Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chris davis 200
here we go again!
How can you possibley say this???? most of the time those who have moved around lots picking up bits a bobs from all over the place have little practical knowledge of how to use the key principles of any of the arts they have 'trained in'. Hence the sorry state of affairs in the MA world today!
MMA is not the same as above they generally train in a set catalogue of techniques applicable to the competition format they will partake in, they train hard, and alot - giving them the best chance to win their competitions.
'Self defence' guys that have just moved from art to art picking up what they can do (ignoring what they cant figure out) tend to have little real skill in comparison to a fighter that has specialised for the same amount of time.
Arts like, BJJ, MT, (some) Karate, (some) chinese Kung Fu, Silat, Kali etc etc all have enough in their sylabuses to produce excellent fighters. If you studied and specialised in one for 7 years you would do better i believe than if you hoped from one to the other after just a year.
These arts are too complicated and deep in principle for you to master them in just a year.
Find an AUTHENTIC teacher that has a deep, all encompasing knowledge of their art! You will get more than some guy that has trained a little in alot of systems!
Also take into account that many arts teach you effective striking for point scoring ring sports but will not deal directly with a large rough street fighter. I see alot of physically small girls doing arts like muay thai and i think - i KNOW that if you punched me in the face or kneed my ribs it would not effect good enough damage to stop me (if i was intent on doing you damage!)
Put quite simply, Saying that Traditional arts teach you useless stances etc is just totally untrue! Most of what pass for traditional arts in the west are quite simpley MC dojos. I know traditional fighters that could / have defended themselves against multiple opponents, knife attackes, larger opponents, boxers, etc - I am one of them!
The misconception is that Traditional fighters dont: train hard, do conditioning, spar, work on realistic street defences, train repetative simple weapons, strike pads, strike bags, do ground work, etc etc - QUITE simpley THEY DO ALL OF THIS!
But they also adhear to the tried and tested combat alignment principles of traditional systems, they study the human body to a great extent, working with and against relex responce reations, automated defence actions, vunerable targets, multiple attacker conciderations, fight or flight responce etc etc.
Many people think that these are new concepts, new ideas and that they people that had to fight (for their lives) over thousands of years had not figured these basics out! Come off it! I have seen NOTHING that is NOTHING in modern combat systems that is not already present in old combat systems. Most of it has just been repackaged as 'the NEW and improved ....'
Ya dont say!! if you really think this is a fighting stance you have NO understanding at all! This stance is designed to increase leg power, is used after some throwing methods to maintain a strong posture allowing you to drop an knee into the guy who has just gone head first into the concrete. YOU WOULD NOT stand in horse stance throwing punches etc - IT IS A TRAINING METHOD! if you learned differently - then you learned wrong!
Firstley Muay Thai is a traditional Martial art is it NOT? Why dont you include this in your evaluation of the Traditional systems collectively??
MMAs are combat sport training not self defence - there is a difference - yes you will be a good fighter - yes you will probably be ok on the streets, BUT you will have many many things in your arsenal that are NOT straight to the point regarding self defence - they are not relevant to self defence. Going to ground working a submittion, shooting etc - none of this large section of the mixed martial arts arsenal is really relevant to street combat.
TMA's take time YES, but this is only dependant on the practitioner.
Many MMAs train daily - going down the gym, etc etc - Mand TMA train once a week as a hobby. BUT those that train the TMAs properly - training hard daily, working with bags, doing what traditional masters did, become excellent fighters in a similar amount of time to those MMA's that train in a similar way.
Time scales are dependant on so so many different factors that you cannot effectively compare the speed at which TMA's and MMAs turn out profficient fighters.
You seem to have been soured by a TMA's school and thus spouting rubbish about ALL TMA's i have mainly trained traditional.
i worked as a doorman and have had many many ecounters. using Traditional systems i stay safe and keep others safe - you quite simpley do not understand traditional systems - neither do many others - that is fine, but dont pretend you do and make rubbish up based on what little knowledge you have. I mean are you saying that modern systems like Aikido, Judo etc are more applicable than arts created far earlier than them like Muay Thai etc??
once again a fictional view of the world of Martial arts curtosy MTF!
Cheers
Chris
|
Okay let me refrase what I meant by first part.I am not talking about guys that just hop from on martial arts to the next without staying one for a few years.When I say instructors who have done more then one martial arts I mean teachers who have done quite a few years in each art they had chosen.
For example,I was in karate for 12yrs.and now Pankration for 5yrs. So I don't mean guys who are in one style for a few weeks or months then decide to go to another style and then another just like that and think they know it all so put together a few moves from each style and then call it a style of their own.Those guys if any really exist are just wannabees.
MMA does not train in a set catalogue of techniques as you have stated. MMA are arts that instructors have spent many years in and put together or arts that they had learnt together.This however doesn't mean that things aren't always being added by instructors experience.Each time my instructor fights he learns something new from other fighters and will add to our style Pankration which already has a long history like any other art.
Once again I agree guys who have gone from style to style picking up a few techniques there and there don't have much knowledge or skills as someone who has spent a few years in one art but those who have spent many years in each art they have done have way more experience then someone,who has spent many years in only one style and refuses to try other styles.
