Ninjitsu

columok

A little caveat before I start. Sorry if I seem arrogant or pigheaded. This is a good debate and you guys are raising some interesting questions. Thanks for keeping the grey matter moving. Also dont worry about picking on me. I'm used to it. I just feel strongly about this stuff. I also love a good debate.

But boxing for instance has it's own set of imposed rules which produces a particular style of fighting. Would you consider that effective?

But when you add boxing skills to an MMA environment, the delivery system allows you to use your hands in the best way. It takes some adjustment to make the transition (watch early UFC to see boxers slaughtered) but a little work and you can use those skills in any environment. Boxing remains the best way of using your hands to knock someone out!

Like dent, I've also noticed that recently there have been a few posters on this board promoting MMA, Muay Thai, BJJ, and rubbishing all other martial arts as being 'ineffective' or out-dated (I'm not just aimimg this at you columok and it's nothing personal )

Its not the arts that are ineffective, its the training systems. BJJ is nothing magical. It just so happens to have been trained right.

Also traditional and "out-dated" surely mean the same thing. If something adheres to a rule for traditions sake then surely it is outdated! Thoughts?

However, what I think you miss is the fact that a lot of people don't train in a martial art to become some kind of competent street fighter or UFC champion.

Like me? Im one of the people Colm mentioned. I train for fun, fitness and to a greatly lesser extent self defence! Dont assume that all MMA people are interested in being shaved headed cage warriors.

I've never been in a real fight in my life and I tend to do everything possible to avoid ever being in a real street fight. Speaking for myself, I train in Taekwon-do primarily to keep fit and because I find it interesting.

Cool. Good motivations. A lot of TKD people are convinced that TKD translates into an effective combat system. As long as nobody is fooling themselves then I say go ahead.

I got attacked by two guys in January. Wasnt pretty. Got my right eyelid torn open and it had to be glued shut. It made me realise that street fighting was something I had no interest in. If you can avoid it like the plague.

The point I am trying to make is that we all do martial arts for different reasons but we don't all measure our martial art purely in terms of how effective it is going to be in real street fight.

Cool again. But you have to evaluate the combat effectiveness if you are gonna market it as a self defence tool. If you arent being honest to people then...

Keep it coming lads. My work day is flying thanks to this quality debate.

PhoenixRising

Yeah it's definitely an interesting discussion. Appologies to the original poster for dragging this off topic. Maybe one of the mods could split this as it could probably do with a thread of it's own.

Colm_OReilly wrote:

Pheonix, in my experience, an awful lot of people have been led to believe that a load of esoteric patterns will make you invincible, and a great many propagate this fallacy.

You're probably right. In my opinion this is down to the attitude of both instructor and student. Any TKD instructor who goes around telling their students that having mastered a certain pattern - they are now leathal weapons is either an idiot or just plain irresponsible (or both!). The attitude of the student is another factor because lets face it, a lot of people live in a fantasy world, and probably believe they are invincible after training in a martial art for a few years, whether their instructor has been feeding them that rubbish or not. We've all met a few of these people at some point!

columok wrote:

Dont assume that all MMA people are interested in being shaved headed cage warriors.

, I wasn't trying to imply that. The point I was making was it tends to attract people who want to learn how to 'fight'.

columok wrote:

Cool again. But you have to evaluate the combat effectiveness if you are gonna market it as a self defence tool. If you arent being honest to people then...

Well I would consider Taekwon-do a self-defense tool. Aside from the patterns and the regular Taekwon-do syllabus, my instructor teaches a few practical self-defense moves every few classes. Are you saying that Taekwon-do has absolutely no value as a self-defense tool?

It's good to see a bit of life in the martial arts/self-defense board.

dent

columok wrote:

Try this. Its by Rodney King, an excellent boxer and the man responsible for developing many of standup training methods. Sorry to constantly refer to SBG articles, but they straightened up a lot of ideas I had in my head once upon a time.

Again wasn't trying to start that debate. Read the article and that can be applied to several martial arts.

columok wrote:

Exactly. Its far from perfect. But it represents the next best thing. The most perfect solution for me is to run . Even that doesnt always work.

I agree.

columok wrote:

Helio Gracie is still rolling in his 80s (I think). Just because you train alive doesnt mean you have to train dangerously or with great risk of injury. Look at the Judo Masters Events with people in their 60s and 70s still competing!!

Think you missed my point. Circumstances change. Maybe they don't have arthritis. They are the exception rather than the norm. Maybe they will have to change there style in the future

columok wrote:

I do respect that. Its a debate about training methods and not a personal attack. If I have issues with Traditional Jiu Jitsu, Karate, Kung Fu etc I'm not having an issue with the individual. You arent defined by your martial art. Its just a thing you do 3 times a week in the local school/college/town hall/whatever. If I dont like football, all football players dont get offended. This is a debate on training methods and therefore we should be as objective as possible about our own training methods and the training methods of others. Politeness could interfere with the honesty in this case!

I agree but I think you are being too general. There are Karate clubs out there that practice ground fighting. Kung Fu that practice clinch. So many different styles. Tae Kwon Do alone has at least three that I know of. Then you have the trainers. We are a Jujustsu school and one of the lads has a black belt in Sambo and Bumese boxing (forgive the spelling). Training methods vary from club to club.

dent

Colm_OReilly wrote:

dent,
Please don't take this as arrogance on our part. Taken from the FAQ on our website.

I dont and I understand not talking face to face can sometimes create that impression. I just feel you guys are being a too critical. You do seem very level headed and open to suggestions though which is great to see.

Colm_OReilly wrote:

You need to be in peak condition to play Soccer at international level. Yet everyone can play a game of Soccer. What's the difference? The Skill level of the professionals, there conditioning and training regimes. The Fundamentals remain the same throughout however.

Yes I agree but what if soccer is not my game bescause I hurt my foot. I hope I'm conveying that point.

columok

We've all met a few of these people at some point!

True.

The point I was making was it tends to attract people who want to learn how to 'fight'.

I dont see any difference between self defence and fighting. Theyre the same skills. I however do it for fun. Self defence doesnt concern me really.

Well I would consider Taekwon-do a self-defense tool. Aside from the patterns and the regular Taekwon-do syllabus, my instructor teaches a few practical self-defense moves every few classes. Are you saying that Taekwon-do has absolutely no value as a self-defense tool?

I think if self defence was your goal then you could learn those skills better elsewhere. I have seen some of the TKD self defence patterns/moves and to be honest I dont think that theyd work in a real fraca!

I only rate/criticise a martial art for its self defence skills when someone asks me! In a lot of previous posts people ask about whether Shotokan or Aikido are good for self defence and I have to be honest. In my experience, having also sparred with TKD people (and having done traditional Karate and Aikido) , I think time would be better spent doing Thai, BJJ, Judo, MMA etc. if self defence is your concern. Otherwise whatever floats your boat. The funny thing is that people always ask a) whats it like for self defence or b) how is it for fitness!


Phoenix, you should come for a roll some day. Youd probably really enjoy it. It could hopefully displace all those views of us being skinheaded meatheads . Colm could also hold me down while you beat me up for being a jerk!

columok

Think you missed my point. Circumstances change. Maybe they don't have arthritis. They are the exception rather than the norm. Maybe they will have to change there style in the future

Maybe Helio could take up Thai in a few years if BJJ gets too much!

Also I know of plenty of traditional JJ senseis with dodgy knees at 40! :rolleyes:

I agree but I think you are being too general. There are Karate clubs out there that practice ground fighting. Kung Fu that practice clinch. So many different styles. Tae Kwon Do alone has at least three that I know of. Then you have the trainers. We are a Jujustsu school and one of the lads has a black belt in Sambo and Bumese boxing (forgive the spelling). Training methods vary from club to club.

Progressive TMA schools tend to be in the minority. Its good to see schools starting up standup, clinch and ground classes. To be honest, traditional arts that evolve are no longer being traditional (a good thing). They are evolving like they had to in the 17th century when considerably more was at stake.

Dent: I know you do JJ but would you be interested in coming to a BJJ or an MMA class. You and Phoenix could form a tagteam against myself and Colm.

PhoenixRising

columok wrote:

Phoenix, you should come for a roll some day. Youd probably really enjoy it. It could hopefully displace all those views of us being skinheaded meatheads . Colm could also hold me down while you beat me up for being a jerk!

, jesus I'd better start training! We should get Sky to pick this one up on pay-per-view!

dent

Yup I'd love to. Rubbish ground fighter and I'm always willing to learn. Better get back to some work. All this typing will give us all arthritis and our MA careers will be over.

columok

How about Monday or Wednesday next week.

Full details at www.twokingsmma.net!

Hope to see you guys there.

briano

TKD self defence patterns

The patterns in TKD are not, and as far as I know, ever meant to be used for self defence. They evolved out of the legal system in Korea which was pretty much "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" The patterns gave students a way of practicing movements as hard as they liked, without fear of accidentaly breaking an opponents jaw/leg/arm, and in turn, having their jaw/leg/arm broken. Its actually funny that you mention the patterns, as a guy was asked at my last grading what the "art" part of TKD was. The answer is, according to the instructor, the patterns. While they might look like just a set of movements students also have to learn about the pattern, such as the meanings of the pattern, what the diagram represents and what the title means in relation to the history of TKD and Korea.

It is also stressed in the class that the way we move in patterns is not the way we should move in sparring. That is beaten into your head from day 1. (Not literally of course, that takes place the first time you try and do a traditional reverse turning kick in sparring.) The way TKD teaches sparring is closer to kick boxing, except we don't have the point sparring system used in KB. Instead AETF rules use continuous sparring, which is quite unlike the impression columok has of it (except for the below the belt rule, about the only one you got right)

As you progress through the ranks, you learn more and more about how to apply sparring techniques in real life situations along with releases from holds and locks.

columok

Instead AETF rules use continuous sparring, which is quite unlike the impression columok has of it (except for the below the belt rule, about the only one you got right)

How common is this style of TKD (AETF)?
My main point of contact with TKD is ITF, IUTF and WTF.

