All martial arts are ruined by their hubris

skribs

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 14, 2013
Messages
7,413
Reaction score
2,503
Apologies for the click-baity title. From my own training in Taekwondo and Hapkido, and what I've seen in several different videos around the web, one theme I keep seeing in martial arts is that an art typically teaches combat only against the style taught by the art.

In some cases, it makes sense for the sport. Obviously a wrestler needs to know how to counter wrestlers, boxers don't need to worry about kicks, and a Taekwondoist doesn't need to have a plan to deal with ankle locks. Just like how I don't expect Tom Brady to go to batting practice, Michael Jordan to work on his bicycle kick, or Tiger Woods to run passing drills. If someone has 5 years experience boxing, I should destroy them in a Taekwondo match. I should be no match for them in the boxing ring.

But I'm not looking at sports right now, I'm looking at martial arts.

One-Step Punch Defense
The self defense we learn in my Taekwondo classes, and from a lot of the videos I've seen covering more traditional versions (as opposed to "modern" or "practical" versions) of Taekwondo and Karate are one-step punches. These are trained to defend against a punch that comes in just like a punch from a poomsae or kata: step forward into front stance and throw your weight into that punch.

Now, the "practical" application of this is that you're defending against a haymaker, instead of a string of punches. Because most people who are going to sucker punch you are going to use a haymaker (and hopefully those with the mindset to train martial arts won't use them aggressively on the street). But still, if someone is using boxing style punches, half the techniques will be different when dealing with a right cross than dealing with the right reverse punch. If someone is using a more symmetrical type of punching, like Wing Chun, then the one-step drills will also fall flat.

Wing Chun
While we're on the subject of Wing Chun, most of the drills I've seen for it seem to assume the person you're fighting knows Wing Chun. I don't know that I've seen another art that has a similar style. Now, I haven't trained in the art, so this is from an outside perspective, but most of what I've seen in Wing Chun videos are how to progress through that style of fighting. Most of those drills wouldn't really even apply to another art.

It's not that other arts would beat those drills. It's that they wouldn't even apply, because the techniques appear to be counters to things I've only ever seen done in Wing Chun.

This is why I mention hubris. Obviously, the Wing Chun fighters, and especially the masters in the art, believe Wing Chun to be the best art. Since Wing Chun is the best art, if you can defend yourself against a Wing Chun fighter, you can defend yourself against any fighter. (I'm using a bit of hyperbole here, I hope you realize). But the end result is you have a martial art where most of the drills are focused on fighting against a style specific to that art.

Hapkido
Along the same lines, you have hapkido. Hapkido's primary method of submitting the enemy is with wristlocks. What does hapkido generally teach? Defenses against someone grabbing your wrist. It's not quite the same as drilling against its own techniques, but it still takes the focus of your wrist needing to be defended and your attacker's wrist being the source of his destruction.

Part of my insight into hapkido may be limited by the fact that Hapkido at my school is basically an elective addition to our Taekwondo curriculum, so we take only that which Hapkido does better than Taekwondo and focus on the grappling and joint locks. But the theme still seems to be the same. Hapkido assumes wrists are a weak link that you need to protect in yourself and attack in your enemy.

Thoughts
  • This post may come across as a rant, and it maybe kind of is. It's partially tongue-in-cheek, but partially serious, too.
  • I think the problem with Taekwondo is that so much sparring time is dedicated to the point-sparring kicking game (at least in KKW schools) that you don't get to do much scenario sparring or more freestyle sparring. So in this case, it may be a case of the sport interfering with the art, than a flaw in the art itself.
  • Wing Chun, I obviously don't have enough experience to comment on the entirety of the curriculum, and perhaps I'm off base in my assessment of their drills. It's just an observation I've made as an outsider.
  • And as to Hapkido, I did admit that we have a focused version of Hapkido to remove redundancy with our Taekwondo training, and as we advance in Hapkido we do learn more than just wrist locks and wrist grab defenses.
  • But with all those caveats aside, I do believe that most martial arts do come from the mindset of "this art is the best" (otherwise, why practice it?) and then because "this art is the best" the best defense is defense against that art.
  • I think this is a big reason why MMA is so popular, and even with its limitations its important - because it provides failure drills by someone outside the art, and forces martial artists to think about their techniques from another perspective.
  • One reason why martial arts might primarily train against themselves is because that's what the fighters are good at. It doesn't make sense to train to fight against a boxer if none of your students are boxers. And you're not going to get good feedback at defeating a wrestling shoot if none of your training partners actually know how to shoot for the leg.

