waht contact level would you call this?

[Oso]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=IkC35VbWGvw


it's the clip from the taikiwhatever vs. kyokoshinkai. I don't really care about the supposed fight from a style sense but am curious as to what others think the contact level would compare as.

I voted already

[Golden Arms]

Good poll idea Oso. In my book, if you are getting hard enough to fall to the ground, then its hard contact. Maybe not in others though?

[RonH]

There is that. That's also the fact one of them ended up with a bloody nose, but that could have been caused by something else after they landed and not during the take down or before. I'd say medium to hard, but it looked like those guys were going for quantity of hits and kicks and not quality, even if you say this was frinedly sparring. With friendly sparring, you shouldn't be throwing your fists and feet out like they were. It looked sloppy.

Did they switch off after that one guy got a bloody nose early on? I'm not sure. Also near the end, what was that style that one guy was doing with his hands ahead of himself, but the palms were facing down? I'm not that familiar with the animal styles of waijia. My first thought was mantis, but then, I thought it could have been something like lion or maybe a tiger, but I don't know.

[TenTigers]

I voted medium-hard, going by the first fight. I saw medium hard kicks and punches to the body, and possibly controlled to the head. Really hard to say. Nothing was clean and it was pretty dark. I also have to say, as the vid went on, it looked worse and worse. Try to find a better example.

[mantis108]

Danger level: 9 (minimal protective gear and no mat)

Contact level: 7 (since there is no small joint manipulation groinshots, eye gouging, etc)

Intensity level: 6 (since limited clinching allowed and no ground range)

competitive level * : 10 (both sides/style really wanted to do the other side in)

Reality level: 4 (too stylisted not quite resembling actually street condition)

-------------------------

* A.K.A animosity level. ;)

Challenge scale averages: 7.2

Challenge scale with value from 0-10

0=nothing at all
1=very easy
2=easy
3=moderate
4=somewhat hard
5=hard
6=very hard
7=intense (bloody)
8=uncomfortably intense (miming)
9=extremely intense (potentially long term injury)
10=dangerously intense (potentially fatal)

Mantis108

[The Xia]

Danger level: 9 (minimal protective gear and no mat)

Contact level: 7 (since there is no small joint manipulation groinshots, eye gouging, etc)

Intensity level: 6 (since limited clinching allowed and no ground range)

competitive level * : 10 (both sides/style really wanted to do the other side in)

Reality level: 4 (too stylisted not quite resembling actually street condition)

-------------------------

* A.K.A animosity level. ;)

Challenge scale averages: 7.2

Challenge scale with value from 0-10

0=nothing at all
1=very easy
2=easy
3=moderate
4=somewhat hard
5=hard
6=very hard
7=intense (bloody)
8=uncomfortably intense (miming)
9=extremely intense (potentially long term injury)
10=dangerously intense (potentially fatal)

Mantis108
Excellent assessment!

[The Xia]

Not that it takes away from your post, but "contact" as you defined it is different then the way I normally see the word used.

[Oso]

mantis108: good breakdown but more analytical than I tend to get.


I voted medium-hard but only because of intent. I think they were trying to hit each other hard but the generally poor skill/technique level inhibited their power.


I don't think it was a great example (though not a terrible one) of fighting but I do think it is a good enough example to make a contact level comparison with what each of us does in our schools.

FTR, in my school as compared to this, we have two levels. One that is lighter than this with an attempt to resemble the 'style' we are doing and one that is harder where affect is more important.

[MasterKiller]

without gear, my vote is for dumb contact.

[Chief Fox]

medium contact

[Knifefighter]

That was full contact. Hard to tell, but it might have been open hand shots to the head & face.

As far as intent, it was definitely there... especially in the first fight and in the other clip (T vs. K #3). In the #3 clip, the Kyokushin fighter got rocked with about four shots to the face.

[PangQuan]

That was full contact. Hard to tell, but it might have been open hand shots to the head & face.

As far as intent, it was definitely there... especially in the first fight and in the other clip (T vs. K #3). In the #3 clip, the Kyokushin fighter got rocked with about four shots to the face.

ya, in the 3rd vid, at :19 its definately open hand to the face

[PangQuan]

What are the distinctions on this thread regarding the 'Hard' and 'Full' contact?

[Oso]

MK, agreed but that's not part of the point.

PQ, there aren't any intended.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I didn't see any BJJ OR Muay Tai Round Kicks, so this must have been light contact point sparring.

[Fu-Pow]

I didn't see any BJJ OR Muay Tai Round Kicks, so this must have been light contact point sparring.

LOL!!!:D................

[mantis108]

Hi Xia,

Thanks, glad you like it. :)

Hi Oso and All,


mantis108: good breakdown but more analytical than I tend to get.

I hear you but I think it would be more interesting to take the ball and run with it a bit. ;) Hope you don't mind.


I voted medium-hard but only because of intent. I think they were trying to hit each other hard but the generally poor skill/technique level inhibited their power.

Well ... frankly and technically, these bouts aren't that different from the Taiji Vs Tibetant White Crane and the one that Wing Chun Vs Ving Tsun in German (you know what I mean?). Why? Because they are more or less born out of the same "lei Tai" mindset of the past. It's about my style is more POWERFUL than yours, not my style is more TECHNICAL than yours. So these are more "p!ssing contests" than anything else if you ask me. They are concerned with who wins, not who is more aesthetically pleasing in knocking the lights out of the other guy. IMHO Kyokushin can be quite technical and beautiful to watch with awesome power. BTW, I don't think this Kyokushin school reflected the true potential of the Kyokushin whole (just my opinion). The one Japanese Yiquan, which I am not much of a fan of even with its Chinese counter part, did try to do some sort of faking but it was horrible and childish at best.

I believe this is the reason that Bruce Lee came up with the whole JKD 5 attacks theory and such things to hopefully remedy the predominant pitfalls of Lei Tai mindset (ie misuse of tradition training methodology lead to ploughing through than blasting through your opponent). But in the end fighting is fighting; to each their own. ;)


I don't think it was a great example (though not a terrible one) of fighting but I do think it is a good enough example to make a contact level comparison with what each of us does in our schools.

