Should good Kung Fu be successful in the ring?

[Merryprankster]

Ok, I want to establish ground rules on this one, not that I can enforce them, but still...

I don't want to see the really BIG "if's," here:

IF they didn't have gloves...
IF they allowed small joint manipulation...
IF they allowed pressure point attacks... (which Pride does, but I digress), etc.

I'd like to limit this to the way things actually ARE.

With the rules of say, a UFC or Pride type event, AS THEY STAND NOW, should good Kung Fu be successful in the ring?

Not would it, but should it? Different question. One is a question of training methods, techniques, etc. The other is a "fundamental," question.

I do not believe ring fighting is the end all be all. It is not necessary to be a great ring fighter to be a great fighter, so let's get that out of the way right now.

However, SHOULD a great Kung Fu fighter, who by all accounts would kick ass on the streets, be able to kick ass in the ring?

I understand that style to style answers might vary.

[Ralek]

I think Kung fu fighters should stick to their forms and unrealistic stances.

[shaolinboxer]

The ring is a place for sport, and it is athletes of that sport who logically should dominate it.

[HopGar]

I think ralek is g a y. Anyhow, a gree with shaolin on this one. Athletes are supposed to dominate sporting events.

[Juan Alvarez]

I think you said it. A great kung fu FIGHTER (and not kung fu) should do well in an event, provided he trained for that event.

Now, let me turn the question around for you. Should a Martial Art (you know: way of life, fighting skills, blah, blah, blah...) be judged effective by a sporting event?

[shaolinboxer]

"Should a Martial Art (you know: way of life, fighting skills, blah, blah, blah...) be judged effective by a sporting event?"

How can it be judged in a catagory to which it does not belong?

[Ralek]

www.bjj.org/images/royce-delucia.jpg

Well kung fu hasn't had a pretty history in NHB tournaments. So if sporting events ARE a good judgement of a style's effectiveness then that would make kung fu a shetty style.

[norther practitioner]

Good gung fu should hold up anywhere

[Ralek]

Yes. Kung fu should have held up but it didn't. Kung fu was repeatedly beat down so therefore kung fu is ineffective by trial and error definition.

[SevenStar]

Rolls, the only thing deemed ineffective through trial and error is your brain.

Now back the topic, I think good kung fu should hold up in the ring. You just have to train for it as would any other athlete. I don't buy into the whole "this is a ring sport, not true martial arts" thing. It's a combat sport. H3ll no you can't poke out eyes or manipulate small joints, but there is more to kung fu than that. I think the biggest difference is training. If you train MMA but don't train for the ring, IE you don't do all the cardio work that you should, or get into the proper shape, you're going to gas early in the fight. Like anything els, there is a certain type of training that should be followed for ring fighting, which I would venture to say that many kung fu schools don't adhere to - because they don't have to. Their goal is not to fight at all, let alone in a ring. If you train a kung fu stylist for the ring, there is no reason why they wouldn't win. I don't keep up with Don Wilson, but wasn't his training mainly kung fu and some TKD? He trained for the ring and was sucessfull because he did.

[Water Dragon]

Yes and no. Yes it should. No, as you need to understand that a ground game is a must in modern times. That being said, I'm back in BJJ starting next week. You can look for my NHB premiere somewhere toward the end of this year beginning of 2003.

[Buby]

You're right, to a certain extent. It's not kung fu that's ineffective, but rather the person using it.

Dude, most people don't want to dedicate the time it takes to develop real kungfu skills. Not only that, but half the people teaching it don't have the first clue as to what real kungfu is. They train ****ty and they don't fight. Without testing your skills how are you going to know what works for you and what doesn't.

The first "Kung Fu" school I signed up to was garbage, but I thought it was the shhhh. I'm just glad I got rocked once or twice and woke up to smell the coffee. I just began training in Kung Fu again and can tell you that it's nothing like I was learning before. I've even had a go with a couple of my friends that are dirty street fighters and could have dropped them more than once had I wanted to. Don't get me wrong I ate my share of punches and kicks, but I noticed the difference in my fighting skill and mindset.

You can study the best system in the world, but if you don't train it properly and put your skills through the test then you'll never learn to fight.


Merryprankster - UFC rules? I say hell yeah! I good kungfu stylist should be able to whoop as$ in the UFC. How much closer to real life can a tourney get?