Questions
  1. Does this make sense? Or is it just insane ramblings on my part?
  2. How does an art "get over itself" and train to fight against other arts? Or is that up to the individual fighter to look at what he needs to learn to defeat another art?
  3. Where am I wrong in my understanding of these arts and the defense drills they provide?
  4. What are some other examples of a martial art primarily fighting against itself in its drills?
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
One-Step Punch Defense

I have personally only done that with a kick in a free sparring session which was more of a step sparring given the belt difference.

Apart from the fact i was unsure if i could damage the persons ankle/foot it hurt myself as it was a knife hand. (only pain, no lasting injury to my knowledge)

I personally dislike it, the school in question is sport based so thats more of a tool to get your co ordination up/to be able to throw walking punches etc. The guard is enpthisied in everything but Patterns from my observations or at my level.

I will most likely never use it in actual fight and in the play fight i did tradtional blocking my hand got punched and i nearly threw my fist into a wall/cabinet.* The sessions of just practicing blocking against another person seems much better than patterns in learning it plus i belive in the conditioning aspect of getting used to taking a lot of force in your blocking surfaces so your arm isnt done after two blocks or something like that or at least so you are used to the pain which is inflicted to yourself.

90% sure you know my views on patterns anyway. :p

*I didnt do it properly nor did i have a guard up etc no reason to.


Edit: I can almost guarantee most traditional styles wont let me fight how i want to fight, eg if i say i want to do vertical punches (which we all know i am fond of now) they will provably be non comprising given it might not be taught to low belts and isnt in Patterns.
Covertly and with pad/sparring i might have more luck as i have done a pad session with vertical punches with little complaint, Instructor either didnt know (more likely) or care.

I will get back to you when i start going again and see how well it goes wanting to the type of punch i want to do. Overtly say i want to do X punch and not Y. Perfectly fine if they complain about my technique though. :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:

wab25

Master Black Belt
Joined
Sep 22, 2017
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
1,222
Its time to connect the dots. Here is what you said in another thread you started:
Learn the rules first, and the exceptions later. This also applies to learning the "primary" application of a motion, and then learning other applications for similar motions; and also applies to learning the "primary" way of doing a technique, and then learning variations of that technique.

For example, always keep your hands up! That is a rule. Of course, at high levels of Taekwondo sparring, many of the Olympic fighters keep their hands down, because they're going to use footwork to avoid being hit. But you don't teach a new fighter to fight with their guard down. You teach them to keep their guard up and later teach them when to keep it down, if they'll need to use that exception.

Similarly, as it applies to learning the primary and secondary application, if you throw too many possibilities at someone right away, it can be hard for them to make sense of it all. An outward circular motion with the hand can be used as a block, as a grab escape, a grab counter, or as a guard clear. If you just teach the motion without an application in can appear abstract, but if you sell the motion as an infomercial (it can be any of these hundreds of things, just call now!) it remains just as abstract. But if you teach the motion within applications and give more applications as students advance and experiment, then they'll get it a lot easier.

As to learning the primary way and then variants of doing a certain technique, it's the same as above. Front snap kicks can be done with the heel, ball of the foot, or instep, depending on your target and training. If you teach all three options, then it might overwhelm students as they're learning the proper form. Having them work on one at a time can be much easier for the learning process.
You make a good case for giving people a "primary" application for the movement that they are working on, even though that movement could be many things. This is what one steps are... you told them this could block a punch, now they get to block a punch. It is just as set up as it was when doing it solo, in the form or kata. It is just more visible. And it allows you to see how effective your movements are... are you off the line, do you have structure in your "block," are you at the proper distance to counter...? When its time to look at the secondary and or other applications, these become great ways to set up that application to learn the application. As you said, this is step 1 in learning, not the final step.

