Winning vs Doing it right

[red5angel]

Ok, this may more apply to TMA guys, I am not sure but I was thinking about something the other day. Lets say you really want to master the art you study right? Now, you want to fight in tournemants or whatever, even TMA tourneys, and winning is important but not everything. Do you win at all cost or do you use your tehcniques and art, being mindful of technique and structure, etc, even though this may distract you enough to mae you loose?

My thinking is that as you start out you may pay attention more to form and structure, because later this may pay off, what do you guys think?

[Merryprankster]

Red--

I think you are asking a question that doesn't make a lot of sense.

If I have to slightly muscle a technique in a tournament because I didn't hit it perfectly, I will. The purpose of a tournament is to go out there and give it everything you've got to win.

Practice is where you polish things--try to improve your form and technique so that it's not so hard next time.

Who cares if it wasn't the world's prettiest punch if it knocked the guy out? But, you need to make sure that it becomes pretty in the future so that you can handle better and better opposition--that looping overhand right may not work on a better guy. :)

That's what practice is for....

[scotty1]

I can see what Red is saying. There is no point learning a complicated Kung Fu style in practice if you don't get used to applying it under pressure. Might as well learn kickboxing.

I would not fight in a kungfu competition until I was confident I could fight using that style and not revert to kickboxing.

[red5angel]

MP - that is sort of what I am getting at. Lets use my wingchun for an example because it is what I know. In wingchu we are supposed to use soft power, deflection instead of resisting directly. But lets say I get in the ring an dthe guy across from me is smaller and I know I can muscle him out of the match. Should I, or should I stick with the precepts of my art?
The easy answer would be to say that it depends on your goal, do you just want to win? Lets say that winning is important but not as important as doing my art right. Like I said, I believe any art once practiced for a while, correctly becomes effective. Do you treat the ring as another practice?
Scotty1 is close to what I am saying, I am not a small guy, so on average I could probably win a good portion of my matches by muscling it, but that isnt what wing chun is about. Do I fall back on my "natural" weapons or do I stick with my art?

[No_Know]

If I had to do it less than perfectish because I didn't understand it enough, I hopefully would happily lose if I staied true to Correctness of what I was doing. But if I was in a competition what I would be doing would be vying to win a place, exhibit me to promote the System or School. So, I would learn it showier if that's the way of winning. But I understand that tournament significance differs from personal pure art improvement, perhaps in general. But if I am good enough, even in a tournament it could be noticed. They deserve support for trying to gain acceptance. In the public eye and in private are seperate things. And while being ourseleves can be nice, it is not always socially appripriate. And for some this differing behavior allows us to be better people than we are in private. At least nicer people.

Be aware of your purpose. Don't lose yourSelf~

[Merryprankster]

Red--

A competition is not a practice. You are there to win--you're there to test yourSELF, not just your WC--that means using all the tools you have at hand within the confines of the rules to defeat your opponent. Your WC could be GREAT, but if your conditioning sucks, you could lose to somebody who is merely good, but with great conditioning. So then you'd learn--hey, I gotta get conditioned!

Comps test you--and then provide you with something to work on. But your goal while you are there should be to win. Am I concerned if my armbar wasn't perfect, but worked anyway? I am in the sense that it requires improvement--but I am not in the sense that it worked right then.

Scotty1--I don't advocate throwing a newbie in a ring, I'm just saying that perfection is the enemy of good enough. If you wait until it's "right" before you go play, you may never get it right. Losses teach you a lot about the holes in your game.

Tournaments teach you about what you need to improve, but they are the wrong venue to attempt to improve your stuff--that's what practice is for.

[red5angel]

Makes sense what you say MP. Would you say that the way you study and the art(s) you study are technically inclined? Is the precision stressed when practicing?

[Merryprankster]

Absolutely. The difference between success and failure can be as little as a cm of difference in body placement.

There is no such thing as an MA practice worth its salt that does not emphasize doing things right. All MA's attempt to maximize body efficiency to improve output. Especially because under stress, that kind of perfection tends to disappear.

[red5angel]

I agree, I think any art that is worth learning will stress precision and structure.
But, if you were a big tough guy who is learning an art, and you find that in the ring you can win just by grabbing the guy and pounding on him relentlessly until he gives, assuming this isnt necessarily a techinque learned in class, then what? Doyou practice the art for the sake of practicing and then when fighting throw it all out to use your strength and toughness to win?

[scotty1]

What I meant was that, if I was practicing an art like Praying Mantis, I would not compete in it until I had sparred enough for it to be quite natural for me to fight like that, and I knew that I would not revert to kickboxing under the pressure of competition.

