Chi was founded in 1986. All I've ever known it as is Northern Lights Tai Chi. Gee, it's gonna be hard to quit Tai Chi after all those years of study. :)

In the history of Taichi, as you have know, Chen's, Yang's, Wu's, Woo's, Sun's. I think you can add some prefix. Is yours called Northern Lights Tai Chi? Is it like Northern Lights Style? I think that can clearify the confusions about to see your Taichi with other style's regulations.

If I am in a TCMA tournamet, back in 100 years ago, I will put this kind of things in shame. Then again, time has changed, poeple changed, culture changed. What was shame back then may not be a shame now. Are you in the area near Orange County, CA at all? It will be very interesting to check out a new style of Taichi.

J is 18 and alrealy value Taichi as much, I think his future is bright. It usually take a much older man with more experience to value Taichi and let Taichi represent his discipline.

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 07:04 AM

Braden--it was actually the second link you posted, not the sixth.

Shooter--I see what you mean about posting on the IMA forum.

PaulLin--how is fighting MMA different from old CMA comps? I don't mean the rules, I mean, what is conceptually different--why is it ok to fight in old CMA comps but not MMA?

Braden

06-03-2002, 01:54 PM

The first [bagua] movie [second link] is like puter kepala as seen here: http://www.dogbrothers.com/bytes.htm and [exactly] like how he starts to go for here: http://www.dogbrothers.com/bytes3.htm , only with a feinted lead to get him resisting in the wrong direction, and more power derived from the step that rotates the whole body.

Shooter

06-03-2002, 01:58 PM

PaulLin,

ÔNorthern Lights Tai Chi and Chi Kung School of Internal Martial ArtsÕ is the name of the school. No such thing as styles beyond the individual.

If your assessment of my schoolÕs Tai Chi Chuan is based on 6 random pictures of a beginning player engaged in a high-pressure situation, youÕre limiting yourself a pin-hole view. You gotta know that though...right? You should be less selective and read more of what I post here to get a better idea of what my practice and teaching entails.

J is ten-fold the player he was then. He isnÕt the only player from our school whoÕs competed. IÕm 9-7. There are others.

I agree with you that his future is bright though. I can only hope that when heÕs studied as long as you have, heÕll be much less critical in his judgement of a first-year playerÕs performance in a similar setting (training exercise). In fact, I doubt he'll so presumptuous at all. He's been there, done that.

Like all his classmates, he understands that Tai Chi is an evolutionary process of the individual acquiring levels of skill with time spent. How many Tai Chi people can remember that much before they start passing judgement?

How perfect is your practice, PaulLin? Could you do any better in crossing hands with J's opponent? I seriously doubt it.

Braden

06-03-2002, 02:07 PM

KnightSabre

Again...

"We've never lost to any traditional school."

Have you ever competed in a tourney or circuit which [whatever you count as] traditional artists routinely join?

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 02:10 PM

I still don't buy it in the first new link you posted. Like I said though, my unfamiliarity is probably the sticking point :)

However, the second one is clean to me--he's using the stick to trap and create leverage--note that he grabs it on the far side with the other hand, and I understand that just fine.

Braden

06-03-2002, 02:15 PM

Well... give it a shot sometime. ;)

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 02:18 PM

Highly unlikely--most of the guys I train with won't let you extend their arms that far :D

NorthernMantis

06-03-2002, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by chokeyouout
I know a little about MMA and I don't run my mouth.If you have a problem with that then Fukc you.

Chokeyouout-

I could have resorted to come back in the same manner but I'm not. The reason why I said that was because I thought you were one of the many mma's that come here and disrespect us in our forum, where we share our ideas and philosophy. Why is it so hard for you to believe that he used taiji during the fight? It was listed in the site why would they lie? Who's to say that he didn't use taiji in the fight? What makes you an expert on it and say how taiji looks like in a fight?

Or did you read something on the internet and assume he won with tai chi and in turn are running YOUR mouth

1)It's right on the site dude or didn't you read? Not only that I copied and pasted. How is a site that is dedicated to having mma competitions going to put on that a taiji won a match?

2)The guy who won posts on this forum.You figure out the rest:)

Braden

06-03-2002, 02:28 PM

Get them to resist the wrong way with that opening move, grip properly, and with the added torque from their head, you might be surprised. Or just misalign the shoulders in a way you're more comfortable with.

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 02:38 PM

An underhook, plus pushing on the head is a similar way to take somebody over--also considered low percentage in wrestling--but it does work provided the other guy gives you bad posture.

The problem I had, as you surmised, is a shoulder control issue. To me, there are too many degrees of freedom in using that straight arm lever. You're relying on the grip to keep the elbow and shoulder from torquing and bending into a position of much less mechanical advantage, and, IME, that isn't enough.

Braden

06-03-2002, 02:49 PM

Underhook was what I was thinking too. ;)

You can make a wrist grip like that work quite well (something about levers and length from the fulcrum...), but it's a very different beast - you have to keep the slack completely out of his arm without making it unnatural, and rotate it along the axis it wants to swing. It definitely takes some time to get the feel for it. If you can change directions smoothly like he does in this, all the better.

Shooter

06-03-2002, 03:35 PM

To all the pedants (Larry, Fu-P, PaulLin, et al) and all the Tai Chi player-haters:

First, to the Tai Chi pedants; PaulLin, you limit your narrow understanding of 5 Steps to structure/posture, root, and balance. I was taught that 5 Steps contains positional strategies which I have yet to see anyone else discuss with any detail on any forum. Having said that, I'll limit my comments to the points you make about your understanding of the 5 Steps and rootedness.

Team Quest has one of the world's most solid grappling programs for the MMA format. J's opponent has an unquantifiable level of skill as a kickboxer (as listed in his profile), but he is a former member of a university wrestling team, and, well, he trains with Team Quest. J got caught by surprise early in the 1st round where he was unbalanced for a split second before recovering to his feet. After that, J was the only one to actually score a decisive throw/takedown in the match. Aside from that, he stood against every attempt Mr. Sagal made to take him down or even marginally unbalance him. If any of you pedantic Tai Chi theorists were to step in with Mr. Sagal, my money would be on him to KO-slam your ass inside of a minute. Your 5 Steps knowledge wouldn't do thing to stop him. If nothing else, I'd say that J's first year of developing his root was fairly represented that night.

Now I'm going into uncharted territory in terms of ya'll's undertsanding of the 5 Steps my sifu taught me, so you'll have to give me the benifit of the doubt here. We trained the ideas contained in the 5 Steps' positional strategies and corn-grinding Chi Kung as the only combative aspects of J's preparation for his first match. Aside from his Li/Ming energy management in his 8 Gates application, that's all he used to win a decision. He applied the 5 Steps exactly as we'd planned and he hit with corn-grinding at all the right times in conjunction with his use of 5 Steps positional strategies. Simple, basic Tai Chi stuff.

To the Tai Chi player-haters; None of you would even have a clue what you were looking at if you saw the whole match and wanted to see some Tai Chi "techniques." There are no techniques in Tai Chi. The ideas contained in J's ring strategies are secret and mysterious wonders of the mind-game. My teachers would watch J's match and be very appreciative of what they were seeing. That's good enough for me.

wufupaul

06-03-2002, 04:15 PM

I enjoyed your post, Shoots, and I understood it. It seems that some of the people on this forum don't understand your concepts, but how can you blame them? Tai chi is a very deep art, and trying to explain it is very complicated; since a lot of the principles and techniques have to be experienced, not just explained and talked about. Some of the MMA people, such as Merry P, simply won't be able to understand it from a discussion, they'd have to experience it to even start to gain a grasp of it. No offense, Merry P or other MMA peeps, that's just my opinion. I think what you're doing is great, Shooter, and I wouldn't dare wish you luck, cause you and your guys won't need it, you have solid experience and/or strong principles to back you up.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by Shooter
PaulLin,

ÔNorthern Lights Tai Chi and Chi Kung School of Internal Martial ArtsÕ is the name of the school. No such thing as styles beyond the individual.