Also please define continuous sparring? Sorry not quite sure what you mean by it.

As you progress through the ranks, you learn more and more about how to apply sparring techniques in real life situations along with releases from holds and locks.

Are these escapes trained fully alive i.e. is the "attacker" fully resisting your efforts to escape? Otherwise I cant imagine that such things would work particularily well! Would you feel confident that if a BJJ, Judo or wrestling person put you in such a hold that you could escape?

briano

Sorry, I should have made that more clear. The INTA, which is an Irish branch of the ITF use AETF rules for competitions. Its gotten quite confusing since Gen. Choi passed away, but basically AETF rules are the same set of rules that ITF competitions in Ireland have always used: Target area is front of the body/head, attacks must be focused and controlled, two minute rounds of continuous sparring, etc.

Continuous sparring is where the fight does not stop after a point is scored, which allows for more comblinations and counter attacks to be used. IMO its much better than point sparring, where the fight is stopped after a point is scored, as it forces both competitors to think more about the techniques they use.

As for the escapes being practiced "alive", we don't call it that. But yeah, The attacker is trying not to let you get away. Emphisis is on speed, i.e. getting out of a hold and then getting away, and/or stopping the attacker coming after you as quickly as possible.

Would you feel confident that if a BJJ, Judo or wrestling person put you in such a hold that you could escape?

It depends, doesn't it. I'd never say "Yes. If a BJJ, Judo or wrestling person put me in any hold I, Briano, could use my TKD skills to get out of it". But, that said, I like to think that I'd probably have a fair idea of how to get out out of it. Whether I'd be able to or not is another story all together, and depends on factors too numerous to mention, such as the hold used, the person using the hold and so on.

columok

No worries. I always get a bit confused with all of the various TKD governing bodies.

How exactly is a winner decided? Is it KO or does it tend to go to decision?

I have seen TKD competitions (IUTF) where there was a greater leaning towards pulling off fancy kicks than scoring powerful effective punches and kicks. Do judges favour the use of more complex kicks/punches or is it about dominating and defeating your opponent any way the rules allow? Pardon my ignorance. Just want to clarify those things before the debate continues.

It depends, doesn't it. I'd never say "Yes. If a BJJ, Judo or wrestling person put me in any hold I, Briano, could use my TKD skills to get out of it". But, that said, I like to think that I'd probably have a fair idea of how to get out out of it. Whether I'd be able to or not is another story all together, and depends on factors too numerous to mention, such as the hold used, the person using the hold and so on.

You can only know this through alive training where your partner is as aware and active as you are. Then youll have a good idea of your skills. Anything else is just hypothesising as you have already said!

briano

No, If you KO someone because you tried to punch through their head you're likely to be disqualified. Although if you throw a punch and they jump on to it, in effect KO'ing themselves off your fist, then you'll get the fight.

Fights are decided on points: 1 point for a punch to the body/head or a kick to the body, two points for a jumping punch to the head/standing kick to the head, 3 points for a jumping kick to the head. There is no extra points given for complex kicks or punches, although if you are sloppy in your technique (not looking at the target, lashing out, focusing through the target) you're likely to get a warning, minus point (3 x warning) or disqualified (3 x minus points, or referee's decision)

Anything else is just hypothesising as you have already said!

I didn't mean to give the impression that we don't practice these techniques, because we do but certainly not to the extent a BJJ or Judo person does. Its just you can never say with absolute certainty that you'd be able to break a hold or lock put on you, because no matter how much you train or how good you get, there is always someone who trains harder, and is better than you are.

columok

Fights are decided on points: 1 point for a punch to the body/head or a kick to the body, two points for a jumping punch to the head/standing kick to the head, 3 points for a jumping kick to the head. There is no extra points given for complex kicks or punches, although if you are sloppy in your technique (not looking at the target, lashing out, focusing through the target) you're likely to get a warning, minus point (3 x warning) or disqualified (3 x minus points, or referee's decision)

Its a bit impractical that the most useful and common strike, punching the head, is looked on as less significant than jumping punch, which is deeply impractical, and a jumping kick, which just seems crazy to me. This scoring system surely encourages people to attempt more outlandish attacks rather than use proven boxing techniques. Why the favouritism towards jumping attacks?

edit: fixing bad grammar

briano

Because they are harder to score with. Its not so much favouritism as a reflection of the skill needed to focus and control these attacks.

Possibly the reason we don't use proven boxing techniques is that we don't practice boxing. Jumping kicks and punches are no more or less practical *in a sparring situation* than standing punches or kicks, it just depends on the circumstances. For instance, leading off with a jumping reverse turning kick would be silly, as the opponent would see it coming a mile off. However, if an opponent was chasing you in the ring, the same kick would be ideal as it performs three functions:

1) you are hitting the opponent, possibly scoring a point
2) you are giving your opponent something to think about, which will probably stop them chasing you, even if you didn't score a point
and
3) you are putting distance between yourself and your opponent, easing the pressure on you and allowing yourself to line up the next attacks

I wouldn't always agree that a standing punch to the head is the most useful strike. Every strike, block, stance and movement has its uses depending on the situation. A standing punch to the head is completely useless if your opponent is throwing side piercing kicks into your ribs every time you move in for the punch.