[Royal Dragon]

You shouldn't have to worry about doing it right, it should be so well practiced that doing it right just happens.

That being said, Win first and take other stuff into consideration later.

[Tigerstyle]

When I saw the title, "Winning vs Doing it right", I immediately thought of point sparring (light contact) tournaments.

There are many people that are more concerned with winning the tournaments, to the point of creating horrible habits to take advantage of the the rules and scoring system (Ex. Turning your back to the opponent, because strikes to the back do not score. Jumping up to tap the top of an opponent's head for a point...).

That being the case, I would rather lose while using my style, but that is my personal choice. If someone else chooses to do whatever it takes to win within the set rules, then more power to them, but I'm there to see if I can use some good technique (doesn't have to be perfect) under a little pressure.


In the case of using your natural attributes, I don't see why you can't use it to aid your style. You might not want to muscle someone around, but that doesn't mean you can't utilize your body weight, extra strength, etc. to help your style out. I think your doing yourself more harm than good by not using your body's natural abilities. We're all built different. Use your natural strengths to strengthen your style. I think it can be done without compromising the principles of your martial art.

BTW (to no one in particular): Speed can be a natural attribute. Why is it a little less taboo to use your speed to enhance your style (as opposed to natural strength)? I mean, speed to the point of reckless, uncontrolled movement is not encouraged, but it seems (IMO) that no one ever says "I don't want to have to use my speed to beat someone. I would rather rely on my technique."

[Royal Dragon]

Isn't speed part of good technique?

[Tigerstyle]

Well yeah, but I would say it's usually reflex speed that is mostly within good technique. Some people have that natural, fast-twitch muscle speed though, and it seems (again, IMHO) a little more acceptable to use that to aid your technique, than using natural strength to aid technique.

I personally don't see how strength cannot be present in good technique. Good posture and good structure is important, but it's our muscles that allow us to create and maintain both.

Am I wrong here? Someone please put me in my place if I am. :)

[red5angel]

Tigerstyle - for strength, wing chun discourages it. It doesnt mean you can't use it but we have other ways of doing it. As for speed, cant imagine anyone arguing that it shouldn't be used!
An good example of what I am talking about would be in a Chi Sau tourney. If all it took was you to walk your opponent out of the ring, or keep him back peddling, or whatever, if you were large you could just reach in and push as hard as possible, and keep doing that. Maybe you could win.

[Tigerstyle]

"...if you were large you could just reach in and push as hard as possible, and keep doing that. Maybe you could win."

Yes, but I said use it to aid your style, not in place of it. :)

I feel you cheat yourself if you don't train to take advantage of your natural abilities. Wouldn't it be more efficient to make use of your attributes than to train around them? I mean, you don't have to make strength, for example, a priority in your personal expression of your style, but there shouldn't be a reason to exclude it's use if you have it. A strong body can help you create an overwhelming offense and an impenetrable defense.

Everyone on this planet is heavier/lighter, stronger/weaker, faster/slower than someone. We should make use of our strengths and minimize our weaknesses to our benefit, shouldn't we? Are there not traditional strengthening methods? When your body becomes stronger, your technique (due to better balance, posture, conditioning, etc.) improves, doesn't it?

[[Censored]]

Clarification: Wing Chun discourages the use of clumsy strength.

[yenhoi]

Red5:

You dont use techniques, ive told you this before.

In Wing Chun, you do what you can to disrupt your opponents centerline, and preserve your own. You do it in the most simple economical fashion. This does not always mean using tan sau, or not using muscle, or always going in a straight line.

If it was the most simple and economical way to disrupt your opponents centerline and preserve your own, then stick your hands out and push him.

You dont use your art, or use your style. You train, and then fight.

[Shadowboxer]

"if you were large you could just reach in and push as hard as possible, and keep doing that..."

That isn't Chi sao. It's called Sumo. Big difference. What would that teach you about Chi sao? How would this approach refine your technique? What happens when you meet the guy who is bigger/stronger/more skilled and you are used to shoving to win?

[Tigerstyle]

Actually Shadowboxer, that is Red5's point. Would you rather win at the cost of abandoning your style's principles, or lose as long as you did so by remaining true to your style and yourself?

Red5 chooses the latter option (me too, for the most part), but the disscussion then steered a bit towards ,"What constitutes, abandoning your style?"

[red5angel]

Tigerstyle - I probably pretty much agree with you, I do think you should use your natural strengths but maybe you should match those to an apropriate art?

Censored - Thanks, I should have been more clear!

yenhoi - very true, very true. I think that that is the goal to get to though. I am not sure that people can arrive at going beyond technique until they have done it for along time though. until then technique you might have to rely on. Maybe not, that didnt come out right, let me think about it......