Buby

[Juan Alvarez]

I'm sorry. I wrote Martial Arts instead of kung fu.

What I meant was that I don't consider kung fu as a sport, more like a way of living and thinking. So, why restraint it to it?

[David Jamieson]

Should good Kung Fu be successful in the ring?

Yes!

peace

[Ray Pina]

Good kung-fu should be succesful in any combat forum.

[Yung Apprentice]

Ralek define "repeatedly". I hope you are not baseing your opinion on cage matches. If so, then what does that say about boxing? They have some boxers in UFC. But they get their ass's handed to them. But if Mike Tyson or someone of his caliber stepped in the ring, they would be the one handing out ass's.

[Xebsball]

Yes it should, but the level of effectiness may change acording to the rules, the same goes to all other martial arts or martial sports.

Think of:
Judo guy on boxing tournament
Boxer on wrestling tournament

See what i mean?

But indeed, overall kung fu or any other martial art should be able to at least put on some decent fighting.

[Gargoyle again]

To the original topic...

Good kung fu should have:
Limb breaking, eye striking, throat striking, weapons weapons and more weapons, multiple opponent fighting, groin ripping, maiming strikes, deadly strikes, ear rupturing strikes, knowledge of pressure points and meridians and medicine...

Funny, I see none of that in the ring no matter what "the ring" gets defined as.

So, no. Ring fighting has no relationship to good kung fu. Take all that away, and your good kung fu gets stripped down to simple sport brawling.

[Reappah-X]

Gargoyle...

It shouldnt matter...within the confines of the rules and everything being equal it shouldn't matter what style the person trains in, provided they supplement their regular training by training specifically for the rules of the event.

All that crap about "our moves are too deadly" is total BS...If you can land moves like that then you should have no trouble landing basic strikes and applying basic holds.

Its that stupid "our moves are too deadly" attitude that gives all traditional stylists a bad name.

On the same topic tho, I do think that NHB fightin and real fighting is totally different because then you have X number of factors which change things up, biggest of course is weapons which is a completely different ball game...

Bottom line is(and this has been said before but should be re-iterated)...anyone should be able to put on a good showing regardless of style so long as they train for the event.

Reap

[Paul]

Limb breaking, eye striking, throat striking, weapons weapons and more weapons, multiple opponent fighting, groin ripping, maiming strikes, deadly strikes, ear rupturing strikes, knowledge of pressure points and meridians and medicine...

here come the kung fu is too deadly for the ring type arguements.

If you can't handle one opponent why even worry about multiples.

If you can't connect with basic techniques like punches and open hand strikes good luck with the more complicated "deadly" techniques, nevermind what would happen to you in the legal system for using such things in a simple street fight.

[Gargoyle again]

I agree with you both to a point, I'm not a believer in the "Invincible Kung Fu Touch o' Death" either.

My intent is to point out the hypocracy when someone claims to have set up the ultimate test of fighting, but then yells "No fair! You can't use a katana! No fair, you chewed off my testicle!". Any arbitrary sport rules will result in the most successful people being those who have spent the most effort training to fight within the restrictions of those rules.

To take it further, I would no more expect Gracie or Shamrock to be able to last 10 minutes in a boxing match against Holyfield, than I would expect a TKD champion or Taijiquan master to last in the UFC.

When the reverse claim that "so-and-so isn't good in my sport, therefore their art is inferior to my sport" is made, this is where the absurdity arises.

[apoweyn]

gargoyle again,

well, that's a good point. but the flip side of your argument is this: most martial systems have facets to them other than those you mentioned. perhaps they don't have the facets you mentioned at all. perhaps they feature no pressure point attacks, for example. but they do feature basic kicking and punching, or basic throws and locks, etc.

so if you were to take the elements away from gung fu that you listed, you would still be left with many arguably more basic elements (punching, kicking, throwing, locking, footwork, etc.) so, the question, as i understand it, is whether those elements (found in various martial systems) would hold up in a competitive environment. would the footwork, punching, kicking, throwing, etc. of gung fu be comparable in capability and performance to similar facets of other arts or practitioners?

to my mind, i can't imagine why they wouldn't be. i agree with most of the posters here. it could work just fine if said gung fu practitioners trained like an athlete. not so much with regard to restrictions, but conditioning, activity-specific training methods, intensity, and so on.

now, back to my doughnut.


stuart b.