If youÕre assessment of my schoolÕs Tai Chi Chuan is based on 6 random pictures of a beginning player engaged in a high-pressure situation, youÕre limiting yourself a pin-hole view. You gotta know that though...right? You should be less selective and read more of what I post here to get a better idea of what my practice and teaching entails.

J is ten-fold the player he was then. He isnÕt the only player from our school whoÕs competed. IÕm 9-7. There are others.

I agree with you that his future is bright though. I can only hope that when heÕs studied as long as you have, heÕll be much less critical in his judgement of a first-year playerÕs performance in a similar setting (training exercise). In fact, I doubt he'll so presumptuous at all. He's been there, done that.

Like all his classmates, he understands that Tai Chi is an evolutionary process of the individual acquiring levels of skill with time spent. How many Tai Chi people can remember that much before they start passing judgement?

How perfect is your practice, PaulLin? Could you do any better in crossing hands with J's opponent? I seriously doubt it.

Do you have a web site on it that I can see more? I sure like to try out the crossing hand you have called, is it same as the PushHands?

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 04:24 PM

No offense taken. I could explain how to move on the ground all day long and it wouldn't make any sense to somebody who's never done it. I don't understand things described in a Tai Chi way cause I've never done it! Makes sense to me :)

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by Shooter
To all the pedants (Larry, Fu-P, PaulLin, et al) and all the Tai Chi player-haters:

First, to the Tai Chi pedants; PaulLin, you limit your narrow understanding of 5 Steps to structure/posture, root, and balance. I was taught that 5 Steps contains positional strategies which I have yet to see anyone else discuss with any detail on any forum. Having said that, I'll limit my comments to the points you make about your understanding of the 5 Steps and rootedness.

Team Quest has one of the world's most solid grappling programs for the MMA format. J's opponent has an unquantifiable level of skill as a kickboxer (as listed in his profile), but he is a former member of a university wrestling team, and, well, he trains with Team Quest. J got caught by surprise early in the 1st round where he was unbalanced for a split second before recovering to his feet. After that, J was the only one to actually score a decisive throw/takedown in the match. Aside from that, he stood against every attempt Mr. Sagal made to take him down or even marginally unbalance him. If any of you pedantic Tai Chi theorists were to step in with Mr. Sagal, my money would be on him to KO-slam your ass inside of a minute. Your 5 Steps knowledge wouldn't do thing to stop him. If nothing else, I'd say that J's first year of developing his root was fairly represented that night.

Now I'm going into uncharted territory in terms of ya'll's undertsanding of the 5 Steps my sifu taught me, so you'll have to give me the benifit of the doubt here. We trained the ideas contained in the 5 Steps' positional strategies and corn-grinding Chi Kung as the only combative aspects of J's preparation for his first match. Aside from his Li/Ming energy management in his 8 Gates application, that's all he used to win a decision. He applied the 5 Steps exactly as we'd planned and he hit with corn-grinding at all the right times in conjunction with his use of 5 Steps positional strategies. Simple, basic Tai Chi stuff.

To the Tai Chi player-haters; None of you would even have a clue what you were looking at if you saw the whole match and wanted to see some Tai Chi "techniques." There are no techniques in Tai Chi. The ideas contained in J's ring strategies are secret and mysterious wonders of the mind-game. My teachers would watch J's match and be very appreciative of what they were seeing. That's good enough for me.

I don't really considered my kind of view as narrow, in fact, it is majority. The majority of Taichi aimming for a clean thow, join lock, and internal strikes without tangle up with opponent. That is why it will take one more than 10 years to really come up with real applications in the Traditional Taichi. By what I mean Traditional Taichi, I include the point of views of Chen, Yang, Wu, Woo, and Sun styles. The way you have using the concept are trading the longterm development to meet the short term applications. That is a new way in Taichi approach and was not encouraged in the traditional ways.

Don't take me wrong, I am not saying what you have is not Taichi, but just a new style. It doesn't hurt to try a new approach and see what are the results. On the other hand, I will still stay in the traditional way as I have been over 15 years. I have just break through some level and really want to try it out. Has no chance yet. If I have won Lottory, I would try it out right the way.

If I inconter with MR. Sagal, I shouldn't have that problem, but my weight class is havier. I also won't stay with only the Taichi style, my most common reactions are in BaGua, Xing-Yi, ShuaiChaio, and ShiaoLinChinNa.

Have you heard of silk wrapping and screwing forces? Do they have to do with the corn-grinding you are talking about?

Hey, wufupaul,

stop assume other's level until you have meet them. I have English language barrier.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by Merryprankster
No offense taken. I could explain how to move on the ground all day long and it wouldn't make any sense to somebody who's never done it. I don't understand things described in a Tai Chi way cause I've never done it! Makes sense to me :)

And yet, there are some people who think they can learn real arts by vedios and books.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Braden--it was actually the second link you posted, not the sixth.

Shooter--I see what you mean about posting on the IMA forum.

PaulLin--how is fighting MMA different from old CMA comps? I don't mean the rules, I mean, what is conceptually different--why is it ok to fight in old CMA comps but not MMA?

Why do you fight? Why do the other MMA fight?

Mantis9

06-03-2002, 05:02 PM

You make an excellent point. Though I am not well versed in Tai Chi Chuan, I understand that many TMA's are of high conceptual fiber.

I think many make the assumption that TMA are simply a volume of techniques linked together by a defining theme. Unfortunately, in many cases, they are right. This isn't because the style itself is that shallow. Perhaps, people observe or learn the technique, believing that this is the end of traditional martial understanding, when in fact its the beginning.

I liken MA to learn a language. A language's ultimate goal is to express thoughts and ideas by means of sound. As a student of languages, I can tell you that expressing the same idea in different languages is both the same and different. Grammar, tone, inflection, pronunciation, and other variables are different, but the objective can be the same.

Now, the 'best' way to express the idea to which I hypothetically refer isn't really important.

Merryprankster and other MMAers, I believe are looking for both this conceptual and pragmatic MA. I also believe that is why MMA's seeming do so well in competitions.

Discovering why your particular style is effective; the concepts behind its invention; and how to pragmatically apply it to fighting is the job of the TMAer and the MMAer.

Sometimes, it takes a MMA threating a TMA to rediscover itself.

Just my two cents.

Mantis9

Braden

06-03-2002, 05:13 PM

PaulLin - "I don't really considered my kind of view as narrow, in fact, it is majority. The majority of Taichi aimming for a clean thow, join lock, and internal strikes without tangle up with opponent"

No one ever claimed JCram had perfect form. No one said he epitomized taiji in every move. No one ever said he had no more to work on. Actually - quite the contrary: they said explicitly that he was a stark beginner and has continued to work hard to develop skill. The only claim being made is that he is training in taiji methods, and trying to make the most out of whatever skill he has achieved with them. It is expected in this situation that there will be flaws in his performance. Nonetheless, he performed - and we can be sure he learned from his experience. What possible disagreement could you have with this?

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 05:13 PM

PaulLin--

We all fight for a number of different reasons.

Some fight to show they are the best.

Some fight to show their team is the best.

Some fight for fun--because they enjoy the thrill of competition.

Some fight because they enjoy testing themselves against new challenges and new opponents as often as possible.

There are probably many other factors I have not considered because I am not everybody and everybody who does this does it for different reasons.

Personally, I fight because I enjoy competition and because I enjoy testing myself against the challenge of meeting new opponents as often as possible.

This year, when I went to the Pan-Am's, which is probably the second largest BJJ tournament in the sport, I lost in the first round by what is called an advantage. It's not even a score. The match had no points, because we were evenly matched and the score was 0-0. I was not unhappy because the person that beat me that time won the entire tournament in my division.

While improvement is always possible, that day, at that time, I tested myself against the best that was available, and the best at the Pan-Am's is very very good. So while I thought to myself that I needed improvement, I was still able to compete successfully with somebody who is also very good.

This year, I am going to the World Championships in Brazil to compete. I have gone up in level since then, and I am brand new at my level, while many people I will play against have been at that level for a very long time. I will probably not win at the World Championships, but I will still train and compete as though I want to be the champion.

If I was only concerned about winning, I would avoid big tournaments that I have to travel very far and spend a lot of money for, and only enter little ones I could win all the time at.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by Braden
PaulLin - "I don't really considered my kind of view as narrow, in fact, it is majority. The majority of Taichi aimming for a clean thow, join lock, and internal strikes without tangle up with opponent"

No one ever claimed JCram had perfect form. No one said he epitomized taiji in every move. No one ever said he had no more to work on. Actually - quite the contrary: they said explicitly that he was a stark beginner and has continued to work hard to develop skill. The only claim being made is that he is training in taiji methods, and trying to make the most out of whatever skill he has achieved with them. It is expected in this situation that there will be flaws in his performance. Nonetheless, he performed - and we can be sure he learned from his experience. What possible disagreement could you have with this?

Now that you have explained this. I think it is great. Just considered that the age factor, J's opponents most likely has more experiences then J. That is very impressive of how J can took him on. Congreduation on it and a very good job on you all on the Internal arts road.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by Merryprankster
PaulLin--

We all fight for a number of different reasons.

Some fight to show they are the best.

Some fight to show their team is the best.

Some fight for fun--because they enjoy the thrill of competition.

Some fight because they enjoy testing themselves against new challenges and new opponents as often as possible.

There are probably many other factors I have not considered because I am not everybody and everybody who does this does it for different reasons.

Personally, I fight because I enjoy competition and because I enjoy testing myself against the challenge of meeting new opponents as often as possible.

This year, when I went to the Pan-Am's, which is probably the second largest BJJ tournament in the sport, I lost in the first round by what is called an advantage. It's not even a score. The match had no points, because we were evenly matched and the score was 0-0. I was not unhappy because the person that beat me that time won the entire tournament in my division.

While improvement is always possible, that day, at that time, I tested myself against the best that was available, and the best at the Pan-Am's is very very good. So while I thought to myself that I needed improvement, I was still able to compete successfully with somebody who is also very good.

This year, I am going to the World Championships in Brazil to compete. I have gone up in level since then, and I am brand new at my level, while many people I will play against have been at that level for a very long time. I will probably not win at the World Championships, but I will still train and compete as though I want to be the champion.

If I was only concerned about winning, I would avoid big tournaments that I have to travel very far and spend a lot of money for, and only enter little ones I could win all the time at.

The reason for yours I think it is very healthy and advance one(if it is not like taking -drug-like enjoyment). Expressional artist. The traditional would fight for Tao, in which to physically prove which way of life is better. For people, as survival of the society. For the master, as repay the teacher for where the arts came form. Or lowest, for themself as they are better than others. Lower than that will be criminals.

That just the old way in the old wrold. Now a days seems to be different. And yet, even Western philosophy has sorted out the growing patter of human as what the motives are when they grow into different ages.

Do you enjoy more on the process, the experiences, or the kewlegde you gain in a fight?

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 05:48 PM

PaulLin,

I understand what you are saying. Deep down, the ones who are the very best, I believe, are doing it for the same reasons I am--to test and challenge themselves--Even though there is money involved now, and fans and TV and promoters and everything else.

The reason why I believe this is because it hurts too much to fight if you don't love the test and the fun, and because all the rest is just politics. The specific politics have changed over the years, but politics are as old as people.

So I think it is different, in the specifics, but I do not think it is different in the motivation. And if the spirit of a thing is important, then I think that people who fight for fun and to challenge themselves are doing ok.

wufupaul

06-03-2002, 05:49 PM

"Hey, wufupaul,

stop assume other's level until you have meet them. I have English language barrier."-PaulLin

I didn't assume anyone's level. I simply stated my own opinions, none of which were directed at you. I would rarely assume someone's level, especially over the net. Your English seems pretty well developed, if you don't understand something in my post, just ask me.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 05:52 PM

Ok, What did you just said?........Just kidding:D

Merryprankster

06-03-2002, 05:53 PM

PaulLin--what I enjoy most is hard to say. It all blends together. I enjoy training to compete. I enjoy the intensity and trying to push yourself and your training partners to get better. I enjoy the competition of matching myself against others, and while every win is nice because it shows I have trained hard, every loss shows me what I need to train harder at.

Shooter

06-03-2002, 06:16 PM

PaulLin, it wasn't my intention to offend you or attack your learning. If I did, I appologize.

Please excuse me if I was too offensive with my comments to you. :)

Shooter

06-03-2002, 06:24 PM

Merryprankster, that's pretty d@mn cool. Best of luck in Brazil!

Sometimes, it takes a MMA threating a TMA to rediscover itself.

Mantis9, thanks for your comments. Innovation and rediscovery are the central themes in my coaching.

wufu, thanks, man. :p

Braden, thanks for keeping a vein of civility in this debate. whew... :)

Stacey

06-03-2002, 07:29 PM

Shooter, don't confuse a large vocabulary for skill. Don't apologise to Paul. He hasn't the courage to enter one of those competitions. Everyone is an expert from the sidelines.

PaulLin

06-03-2002, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by Shooter
PaulLin, it wasn't my intention to offend you or attack your learning. If I did, I appologize.

Please excuse me if I was too offensive with my comments to you. :)

Don't worrie, it doesn't really offend me or any thing. I only felt how much you love what you are practicing and it is all positive spirit.

Stacy, I supposed you did entered some MMA, eventhough you are training in that purpose.

Xebsball

06-03-2002, 07:54 PM

Hey Merry is the championship in Rio?

KnightSabre

06-04-2002, 03:20 AM

Braden,

A while back 5 of our students took part in an amateur Kickboxing competition against a kickboxing school.
We used the standard kickboxing rules.
We won 4 and lost one.
We are not a kickboxing school yet wer beat them at their own game.
The styles we've competed against in NHB are Ninjitsu,Kung Fu,Karate,Kickboxing,Boxing,Muay Thai,BJJ,Wrestling,Judo,Taekwon do.

Merryprankster

06-04-2002, 08:02 AM

Shooter, Thanks.

Xebs--yup, it's in Rio.

Braden, I think I figured out WHY that throw looks the way it does. The fact it's in Silat, helped me figure it out.

If somebody attacks you with a knife in a horizontal arc stab, you step in using a collar tie to control the neck and block their body movement. At the same time, you block the attacking arm. Then you control the wrist. If he keeps trying to force his way in, then the throw should be a piece of cake.

Empty hand, I think there are better ways to do this.

shinbushi

06-04-2002, 10:02 AM

Originally posted by Braden
Out of curiosity, is Sak's way of moving characteristic of a style, that you can say?

Saku calls his art IQ wrestling

Merryprankster

06-04-2002, 10:05 AM

Well, he should! He's a VERY clever fighter.

Le nOObi

06-04-2002, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by KnightSabre
Braden,

A while back 5 of our students took part in an amateur Kickboxing competition against a kickboxing school.
We used the standard kickboxing rules.
We won 4 and lost one.
We are not a kickboxing school yet wer beat them at their own game.

Well thats settles it now we know for sure that BJJ is the worlds greatest style! We all know that the only style its possible for BJJ to lose against is other BJJ!

Braden

06-04-2002, 02:47 PM

KnightSabre - Congratulations on your school's accomplishments.

You comment 'We've never lost to any traditional school.' When pressed for details, you remark that you compete in kickboxing competitions. I might suggest that when you compete in kickboxing competitions, you are most likely to face kickboxing schools. Therefore, your comment isn't particularly surprising - and more to the point, can defend no conclusions about traditional schools. If you want to face traditional schools, I would suggest you enter tournaments where traditional schools compete. You might want to contact the US / Chinese Koushu Federation if you are serious in this desire.

Despite being meaningless, your post did cause some decent conversation though. Thanks. :)

MerryPrankster - In terms of self-defense, do you think it's a good idea to have very different strategies depending on whether or not your opponent has a knife?