Shadowboxer - Tigerstyle is correct that is basically my point.

[Merryprankster]

Red5--

Let me put it this way, because I think we're agreeing. Lennox Lewis is a great boxer. But, does he only use enough strength to discourage his opponent and win via decision?

Nope. He puts everything he's got, into his properly thrown punches.

A bigger stronger person is going to hit harder than me, all other things being equal. Should they only use just enough power to hurt me or should they beat my ass mercilessly?

Nobody is saying "abandon your style and bumrush your opponent," but natural attributes are part of the equation. There are technical ways to escape an armbar and there is muscling out. Obviously, muscling out isn't the preferred option, but if THAT'S your opportunity for escape right then, which do you think the competitor is going to chose, losing or muscling?

That's really all I'm getting at.

And don't enter point sparring tourneys. Horrible habits.

Shadow--I'm going to go out on a limb and bet you don't know much about/watch a lot of sumo. It's a very technical and highly developed sport. Unless you're Akebono or Musashimaru. Those two are BORING.

[Tigerstyle]

"Obviously, muscling out isn't the preferred option, but if THAT'S your opportunity for escape right then, which do you think the competitor is going to chose, losing or muscling?"

Yes I agree with that. In competition, if I could muscle out of an armbar, when not doing so would mean losing, then I would muscle out. For the most part though, during training I would practice using more efficent techniques to escape, because the odds of me being able to muscle out of many techniques is slim to none.


"I do think you should use your natural strengths but maybe you should match those to an apropriate art?"

I agree with that too, but I also feel a good martial art should accomodate you (your body) to a reasonable extent. For example, there are heavyweight and lightweight boxers. They use some different strategies or emphasize different techniques at times, but both are boxers and neither are fighting contrary to the principles of their chosen art. Boxers can be defensive or agressive, fast or powerful, but they all use their natural ability to it's fullest extent to maximize their potential.


MP,
I don't point spar anymore, because I did not want to resort to jumping taps to the head to win a match. I was always the guy that threw a clean punch to the body while getting tapped on the top of my head (of course I lost). :mad: Also, I got tapped alot because my reflexes are horrible (That's not why I stopped, it's just why I lost more often :o )

I guess if I wanted to I could tap their head and say "That was an iron palm strike to the head. You would have been dead on the street." :p

[red5angel]

MP - would you say boxing encourages the use of strength? Would you also say that some techniques do not rely on all your strength?
If not ( I dont know, I am not a boxer) then would you say it would be ok to ignore that for the sake of possibly knocking someone out? If they always encourage using all your power then this wouldn't make any sense.
I think I agree with you, but I think we may be talking about something subtly different........

As for point sparring, I am hoping to get into more traditional stuff. Maye I can find some fight til you drop type tourneys!

[Merryprankster]

Can you throw a light punch and a hard punch and do both with proper technique? That's what I'm getting at.

What I'm trying to say, is that a tournament is not the time to worry about your technique being right or perfect. Do that during practice.

[Tigerstyle]

MP,
Here's a hypothetical situation (just curious about your opinion on this):
In a submission grappling tournament, if you were ahead on points, would you stall/slow the pace of the match down (within the rules, of course) in order to win by points?

Would you rather win that way, if fighting for a submission might (slight risk) cost you the match?

Would you stall to win if going for a submission meant a greater risk of losing?

How about if there was 4 or 5 minutes left in a match? What about only 15 or 20 seconds left?


Personally, I don't like the idea of trying to stall to win, but I think I would probably consider using it in a couple of the above situations (more skilled opponent, or very little time left).

[Merryprankster]

If I had a limited amount of time left, say a minute or less, and I was up by points, I would stall.

If there were several minutes left, I would play a safe, smart game. No unnecessary risks.

If my opponent were of greater skill and I found myself up, I would do everything I could to avoid having more points scored on me. Specifically, I would work to a position that is "safe," for me (ie, one I am good at) and work a safe, smart game.

If I am down with limited time, it's balls out.

[red5angel]

I gotcha MP!

[Merryprankster]

OT--The WC forum... whoa....hate and discontent. :)

[Tigerstyle]

Thanks for the response, MP.

[red5angel]

MP - Hehe, well, me and my crazy opinions! What was I thinking disagreeing with those guys and feeling strongly about what I do! I dont mind though, there are a few guys worth talking to, the rest, like any forum, are worthless..... I am thinking maybe when I am ready, just doing the Red5Angel World Tour.... ;)

[vingtsunstudent]

my opinion is that you should try to win at all costs, if you can use perfect technique in doing so, then that is perfect, if not then the main thing is to always go back whether you win or lose & try & work out how you could have done it easier & with better technique.
even when your techniques are excellent there is still room for improvement, you never know whether or not your next opponent may be even better.
vts

[Shadowboxer]

Actually, I do watch Sumo when I can find it on ESPN. Don't know that much about it. I was being pretty general. I think a basic technique in sumo is the palm(s) to the face. Disrupt your opponent's center/balance and drive them out of the ring. Or, get them to touch the ground first with a throw of some kind, by taking their balance and keeping yours. To drive someone out of the ring by shoving is not Chi sao IMHO was the point I was making.

[Shadow Dragon]

Haven't read trough the whole thread.

But here is my take on it, and it might be old-fashioned.

Competitions are supposed to be a test of skills, so whoever has the better skill should win.
IMHO, if you can't win with your skill as per competition rules you should loose, learn from it and move on.

But I feel that too many people are more interested in prize money, trophies and recognition by their peers to override this

Just my little Opinion.

[Braden]

scotty1

"There is no point learning a complicated Kung Fu style in practice if you don't get used to applying it under pressure."

'Applying it under pressure' is not a binary variable. It's not something that you either do or don't do. No one will ever apply their art perfectly under pressure. The point is that you improve. If someone fights and is utterly miserable at applying it under pressure, so long as the next day he's slightly less utterly miserable, it's been a success.

red5angel

"Do you treat the ring as another practice?"

Why? If you want to practice, practice. If you want to be in the ring, step in the ring. It's unfair to yourself and everyone else involved to confuse the two, which happens both ways!

"I could probably win a good portion of my matches by muscling it"

What, exactly, is wrong with 'muscling it'? If you were a caravan guard in ancient china, and your caravan got attacked by bandits, do you think you would worry about 'muscling' your technique against them?

Shadowboxer says: "That isn't Chi sao. It's called Sumo. Big difference. What would that teach you about Chi sao? Then Tigerstyles says: "Actually Shadowboxer, that is Red5's point. Would you rather win at the cost of abandoning your style's principles, or lose as long as you did so by remaining true to your style and yourself? Red5 chooses the latter option (me too..."

So the point of your training is to get good at chi sao?

[Merryprankster]

Braden--Sounds like we're in agreeance again--shocker--seems to happen a lot as long as we both try to make sure we understand what we're both talking about.

Lloyd has a saying--try to improve by 1% every day. The compound return on that investment is enormous.

Shadow--yup, palm strikes to the face and body are legal, but it's for the purpose of manipulating balance :)

[Tigerstyle]

"So the point of your training is to get good at chi sao?"

Braden,
If I was training to be in a Chi Sao tournament, then yes that would be one of the primary points of my training. When it's showtime though, and I can win a match by "muscling" I probably would.

In the future I would hope that my training would help me to combine my natural strength with my Chi Sao technique. (hypothetical, because I don't have much strength advantage over people personally :) ). That way I eventually wouldn't have to choose "chi sao" or "muscle", it would be "powerful chi sao" :D


"What, exactly, is wrong with 'muscling it'? If you were a caravan guard in ancient china, and your caravan got attacked by bandits, do you think you would worry about 'muscling' your technique against them?"

I was going to post a similar response like that, but I couldn't come up with a good analogy. Do you mind if I pretend that I posted that too? :)

[scotty1]

"If I am down with limited time, it's balls out."

*shudders*

"What, exactly, is wrong with 'muscling it'? If you were a caravan guard in ancient china, and your caravan got attacked by bandits, do you think you would worry about 'muscling' your technique against them?"

No, obviously not. But that is defending your life, we are talking about competition, which is completely different, with different risks. losing a competition doesn't mean not being able to fight in the future.

Braden

I said:

"There is no point learning a complicated Kung Fu style in practice if you don't get used to applying it under pressure."

You said:

'Applying it under pressure' is not a binary variable. It's not something that you either do or don't do. No one will ever apply their art perfectly under pressure.'

It is something you can do competently or you can't do competently. You could watch two guys fighting under pressure and say "he is using Praying Mantis" and "he is not"

In that instance the guy who can fight competently using Mantis could win a tourney without having to resort to strength, the guy who is not competent could not.

What I am saying is that before entering a tourney I would ensure that I was the competent one.
Therefore: less muscling necessary to win.

'The point is that you improve. If someone fights and is utterly miserable at applying it under pressure, so long as the next day he's slightly less utterly miserable, it's been a success. '

In sparring I would agree. But I would not fight in a competition with my style until I could be sure that I could fight competently with it ie. not revert to natural kickboxing style tactics.

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

i just go to comps to get kicked in the nuts. i like the abuse.