The Effect of "Alive" Training on TMA

[Berserk001]

Originally Posted by treehugger

. You can punch a bag as much as you want, but when the bag starts ducking, weaving, and hitting back, things change.

By saying this,would you recomend a karateca to practice box.

[gabbah]

Originally Posted by Aikiguy

Funny how this thread went off in a different direction than I had hoped, but is still just as interesting

I tend to wander off, and not care much about what the thread was really about. I should be diciplined.

Originally Posted by Aikiguy

To supplement the original question - or maybe simplify it:

Some gyms have found an "ideal system", in the sense that it seems to work against other arts very well, it can be trained effectively, and it can evolve if necessary. Many times this system involves boxing, MT, wrestling, and BJJ. Is this it? Or, can any art maintain its cultural and physical identity yet at the same time be alive and equally applicable?

(Example: Suppose a Ba Gua guy decided to up his striking game a bit. Would the end result be a more effective, direct, "alive" Ba Gua, or would he end up with boxing / MT after a while?)

I think that yeah, you would end up with boxing/MT/wrestling/BJJ, simply because those arts have found the best way to do that stuff due to decades of alive training and testing.
But even those arts require some modification to work in NHB competition. So that leads to my next question: is Shooto to ultimate complete art (for NHB comp)? Since it blends all of the above and probably has made the proper adjustements to each art)?

[aseepish]

Motion, timing, resistance... great definition of aliveness!

For the record, I don't equate aliveness with boxing, MT, or BJJ, except for that those arts incorporate aliveness into their training. You could have alive arts that look nothing like what we see of MMA, Kali for example.

I can conceive of an art like Aikido being practiced against realistic attacks (progressively), using flow drills that gradually increase the resistance. But the problem is that the end product is no longer Aikido. It would best be described as some new form of Aiki-jujustu. It wouldn't necessarily follow the teachings of Morihei Ueshiba. It would no longer be traditional.

Similarly, if you drop all the kata training from Goju-ryu Karate, you're no longer following the teachings of Yamaguchi.

[JkD187]

Originally Posted by gabbah

Ok, so if we define "what you do" as "hard sparring with kicking and punching to the upper body but not head", and this was practiced with timing energy(resistance) and motion, it could be called "alive"?
That is by no means "complete", but it is "alive", is it not?

"What we do" is what all of SBG dose...we train under the same principals and philophsy.What we teach may be slightly different...but we all train the same.In response to your question...it could be called "alive" depending on what your training for...if your training for Boxing....Muay Thai...Savate....MMA...San Shou...Self Defense..etc etc.. then No it would Not be alive.If you were training for a TKD tourny or Kyokushin fight then yes it would be alive.If you practice Grappling only with no striking then yes it is alive...but if your were training ONLY grappling for an MMA fight then it would not be alive.It all depends on what your doing...if you train "no punches to the head" in prep. for a Boxing match...even if your using all three elements your not training realisticly...because you will be hit in the head alot.Aliveness is what seperates myths from reality...so it has to be adjusted to what you are doing.

[gabbah]

Ok that's what I wanted to hear. I'm all set, thanks.

[JkD187]

Originally Posted by aseepish

Motion, timing, resistance... great definition of aliveness!

For the record, I don't equate aliveness with boxing, MT, or BJJ, except for that those arts incorporate aliveness into their training. You could have alive arts that look nothing like what we see of MMA, Kali for example.

I can conceive of an art like Aikido being practiced against realistic attacks (progressively), using flow drills that gradually increase the resistance. But the problem is that the end product is no longer Aikido. It would best be described as some new form of Aiki-jujustu. It wouldn't necessarily follow the teachings of Morihei Ueshiba. It would no longer be traditional.

Similarly, if you drop all the kata training from Goju-ryu Karate, you're no longer following the teachings of Yamaguchi.

Beautiful...exactly what i said in the other thread...its the word TRADITION that makes TMA not evolve.I used a similar example with TKD but beautiful none the less.

[JkD187]

Originally Posted by gabbah

Ok that's what I wanted to hear. I'm all set, thanks.

You are very welcome my friend.

[aseepish]

Originally Posted by JkD187

it could be called "alive" depending on what your training for...if your training for Boxing....Muay Thai...Savate....MMA...San Shou...Self Defense..etc etc.. then No it would Not be alive.If you were training for a TKD tourny or Kyokushin fight then yes it would be alive.If you practice Grappling only with no striking then yes it is alive...but if your were training ONLY grappling for an MMA fight then it would not be alive.It all depends on what your doing...

Good point.

Chi sao is an example of an alive drill. But since it's very difficult to apply the trapping that is used in chi sao against a boxing structure, it's not a very useful drill for MMA. But it might come in handy in self defense against someone shoving you, grabbing your shirt etc.

Intelligent training is a must. Also knowing when to discard a certain structure or mentality in any given situation.

