Traditional or MMA preference

I don't think I intentionally insulted anyone or if I did it wasn't without provocation. Sorry if I did. Veiled Insults ("I use to take karate, but it was no good because of kata and lack of fake fighting"), or tactful derogatory statements are cowardly. I'd rather just hear "TMAs suck and I know because I'm the MMAs bomb", than some weak passive-aggressive attack. If someone gives their opinion and it offends someone else because that was the original intent ("my MMAS is better than TMAs [Shorin Ryu in this particular case]"), then I have every right to defend the counter position.

Again, if you insult a strong and smart person who doesn't wish to deal with things in a cowardly "diplomatic" fashion then you get what you wanted and deserved, right? Don't assume you can say what you want in a nice way and that you won't get checked by someone who feels you.

BTW, Kajukenbo for the most part is an awesome style. Do you use the original Okinawan forms from Naha Te and Shuri/Tomari Te, or are they Parker synthesized forms like most Hawaiian Kempo derived arts?

Thanks and don't back a sneaky attack and then dis someone when they defend their back. Be fair and learn to comprehend the words read, at the least.

This is my last post here, so good luck to all of you. I guess I never got my messages across to anyone here. Seems to be very common to say one things and mean another here in the US of A, and to misjudge, and say stuff that is weak is dope and stuff that is dope is weak. There really is strength in numbers on this forum like all others I've seen. The minority will never win. I guess uniqueness is for artists (wait isn't this Martial ARTS?).

I just wanted to defend my TMAs background (20+ years of Shorinkan Shorin Ryu and Matsumura Orthodox Shorin Ryu) since many do 'Rasslin', MMAs, FMAs, schoolboy karate-American karate-Japanese/Korean karate.

I guess you can't make a dent in rocks with words.

Go punchy-kicky, locky, chokey guys!!!! You're the next person to kick your own butt!

Pitiful.

Laterrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

 

Hey all... My preference is mixed martial arts mainly because that is what I study. I do have an appreciation for traditional martial arts and can respect the discipline that is inherent in the various traditional styles.
I do have a gripe with my particular style because they basically cut out all forms from the program. I rather enjoyed the dynamic meditation aspect of the forms that were in our system. My style now focuses on training for various mixed martial martial art, kickboxing, and grappling tournaments.
Don't get me wrong though I really enjoy mixing it up in the ring.

-Vadim

 

I prefer the living over the dead.
If your living things change.

This is not to say I agree with your definitions; (above) as this is ancient wisdom.

 

I voted mma though our class is structured more as traditional ma.
I voted MMA because the main art is study is less than 50 years old and was mainly mixed from 3 styles with some from 2 others and therefore under you definition is mma. But i would like to say it is not the MMA where nobody wears belts an practices forms.

 

There is no perfect Martial Art that has all the elements needed for our modern self-defense needs. The closest thing I have seen is my American Kenpo organization (AKKI) that has integrated ground and weapons curriculum. However, I would still like to complement my Kenpo study with Ju Jitsu down the road to round off my ground fighting skills.

 

I do judo and boxing. It's hard to say whether they are traditional or MMA by these definitions.

Judo is a fairly modern sport martial art, and the curriculum hardly varies from BJJ. Both BJJ and Judo I'd say are traditionally grounded sport arts. This is especially so given that the kata in judo are mostly practised by those who are too old to do sparring.

Boxing is also a sport art. It derives from a sport which used to be bare knuckle and involved lots of standing grappling. Some of the boxers in my gym are also gypsy bare knuckle boxers. They have the same accent as Mickey (Brad Pitt) in Snatch. Is that MMA?

Is tactical shooting MMA or Traditional? (Not that I do shootinhg, it's just for the sake of argument).

Two options on a poll are never enough.

 

Actually any martial art was practiced or developed for the social era of their need. Martial arts were done this way to adapt to changing era/times. Therefore, how can one separate or classify martial arts as either traditional or modern?

 

An interesting point. Yet I would distinguish the two in my personal experience in this way. I think that a lot of styles that label themselves as traditional, have not adapted to some of the science and hazards of actual modern combat. In fact, I researched several dojos, and have found that many do not prepare the students to face an actual violent attack. They cover very little on the emotional and mental aspects that need to be honed as well as the physical, to be prepared for the chaos of a real attack. Also some traditionalists(not all) feel there is nothing to gain in exploring other styles or training methods, even in the face of overwhelming statistics.

 

So in those cases as you posted, everyone suffers.

 

Coming in lat ebut how do you define 'traditional'?

The reason I ask is because someone recently told me that most TMAs were originally mostly very well rounded as 'combat' not just 'hand strikes' or 'foot strikes' or 'ground fighting' and that it's only been over time that the arts have gotten so focused.

So a really traditional approach to TKD would include foot strikes and grappling. A modern approach to TKD would only have foot strikes; so a modern MA wanting to be well rounded could either really go traditional in all of TKD, or would just do modern TKD and then modern Judo, or whataver. Just an example.

I tend to think there may be value in mastery of a more limited set of techniques rather than trying to learn a little of everything; but I'm not a soldier or mercenary, I'm a computer programmer, and my hours per day of MA devotion are not the same as someone who needed to live and die by it generations ago

 

So is versitility the key.

 

Probably the vast majority of students, if ever attacked , would likely suffer. I know this is a bold statement, and I mean no offense to anyone. The fact still remains that if you intend to qualify yourself for self preservation, there is a heck of a lot more you need to know than mainstream schools offer. I am a combat veteran, had experiences with prison inmates, and work closely with law enforcement in my area, Ive seen many a martial artist go down hard, because they had ne idea what to expect. This not only goes for what to expect from the attacker, but also from yourself. I know this debate goes on quite a bit, and I dont claim to be superior to anyone, but I know how to survive, and it takes more than what the traditional type school setup (in most cases) has to offer.

 

Yes, but the main emphasis of martial arts is that they were developed per the era of their need. Martial arts (for defense) have to change or they could find difficulty to overcome new changes in new eras/societies.

If a traditional, >gasp<, martial art does not do this, perhaps they are more into the preservation of a particular traditonal martial art, as a art form?

In a analogy of table/dinning ware. Woodworking. Classic music. Antique restorations...etc.

One can have traditional, as long as there are practical, or updated, areas to be studied/included, per future eras.

 

Agreed, as lond as preservation of your life remains more important than preservation of art.

 

Where is the option for "traditional SD techniques, MMA training methodology"?

 

Hello...

I think if you apply traditional techniques to a MMA training methodology, you are "riding the line" between the two. Not one, or the other. I think the "poll" wanted you to commit to one way. Polls are like that. Rather unfair.

Personally, I think MMA techniques are most complimentary to MMA method training. And traditional techniques most complimentary to same. Of course this is just my opinion, and I cannot be considered an MMA practitioner in any sense of the definition. Either one can be applied in a sporting or self-defense situation though, with minor adjustments.

Just a long time practitioners attempt to make sense of a senseless world... Now, does that make sense???

Thank you,
Milt G.

 

Both i prefer to stick to tradition but also like some of the aspects of the mma style

 

I take my training via the MMA variety, for lack of a better term.......embracing what works for me, and discarding what does not.

 

I apologize if this has already been brought up, I read the first 7 pages of this thread, but I'm running short on time and wanted to put in my 2 cents.

I have trained in one martial art for 24 years, and I have had the opportunity to train with martial artists from other martial arts. I DO encorporate what works for me from these other arts into my martial art. I think it would be foolish to abandon something that works.

My biggest issue with my LIMITED experience with MMA (sports, not eclectic MA) is not from a fighting or self-defense aspect. The primary goal of my martial art is personal development, a.k.a. making oneself a better person. This encompasses physical fitness and being able to defend oneself.. . but it also deals with mental and spiritual development as well. Self-respect, self-discipline, loyalty, etc.. .

I confess I do not know how most MMA gyms train, but what I see on the television represents a lack of humility and respect for their fellow competitors. If any of my students represented themselves like that, they would be in for one whale of a tongue lashing.

 

Going back to the statement of "complete", I beleive that you are never complete in your martial arts training. Everyday should be an ongoing lesson. Just when you think you have seen everything under the sun one of your students can throw a real curve ball at you and cause you to think. I think thats what sets teachers and students aside is that we don't need someone continually giving us instruction rather we should be able to find the lesson for ourselves in whatever we see in daily life. Humbleness is one of the core charecteristics of any true martial artists and believe yourself to be complete and not in any need of any additional learning proves that the said persons mind is closed. I always try to learn something from the lowest of students or the highest of Grand Masters. Thank You for your time.123