Agreed.


FTR, in my school as compared to this, we have two levels. One that is lighter than this with an attempt to resemble the 'style' we are doing and one that is harder where affect is more important.

Well, if I may say so, I believe we might be of similar if not same path. BTW, I hope get the link of my student's first Pankration fight?

Warm regards

Mantis108

[Oso]

Hi Xia,

Thanks, glad you like it. :)

Hi Oso and All,



I hear you but I think it would be more interesting to take the ball and run with it a bit. ;) Hope you don't mind.

not at all. I went down a path like that but discarded it as 'thinking too much' ;)


Well ... frankly and technically, these bouts aren't that different from the Taiji Vs Tibetant White Crane and the one that Wing Chun Vs Ving Tsun in German (you know what I mean?). Why? Because they are more or less born out of the same "lei Tai" mindset of the past. It's about my style is more POWERFUL than yours, not my style is more TECHNICAL than yours. So these are more "p!ssing contests" than anything else if you ask me. They are concerned with who wins, not who is more aesthetically pleasing in knocking the lights out of the other guy. IMHO Kyokushin can be quite technical and beautiful to watch with awesome power. BTW, I don't think this Kyokushin school reflected the true potential of the Kyokushin whole (just my opinion). The one Japanese Yiquan, which I am not much of a fan of even with its Chinese counter part, did try to do some sort of faking but it was horrible and childish at best.

enh, I'd say they were better than those two examples by at least one order of magnitude.

I believe this is the reason that Bruce Lee came up with the whole JKD 5 attacks theory and such things to hopefully remedy the predominant pitfalls of Lei Tai mindset (ie misuse of tradition training methodology lead to ploughing through than blasting through your opponent). But in the end fighting is fighting; to each their own. ;)



Agreed.



Well, if I may say so, I believe we might be of similar if not same path. BTW, I hope get the link of my student's first Pankration fight?

I did but didn't get to look at it for long...he looked fine, but I didn't get in to a real critical exam of it.

i'm getting ready to move at the end of the month and am busy preparing for that.

[Mr Punch]

Well ... frankly and technically, these bouts aren't that different from the Taiji Vs Tibetant White Crane and the one that Wing Chun Vs Ving Tsun in German (you know what I mean?). Why? Because they are more or less born out of the same "lei Tai" mindset of the past. It's about my style is more POWERFUL than yours, not my style is more TECHNICAL than yours. So these are more "p!ssing contests" than anything else if you ask me. They are concerned with who wins, not who is more aesthetically pleasing in knocking the lights out of the other guy. I don't know what your point is. Those fights you just referenced were really crap, right? So you're saying these are really crap?

I don't think you can break down a distinction into a fight to show power, and a fight to show technique, and especially not in this case. And furthermore I don't understand your logic in saying they are 'p!ssing contests' - they are of course competitive... why should they be more concerned with who looks pretty: that's not what MA should be about for the most part, right?


IMHO Kyokushin can be quite technical and beautiful to watch with awesome power. BTW, I don't think this Kyokushin school reflected the true potential of the Kyokushin whole (just my opinion). LOL, one of those guys was Matsui who is the Kancho the Kyokushin HQ, which regularly turns out some of the hardest Kyokushin fighters in Japan! Who are you, again!? :p

I didn't recognise any of the Yiquan guys but I can only assume that they knew the level of their opponents and didn't just send a bunch of cans.


The one Japanese Yiquan, which I am not much of a fan of even with its Chinese counter part, did try to do some sort of faking but it was horrible and childish at best.LOL again... and you can say it's it was horrible and childish based on what? And is faking supposed to be some indicator of a higher level of skill? Do you have any experience of Yiquan - or is it just bias based on a couple of things you've seen or read? These Japanese Yiquan guys punch like mules... they cause a lot of hurt, and some of them train as hard contact as Kyokushin...


I believe this is the reason that Bruce Lee came up with the whole JKD 5 attacks theory and such things to hopefully remedy the predominant pitfalls of Lei Tai mindset (ie misuse of tradition training methodology lead to ploughing through than blasting through your opponent). But in the end fighting is fighting; to each their own. ;)I think they stick to their own styles as much as they can. It is obvious who is which side if you have any experience of either.

These are good fights I think. They're hard but there are no rules that would take them out of their comfort zone enough to make it look like generic MMA. I.e. if there was grappling, shooting etc they wouldn't be able to stick to their favoured stances and strategies. However, the fact that it is bareknuckle and both sides can take and give out a lot of punishment means that it doesn't look like a) and average brawl or b) generic kickboxing a la K1.

The only reason I don't say they are full contact, is because nobody gets injured! There may well have been a couple of broken noses, and skinned knuckles, but if you have a full contact fight with these levels of fighters and no protection there will be injuries. IMO full contact can only be done with protection.

[Knifefighter]

The only reason I don't say they are full contact, is because nobody gets injured! There may well have been a couple of broken noses, and skinned knuckles, but if you have a full contact fight with these levels of fighters and no protection there will be injuries. IMO full contact can only be done with protection.

Mr. Punch-
Good post. However, I disagree with you about the full contact. A few of those guys (on both sides) got rocked.

What prevented KO's and big injuries was the fact that they were more than likely using palm strikes to the face.

[Knifefighter]

It's about my style is more POWERFUL than yours, not my style is more TECHNICAL than yours. So these are more "p!ssing contests" than anything else if you ask me. They are concerned with who wins, not who is more aesthetically pleasing in knocking the lights out of the other guy.

LOL @ someone trying to be "aesthetically pleasing" when fighting full contact. Any thought of being "aesthetically pleasing" will go right out the window the first time the opponent lands a halfway decent shot.

[Oso]

These are good fights I think. They're hard but there are no rules that would take them out of their comfort zone enough to make it look like generic MMA. I.e. if there was grappling, shooting etc they wouldn't be able to stick to their favoured stances and strategies. However, the fact that it is bareknuckle and both sides can take and give out a lot of punishment means that it doesn't look like a) and average brawl or b) generic kickboxing a la K1.

so, you're saying that neither of the styles represented could handle clinching/takedowns/grappling?