[Aikiguy]

Originally Posted by aseepish

I can conceive of an art like Aikido being practiced against realistic attacks (progressively), using flow drills that gradually increase the resistance. But the problem is that the end product is no longer Aikido. It would best be described as some new form of Aiki-jujustu. It wouldn't necessarily follow the teachings of Morihei Ueshiba. It would no longer be traditional.

That would be something to see . Imagine bringing striking and groundwork into aikido, and totally revamping the training program? I'd love to see something like that in action. (I'd probably still be training it too ...)

Originally Posted by aseepish

Similarly, if you drop all the kata training from Goju-ryu Karate, you're no longer following the teachings of Yamaguchi.

This opens up another topic altogether ... but how important is Kata nowadays? If timing / speed / accuracy is trained with a resisting partner, then kata would only serve as a way to transmit the system without having to write any of it down or videotape any of it. (Which I think is why they did it to start with).

[JkD187]

Originally Posted by Aikiguy

That would be something to see . Imagine bringing striking and groundwork into aikido, and totally revamping the training program? I'd love to see something like that in action. (I'd probably still be training it too ...)



This opens up another topic altogether ... but how important is Kata nowadays? If timing / speed / accuracy is trained with a resisting partner, then kata would only serve as a way to transmit the system without having to write any of it down or videotape any of it. (Which I think is why they did it to start with).

Kata training has no use at all for fighting...to put it bluntly.Kata was used so the person could hide the techniques of the art in them and teach them to other generations...to someone who dose not know about kata it looks like a dance of sort(im talking about thousands of years ago)so no one would find out the secrets of their art.Everything back then was very secertive...nowadays we have no use for katas at all...the only reason its still practiced is again to preserve tradition.For a person interesed in PERFORMANCE steer far far away from katas.

[gabbah]

Originally Posted by aseepish

But since it's very difficult to apply the trapping that is used in chi sao against a boxing structure, it's not a very useful drill for MMA. But it might come in handy in self defense against someone shoving you, grabbing your shirt etc.

Emin Boztepe says ving tsun works against boxers, thaiboxers and wrestlers also.
He showed it in a tape: if a thaiboxer tries to low kick you, you use your ving tsun circle step, move in and land 13 straight ving tsun punches on his nose. So there ya go.

[bbbb]

on what sort of person you want to be...

It's all about conditioning..the environment you put yourself in and have also come from...

I say Yes, it is the word Traditional that keep's Kung Fu and Tae kwon do etc from being as effective in the ring as boxing etc...

The people who teach TMA have histories of violence which they don't want to hand down... they want to teach people how to defend themselve's BUT NOT TO ATTACK OTHER'S.

THEY BELIEVE in teaching people the confidence to walk away and not to glorify themselve's with violence(?!!!!); ya know...it doesn't make sense. (basically warning you that you will meet your match, and worse!).

As for aliveness; for the purposes of self defense then they are plenty alive.
How many are there out there- they couldn't be more alive.

"Don't go out looking for the multiple opponent situation. It's all about the confidence to walk away." {Sihing ____}.

Boxing and all other ring sport's are Gladiatorial. People pay money to see it-to be entertained. But it is wrong...and this is what the TMA teach.

They teach you to not be a victim, (anymore). To "..strive for the light side and let the power of the flow keep them in harmony".{poem of the Tao.}

"It's not someone beating you up..but you beating someone else up, that disturb's the mind." [somewhere off the net].

[aseepish]

Originally Posted by gabbah

Emin Boztepe says ving tsun works against boxers, thaiboxers and wrestlers also.
He showed it in a tape: if a thaiboxer tries to low kick you, you use your ving tsun circle step, move in and land 13 straight ving tsun punches on his nose. So there ya go.

Damn! And I can't shoot in on him because he knows the ANTI-GRAPPLING...

I'm screwed.

[medic06]

I think the more appropriate answer is "What happened to aliveness training in TMAs?"

I'm still not completely decided on katas. When I was younger I dismissed katas as useless, now I kind of see the usefulness of such drills.

I think the biggest problem comes from confusing training drills with fighting. Katas are useless in fighting. But so is weight lifting and cardio training.

[JkD187]

Originally Posted by medic06

I think the more appropriate answer is "What happened to aliveness training in TMAs?"

I'm still not completely decided on katas. When I was younger I dismissed katas as useless, now I kind of see the usefulness of such drills.

I think the biggest problem comes from confusing training drills with fighting. Katas are useless in fighting. But so is weight lifting and cardio training.

Is this a double edged sword question....because you can argue bolth way on this.Weights and endurance (well endurance mostly) is one of the most important things in fighting.I see where you are comming from on this...however endurance training is different then kata....bolth can be a great workout...but if your training for a fight...repeating a sequence of the same moves over and over again will become very predictable.Can you imagine a boxing kata? i can smell the KO's comming already....just not in your favor.