Registered User
Knifefighter,
Dan Hardy's march against GSP looked very similar except
GSP couldn't submit him. Every round Dan Hardy was taken down instantly and remained there for the whole round. Dan Hardy IS an mma guy. Are you going to now disparage mma like you do wing chun or was that an example of "bad" mma?
Last edited by SavvySavage; 05-19-2010 at 06:29 AM.
Registered User
Personally I don't care what you say about wing chun. Much of what you say I believe to be true.
I just want to see if you can see past your mma bias and apply your logic to mma fighters.
Glorified TCMAist
what is this, "Non-fighters use "theory" crap? Everytime someone says theory, people jump on him and shout,"Non-fighter!" and they immediately put their fingers in their ears,"La-La I can't hear you! Non-Fighter!"
Having an understanding of your system's theories and concepts doesn't make one a non-fighter, it allows them to understand how to use their art correctly, rather than simply having a skin and hair understanding.
it reminds me of Chris Rock's line about books being kryptonite.
"My Gung-Fu may not be Your Gung-Fu.
Gwok-Si, Gwok-Faht"
"I will not be part of the generation
that killed Kung-Fu."
....step.
Registered User
Yeah... Who's smoking what?Originally Posted by YungChun
2:01- Is that "charging in" or is it "not to over committing, over extending or building up lots of momentum"?
Whatever you want to call that, that will pretty much have the same effect of setting you up to get taken down.
Banned
No, it doesn't -- theory, concepts, etc. don't permit you to understand how to use your art "correctly". In fact, it works just the opposite. Understanding comes from skill, not the other way round.
When you learn the concepts and theories of people who can't do something well or at all, what are you learning?
Registered User
I didn't see that particular fight. However, if Hardy's goal was not to get taken down and he was constantly moving forward, then, yes, that would have been a very bad strategy.
Glorified TCMAist
Understand this: there is a WORLD of difference between concepts and theory without experience, and concepts and theory with experience-which will lead to greater understanding and ability. This needs to be mentioned.
You need to differentiate between the two.
Otherwise, the conversation is just childish bickering and name-calling.
Which, for the most part, this and many threads are.
"My Gung-Fu may not be Your Gung-Fu.
Gwok-Si, Gwok-Faht"
"I will not be part of the generation
that killed Kung-Fu."
....step.
Registered User
I agree with a lot of what you say but I’m afraid this is incorrect, In training you spar, you might even spar very hard/full contact but this is not the same as fighting. Fighting is something different it’s going up against someone who is looking to do you real harm, not be your training partner. In a fight if you don't tap or make a mistake you get knocked out, things get broken you get damaged on purpose.
GM of Hadaka Korosu
I agree and we have had this dicsussion before, A LOTS !
Dale made a very good point once and that was that, and I am paraphrasing, while sparring is NOT fighting but the training for fighting, competition is fighting.
Now, I disagreed with him because of intent, but Dale made a very valid point in regards to high level competition and what it takes to be successful and, at that level, I think he is right and competition is as close to a real fight as you can get.
Psalms 144:1
Praise be my Lord my Rock,
He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !
Banned
No, I think that for the most part, concepts and theory are simply our trying to over-intellectualize a non-intellectual activity. In fact, the better you get, the less you do that. Wrestling, boxing, like every other sport or athletic activity, doesn't use much in the way of concepts or theory.
Registered User
yep i remember those descussions lol
and of course you are right, the intent in competition is different than sparring, and the intent in competition fighting is alot closer to actual fighting than sparring is. i just think we should be careful saying we fight a lot etc, we spar, in sparring i am always looking after my partners health, i might clean his clock and he might clean mine, but intent wise we are trying not to do to much damage, its the same with grappling i put an armbar on tightly but i don;t go to injure him, in competition i look to finish him its up to him and the ref to look after his health.
I am confident of my grappling in a fight because i have competed, i am much less confident of my striking because i have not done MMA or full contact thai although i have sparred hard with very good people, and from reading yours and dales posts and just from being sensible i know there is a diferencebetween the two
Registered User
There are plenty of people in MMA that can't pull off very much at all against GSP. That's why he's got the belt.
It has nothing to do with good or bad MMA. There are levels of competition for a reason.
Banned
Ah, the "real fighting."
When you look at these things from a skill-based perspective, you will realize that we develop any skill only by and through actually practicing that skill. Fighting (or various skill sets associated with it) is no different. Same with swimming or riding a bike or surfing. It's by doing the activity itself that you get better at the activity.
Certainly competition in the activity (sport) drives progress (Dale is right about that). In fighting arts, the activity itself is competitive (you are sparring/fighting with an opponent).
But competition isn't "as close to a real fight as you can get" -- it's very far removed: it is much more demanding than any "real" fight (since in any "real fight" you will unlikely be facing an in-condition athlete with very good skills).
Registered User
This IMO is many times a dividing line between a competitor and a coach. Many times the top level competitors do not make the best coaches. They do things instinctively and athletically that they have a hard time breaking down to teach other people. A good coach has the right blend of theory, instruction, and practice to be able to explain why and how and provide the environment for people to develop themselves.
But I'm not discounting your point about people getting too bound up in over-intellectualization. That is highly prevalent in WC.
Registered User
I just caught you in a case of having a double standard. You didn't badmouth all of mma like you do with wing chun. You only talked about Hardy's performance as an individual not reflecting the whole sport.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote