Absorb What is Useful

[Wing Woo Gar]

A lot of the wall stuff is now very technical.

A lot of the wrestling meta over BJJ meta.

Use of rides. The dagastani hand cuff being the more famous one.

The use of fancy kicking, not just the question mark or the oblique kicks. But just a step up in kicking intelligence.

Calf kicking.

The striking with little gloves. And therefore the covering head movement angles and distances.

This is a good video to showcase the methods being attempted during a sparring match.

You touched on an important detail. Little gloves or no gloves really changes the dynamics of blocks and defense tactics up the middle.

 

[drop bear]

Thanks for the response. What I'm exploring is, "is there a difference in the 'innovations' like you mentioned compared to the kind that come to mind in TMA?"

One thing I noticed is the MMA ones you mentioned seem to be of several types: First, adjustments to deal with equipment such as the walls (I'm assuming you're referring to the cage?) and gloves. Second, inserting existing techniques borrowed from different arts such as wrestling or kicking arts. Third, adapting these existing moves to be better used within MMA rules, such as the dagastani hand cuff allowing a wrestling move to be used in conjunction with ground and pound. No doubt there are other examples.

In TMA (I'll use my style as examples) the innovations seem to be more intrinsic concepts of execution: Using the fist vs open hand, vertical punch vs twist, snapping strikes and kicks vs extended thrusting, modifying the fist to stabilze the wrist. Then, there is the whole subject of kata wherein many applications and concepts were built in by the masters but lost due to uniformed changes by others or thru changing the kata for sport.

Sport karate now uses gloves and pads (which had their own evolution in size) that caused adjustments as well, and rules have changed types of techniques used and not used. This has even found its way into non-sport karate over the past 90 years in some styles. Is this innovated evolution, or just a new specialized form of karate with its own set of goals?

Karate was created as MMA, fusing various Chinese styles with Okinawan fighting styles. Its main purpose was close-in self-defense against common physical attacks and incorporated locks, grabbing and twisting, takedowns, kicks and strikes to all targets. Mass teaching and sport have often changed this basic premise of TMA, creating a parallel art of competitive karate.

I think TMA (non-sport) and MMA are two different things with different purposes and so different in selection of techniques and tactics, despite some commonalities. They are thus hard to compare and correlate. Attempts to do so will always be biased at worst, unsatisfactory at best. Best to view them as two distinct activities, each worthwhile in their own way.

One of the major differences in innovation in MMA or sports in general is you can very easily find a tutorial on a technique by a qualified professional.

Someone who uses that technique successfully at an elite level.

And each qualified professional will have their own twist on how to apply a technique.

And what this means is there are just vastly more options and ideas than you can access from within the room of guys you are training with. And these guys are just technically better and have a greater depth of understanding than you will generally get within a club.

And that isn't factoring in seminars or open mats or martial arts tourism. Which also exposes you to these quality guys.

And all of this is because of the change in how we are processing the techniques and viewing martial arts in general.

And the expectation is pretty simple. Can someone do the technique and make it work on someone that doesn't want it done to them?

Can they repeat that?

Can someone else repeat that?

Can people either shut that down. Or have a better method?

And that is about it.

Making a distinction between sport and TMA. Would mean we would need to find 2 methods that already fit that base expectation.

Normally the distinction is made so that we don't have to fit that base expectation. And instead turn a bunch of mental gymnastics to avoid that.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Traditional arts often require us to follow the form exactly. This is definitely how the Japanese martial artists I've met think and approach life. If the founders of those styles were still alive and practising their art, do you think they would have modified their approach after all these years - or do you believe they would still be executing the techniques in the exact same manner as they did in the 1900s?

If the were actively using
would have changes it easily

A lot of the wall stuff is now very technical.

A lot of the wrestling meta over BJJ meta.

Use of rides. The dagastani hand cuff being the more famous one.

The use of fancy kicking, not just the question mark or the oblique kicks. But just a step up in kicking intelligence.

Calf kicking.

The striking with little gloves. And therefore the covering head movement angles and distances.

This is a good video to showcase the methods being attempted during a sparring match.

I'm still a believer in lowering thst stance to make it more difficult for people to shoot in.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

There are some things you just have to learn the hard way. that’s why application is important, and also why innovation is an inevitable byproduct of application.

If we agree that you can’t learn it all from your instructor, then we would also agree that there are some things you’re going to have to figure out yourself.

So, the question then is how reliable is your own judgment? Do you have enough practical experience to fill in the gaps?

And this isn’t my opinion. This is observable fact. It’s the way we learn to do anything. There are good and bad ways to train people, and everything in between. Some are more efficient than others. But even if the training is top notch, you will never progress to a point where objective evaluation and innovation occur if you don’t apply the skills.

Or said in a positive way, you become an expert in the things you do. If you do kata, for example, you get better at the various elements of kata. If you fight in MMA, you develop all of the skills that contribute to that. If you do both, you may find synergies between the two.

In your opinion, what sort of symmetry might one find by doing both kata and mma? I’m also curious if you had this experience?

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

One of the major differences in innovation in MMA or sports in general is you can very easily find a tutorial on a technique by a qualified professional.

Someone who uses that technique successfully at an elite level.

And each qualified professional will have their own twist on how to apply a technique.

And what this means is there are just vastly more options and ideas than you can access from within the room of guys you are training with. And these guys are just technically better and have a greater depth of understanding than you will generally get within a club.

And that isn't factoring in seminars or open mats or martial arts tourism. Which also exposes you to these quality guys.

And all of this is because of the change in how we are processing the techniques and viewing martial arts in general.

And the expectation is pretty simple. Can someone do the technique and make it work on someone that doesn't want it done to them?

Can they repeat that?

Can someone else repeat that?

Can people either shut that down. Or have a better method?

And that is about it.

Making a distinction between sport and TMA. Would mean we would need to find 2 methods that already fit that base expectation.

Normally the distinction is made so that we don't have to fit that base expectation. And instead turn a bunch of mental gymnastics to avoid that.

So I’m doing some wrist/elbow locks with some guys that I know and a few from other styles. I can stop some of these with structure alone. I think these work best on someone who is not familiar with the set up. They are far more effective at full speed but the chance of injury is significantly higher. Sure enough, one guy goes full speed and wrecks a guys elbow. These are not beginner, they are all past 10 years of training in various arts. My question to you is, what’s the happy medium for you on pressure testing? Some things just don’t work without speed and strength, but when applied with speed and strength they potentially work too well for safe practice or sparring. In other words, it works when it works but that has everything to do with whether there is real intention.

 

[JowGaWolf]

There are some things you just have to learn the hard way. that’s why application is important, and also why innovation is an inevitable byproduct of application.

I agree. Generally things that aren't used don't get better nor does anyone try to develop it.

 

[isshinryuronin]

If you do kata, for example, you get better at the various elements of kata. If you fight in MMA, you develop all of the skills that contribute to that. If you do both, you may find synergies between the two.

I agree with your post #112 and the one quoted in part above. It's just the last statement that I have some issue with. The basic distinction IMO between the two, and the reason it's hard to fairly compare them as I mentioned in my response to drop bear, is that they have been designed for different purposes.

A very rough example: Allen wrench vs crescent wrench. They are alike in that both are metal tools that are rotated to loosen or tighten a fastener of some sort, but they cannot be interchanged. They were designed for different things, so how can they be compared as to value. It would be very hard to combine their two uses in any synergistic way.

Karate was developed for subduing a common attacker asap with no restrictions on tools or targets (as partially cataloged in kata). MMA is designed as a sport with rules. One of the rules is that matches are commonly up to 15 minutes long. This allows attacks like kicking to the outside upper leg to damage it over time. (I've seen guys dropped with just one such kick, but that's an impressive exception like a quick KO.) This is a tactic not found in karate as it's designed for 15 second fights.

A much larger percentage of MMA practitioners have professional fighting in mind than karate practitioners, who seek other goals and more general benefits from their art.

Another big difference is that karate was not designed for combat vs other karate or MMA guys (there weren't many around at that time) but vs a more common type of attacker not trained in MA as a rule. Whereas MMA fighters train specifically to fight other MMA fighters. A significant fact. This calls for a wider set of skills, tactics and physical conditioning. (Each can be used against other types of fighters of course, with MMA having the edge here, I think.)

MMA has some karate in it, but karate has very little MMA in it. This is a result of their being developed with different purposes in mind. They are both successful at what they were created for. Why not now add MMA into karate? Then it would evolve to become MMA.