Once these ideas, proper movement, getting off line, proper distance, proper timing, proper structure... are learned, they can be applied in many different ways. In fact, I would say that if you can not apply these things in other ways and in other situations, you haven't really learned anything from that movement, kata, form yet. This is what sparring / randori are supposed to be for. You are supposed to evaluate not so much whether you won or lost, but what were you able to translate and use from your kata / form. Were you able to find a new application for a movement you already know. This idea of randori or sparring should include people of different styles, so you can see and learn how your style interacts with other styles. You are correct, MMA forces that a bit. But there is no reason you can't go out and play with other arts and learn similar things on your own.

Go back and do more reading on that Shu-Ha-Ri bit I mentioned in the other thread. What you will see, the more you understand that method, is that most people are working on the Shu part. This is the copying step. They get really good at copying the form or kata. Then they get their shiny new black belt, and think they have learned and or mastered a thing... when really all they are doing is copying. And half the time they don't even know what they are copying or why... except that it is kata or form. This is why black belt is considered the beginning... you have now learned the alphabet (the forms or kata) and even how to make words... but now you can start to learn the grammar, paragraph construction... all the rest of the things. Not too many people really get to the Ha part, and many who do, get shunned by others in their own art for diverging. The others in their art are still stuck in the Shu part, copying because thats all they know. How dare someone modify or diverge? Well, thats by design... Ha! (see what I did their? ;)) Very few people make it to the Ri stage. Although this method is very Japanese, many arts follow this pattern, or are supposed to. (TKD and Hapkido are so influenced by Japanese arts, that they should be following this method as well... though in Korean terms)

Along the same lines, you have hapkido. Hapkido's primary method of submitting the enemy is with wristlocks. What does hapkido generally teach? Defenses against someone grabbing your wrist. It's not quite the same as drilling against its own techniques, but it still takes the focus of your wrist needing to be defended and your attacker's wrist being the source of his destruction.
If that is your take on what you are learning in Hapkido, you need to go back and really look at what is going on. The wrist lock drills should be teaching you a lot more than just hold here and bend there. There should be a connection made, a blend, an off balance, and redirection made. That they are tapping to the wrist being bent is almost irrelevant, if you are doing it correctly. If done correctly, you should have a good structure and their structure should be compromised such that they cannot attack you. You should have their balance such that you could shove them away, throw them, punch them, use your TKD kicks on an unprotected target or damage the joint you are locking. (or all of the above, which is my favorite...) You should be learning how the joints and body connect, how they effect one another and how to manipulate the other guys body. There is a lot hidden behind those wrist locks.
 

now disabled

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jul 9, 2018
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
200
I have personally only done that with a kick in a free sparring session which was more of a step sparring given the belt difference.

Apart from the fact i was unsure if i could damage the persons ankle/foot it hurt myself as it was a knife hand. (only pain, no lasting injury to my knowledge)

I personally dislike it, the school in question is sport based so thats more of a tool to get your co ordination up/to be able to throw walking punches etc. The guard is enpthisied in everything but Patterns from my observations or at my level.

I will most likely never use it in actual fight and in the play fight i did tradtional blocking my hand got punched and i nearly threw my fist into a wall/cabinet.* The sessions of just practicing blocking against another person seems much better than patterns in learning it plus i belive in the conditioning aspect of getting used to taking a lot of force in your blocking surfaces so your arm isnt done after two blocks or something like that or at least so you are used to the pain which is inflicted to yourself.

90% sure you know my views on patterns anyway. :p

*I didnt do it properly nor did i have a guard up etc no reason to.


Edit: I can almost guarantee most traditional styles wont let me fight how i want to fight, eg if i say i want to do vertical punches (which we all know i am fond of now) they will provably be non comprising given it might not be taught to low belts and isnt in Patterns.
Covertly and with pad/sparring i might have more luck as i have done a pad session with vertical punches with little complaint, Instructor either didnt know (more likely) or care.

I will get back to you when i start going again and see how well it goes wanting to the type of punch i want to do. Overtly say i want to do X punch and not Y. Perfectly fine if they complain about my technique though. :p

Where did you do all this blocking may I ask?

I'd suggest that if you go and train in a specific art then you by dint of being there, you are thereby saying you will practice and train the way the school teaches, or am I wrong there ?