The only reason I don't say they are full contact, is because nobody gets injured! There may well have been a couple of broken noses, and skinned knuckles, but if you have a full contact fight with these levels of fighters and no protection there will be injuries. IMO full contact can only be done with protection.

I agree with that. I don't think they are full contact either.

[Oso]

Mr. Punch-
Good post. However, I disagree with you about the full contact. A few of those guys (on both sides) got rocked.

What prevented KO's and big injuries was the fact that they were more than likely using palm strikes to the face.

would you define 'full contact' as you see it? thanks. :)

[Knifefighter]

would you define 'full contact' as you see it? thanks. :)

Full contact = punching and/or kicking as hard as you can, attempting to do as much damage as possible.

[Oso]

so, intent vs. effect ?

[Knifefighter]

so, intent vs. effect ?

Absolutely... a 15-year-old amateur featherweight boxer in his first ever match will never have close to the same effect as a professional heavyweight boxer. However, he is still fighting full contact in his competition.

[Oso]

check. just looking for definitions. thanks.

[PangQuan]

what about breaking fingers (not easy, but if you did), ripping ears or clawing? what kind of contact is that?

[Knifefighter]

what about breaking fingers (not easy, but if you did), ripping ears or clawing? what kind of contact is that?

Same... just different rule sets.

[mantis108]

I don't know what your point is. Those fights you just referenced were really crap, right? So you're saying these are really crap?

All I am saying is that these fights and the other "Chinese Kung Fu" ones are of similar if not the same format. All of them are allow to punch and kick but not clinching or ground fighting (bare knuckles also). Your partiality or rather double standard towards the Kyokushin karate doesn't change that fact and it certain doesn't make Kyokushin Holier than Kung Fu. I don't understand why people have to belittle the Taiji Vs Tibetant White Crane fight. It was a bout for charity and it was a older gentleman who would put his own well being on the line using the same darn format as those kyiokushin guys for charity. Have you fought for charity lately?


I don't think you can break down a distinction into a fight to show power, and a fight to show technique, and especially not in this case. And furthermore I don't understand your logic in saying they are 'p!ssing contests' - they are of course competitive... why should they be more concerned with who looks pretty: that's not what MA should be about for the most part, right?

You wrote, "These are good fights I think. They're hard but there are no rules that would take them out of their comfort zone enough to make it look like generic MMA. I.e. if there was grappling, shooting etc they wouldn't be able to stick to their favoured stances and strategies. However, the fact that it is bareknuckle and both sides can take and give out a lot of punishment means that it doesn't look like a) and average brawl or b) generic kickboxing a la K1."

So you have the ability to discern the differences between all different fighting format presumeably with their strength and weakness and you don't think it's possible to break down the bouts and form distinctions between someone who's bulldozing and someone who's really using strategy and tactics. How is a war of attrition slug fest not a "p!ssing contest"? Now I didn't say it wasn't the case with the Chinese fights. I think you really wanted to said "you" (meaning me) having a different view than you which makes me stupid and you oh so smart. Man, you are such a hypocrite.


LOL, one of those guys was Matsui who is the Kancho the Kyokushin HQ, which regularly turns out some of the hardest Kyokushin fighters in Japan! Who are you, again!? :p

EXCUSE ME, indeed I am a nobody. That doesn't mean that I have no opinion or I am not entitle to one. With your logic, every one trains at Gracies HQ would be bad ass mo-fo? No one from there every get their ass kicked. What kind of logic is that? You wanted to subject to pedigree worship? By all means, be my guest.

I seems to remember seeing qutie a bit of Kyokushin at youtube that have lots of knock out by powerful kicks (usually to the head) or punch to the solar plex. Hell, I have even seen outer reap takedowns and an armbar or two from on those Kyokushin matches. HQ of Kyokushin, so?


I didn't recognise any of the Yiquan guys but I can only assume that they knew the level of their opponents and didn't just send a bunch of cans.

That's part of my point. You don't think the so called Yiquan could have been "cross trained" other stuff before they have those bouts? There are rumours that Chinese Yiquan guy "cross trained" other than what they claimed "pure" Yiquan training. How do we know if the Japanese counter part didn't do the same? To simply put Yiquan might not be the "purists" that they claims when it comes to fighting. To me the Kyokushin guys are truth to their training and their style in the clip. I don't think they are crapy and I never have said that but I think they could have allowed clinch, takedowns, and ground (10 seconds rule). They are capable. Why not up the ante? That's just my opinion.


LOL again... and you can say it's it was horrible and childish based on what? And is faking supposed to be some indicator of a higher level of skill? Do you have any experience of Yiquan - or is it just bias based on a couple of things you've seen or read? These Japanese Yiquan guys punch like mules... they cause a lot of hurt, and some of them train as hard contact as Kyokushin...

So a boxer who does bobbing, waving, etc or Ali's footwork and faking is not an indicator of sophisticate skills? :confused: Anyone can punch like a mule (within their own weight class) with descent training, that's doesn't make Yiquan anything special. I don't seem to recall the clip showed any knock out by the Yiquan guys or anything technically superior other than your observation of punch like a mule do you (technical knock down may be and just may be)?


I think they stick to their own styles as much as they can. It is obvious who is which side if you have any experience of either.

so you opinion counts and mine don't? :rolleyes: Because you have done both?


These are good fights I think. They're hard but there are no rules that would take them out of their comfort zone enough to make it look like generic MMA. I.e. if there was grappling, shooting etc they wouldn't be able to stick to their favoured stances and strategies. However, the fact that it is bareknuckle and both sides can take and give out a lot of punishment means that it doesn't look like a) and average brawl or b) generic kickboxing a la K1.

The only reason I don't say they are full contact, is because nobody gets injured! There may well have been a couple of broken noses, and skinned knuckles, but if you have a full contact fight with these levels of fighters and no protection there will be injuries. IMO full contact can only be done with protection.

RIGHT .... as if you are the only one allowed to have a "corrected" opinion. I shared my opinion already and I didn't have to cut you or other short to come to my opinion. Get a hold of yourself and stop the ego mastur bation!

Mantis108

[Mr Punch]

Oh, man,

where to start...

I have no time, but I'll come back and address your post in detail later...

I just wanted to say that you are entitled to your own opinion and I wasn't trying to belittle you or say that I was right and you were wrong at all.

So for my part I am really sorry if it came across that way and for your part... maybe you could be a little less sensitive and not see my post as a personal attack. The 'who are you' bit was just a joke - thart's all... you could be a super badass james bond bruce lee mofo for all i know - I've read a lot of your posts and agree on many things (and your previous post on this was interesting)

In this case you have a valid PoV, but I think you have a couple of things a bit off...

Everytime I say 'I think', it's the same as saying IMHO or whatever: it's not stating a fact - of course it's just stating my opinion...

Sorry

and back laterin the spirit of discussion.

[mantis108]

Fair enough, I am sorry if I got jumpy. If that "who are you" was meant as a joke, it could have been easily fixed by indicating it with (j/k) quotation.

Anyway, I am here to make friends not foe. So I apologize for my over reacting. :o

Please share your view. Thanks

Sincerely,

Mantis108

[rogue]

That was full contact. Hard to tell, but it might have been open hand shots to the head & face.

That's what we do when gear isn't on hand and we go about as hard as the guys in the vid. Funny though that even with someone getting knocked down or staggered that I still wouldn't call it full contact. Not patty paws but still not full contact, but that may because we pull our strikes when the other guy is unable to fight back.

[Yum Cha]

I'd call it full contact. Not "no holds barred" or anything goes, but the issue is, trying to hit as hard as they can. I'm sure there were some informal rules to protect the fighters, but it was pretty competitive.

I can't tell, open hand or closed to the face, but there looked to be some closed hand to the face stuff. Open hands have to sweep, lots of those shots looked like straight in shots.

It was the face shots and head shots that determined the outcomes, there must have been some significant contact there.

Somebody said it couldn't be full contact because there are no pads, well, this goes back to so many threads in the past. Full contact takes on another dimension without the protection. The cost of entry goes up. You don't see guys wading in covering up behind the pads and than opening up blindly.

It looked like takedowns were allowed, just no follow through. These guys weren't grapplers, and to assume its not full contact because they don't grapple is irrelevent noise.

The same as saying, because there are no nut shots or eye gouges, its not full contact....

As for being aesthetically pleasing, I though it looked good. You could see training and stylistic skills being used, heart and technique.

I did see a lot of raised elbow, square facing right-left-right-left straight punches, which are pretty common, probably due to their effectiveness.

Nice vid

[bakxierboxer]

.......

I can't tell, open hand or closed to the face, but there looked to be some closed hand to the face stuff. Open hands have to sweep....

No, they do not.


As for being aesthetically pleasing, I though it looked good. You could see training and stylistic skills being used>....

It seems that you're "easily pleased".


I did see a lot of raised elbow, square facing right-left-right-left straight punches, which are pretty common, probably due to their effectiveness.

With pretty much ZERO directed to the midsection.

Pete

[Mr Punch]

Thanks Mantis... Group hug! :D


I don't know what your point is. Those fights you just referenced were really crap, right? So you're saying these are really crap?
Your partiality or rather double standard towards the Kyokushin karate doesn't change that fact and it certain doesn't make Kyokushin Holier than Kung Fu. I don't understand why people have to belittle the Taiji Vs Tibetant White Crane fight. My 'right?' was asking you for confirmation... because the opinion of most people on most of these boards is that that fight sucked. I wasn't actually saying so, but I really didn't know what your point was so I was asking what you thought of the Chinese fight, and from then what your comparison point was about this one.

As for kyokushin, I’m not particularly partial to it: but I’ve had a little experience sparring and training with some kyokushin people.


It was a bout for charity and it was a older gentleman who would put his own well being on the line using the same darn format as those kyiokushin guys for charity. Have you fought for charity lately?I didn't know it was a fight for charity... that's cool. However, I'm not sure about the age point: at least with the taiji these are supposed to be arts that take years to develop into useful and devastating fighting skills: so from that perspective older guys should be in their prime, no? Then again, I don't know how old those guys were...! :eek: :D

And no, though I don't really think it's relevant, I've never fought for charity, though I have done vast numbers of throws and breakfalls and sword cuts etc, for charity. And FWIW, I think fighting hard contact, limited rules, no protection, is a pretty daft thing to do for charity!


All I am saying is that these fights and the other "Chinese Kung Fu" ones are of similar if not the same format. All of them are allow to punch and kick but not clinching or ground fighting (bare knuckles also). Thank you, the above cleared up what I was asking you about where you stood on both of the fights.


So you have the ability to discern the differences between all different fighting format presumeably with their strength and weakness and you don't think it's possible to break down the bouts and form distinctions between someone who's bulldozing and someone who's really using strategy and tactics. How is a war of attrition slug fest not a "p!ssing contest"? Now I didn't say it wasn't the case with the Chinese fights. I think you really wanted to said "you" (meaning me) having a different view than you which makes me stupid and you oh so smart.I don't know if you've ever seen many kyokushin on kyokushin fights, but IMO, they look more like untrained, unlovely slugfests than this one. You said that you thought this wasn't a great example of the potentially beautiful moves of kyokushin, but I think it actually showed more variety and style than kyo vs kyo. They didn't know what was coming against yiquan so they had to be a bit cagey and couldn't just bulldoze. I think these bouts show a lot more inventive use of footwork and evasion from the kyo guys than their usual slugfests.

But anyway, since we are talking about fighting skills (and Oso started this thread because he wanted people’s opinions on the level of contact, not technical merit or aesthetics) bulldozing/muscling through is a relevant strategy, and as relevant as feinting for example.

And I really did mean that I didn’t distinction was possible generally, not as a direct reference to you.


LOL, one of those guys was Matsui who is the Kancho the Kyokushin HQ, which regularly turns out some of the hardest Kyokushin fighters in Japan! Who are you, again!? :p
EXCUSE ME, indeed I am a nobody. That doesn't mean that I have no opinion or I am not entitle to one. With your logic, every one trains at Gracies HQ would be bad ass mo-fo? No one from there every get their ass kicked. What kind of logic is that? You wanted to subject to pedigree worship? By all means, be my guest.I pointed out that one of them was Matsui in response to your statement that you didn’t think it was a good show of kyokushin: i.e. because it’s Matsui (who is the HQ kancho) it should be a reasonable level. Then, in case you said anything along the lines of, “Ah, but Matsui isn’t that great, and the HQ trains a lot of bad fighters too, compared to [wherever]”, I pointed out that he does turn out a lot of good fighters. I wasn’t trying to say that all his fighters would be bad-ass, just that although some of the kyokushin have been criticized for weakness by some of their more hardcore offshoots, some kyokushin is still good.

The ‘Who are you?’ was completely just a gag… just by saying that I wouldn’t judge the head of kyokushin’s kyokushin because I don’t know enough about it… wasn’t very funny I guess :o Sorry.

[Mr Punch]

That's part of my point. You don't think the so called Yiquan could have been "cross trained" other stuff before they have those bouts? There are rumours that Chinese Yiquan guy "cross trained" other than what they claimed "pure" Yiquan training.From what I understand, Yiquan is by its nature more of a way of moving and maintaining body structure while attacking and being attacked rather than sets of techniques, so yes, all the Yiquan guys I’ve met have cross-trained… with respect, I don’t see how this is relevant to the contact debate.


I don't think they are crapy and I never have said that but I think they could have allowed clinch, takedowns, and ground (10 seconds rule). They are capable. Why not up the ante? That's just my opinion.Well, I don’t know. It seems to me that they are fighting as hard contact as they can within their rule-set. If you are saying because they are not clinching, takedowns and ground that they are no fighting hard contact, I don’t think that is accurate. As to why they didn’t I don’t know, but since this was for Japanese cable TV (you can also find the edited version on youtube – it’s horrible, and cuts out all of the bits where it looks like Yiquan is winning!) presumably they had certain safety or insurance issues.

LOL again... and you can say it's it was horrible and childish based on what? And is faking supposed to be some indicator of a higher level of skill? Do you have any experience of Yiquan - or is it just bias based on a couple of things you've seen or read? These Japanese Yiquan guys punch like mules... they cause a lot of hurt, and some of them train as hard contact as Kyokushin...


So a boxer who does bobbing, waving, etc or Ali's footwork and faking is not an indicator of sophisticate skills? :confused: No, of course, Ali and many other boxers were excellent fakers and very very highly skilled. But conversely, that doesn’t mean arts or individuals who don’t fake so much are of low skill level… You seemed to be saying that because there was no faking in these bouts they somehow didn’t show a high level of skill. And getting back to the contact point: ‘just bulldozing through’ is a higher contact level than faking!


Anyone can punch like a mule (within their own weight class) with descent training, that's doesn't make Yiquan anything special. I don't seem to recall the clip showed any knock out by the Yiquan guys or anything technically superior other than your observation of punch like a mule do you (technical knock down may be and just may be)?I wasn’t saying that because Yiquan punch hard it makes them better than kyokushin. I was saying that because both sides punch hard (and furthermore, because some of the kyokushin guys were forced to be hesitant) it’s an indication of how heavy the contact was in these bouts. A lot of kyokushin bouts look like pretty light contact to the casual observer because bodies are not really rocked about, but then they practice hitting each other full-contact, no protection all the time so appearances are deceptive, and what often looks like schoolboy gut punch would have many of us rolling on the floor gasping for breath!

Hope that clears up some of my opinion!
:)

[Mr Punch]

Somebody said it couldn't be full contact because there are no pads, well, this goes back to so many threads in the past. Full contact takes on another dimension without the protection. The cost of entry goes up. You don't see guys wading in covering up behind the pads and than opening up blindly.You're probably referring to me.

I said that full contact without pads by its nature leaves people injured. So, I'm thinking they're pulling even if only a little. Again, this wasn't some underground stuff, this is some amateur footage from a TV shoot.

I agree completely with the fact that (and how) it changes the dynamics of a fight to be wearing pads of course.

[Mr Punch]

No, they do not.I thought I saw some too. I'll check again.
It seems that you're "easily pleased".Me too! Could it be (SHOCK!) that people have a different idea of what is aesthetically pleasing??? :confused: :rolleyes:
With pretty much ZERO directed to the midsection.Not necessarily accurate anyway, but what's your point? That it can't be hard contact because nobody's hitting the gut/chest?

When entry becomes more difficult because there's no padding, big shots and head-hunting relying on good timing become more important. Did you see Chuck Liddell get KOed by Rampage because he went for a body shot and left himself open to a big head shot? Happens all the time. In my experience of bare-knuckle, body shots are more often a dangerous waste of time than in say, boxing.

[bakxierboxer]

I thought I saw some too. I'll check again.

The "No, they don't." was specifically in response to "Open hands have to sweep.."


Not necessarily accurate anyway, but what's your point? That it can't be hard contact because nobody's hitting the gut/chest?

I don't "follow" any form of "full-contact".
In the few matches I have watched, I've seldom seen anything like a front kick to the midsection.... perhaps it's "outlawed" too?
OTOH, even Muay Thai is not big on allowing the Uechi-style pointed-toe front kicks.


When entry becomes more difficult because there's no padding, big shots and head-hunting relying on good timing become more important. Did you see Chuck Liddell get KOed by Rampage because he went for a body shot and left himself open to a big head shot? Happens all the time. In my experience of bare-knuckle, body shots are more often a dangerous waste of time than in say, boxing.

Given the "guard" positions used in those matches, there simply wasn't anything "there" to deter the use of front kicks which don't necessarily leave you open to "a big head shot".

[Samurai Jack]

I voted full-contact. Those guys didn't appear to be holding back to me. Several times I saw some good head shots. There were also knock downs and a couple of throws. If there had been no referee, it seems obvious to me that someone would have been hurt.

I didn't read the replies here, but the youtube comments were just another sad example of people who have little training expecting to see something like what they see demonstrated in class (read rehearsed) as opposed to an art used for real.

Real fighting isn't pretty. You are likely to throw as many "bad" punches as "good" ones. That's if you are "good".

[David Jamieson]

To me that's Hard contact w/courtesy.

Full contact is closed fist, gear or no.
Pretty dangerous and yeah they were trying to use the styles they have learned as opposed to looking like boxers, or wrestlers, or taekwondo guys or mma-ers.

In my opinion, schools that go at this level of intensity should allow for more realistic technique usage by simply allowing gear to be worn. mouth guards, cups at least! :p

Not the worst approach to martial arts I've seen if you get my inference. lol :)

[Oso]

I like the phrasing 'with courtesy'. Any level of sparring that isn't for money, honor or revenge should include the courtesy of not breaking something of your opponents.

[Becca]

Good poll idea Oso. In my book, if you are getting hard enough to fall to the ground, then its hard contact. Maybe not in others though?
Agree with this. Not trying to cause harm, so it's not full contact. But not pulling any strikes and using full power, so it's definantly hard.

[sanjuro_ronin]

To me that's Hard contact w/courtesy.


Bingo.
Though I would probably say more like Hard Contact with no intent to mutilaite and dumb body in dumpster.
Yours sounds better.

Kyokushin guys had a tendency to drill hard on most shots and drill full force when they pother guy is really open, bare knuckle fighting in which your unprotected fists smash into elbows tends to do that to you.
The head shots weren't all out either, but they were done to make a statement.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The second match seemed closer to full contact and it looked like they were throwing closed fists.

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkC35VbWGvw

[Judge Pen]

I voted hard contact only because they broke up the action in the clinch and once they went to the ground. I think they were trying to pop one another fairly hard, but there were obvious "rules of engagement" in place to make this less than a full contact fight.

[sanjuro_ronin]

When ever you look at a sport combat match or an organized fight, you need to ask yourself, "is every shot thrown going full speed full force?".
Not the case here, certainly in the second match the first exchange was full contact.

[Mega-Foot]

This was clearly very light contact, perhaps even point sparring no-contact (stopping 2 inches from target), but since the category of Light contact was the lightest contact allowed, I was forced to choose that.

[Samurai Jack]

I disagree that they weren't trying to hurt each other. Those were real punches to the face. If they had gone at it for awhile longer, I'm sure you'd have seen a knockout, or at least some blood.

Judging from the comments, it appears that people are saying they regularly spar at this level bare knuckle.

What about a boxing match? Is that not really full contact in your estimation? Anyone have clips of what they consider full contact (since for the majority, this obviously isn't it)?

[Yum Cha]

The "No, they don't." was specifically in response to "Open hands have to sweep.."


Fair enough, open hand strikes like palm, willow leaf and knife hand can come in straight. But, I think the general contention was open handed "slap" fighting vs closed hand "Fist" fighting. For what its worth, it didn't look like slap fighting to me.



I don't "follow" any form of "full-contact".
In the few matches I have watched, I've seldom seen anything like a front kick to the midsection.... perhaps it's "outlawed" too?
OTOH, even Muay Thai is not big on allowing the Uechi-style pointed-toe front kicks.
Given the "guard" positions used in those matches, there simply wasn't anything "there" to deter the use of front kicks which don't necessarily leave you open to "a big head shot".

Don't know what video you were watching, but I saw several effective front kicks used to attack and to jam attacks.

===================

I agree, there is a 'courtesy' involved here. There is another level it could go to, perhaps even two, but here's the distinction I make. Targetting vs power.

I think there is no question, they were trying to hurt eachother, maybe not maim. And I think there was honour on the line.

I didn't note the difference between full and heavy contact in the poll.

You can fight full contact with deference to soft targets and still get full contact training. Unfortunately, you may not follow through when you need to in a pinch, but there are always tradeoffs. Forewarned is fore armed.

Same goes to the lack of ground work. It may not be comprehensive, but the training skill is to be able to deliver power, full power. Not only the individual phyiscal execution of the power, but the way you have to comit your weight, you have to pass their defense carrying a bomb from the safe zone to the target. The importance of speed and balance relative to your big guns, all that.

Ground guys are used to full power. When you roll, you use it always. You may not choke a guy to death, but you use your power to get the tap, and you have to fight for the positioning, escapes, etc. It a great advantage in training. Strikers have a different challenge, as we all know.

[Yum Cha]

Anyone have clips of what they consider full contact (since for the majority, this obviously isn't it)?

Perhaps some will admit this is full contact?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ_T7GnAmrE

[Oso]

I think there is a distinction between trying to 'hurt' and trying to 'maim'.

i think there was 'control' in those fights as in: neither fighter was trying to permanently damage the other...bust a nose, crack a jaw, break a tooth; possibly. but neither was trying to put the other 'out' out.



I don't really see where anyone has said they do this regularly bare knuckle.


We go this hard (and a bit harder, imo) w/ boxing gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces) but not as hard w/ light gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces).

[Samurai Jack]

I don't really see where anyone has said they do this regularly bare knuckle.


Not here, perhaps, but it seems almost everyone claimed to fight using "hard contact" on this recent thread:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=363

Now, doing a little math here, if 82% people on this board are saying that they "regularly fight hard contact", and over 70% claim that this is an example of "medium/hard" to "hard contact", then 57% of the folks on this board claim to be fighting this hard or harder.

If that's really the case (giving the benefit of the doubt), we've obviously got some seriously tough S.O.B.'s here. I'd like some examples of what this 57% considers full contact, wouldn't you?

[Oso]

perhaps, but I don't really care if someone doesn't want to post a vid of themselves sparring.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think there is a distinction between trying to 'hurt' and trying to 'maim'.

i think there was 'control' in those fights as in: neither fighter was trying to permanently damage the other...bust a nose, crack a jaw, break a tooth; possibly. but neither was trying to put the other 'out' out.



I don't really see where anyone has said they do this regularly bare knuckle.


We go this hard (and a bit harder, imo) w/ boxing gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces) but not as hard w/ light gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces).

Even in my time, where kyokushin was "probably" a tad harder due to no or very limited wieght divisions, we never did hard contact all the time, certainly not bare knuckle.
Too much damage being done, not only to the bodies but the hands too.

I have always viewed sport as Hard contact and "real world altercations" as full contact, simply because you do hold your self back in the grand scheme of things in sport and the only time you go all out is when your bacon is on the line.

BUT, over the last little while, people like Knifefighter and others and their view have cause me to re-evaluate how I veiw sport combat and I think that I need to distinguish "sport full contact" from "combat/street full contact".

So, in terms of Sport combat arts, yes, some of those fights and all the MMA and Boxing ones are Full contact, in the sport sense - looking for the knock out but being respectful of the opponent.

[mantis108]

Thanks Mantis... Group hug! :D

:)


My 'right?' was asking you for confirmation... because the opinion of most people on most of these boards is that that fight sucked. I wasn't actually saying so, but I really didn't know what your point was so I was asking what you thought of the Chinese fight, and from then what your comparison point was about this one.

While I believe public opinion is not to be ignored, yet as a martial artist I don't feel that I have the need to comply or to conform to that kind of opinion. I think the greatest gifts and attributes of martial arts are brains, hearts and courage. My favorite example of all time is Ali. On the stage of life, he would rather go to jail for his consciences and believes rather than comply with the interests and political agenda of the state. In the boxing ring, he achieved the "impossible" by wisely using rope-a-dope strategy at a time when the "public opinion" believed that George Foreman will more than likely knock the fu[k out of him. So personally, I don't subcribe to public opinion that much if at all.

The negativity of the critics of the Chinese fight is rooted in the hype IMHO, which was the Hong Kong head of the Wu Style Taiji (so called internal style), who was around 50 some years old, against a much younger 20 something Tibetant White Crane rising star in the the HK Kung Fu community. Both styles have a lot at stake riding on this. In some ways, the public exhibition of basic or rather fundamental fighting skills, which is to say it's in essence kick boxing, when both side have little idea or feel of what the other side is capable of it's better to play it safe but it disappointed people and shattered some myths and dreams. People rather romance Kung Fu (in this case an honorable deul) than to experience Kung Fu for real. Fighting to most are based on a romantic notion (no small thanks to martial novels and pop culture), so the martial arts merchants sugar coated the fundamental truth of fighting and sell "flowery fist embroidered legs". If a "master" isn't doing some fancy moves according to public perception of the identity of the master, he's viewed as being crapy in fighting. When "masters" fighting like everyone else, which is to say that fighting is fighting, where the expression of the human body in combative form is limited to the attribute it adapts to, people become angry not necessarily at the masters but rather at themselves of living a fantasy for all that time. So they turned that negative energy towards the masters and styles instead of taking a cold hard look at their own disability in discerning the truth. Yes, the truth is hard to face.

That kind of negative opinion, public or otherwise, doesn't help anyone especially those who are after the truth. It is just hot air and venting of incompetency in coping with the truth IMHO. Personally, I don't think it's healthy to discern qualities of martial artists based on that alone.

So my point was that I see the Chinese fight as lessons to be had and learn from it. I am grateful that they showed their skills and I am able to learn a thing or two through the documentation of it. It is the same as the Kyokushin fights. I would try to learn something from it rather than being judgemental to it. Besides the point of the discussion was the degree or level of contact, I used what I called a "Challenge scale" to shown how I get to my opinion that it is intense contact (with the intend to hurt or mime) not full contact (with the intend to kill or murder). It is like many that have pointed out eariler - it is an honorable duel with rules and accords in effect not non sensible street voilence. So the format allowed and the activities reflected is hard contact IMHO not full contact.


As for kyokushin, I’m not particularly partial to it: but I’ve had a little experience sparring and training with some kyokushin people.

Thanks for sharing.


I didn't know it was a fight for charity... that's cool. However, I'm not sure about the age point: at least with the taiji these are supposed to be arts that take years to develop into useful and devastating fighting skills: so from that perspective older guys should be in their prime, no? Then again, I don't know how old those guys were...! :eek: :D

Age might not matter as much as experience if it's street self defense. But as martial sports (as in the Chinese event) or any sport for that matter, age often is the decivisive point. Unless of course, you are Captain America - Randy "the natural" Couture. It's more possible for the older person to get hurt, which also is harder for him to recover from the aftermath, not to mention that recouping time in the ring is more favorable to the younger person. So...

The powress of the Taijiquan IME so far are more or less myth. I believe it's pretty good in getting people a swelled head than swell skills these days.


And no, though I don't really think it's relevant, I've never fought for charity, though I have done vast numbers of throws and breakfalls and sword cuts etc, for charity. And FWIW, I think fighting hard contact, limited rules, no protection, is a pretty daft thing to do for charity!

Well, it was the hype to draw crowd and it worked. ;)


Thank you, the above cleared up what I was asking you about where you stood on both of the fights.

You are most welcome.


I don't know if you've ever seen many kyokushin on kyokushin fights, but IMO, they look more like untrained, unlovely slugfests than this one. You said that you thought this wasn't a great example of the potentially beautiful moves of kyokushin, but I think it actually showed more variety and style than kyo vs kyo. They didn't know what was coming against yiquan so they had to be a bit cagey and couldn't just bulldoze. I think these bouts show a lot more inventive use of footwork and evasion from the kyo guys than their usual slugfests.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. I think a well develop combination or a well timed terminating technique (ie a high kick to the head causing knock out, or a punch to the liver that drops the opponent, etc) is beautiful. That's what I meant by aesthetically pleasing fundamentals (style). You are right that kyo vs kyo fights sometimes are monolithic. These kyo vs YQ fights are relatively "colorful".


But anyway, since we are talking about fighting skills (and Oso started this thread because he wanted people’s opinions on the level of contact, not technical merit or aesthetics) bulldozing/muscling through is a relevant strategy, and as relevant as feinting for example.

You are right bulldozing through indeed is a relevant strategy. Be that as it may, it's not one that Kung Fu is found on IMHO. So...


And I really did mean that I didn’t distinction was possible generally, not as a direct reference to you.

Understood.


I pointed out that one of them was Matsui in response to your statement that you didn’t think it was a good show of kyokushin: i.e. because it’s Matsui (who is the HQ kancho) it should be a reasonable level. Then, in case you said anything along the lines of, “Ah, but Matsui isn’t that great, and the HQ trains a lot of bad fighters too, compared to [wherever]”, I pointed out that he does turn out a lot of good fighters. I wasn’t trying to say that all his fighters would be bad-ass, just that although some of the kyokushin have been criticized for weakness by some of their more hardcore offshoots, some kyokushin is still good.

I hear you and I thank you for sharing that.


The ‘Who are you?’ was completely just a gag… just by saying that I wouldn’t judge the head of kyokushin’s kyokushin because I don’t know enough about it… wasn’t very funny I guess :o Sorry.

My friend, in hind sight, I might have jumped the gun. So I am sorry to have over reacted. It's not easy to discern a joke from ridicule on a public forum sometimes. Anyway, I bare no ill will as I am sure you don't either. Let's move forward.

Warm regards

Mantis108

[golden arhat]

i think the kicks looked a little pulled

[sanjuro_ronin]

i think the kicks looked a little pulled

Not pulled, just "thrown" in there, with little real power behind it, sometimes typical when you are just throwing the kick in there to see what he does, you know, no real commitment.

[msg]

i would say its hard contact with realy now power behined it .
but thats why i dislike those white suits and so called black belts sloppy .looks like some f...up kick boxing but whats new crap like that wont change people will still go and learn that **** the should just learn boxing and there kicks my newphew can throw those

i know that thats not the point of the thread but i cant help saying it people train for years and it end up like that sad

[Knifefighter]

Not here, perhaps, but it seems almost everyone claimed to fight using "hard contact" on this recent thread:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=363

Now, doing a little math here, if 82% people on this board are saying that they "regularly fight hard contact", and over 70% claim that this is an example of "medium/hard" to "hard contact", then 57% of the folks on this board claim to be fighting this hard or harder.

If that's really the case (giving the benefit of the doubt), we've obviously got some seriously tough S.O.B.'s here. I'd like some examples of what this 57% considers full contact, wouldn't you?

Yeah, and I'd like to see their clips to back it up.

[Knifefighter]

i would say its hard contact with realy now power behined it .
but thats why i dislike those white suits and so called black belts sloppy .looks like some f...up kick boxing but whats new crap like that wont change people will still go and learn that **** the should just learn boxing and there kicks my newphew can throw those

i know that thats not the point of the thread but i cant help saying it people train for years and it end up like that sad

One reason this looks sloppy is because they are clinching and grabbing clothing. It's hard to get off good crisp techs when the opponent is doing this.

[rogue]

One reason this looks sloppy is because they are clinching and grabbing clothing. It's hard to get off good crisp techs when the opponent is doing this.

Bruce Lee could.

I think to label what level of contact we think we're using we need set some standards.

For example I would say the following video shows light contact/low intent as it's in a friendly setting.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=etBsBoe5ZDM

BTW No offense meant to the Bullshido folks or on their skill.

I came across this while looking for a video of Goju Sanchin testing. What level of contact is this and does it count? I can see someone figuring that this can supplement their light sparring and count as hard contact.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_joSS_Y7ro&mode=related&search=

[Oso]

lol, Rogue, I think you're just trying to be slick. ;)

I didn't see anything in the bullshido clip that was above what I consider medium contact...and not much of that. the yiquan vs. kyoko clip was much harder.


as far as the goju guy hitting his students...medium to medium hard...and only slightly usefull for sparring as you might understand how painful it could be to get hit.

[Oso]

Yeah, and I'd like to see their clips to back it up.


you know, I don't really get why it's that important (even for the tma **** talkers)

i know, it's the internet and the only 'proof' is vid or pic...but, still, aren't you placing too much emphasis on the worth of someone's internet opinion?

[bakxierboxer]

lol, Rogue, I think you're just trying to be slick. ;)

If so, he just flunked the class.


I didn't see anything in the bullshido clip that was above what I consider medium contact...and not much of that.

It was cr@p.
No force/power.
Even if there had been, the deliveries sucked.


as far as the goju guy hitting his students...medium to medium hard...and only slightly usefull for sparring as you might understand how painful it could be to get hit.

In Kajukenbo ("original"/"hard-style")....
We hit WHITE belts LOTS harder "back then".
I'm nearing 65 and I can still make my stomach and solar plexus sound like bongos while using finger strikes.... as a matter of fact, that was part of an exercise that the entire class did.... children (the few) and women.
Oh, yeah... that was all "just in case" (you missed a block)

[RonH]

But, the internet is God. :p

[rogue]

lol, Rogue, I think you're just trying to be slick. ;)

I didn't see anything in the bullshido clip that was above what I consider medium contact...and not much of that. the yiquan vs. kyoko clip was much harder.


as far as the goju guy hitting his students...medium to medium hard...and only slightly usefull for sparring as you might understand how painful it could be to get hit.

Me, slick? Naw.:D

But I am serious about how we each can have a different standard of what is hard contact. It's obvious the Bullshido throw down video is about having some fun rolling with the gang and not getting hurt. So we can safely say light to medium contact. But I think as things ramp up it gets harder to define what's hard and what's not.
For example, to those goju people that may be hard contact if that's the hardest they've ever been hit, on the other hand these guys may have a different opinion...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C4T4bOfriw&mode=related&search=

And I doubt any of them could go full contact with these two...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nox2uNiQ_o&mode=related&search=

Both sets of fighters had similar results(kind of). So who is going full contact?

[Oso]

well, yea, what do you think the point of the thread is? :p


ouch, I guess they didn't allow punching to the head...for safety I reckon :rolleyes: those first couple of guys probably ended up with concussions.

Everybody thinks they are making thier point when they do what they do, though.




i dunno, chuck just got served.:(


****, now I gotta go say 10 Hail Chuck's for blaspheming:o


Hail Chuck, full of power, the hip is with thee.
Blessed art thou in the cage, and blessed is the fruit of thy bombs, KO.

[Ben Gash]

I think it was a full contact bout, but the Kyokushin guy was going easy on him, some of his shots were definitely mildly pulled. For this reason I put hard contact.

[David Jamieson]

I think it was a full contact bout, but the Kyokushin guy was going easy on him, some of his shots were definitely mildly pulled. For this reason I put hard contact.

did you say hard contact? (http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1764124)

[RonH]

That's uber hard contact.