MMA and karate have different goals and methods. Understanding this I think will reduce debates and bias between the two. Synergistic collaboration in any endeavor works best if the individuals share the same goals. All this said, it's great to cross train if one wishes or stress competition or everyday self-defense or just the traditional art.

 

[drop bear]

So I’m doing some wrist/elbow locks with some guys that I know and a few from other styles. I can stop some of these with structure alone. I think these work best on someone who is not familiar with the set up. They are far more effective at full speed but the chance of injury is significantly higher. Sure enough, one guy goes full speed and wrecks a guys elbow. These are not beginner, they are all past 10 years of training in various arts. My question to you is, what’s the happy medium for you on pressure testing? Some things just don’t work without speed and strength, but when applied with speed and strength they potentially work too well for safe practice or sparring. In other words, it works when it works but that has everything to do with whether there is real inintention

Get better.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Get better.

Well ok, but that doesn’t answer my question as to how YOU train these without injuring your partner.

 

[drop bear]

Well ok, but that doesn’t answer my question as to how YOU train these without injuring your partner.

I develop better set ups or better timing rather than just cranking the hell out of a technique.

Then I can live drill all sorts of crazy stuff. And not be a danger to my partner.

 

[Steve]

I agree with your post #112 and the one quoted in part above. It's just the last statement that I have some issue with. The basic distinction IMO between the two, and the reason it's hard to fairly compare them as I mentioned in my response to drop bear, is that they have been designed for different purposes.

A very rough example: Allen wrench vs crescent wrench. They are alike in that both are metal tools that are rotated to loosen or tighten a fastener of some sort, but they cannot be interchanged. They were designed for different things, so how can they be compared as to value. It would be very hard to combine their two uses in any synergistic way.

Karate was developed for subduing a common attacker asap with no restrictions on tools or targets (as partially cataloged in kata). MMA is designed as a sport with rules. One of the rules is that matches are commonly up to 15 minutes long. This allows attacks like kicking to the outside upper leg to damage it over time. (I've seen guys dropped with just one such kick, but that's an impressive exception like a quick KO.) This is a tactic not found in karate as it's designed for 15 second fights.

A much larger percentage of MMA practitioners have professional fighting in mind than karate practitioners, who seek other goals and more general benefits from their art.

Another big difference is that karate was not designed for combat vs other karate or MMA guys (there weren't many around at that time) but vs a more common type of attacker not trained in MA as a rule. Whereas MMA fighters train specifically to fight other MMA fighters. A significant fact. This calls for a wider set of skills, tactics and physical conditioning. (Each can be used against other types of fighters of course, with MMA having the edge here, I think.)

MMA has some karate in it, but karate has very little MMA in it. This is a result of their being developed with different purposes in mind. They are both successful at what they were created for. Why not now add MMA into karate? Then it would evolve to become MMA.

MMA and karate have different goals and methods. Understanding this I think will reduce debates and bias between the two. Synergistic collaboration in any endeavor works best if the individuals share the same goals. All this said, it's great to cross train if one wishes or stress competition or everyday self-defense or just the traditional art.

On a phone so answer will be brief. I see what you’re saying. I would just propose that in your analogy, kata is a tool (eg, Allen wrench) and mma is what the tool makes (eg, a chair).

It’s possible that some tools will be more or less helpful depending on the product. But that’s a different (and interesting discussion).

The point here is that, for the purposes of this discussion, kata is analogous to any other tool (eg, drills, sparring, cardio, technical instruction) and the only people competent to creatively use both is someone who does both.

Also, problems start to pop up if how to use the tool becomes the focus instead of what the tool is used to create. If that makes sense.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So I’m doing some wrist/elbow locks with some guys that I know and a few from other styles. I can stop some of these with structure alone. I think these work best on someone who is not familiar with the set up. They are far more effective at full speed but the chance of injury is significantly higher. Sure enough, one guy goes full speed and wrecks a guys elbow. These are not beginner, they are all past 10 years of training in various arts. My question to you is, what’s the happy medium for you on pressure testing? Some things just don’t work without speed and strength, but when applied with speed and strength they potentially work too well for safe practice or sparring. In other words, it works when it works but that has everything to do with whether there is real intention.

