Why do TMAs have more difficulty in the ring/octagon?

[Hanzou]

Depends if you train against being taken down.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVKxEdCdBog
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TRvgw1qIqE0

I think the sprawl is a wee bit more reliable than those counters.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vfmfM357Sdw

Or is they are already in ..
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTNDHodUISw

That's more like it.

 

[Argus]

I'll say the "solo form training" is the major problem.

When you learn a form, it will become your burden for the rest of your life. The day that you throw away your forms, the day that you will be free. You can then concentrate on your

- kick,
- punch,
- lock,
- throw,
- ground work,
- ...

Where is the "dislike" button?

I could not disagree more. Either you do not understand the purpose of forms, or you do not believe that training has any value, and that we should only spar. I do not understand.

Conscious habit forming is essential. That is where you learn to make your techniques and principles viable habits. Proper form training is to allow for the instinctual application of correct technique without having to stop and think about what you're doing. If you don't believe in forming good habits and applying good technique, there's no sense in practicing a martial art.

 

[Argus]

I agree with the rest of your post but I do want to comment on this statement. Yes, MMA has distinct limitations due to it being sport. No option to retreat, restrictions on striking, etc, do differ from TMA to an extent. However, the reason for the disparity between grapplers and TMA practitioners itself lies in the idea that grappling isn't a necessary to those TMAs. Jackie Chan once criticized MMA for it's promotion of the "barbaric" tendency to ground and pound. To him, "honorable" TMAs wouldn't follow up a fall with such a thing, especially in sport. Earnest fighting would itself have to consider the what if. What do you do if someone throws you to the ground and starts beating on you? It happens all the time in real world scenarios.

This is not to disagree with your point. The rules instated do handicap the efficiency of TMAs in the ring, just as it can infuriate me to watch some competitive TKD fighters walk around with their hands and their sides, because blocking with the elbow could break someone's foot. However, the attitude of 'earnest' fighting can itself be an intricate debate when you start to break down the philosophies behind a certain style.

Working within the rules of the game, it's easy to see why grappling could have such a big advantage.

I wouldn't say it is necessary in all cases, though I recognize your point.

Generally, in many TMA's, it's considered a mistake to follow an opponent to the ground, and a bigger one to be knocked to the ground yourself. The thinking goes that you should learn to stay on your feet, and if you knock someone else down, the fight is over as far as you're concerned anyway -- you're free to leave.

Now, I absolutely agree that it's good to learn what to do if you get taken to the ground. And, some TMA's do even cover what to do if you're taken down or fall -- to a limited degree. But ground fighting isn't their focus, because it's generally considered something to be avoided.

I would consider the example you gave in regards to TKD to be a result of sportive training methods, and not an example of TMA approaches, though. Not to say that TKD can't be practiced as a TMA, but many schools tend to be very sport focused, and TKD competitions have rulesets that only really allow for (or reward) kicking.

Heck, even Muay Thai's low round house shin-kicks can result in some nasty injuries in the ring. It's one thing to train with shin protectors all day, and an entirely different one to swing your shin into someone else's, regardless of how much conditioning you've done. Someone recently posted footage of a UFC fighter completely snapping his lower leg this way. The same could be said for practicing your punches with gloves all of the time, or any other training equipment or convention you become overly accustomed to. These things can be a real disadvantage, whether in the real world, or just switching to a different competitive setting.

 

[Buka]

Well yes, because Mayweather would have to deal with grappling, and Rickson wouldn't be allowed to grapple. However, NHB rules don't limit something like Kung Fu the way boxing rules would limit Rickson Gracie. Also, we all know that Boxing is heavily limited to hand techniques. TMAs are supposed to be complete systems of fighting, so they should cover all the bases, including grappling defense.

Am I wrong?



Well no. I was merely pointing out that martial athletes are good fighters outside the cage as well as in. If you're a good fighter, you're a good fighter period. If the goal of a TMA is to develop a good fighter, why would a couple of rules hinder their abilities?

Again, extreme rule sets like Boxing, TKD, Judo are understandable, but we don't even see strong TMA representation in MMA/NHB where the rule sets aren't all that prohibitive for martial arts.

I'm not trying to split hairs here, nor am I trying to be a jerk (my wife says it comes naturally to me, though) but Rickson is as much a Traditional Martial Artist as I know. As is his brother Relson. (the only Gracies I know personally) They train in one and only one style of Martial Arts. I'm sure they have experience with artists of other arts, as I'm pretty sure all TMA guys do, but they train in their art, and only their art. I think of BJJ as a traditional Martial Art. Probably the best one I know, but that's just me. And my opinion.

I'm not sure the goal of a TMA is to develop good fighters, there's more to it than that. However, I do believe the goal of an MMA is strictly regulated to develop good fighters in MMA. But, again, I believe it's all sport specific. If I were planning on competing in MMA - and believe it or not Jorge Rivera offered me a fight in Puerto Rico when I was 54 - I would ONLY go train in an MMA gym. Heck, I wouldn't even train in my own gym. Not because my gym is bad, but it's not geared towards MMA competition. I'd go to my buddy Shawn's gym, who's a better trainer than I am and he has a really nice cage.

As for any martial art being a complete system, I have never believed that to be true. I'd even be willing to bet your life on it. Before the first UFC came along most martial artists didn't know squat about real grappling. Myself not only included, I'm probably the front runner in naiveté in that regard. It's one of the things I will always love about the UFC, it opened a lot of eyes, it helped the Martial Arts in general more than any single thing in my lifetime. And that's saying a lot.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Either you do not understand the purpose of forms, or you do not believe that training has any value,...

I learned my 1st from when I was 7 years old. That was 60 years ago. I have learned more than 50 forms in my life. I understand the purpose of forms, but I still do not believe that form training has any "combat" value (it has health value and no argument on that).

The following training program is much more effective.

One can use

- partner training to "develop" skill,
- sparring/wrestling to "test" skill,
- equipment training to "enhance" skill,
- solo drill training to "polish" skill.

I can write a book about "why form training is a big waste of time from the combat point of view". But that will have nothing to do with this thread discussion.

 

[Blindside]

Where is the "dislike" button?

I could not disagree more. Either you do not understand the purpose of forms, or you do not believe that training has any value, and that we should only spar. I do not understand.

Conscious habit forming is essential. That is where you learn to make your techniques and principles viable habits. Proper form training is to allow for the instinctual application of correct technique without having to stop and think about what you're doing. If you don't believe in forming good habits and applying good technique, there's no sense in practicing a martial art.

I do see the need for forms work, but I think it is often overdone. I also think that if the practitioner does not know the actual application of the movement, much of the repetition is wasted. You give me a technique so that I can practice it in the air to get the mechanics down, practice it on a target so I can get the power generation in, practice on an opponent so I can see application, and then practice it against increasingly less cooperative partners, and finally against completely uncooperative partners, and I will be happy with the training method. Most TMAs never get to that last part, those that do will generally produce respectable fighters.

 

[Hanzou]

I'm not trying to split hairs here, nor am I trying to be a jerk (my wife says it comes naturally to me, though) but Rickson is as much a Traditional Martial Artist as I know. As is his brother Relson. (the only Gracies I know personally) They train in one and only one style of Martial Arts. I'm sure they have experience with artists of other arts, as I'm pretty sure all TMA guys do, but they train in their art, and only their art. I think of BJJ as a traditional Martial Art. Probably the best one I know, but that's just me. And my opinion.

I used to train at a Relson Gjj school, and I agree that Relson and Rickson are moving more towards a TMA slant than other Bjj schools. I was actually going to make a thread about that in the Bjj forum, but decided to start this one first. I love what both of them are doing, and their philosophy about Bjj being more than guard jumping and butt scooting.

That said, there's a pretty big difference with how a Relson/Rickson Gracie school does MA and a TMA school does MA. Rickson and Relson want to move Bjj towards its roots, which is simpler, more brutal, and a lot less pretty. They're not advocating the practice of using 16th century farm equipment, and dozens of pre-arranged forms.

As for any martial art being a complete system, I have never believed that to be true. I'd even be willing to bet your life on it.

Well that's fairly morbid. I believe the goal of most TMA systems is to offer an answer for as many situations as possible. I find it hard to believe that a system as old as Wing Chun for example doesn't offer an answer against a grappling opponent.

 

[Argus]

I do see the need for forms work, but I think it is often overdone. I also think that if the practitioner does not know the actual application of the movement, much of the repetition is wasted. You give me a technique so that I can practice it in the air to get the mechanics down, practice it on a target so I can get the power generation in, practice on an opponent so I can see application, and then practice it against increasingly less cooperative partners, and finally against completely uncooperative partners, and I will be happy with the training method. Most TMAs never get to that last part, those that do will generally produce respectable fighters.

Absolutely. But that experience should then transfer directly into your solo form practice, where it will stay fresh in your mind and body.

I spend a lot of time training at home, and I find that practicing and refining my forms make a huge difference when I go back to school and practice with live partners, both resisting and not. Forms are where you refine and correct your habit. Whenever I find that something isn't quite working right for me, I go back to my form and refine or correct it, and see real results the next time I apply it.

I just think that many practitioners just go the motions of their forms, without really utilizing them as a training method.

 

[K-man]

Well yes, because Mayweather would have to deal with grappling, and Rickson wouldn't be allowed to grapple. However, NHB rules don't limit something like Kung Fu the way boxing rules would limit Rickson Gracie. Also, we all know that Boxing is heavily limited to hand techniques. TMAs are supposed to be complete systems of fighting, so they should cover all the bases, including grappling defense.