If you go to a school and you try and pull out all the things you think you know, then ether you will get shown the door, or if your up against a high rank and you try to pull something you might not like the response. Please don't say that if you get knocked down or the like your learning as that mind set kinda went out with the gladiators in the arena.

You really need to start actually training as opposed to jumping around like you do. Sorry harsh but imo true and logical
 
OP
skribs

skribs

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 14, 2013
Messages
7,413
Reaction score
2,503
Its time to connect the dots. Here is what you said in another thread you started:

You make a good case for giving people a "primary" application for the movement that they are working on, even though that movement could be many things. This is what one steps are... you told them this could block a punch, now they get to block a punch. It is just as set up as it was when doing it solo, in the form or kata. It is just more visible. And it allows you to see how effective your movements are... are you off the line, do you have structure in your "block," are you at the proper distance to counter...? When its time to look at the secondary and or other applications, these become great ways to set up that application to learn the application. As you said, this is step 1 in learning, not the final step.

Once these ideas, proper movement, getting off line, proper distance, proper timing, proper structure... are learned, they can be applied in many different ways. In fact, I would say that if you can not apply these things in other ways and in other situations, you haven't really learned anything from that movement, kata, form yet. This is what sparring / randori are supposed to be for. You are supposed to evaluate not so much whether you won or lost, but what were you able to translate and use from your kata / form. Were you able to find a new application for a movement you already know. This idea of randori or sparring should include people of different styles, so you can see and learn how your style interacts with other styles. You are correct, MMA forces that a bit. But there is no reason you can't go out and play with other arts and learn similar things on your own.

Go back and do more reading on that Shu-Ha-Ri bit I mentioned in the other thread. What you will see, the more you understand that method, is that most people are working on the Shu part. This is the copying step. They get really good at copying the form or kata. Then they get their shiny new black belt, and think they have learned and or mastered a thing... when really all they are doing is copying. And half the time they don't even know what they are copying or why... except that it is kata or form. This is why black belt is considered the beginning... you have now learned the alphabet (the forms or kata) and even how to make words... but now you can start to learn the grammar, paragraph construction... all the rest of the things. Not too many people really get to the Ha part, and many who do, get shunned by others in their own art for diverging. The others in their art are still stuck in the Shu part, copying because thats all they know. How dare someone modify or diverge? Well, thats by design... Ha! (see what I did their? ;)) Very few people make it to the Ri stage. Although this method is very Japanese, many arts follow this pattern, or are supposed to. (TKD and Hapkido are so influenced by Japanese arts, that they should be following this method as well... though in Korean terms)

My point is, for the most part in a one-step drill, you're training AGAINST a single punch with a step. If that's the type of punch you always train against, what are you going to do against a boxer who throws a jab (the other hand than you've trained to defend), pulls back his cross after it lands/misses, or throws an uppercut? What are you going to do if you go against a Wing Chun fighter who uses inside leverage on his strikes?

It's not about YOUR technique. It's about the technique the other person is using. There's a big difference between a haymaker, a 1-2-hook-uppercut combo, and a fast combo of centerline straight punches. If all you ever train against is a haymaker, are you going to be prepared to deal with left hand or deal with combos?

Like I expanded on in my thoughts, I think in another art, like kickboxing or karate, there will probably be more sparring that allows you to explore these concepts in full and expand on the drills. But because KKW schools tend to teach WT sparring, 95-100% of your sparring in a KKW school is going to be towards the kick game. So maybe the issue here is that the teaching on punch defense ends at the drill stage instead of being allowed to move into sparring (especially since punches are restricted and generally of little use to the point game).

But from my experience, we generally practice against a haymaker, and don't get to deal much with other styles of punching coming at us. So is that because a haymaker is the most likely punch you'll see in a street fight? Is it because the training stops before sparring? Is it because the Taekwondo fighters generally don't throw punching combos, so we don't train against it?

If that is your take on what you are learning in Hapkido, you need to go back and really look at what is going on. The wrist lock drills should be teaching you a lot more than just hold here and bend there. There should be a connection made, a blend, an off balance, and redirection made. That they are tapping to the wrist being bent is almost irrelevant, if you are doing it correctly. If done correctly, you should have a good structure and their structure should be compromised such that they cannot attack you. You should have their balance such that you could shove them away, throw them, punch them, use your TKD kicks on an unprotected target or damage the joint you are locking. (or all of the above, which is my favorite...) You should be learning how the joints and body connect, how they effect one another and how to manipulate the other guys body. There is a lot hidden behind those wrist locks.

The structure not being compromised is what allows us to get the tap. And the structure is usually not compromised as a combination of footwork and a wristlock.

Like I said, I am just an orange belt in Hapkido. I've been doing Taekwondo 6 days a week for 4 years, plus another 5 years before that of 3 days a week. I've done Hapkido once a week for 2 years. So my knowledge of Taekwondo and my position in the curriculum is much more advanced. So some of this may come with time (and having been the partner for blue, red, and black belts, I know some of it will come). But even as other things are added in, it still seems to be about 50% wrist grabs and 60% wrist locks.

There are other ways to accomplish what you say with the wrist locks. Muay Thai does this with the clinch. Wrestling to some degree with overhooks and underhooks. Judo with shoulder grabs, hip throws, and armbars. BJJ with chokes. All of these clinching or grappling techniques seek to gain leverage on your attacker. But different arts focus on different targets, and Hapkido seems to focus on the wrist.[/quote][/QUOTE]
 

pdg

Senior Master
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
3,568
Reaction score
1,034
Like I expanded on in my thoughts, I think in another art, like kickboxing or karate, there will probably be more sparring that allows you to explore these concepts in full and expand on the drills.

Obviously I can't speak for every school, but maybe try taekwon-do instead of taekwondo...

All of our step/set sparring drills use attacks and defences on both sides, with different attacks.

Kicks of various types, punches, hammerfists (to use a generic term), knifehand, spearhand, thrusts, etc.

Random in class free sparring is way more open on technique than the wt/kkw ruleset, and once a month or so the kickboxers and taekwondoin mix in.

Oh, and even when scoring is done, we don't stop for each point...
 

wab25

Master Black Belt
Joined
Sep 22, 2017
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
1,222
It's not about YOUR technique. It's about the technique the other person is using.
Yes and no. First, you have to have your own technique. This is what the one steps are, they are about you developing your technique. Once you have developed your technique to a point, you need to learn to apply it. One steps are not about applying the technique in a real situation. They are about teaching you a technique. In TKD when you teach a newbie to kick, you don't have him spar full contact. You teach him the parts, then the whole of the kick... in the air. Then you may move to using pads. Then a heavy bag. Then you may have some drills to kick at the proper time and distance. Then you start the sparring thing. Even MMA, BJJ and wrestling follow this pattern: show the technique, try the technique, drill the technique, increase the resistance, then free spar and try to apply.

My point is, for the most part in a one-step drill, you're training AGAINST a single punch with a step. If that's the type of punch you always train against, what are you going to do against
You are answering your own question here. Train against different types of punches, after you have developed your technique.

If you always train against the one step punch, you are stuck in the Shu stage. You are just copying and don't know what it is that you are copying. You need to take it out of the box and play with it. Read that again: You need to take it out of the box. That is, this is an exercise for the student to do, regardless of what your instructor does or does not do.

The structure not being compromised is what allows us to get the tap. And the structure is usually not compromised as a combination of footwork and a wristlock.
Are you saying that if you applied a wrist lock to me that my structure would not be compromised? If you are applying a wrist lock to me, my structure had better be compromised, or you will be the one to tap or hit the floor. When you apply a wrist lock to me, your structure needs to be intact and correct, mine needs to be compromised.

There are other ways to accomplish what you say with the wrist locks. Muay Thai does this with the clinch. Wrestling to some degree with overhooks and underhooks. Judo with shoulder grabs, hip throws, and armbars. BJJ with chokes. All of these clinching or grappling techniques seek to gain leverage on your attacker. But different arts focus on different targets, and Hapkido seems to focus on the wrist.
Okay. I agree. Figure out how to get these same things from your wrist locks. These are the things you should be getting from all those wrist locks. (they will also make your lock more effective)
 

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,568
Reaction score
7,602
Location
Lexington, KY
Unfortunately most martial arts students don't have the opportunity to practice their techniques regularly against skilled practitioners of other martial arts. Still, there are things an instructor can do to maximize the chance that their students can generalize their skills for application against a wide range of opponents.

