Style bashing

[Gerry Seymour]

Sometimes.

Sorry.

This, IMO, is meant to test a specific concept. We test it differently, but also in a not-quite-live approach. If this is purported to be a realistic assessment of multiple attacker defense, it isn't that. If it's meant to be a test for a specific kind of movement and control, it is that.

 

[Headhunter]

I agree.

But of course that would be style bashing.

Not really its not about the style it's how the instructor teaches it and again even if the instructor isn't teaching to a great level and someone still enjoys learning there and training with them then that's great they're still getting out the house and staying active

 

[drop bear]

On the other hand, when you have seen a clip like this and you are afraid to say anything, you are not only untruthful to yourself, you are not doing MA community any good either.

It starts to get more interest after 2.00.

The thing for me is I have trained reality systems that provides the same false feedback.

And untill I got that strong tradie guy who rocks up on his first day and did not know how to partner right so instead of a drill it became a fight. I never even realised that there were two different versions of training.

One is honest with honest feedback and falure and the other is a pleasant fantasy.

 

[Martial D]

That would be more useful if you were talking to the prospective student. Talking to the huckster doesn't do much.

Oh contraire Mon Ami.

Prospective students will often search for information first, and if just one of them reads this thread, or others like it, and it caused them to more closely evaluate their training decisions, then it was worthwhile to write.

I would say many if not most that have 0 experience in this would assume it's all effective, and that they are truly preparing themselves for something they aren't(self defense or combat).

 

[drop bear]

Not really its not about the style it's how the instructor teaches it and again even if the instructor isn't teaching to a great level and someone still enjoys learning there and training with them then that's great they're still getting out the house and staying active

Ok. the next time i see someone basically getting shafted by expending time effort and money on a system that will never deliver on its expectations. And the best we can hope for at the end of this is that the person never has to use it.

I wil use that encouragement.

"It is good to see you getting out of the house and staying active"

 

[Martial D]

Ya, who am I to try to help people, and dispel ********. We should just let hucksters and frauds take peoples money, because its nobodies business.

.......I think not.

I think it's funny that three individuals hit the little disagree button on this...effectively saying that it's perfectly fine to scam people.

QED.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Oh contraire Mon Ami.

Prospective students will often search for information first, and if just one of them reads this thread, or others like it, and it caused them to more closely evaluate their training decisions, then it was worthwhile to write.

I would say many if not most that have 0 experience in this would assume it's all effective, and that they are truly preparing themselves for something they aren't(self defense or combat).

A valid point, though I'm not sure most of the approaches used in discussing those issues with instructors would make as much sense to prospective students. Most aren't digging around on MA fora before they start (some are - we get several a year here). An informative video on YouTube and/or a blog article that will turn up in a search (good SEO) would reach more, and would be more directly communicative to the student.

 

[Headhunter]

I think it's funny that three individuals hit the little disagree button on this...effectively saying that it's perfectly fine to scam people.

QED.

Oh dear you're people are pressing dislike on you again?

 

[Headhunter]

Ok. the next time i see someone basically getting shafted by expending time effort and money on a system that will never deliver on its expectations. And the best we can hope for at the end of this is that the person never has to use it.

I wil use that encouragement.

"It is good to see you getting out of the house and staying active"

Like I said it's none of your business what people do. Get on with your own life you haven't got the right to tell anyone what to do with theirs

 

[drop bear]

This, IMO, is meant to test a specific concept. We test it differently, but also in a not-quite-live approach. If this is purported to be a realistic assessment of multiple attacker defense, it isn't that. If it's meant to be a test for a specific kind of movement and control, it is that.

Yeah. I was thinking that. Because we do a similar drill. And so you are not technically ninjering five guys. but just trying to shorten the time it takes to get feeds and hit them from a different angle and even use multiple guys to gas that one guy out.

And it is still a fantasy approach to that because what is the point of upping the pressure if everyone just becomes extra collapsy to accommodate it.

 

[Martial D]

A valid point, though I'm not sure most of the approaches used in discussing those issues with instructors would make as much sense to prospective students. Most aren't digging around on MA fora before they start (some are - we get several a year here). An informative video on YouTube and/or a blog article that will turn up in a search (good SEO) would reach more, and would be more directly communicative to the student.

Fair enough, but there's no such thing as being too prepared. The standard tiptoing on eggshells to not offend anyone style that is super common here needs some yin to it's yang though, and I don't mind being one of the guys that splashes the cold water, even if it offends some of the more thin skinned among us.