Of course, all this is just for competition sparring. I wouldn't dream of trying some of the more "outlandish" kicks on the street. We learn different techniques for self defense, which are completely removed from sparring.

columok

Jumping kicks and punches are no more or less practical *in a sparring situation* than standing punches or kicks, it just depends on the circumstances.

But they are certainly outlandish in a self defence situation, which I think you infer towards the end of the post!

I wouldn't always agree that a standing punch to the head is the most useful strike. Every strike, block, stance and movement has its uses depending on the situation. A standing punch to the head is completely useless if your opponent is throwing side piercing kicks into your ribs every time you move in for the punch.

Not talking about usefulness in competition but in self defence! In competition couldnt you just grab their foot?

We learn different techniques for self defense, which are completely removed from sparring.

Is that to say that your sparring isnt applicable to self defence?

TwoKingMick

TKD sparring is a game. Everyone is getting bogged down in discussing the rules of a game. Oh and briano, i did tkd for years, you couldn't get out of a bjj, wrestling or judo lock, trust me.

columok

TwoKingMick

Surely sparring of any kind is a game. Surely the point is to make the rules as close to real combat as possible.

And no "dont call me Shirley" jokes!

briano

Is that to say that your sparring isnt applicable to self defence?

No. Its the other way around. Some of the self defense we are shown involves things like straight kicks to the front and side of the knee, Strikes to the eyes and neck, strikes to eaisly breakable joints like elbows, wrists and ankles and the odd thing like chokeholds and what not. These techniques would get you disqualified from a sparring competition in no time flat at the very least.

In competition couldnt you just grab their foot?

Not in TKD.

Surely the point is to make the rules as close to real combat as possible

The point of sparring, as I understand it, is to show your ability in a particular MA by demonstrating comblinations of techniques that you have learned. If it was to make it as close to real combat as possible you'd have to get all the competitors a little drunk and stage the competition at 2 am in temple bar.

TwoKingMick, As I said before, it all depends doesn't it? Don't get me wrong, I'm not in anyway trying to imply that those locks might be ineffective, or that I'm some sort of super bendy invincible mutant that could get out of any lock put on me. I was just pointing out that, in my class, we have spent some time learning how to break out of holds and locks, although possibly in a different style to how someone from BJJ or Judo would learn how to do it. (ie find something that is attached to them, break it)

Colm_OReilly

Briano,

Where'd you train at?

It can get very confusing discussing details in such an unnatural setting as the internet, people pick up on different things, subtleties are hard to explain etc etc. It's so much easier to explain and demonstrate what you mean in person. Are you near us?

Also, would I be right in saying that your definition of sparring and Columoks are different, like this.

You: Sparring, a means to show your ability in a particular MA by demonstrating comblinations of techniques that you have learned. ( I pretty much copied and pasted there)

Columok: Sparring, a method by which techniques are tested against an opponent offering resistance, timing, and motion, and then refined/rejected with the aim of being the most effective in a self-defence/combat sport situation.

Take Care Y'All,
Colm

briano

I train up in DIT Kevin ST during the Year and the INTA center on Exchequer St during the college holidays.

Thats a fair enough definition of sparring, I'd think that most sparring takes place against a resisting opponent.

columok

I dont know about joints being so easily breakable. Its not just a case of hitting the joint. I have studied joint locks from Aikido, Yoshin Ryu Ju Jitsu, Judo, BJJ and Karate and have seen through alive training that getting into a position to "strike" a joint takes a lot of practice and (here we go again) alive training.

The point of sparring, as I understand it, is to show your ability in a particular MA by demonstrating comblinations of techniques that you have learned. If it was to make it as close to real combat as possible you'd have to get all the competitors a little drunk and stage the competition at 2 am in temple bar.

Have you ever seen MMA in action. I would say that MMA competition and MMA sparring is as real as it gets. The early UFCs really did prove what worked and what didnt. To stand the best chance in a fight you need to understand the basics of standup (boxing, muay thai) clinch (wrestling, judo) and ground (BJJ). You assume that anything could happen and that you could get into any position.

I was just pointing out that, in my class, we have spent some time learning how to break out of holds and locks, although possibly in a different style to how someone from BJJ or Judo would learn how to do it.

I would say that the practices of BJJ, wrestling, Judo and some traditional jiu jitsu schools are the only ways to learn grappling. Ask a member of the DIT Judo club to pin you and try your escapes. They are used to holding resisting opponents and also escaping from resisting opponents. Its no contest really!

(ie find something that is attached to them, break it)

Breaking a joint without a good knowledge of submissions is very hard to do. The human body is tougher than most martial arts instructors give it credit.



Also Colm made the distinction between your understanding of sparring and mine. I see it as preparation for combat sport/self defence situation while you see it as a means of evaluation of ability (which is cool!). But the argument all along is that to measure ability in self defence and to improve you need to spar. Therefore does TKD really provide self defence ability?

PhoenixRising

columok wrote:

Therefore does TKD really provide self defence ability?

I believe it does - but to a point. You can't say that it provides no self-defense ability. I believe that all martial arts equip the practitioner with at least some level of self-defense ability. Who is better equipped to defend themselves should they have to - someone who has never practised any kind of martial art, or a Taekwon-do black belt? I'd go with the Taekwon-do practitioner. I'm not saying that he is equipped to deal with any situation which might arise in a real fight, but he is certainly better equipped than the non-martial arts person.

I've read through your website and found myself (for the most part) agreeing with what you are saying about training in an 'alive' scenario. If it came to a real fight on the street, I agree that your training would probably better equip the individual to deal with whatever comes his or her way. But, like I said before, becoming a competent street fighter is not everyone's primary goal when taking up a martial art. I don't believe people take up Taekwon-do for instance, to become the 'ultimate fighting machine'. I would like to think that most people understand the art, it's limitations, and it's practical applications. So, this is where I take issue with your attitude towards any other art besides MMA. You only measure a martial art by it's usefullness in an 'alive' fight scenario - if the sparring rules of that art limit the 'aliveness', you brand it as being rubbish and completely useless. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree with it.

What I also have a problem with, is that when a poster who is new to martial arts, posts a thread looking for some opinions on which art he should take up, the thread practically gets hijacked by the pro-MMA group pimping their art, and if any other art is mentioned, it is rubbished by you guys and the same old argument rears it head again.

columok

I believe it does - but to a point. You can't say that it provides no self-defense ability. I believe that all martial arts equip the practitioner with at least some level of self-defense ability. Who is better equipped to defend themselves should they have to - someone who has never practised any kind of martial art, or a Taekwon-do black belt? I'd go with the Taekwon-do practitioner. I'm not saying that he is equipped to deal with any situation which might arise in a real fight, but he is certainly better equipped than the non-martial arts person.

Absolutely. The TKD person has trained some striking and is likely to have learnt basic boxing. Also the TKD person is fairly fit and better conditioned than your average street bum. My only concern would be the TKD person maybe standing up to attackers in a situation where running is more appropriate because they overestimate their abilities!

I've read through your website and found myself (for the most part) agreeing with what you are saying about training in an 'alive' scenario. If it came to a real fight on the street, I agree that your training would probably better equip the individual to deal with whatever comes his or her way. But, like I said before, becoming a competent street fighter is not everyone's primary goal when taking up a martial art. I don't believe people take up Taekwon-do for instance, to become the 'ultimate fighting machine'.

Again, most MMA people arent concerned with becoming an "ultimate fighting machine". They just feel that if you are going to study a fighting system why not make it as efficient as possible. That seems like common-sense to me!

, this is where I take issue with your attitude towards any other art besides MMA. You only measure a martial art by it's usefullness in an 'alive' fight scenario - if the sparring rules of that art limit the 'aliveness', you brand it as being rubbish and completely useless. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree with it.

Youre kind of missing my point. What I have been saying all along is that if you are measuring an art BY ITS APPLICABILITY TO SELF DEFENCE then alive arts are the ways to go. I dont hear any of you guys disputing this! So am I being unfair or am I just being honest. I'm not commneting on any other criterion for judging a martial art, as people arent asking about them.

What I also have a problem with, is that when a poster who is new to martial arts, posts a thread looking for some opinions on which art he should take up, the thread practically gets hijacked by the pro-MMA group pimping their art, and if any other art is mentioned, it is rubbished by you guys and the same old argument rears it head again.

I am only honest to people with my opinions when they ask about arts with regards to self defence. I think you are being very unfair in this regard. With respect to the Shotokan Karate thread, look at its title. The question asked was how does it relate to self defence. I gave an honest and what I feel to be a truthful opinion with respect to my experience with traditional Karate (GoJu Ryu, WaDo Ryu and Shotokan). Thats not hi-jacking a thread and I really resent that implication. Someone asked about Wado-Ryu Karate and its advantages over other styles of Karate and I answered his question without "pimping MMA" as you put it!

In this thread someone specifically asked about how ninjitsu applies to self defence. I voiced my opinions from my experience!. They asked so I answered- again is this really hijacking?

What I also have a problem with, is that when a poster who is new to martial arts, posts a thread looking for some opinions on which art he should take up, the thread practically gets hijacked by the pro-MMA group pimping their art, and if any other art is mentioned, it is rubbished by you guys and the same old argument rears it head again.

We arent rubbishing other arts. We are using logical arguments and are debating points. Surely questioning the validity of something you are doing is a healthy way of evolving and improving your martial art.

I'd like to remind you that most MMA people (including Colm and myself) have considerable experience in traditional martial arts. We are speaking from experience and not blindly rubbishing other arts, an allegation which I would appreciate that you would retract as I find it deeply offensive!

PhoenixRising

columok wrote:

Youre kind of missing my point. What I have been saying all along is that if you are measuring an art BY ITS APPLICABILITY TO SELF DEFENCE then alive arts are the ways to go. I dont hear any of you guys disputing this! So am I being unfair or am I just being honest. I'm not commneting on any other criterion for judging a martial art, as people arent asking about them.

Fine, I accept that you are only judging them against their applicability to self-defense, but sometimes this doesn't come across in your posts. What I posted is just the impression I have gotten from reading your posts over the last number of weeks.

columok wrote:

We arent rubbishing other arts.........

........I'd like to remind you that most MMA people (including Colm and myself) have considerable experience in traditional martial arts. We are speaking from experience and not blindly rubbishing other arts, an allegation which I would appreciate that you would retract as I find it deeply offensive!

Well to be honest, I can't say that I remember any occasion where you said anything positive about any other martial art. I haven't seen anywhere where you have conceeded that other martial arts have their advantages or benefits. Please correct me if I'm wrong - I might just have missed that post.

I wasn't trying to offend you. I've just posted the impression that I have gotten from your posts. If the moderators of this board feel that it was an unfair statement, then I will certainly retract it.

columok

Questions about the other benefits of martial arts just dont come up on these boards. Look around. People consistently ask about how martial arts work with respect to self defence and also fitness. I feel, and most of you seem to be agreeing here, that MMA is pretty good at instilling self defence skills and fitness.

Well to be honest, I can't say that I remember any occasion where you said anything positive about any other martial art. I haven't seen anywhere where you have conceeded that other martial arts have their advantages or benefits. Please correct me if I'm wrong - I might just have missed that post.

I have consistently spoken about the benefits of Judo, Muay Thai and Boxing none of which I train in. I have no vested interest in seeing any of these arts succede so ask yourself why I might be promoting them ahead of others.

Also, when has someone put a valid argument for doing another art ahead of MMA. If someone mentioned that an art had meditation benefits etc etc I would have conceded that MMA didnt have it. People keep talking about fighting/self defence on this board and thats what Im replying to. If someone asked about what arts contained Zen meditation, Shiatsu or Chi Kung then I would try and point them in the right direction (Having experience in some of these areas).

Also your original statement that I took offence to was much stronger( and harsher) than the more logical and fair comment of your last post, namely:

Well to be honest, I can't say that I remember any occasion where you said anything positive about any other martial art. I haven't seen anywhere where you have conceeded that other martial arts have their advantages or benefits. Please correct me if I'm wrong - I might just have missed that post.

Check out the Wado-Ryu threads and Tai Chi threads where I dont think I'm pimping MMA. Any other thread Im giving my opinion from my experience that I think is valid to the question.

vasch_ro

columok wrote:

Would that mean that the confidence gleaned from training in a martial art is dependant on the effectiveness of that martial art? So if a martial art lacks effectiveness (such as Iaido) then what can be gained from it that cant be gained from another sport or philosophy book. What makes martial arts unique in this respect?


How does Iaido lack effectivness ??

What makes martial arts different in this respect colum is the "DO" factor
this is the difference between aiki-do and aiki jutsu
The term do being a japanese expression for the the way or the path , whereby the martial art is the path to self enlightment and is ingrained into the martial art fully
it is the point of the art , you become literally moving zen through skills developed in martial training , ibuki brathing etc Kata

To quote " the suffix "do" found in kendo judo and budo means "the way" "path" or "road" the same character is also pronounced "dao" in Mandarin and is most notably used for the Doaist Philosophy of Lao Zi, in the philosophical traditions the do became the way of life a path one travels while pursuing karates goal of pefection. The ideogram jutsu in Karate - jutsu meant art or science"

Thus the do martial arts transcended physical boundaries of combat and became a vehicle through which the japanese principle of wa ( harmony) was funneled

Taken from the Bubishi the Bible of Karate by Patrick Mc Carthy

columok

Vasch:

My first time in that particular form of transport, as youll be glad to know, but much appreciated!!


My reference to Iaido was with respect to the notion that a martial art should give confidence with respect to handling oneself in modern combat. Iaido sets out to teach a certain thing (noto, kesa (I think?) and chiburi) and succeeds in this. Iaido is certainly useless in street situation, unless you have youre katana tied to your hakama when bad guys attack. :rolleyes:

As you say Zen may mainfest itself in the moving self, trying to attain perfection. I would question how many martial arts students seek this when starting martial arts. How many just want to learn to beat up bad guys like in the movies. I'm not rubbishing Iaido, as I feel it is a beautiful art, but I feel that people often pursue such things for the wrong reasons. Would those who pursue "Zen" in such ways also practice fundamentals of Buddhism such as attempting to maximise their compassion?

If Judo is a "way", "path" or "road" then how many Judoka see it that way? Maybe, correct me if Im wrong, Zen doesnt require awareness from the student. Similarily in Aikido few in my experience really search for enlightenment in an honest way. I think that perfection and confrontation of ego are noble pursuits that can be helped by confronting ones motivations. I also think that this is enable by competition, a pursuit which makes one face reality and forget image. When the talking stops, and "put up or shut up" begins then I feel, enlightenment can begin in the moments where there is no ego only action and reaction! AKA the right side of the brain kicking in where we strip away all the bull**** and just do it! You can do this painting, sculpting, running or practicing martial arts.