Merryprankster

06-04-2002, 03:12 PM

I think your tactics are going to have to change. These are the sorts of things you pray that you are cognizant enough to be aware of as a martial artist.

I think there are an awful lot of things we all do that are good ideas on unarmed opponents, and not so hot on armed ones--or on opponents with different sorts of weapons. A double leg takedown may not be a great idea on a guy who has a knife, but might be fine on somebody with a baseball bat or who doesn't have one, etc. So I'd love to say that it should all be the same, but it isn't and I think that's just reality...

Braden

06-04-2002, 03:15 PM

I agree completely. And add - I'm not sure we can determine reliably whether or not our opponent has a knife.

Merryprankster

06-04-2002, 03:33 PM

I thought that was what chi was for :D

Braden

06-04-2002, 03:36 PM

D@mn you. You were supposed to be forced to admit your foolish double-leg tactics were outdated! :D :D :D

Merryprankster

06-04-2002, 03:57 PM

You dare challenge the supremacy of the double leg?!

It is a VERY POWERFUL technique....

Braden

06-04-2002, 04:01 PM

Your technique is from the old school!

It is no match for my Bagua Fist!

Merryprankster

06-04-2002, 04:03 PM

Bagua Fist....

Hmmm... is that the one where you curtsy and extend your hand, palm down, limp wristed, and then piroutte and present your backside?

Archangel

06-04-2002, 07:56 PM

You 2 are a little too friendly with each other ;)

KnightSabre

06-05-2002, 12:27 AM

Braden,

I did kung fu for 5 years and went to plenty of Koushu comps,to me it just looks like bad kick boxing.
They start in their stances but as soon as the first punch or kick is thrown then both parties just start flailing.
There were very few guys that actually looked like they did kung fu.

Now when I said we've never been beaten by a traditional school it was in NHB and challenge matches,if I had to include the amount of times we've been challenged in the school by traditional schools than it goes from 30-5 to about 60-5.
In our NHB matches the kung fu guys could do everyhting they could in Koushu and more.

And I never said that we were a BJJ only school,were a MMA school.
BJJ is merely one of our weapons,
We do Street Boxing,Muay Thai,BJJ,Filipino Knife,Kali Stick.
The knife and stick we don't do very often though.

Three of my best friends still train at the kung fu school that I used to train at,the one is a Si Suk (9 years) the other have been training 8 years.They wanted to see what this ground fighting story was so I grappled with them all,they were all pretty suprised to see that things that work while standing(Chin Na)
don't work very well on the ground.
I trained them all for about 6 months before politics forced me to stop training them.All of them told me that they were able to take down and dominate guys training 3 or more years longer than them.

Something I found real interesting was how quickly they were learning the techs I tought them,the kung fu training had obviously helped in there ability to remmember and learn techs quicker than someone who hasn't trained before.

Instead of arguing weather kung fu was better than BJJ,they tested it, found it didn't go against any of their kung fu principles, liked it and then combined it with there stand up style.

Even now they still often tell me how they miss their grappling training.

If they were able to continue, those guys would have been complete fighters.Infact I'm sure that even those 6 months will make a huge difference.

Archangel

06-05-2002, 09:09 AM

KnightSabre,

Hmmmmm, interesting; when you say that there were only a few guys that "actually looked like they did kung fu", What do you mean. What are the traits you noticed (stances, strikes etc.).

Le nOObi

06-05-2002, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by KnightSabre
Instead of arguing weather kung fu was better than BJJ,they tested it, found it didn't go against any of their kung fu principles, liked it and then combined it with there stand up style.

Thats a good point actually. So your saying you dont think kungfu is a bad style just that it practicioners dont try to improve what they know beyond what they are taught?

However your full post does kind of prove my point that styles are not superior to eachother, fighters and their trainings are. I mean you train 3 martial arts just for hand to hand and im sure all of them have heavy sparring. This would make you better than someone who rarely spars and hasnt learned groundfighting.

p.s. i dont see what seperates muay thai from a traditional art

NorthernMantis

06-05-2002, 03:37 PM

Hmmm... is that the one where you curtsy and extend your hand, palm down, limp wristed, and then piroutte and present your backside?