Here is where I disagree because very few martial artist styles have enough techniques in their style to produce good fighters outside of martial arts or at least outside of their own art, however some styles are more practical then others. On the other hand styles like MuayThai being an effective stand up art is one of the few that could work even outside of the martial arts not to say it isn't limited though, because even a MuayThai fighter could lose if taken to ground. BBJ would lose on its own but combined with a stand up art like Muay Thai or similar would give the BBJ guy an advantage over the person who only knows MuayThai. As you already know that I feel karate and chinese kung fu will never produce excellent fighters other then among themselves I am sure I don't need to say much more about those styles.Kali is effective against another guy with a similar weapon or someone with no weapon it won't work against all weapons.
I also disagree with your statement about effective striking for point scoring ring sports, because from my experience and I do mean from my experience only not yours or someone elses, is that striking for points cannot be compared to ring sports,because a person used to fighting for points will not usually if ever last long in the ring.There is a difference between going full out and pulling your punches as done in point sparring for this reason a point sparrer won't deal with a large street fighter.
I would like to know why you refer to martial artists who fight in a ring as a fighing in ring sport instead of fighting in a martial arts being done in the ring ? Just because we fight in a ring doesn't make us more of a sport then a martial arts.We are a full contact martial arts not a full contact ring sport we just happen to fight in a ring.
Why would you even bother to mention women in Muay Thai punching you wouldn't hurt you?,I'd certainly hope not or you'd be one wimpy guy since men are supposed to be naturally stronger then women.If you are going to compare by the different sexes then any martial arts will do but if you are going to go just by the martial arts itself then there are differences.
You claim that Traditional arts do not teach useless stances,okay then name one stance in karate that is useful and exactly how ? Then I'll give you my opinion.If you can convince me then I'll let you know if I agree or not.
I never once said or implied that Traditional artists don't train hard, I trained just as hard in karate then in Muay Thai but it's not how hard you train that I was talking about although that is important,I was talking about how a style teaches and how you train.
You know traditionalist who can fight multiple attackers!!!!!!!!!!!! I really doubt that,so you're saying that if 5 or 20 guys jumped him at one time he'd survive ? That is physically impossible especially if they were to all be weaponed and chances are if in groups they have a hidden weapon.I know traditionalists train for multiple attackers but would that training really work on street? Absolutely not, because most if not all people will suddenly freeze in a real situation where they are out numbered by quite a bit and if they are willing to fight all those guys by themselves they are either very tough or plain stupid or both ? I'd go for more like stupid.There is a difference between training against multiple attackers and actually being able to apply it on street.
Yes Muay Thai is a traditonal martial arts you are right,because it has a long history,however I assumed you would have understood that by traditional I meant arts that do forms and don't change or not much anyways with the times,because to change would to be going against what their masters and masters before them had taught which in many arts is considered wrong. I simply think it is wrong not to change the art if can be changed and improved on especially in these days. Muay Thai although it has a long history doesn't keep to tradition. Many of the old techniques in Traditional MuayThai are same but there are also many improvements.I'm sorry if I didn't explain myself better in what I meant by traditional arts.
I disagree once again,MMA does have both combat sport as you have decided to call it but also has lots of self-defense.Many of those techniques of shooting in,submissions are very relevant to street fighting,how can you possibly say it isn't ? Do you not believe that most fights end on the ground ? To say MMA are not straight to the point is simply not true because everything taught is straight to the point at least in my school it is.To say MMA lacks for your typical street-defense shows lack of knowledge in any martial artist that truly believes that.Everything as seen in UFC would work on street,although not a real fight it is the next best thing to one and is as close as you will get to a real fight. The one thing I would agree that MMA lacks in is defense against a weapon as we don't have weapon training in our school. At the same time how many schools actually teach realistic weaponry ? Not many,because it is mostly traditional weapons, I can't imagine a person walking the streets with some huge sword on his back or carrying nunchuks with him and no one carries tonfas or sais with them.I think the bo is realistic however because a piece of wood lying on street can be used in same way as a staff against just about any commonly used weapon on street accept against a gun of course.
The TMA's who train hard daily do become excellent fighters but only against their own style or other TMA's but won't last against someone trained in MMA.
It shows you have trained mostly TMA because of your lack of knowledge of MMA and saying it is not relevant to street combat.
You're funny,I don't know anything about traditional arts!!!!!!!!!! No of course not I only spent 12yrs. doing it,sarcasm.
Yes I am saying arts like Judo and Aikido are more applicable then arts before them except for MuayThai. Judo and Aikido are grabbing arts and I'd never let someone get close enough to grab me,however Judo and Aikido mixed with MuayThai would make an almost perfect art,so I'd never say those two arts are completely useless as it would be wrong to do so.
However the one thing that Judo lacks is by actually grabbing the person instead of grabbing uniform.Grabbing a uniform is useless as any piece of clothing on street which obviously won't be a judo uniform can easily ripp in a real fight, however the concept of grabbing to flip,throw,sweep etc.is very realistic.Personally I wouldn't want a Judo person to get in close enough to throw me on pavement, because I know I could end up in hospital if lucky that is all that would happen,just as I wouldn't want to be grabbed by an Aikido person and be thrown into a wall or through a window. As I stated before and agree with is that on its own MuayThai is only good for stand up but with grappling added can be very street realistic.
Just because an art has been around longer doesn't mean it is better.
Cars are much better then in the old days as you don't need to go the front of the car and crank the damn thing before it can turn on, the same is with martial arts in the sense that some have improved and others like TMA's have stuck to tradition and are no longer any good, because they are so out dated.
A pentium is not as good a computer as a 486 and a pentium is not as good as pentium 2,which is not as good as a pentium 3,which is not as good as a pentium 4,got my drift ? So age of something has nothing to do with the art.