How many of you have faced up to BJJ and MMA?

[carly]

I'm thinking of "giving in" and joining a BJJ class to learn how to deal with these types of grapplers on the ground.
Anyone here still in denial about their groundfighting abilities?

[ewallace]

I am not sure I understand your mindset of "giving in". If it stands to benefit your training and ability to defend yourself, then the matter of it being MMA, CMA, FMA, JMA should not be a factor. It's not as though you will be joining the darkside. :)

[red5angel]

carly- are you a TMA practitioner now? I was, I studied wingchun for 4 years. I have chosen to go to more of a sport fighting format and am taking grappling at the moment. I think it is a good add-on to anyone who doesn't have the time to study their art deeply or feels their art is incomplete. the only thing I say is that you look deeply into whta it is you are studying now to make sure it doesn't have its own answers.

[carly]

and going over to the dark side!
I'm a traditional Chinese martial arts practicioner and I've learned chinese grappling, but yes, the groundwork is obviosuly the specialty of BJJ and I think it's so commonly used and widely known nowadays that it's pretty much essential to be familiar with it.

[KC Elbows]

Going to the ground is considered fair game when we're sparring. I'm okay at it, but experienced ground fighters can destroy me there, but I have a better chance because I work on it than I would otherwise.

[ShaolinTiger00]

Good for you Carly! another convert. *rings the bell*

[Ford Prefect]

Give it a whirl, Carly. You're in the Boston area, right? There a lot of good places around here. I trained extensively at Boston BJJ, and I've also trained at Sityodtong Muay Thai (and grappling) in Somerville, Newton Judo, Tohuko Judo (Somerville), Bay Union Wrestling Club (Boston), and IMDC/Maffei JKD in Waltham.

There is also the BU BJJ club (BU), Needham BJJ, NE BJJ (everett), Dragon Lair (MMA-Framingham), Mass Sub Academy (MMA-Clinton), Boneyard (MMA-Raynham).

[Waidan]

I've been training CMA since I was 18, but I joined the ranks of the Sith back in December. I've been training shootfighting a couple times a week, and I really enjoy it. We do a lot of endurance and strength training, drill all manner of takedowns and submissions, and there's always plenty of "live" mat time. It has really complimented my kung fu training, and I'd recommend it to anyone thinking of competing, or just looking to sharpen their ground game.

[dnc101]

Whoa there... , easy ST! Down boy! And Carly, it isn't uncommon for martial artists of all types to cross train these days. I think it's a good idea. I'm trying to learn enough to at least defend against the average street punk if it ends up there. I'll never be able to roll with the likes of Ryu, or even St. But they aren't the ones I wory about (well, maybe ST) as most martial artists aren't out looking for trouble in the first place.

Speaking of grappling, my neighbors plumbing broke. She has (had) a lot of carpeting with really thick pads, so I've offered to help remove it if I can keep some of the unspoiled stuff. Looks like I'll get my makeshift matt until something better comes along. She offered to throw in sex, but my wife shut that down really quick. For a liberal, she's not verry tolerant or understanding about some things. :D

If you don't hear from me for a while, you can figure she read this and broke all my fingers. :eek:

[carly]

try using that carpetting at matts by pulling it out and using it oon top of grass in your backyard or a park - the outdoors is good for grappling, but the grass causes you skin to itch, and the carpetting should protect against that.

[dnc101]

That is what I plan to do with it. The back yard, or take it to my brothers barn or my shop when the weather is bad.

[Crushing Step]

I found the cross training useful. I learned the bare basics from a student of vale tudo style mma, and incorporated some things into the ground fighting I already traineed in.

I sparred against a guy who was a boxer, ex high school wrestler, and weight lifter. By all common sense it was no match. But I both out-boxedd and out-wrestled him.

Part of that is the high school wrestler's train mainly for the pin. Granted, he shot for my legs and had me on my back with speed and skill. But I put him in my guard, and quickly locked up his arm for a submission.

IMHO, cross training is good, but you must excel at one chosen style.

[yenhoi]

Sillyness - just win, thats excelling enough.

Im a bjj blue belt, but I only goto the bjj academy once a week, Tuesday night open rolling night.

:)

I also sparr regularly with the Straight Blast Gym guys and another MMA school called the Reno Combat Academy.

And Sacramento is only a couple hour drive away.

[SifuAbel]

Trolls galore

[carly]

There doesn't seem to be anything trolly on this thread.
Perhaps you could share what you meant or referred to with us.

[Knifefighter]

yenhoi:

I've been tossing around moving to Reno or Carson City to be closer to the skiing and mtn biking in Tahoe. What's the martial arts scene like there? Any good BJJ schools?

[Marky]

Hi all,

I practice wing chun at a school with three teachers. One teaches wing chun, another teaches BJJ, and the owner of the school teaches Shaolin Kempo and kickboxing (seperately, not one of those "combination" deals). Although I only practice wing chun there, I can say with all honesty that practicing BJJ looks like an awesome route to take, and I was also very impressed with a lot of their exercises. It's definitely not turning to the Dark Side (until you get a black belt!), because different people need different things.

[Merryprankster]

I'll clarify what Abel meant:

People on this thread have had the temerity to suggest that classical TMA styles tend to have a hole in their game--the lack of a well-practiced system of groundfighting. We also have the temerity to suggest that groundfighting is a necessary component of self-defense. We also find it reasonable to assume that the nature of groundfighting lends itself to grappling, vice vainly throwing shots from inferior positions in the hopes that the 300 lbs angry bozo on top of you might feel sorry for you and let you up.

Consequently, we are trolls.

[yenhoi]

Temerity is a pagan word, sheesh.

Sourpuss.

:eek:

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by carly
try using that carpetting at matts by pulling it out and using it oon top of grass in your backyard or a park - the outdoors is good for grappling, but the grass causes you skin to itch, and the carpetting should protect against that.

seems like that would cause hellacious carpet burn

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by carly
I'm thinking of "giving in" and joining a BJJ class to learn how to deal with these types of grapplers on the ground.
Anyone here still in denial about their groundfighting abilities?

G'head and give in... you won't regret it.

[carly]

I haven't experienced carpet burn from being thrown onto carpet or matts (you tend to plummet down or roll rather than slide), the concern is more about softening impact and avoiding getting muddy than getting carpet burn.
merryprankster, thanks for the clarification. I don't know why some people feel the need to hide their head in the sand about groundfighting.

[SevenStar]

That's different, sorry if I misread. I thought you were trying to grapple on carpet.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by dnc101
Whoa there... , easy ST! Down boy! And Carly, it isn't uncommon for martial artists of all types to cross train these days. I think it's a good idea. I'm trying to learn enough to at least defend against the average street punk if it ends up there. I'll never be able to roll with the likes of Ryu, or even St. But they aren't the ones I wory about (well, maybe ST) as most martial artists aren't out looking for trouble in the first place.

Speaking of grappling, my neighbors plumbing broke. She has (had) a lot of carpeting with really thick pads, so I've offered to help remove it if I can keep some of the unspoiled stuff. Looks like I'll get my makeshift matt until something better comes along. She offered to throw in sex, but my wife shut that down really quick. For a liberal, she's not verry tolerant or understanding about some things. :D

If you don't hear from me for a while, you can figure she read this and broke all my fingers. :eek:

Tell your neighbor to PM me ;) :D

[yenhoi]

Knifefighter:

there is plenty of karate and tkd around here if thats what your looking for.

otherwise there is 1 bjj place, a MMA place called Reno Combat Academy, and a straight blast gym. then there is my teacher and his 6 students :D

There is some neat schools in Truckee and Good stuff in South Tahoe, and the West lake is just cool, and not very far from California civilization.

What are you looking for?

[BrentCarey]

Ground fighters (of various flavors) are common enough these days that I have taken to providing extra training to my students for countering these tactics. There is certainly nothing wrong with crosstraining to learn how other stylists might attack. However, kung fu, when properly trained, is more than adequate without mixing in BJJ (or whatever) techniques.

I absolutely encourage any CMA practitioner to regularly spar with other stylists. It doesn't do much good to only practice with your classmates because they will tend to have the same strengths and weaknesses as you.

I frequently invite other schools to come spar with us, which is usually accompanied by some exchange of techniques. Unfortunately, ego, politics, fear, and whatever else limits the number of instructors that are willing to do this. Some people just want the blissful ignorance of thinking they have a monopoly on knowledge and skills. It takes a confident instructor to lay it all in the open like that.

The biggest difficulty we have while actually sparring with ground fighters, is defeating them without severely hurting them. In my experiences, most of their attacks require the opponent to either succumb to a ground confrontation and try to win there (usually futile), or use severe counter attacks before it goes to the ground. They don't usually notice the courtesy taps we like to give them to let them know that we could have broken their face/arm/back. So, to win, we usually have to hurt them pretty badly, making it not very fun for anyone involved.