[Kristoffer]

who cares?

[apoweyn]

kristoffer,

clearly, you care. otherwise, you're engaged in an absurd activity: responding to input about which you feel nothing. that seems kind of unlikely.


gargoyle again,

i agree that a statement like that is a form of hypocrisy. but it's another form of hypocrisy to say that a style is better BECAUSE you train with a katana or chew testicles (remind me NEVER to come to your kwoon, by the way).

if you've never used a katana on someone in a live-fire environment, never punched someone in the throat or clawed at their jumblies, then you're discussing theory. and presenting theory as application is a form of hypocrisy. it's one that many of us (myself included) do, because we live in a time and place in which personal combat is an infrequent reality. we simply don't do the real thing very often. so much of what we do necessarily and thankfully remains theory.

but that which we CAN test, perhaps we SHOULD test. and i think that's what people like merryprankster are calling for. not that NHB represents truth. and not that theory represents truth. but that, by an honest study of both, some measure of truth might be found.


stuart b.

[Tigerstyle]

Plenty of people here care, Kristoffer. That's why they're posting on this thread. :)


"Think of:
Judo guy on boxing tournament
Boxer on wrestling tournament"

Xebsball,
The thing about the examples you mentioned is that grappling is not allowed in a boxing tournament and striking is not allowed in a wrestling tournament. Judo doesn't teach striking (for the most part) and boxers don't learn to wrestle.

Grappling and striking are both allowed in a MMA tournament. With the "deadly techniques" removed, kung fu styles are still left with, at the very least, strong basics. If a person's style relies on breaking and killing their opponent in a conflict, then they're a tragedy waiting to happen (What would they do if a friend was drunk and got a little rowdy? Thumb his eyes out? tear out his groin? :eek: )

Strong basics is what's winning these tournaments right now. The BJJ submissions we see in the ring are basics taught from the beginning (triangle choke, rear naked choke, arm bar, key lock, etc.). Kick boxers are KO'ing with "bread and butter" techniques (low roundhouse, high roundhouse, basic punches). Wrestlers are grounding opponents and pounding on them (many times with little technique, but great effect).

In my opinion, yes kung fu should be doing good, but I think it does take a different training approach/method to prepare for the ring than what many kung fu schools (and many schools in general) are doing.


Water Dragon,
(If you're serious) Good luck! If you were kidding... :p

[Water Dragon]

Oh, I'm dead serious.

[Merryprankster]

Water, how much do you weigh?

Xebs, Gargoyle;

Ap's point should be well taken. He does Escrima as a primary martial art. I wouldn't expect him to take escrima to the ring and do well. Heavy weapon emphasis. More precisely, I SHOULDN'T expect an Escrima fighter, who may very well be a bad-ass streetfighter, to be a kick ass ring fighter. While I appreciate the point, two words must be applied when discussing our day to day lives "within reason." You can take anything to its logical extreme, and you will wind up with an untenable position.

Turn the other cheek is an example.... Ok, so I should simply not defend myself when attacked?


But all that aside, I like what is taking place here, keep it coming guys!

So far, I am hearing "Kung Fu and its principles should be fine in the ring, provided the ring is properly trained for in terms of cardio, etc," With a light undercurrent of "Ring and street are too different to make an accurate comparison.

Please, keep it coming!!

[Black Jack]

Water Dragon,

I don't know many of the local NHB events but I have heard of a popular one called the Hook & Shoot that is in your area I believe.

Which events are you thinking about running with?

More of an eclectic tourney or more traditional like San Shou?

[Ray Pina]

A full out punch on the street is the same as a full out punch in the ring -- chances are, the guy in the ring is better trained.

The only differences (besides bitting, neck snapping, ect.) is that they'll break it up in the ring before any major damage can be done. But a beating is a beating. To me, this is gung-fu's specialty, if you have gung-fu.

Many people watch Kung-Fu movies, go to Kung-Fu schools, wear Kung-Fu clothes and swing cheep, flimsy replicas of Kung-Fu weapons, but I'd say maybe 1 out of 15 to 20 practitioners have Gung-Fu. That's the difference, and that's why Ralek keeps talking smack. I have invited him to NYC to see the difference, but he wants to be king of the hill of his one horse town. I like his attitude, calling BS when he smells it, but not the fact that he is unwilling to open his mind to a bigger world. After all, where does he thing BJJ came from? Tekken?

[Golden Arms]

I agree with Tigerstyle's post, the training of most schools seems to be what would limit the fighters the most. The simple fact is that kung fu is a much higher learning curve than many other martial arts styles, and if you want to be able to use it reliably and to great effect, you are going to need to practice hard, against a resisting opponent, and get used to being hit, taken down, kicked, etc, which, sadly is NOT the mentality of many students OR teachers of martial arts schools. I know for example that at my school, i spar with no gear on, on a nightly basis, and I KNOW what i can make work, and what i cant, but it will still depend on the fighter, the opportunity to use the move, and the mindset of the person trying to use it.....Sadly, many kung fu styles are based around being aggressive and moving in on your opponent, and right through them in many cases, and this takes a LOT of training to get good at doing naturally against someone you know, let alone somebody that wants to rip your head off. I am confident though that if someone wants to badly enough, and they train hard, that you will see at least SOME successful kung fu players in MMA fights in the future.

-Golden Arms-

[Shaolindynasty]

Here's the difference. MMA train for MMA competitions. It is one of the main focuses of their training whatever self defense benifits they get is from the techniques they also use in competition. No when Sifu x decides to jump into a MMA tournament he tries to transform his previous training for the event. New elements have to be learned, new strategies have to be developed and so on. So when they meet in the ring the MMA guy has trained for this type of fight from the begining and the Kungfu guy treats it like a extra hobby. It shouldn't take a genious to learn who would win. I guess my point is that ring fighting is actually harder than streetfighting and since most kungfu guys don't train for the ring all the time or at least as often as a MMA, they just aren't ready for it.

If a kungfu guy came along and trained in his style to counter what goes on in the MMA scene now he would do fine. I just don't know if anybody is that unorthadox, most fighters just supplement their stuff with BJJ. Then when they win people go"no fair that's not kungfu". To tell the truth I don't know why kungfu can't cross train, if they do people say look he didn't win cause of kungfu he won cause of x style. I have seen the Muay Thai guys loose alot to but people still think it's the "ultimate standup art" even thoug Sanshou a CMA has beaten them on several occasions. Look at the Muay Thai guys who enter Draka.
In the ring you need to study the arts that do best under those particular rules. Most people don't train kungfu for MMA and most people don't train BJJ for san shou or lei tei.

[Water Dragon]

MP, I'm 6'1" and currently 175 (thin) I'm hoping to compete between 180 and 185.

Black Jack, go to www.intensecombat.com
Check out the Finke's listings. That's where I'll probably "Debut" Hook & Shoot is probably too big to start. Let's see how I do at Finke's first.

[Black Jack]

Water Dragon,

Thanks for the link I will check it out, I did not really know how big the Hook & Shoot events have become, all I remeber is that they are local.

It's weird to get physical descriptions on the net, I am like your polar oppositte.

5'6 1/2 179lbs stocky

[Merryprankster]

Ah well water, we'll have to meet one of these days. I'm 6 even and 184 or so at most weigh-ins. :)

Although I'm not particularly thin somehow.

[Mutant]

Yes it SHOULD be able to hold up in NHB competition.
Looking at the past several years since NHB became popular, kung fu HASN'T held its own, but I think that it CAN and it will eventually when quality kung fu practioners who also train for the sporting aspects as serious high-level atheletes with an understanding of what it takes to compete and win in modern NHB competitions.

I think defeating the ground game is possible (example; Maurice Smith) but needs to be studied and trained rigorously, something that the kung fu community has been slow to adopt...maybe we're too often steeped in tradition, compared to other arts? Too bad because its a fact that being proficient in the ground game is nessesary for success in NHB, even if its not the kung fu guys primary strategy, it needs to be understood in order to be countered and neutralized.

I agree with the premise that if you can't even land a solid basic strike, whether it be a good punch or kick, etc, then you certainly won't be able to land a precision 'specialty technique' that is not allowed. We have plenty of punches, kicks and a whole lot more, and they are enough, so that isnt the issue in question. The 'deadly' self defence techniques are the icing on the cake for real world fighting and defense, but the fundamentals of kung fu should be able to hold up under the test of NHB competitions; people tend to get distracted by what is not allowed, but overlook how much good stuff that kung fu offers, is allowed, which should be plenty.