There are techniques I won’t apply anything near fully at live speed. Most of them, I can feel when it’s fully available- structure is broken, and I’ve gotten to the last point before the lock would start - and can abandon them at that point. It doesn’t work for committed sparring, since I have to commit to the technique, then abandon it without any payoff, but it’s the best way I know to work on bridging the gap between drills and live application.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

There are techniques I won’t apply anything near fully at live speed. Most of them, I can feel when it’s fully available- structure is broken, and I’ve gotten to the last point before the lock would start - and can abandon them at that point. It doesn’t work for committed sparring, since I have to commit to the technique, then abandon it without any payoff, but it’s the best way I know to work on bridging the gap between drills and live application.

You know, that’s exactly the type of answer I’m looking for. Your personal experiences are important to me. Thank you.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You know, that’s exactly the type of answer I’m looking for. Your personal experiences are important to me. Thank you.

I'll add that I only think this approach is useful where you have other options to handle the same situation. I'm not sure that sentence made as much sense as I expected, so I'm going to try to clarify.

If I were not generally competent at, say, working from my knees on the ground to control someone else on the ground, I wouldn't have the "feel" I need to know that I had the right amount of control of the situation (their structure compromised, not in a situation where they're likely to be able to resist in the direction I intend to take them, etc.). I won't be able to judge whether the technique I came close to - but never actually applied - would actually have been available.

Without a foundation in live grappling against a resisting opponent, it turns into something like kids playing "war". You think you "got him", he says "you missed". If you've worked enough in a similar situation with full resistance, you are less likely to be wrong in thinking you could have finished that technique.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I'll add that I only think this approach is useful where you have other options to handle the same situation. I'm not sure that sentence made as much sense as I expected, so I'm going to try to clarify.

If I were not generally competent at, say, working from my knees on the ground to control someone else on the ground, I wouldn't have the "feel" I need to know that I had the right amount of control of the situation (their structure compromised, not in a situation where they're likely to be able to resist in the direction I intend to take them, etc.). I won't be able to judge whether the technique I came close to - but never actually applied - would actually have been available.

Without a foundation in live grappling against a resisting opponent, it turns into something like kids playing "war". You think you "got him", he says "you missed". If you've worked enough in a similar situation with full resistance, you are less likely to be wrong in thinking you could have finished that technique.

Thank you for that. The issue I’m concerned with is that I’m trying not to injure people but I feel lIke I need to apply the techniques to full submission or we are, as you say, “ playing war” which I have no interest in doing. I’m finding that several people just immediately tap before I’ve even applied the technique because they fear the pain. It’s not too helpful. I find that in order to really get the complete theory on each technique I need to have it applied to me successfully. That way I can start finding counters immediately. There is also a gorilla there that goes full force every time on everyone, I don’t go easy on him but he is kind of flailing through the techniques with brute strength rather than finesse. It’s a mixed bag of people with varied backgrounds and experience and you never know who will be there for the open practice sessions. We aren’t sparring in this environment just picking up and practicing a new technique each time and going over the ones we have learned already. I am having a great time learning new stuff, just trying to squeeze the most from each session. For Aikido and jujitsu guys I’m sure a lot of these techniques are pretty basic. From a primarily striker background, it’s like a secret room in the toy store. Thanks again!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Thank you for that. The issue I’m concerned with is that I’m trying not to injure people but I feel lIke I need to apply the techniques to full submission or we are, as you say, “ playing war” which I have no interest in doing. I’m finding that several people just immediately tap before I’ve even applied the technique because they fear the pain. It’s not too helpful. I find that in order to really get the complete theory on each technique I need to have it applied to me successfully. That way I can start finding counters immediately. There is also a gorilla there that goes full force every time on everyone, I don’t go easy on him but he is kind of flailing through the techniques with brute strength rather than finesse. It’s a mixed bag of people with varied backgrounds and experience and you never know who will be there for the open practice sessions. We aren’t sparring in this environment just picking up and practicing a new technique each time and going over the ones we have learned already. I am having a great time learning new stuff, just trying to squeeze the most from each session. For Aikido and jujitsu guys I’m sure a lot of these techniques are pretty basic. From a primarily striker background, it’s like a secret room in the toy store. Thanks again!

If I know the technique well, and know it can easily injure, I’m fast to tap out. I’ll also be able to tell a partner whether they really had it or not. Sometimes I’d have to say, “Sorry. I tapped too soon, you didn’t have control of my wrist yet.” But more often, if they asked why I tapped so soon, the answer was, “You already had it, you just hadn’t locked it yet. Nothing I did was going to prevent it, and trying would just make N injury more likely.”

Many of these sorts of techniques have at least one “fail” that still causes injury. I watched a training partner get a broken 4th metacarpal because he was waiting for the pain (the lock was a bit off, and had leverage on the bone, rather than pressure in the wrist joint).

 

[isshinryuronin]

“You already had it, you just hadn’t locked it yet. Nothing I did was going to prevent it, and trying would just make N injury more likely.”

Many, many years ago during my very short time in jiu-jutsu, I had the honor to engage in randori with a Russian Olympic judo champion. He quickly got me into an arm bar and waited for me to tap out. For some reason I felt no pain or dangerous pressure and despite his several inquiries, I did not submit. He finally released the hold (no doubt he feared making me angry and that I'd kick is a**). I'm sure there was some tweek he could have done to cause injury. There is often a fine line between safe and unsafe, pain and injury. It's nice if your partner knows the difference.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Many, many years ago during my very short time in jiu-jutsu, I had the honor to engage in randori with a Russian Olympic judo champion. He quickly got me into an arm bar and waited for me to tap out. For some reason I felt no pain or dangerous pressure and despite his several inquiries, I did not submit. He finally released the hold (no doubt he feared making me angry and that I'd kick is a**). I'm sure there was some tweek he could have done to cause injury. There is often a fine line between safe and unsafe, pain and injury. It's nice if your partner knows the difference.

It’s that fine line I’m treading. I don’t tap until it’s fully locked, I want a partner that’s on that same page with me. I don’t want to half *** the training but I don’t want to give or receive injury either.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

If I know the technique well, and know it can easily injure, I’m fast to tap out. I’ll also be able to tell a partner whether they really had it or not. Sometimes I’d have to say, “Sorry. I tapped too soon, you didn’t have control of my wrist yet.” But more often, if they asked why I tapped so soon, the answer was, “You already had it, you just hadn’t locked it yet. Nothing I did was going to prevent it, and trying would just make N injury more likely.”

Many of these sorts of techniques have at least one “fail” that still causes injury. I watched a training partner get a broken 4th metacarpal because he was waiting for the pain (the lock was a bit off, and had leverage on the bone, rather than pressure in the wrist joint).

Very very easy to destroy small joints with these. Even the lower level ones.

 

[Flying Crane]

Thank you for that. The issue I’m concerned with is that I’m trying not to injure people but I feel lIke I need to apply the techniques to full submission or we are, as you say, “ playing war” which I have no interest in doing. I’m finding that several people just immediately tap before I’ve even applied the technique because they fear the pain. It’s not too helpful. I find that in order to really get the complete theory on each technique I need to have it applied to me successfully. That way I can start finding counters immediately. There is also a gorilla there that goes full force every time on everyone, I don’t go easy on him but he is kind of flailing through the techniques with brute strength rather than finesse. It’s a mixed bag of people with varied backgrounds and experience and you never know who will be there for the open practice sessions. We aren’t sparring in this environment just picking up and practicing a new technique each time and going over the ones we have learned already. I am having a great time learning new stuff, just trying to squeeze the most from each session. For Aikido and jujitsu guys I’m sure a lot of these techniques are pretty basic. From a primarily striker background, it’s like a secret room in the toy store. Thanks again!

As a beginner aikidoist I am finding the method very interesting and I see a lot of value in understanding this approach to leaning and developing skills in joint locking and understanding the structure and how it affects the application of the techniques. This stuff can be effective even with sloppy technique and too much “muscling”. It is far more effective when technique is accurate and timing is precise and structure is on-target. It becomes effortless. That is what we strive for in our practice.

These techniques can be destructive with a very very small application beyond “just enough”. I cannot figure out how to safely practice that kind of thing in a faster-paced sparring scenario. Some things cannot be safely done at full speed like that. So we work methodically and cooperatively to help each other develop the skill without damaging each other. I don’t see another way to do it.