As much as I discourage my students from intentionally hurting a guest, I think that it is sometimes good. Too frequently these guys think they have the "ultimate" style, and need a wake up call.

In any case, when everyone shows up humble and ready to learn, everyone walks away better from the experience. This is usually how it turns out.

[Sho]

Great post BrentCarey, but I'm afraid this might (or might not) again bring up the discussion, or perhaps I could say the debate, about kung fu being too lethal. Nothing wrong with that, but it has been discussed over and over many times and there's no ultimate yes or no answer to that.

[carly]

BJJ guys regularly face thai kicks and boxing hand techniques and all kinds of joint locking and throws before goingto the ground - I honestly don't know what your kung fu has that could be much more punishing than that, or that could stop them from closing with you if they can get past those kind of defenses.

[Sho]

Well, as far as I know, biting isn't allowed in any legitimate competition. :D

[carly]

begging-for-mercy-oh-please-oh-god-help-me technque?

[Marky]

Hi all,

"The biggest difficulty we have while actually sparring with ground fighters, is defeating them without severely hurting them." BrentCarey

Agree with you there.

"BJJ guys regularly face thai kicks and boxing hand techniques and all kinds of joint locking and throws before going to the ground - I honestly don't know what your kung fu has that could be much more punishing than that, or that could stop them from closing with you if they can get past those kind of defenses." carly

Elbows to the face. Those have stopped every BJJ practitioner I've sparred with. Not to say they're any better than the techniques you mentioned above, but they've definitely worked for me. Not "fair" by competition rules, admittedly.

[dnc101]

Originally posted by SevenStar
Tell your neighbor to PM me ;) :D

HA! You ole horn dog! I'll do better than that. Come out here to the hinterlands and help me set up my workout area and I'll introduce you. Share a few techs and pointers, maybe even a sparing session, and I'll introduce you.

I should warn you though, she is recruiting for another play, and she is verry persuasive. Couple of years ago she conned me into playing Satan in a major production (by this areas standards). Now, I'm a marked man. I'll probably never live it down.:p

[dnc101]

Brent C,

You made some good points. But things happen at the worst time. I don't want to learn to 'choke out Royce', but if things go wrong and I end up down I'd like to know a little bit about what to do there.

[SanHeChuan]

I took a BJJ class from my university one semester, the most useful skill you could learn in BJJ is movement and position. With those trained well enough you can get to your feet. By the end of the semester I could submit most of the mid level and lower students that I got to roll with out side of class. One of the guys I spanked pretty easy a couple times said he had been there for two years, maybe he didn’t make it to class much. I didn’t get to roll with many of the advanced students and I could barely even move when I rolled with the instructor. Maybe you can’t train enough to choke out royce but maybe you can train enough to get the hell up and run away. I'd have to have a hell of a lot free time to do some thing other than kung fu.

[SifuAbel]

Bjj is the ultimate martial art. It is complete and invincible. Happy? Feel better and more secure now?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Marky
"BJJ guys regularly face thai kicks and boxing hand techniques and all kinds of joint locking and throws before going to the ground - I honestly don't know what your kung fu has that could be much more punishing than that, or that could stop them from closing with you if they can get past those kind of defenses." carly

Elbows to the face. Those have stopped every BJJ practitioner I've sparred with. Not to say they're any better than the techniques you mentioned above, but they've definitely worked for me. Not "fair" by competition rules, admittedly.

Elbows to the head are very acceptable by competition rules, they've been tried and used - sometimes with success, most times not, though. A grappler isn't gonna try to shoot from a mile away, telegraphing it. you will be in infighting range, or already off balance from a missed punch, or any kick. Once you are off the ground and going backwards, an elbow isn't gonna do you any good whatsoever, as it will have no power. most MMA guys train either boxing or thai boxing for stand up - If they train thai, rest assured, they can definitely throw effective elbows, as they train them extensively.

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by carly
BJJ guys regularly face thai kicks and boxing hand techniques and all kinds of joint locking and throws before goingto the ground - I honestly don't know what your kung fu has that could be much more punishing than that, or that could stop them from closing with you if they can get past those kind of defenses.

Muay thai and boxing, while fine styles, tend to be quite a bit more direct and stationary when compared to kung fu. This raises a few generalizations, but still, in general is true. The worst thing you can do with a direct attack is directly counter, unless you have a strength, speed, or range advantage as appropriate.

I'm not saying that these other styles lack evasive footwork. I'm just saying that they tend to deal with much smaller/finer adjustments in range and direction, and are not as well suited for defense against an attacker when much larger moves are required.

All styles and stylists have their strengths and weaknesses. BJJ practitioners must grapple, preferably on the ground. They tend to be at a huge disadvantage until they can they can get a useful hold on the opponent. However, they tend to be among the best when fighting on the ground.

Boxers/kickboxers have a good short and mid-range game with a keen understanding of positioning, conservative blocking, and speed/timing. However, they tend to be a disadvantage when attacks come from outside their front 90 degrees, or involve grappling or ground work.

Kung fu has a well-rounded approach that provides practitioners assets in a wide variety of situations, but tends to produce less specific proficiency. Practitioners tend to have a good grasp on a wide variety of subjects, but not focus and excel on specific skills and principles.

So, to come back to the point, the difference between getting past a muay thai kick, and a kung fu kick, is that the MT practitioner will tend to kick, but remain more or less in the path of the opponent - or at least within reach. However, an example of a more effective approach with this kind of attacker is to strike at long range, move to short range laterally out of reach, strike again while moving behind the opponent, then either move back to long range or continue to drive forward with rapid short to mid range counterattacks - depending on the situation.

There is nothing magical about any style. Every attack has a solution. People like to portray BJJ as an invincible style, and it has been effectively marketed thusly. The truth is, however, that if you train well enough in just about any style, and make advantageous and speedy tactical decisions, you can defeat just about anyone in any other style.

BJJ is not the "ultimate" style. It is a fine style for sure. I personally have no use for it. I am 5'9" and about 145 lb. In the real world, I will most likely be at a 40 lb (or more) disadvantage under my opponent. Although size is not everything in BJJ, it is certainly important. I require a style that takes advantage of my size and speed. In kung fu, my build is a great asset rather than something I need to compensate for.

People that argue on both sides of the style vs style debate are ignorant. The fact is, incidents that make real world self-defense necessary are statistically quite rare. Moreover, serious injuries are even substantially less common when weapons are not involved, which of course, they rarely are.

Here is a relevant excerpt from an article a wrote a while back. Understand that this excerpt occurs in the context of a passage that makes it clear that incidence of serious injuries (those requiring professional treatment) is nearly neglible when a weapon is involved. So, the most meaningful discussion of self-defense includes defense against armed attackers.


A review of some more figures from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics [is relevant]. Analyzing the statistics from 1992-2000 and making a few inferences, one finds that if a person lives to be 80 years old, he/she has about a 2% chance of being the victim of a serious violent crime involving a weapon. [This doesn't mean the person was actually attacked. It just means that a weapon was involved in the crime.] If the person is already older than 25, that person is already about half as likely to be a victim of such a crime.

So, the average practitioner should recognize that there is only about a 1%-2% chance of needing techniques for defense against armed attackers. Less than one-fourth of these victims will be injured regardless of training. [...] There is only a miniscule rate of crimes not involving weapons where the victim sustains serious injuries.

So, to do the math for you. Statistically speaking, in the U.S., if you are over 25 you have less than a 0.25% chance (1 in 400) chance of being seriously injured by any attacker. Gang related and domestic violence accounts for the lion's share of these injuries. So, if you are not involved in gangs or a victim of domestic violence, you chance of needing style X in the real world is pretty low - about 1 in 1000. When you look at it that way, the relative effectiveness of style X vs style Y is pretty insignificant. If you are training for real world self-defense only, you are probably wasting your time.

So, there are countless other reasons to train. If you are training to fight, you had better just plan on fighting in the ring. If you are training to fight in the ring, BJJ, MMA, and a number of other sport styles are where you should turn. Kung fu has a poor record in the ring.

Kung fu provides a rich experience, however, that appeals to many people. Is it any more or less effective for self-defense than style X? Who cares? I have my opinion on the subject, but it is largely irrelevant. The health benefits I get from kung fu are much more likely to save my life than an self-defense technique I may know. I will live a longer, healthier, and happier life because I study kung fu - whether or not I ever have to use it again in real world combat. This is the bottom line. Anyone who misses this point, is truly missing the point.

Am I saying that BJJ (or whatever) cannot do this for some people? No, of course not. I'm just saying that it doesn't appeal to me. If one person chooses to pursue cycling, and another person pursues running, will they argue about the relative merits of their respective pursuits?

Look, I know that this debate is not going to end anytime soon. The purpose of this post is not to persuade any person to lean more toward style X or style Y. It is not even to persuade people to let this subject rest. I just think that it is important for those people that are watching this debate from the sidelines to know that not everyone is ridiculous, and that there are people that have a more balanced view of martial arts.

Such is the nature of free speech though. For every extremist that speaks out, there are a few people that agree. For every moderate that speaks out, there is a vast majority that agree.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
Bjj is the ultimate martial art. It is complete and invincible. Happy? Feel better and more secure now?

actually... :D

Seriously though, bjj doesn't claim to be complete and invincible. That's the story you here from mostly from traditionals. sport fighters have shot that theory down time and time again...whenever it happens, all that is ever said is "well, that traditional guy sucked"

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by BrentCarey


Muay thai and boxing, while fine styles, tend to be quite a bit more direct and stationary when compared to kung fu. This raises a few generalizations, but still, in general is true. The worst thing you can do with a direct attack is directly counter, unless you have a strength, speed, or range advantage as appropriate.

I'm not saying that these other styles lack evasive footwork. I'm just saying that they tend to deal with much smaller/finer adjustments in range and direction, and are not as well suited for defense against an attacker when much larger moves are required.

So, to come back to the point, the difference between getting past a muay thai kick, and a kung fu kick, is that the MT practitioner will tend to kick, but remain more or less in the path of the opponent - or at least within reach. However, an example of a more effective approach with this kind of attacker is to strike at long range, move to short range laterally out of reach, strike again while moving behind the opponent, then either move back to long range or continue to drive forward with rapid short to mid range counterattacks - depending on the situation.


If it's all so straightforward and easy, why is it so hard to accomplish? MMA guys aren't running around saying "if a cma attacks me, I'll counter his eye phoenix eye with a double leg and then..." They just get in there and do it. They also tend to be more open minded - if it works, they are not opposed to using it. Their openness to change, along with the intense training is part of what makes them difficult to contend with. However, all too often we hear "if a bjj guy came at me, I'd sidestep his double leg and..."

All styles and stylists have their strengths and weaknesses. BJJ practitioners must grapple, preferably on the ground. They tend to be at a huge disadvantage until they can they can get a useful hold on the opponent. However, they tend to be among the best when fighting on the ground.

They realize that. That's why the bjj guys that compete in mma crosstrain in grappling styles. as said before, they are more than open to change. On the same token, a cma guy is at a huge disadvantage once on the ground. What do they do? "well, I'd just use chin na..." c'mon...

Kung fu has a well-rounded approach that provides practitioners assets in a wide variety of situations, but tends to produce less specific proficiency. Practitioners tend to have a good grasp on a wide variety of subjects, but not focus and excel on specific skills and principles.

it's good to be well rounded indeed. But being TOO well rounded is actually part of the problem. while you are practicing all of those techs a few hundred times, you've got a boxer practicing his same seven or so techniques thousands of times... I fear the guy who does one tech 1,000 times moreso than the guy that does 1,000 techs one time...


There is nothing magical about any style. Every attack has a solution. People like to portray BJJ as an invincible style, and it has been effectively marketed thusly. The truth is, however, that if you train well enough in just about any style, and make advantageous and speedy tactical decisions, you can defeat just about anyone in any other style.

I COMPLETELY agree. the thing with MMA is that they will regulary test themselves. If what they are doing isn't working, they go back to the lab and change it. Also the point you made = "if you train well enough" is key. since the MMA guys are competing, they HAVE to train darn hard, or else they get their arse handed to them.

BJJ is not the "ultimate" style. It is a fine style for sure. I personally have no use for it. I am 5'9" and about 145 lb. In the real world, I will most likely be at a 40 lb (or more) disadvantage under my opponent. Although size is not everything in BJJ, it is certainly important. I require a style that takes advantage of my size and speed. In kung fu, my build is a great asset rather than something I need to compensate for.

Why does evey non grappler make that assumption? Grappling is AWESOME for smaller guys as long as their technique is right. I think you've seen my pic, if not, read my sig - I'm a pretty big guy. Smaller guys in bjj dominate me consistently. When your technique is good, you learn how to work with the weight disadvantage. Yes, it does matter very much. BUT it matters less to them than it would you, as they know what they are doing and methodically manipulate the extra weight. You as a non grappler will just struggle and likely lose because you exhaust yourself...

Here is a relevant excerpt from an article a wrote a while back. Understand that this excerpt occurs in the context of a passage that makes it clear that incidence of serious injuries (those requiring professional treatment) is nearly neglible when a weapon is involved. So, the most meaningful discussion of self-defense includes defense against armed attackers.

Someone here also posted a recent one that said copy are most likely to end up on the ground in a fight than remain standing, as their attackers are trying to either push, drag or fight them to the ground...




Kung fu provides a rich experience, however, that appeals to many people. Is it any more or less effective for self-defense than style X? Who cares? I have my opinion on the subject, but it is largely irrelevant. The health benefits I get from kung fu are much more likely to save my life than an self-defense technique I may know. I will live a longer, healthier, and happier life because I study kung fu - whether or not I ever have to use it again in real world combat. This is the bottom line. Anyone who misses this point, is truly missing the point.

well said.


Look, I know that this debate is not going to end anytime soon. The purpose of this post is not to persuade any person to lean more toward style X or style Y. It is not even to persuade people to let this subject rest. I just think that it is important for those people that are watching this debate from the sidelines to know that not everyone is ridiculous, and that there are people that have a more balanced view of martial arts.

I think mma has the most balanced view out there...

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SanHeChuan
I took a BJJ class from my university one semester, the most useful skill you could learn in BJJ is movement and position. With those trained well enough you can get to your feet. By the end of the semester I could submit most of the mid level and lower students that I got to roll with out side of class. One of the guys I spanked pretty easy a couple times said he had been there for two years, maybe he didn’t make it to class much. I didn’t get to roll with many of the advanced students and I could barely even move when I rolled with the instructor. Maybe you can’t train enough to choke out royce but maybe you can train enough to get the hell up and run away. I'd have to have a hell of a lot free time to do some thing other than kung fu.

Nice post.

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by SevenStar
bjj doesn't claim to be complete and invincible. That's the story you here from mostly from traditionals.

I don't know about that. I would say you here it pretty well equally from both sides of that debate.


Originally posted by SevenStar
sport fighters have shot that theory down time and time again...whenever it happens, all that is ever said is "well, that traditional guy sucked"

The problem here is that the main arguments on both sides are tired and flawed.

From my perspective (a CMAist), it seems like the BJJ people won't be satisfied until the CMA community gives up CMA because it is useless, as evidenced by the fact that BJJ dominates competition X.

In all honesty, somehow whenever you see style X vs kung fu, the kung fu competitor does indeed suck. If I saw even some of my first-year students performing so poorly, I would be horrified. I have never seen what I consider to be a competent kung fu practitioner defeated in one of these contests.

From the BJJ perspective, it probably seems like the CMA community is in denial of the indisputable facts. How could you claim CMA's effectiveness when the record clearly shows otherwise?

Here is a controversial statement for you. Especially bear in mind that I am a die-hard kung fu proponent. The statement:


When it comes to actual combat, most kung fu practitioners are severely deficient.

Notice that I said "kung fu practitioners", and not "kung fu". Kung fu is an outstanding art. However, most modern practitioners do not adequately train for combat. The causes and reasons are numerous, and the subject for an entirely different discussion. I think that most (informed) people on both sides of the debate can agree with this statement, however.

This brings to mind the bumper sticker which reads, "I may be fat, but you're ugly, and I can lose weight." So, a kung fu practitioner may do poorly in combat, but he/she can train within kung fu and become proficient in combat. Kung fu is broad enough to support any emphasis a practitioner wants to make. However, many other styles have a relatively much narrower range within which a practitioner can explore emphasis.

I'm not trying to marginalize other styles. I support all styles. However, I personally have numerous pursuits I wish to explore through martial arts training, and none of them include competition. These seems hard for many sport fighters to understand.

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by SevenStar
I think mma has the most balanced view out there...


I'm not sure if you were kidding here or not. If so, disregard the rest of this post.

MMA has one of the the least balanced views out there. MMA focuses specifically on what it takes to win a competition. This is about as narrow as it gets.

I'm not saying that it's right or wrong, but it certainly is not balanced.

MMA reminds me of the Alaskan Husky. For those that don't know dog sledding, the Alaskan Husky is the umbrella term for pretty much any crossbred dog, bred solely for the purpose of dog sledding - usually to win competitions. They range in appearance from greyhound-like to malamute-like.