In bagua you don't present your backside to. It goes againt's all martial arts in general. Never turn your back on an opponent. Oh yeah and they don't pirouette neither. Some guy showed me some ba gua and almost snapped my neck.

MP-

I hope you don't think I took ofense. Just giving it's cerdibilty to ba gua. In the same way most most groundfighters respond to critics: don't talk about it, unless you've experienced it.:)

PaulLin

06-05-2002, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by NorthernMantis

In bagua you don't present your backside to. It goes againt's all martial arts in general. Never turn your back on an opponent. Oh yeah and they don't pirouette neither. Some guy showed me some ba gua and almost snapped my neck.

Very true, rather than pirouette yourself and present your backside, BaGua would turn your opponent's angle and have your opponent present his backside to you. There is alot of hidden legs and palms in the curving angle of BaGua, very tricky.

Merryprankster

06-05-2002, 06:54 PM

EEEEEEEEEASY Lenny :)

Braden and I were just playing. Sorry if we gave some other idea.

KnightSabre

06-06-2002, 01:10 AM

Le nOObi,

My Si Suk friend can really throw down when standing,he's about 5'8
143 and I've seen him win some street fights against some much larger foes,he's real quick and hits hard for his size.

After I grappled with him and the other guys,he told me he is lucky the guys he fought didn't know ground fighting because he felt like a fish out of water there.Thats why he wanted to train it,so that he could go at it in any range.

Braden

06-06-2002, 01:20 AM

Maybe YOU were playing.

But you have insulted my family and my temple.

Your style is strong and you have seen the highest technique of the bagua fist. You must have trained at wudan. But my style is not one style - it combines the strength of THREE styles. You shall be defeated by the thousand buddha palm technique.

scotty1

06-06-2002, 01:22 AM

LOL @ being corrected on presenting your ass in a fight.

Some if the people on here are just too dam serious. :D

Merryprankster

06-06-2002, 06:36 AM

Thousand Buddha Palm?

don't you mean HAIRY Buddha Palm?

At any rate, it is no match for my Dry Humping Choke technique. It has been perfected in such places as Greece, San Francisco and Greenwich Village. Truly dangerous.

omegapoint

06-07-2002, 02:26 AM

MP: I just wanted to say that I know that you are a real martial artist. Hell, you were the only guy who could give me a reasonable rebuttal on that "speed in punching" post. I know you're not some bloodthirsty savage, and as is evidenced from your well thought out, lucid posts, you're definitely one smart cat. The mental aspect of MAs is often overlooked. Your maturity and intelligence gives you the one-up on many traditionalists and MMAs. Polished physicality is the predominant philosophy in the fighting traditions. Good for the knowing...

To say that boxing, BJJ, Judo, wrestling and muay thai are not traditional fighting forms would be a serious error. The history behind these combat arts is storied and ancient. They are just as classical as any modern rendition of a traditional MA. Their effectiveness can be measured quite regularly (to a certain degree), and I have yet to meet any decent MMA or BJJer that was good and an arsehole. Most are very confident, and have a very "Zen" approach to life, even if they don't realize it.

I found myself in my teens and 20s, loving the competition scene. I've always thrived on immediate challenges and dodging unexpected curve-balls. I encourage my students to compete, and enjoy training and watching them as they prepare themselves for tournaments. I love it when our school wins big, but I enjoy the journey more than the goal.

I think fighting in the ring or on the street can be very variable. There are very few good MMAS that are undefeated. Heck, some even get KO'd by the most unsure of punching techs- the spinning backfist.

Competing for fun and to test your mettle is great. I'm being facetious when I say that those who like to compete must be S&Mers. That would make anyone in any MA, even aikido, S&Mers. The truth is that there are some sadistic folks out there who love to use pain and intimidation to get their thrills, or to feel powerful. I doubt guys like MP, Rogue, Ryu, Black Jack and others on KFO are anything like that. It's great to have a Chuan Fa forum that invites and relishes in seeing differing opinions from a myriad of martial artists. Good, safe training to all... Peace!