One very important component is of this process is regular sparring/free-form exercises where participants are not forced to limit themselves to a particular style of movement. Every drill has rules imposed for the sake of safety or focusing on a particular skillset (grappling only, striking only, striking and takedowns with no groundwork, groundwork only, no gouging the eyes, whatever). Within those boundaries, participants should be able to try whatever works for them. If your sparring partner throws a boxing punch or a karate punch or a wing chun punch or an untrained brawlers punch, it's your job to deal with it. "He didn't throw the right kind of punch" is not an excuse for being hit.

One side effect of engaging in this type of training regularly is that practitioners learn to instinctively apply principles rather than just executing memorized techniques that depend on an opponent moving in a particular stylized way.

Another is that instructors will be familiar with the most common movement patterns of untrained individuals as well as those typical of more skilled fighters.

I've been fortunate enough to have the experience of grappling and/or sparring with wrestlers, judoka, jiu-jiteiros, capoeristas, karateka, wing chunners, boxers, samboists, MMA fighters, nak muay, aikidoka, power lifters, football players, completely untrained people, and many more. When teach new students, I don't start them out with "this is a counter to such-and-such a specialized BJJ technique." Instead I start them out with common situations and attacks that they might encounter from an untrained fighter and I show them highly generalizable moves which will work not only against these untrained attacks but also more sophisticated , trained versions. I emphasize the principles that make the techniques work so that when they have to modify the defense for a different attack it makes sense and isn't just memorization.
 

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,568
Reaction score
7,602
Location
Lexington, KY
Are you saying that if you applied a wrist lock to me that my structure would not be compromised? If you are applying a wrist lock to me, my structure had better be compromised, or you will be the one to tap or hit the floor. When you apply a wrist lock to me, your structure needs to be intact and correct, mine needs to be compromised.
I tell my students over and over again. The fundamental requirement for any throw is that you compromise your opponent's structure without compromising your own in the process. The same applies to sweeps, joint locks, and just about everything else in jiu-jitsu.
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
Where did you do all this blocking may I ask?

I'd suggest that if you go and train in a specific art then you by dint of being there, you are thereby saying you will practice and train the way the school teaches, or am I wrong there ?

If you go to a school and you try and pull out all the things you think you know, then ether you will get shown the door, or if your up against a high rank and you try to pull something you might not like the response. Please don't say that if you get knocked down or the like your learning as that mind set kinda went out with the gladiators in the arena.

You really need to start actually training as opposed to jumping around like you do. Sorry harsh but imo true and logical

I dont overly want to derail this so a quick a response

I have done two TKD styles. This was at the first bloc of attending i did with my first martial art style.

As for the second/third part: Im under the impression martial arts are there to help you find your way of fighting more than not. Obviously if its my first style it influences how i do anything etc. Generally speaking (*in princple) i will concede if its provable to be better than what i do, like i will do what the school teachers until i find something that i like better/works better for me.

It was a friendly sparring match, i did hand strikes mainly and did open palm strikes to avoid any accidental proper punches. They were also to the body and it was without armour. So i sparred how i was comfortable with sparring at that moment.

As for knocked down, if its avoidable you will learn from it. These places exist to give you a safe environment to make mistakes as opposed to making them with your life on the line.

*Dont know which works better in that line.




Also tying into the above post by @Tony Dismukes I will gladly step in as a "untrained" brawler for practice when i am confident in not maiming someone by accident in sparing and wont cause offence to be maimed if i hit harder by accident etc etc. :p
 

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,568
Reaction score
7,602
Location
Lexington, KY
There are other ways to accomplish what you say with the wrist locks. Muay Thai does this with the clinch. Wrestling to some degree with overhooks and underhooks. Judo with shoulder grabs, hip throws, and armbars. BJJ with chokes. All of these clinching or grappling techniques seek to gain leverage on your attacker. But different arts focus on different targets, and Hapkido seems to focus on the wrist
Just to be picky, BJJ applies those concepts with clinching, overhooks, underhooks, shoulder grabs, hip throws, armbars, chokes, and wristlocks. (Also sweeps, trips, leglocks, and more.) :)
 

Buka

Sr. Grandmaster
Staff member
MT Mentor
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
12,930
Reaction score
10,397
Location
Maui
Without hubris in Martial Arts there would be no Master Ken.

Oh, the humanity.
 
OP
skribs

skribs

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 14, 2013
Messages
7,413
Reaction score
2,503
Yes and no. First, you have to have your own technique. This is what the one steps are, they are about you developing your technique. Once you have developed your technique to a point, you need to learn to apply it. One steps are not about applying the technique in a real situation. They are about teaching you a technique. In TKD when you teach a newbie to kick, you don't have him spar full contact. You teach him the parts, then the whole of the kick... in the air. Then you may move to using pads. Then a heavy bag. Then you may have some drills to kick at the proper time and distance. Then you start the sparring thing. Even MMA, BJJ and wrestling follow this pattern: show the technique, try the technique, drill the technique, increase the resistance, then free spar and try to apply.

I understand that the drills are to teach my technique. But the drills also train other things - such as timing, distance, and reactions. Doing the drill for a one-step punch I learn to see the haymaker, and my eyes get practice tracking the punch on the way in.

What I'm not getting out of these drills is how to track and time punches coming from the other side, or how to track different punches. And if I start learning to track that when I need it, then I'm going to get hit in the face. It's a lot better if that experience comes from drills or sparring than from a real fight or a match.

If you always train against the one step punch, you are stuck in the Shu stage. You are just copying and don't know what it is that you are copying. You need to take it out of the box and play with it. Read that again: You need to take it out of the box. That is, this is an exercise for the student to do, regardless of what your instructor does or does not do.

Unfortunately there's not a lot of time to do that while I'm in class. That's the issue I have.

Are you saying that if you applied a wrist lock to me that my structure would not be compromised? If you are applying a wrist lock to me, my structure had better be compromised, or you will be the one to tap or hit the floor. When you apply a wrist lock to me, your structure needs to be intact and correct, mine needs to be compromised.

I'm saying that if I don't do the technique right and my partner has an opening, they will capitalize on it. So I am learning to correctly compromise your structure, because if I don't, I will lose.
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
Without hubris in Martial Arts there would be no Master Ken.

Oh, the humanity.

Hes my role model. :p


One reason why martial arts might primarily train against themselves is because that's what the fighters are good at. It doesn't make sense to train to fight against a boxer if none of your students are boxers. And you're not going to get good feedback at defeating a wrestling shoot if none of your training partners actually know how to shoot for the leg.

Skimmed over this orginally but: I was reading up on Bartitsu,and the main justification of him teaching kicking* (at the time was throwned upon by who he was aiming to teach mainly) is so, you are a good partner to teach kick defences and counters with (and secondly and lesser point, so you can kick if you need to as they might not play by your rules :p)

Just a tidbit i know and ,might explain some things in martial arts also. ( i granted look over this and forget that as a possible reason for anything in any martial art)

* Apparantly
 
OP
skribs

skribs

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 14, 2013
Messages
7,413
Reaction score
2,503
Unfortunately most martial arts students don't have the opportunity to practice their techniques regularly against skilled practitioners of other martial arts. Still, there are things an instructor can do to maximize the chance that their students can generalize their skills for application against a wide range of opponents.

One very important component is of this process is regular sparring/free-form exercises where participants are not forced to limit themselves to a particular style of movement. Every drill has rules imposed for the sake of safety or focusing on a particular skillset (grappling only, striking only, striking and takedowns with no groundwork, groundwork only, no gouging the eyes, whatever). Within those boundaries, participants should be able to try whatever works for them. If your sparring partner throws a boxing punch or a karate punch or a wing chun punch or an untrained brawlers punch, it's your job to deal with it. "He didn't throw the right kind of punch" is not an excuse for being hit.

One side effect of engaging in this type of training regularly is that practitioners learn to instinctively apply principles rather than just executing memorized techniques that depend on an opponent moving in a particular stylized way.