These dogs are bred with one thing in mind - sledding. As a result, they consistently perform better than purebred teams. In fact, many competitions have a separate class for purebred teams, just to give them a chance to compete.

If you just want to win races, run Alaskan Huskies. However, for many people, there is much more to it than that.

MMA is a mutt - bred specifically for one purpose. It is a great approach for that purpose, but don't for one minute think that it is in any way well-balanced. A well-balanced approach does not win competitions. Specific proficiency wins competitions.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by BrentCarey


I don't know about that. I would say you here it pretty well equally from both sides of that debate.

I would say you heard it alot in the past. Now, people know bjj isn't invincible, because it's been defeated by boxing, thai boxing, wrestling, etc. I would say that they tend to think a "traditional" stylist wouldn't beat them, but I'll get to that in a second...



The problem here is that the main arguments on both sides are tired and flawed.

From my perspective (a CMAist), it seems like the BJJ people won't be satisfied until the CMA community gives up CMA because it is useless, as evidenced by the fact that BJJ dominates competition X.

In all honesty, somehow whenever you see style X vs kung fu, the kung fu competitor does indeed suck. If I saw even some of my first-year students performing so poorly, I would be horrified. I have never seen what I consider to be a competent kung fu practitioner defeated in one of these contests.

From the BJJ perspective, it probably seems like the CMA community is in denial of the indisputable facts. How could you claim CMA's effectiveness when the record clearly shows otherwise?

From the CMA perspective, as I've experienced, CMA looks down on bjj and sport fighting in general. They think it's simplistic and a lesser style - when I was in longfist, I overheard a guy say "boxers don't have REAL skill - they just stand there and slug each other" sifu never taught him that - it was like some sort of inherited arrogance. That attitude is what I think provoked mma in the first place. CMA said "Iwould do this..." and MMA said "Put your money where your mouth is."

From a bjj perspective, they are very open minded, and in several cases, have some background in a "traditional style" anyway. When I started bjj, several guys had trained aikido, karate or tkd, and all expressed interest in kung fu. MMA doesn't hate CMA, it hates ANYONE/ANY STYLE that claims they can do something and either won't back it up or can't back it up.

Here is a controversial statement for you. Especially bear in mind that I am a die-hard kung fu proponent. The statement:

"When it comes to actual combat, most kung fu practitioners are severely deficient."

Notice that I said "kung fu practitioners", and not "kung fu". Kung fu is an outstanding art. However, most modern practitioners do not adequately train for combat. The causes and reasons are numerous, and the subject for an entirely different discussion. I think that most (informed) people on both sides of the debate can agree with this statement, however.

I agree with that. As many of the mma/bjj guys on KFO have expressed, it's more of a training issue than anything else.

This brings to mind the bumper sticker which reads, "I may be fat, but you're ugly, and I can lose weight." So, a kung fu practitioner may do poorly in combat, but he/she can train within kung fu and become proficient in combat. Kung fu is broad enough to support any emphasis a practitioner wants to make. However, many other styles have a relatively much narrower range within which a practitioner can explore emphasis.

I dunno... from what I've seen, kung fu doesn't transition to groud fighting very well...it definitely addresses the other ranges though, and can produce VERY proficient fighters, I know. As stated, that's more of a training issue.

I'm not trying to marginalize other styles. I support all styles. However, I personally have numerous pursuits I wish to explore through martial arts training, and none of them include competition. These seems hard for many sport fighters to understand.

That's not what's hard to understand. What's hard to understand is the CMA that rationalize all sport fighting techs away, and then will not/cannot support it. because they compete, they know that there's alot more to defending a double leg than simply sidestepping.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by BrentCarey


I'm not sure if you were kidding here or not. If so, disregard the rest of this post.

MMA has one of the the least balanced views out there. MMA focuses specifically on what it takes to win a competition. This is about as narrow as it gets.

I'm not saying that it's right or wrong, but it certainly is not balanced.

MMA reminds me of the Alaskan Husky. For those that don't know dog sledding, the Alaskan Husky is the umbrella term for pretty much any crossbred dog, bred solely for the purpose of dog sledding - usually to win competitions. They range in appearance from greyhound-like to malamute-like.

These dogs are bred with one thing in mind - sledding. As a result, they consistently perform better than purebred teams. In fact, many competitions have a separate class for purebred teams, just to give them a chance to compete.

If you just want to win races, run Alaskan Huskies. However, for many people, there is much more to it than that.

MMA is a mutt - bred specifically for one purpose. It is a great approach for that purpose, but don't for one minute think that it is in any way well-balanced. A well-balanced approach does not win competitions. Specific proficiency wins competitions.

1. they train ALL ranges
2. they are open to ANY techniques that work.

because of that, it's very well rounded and very balanced. punches? check. kicks? check. throws? check. locks? check. grappling? check.

The mutt mentality is what balanced them out.

A well-balanced approach does not win competitions. Specific proficiency wins competitions.

yea and nay...MMA isn't the way it was in the early to mid 90's anymore. Specificity is not key anymore. It's hard training and a well rounded game. You MUST be able to grapple. you MUST be able to strike. If you neglect one of those, you are crippling your chances of winning.

Now, if you are kickboxing, then yes, you only want to train striking. If you are only grappling, then yes, you want to train grappling.

[Xebsball]

Originally posted by SevenStar
Seriously though, bjj doesn't claim to be complete and invincible.

But... but... but master Helio said it is :(


:D

[Former castleva]

But... but... but master Helio said it is ""
Of course Xebs is kidding,Helio is unlikely to have said that...
I believe this Helio and related fellows do have plenty of respect for """"TMA"""" which is not ironic at all.We are all rocking the same boat of MA around here,not to forget that empty barrels go "rock,rock" a lot.
There shall be very little need to talk about stepping to "dark side",there is no such thing (unless you are a fundamental christian or related,no offense there) BJJ was discussed a lot,great,it comes from """TMA""".
There were also posts of different types of approaches,"striking"..."groundfighting"...
Groundfighting...also included in arts of karate as an example and vice versa (not much of a bridge to cross?)
Groundfighting specified person wants to show you some kind of statistics on how "it goes like this",neglecting things outside of it,while striking...well,you do the math (these examples mentioned here are slightly yin/yang types,not "accurate generalisations")
It is quite hard to point out a general direction from here,provided we (ppl) are very good at rationalizing our acts and thus we can go on forever!

No knowledge hurts,when excessive hearbeat slows,the tunnel vision will fade...
Have a lot of fun in your BJJ class,may it be a cheerful experience.

[carly]

their CMA practice when I posted this.

[SifuAbel]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
I'll clarify what Abel meant:

People on this thread have had the temerity to suggest that classical TMA styles tend to have a hole in their game--the lack of a well-practiced system of groundfighting. We also have the temerity to suggest that groundfighting is a necessary component of self-defense. We also find it reasonable to assume that the nature of groundfighting lends itself to grappling, vice vainly throwing shots from inferior positions in the hopes that the 300 lbs angry bozo on top of you might feel sorry for you and let you up.

Consequently, we are trolls.

These are your words. You filled in the blank were I said nothing. You forgot to add the temerity of elitism and superiority and that yours is the only way. And, the fact that a 300 pound bozo doing kung fu on you wouldn't let YOU up either. Are you a giant? This "we are big , you are smal, we are smart, you are dumb" idea as the crux of your arguement is really funny. Vanity also says you are unstoppable and that there is now way for someone to control or avoid you "Giants".

This is precisely a troll post for another BJJ is the best thread, and YOU FELL FOR IT.

[carly]

You either aren't reading this carefully enough or have a some kind of logic I don't understand.

[Merryprankster]

Hi all,

Went to reality fighting III this weekend to support one of our fighters (He won.)

He can kick, he can punch, he can throw, he can grapple well enough to avoid submission, throw a few himself, and get up off his back. His opponent had mediocre stand-up.

Seven is addressing everything already. I'd like to point out that MMA IS a well rounded approach--to fighting. It is not a well rounded approach to anything else. Many people seek the martial arts for some other sorts of intangible benefits beyond fitness, and the ability to kick a little ass. As much as I disagree with that approach, I do agree that if you're looking for something other than those two things, MMA is not the right cup of tea.

SifuAbel--It's amazing--you say one thing and you're wrong and you say the complete opposite, and you're STILL wrong. Lemme give you my background--I'm a wrestler of some modest experience and a purple belt in BJJ. I've done enough boxing and thai boxing to get myself hurt if I ever try to use it in a fight. BJJ is not the ultimate martial art, and the game changes quite a bit when people are trying to whack you around. A prime example is the history of BJJ--sport BJJ experts saw these fighting events and the success of Royce, and said "Hey, I can do this too!" And they got stomped because they didn't take the time to adjust what they were doing. BJJ, boxing, wrestling, etc--they all give you raw tools that require very little modification or small add-ons to become nasty. I mean, I can take somebody down and lay on them (Wrestling)...Or I can take them down and pin them and start blasting them with knees. It doesn't take much imagination to change--but it IS different and must be addressed.

