Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 34 of 34

Thread: Jack of all trades master of none...

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The state that resembles a middle finger.
    Posts
    3,274
    It would be pretty hard to 'fake' being an expert at ground fighting for very long these days.
    agree, rolling a few minutes would be the telling tale.
    Originally posted by Bawang
    i had an old taichi lady talk smack behind my back. i mean comon man, come on. if it was 200 years ago,, mebbe i wouldve smacked her and took all her monehs.
    Originally posted by Bawang
    i am manly and strong. do not insult me cracker.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Songshan View Post
    I see your point and agree to an extent. I am not saying cross training is bad but based on what you said, MMA to me represents martial arts being done "good enough" at a high level. Is an MMA fighter truly a master of one style? For example you have a ju jitsu fighter vs a muy thai fighter. Ju jitsu rely on their ground game while Muy thai fighters are not trained for ground fighting. Throw a San da fighter in there and he will give both styles a run for their money. What it boils down to is fighting principles. It is why wing chun artists believe in wing chun and a few other straight traditional styles swear/believe by their fighting methods. Bruce Lee developed JKD based on fighting principles not so much cross training principles. I see MMA as an anything goes fighting style. I have been preaching when you reach a certain age the "best fighting style" debate goes away and you train in something that will keep you healthy.
    You said what it boils down to is fighting principles. I think this is absolutely wrong. It boils down to who is better prepared for the fight. Who is better conditioned, who is better trained, who is the most athletic, and so forth. In other words who is the better fighter. That has nothing to do with fighting principles but with training.

  3. #33
    But you train a person or yourself with principles in mind. It's not enough to know each tech, whoever set up the training you underwent to entrain good fighting habits, no matter if we're talking kung fu or boxing or whatever, had to stress habits that are based on understanding certain principles. For boxing, having a good cross, but not being able to sometimes naturally step to your lead side because this lines up the cross, you will always be trying to apply the cross against their strongest defense. If one fighter fights orthodox, and one fights southpaw, if they are not trained to know that the jab does not function at all the same in those conditions, there will be problems. If one doesn't train for fluidity in going from range to range, then in fighting, they will use the wrong tools at the wrong ranges. If one doesn't recognize that kicks at one range transition to trips at another, they will likewise run into problems.

    Principles aren't to be applied on the fly, but they are essential in planning one's training. Everyone worth training under has them as the basis of what they do, but they shape the training more than decisions made during sparring or fighting, as deciding during the fight is reserved for either when fighting someone you totally dominate, or facing a situation that your training hasn't specifically engaged.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    280
    Quote Originally Posted by tc101 View Post
    You said what it boils down to is fighting principles. I think this is absolutely wrong. It boils down to who is better prepared for the fight. Who is better conditioned, who is better trained, who is the most athletic, and so forth. In other words who is the better fighter. That has nothing to do with fighting principles but with training.
    In a fight, yes of course the bottom line always comes down to who is better prepared. It is why I frown upon which is the best fighting style to learn debates. You can have a shaolin fighter vs a tae kwon do vs a karateka and the argument always arises which style is better not which fighter.

    We are talking about being a jack of all trades and master of none in a particular MA style or system. Yes, fighting principles has everything to do with why you train whatever your style is. Jiu jitsu practitioners believe ground fighting is where its at, tae kwon do practitioner place a lot of emphasis on distance and kicks, shaolin practitioners place a lot of emphasis on hand techniques/forms and weapons, MMA fighters kind of mix a lot of things together etc etc. People train in those styles because that's what principles they believe will work for them should they get into a fight.

    Is it wrong for an MMA fighter, or any martial artist, to pick a little of each and "put it in their box"? No, of course not. Are they truly a master of a particular MA style? Well, that remains to be answered. Mastering a style sometimes goes beyond learning forms and weapons. There is history and tradition which seem to be fading these days that also define a particular style.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •