I'm not entirely certain what the point of the post was. I think it's a disection of what Xia feels to be a lack of faith by TCMA practicioners lately in their arts, and a perceived amount of ego being injected into the whole deal.
I wouldn't really be certain how to respond to it, under normal circumstances, and under these less so; but here's my take:
The arguments, such as they are, are almost invariably over training methods. When people say such enlightening things as "Kung Fu doesn't work," it's a kind of short hand for "The training methods have become poor, and that has allowed all kinds of things to happen to its effectiveness." There's some truth to this, but it's not articulated clearly.
Let me caveat this all by saying for those who don't know me that I'm not a TCMAist. However, the arguments that people have here about what is "real" TCMA speaks volumes. People can't even agree upon the criteria they use to evaluate what is a "real" TCMA. People get into arguments constantly about that type of thing. They argue about who has the "real," art. They argue about what "really," is TCMA. They argue about whether or not you can add something or take away or study different styles etc and if that means you aren't a "real" TCMA practitioner.
TCMA does not have its house in order, collectively.
By contrast, MMAists have collectively agreed on the criterion - demonstrated effectiveness and contribution to sportive combat. Nobody argues about what is "real" or not because as long as it meets the criterion, it's in. Combat drills are in; padded, but full on, sparring is in, heavy conditioning is in, etc. People tend to argue more about "what so and so should have done IN THAT FIGHT," when in MMA discussions, not about the grand scheme of "how they should be training, etc."
Now, we can argue all day and night about whether or not this makes a complete training program or about the pros and cons of such an approach; but there is something else here. Not even the most hard core TCMAist, unless they have no shred of higher brain function, can deny this: the training approach of MMAists consistently generates people with useable, dangerous skillsets for unarmed combat.
As a collective, this fact throws TCMA on the defensive for a simple reason: TCMAists are very aware, first, that effectiveness, even if not the only criterion, is certainly one important one of several, and that secondly, that their own house, collectively, is not in order. People practicing "TCMA," (again we run into the "real" or not argument here) are not consistently effective on the whole. And that's a real problem, "real" TCMA or not, because judging quality is not a straightforward proposition. This makes it very easy for fakes, charlatans, and people who just suck to claim an awful lot of crap and never have to back anything at all up.
To clarify, this does not mean that there aren't crappy MMA schools out there, or schools that claim to be "MMA," but really have bad programs, which could fall under the category of not "real" MMA. The difference is that because our community has agreed upon quality standards, because we have collectively agreed upon the criterion/criteria, we will always know where to go to receive quality instruction. Can you say the same in TCMA? I don't think you can, generally speaking, because of the quality evaluation problem.
And I think that's the rub. That's what keeps TCMA on the defensive, on the whole, in this general argument... you can't deny that a great deal of TCMA claimants can't deliver the real deal, and even talk about it amongst yourselves all the time...but then, you can't even identify what is "real," so you can't provide examples when asked by MMA types.
"In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell
"Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli
"A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Anthony
), LOL.
