Traditonal Versus Progressive Arts

[HumbleWCGuy]

OK, let's follow your route of reasoning...

Karate is clearly better than WC as a base art for producing good fighters since none of the fighters you listed have WC backgrounds, but most of them have karate backgrounds.

That's probably true on the whole.

[HumbleWCGuy]

qft;

if u look at GOOD motor learning research, it's pretty straight forward: the "best" method of acquiring skill involves a short initial period of training where things are broken down and practiced in a simplified, rote manner, but that very quickly gets changed into a relatively random-style of practice; that's because random practice forces you to "relearn" at every given moment; in ML research it's called a higher level of "contextual interference" (CI); the trick is getting just the right amount, not too hard, not too easy...rehab medicine is the same way; which is why the field has spent so much time studying ML; the key is that random training w/higher CI increases the degree of both retention and of transfer (being able to take an existing skill and apply it under a novel circumstance; which is where things get real interesting and where the whole TMA vs. MM argument really arises out of - IOW, what approach wil enable one to function best in "the street" - LOL, we have the same arguments in the world of PT guys, it's nothing new!;

the thing about learning is that if u have too much success at any stage in the game, you are actually degrading your overall degree of skill building! the problem w/most MA training is that it feeds this need for success; so you do your one steps 10,000 times - be honest, after the first 100, you've pretty much got that down; but you get feed some mumbo about "it's never perfect" - well, true, but what is? problem is that it's an artifact; as is most sparring too - at the same time, the "real world" is not the most convenient to train in either; so you go for as close as an approximation as u can, because this is what gives u the best chance of being able to "transfer" the skill; meaning that it is better to go all out but not use certain specific techniques (eye gouges, throat rips, etc.) than it is to practice specific techniques out of context (eye gouges w/compliant opponents); IOW, the CI effect in TMA is usually way lower than in more "live" environments; sorry TMA guys, that's what the research shows (and u can argue that "research" doesn't show what's what, but my next question would be is, how much do u really know about the research method? poo-pooing research w/out knowing what it's really all about would be like denegrating ITCMA w/out having actually studied it, right?)

if u look at any "great" fighter, artist, musician, etc., they will spend more time talking about their failures and frustrations (if they are being honest, that is) then they do about their relative success...that's because they r always training at the edge of their ability, they rarely live in a comfort zone...

Sorry, but you basically support my point and then conclude that only the progressive or fight training is needed. One of the most important points to remember about learning is the yerkes-dodson law applied to learning. YDL says that optimal performance occurs at moderate levels of arousal. Similarly, moderate arousal best facilitates learning. Solid traditional training provides this. Hard sparring is a high arousal situation and is not an appropriate time to learn large amounts of new material.

[Kansuke]

Again, by your reasoning, anyone who wants to be a good fighter should start with wrestling first.

That is very solid reasoning.

[anerlich]

In progressive arts people enter into the practitioner phase too early. That's is too much heavy sparring and competition before developing a full skill set which leads to relying on very basic and limited skills just to survive.

This is (of course) a gross overgeneralisation. If you think all "progressive" schools are like this, you need to go to a few more.

The most progressive MAist and MA instructor I've met, John Will, does not advocate hard sparring straight away (or even that often). There is a progression to be followed in sparring along with everything else. He does a lot of moderate speed rolling and sparring with varying degrees of cooperation. There is full on rolling and sparring, which is essential to some degree for physical and mental conditioning, but this would probably max out at a couple of rounds a night. Black belts smashing white belts round after round doesn't help either group progress.

John's also a "technician", as you describe it, from hell. As KF said, BJJ is WAY more complex than WC. Technique is almost all. You don't have decent technique, you aren't going to become good at BJJ or enjoy it much.

No one can go balls to the wall all the time anyway. Too many injuries. Also a "hard, tough" culture gets counterproductive, because no one is prepared to experiment because the consequences of mistakes are too high. So the improvement rate is slower.

Another coach I respect won't let his guys train MMA until they've done a minimum six months each of kickboxing, wrestling, and BJJ classes. My coach doesn't do that, but he does expect six months of technique before he allows anyone in the ring even at training.

Your labels and categories don't really match reality. I've met many "technicians" in "progressive" schools (at 55, I've had to become one myself), and LOTS of "progressives" in TMA's.

[SAAMAG]

Unless you are the person rolling with the beginner. I think the spaz factor causes more injuries in BJJ/grappling than anything else.

Truth. I had a girl who was a relative beginner jack me in the mouth with her foot from the bottom because she was flailing all over the place instead of controlling and using position to gain the advantage during a roll at the local MMA gym.

So I can definitly attest to that.

To the original post however, I think a more succinct way of putting things is that those who have spent an appropriate amount of time learning / drilling their techniques will have an easier time transitioning to the application part of things against resistant opponents. Why? Because they will not have to concentrate as hard on the literal movement and focus more on things like the strategy, tactics, timing, and conditioning of fighting.

[taai gihk yahn]

Sorry, but you basically support my point

I don't know what your point was in the first place, i wasn't trying to either support it or refute it; I was simply posting in a general sense;

and then conclude that only the progressive or fight training is needed.

I don't "conclude" anything; I presented what the research in the field of ML has indicated in regards to optimal motor skill acquisition; if we examine the research, it would seem that, in general, skill acquisition in TMA's do not coincide with the findings, since many TMA's devote disproportionate time to relatively abstract practice of technique (form) out of context of application (fighting);

One of the most important points to remember about learning is the yerkes-dodson law applied to learning. YDL says that optimal performance occurs at moderate levels of arousal. Similarly, moderate arousal best facilitates learning. Solid traditional training provides this. Hard sparring is a high arousal situation and is not an appropriate time to learn large amounts of new material.

your counter-argument does not address my point; I said nothing about arousal level, nor even about sparring per se; I was talking about things in a general principle sense; and what I presented in no way advocates "learning large amounts of new material" in a "high arousal" situation; you either misread my post or are deliberately attempting t mischaracterize it; so here's what I said, in a nutshell: at the very beginning of motor skill acquisition, breaking things down and repeating them in a controlled situation is preferable; however, one should then start to introduce randomness into practice at a relatively early stage, increasing the level of contextual interference to a point where the task is not too hard, but not too easy (how one determines this, the criteria for this happy medium, is a subject for further discussion, of course, and tends to be highly skill and context specific); the goal is to make the practice context as close to ultimate performance context as much as possible, as quickly as possible; however, within this context, there are other parameters that can be adjusted so as not to overwhelm the student (e.g. - intensity / duration of practice, knowledge of results and feedback ratios, etc.);

[HumbleWCGuy]

This is (of course) a gross overgeneralisation. If you think all "progressive" schools are like this, you need to go to a few more.
.

Generalization... Of course... "Overgeneralized" only in that all generalizations are overgeneralizations. I am not going to spend an hour typing out qualifications because people can't get their mind around the short version. What makes you think that all traditional schools are a certain way either? Anyone with any sense knows that there are schools at the extreme and a gamut of schools on the continuum between those extremes.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Please site the evidence where this has happened.

It would be difficult to find such evidence because boxing versus kickboxing isn't done. Boxing in a kickboxing match is bringing a gun to a knife fight. Full rules MT fighter easily capitalize on the mistakes made in boxing. Basic boxing defenses turn into dangerous mistakes in full rules MT. If you trained in MT, I should not have to explain it to you. You should already know this.

[Knifefighter]

It would be difficult to find such evidence because boxing versus kickboxing isn't done. Boxing in a kickboxing match is bringing a gun to a knife fight. Full rules MT fighter easily capitalize on the mistakes made in boxing. Basic boxing defenses turn into dangerous mistakes in full rules MT. If you trained in MT, I should not have to explain it to you. You should already know this.

Actually, if you had trained the way you have claimed, you wouldn't be making such stupid generalizations.

BTW, sparring when done regularly is not a high arousal state after a relatively short amount of time. It quickly becomes the norm. You would know this if you had the background you claim.

[Knifefighter]

It would be difficult to find such evidence because boxing versus kickboxing isn't done.

Yes it is. Again, if you had the background you claim, you would know this.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Yes it is. Again, if you had the background you claim, you would know this.

Dude, you can't fight at all so you really need to just stop. You are almost always wrong. Your techniques is sloppy and in in mma you are easily defeated by blue belt BJJ players with decent striking. If you see boxers beating kickboxers then you are kickboxing with the worst kickboxers on the planet.

[Knifefighter]

Dude, you can't fight at all so you really need to just stop. You are almost always wrong. Your techniques is sloppy and in in mma you are easily defeated by blue belt BJJ players with decent striking. If you see boxers beating kickboxers then you are kickboxing with the worst kickboxers on the planet.

LOL... you should just STFU now because you are making yourself look even stupider than you have in the past.

It's very clear by every post you have ever made that you have no clue about anything related to actual full-contact fighting.

[weakstudent]

It would be difficult to find such evidence because boxing versus kickboxing isn't done. Boxing in a kickboxing match is bringing a gun to a knife fight. Full rules MT fighter easily capitalize on the mistakes made in boxing. Basic boxing defenses turn into dangerous mistakes in full rules MT. If you trained in MT, I should not have to explain it to you. You should already know this.

you mean with there leg techniques only, never with the hands, a mt champion will never beat boxing champion if they just use there hands

[Knifefighter]

If you see boxers beating kickboxers then you are kickboxing with the worst kickboxers on the planet.

Really now?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLDJ6GeRRh4
http://www.fighttips.com/videos/othe...-200812111465/

Thanks for proving your stupidity once again.

[HumbleWCGuy]

you mean with there leg techniques only, never with the hands, a mt champion will never beat boxing champion if they just use there hands

Absolutely not! I am saying that boxing is a subset of MT. In FULL RULES MT, much of boxing is irrelevant. A person trained in boxing who just has a leg check will get destroyed in a full rules MT match. Conventional boxing in a full rules MT setting amounts to a lot of mistakes from a MT stand point.