Gargoyle, I agree with much of what you are saying, but think that even stripped down, sport oriented kung fu can have enough good stuff to give it an advantage over, say, kickboxing, if trained to a high sporting level (look back to the Don Wilson example). The core and the basics are more highly developed, i.m.h.o., than most other martial arts, and that's why many of us choose to study it.

Kung fu's energy, root and mobility can be particularly well developed, so this should be an asset. Sanshou training should be a good foundation for a NHB fighter, with its integrated strikes take-downs. For whatever reason (and I don't think its ineffectiveness or lack of potential), kung fu people don't tend to go the pro or semi-pro athlete route, which is nessesary to win at the top level of modern NHB competion. This may sound contradictory, but its not actually. Its a catch-22 really; the pure athletes tend to focus so much on the sporting ring-oriented aspects of martial arts that they neglect obtaining the 'real' kung fu that is offered at the highest levels of legitimate traditional CMA, which often takes years and patience to cultivate and understand : but at the same time, practioners or masters who have obtained these levels often neglect all out testing and trial in the highest levels of simulated combat available, the NHB arena, neglecting the sporting aspect, which in itself is an art form that has to be specifically trained for.

No matter how high their ranking or knowlege, pedantic kung fu 'masters' can't just jump into the ring and expect to win. Thats like throwing them out onto the field in a pro-football game and expecting the to be able to play; its a whole different ball-game, so they tend to be 'armchair quarterbacks'.

I know there are a lot of different opinions on this, but that is mine, for anyone who cares.

[DragonzRage]

IMO good karate/kung fu/whatever does not necessarily have to dominate in NHB...but it has to at least hold its own and prove itself to be functional. A point that a lot of people have made and one that i agree with is that the NHB ring is not completely representative of a streetfight. But you'd have to be an idiot not to acknowledge the fact that there is a lot of elements of real fighting involved in NHB. Your opponent is REALLY coming at you hard, REALLY hitting you, REALLY throwing you and REALLY trying to wrestle you down and pummel the $hit outta you. Add the fact that you are likely facing a strong and skilled opponent. Yeah it may not be the street, but it is still very much a great measuring stick for h2h fighting ability. My problem with a lot of the so called "traditional" arts is not that they aren't dominating everyone, but that they more often than not DO NOT demonstrate functionality in NHB. I don't care how much the restrictions against eye poking limit you...if you can't stop a guy from dropping you on your a$$ and pummeling the crap out of you or if you are getting hopelessly mauled everytime you go toe to toe with a good striker, that shows a lack of functionality. If you can't put together any meaningful form of defense or offense, then there is something definitely wrong with your training and/or techniques.

[Shooter]

While the nature of combat athletics is certainly a good test of attributes and technical skill, the mind is wired to deliver the body in a certain way by virtue of the KF guy's focus and mindset. That not withstanding, there is no reason that the preparation be a departure from the overall development of one's practice.

My own experience has been that other apsects of my Tai Chi take a back seat to the entriety of Tai Chi's idea. In that respect, the sport does limit my model of Tai Chi as a Martial Way, but on the other hand, it addresses what I train and "teach" in a direct manner. (hope that makes sense)

The simple answer is; Yes, "Good Kung Fu Should Be Successful In The Ring" as long as the training follows the sportive model. What that means to the KF guy is no different than what it means to anyone else who competes in the same format. It all starts to look the same. Does that mean that the KF guy has failed to present the unique flavor of his particular system? Yes and No (read on).

I've done enough training for all forms of combat athletics to know that each format addresses certain apsects of my Tai Chi, but doesn't include some of the most important components of my delivery system. If I can't interpose and set up my attack, if I can't reason with my opponent or try to dissuade him from seeking a violent solution, if I can't use my environment, if I can't avoid him or run from him, if I can't carry, if I can't find a rock or other enviro weapon, then I have no choice but to defend myself on a very limited scale. It simplifies the conflict and makes it much easier to deal with. I don't have to worry about all the other things I would worry about in real life. My loved ones aren't in danger, there's no danger of weapons or multiple attackers, and I get to spar with a well conditioned athlete who is intent on winning. All the better. It's just sparring in a sterile environment with lots of margin for safety.

