Several times over the past couple of weeks I've check out a yahoo martial arts chatroom. I have been very suprised at what I have been reading there. It is full of people who are traditional martial artists. I'm not saying that is bad in and of itself. When they ask me what I train, I just say MMA/ NHB. Usually they ask what that is, and I have to explain it to them. I explain that I crosstrain in several martial styles, but instead of being loyal to a certain style, person, or system, I really only care about what really works in all ranges of combat against a fully resisting opponent. I tell them that I test this by fighting in my training, and competing and NHB events. Most of them havent heard of NHB, so I say it's like the Ultimate Fighting Championship they have seen on TV.
I would imagine that this is a simple idea that wouldnt involve much debate. The idea that you have to fight in your training to actually be able to fight well. Well, I run into great disagreement. There must have been at least a dozen "Martial Artists" tell me that NHB is not realistic, so they dont do it. They say their techniques are too deadly for a competition or to even train them against resistance. I've heard things such as "against a groundfighter I would just bite him and rip his nuts off". I told them that by merely ellimating a few things, like biting, eyegouging, and attacking the groin, we are able to still realistically test what really works in all ranges of combat. I have been preached to about the benifits of forms, katas, and not doing any sparring until you are "4th dan".
I have learned something from them though. Not everyone is into the martial arts to learn how to realistically fight in all ranges of combat. I have had to accept that. Judging by the people in that chat room that I've been in, most of them have never even thought about fighting in all ranges of combat. They are into chi, and claim they have very deadly techniques that they cant practice. I've asked them what they would do if someone was sitting on their chest, and I've heard things such as "I'd just knock them out before they got me there". Well, what could I say to such wisdom?
I tried to explain the idea of training with submissions and tapping out; but I ran into more interesting responces. They said they dont tap out in training. Their techniques dont allow for it... they just break stuff immediatly. I asked how they were able to train that way, and they said through katas. Just so you know, must of them were into TKD, kung fu, and lots of different Chinese sounding arts.
I'm really not trying to put down any traditional martial arts. I truly believe that every martial art has some positive things to offer. However I also believe that no individual style or system is completely well rounded in all ranges of combat; thus the need to crosstrain. It seems to me that a person is going to be relatively tough and competent in all ranges of combat if they simply train realistically, even if they havent had any instruction in it. Take 2 brothers that grew up fist fighting each other in their backyard on a regular basis. They are gonna be some tough dudes, I dont care if they never officially studied martial arts in some school. One interpretation of "Martial" is "Combat", and they have been combating each other regurly. The same can be applied to someone that has studied a traditional martial style. If they have gone beyond those techniques and actually done a lot of actual fighting, then they are still going to be a pretty competent fighter.
Sorry for the long-windedness, but here's my point. It seems like the great divide between traditional martial artists that study one style or system of combat, and Mixed Martial Artists, is that typically the traditionalists do not engage in realistic training. They dont actually fight each other in their training. They dont kickbox, strike from the clinch, throw/ takedown, and go to submissions against a training partner that is trying to do the exact same thing. They dont ever get bruised or bloody in their training. They also seem to take great offence to this idea being somehow better at preparing them for combat.
Reply With Quote
Just because something is "Chinese sounding" doesn't make it a traditional martial art... and generalizing is kind of dumb. Should all the people who practice Liu Yun Qiao's baji style be attacked because someone from Freds school of magic duck kungfu is talking out of his @ss? China has produced hundreds of different systems of training, some as different as jujitsu and tae kwon do. Some arts were derived from military, some from farmers, some from cult leaders, etc. Waaaaaay too much diversity to be lumping everyone in together.
Originally Posted by Brad