 

[drop bear]

Like I said it's none of your business what people do. Get on with your own life you haven't got the right to tell anyone what to do with theirs

Yes I do.

I am not at all sure where you got that idea from.

I mean you just told me what to do. And you have that right.

 

[Streetfighter2]

I think it's funny that three individuals hit the little disagree button on this...effectively saying that it's perfectly fine to scam people.

QED.

Here have another

 

[Streetfighter2]

Fair enough, but there's no such thing as being too prepared. The standard tiptoing on eggshells to not offend anyone style that is super common here needs some yin to it's yang though, and I don't mind being one of the guys that splashes the cold water, even if it offends some of the more thin skinned among us.

Just stick to talking **** on dead guys that seems to be your area of expertise

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ok. the next time i see someone basically getting shafted by expending time effort and money on a system that will never deliver on its expectations. And the best we can hope for at the end of this is that the person never has to use it.

I wil use that encouragement.

"It is good to see you getting out of the house and staying active"

In the end, that's one of the most important things most of us get out of our training, whether it is fight-effective or not.

Now, this comes back to a recurring question of how much the system matters, and how much the training approach matters. And I think the answer (as with nature vs. nurture) is that they both matter more than some people think and less than others think. For the moment, let's assume all MA pursuits should end up with effective fighting (to remove argument about whether that's the case or not).

If I say "Karate is crap because of kata", that's a pretty clear bias against a training tool, not really supported by any specific evidence. Even if I could assert (with evidence) that kata were less effective than other means (which incidentally, I cannot), that wouldn't be evidence that there's something really wrong with kata. I might be able to make a similar assertion about a 50-pound heavy bag as opposed to a 75-pound one. But just because on is generally better, that doesn't make the other bad, so my evidence wouldn't be enough. And then we have to decide if the training method is actually the style. Some would argue it is, but there's no reason a style based on forms (kata) couldn't be taught without the forms, just by teaching what was in the forms. It would change the training, but not the system (if we define "system" as the collection of techniques, strategies, and tactics).

So, if a style includes some techniques that aren't effective, is that a bad style? I'd argue it depends how they are used, what percentage of the style/focus they are, and probably some other factors. Okay, if it's 50% ineffective (for fighting - remember our assumption here) techniques, that's probably a weak system. But what if it's 10%, or 25%? I'm not sure at what point it starts to become an actual problem. I expect if we looked into the entirety of every system, we'd find some things (perhaps not taught everywhere) that were less-than-optimal. And then we get the real confusion when some of those are actually quite good, but only under very limited circumstances - are those "ineffective" or "specialized"?

Of course, there are some things we can pretty universally agree are ineffective, in that none of us believe they'd work if we stepped in and let them try it on us. The problem is finding the right line between that and a few objectionable practices within a system - a line beyond which we consider the system "bad".

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. I was thinking that. Because we do a similar drill. And so you are not technically ninjering five guys. but just trying to shorten the time it takes to get feeds and hit them from a different angle and even use multiple guys to gas that one guy out.

And it is still a fantasy approach to that because what is the point of upping the pressure if everyone just becomes extra collapsy to accommodate it.

I'd tend to agree. I'd prefer it if this kind of test weren't expected to be 100%. How a person fails (and why) is a more certain test of their skill at something than how often they succeed. That latter measure can be inflated by over-cooperative partners.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Fair enough, but there's no such thing as being too prepared. The standard tiptoing on eggshells to not offend anyone style that is super common here needs some yin to it's yang though, and I don't mind being one of the guys that splashes the cold water, even if it offends some of the more thin skinned among us.

I think the issue is that some folks (and my memory is crap enough that I can't really recall if you've done this) come out too strong against specific practices and approaches, before finding out if they've produced positive results or if there's a good reason for them. I actually welcome folks (including my students) questioning why I do things the way I do. What I don't welcome is someone dismissing what has been effective for folks in the past, because it doesn't fit their image of what should work, or coming in aggressively, rather than starting a discussion.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This, IMO, is meant to test a specific concept.

I will say "to train a special concept" instead.

Train - your opponent cooperates with you.
Test - your opponent does not cooperate with you.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I will say "to train a special concept" instead.

Train - your opponent cooperates with you.
Test - your opponent does not cooperate with you.

Except that the video was actually a test. The over-cooperation was the point DB was making.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you put up a clip like this, you are not basing BJJ but to indicate that some BJJ guy has extended the "sport rule set" a bit too far.

IMO, this kind of comment is good for the BJJ in the long run.