On the other hand, it simplifies the encounter to the least common denominators shared between combatants thus, complicating it on a different level. Who has the better conditioning? Who has the better technical proficiency and awareness of the other's tactical skills? Who's ON that day? Who best minimizes their own attrition while inflicting more damage? Who uses better ring strategy? Who has the broadest frame of reference in recognizing and anticipating what the opponent may do next? All these things are sorted out in the preparation. Then there's the intangibles - Heart/will, pre-fight injuries, mental preparation, etc. It's all based on the idea of protracted engagement where the athlete has to pace himself and maximize the economy of his energy stores.

No reason why a KF guy SHOULDN'T be engaging the sportive formats that allow him to safely test HIMSELF, and NOT his "style" The rules of engagement dictate the style of preparation. Everyone expresses their own style in the ring anyway...no reason to compound the potential for failure through the limiting idea that they must represent their "style" of Kung Fu.

Is it "Kung Fu"? Of course it is. Then again, it's not.

[Tigerstyle]

What shooter said.

[Golden Arms]

Agreed, so who is going to be the first to make a nice name for kung fu, or even better...southern kung fu?

[Ralek]

Well there's already been a bunch of kung fu guys to step up to the plate. And they sure did make a name for kung fu. (sarcasm)

Maybe the second wave of Kung fu fighters will do better.

Or maybe the second wave of kung fu fighters will go out and learn Brazilian jiujitsu, mauy thai, kickboxing, and wrestling and then fight under the kung fu banner. Sounds like a good strategy to me.

[Brad Souders]

With the IF'S in place Kung Fu would survive on the feet in MMA. A couple perfect examples are keith Hackney vs Royce Gracie in UFC #4 ( Hackney was one of the first people to even hit Royce) and also Felix Mitchell vs Ken Shamrock in UFC #3 ( in close Felix put up a strong showing til it hit the ground)

[Budokan]

If you mold your KF into a sport and excise the artistic aspects, then yes it should be successful in the ring. But then you won't be doing KF anymore, would you?

More importantly, and with much weightier philosophical ramifications that outline the crux of what rassling is all about, does KF *have* to be in the ring to be considered successful...?

The answer to that, IMO, is a resounding 'No'.

[Merryprankster]

Budokan;

Already made abundantly clear that Good Kung Fu wouldn't HAVE to be successful in the ring to be considered effective. Ring and street are two different things with two different goals in mind. But that wasn't really the point of the question, although, I thank you for answering it (if you train as a sport, then yeah, it should be successful)

San Shou is not Kung Fu by your argument Budokan... is that correct?

Now as far as that goes, I believe the "flavor" of what you trained in would leave an indelible impression on your attacks. Look at Guy Mezger for example. His kickboxing background is apparent... Renzo Gracie's ground game LOOKS like BJJ, etc.

[Budokan]

San Shou is kung fu, or can be. So is driving a car and baking a cake if we consider the true definition of *gong fu* as given.

[apoweyn]

but, then, why wouldn't ring competition also be classifiable as 'gung fu'?

"If you mold your KF into a sport and excise the artistic aspects, then yes it should be successful in the ring. But then you won't be doing KF anymore, would you?"

but surely, baking a cake lacks the artistic aspects characteristic of chinese martial arts as well.

we've got two competing definitions of gung fu here. so what marks the style as gung fu? the execution of culturally or stylistically specific maneuvers or the property of great skill?


stuart b.

[Merryprankster]

Well, you got to it before I did ap...

[apoweyn]

idle hands, my friend. KFO is so much better than... working.

[Merryprankster]

I'm about to go put my hands to use boxing, myself... SO frustrating... we can talk about that later :)

[apoweyn]

groovy. you know where to find me.

[Godzilla]

I read somewhere that Frank Shamrock said he had his butt kicked around the ring when he first tried the NHB thing. He’s a grappler who strikes.

The key was the training. He had the skills but was not prepared to use them properly in the ring.

I believe it’s in the training. Understanding what happens in the ring is key. I think grappling is way to complicated for the street. Way to slow and way to close quarters for me. I would rather hit and run!

Also, grapplers train against strikes. They learn to duck them and move in. I haven’t been to any schools where a striker would train against a takedown.

Godzilla

[Merryprankster]

I haven’t been to any schools where a striker would train against a takedown.