With compassion, peace and love (not to mention warrior courage )

Colum

Colm_OReilly

Columok,

Chill Man! Take some time off forums if they get you this worked up, it does not seem healthy to me.

Phoenix,
Colum is a pretty excitable dude, so try to take him with a pinch of salt.

Peace and Love Y'All,
Colm

columok

While admittedly I should be taken with a pinch of salt (or a bucket if available- preferrably Pharmaceutical Grade Salt) I dont think Im getting unchilled. I'm just trying to engage in a form of verbal sparring. Healthy debate, wherein a point is countered with a point, is a good way of exercising the mind. I dont think I need to chill per say. Although if youre offering to bring me some icecream and a deck chair I wouldnt complain .

dent

Hey all
Coming to the defence of some of the Tae-kwon-do schools. First ITF. I know some Tae-kwon-do guys who are boxing standard with there fists. Internatinoal ITF competition is full contact with gloves. Its "semi-contact" but at that level thats taken at lip service. Some of these guys train full time. I wounldn't under estimate there standup. Its lacking in some parts but its just as "Alive" as boxing.

WTF. OK its just kicks but you can win by KO and its full contact. Has body armour though. This is an olympic sport? At that level they train purlely in the fighting aspect. In fact I'm sure many ITF guys may say its not a martial art.

Plenty of Alive stuff here. Both Judo and Boxing lack in areas too. Why do you give them more respect. Just curious.

columok

Certain TKD styles are now incorporating full contact sparring and guess what? What does it look like? Muay Thai minus certain elements. The reason is that the human body can only do so many things. Put two guys into a room fighting for a hundred years only aloud hit with their hands and theyll have a style evolve to be similar to boxing. Same with grappling. Same with football, surfing etc. etc. etc.

Maybe you missed the above from one of my previous posts in the thread(Page 3).

WTF. OK its just kicks but you can win by KO and its full contact. Has body armour though. This is an olympic sport? At that level they train purlely in the fighting aspect. In fact I'm sure many ITF guys may say its not a martial art.

They train in the competition aspect, not the fighting aspect. Theres a big difference! No leg kicks allowed. No grabbing. It is a martial art by the way. Define a martial art? By its lethality?

Plenty of Alive stuff here.

A majority of dead stuff e.g self defence patterns.

Also I was actually saying very little about my opinion of TKD. I was trying to draw conclusions from the answers that Briano and Phoenix_Rising had given me.

You have given examples of top-level TKD being Alive, but all boxing and all judo and all MMA/Muay Thai is alive. You dont need to be world class to get the alive angle. From day 1 thats how you train and thats how the aforementioned systems work better in combat then TKD.

dent

columok wrote:

You have given examples of top-level TKD being Alive, but all boxing and all judo and all MMA/Muay Thai is alive. You dont need to be world class to get the alive angle. From day 1 thats how you train and thats how the aforementioned systems work better in combat then TKD.

Fair point. But just pointing out there are exceptions. If you really want to train that way in Tae Kwon do you can. I'm not Tae Kwon Do's biggest fan. Two torn ham strings might be the reason. Why I changed to Jujutsu

Should Clarify WTF is World Tae Kwon do Federation just in case.

Maybe I'm missing some of the Alive stuff. But Judo does a lot of impractical stuff. Ever see the way they huddle up into a ball when they go to ground. Just an example.

Plan to visit your club as it does sound quite interesting. Was sick this monday

columok

Yeah the other WTF (What The F**k..) TKD is a bit too weird for my liking !

I fully agree with you on some of the flaws of Judo. That turtle thing is kind of silly- wrestlers do the same, but nonethless a Judo guy will still beat most non-alive fighters purely cause theyre used to sparring, sparring, sparring! Also they tend do rely on the gi too much, exactly why Id favour Greco-Roman Wrestling as my method of take downs!

Cool. Try and come along tomorrow. I was benched on Monday too because of a sea-swimming injury ( ) but I believe Wednesday Colm is doing some cool stuff- as always!

Hope to see you tomorrow,

Colum

Bepetki

This is a very funny thread, with some excellent points raised.

I must admit to agreeing slightly with Phoenix's assertion of MMA versus all other Martial Arts. Especially "pimping MMA" which made me snot all over the keyboard when I read it!

Of course everyone is entitled to their opinions... that's why we're here. However, these opinions are quite heartfelt, and that's because what we do is a way of life. I don't think anyone has really been able to answer EXACTLY why they practise any style. This is where I would like to turn the table slightly and ask Colmok with respect, could you explain in one or two sentences, WHY you practise MMA over all other Martial Arts - without mentioning any style, 'aliveness' or fighting? I guess I want to know what else it is you get from your practise.

One final point... there was talk of breaking knee joints and elbow joints earlier. This is near to impossible. You can break bones certainly, but joints are a whole different ball game. Your best bet is to attempt to wrench a joint to tear the ligaments and cause muscle trauma, but you'll be hard pressed to break 'em. Anyway, look at the x-ray's of break victims (myself included - nasty ankle injury involving operations and pins and metal plates) and you'll see that a break is almost always down the middle section of the bone.

