Discussion in 'Members in Motion' started by Azulx, Feb 12, 2017.
Not really no martial arts is about many things. What conditioning do you do in things like tai chi
Bouncing is very common in striking, and it really doesn't do much detriment to the fighter when mixed with grappling, as bouncing can keep the fighter mobile and significantly impact the pace of the fight, depending on how good you are at pacing yourself, and controlling it. After a certain point, bouncing consumes virtually no energy at all, and the only reason you stop it becomes that you want to slow down to a feeling pace to set up attack. Of course, you don't have to bounce, nobody says that. But if you use it right, it's definitely an advantage over those who cannot. Wrestlers don't bounce, simply because, they are always "in the pocket." This means that leaning forward, front-heavy is advantageous, which eliminates the want for such footwork. This
should be taken with a grain of salt too - if it was that easy to time stand-up bounces (which really aren't even bounces, they're really just hip shifts) for a successful shot, one of the best wrestlers in the UFC couldn't possibly think of bouncing, ever - he should know better, right?
Nope. TJ Dillashaw bounces like a wallaby in training and between fences. Since he's so good at utilising such footwork, coupled with his speed, he can outpace and outstrike most opponents without a sweat, while being dominant in most of his wrestling exchanges.
I'm not saying you're a bad grappler or anything near that. But I think that's an exaggeration.
PS: this was a "touch-sparring" match, like point karate/tkd, so bouncing is pretty much metagame.
Just because one MMA fighter 'bounces' actually proves nothing, it doesn't mean bouncing is good it just means that one MMA fighter bounces. That you think it works for him means little, he may actually be a better fighter if he didn't do it but it's his shtick. Every fighter needs something that makes him different, noticeable so promoters pick him and people buy tickets to watch him fight.
I think you may need considerable more fighting experience to actually state that bouncing is good or that another poster isn't as good as he thinks he is.
I think my main point was that it's not THAT much easier at all for a takedown to occur simply because of the fact the fighter is bouncing. It would have to do with the range, posture and reaction of the target.
That depends on the form of tai chi. I am sure Tai chi chuan which is more combat oriented has some type of body conditioning.
Don't quote me on that because I have never trained in that.
'You think'? How people have you taken down in a pro rules MMA fight? JKW is a very thoughtful poster, he tries things out, has a lot of experience and wouldn't say something about techniques he couldn't prove. I think basing your supposition on one MMA fighter and your own short experience in martial arts doesn't make you right about this. JKW isn't the only experienced martial artist saying bouncing isn't necessary, other very experienced martial artist are saying it too. Sure it works for the odd fighter, though as I said we haven't seen them fight without doing it there's a chance they could be better without it. As for it not using much energy that would be true when you are 16 I imagine but not true when you are older and have larger muscles to feed!
steve vic back in the shiny pants kickboxing days could pull the TKD style off.
He meshed in some good hands though.
Just to throw this in there: about a year ago I had the pleasure of attending a sparring seminar with some members of the Korean Natl. TKD team.....I got constantly yelled at for not bouncing more
Watching the Olympic TKD you can see competitors bounce... doesn't make it a good thing though just makes it Olympic TKD. You don't see them punching much either.
I didn't mean to defend it. I just put it there to say that it's, as you point out, an Olympic TKD thing.
Edited to add: after a quick Youtube consultation it seems to also be an ITF sparring thing
This may seem the case if you spar or fight where grappling and sweeps aren't allowed. Bouncing means that you are not rooted. It also means that you have given your opponent something to time you on. As your opponent I now know when you will be off the ground and when you'll be sinking into your root. I don't bounce and you wouldn't have the advantage that you think you would have.
He knows better. Here's his UFC fight. Clearly there is no bouncing around like TKD
A question (not an assertion) on this. Is it possible that a style's own primary stance is one of the better counters to that style's tactics? It seems likely practitioners would adopt a stance that best fits what they fight against the most (their own style). If that's true (a big "if"), then it would make sense that styles would start to adopt similar stances as there's more mixing (much more mixing today than there was in the '70's). There would also be some cross-pollination of tactics. These could make the styles look more similar, the more they have to deal with each other.
One of my students has several years of Shotokan, and they spar like that (bouncing) even in class.
It's a very easybtrap for a style to set itself up best against itself or similar styles. But I actually suspect therevwas more free mixing in the past than today... Profit oriented schools, liability concerns, even just time available to explore makes ot harder today, i think. (Outside of the special scope of MMA.) But there was a different understanding of mixing, i think. Rather than "I use BJJ on the ground, Thai knees and clinch, etc." There was more taking a piece or technique and incorporating it into your style than i see today. But, that's also just my opinion, too...
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
That's just based on folks' conception of what BB "means". It would be true-ish within NGA, but I have little reason to be concerned about how others use those same colors for their ranks. So long as they are clear within their program what BB really means, that's all that really matters to me.
this is how I will refer to youtube from now on lol
I like belted systems, personally. I just wish we could leave the belts out of these discussions, for precisely the reasons you point to.
This is, indeed, an issue with belt ranks. And it's why, when I travel to another school, I bring both my black belt and a white belt. If I can watch class a bit and confirm that BB means approximately the same thing there, I'll wear the black one (it's more what they'd expect and communicates my level appropriately). If their BB means something drastically different (at least in the context at hand, as it would in a BJJ school), I'll put on the white one to better communicate what they should expect.
I was thinking more about the likelihood that a given school will have students with significant experience in other arts. In the 70's, schools were farther apart, and there were fewer arts to be found in most towns. Today, finding a Karate school and a Tae Kwon Do school in the same area is pretty easy. And students are likely to occasionally leave one and go to the other. I would expect that to have an impact on the other students in the school.
Separate names with a comma.