Then you're getting an incomplete education.


I think grappling is way to complicated for the street.

And too slow and too "in," apparently

When "in" you avoid a lot of the really powerful weapons, glued to the side properly, I can jam up knees and elbows. To say nothing of the rapidity of a throw.

Anyhoo, not really on topic, but this seems to have drifted off... S'ok, I think I got the answers I was looking for.

[Order]

The goals are not the same. In MMA tournaments, the participants are practicing a sport, albeit a violent one for money, belts and material re-ward. It is essentially a mixture of Western boxing, greco-roman wrestling, kickboxing, and joint locks. doesn't sound as impressive once ya break it down huh?

If there were no rules , then somebody should have died. I dont believe that Hsing I people feel they have anything to prove. It is only self-doubt, or foolish ego ( see Machismo) which drives someone to embarrass themseves in such a way. It's like saying, "I think my style works, but it never having been used successfully in battle, and it being such a new style, I just dont know. What you have to realize sir is that the Japanese brought JuJitsu to Brazil. They took a piece of it, and ignored the rest of the system. The JuJitsu system has everything that BBJ has and a lot more.

[SevenStar]

"The goals are not the same. In MMA tournaments, the participants are practicing a sport, albeit a violent one for money, belts and material re-ward. It is essentially a mixture of Western boxing, greco-roman wrestling, kickboxing, and joint locks. doesn't sound as impressive once ya break it down huh? "

Actually, It's extremely impressive if you're trained properly. The fact that it's a sport really makes no difference. Whether or not there are rules makes no difference. If you are trained correctly, you will be able to defend yourself. That's the kicker - there are a lot of schools nowadays that don't train correctly. you have many schools now that do not spar and many that lack in other places also.

Even though mma, thai boxers, kickboxers, etc. are practicing for sport, don't think for a minute that those skills won't transfer just as well to the street.

[Merryprankster]

Even though mma, thai boxers, kickboxers, etc. are practicing for sport, don't think for a minute that those skills won't transfer just as well to the street.

What Sevenstar said.

Order,

Considering I have a good idea of the dedication and hard work it takes to be top of the line in those "unimpressive," disciplines, I find it quite impressive that these athletes can attain proficiency in several and mastery in one, possibly two.

Your dismissiveness is disturbing, but you are entitled to your opinion.

[Reima Kostaja]

Haha, Apoweyn sounds just like mr spock:




clearly, you care. otherwise, you're engaged in an absurd activity: responding to input about which you feel nothing. that seems kind of unlikely.



That is all, carry on.

[scotty1]

Should good Kung Fu be succesful in the ring?

No.

I think you could have good KungFu and not be successful in the ring. You could practice the best KF in the world and it might not transfer to the ring, if you had no ring craft and not enough cardio. But you'd still have good KF, its just not always appropriate for the ring environment, without specific ring training.

Can good Kung Fu be successful in the ring?

Yes.

If somebody who had good Kung Fu said "right, I'm going to train for the ring" and concentrated his training on takedown defense, cardio, and striking using non lethal weapons, and fought in the ring, I think that would still be Kung Fu.
And because he had trained specifically for the ring in a form of combat (KF) with strong foundations he could probably do rather well.

I'd like to see it. Because maybe then we could put an end to all these MMA vs kungFu threads. :)

[apoweyn]

"Haha, Apoweyn sounds just like mr spock"


crap. you're right.

...

oh, well. spock always got the girls, right? right? no? son of a...



stuart b.

[Merryprankster]

On the upshot Ap, you get pointy ears, the ability to raise one eyebrow, copper based green blood and every seven years you go into a mating frenzy.

[apoweyn]

that is a good upshot.

of course, in reality i've got prince charles ears. i can, indeed, raise one eyebrow at a time. (mine, not other people's)

as for the mating frenzy thing, i'm reminded of a comment my college roommate made to me once: "i'm not having sex out of choice... not MY choice, mind you."


stuart b.

[Tigerstyle]

scotty1,
Good post. You make some good points in it.


"What you have to realize sir is that the Japanese brought JuJitsu to Brazil. They took a piece of it, and ignored the rest of the system. The JuJitsu system has everything that BBJ has and a lot more."

Order,
Are you implying that "more is better"? That's a whole different argument.