BrentCarey--I'm not trying to be a jerk with my next question, but you "give the grappler taps" which they "ignore," but that, if applied full on, would end the fight in a rather gruesome way.

I am forced to assume you don't do these techniques full-on on a normal basis with each other. How do you practice these techniques full-on? And if you don't, how do you know they work consistently on a trained, reasonably competent individual?

[TaoBoy]

Except for SifuAbel's rambling this thread actually has a decent, coherent discussion for multiple perspectives. Brent and Seven's points are both valid and it is nice to see them shared.

I study both CMA and BJJ and see the world from both sides. Both are guilty of disrespecting the other camp. I have heard some blatantly stupid statements from CMA guys in the vein of "I would do this". I have also heard some uneducated statements from BJJ playeres regarding the ineffectiveness of CMA. It smacks of ignorance on both sides.

Now, let's all hug.

Peace.

[bougeac]

hi, just thought id say, great thread and for myself (a wing chun practitioner) i definately understand the value of having at the very least, a rudimentary ground game.

an academy i trained at a couple of years ago, gave us instruction in wing chun but also (separately from the kung fu) a hybrid form of grapping which involved stuff from bjj, judo and wrestling.

every friday night we would get together and put our skills to the test, starting vertically (using wing chun) and when (not if) the fight went to the ground, youd have 1 minute to secure a submission before we returned to our feet...

we would fight 3 * 2 minute rounds this way (no punching or elbows but anything else ok) and after just one fight we would be EXHAUSTED!!!

the one thing i learned from this experience was that as much as i love the art i train in, it is NOT complete and ignorance of studying even just the basics of groundfighting is a one way ticket to casualty if you ever get into a fight and dont finish it quickly on your feet...

[Marky]

Hi bougeac,

"every friday night we would get together and put our skills to the test, starting vertically (using wing chun) and when (not if) the fight went to the ground, youd have 1 minute to secure a submission before we returned to our feet..."

we would fight 3 * 2 minute rounds this way (no punching or elbows but anything else ok) and after just one fight we would be EXHAUSTED!!!"


Why did you start vertically if there was no punching or elbows? Why call it wing chun if there was no punching or elbows? Or do you mean that once on the ground, there was no punching or elbows? I thought of some ground ideas based on wing chun, but it uses punching and elbows.

Looking back, why did I have to say "punching and elbows" so many freakin' times? That's pretty annoying!

[SifuAbel]

Whats amazing to me, Merry, is that you can appear to be the poster child for Political Correctness just as long as somebody doesn't say kung fu has something to offer. Then its, "look I tolerate you but I'm still superior to you and My wrestling....... etc etc etc" and start the whole pizzing contest over again.

I saw this as a troll post as would have many others not too long ago when they read "How many of you have" faced up" to BJJ and MMA?" Talk about a dead horse. This type of thread is OLD and TIRED. Freaking excuse me for making a judgement call. :rolleyes:

And do me a favor, don't assume you know what I'm thinking or what my opinion is. 'Cause obviously you don't.

[yenhoi]

oh yeah! Well Im telling!

:eek:

[Merryprankster]

SifuAbel,

If I can appear to be the poster child for political correctness in the eyes of others, one might suggest it's because I don't run around screaming and yelling at what I perceive to be the slightest insult to what I do.

I don't identify myself by my MA practice. I'm a guy who happens to do BJJ. At one point in my life, I happened to wrestle. At another, I happened to box as well. Telling me that BJJ, wrestling, judo, SC, grappling, tiddlywinks or golf is not the end all, be all of martial arts/fighting/life doesn't send me into a conniption fit and cause me to slaver at the mouth or bang my keyboard in tard-like frustration.

My suggestion remains, and always has been, that it's a useful thing to supplement your regular stand-up training with a little high-quality ground work, if your goal is self defense, because the people that might attack you are an unknown quantity, and a passing familiarity with how to move on the ground, which is fundamentally different than how you move on your feet, just might save your butt. I have also always adovocated sparring against people of wildly different styles as often as human possible.

I've never once disparaged CMA. I can be fairly abrasive, and I have had some harsh words about training intensity and focus. I have insisted people call a spade a spade and admit that a 90% stand-up style is not going to prepare you adequately for a ground altercation, and that a 90% ground style is not going to prepare you adequately if you can't get it to the ground. I've suggested that not practicing against Good Grapplers (TM) will likely result in a person unused to truly committed grappling attacks winding up on their ass. I've also suggested that grapplers unused to getting whacked around may not be able to execute their attacks properly. I have requested clear definitions of what people are talking about also, since I personally believe that good MA done well looks remarkably similar in execution, regardless of stylistic background, and believe that 95% of the disagreements on this board are semantics.

I think CMA probably has a lot to offer. On the other hand, your contributions are continuously suspect.

[Kaitain(UK)]

I study BJJ because I want to _know_ what I'm doing on the floor. I enjoy the art itself (what little I know) - it has a logical and scientific approach to ground fighting. The guys I train with are good guys and are always helpful.

Taiji is great for standup - it is a well integrated system for stand-up fighting, training it's own blend of striking, grappling and throwing. However, in my school we do not train for ground-fighting - I have been given then following reasons why:

"If you're taken to the ground then you've done something wrong - if your Taiji is good enough, you won't be taken down" - seminar guest instructor

"In a real fight, the last place you want to be is on the ground" - different guest instructor

"We don't have a ground-fighting component to our system - I'd be teaching you stuff that was untested and based on my assumptions. If you want to train ground-work elsewhere, then feel free - I'd be interested to see what you learn" - my instructor

If you study a system that encompasses ground-fighting then that's great - mine doesn't. Consequently I train BJJ to cover something I feel I need. I don't see that as trolling.

[Knifefighter]

yenhoi:

I'm a BJJ brown belt, so I'm hoping to find some higher level BJJ/submission fighters with whom to train. Some fellow stick fighters would be nice also.

I would also like to check out the competition/opportunities for fitness training/sports conditioning facilities.

Any resources you could point me towards to check things out in your area would be appreciated.

[Nevermind]

Originally posted by carly
begging-for-mercy-oh-please-oh-god-help-me technque?

I thought The Nature Boy Ric Flair invented that technique. :D

[SevenStar]

"There shall be very little need to talk about stepping to "dark side",there is no such thing (unless you are a fundamental christian or related,no offense there) BJJ was discussed a lot,great,it comes from """TMA""".
"

FC just has a talent for stating the obvious, doesn't he? :D

[Former castleva]

Ah,if it was just considered such. :D

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Many people seek the martial arts for some other sorts of intangible benefits beyond fitness, and the ability to kick a little ass. As much as I disagree with that approach [...]
Why would anyone disagree with that? The benefits I believe your are referring to are not intangible. This is one thing I stress to my students - if you cannot clearly sense a concept and its benefits, you probably don't get it yet.

Originally posted by Merryprankster
I'm not trying to be a jerk with my next question, but you "give the grappler taps" which they "ignore," but that, if applied full on, would end the fight in a rather gruesome way.

I am forced to assume you don't do these techniques full-on on a normal basis with each other. How do you practice these techniques full-on? And if you don't, how do you know they work consistently on a trained, reasonably competent individual?
A valid question. I base its effectiveness on three observations - 1 logical, and 2 empirical.

First, one can reasonably rationalize that if a student can seriously rock an 80 lb bag with a straight kick and can center the kick on a dime-sized moving target, then that same kick placed on the jaw of an attacker would be a strong deterrent. We don't need to break someone's jaw to prove it. We just need to prove that the kick could have been placed at the right time.

Second, we prefer guests to pad up. Just because we are pulling punches, doesn't mean that our opponents are. We have mixed results. Sometimes students and guests hold back. Here's generally what happens: One of my students goes up against a guest and gets badly beaten about 2-3 times. He/she usually gets in a few blows that I feel would have stopped a real fight, but the guest fails to acknowledge. The student then adjusts expectations, raises the intensity, and stops pulling punches and kicks so much (usually out of frustration/temper). After a few more rounds, the guest usually concedes that without the protective gear, and with a little more power, they would have been incapacitated.

Granted, we see mixed results. I'm not at all claiming that my students and I can beat any opponent. I am saying that we do quite well against opponents of various other styles with a comparable amount of training. When more or less evenly matched, we win about 75%. When stacked against bigger, faster, or more trained opponents, we tend to get around 50%. This seems like a pretty good track record to me when fighting trained martial artists. Some students win close to 100%, some close to 0%, but that has more to do with how seriously they take their training.

Third, I have considerable real world experience working in counter-drug law enforcement. I am a small guy, so have had to fight more than some of my larger counterparts. I have successfully deployed many of the techniques and concepts I teach. They have never failed me in a real-world confrontation. Kung fu worked in the real world 1000 years ago, and it works today. The main difference is that historically practitioners trained and performed as if their life depended on it. Nowadays, most kung fu training has become a quaint fitness alternative. That doesn't invalidate the system, just the training attitude.

This is my crusade in the CMA community. I am a staunch advocate of training solid traditional kung fu for real world combat. I am weary of people claiming that kung fu is "too complex", "lacking ground techniques", or "outdated". None of these is true. What's more, these statements are generally made by people with little or no real combat experience.

[SifuAbel]

"What's more, these statements are generally made by people with little or no real combat experience."

I wouldn't go that far. This kind of statement just fuels the fire. Some of these people do have combat experience. They can only view things as to what they know through thier own experiences. This may not include good kung fu. Which leads them to make statements that seem silly to us. Sometimes things are said here on certain aspects that don't reflect correctly on what we know kung fu to be. Sometimes it said just to be self serving, oh well what can you do. Its our job to inform them otherwise. If they are mature enough or not to actually discuss it without resorting to the usual ****ing contests is another matter all together. I'm no saint, but who is, maybe kung lek.

Beyond that, THEN there are all the "fans" and the "kids" that come here whom know even less or nothing about kung fu. Those are the people that really muck things up.



I'm with you for everything else.

[Merryprankster]

BrentCarey,

Thanks for the intelligent reply.

I don't agree with the spiritual hoo-ha that some people associate with MA practice. I believe that any character or mental developments are a result of the hard work involved, and not necessarily associated with the practice of MA. If you pick something and work hard at being the very best you can, you'll achieve the same self-improvement benefits IMO, plus or minus the physical benefits, of course, depending on the activity. I guess my feelings are that dedicated hard work is the actual builder, and not anything unique to the MA's. That's what I meant when discussing "intangible benefits." A better term, perhaps, would have been "not quantifiably measurable." I realize that "better health," isn't really measurable, but there are certain indicators that can be used as benchmarks (flexibility, strength, endurance, weight loss, less sick time, etc).

I disagree with the "recognize," approach when it comes to strikes. I realize that for some techniques this may be valid, but for the majority of basic fighting skills I find this mindset not entirely accurate. Who's to say the proverbial kick to the jaw WOULD have ended the fight? The only way to find that out is to do it. To use an analogy, we don't need to be shown that a fork in the eye hurts--but we do need to know if we can deliver the fork to the eye reliably. There are so many variables in a full contact sparring or fighting situation that even skill with a moving target will not ensure success--just because you're a great marksman doesn't mean you'll be a great hunter. It means you have one of the prerequisites, and nothing more.

I do agree with you that the biggest problem with any of this is training intensity and focus. It's an absolute must.

We'll agree to disagree on the ground technique stuff :D

[KnightSabre]

Reading Brent Carry's articles reminds me of a incident that hapenned when our school competed in a MMA comp.

The rules were old UFC 1-5 style,no time limit and almost anything goes.

Well this guy phones in and wants to compete,
He says however that he has been training in Ninjitsu for 15 years and most of his techniques are too "deadly" for the competition.He was told that not too worry apart from biting and eye gouging he can do what ever he wants too.

Now this guy also owns one of the largest martial arts schools in his area.

Well that day we had About 15 fights,there were a mixture of styles that competed,these included Karate,Tae Kwon do,Ju Jitsu (Japenese version),Muay Thai,Kick Boxing,Street fighters and the Ninja.

I got too fight the ninja.
I was quite nervous,I had only been training for 3 and a half years and I weighed 210,
He had 15 years training and weighed 235,
This whole I'm "lethal" thing had me nervous too.

Anywayz we engaed and I stuck to my boxing for the standup,as soon as he attacked I shot in and lifted him up and took him down hard,I got side control and held it for maybe 10 secs,he couldn't escape and I moved to mount,I wanted to get the fight over with so instead of going for a submission I started punching from the mounted position,he tapped soon after.
He simply had no idea on the ground.

That day we won all our fights,most of the traditional guys had been training longer than any of our students had.

In all our NHB fights (Old UFC rules) we have only lost 5 fights,
and it was to another MMA school,we have never been beaten by any traditional schools be it Tae Kwon do,Karate,Kick Boxing,Kung fu,Ninjitsu,Ju Jitsu and more,

Our students have also beaten pro level boxers and kick boxers by using groundfighting in the fights.

By the 3rd NHB comp the traditionalists were no longer entering,
the only single style that were still competing were the kick boxers,they had alot of heart,but without ground skills they had very little chance and only won when they fought other kick boxers.

Now I'm a person that believes in the proof is in the pudding,
How can it be that not one of the traditional schools did well,could it be that they all train badly?All of them?
Could it be that our school and the other MMA school had far superior athletes?
Could it be the rules,no biting and eye gouging?
Could it be the techniques?
Could it be the fact that they had no ground knowledge and we were able to exploit that?

You tell me.....

[Kaitain(UK)]

This is returning to the same old circular arguments:

"BJJ is exceptional on the ground"
"Yes, but proper Kung Fu is as good or better"
"Why hasn't anyone from a 'proper' Kung-Fu school competed in MMA and succeeded then?"
"Don't want to\too deadly\hobbyist"
"How do you know it's better then?"
"I just do"

We've added a new circle to it now:
"Well I study Kung Fu and BJJ because I want surety on the deck"
"Your Kung Fu is crap then"

I've searched and searched for groundfighting knowledge within Taiji - and aside from Shooter I've found nothing - information that leads me to think that my school is no different to most other schools. If your school trains groundfighting that works against skilled opponents then that is fantastic - but let's not **** about here, it is a rarity. A lot of schools I've looked at have an instructor who's attained Blue Belt in BJJ, and he's the fountain of knowledge on groundwork for that club. That's not something that was originally in their system - it's something they are incorporating. It's great that they are doing that - far preferable to having instructors reading a few books and rolling around with each other, before proclaiming that they too have groundfighting within their 'complete' system. (This is not to imply that this is the case with anyone on this thread)

I don't see many BJJ guys claiming that BJJ alone is superior - the message that I hear now is the same as on the Gracie In Action tapes from years back- if you neglect to train for the ground then you are being naive, BJJ (or any other evolved ground-grappling system) is a great supplement to your standup skills.

I think it is conceited and offensive to say that "They can only view things as to what they know through thier own experiences. This may not include good kung fu. Which leads them to make statements that seem silly to us. ". If a system does not cover groundfighting, and you want to be confident in that sphere, then the best thing to do is to seek out a system that supplements your own. Not all Kung Fu systems proclaim to cover the ground - that doesn't mean they are bad schools, just honest. (again, not implying that any school that proclaims 'completeness' is a bad school)

Last note - I am sure there are kung-fu schools that have a great system of groundwork. I am not making a sweeping statement that BJJ is the only way to go - in my case I looked around and saw nothing else that was viable. It works for me.

[ShaolinTiger00]

Great post KnightSabre.

[MightyB]

"just because you're a great marksman doesn't mean you'll be a great hunter. It means you have one of the prerequisites, and nothing more."

You could also add, having marksmanship skills doesn't mean you'll be able to shoot for sh_t when another person is shooting back.

"How can it be that not one of the traditional schools did well,could it be that they all train badly?All of them?
Could it be that our school and the other MMA school had far superior athletes?
Could it be the rules,no biting and eye gouging?
Could it be the techniques?
Could it be the fact that they had no ground knowledge and we were able to exploit that?"

I'll answer it--- No Real Experience and Too Much Martial Fantasy Training


I pointed out the obvious, so now I'm a troll...

:(

[KnightSabre]

Mighty B,

"I'll answer it--- No Real Experience and Too Much Martial Fantasy Training"

Exactly,not only that but the fact that they train with less resistance than we do.
When I did kung fu for 5 years the only time I got hit in the face was when it was by accident.
When we grapple we are doing our best to tap the other person out,
also when we spar we hit each other hard,if you don't block or slip the punch,you get knocked out.

[MonkeySlap Too]

The thing that kills me, is I just don't understand the argument. Probably because I started in Judo before CMA. I know I can pretty much cut up any groundfighter into ribbons with a knife. They are absoloutly helpless in that arena. So life and death I have squared away. But what about non-life or death situations, of course you want some groundwork. Duh.

[shaolin kungfu]

Knightsabre, When you were doing kungfu you should have looked for people outside the school to spar instead of blaming the school for not teaching you correctly. And, by sparring outside of the school you would have been facing many different styles, which would give you some very good real life experience.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by shaolin kungfu
Knightsabre, When you were doing kungfu you should have looked for people outside the school to spar instead of blaming the school for not teaching you correctly. And, by sparring outside of the school you would have been facing many different styles, which would give you some very good real life experience.

But if the school's not teaching you to use what you are learning, then what? Also, even if he did spar with others outside of his class, his school should've been advocating some type of contact, IMO.

[KnightSabre]

shaolin kungfu,

I did,infact I also did 2 years of wing chun.
When I finally sparred a MMA instructor I found out the hard way,
been doing it ever since.

Funny thing is,I've been doing MMA for 5 years and Ive had lots of challenge matches with traditional styles,these include champs in their styles as well as instructors,I have never lost too one.When I did 5 years kung fu the first MMA guy I sparred with beat the snot out of me.

[shaolin kungfu]

If the school taught no sort of applications for any techniques then I agree, it was a bad school. Teaching someone how to fight is the schools #1 priorty. But if the school did show him how to use what they taught, and for some reason did not spar, he should have sought out a sparring partner on his own. It is up to the student to learn and make sure he can use what is tought.

[shaolin kungfu]

sorry, you posted while i was writing, i didn't see your last post. maybe the kungfu school wasn't any good.

[KnightSabre]

well thats the thing,as a kung fu school it was very good,
the school took part in the Beiging(can't spell) kung fu competition a few years back and they got medals in forms and sparring.

Against other kung fu guys they do very well.
It's not like they didn't spar but it was the amount of liveness used and also the amount of contact to the face.

[shaolin kungfu]

If you are trying to say that kung fu is inferior, you are sorely mistaken. I have sparred with people from many different styles and have never been beaten so bad that it made me want to quit kung fu. Hell, I even won a few times.

Maybe wing chun just wasn't your thing. Maybe what your doing now is. You have to do what feels right to you. Different strokes for different folks.

And what exactly is liveness.

[Sho]

[Beijing] ;)

[KnightSabre]

Sho, thanks bud :)

I did 2 years of Wing Chun,
I did 5 years of Northern Long Fist and 5 Animals

[KnightSabre]

Oh,sorry I meant aliveness,
It's a term used by Matt Thornton (BJJ Blackbelt and JKD exponent) and his straightblast gyms.
It refers to training in an alive manor with resisting aponents.

Check his web site http://www.straightblastgym.com

[shaolin kungfu]

Is it just me, or does Mat Thornton seem like Bruce Lee with a little bit of added crazy?

[KnightSabre]

Matt Thornton is unbelievable,
He is the best martial artist I have ever met,
His grappling is mind boggling and his standup is awesome,
he teaches the best clinch stuff out there.
Ask anyone who has trained or grappled/sparred with him.

[shaolin kungfu]

That's all well and good. But is he crazy? He talks about having no terminology, and yet coins the term aliveness. He talks about traditional "cultism" and how to break free from it,but doesn't realize that all he is doing is creating a new "cult" with different rules. So, is he crazy, or is he hippocritical, regardless of his ability to fight.

[KnightSabre]

No,he certainly isn't crazy,he is a very intelligent man.

Matt thornton believes that you are as good as you can spar or grapple,and not what color your belt is,he grades his students the same way.

Ask him some questions on his site,he will gladly respond to you.

[Xebsball]

Royce would choke Matt Thornton

[No_Know]

"Who's to say the proverbial kick to the jaw WOULD have ended the fight? The only way to find that out is to do it. To use an analogy, we don't need to be shown that a fork in the eye hurts--but we do need to know if we can deliver the fork to the eye reliably. There are so many variables in a full contact sparring or fighting situation that even skill with a moving target will not ensure success--just because you're a great marksman doesn't mean you'll be a great hunter."

This seems a possible arguement for forms. Do the same move without actually hurting the person, you already know it's going to hurt.

bougeac, Learing the technique is not "getting the technique...depending on definition one could reverse the positions of getting/learning, and the idea should be the same.

You were doing Wing Chun and any training was getting used to it. Greater skill happens with practice. The longer you did the Wing Chun, theoretically what was not effectinve at the start eventually becomes effective, with dilligence. You are you at birth and how you grow has already been established. How you understand things develops and your already programmed growth is accentuated and otherwise influenced as you continue or Practice living. You become less weak as you continue.

Techniques you did when younger become more effective even though it's both the same thing--walking. I presume you walk better now than you did in the first few years.

It's a short life and a long life. One tends to do as that one best understands. Each choice is might be considered correct, at that moment

[No_Know]

"MMA has one of the the least balanced views out there. MMA focuses specifically on what it takes to win a competition. This is about as narrow as it gets.

I'm not saying that it's right or wrong, but it certainly is not balanced..."-BrentCarey

"...1. they train ALL ranges
2. they are open to ANY techniques that work.

because of that, it's very well rounded and very balanced. punches? check. kicks? check. throws? check. locks? check. grappling? check.

The mutt mentality is what balanced them out."-SevenStar


Views, not MMA. There's more than competitions (paid to view events) in Life. Relevant to SevenStar's mention, MMA has a balance in it's total package.

However, BrentCarey, it seems that life is a large arena with simultaneous and multiple competitions. We race to get there before they run out. We vie for attention. A belle is courted by two or more beaus. The beaus compete for her hand (to eventually marry her). At the dinner table, some compete for the food on the table. And Some use Status of some sort to bypass competition--I'm the oldest, he has tenure, highest ranking officer present...

Raising the standard of ourselves--competition. If are not at a comprehension level to grasp Kung-Fu, then Awesome! If you at least like Kung-Fu, then Awesome!. We do what we understand to be correct/Good/good. And what we prefer or like...

There is being declared winner by the decision officials. And then there is being a Winner. Just trying against the Odds cAn show one to be a Winner.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by shaolin kungfu
If you are trying to say that kung fu is inferior, you are sorely mistaken. I have sparred with people from many different styles and have never been beaten so bad that it made me want to quit kung fu. Hell, I even won a few times.



I don't think anyone here thinks kung fu is inferior. What's inferior is the approach that some schools take to training, and that doesn't apply only to kung fu.

[SevenStar]

Good post, No_Know

[Knifefighter]

MMA fighters as a whole are the most balanced fighters there are. Most MMA fighters have experience in wrestling, boxing, Muay Thai, BJJ or other submission fighting system AND a background in some kind of traditional asian martial art. Many of them also have had weapons training. Can't get much more balanced than that.

[ShaolinTiger00]

I attended a Rickson Gracie seminar last year. He asked us how many of us had black belts of equiv. in other arts and if we could stand up. Nearly half the class stood up and gave answers as different from kung fu to tkd, karate, jujutsu, aikido, etc.

Rickson-"Well I guess that gets rid of the myth that bjj guys can't punch and kick!" thanks guys.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by BrentCarey
First, one can reasonably rationalize that if a student can seriously rock an 80 lb bag with a straight kick and can center the kick on a dime-sized moving target, then that same kick placed on the jaw of an attacker would be a strong deterrent. We don't need to break someone's jaw to prove it. We just need to prove that the kick could have been placed at the right time.

That was exactly the kind of thinking that almost got my head stomped in when I was younger and stupider.

[Xebsball]

bjj guys cant punch and kick

its mma guys that can

thas obvious

[ShaolinTiger00]

yeah ****ty bjj guys

bustamante, noguiera...

[Xebsball]

those are mma guys

you do know they crosstrain in boxing and MT... dont you?

and you misspelled Nogueira

[ShaolinTiger00]

Of course I know. I know everything.

My point is most bjj guys ARE cross trained.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
I attended a Rickson Gracie seminar last year. He asked us how many of us had black belts of equiv. in other arts and if we could stand up. Nearly half the class stood up and gave answers as different from kung fu to tkd, karate, jujutsu, aikido, etc.

Rickson-"Well I guess that gets rid of the myth that bjj guys can't punch and kick!" thanks guys.

That's a good point. Alot of guys tend to look over the face that many bjj guys have had some previous training. Not in all cases, but it's not uncommon either.

[Xebsball]

Definitions:

BJJ guy = dude that trains BJJ
CMA guy = dude that trains CMA
MMA guy = dude that trains more than one art

Nogueira = trains BJJ + MT = MMA guy
Royce Gracie back in the day of the early UFC = trained BJJ = BJJ guy

[ShaolinTiger00]

seven from my experience.

typical bjj student.

high school wrestler. maybe wrestled in college, maybe not. football, soccer & other sports,

trained in a traditional martial art. many usually TKD or a karate or judo for a minimum of 5 years, usually more.

still young and in good to excellent shape.

continue to practice striking and couldn't pass up a heavy bag if they had to.