Anyone wanna set up a fight club - no holds barred? We could meet at about 2 am down some car-park and really test our skills! (Note to self - I shoulda called myself Tyler Durden, dagnammit!)

columok

This is where I would like to turn the table slightly and ask Colmok with respect, could you explain in one or two sentences, WHY you practise MMA over all other Martial Arts - without mentioning any style, 'aliveness' or fighting? I guess I want to know what else it is you get from your practise.

Why do I train MMA? I like physical activity and contact sports as such. I feel that combat sports (or any other competitive activity) make me confront my ego and my view of myself. I cant lie to myself or to others when Im forced to perform. It no longer becomes about the image I have of myself and the image I want others to see. When I have to perform in MMA/BJJ I get to be myself, no lies, no fooling myself. The smokescreens we create while dealing with others to hide our true selves dissipate. Maybe when Im performing in an MMA gym its one of the only times in life you can truly be yourself or at least aspire to be. The walls of ego come down and I just go. Thats why dude. I dont really care about fighting or self defence anymore even though what I do is the most effective self defence. Fighting repulses me. I have no interest in fighting

that's because what we do is a way of life.

I think a lot of people chase martial arts as some surrogate religion, waiting for the katas/pressure points/bowing/ritual to give them a better life, way of thinking etc. You dont need any of this. Go find your own way. Dont follow some way of life. Life should be your way of life. Screw image and how you want people to see you, its all an illusion. Go find your own truth. Find what works for you but make sure you are being true to yourself and that your motivations are pure.

Keep questioning. Never accept something as true. The minute you stop questioning something it becomes stagnant. Martial arts are no different.

Hope that helps explain my motivations.

Walsingham

columok wrote:

The walls of ego come down and I just go. Thats why dude. I dont really care about fighting or self defence anymore even though what I do is the most effective self defence. Fighting repulses me. I have no interest in fighting

I think a lot of people chase martial arts as some surrogate religion, waiting for the katas/pressure points/bowing/ritual to give them a better life, way of thinking etc. You dont need any of this. Go find your own way. Dont follow some way of life. Life should be your way of life. Screw image and how you want people to see you, its all an illusion. Go find your own truth. Find what works for you but make sure you are being true to yourself and that your motivations are pure.

Keep questioning. Never accept something as true. The minute you stop questioning something it becomes stagnant. Martial arts are no different.

Hope that helps explain my motivations.

This is interesting. I think that this is why most people practice martial arts. It is why I do. It is that desire to continually push yourself past your previous limits and achieve something better. The other effects are very useful none the less.

I agree with you that you must keep questioning. The question you must ask is not does this work but does this work for me ? If not why not. I am not the kind of person who could lift a 100 kg guy over his head and throw neither do I want to be but there are guys out there who are more than capable of this even if the other guy did not want to have them do it. Just think what an olympic power lifter could do. I saw one guy lift 265 kgs. Being able to do this is goignto help you in lots of areas of your life. Fitness should be part of all our lives. It should make up a reasonable component of any one who considers them a martial artists life. If you cannot walk up two flights of stairs without breaking into a sweat then you are going to have issues with a lot of areas of training. The same goes for flexibility. If your legs are not flexible you will have issues with mobility kicking and foot work.

As for resisting partners I agree with you. It should work against someone who does not want you to do it against them. This means to me, that you should be able to apply the technique with them resisting or create an opening so that you can apply a technique so it will not be resisted. I have recently taken up Judo again. When I went down to a club with some reasonably experienced guys they found it difficult to throw, when I was not "playing along". My aim was not to be thrown while doing randori while I was similtaneously trying to get them. It was extremely difficult for these guys as I was not trying to genuinely throw them put just get them to react and create openings. If I was thrown it was due to them muscling me for a couple of minutes while I tried to slip out. It was ****e for both people. I tried this for two weeks but in the end of the day decided I was there to learn and not to resist being thrown.

The aim of training is to create windows and although I am now going at guys even harder than ever in randori, I find that I am now getting into positions where I can get in good throws. I have however seen complete novices from other arts (TKD, BJJ, Karate) act the monkey with very high level guys and give them a hard time. These guys are not skilled in any way and often try to use illegal moves on a guy who is really good at judo. While it is frustrating for the judoka, they can normally work a situation to the point where they dump the guy. There was for example one guy who while doing ground work still insisted on getting onto his back in a gaurd position despite the fact he had been told not to and had been choked out or submitted every time in under 5 seconds. We were not even practicing that kind of stuff. But some people cannot be told.

In my own art many people have no desire to go live, and they lose out in my opinion. We also suffer from people who show up and although you might not want to illustrate that a shuto to the nose or a soild in the jaw works all the time they insist that they can get out or escape. So what do you do let them think that and look "foolish" or level them with a slug in the jaw? If you do they will not learn much in my opinion and if they stick around long enough they will realise that they are mistaken. Then ironically it can be time to slug them in the jaw ....