"This type of fight"

[red5angel]

I have noticed this phrase a lot in some of the discussion strings, especially when it comes to ring fighting or what have you. I think this statement is a bad theory to be working from. A good system should have everything you need to get you buy in any sort of fight, IMHO. If it doesnt, shouldnt you be training in something else?
What I am saying is this: I think that a good, comprehensive system, should teach you to not only fight, but to control the fight, and how to meet things as they come. Most arts will say they have something to deal with everything, and alot of them probably do, if you take the time to understand them
This is why I am against mixing training, especially too early. what I am coming to learn is that many MA people who say they had to go to another art to fill a vacuum, have reached this decision while still growing in thier original art. Am I making any sense here?
now I know most of you cross train, and depending on what your motivation is, thats fine, what I am saying is if you feel you have to cross train just because you may be missing a certain technique, or learn how to fight a certain type of fight, maybe you should try applying the principles of what you study, to each situation.
For example, if you want to fight in the ring, it would seem the first decision would be to choose an art that workss well in the ring., If you have been studying for a while, and just dont want to switch, then can you reach into your art, its toolbox and pull out what you need?Is it absolutely necessary to have to go to another art?

[apoweyn]

"A good system should have everything you need to get you buy in any sort of fight, IMHO. If it doesnt, shouldnt you be training in something else?"

i think, though, that the crux of many people's problem with this statement is simple. how do you know?

how do you know that your system can address any sort of fight? how do you know that it can address ANY sort of fight? (i'm not suggesting you haven't tested it. just that this sort of scientific inquiry is what many MMA types are espousing.)

switching styles for the sake of collection is absolutely a mistake, to my mind. but investigating other styles, training methods, and the like as part of an ongoing investigation... that's self-directed learning of the same sort used in universities and in everyday life. (i don't listen to everything my parents tell me, even though they've been there before. they're the sifus in that relationship. and what they know represents a 'style' of living. but few people wouldn't defend a child's right or instinct to discover these things for themselves. their own way.)


stuart b.

[Brad Souders]

I'm going to answer yes and the reason being if i train in that art a little it will teach me how to prepare for an oppenent useing that syle. I wold rather see some of it in training before running into it in the ring. It also helps me become just that more complete.

[Water Dragon]

Yeah, it's nice to know what the other guy is bringing to the table.

[LEGEND]

The problem is there is no style out there that is complete! No such thing...the reason y u crosstrain is to understand the other martial arts out there and impose your on them. You have to adapt dood...if not then u will die.

[shaolinboxer]

This is why it is important, IMO, to strive to go beyond technique.

Each technique is a guideline for handling a specific situation. He goes for x, you counter with y and progress to z. Or he presents A, you go for B.

We can create countless scenarios, and effectively infinite combinations of techniques.

However, it is not the scenarios we are familiar with that we need to be wary of (no matter how many of the we have encountered)...it is those situations in which we have had no direct training or experience.

Therefore, we must use martial arts to create within ourselves a state of infinite adaptablity. Takemusu aiki. Whatever type of training gets you there, so be it.

[red5angel]

Shaolinboxer - You make a good point, I was at a seminar this last weekend with my instructors instructor, and he said he does not like to teach techniques. He touched hands with a guy who was all about technique and really wiped the floor with him! It was incredible to see this in action! He stresses that you study the basics as hard as you can, basic training all the time and th rest will come in time.

Apoweyn- you make very good points, and studying of another art to understand what it has and can do to you, is a good reason, but I think you cant prepare for each style this way, you must understand your own style deep enough to adapt to the moment. Atleast that is the way I feel about it. Same to you Brad since you both seem to be coming from the same direction. I think you can learn an art well enough that 'understanding' an opponent becomes second nature.

Legend - I may not disagree with you on that, "alot of styles dont appear to be complete" says more about how I feel about it though. most people dont understand thier Art well enough to make that decision. I know guys who have been studying for 10-15 years and still find things they havent seen in what they practice. I think any good art, most that are out there now, taught by a knowledgeful teacher, and being learned by a studyous student, can be complete. It may not be perfect, but it can be complete.

I have heard the argument alot about how you need to understand what the other guy has, but really that is unrealistic. Would you do a demographic study of the most popular arts you may come into contact with, and then go study those? would you only pick fights with people who study a certain type of art? you never know who you are going to come up against, and alot of styles that have been tested thoroughly (most of the surviving arts in existance now IMO), can caver you in just about anything. there will always be asituation where you just cant do anything to get out of it. But, in general, I feel it is better to concentrate on one, to learn it inside and out then to spread yourself thin. then, I think you will be able to deal with the odds and ends that come your way.
I am not saying cross-training doesnt work, and I am not precluding the idea that maybe you just found something else you liked later on in life, or was more suitable to you, I am just saying if you like what you do, and you stick with it, I think you will find all the answers you need.

[apoweyn]

thanks red5angel.

i think my point is not so much preparing for every style. it's a question of self determination. your style is a style because a series of intelligent and driven people practiced what they felt to be of value. they weren't gods. they weren't geniuses. they were people.

so why shouldn't people today be capable of that same sort of process?

take wing chun for example. as i understand it, the long pole set was added sometime after wing chun's beginnings. whoever did that did not reason that 'i should be good enough to use the butterfly knives in any situation and not need to crosstrain in the long pole.' but they did opt to add the long pole, presumably based on some perceived need. so was it still wing chun after that? hundreds of years later, we generally still say yes, even though long pole was added after the fact. and even though long pole seems to run contrary to the close-range emphasis of wing chun.

but that's presumably what happened. a practitioner also familiar with the long pole perceived a need in wing chun and found a way to integrate and reconcile the two, making the style stronger.

now, people do the same thing. they look at their own training, identify needs, and work to make a coherent whole. it's a question of making decisions for your own advancement. that can be done within a style or without. but to my mind, that will always be the point. to be consciously and deliberately involved in your own education.


stuart b.