[Xebsball]

Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
trained in a traditional martial art. many usually TKD or a karate or judo for a minimum of 5 years, usually more.

continue to practice striking and couldn't pass up a heavy bag if they had to.

Not true for typical, maybe there but not here, great majority here go to bjj without having trained anything before, since bjj is very popular.

[ShaolinTiger00]

Both guys I mentioned are Bjj guys.

BJJ - has always been about vale tudo w/ striking!, sport bjj (grappling only) is just a way of in-house skill testing.

[ShaolinTiger00]

Even the judoka Maeda that brought the origin of the art to the Gracie family was a "vale tudo" man.

Modern bjj students who want to practice striking just train in the most effective manner - western boxing and basic kicks.

[Xebsball]

Bjj has the "pedalada", wich is that kick you do when you're down.
It doenst have its methods for punching, kicking etc. Whatever of striking they do comes from other arts.

[ShaolinTiger00]

100% false.

They have has kicks and punches since their origin. but prefer more often than not to use positional dominance as a way to victory instead of pugilism.

Maeda was a MMA champion before he even got to Brazil. He fought western boxers and wrestlers and molded his judo (which at the time had striking - still does) for this combat no-gi. This was the combat method that was passed on to Carlos and then thru the Gracie family. In fact Rolls Gracie was an excellent striker and won several of his matches in this manner.

[Xebsball]

the story about kicks and punches since the origin refers to japanese jujutsu, not bjj.
Bjj came from Judo -> wich doesnt strike

[ShaolinTiger00]

Bjj came from Judo -> wich doesnt strike

again false.

Judo's striking (atemiwaza) was very important & much trained aspect until WW2 - by that time Maeda had been in Brazil for 40 years or more..

MMA wouldn't exist without BJJ. bjj has always had the mma mentality.

[Xebsball]

funny thing becouse theres nothing showing Helio or Carlos or Maeda ever decently striking or training striking.
I thought it was the mma guys that asked for proof all the time with tapes and such...

[Xebsball]

mma existed much longer before bjj ;)

[ShaolinTiger00]

From Maeda's biography "A Lion's Dream, the Story of Mitsuyo Maeda"

Maeda's strategy in an anything goes fight was to set his opponent up with an elbow or low kick. He would then go for a throw and then finish his opponent off on the ground with a choke or joint lock

Carlos's jujutsu was of a similar manner. and Helio has even stated that it was more of the classic style than his.

Here is an old picture of Carlos Jr. and Reylson clickhere (http://www.rodrigogracie.com/images/reylson_g.gif) looks like a palm strike / throw id I've ever seen one. Love the caption on the Mag: MUCH MORE THAN GROUNDFIGHTING!

Helio as we all know wasn't the strongest kid on the block and adapted the art to fit him.

However his children weren't as limited and were able to be more well rounded but saw that advantages that Helio's methodology had. As I mentioned his son Rolls, was a very skilled boxer and vale tudo fighter. much better than even Rickson.

You mentioned that mma wasn't started in brazil and while that's true is certainly didn't exist in modern history in any place else so frequently or as visable as brazil.

People are so loathe to give BJJ credit.. so many haters..

You know next to nothing about the art.I've shot down every point you brought up. Why would you argue and talk smack about something that you know nothing about?

[Xebsball]

I dunno, anyone could write that stuff and just publish, sounds like the stories one can read about the great CMA masters that the MMA guys refuse to believe since there are no proof... ooops

Maeda did some elbows and kicks - does that mean that if i do a headlock on some guy on a fight now i can say we "Oh we have that in Xing Yi too"?
Guess if i pull out a double leg or do it regularly of course i can say "we have that in xing yi".
Now you can tell me "Its all bjj" ;)
Carlos "jujutsu" as you said it yourself, was not what we today call "brazilian jiujitsu" -> the later was created by Helio.
Helio said that himself.

Do you think Rickson goes around teaching people how to punch and kick? I'm sure he doesnt.
That is todays bjj -> no regular striking training
The people that do bjj and strike are the ones that had to look elsewhere to learn how to strike.

[Xebsball]

Stop editing your posts while im typing my replys, thats very lame.

You talk about me not knowing bjj?
You are the one running your mouth on this CMA forum about something you dont know: real CMA.
Dezhen told you this just the other day too, remember?

You were comenting on things you never did such as IRON SHIRT
does that ring a bell?

[ShaolinTiger00]

I dunno, anyone could write that stuff and just publish

The author did a great deal of research in writing this book. He traveled to Cuba, the U.S., Europe, and South America and dug up old newspaper and magazine articles in library archives in these places. He talked to Japanese immigrants in Cuba and Brazil in order to learn more about the experiences of Japanese settlers and understand what Maeda's life might have been like. The author even went so far as to find Maeda's grades from a school he attended in his home prefecture (Maeda was a poor student and failed English).

If you are "resorting" to such lowly tactics like headlocks and double legs, your art is probably failing you. :)


Now you can tell me "Its all bjj"
Isn't this the matra of kungfu = "Yeah, we have that in our system." sounds like hypocracy.


Do you think Rickson goes around teaching people how to punch and kick?
That is todays bjj -> no regular striking training

He showed me a sweet self-defense counter when put in a rear choke. I'm guessing that you've never ever been to a bjj class because in almost every class there are 2-3 self defense techniques taught and practiced.

[ShaolinTiger00]

I'll edit my posts as I wish. it saves bandwidth.

You were comenting on things you never did such as IRON SHIRT

- You'll forgive me if my sifu wasn't a moron who believed in such utter nonsense and instead taught me to fight.

This chat is over. I replied to someone's post, you responded to mine and I provided you with a credible answer for every comment. Now it seems your just flailing and will soon resort to name calling and other nincompoopery.

[Xebsball]

Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
If you are "resorting" to such lowly tactics like headlocks and double legs, your art is probably failing you. :)


You are the one claiming headlocks and double legs to be lowly tactics, thats on you. I never found anything wrong with those.


Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
Isn't this the matra of kungfu = "Yeah, we have that in our system." sounds like hypocracy.

No its not the mantra (not matra btw) of CMA. Thats what some CMA guys say, but doenst correspond to the reality of all CMA praticioners.

Did you do those strikes at full power during live sparring on a fully resistant sparring partner? Cos if you didnt none of that will work ;)

[ShaolinTiger00]

Did you do those strikes at full power during live sparring on a fully resistant sparring partner? Cos if you didnt none of that will work

Something we agree on!

Exactly the reason why they practice these strikes and kicks with gloves and gear on! And to be very good at this They would want to train with guys that practice in this manner all the time.. like muay thai guys... but they are still training under the methods of bjj. no one will ever mistake Busta or Nog as "thai guys"

[Waidan]

ST receives 10 points for his use of the word "nincompoopery".

Penalties for making fun of Iron Shirt training and for anal spelling corrections are offsetting, no points are deducted.

[ShaolinTiger00]

LoL!
"Ignoramus" was ****ed and loaded..

[KnightSabre]

Allthough Antonio Nogiuera's primary style is definately BJJ he cross trains in boxing for his standup game,he doesn't use it to knock his apponent but to set up his take downs so he can use finnish his appponent with a submission.

[Kaitain(UK)]

I think in UFC 35 or so, Bustamante references the fact that he is a skilled boxer - he'd just not had to use it before (he'd just KTFO'd some guy for the title)

ST - I think it's pushing it a bit to say that because Carlson or Maeda did striking, BJJ has striking in it :). I study under one of Rickson's coaches and we do a lot of self-defence - strikes are always mentioned (when they're available, when you're vulnerable), but not trained. There's no bag work, no pad work and no sparring.

[KnightSabre]

I think we gotta be carefull that we don't fall into the boat of some of the traditional guys who claim there style incorporates a range that it doesn't.

I study BJJ and I also study Boxing and Muay Thai,we have never learnt any strikes from BJJ.All my striking come from the other two arts.

[Knifefighter]

For all intents and purposes, BJJ, contains no strikes other than a push kick and a low side kick. Even these are only used as distractions to help close the distance.

Lots of BJJ schools bring in wrestlers to supplement takedowns and boxers or Muay Thai practitioners to supplement striking.

Most BJJer's understand the limitation of only studying one art and thinking that any single art contains effective approaches for all ranges.

[ShaolinTiger00]

as you mentioned BJJ uses strikes including punches, Elbows & knees and kicks to set up their prefered method of combat.

I do the same thing with sanshou (I punch to close the gap safely) and would do the same with judo but because groundwork in hindered by the gear.. need gear to practice striking.. they have to be divided (usually). and of couse grappling is the focus of these arts because you can go full speed safely.

Just about every person that trains BJJ in a no-gi manner also trains striking to complete his range and represents a "vale tudo" mindset.

Sport bjj club students do not train striking. although even many of thse practicioners will study striking skills.