Another is that instructors will be familiar with the most common movement patterns of untrained individuals as well as those typical of more skilled fighters.

I've been fortunate enough to have the experience of grappling and/or sparring with wrestlers, judoka, jiu-jiteiros, capoeristas, karateka, wing chunners, boxers, samboists, MMA fighters, nak muay, aikidoka, power lifters, football players, completely untrained people, and many more. When teach new students, I don't start them out with "this is a counter to such-and-such a specialized BJJ technique." Instead I start them out with common situations and attacks that they might encounter from an untrained fighter and I show them highly generalizable moves which will work not only against these untrained attacks but also more sophisticated , trained versions. I emphasize the principles that make the techniques work so that when they have to modify the defense for a different attack it makes sense and isn't just memorization.

As I mentioned in my reply to @wab25 I feel this is one thing I wish we could do more in TKD. But as I said, our free sparring is usually focused on WT rules. We do this type of sparring in our Hapkido class, and I wish we could bring it over to TKD. Either freestyle sparring, or freestyle games.

I will often take drills we do and modify them and come up with variations, but most people don't (because they still need to master the drill itself). But I don't have a lot of opportunity to get creative, and I do wish I did.
 

now disabled

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jul 9, 2018
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
200
I dont overly want to derail this so a quick a response

I have done two TKD styles. This was at the first bloc of attending i did with my first martial art style.

As for the second/third part: Im under the impression martial arts are there to help you find your way of fighting more than not. Obviously if its my first style it influences how i do anything etc. Generally speaking (*in princple) i will concede if its provable to be better than what i do, like i will do what the school teachers until i find something that i like better/works better for me.

It was a friendly sparring match, i did hand strikes mainly and did open palm strikes to avoid any accidental proper punches. They were also to the body and it was without armour. So i sparred how i was comfortable with sparring at that moment.

As for knocked down, if its avoidable you will learn from it. These places exist to give you a safe environment to make mistakes as opposed to making them with your life on the line.

*Dont know which works better in that line.




Also tying into the above post by @Tony Dismukes I will gladly step in as a "untrained" brawler for practice when i am confident in not maiming someone by accident in sparing and wont cause offence to be maimed if i hit harder by accident etc etc. :p
Go actually train in an art as opposed to talking bout every art .........that will stand you better than anything
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,896
Reaction score
7,432
Location
Covington, WA
Questions
  • Does this make sense? Or is it just insane ramblings on my part?
Makes a lot of sense. Other than that hubris is terrific on a cracker, with lot's of garlic, olive oil, and some nice Kalamatas. Or is that hummus? I can never keep them straight. Point is, sure, there are plenty of things we could unpack and dig into, but for the most part, I think you provide the answer in the preamble.
  • How does an art "get over itself" and train to fight against other arts? Or is that up to the individual fighter to look at what he needs to learn to defeat another art?
Compete against other styles? If the competition doesn't suit your needs, create a new rule set. Dog Brothers, HEMA, MMA, that Chuck Norris team MMA thing, chess-boxing. And you can get a job that relies on the skills you're looking to develop. Cop, prison guard, bouncer, mob enforcer, ER nurse in Denver.

The more you do, the more well rounded you will become. If it's important for you to do X against Y, create a situation where you are routinely doing X against Y. You'll get better at it.
  • Where am I wrong in my understanding of these arts and the defense drills they provide?
Personally, I think you're struggling to articulate the lack of application in these arts. Simply put, in my opinion, you aren't identifying a problem with training. You're identifying the lack of application. You can't fake skills you don't have.
  • What are some other examples of a martial art primarily fighting against itself in its drills?
All of them. Even sports. It's an inherent, unavoidable characteristic of training. You can't replicate application in training. Training is, by definition, not "real life." The only way you can overcome this is to do the thing you're training to do. And this is why, over time, styles get worse. It only takes a generation to see serious issues emerge.
 
D

Deleted member 39746

Guest
Wasn't it extremely short term though?

I legit cant give a accurate response to that. I wouldn't call it extremely short term, but its shorter rather than longer. I have done it enough to do the four directional patterns to perhaps a grading standard at this point. :p
 

Latest Discussions

Top