[Brad Souders]

Here is why. A guy with his hands high up = boxer. A guy turned to the side usually = a guy who throws many kicks. A guy who is bent slightly with weight foward = a wrestler probably ready to shoot. But o well i guess being blind is better than semi prepared for some. I personally would rather figure a game plan in my head as it happens. But then again thats how i train not to act like MY art is the best but how i can out smart the oppenent.

[LEGEND]

REDANGEL...yes...dood u do demographics...u research based on tapes...like www.streetbrawl.com...or watch COPs...etc...u have to do RESEARCH and figure out who the likely opponents will be! And train for it...and it involves crosstraining. U keep saying guys that study for 15 years are still finding out about there styles...but uhhhhhhhhhhh u're gonna be doing that to find out...ohhhhhh there's ground fighting...13 years after a rugby player tackles u to the ground??? If it takes a style 15 years before u get effective in a certain range or in case of what u're saying to be a complete fighter don't BUY IT! Once again...adapt or die.

[red5angel]

Apoweyn, another good point, something I was going to bring up but got sidetracked, all arts probably have room to grow, and I fdont think there is anything wrong with adding to an art where and if it needs it. For me though I feel you definitely need to stick with the basic principles of your style.

Brad, what I am saying is that with a good amount of focused practiced, you can adapt to these things without having to figure out what the other guy is doing. Its an unnecessary step I feel. That is what I mean by adapt to the moment, you take what comes when it comes.

Legend, I think maybe you misunderstood me, I am not saying that those guys who practice that long havent become effective fighters. Some people never can really. What I am saying is that a guy who has studied an art for 15 years is still discovering the depth of his art. The guy who has been stand up fighting for his last 12 years, starts screwing around with a wrestling friend to find that hey, this technique, applied in this way, works very well in this situation. I say the adaptation isnt in learning new arts, it is learning how to use the one you have already.

[Brad Souders]

I agree with you point to some degree. I'am a big fan on feeling out your oppenent

[red5angel]

I am not criticizing mixed martial arts because I dont think it works. I am sure it works, my only contention is that it may not be the best choice. Again, it ultimately comes down to choices, and what seems to be better for you. I am definitely not trying to turn this into a classical vs mixed!

[Tigerstyle]

"...all arts probably have room to grow, and I don't think there is anything wrong with adding to an art where and if it needs it."

red5angel,
That's the definition of cross-training for many people here.

[apoweyn]

red5angel,

yeah. i agree about filtering new experiences through an established set of principles. i think the difference in an MMA philosophy is that that set of principles exists independent of a name. know what i mean?

rather than looking at a new set of techniques as a living embodiment of wing chun, and then filtering that new style through wing chun, you look at that new style as an individual with a solid base in, say, close-range trapping. essentially the same process. just a question of perspective.

whatever your 'base' is, and however you define it (a style, a training method, you yourself, etc.), you're going to filter new experiences through what you have experienced previously. so when i look at grappling, for example, i might think in terms of eskrima. i might look at a double leg and try to figure out how i'd get to that position from my eskrima footwork. or whether my kicking practices would leave me extra vulnerable to the same. and so on.

any one of us can only process the new through what we understand of the old. the difference (and i don't regard it as a big difference) seems to be in mindset.


stuart b.

[red5angel]

Apoweyn, I definitely understand what you are saying, I guess for me it is just that I do my art for a reason, I am convinced that not only is it a good art, but it is right for me. When I get far enough along to start "making it my own" My intention is to not stray too far from the path, if you understand what I am saying.
Basically, Wing Chun has a lot of principles I admire, and I feel can be applied in any situation. Whether I apply them correctly or not is another story! :) Really though, what I am trying to get at is, that even though I may discover something that works well, my recquirement is that it fits within the 'paradigm' of WC. this is for me personally. One of these reasons is that I do not want to get my wires crossed. If I am training all these years to keep my elbows close to my body, then try to adopt a technique that recquires me to throw my arms out there, it goes against what I have learned and am learning. It doesnt mean it doesnt work, just that it is like taking two steps back, to me.

Tigerstyle - you are correct. My problem is that it can sometimes get out of hand. for instance, if I take bjj, and start applying its techniques to WC, Well, I am in essence practicing two arts. If I see something that bjj does, that works well with the ideals of WC, and I can make it work for the system, then I have something!

[apoweyn]

red5angel,

that sounds like a very intelligent training strategy to me. clearly, you've given the subject some serious thought. and i think ultimately, that's the most important training method there is.

regards,

stuart b.

[red5angel]

Thanks Ap...I have done a lot of thinking about it. Lately there is sort of this popular idea that the only real combat skills are bjj or similar styles. This has probably been the case throughout time but much more prevalant with information technology. The common misunderstanding is that there are good and bad styles or systems. I personally feel that a system can be good, if it suits you. Like a nice outfit or suit, they can look good if they are about your size, but if they are tailored they look really good!

[apoweyn]

amen, my friend.