Am I wrong?

You are only wrong because of the way you are classifying TMAs. This is my arguement all along. Most forms of karate practised in Japan, as distinct from Okinawa are modified. They may be 'traditional' in that they have been around for a reasonable time but they are totally different to their traditional Okinawan roots. These styles of karate have developed into competitive styles such as Shotokan, Goju Kai and Kyokushin. They have developed to a specific rule set just the same as most TKD or any other sport and hey have developed into systems that rely almost exclusively on striking and kicking. The original styles of karate are complete systems of fighting, including grappling, just not so much of the ground work.

if you were to exempt some of the older styles of martial arts, like Okinawan karate, from your definition then I would agree with a lot of your arguement.

I think the sprawl is a wee bit more reliable than those counters.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vfmfM357Sdw

That's more like it.

Interesting, this one. Herein lies my arguement. This sprawl defence against the shoot is fine for competition and it is part of what I teach. But in this instance the attacker has his head and neck exposed for a downward elbow strike, a technique that is banned in MMA. In my training, especially against weapons, the point of the elbow is my 'go to' preference. Given that target, bearing in mind that it is unlikely your street thug is a highly trained martial artist, anyone training in my style of martial art should have no trouble dealing with a shoot.

And of course my comment on this stems from Angus' mention of allowing grapplers to get under your defence to enable them to achieve the takedown.

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

Well that's fairly morbid. I believe the goal of most TMA systems is to offer an answer for as many situations as possible. I find it hard to believe that a system as old as Wing Chun for example doesn't offer an answer against a grappling opponent.

When it comes to most TCMA they have basic answers to grappling or take downs but never concentrated on advancing it since rolling around on a battle field isn't the smartest thing to do.

The main answer to takedowns and grappling is their weapon training.

Don't get me wrong I love grappling arts and consider it part of my foundation along side with my TMA.

 

[Steve]

Kung fu works if it's trained against resistance and with a mind toward the ring. Cung le is a badass and I wish he'd made the transition to Mma as a younger man. But Kung fu alone won't work. You have to supplement the tma with a another tma, either cacc or freestyle wrestling, Bjj or judo.

Same with Karate, tkd, boxing or any other striking art.

The converse is also true.

Personally, the biggest impediment is mindset. My opinion is that it is common for people who train in some styles to seek out their holes. And uncommon in others.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hanzou]

You are only wrong because of the way you are classifying TMAs. This is my arguement all along. Most forms of karate practised in Japan, as distinct from Okinawa are modified. They may be 'traditional' in that they have been around for a reasonable time but they are totally different to their traditional Okinawan roots. These styles of karate have developed into competitive styles such as Shotokan, Goju Kai and Kyokushin. They have developed to a specific rule set just the same as most TKD or any other sport and hey have developed into systems that rely almost exclusively on striking and kicking. The original styles of karate are complete systems of fighting, including grappling, just not so much of the ground work.

if you were to exempt some of the older styles of martial arts, like Okinawan karate, from your definition then I would agree with a lot of your arguement.

My only issue with that is Korean and Japanese karate practitioners also consider themselves traditional stylists.

Interesting, this one. Herein lies my arguement. This sprawl defence against the shoot is fine for competition and it is part of what I teach. But in this instance the attacker has his head and neck exposed for a downward elbow strike, a technique that is banned in MMA. In my training, especially against weapons, the point of the elbow is my 'go to' preference. Given that target, bearing in mind that it is unlikely your street thug is a highly trained martial artist, anyone training in my style of martial art should have no trouble dealing with a shoot.

And of course my comment on this stems from Angus' mention of allowing grapplers to get under your defence to enable them to achieve the takedown.

I have no problem with a takedown defense like that. My issue is the idea of defending a shoot with a kick to the face. I think that's a pretty laughable TD defense. I didnt get a detailed look at the second one, but that looked iffy as well.

I would also point out that (here in the states at least) wrestling and American football are very common and popular sports taken up by the male population in secondary school and college. Football is the most popular sport in the US by a country mile. Thus, there's a higher than normal chance of running into someone who is highly trained in tackles and takedowns here in the US.

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

I can write a book about "why form training is a big waste of time from the combat point of view". But that will have nothing to do with this thread discussion.

I wouldn't say thats 100% true since in my opinion forms are the encyclopedia of techniques that give you the tools to use in your sparring or real life self defense scenario. (In particular with weapon forms)

As you already said they are great health benefits etc but they do also teach you the proper structure of how your techniques should be done as well.

Now of course if you don't apply the techniques from form training while sparring or with some live resistance training they almost become pointless from a combative point of view.

They are also overdone in many TMA schools putting combative training and technique application on the side burner unfortunately.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

but they do also teach you the proper structure of how your techniques should be done as well.

You won't need form if you just train drills. Your drills may come from your forms but it doesn't have to be. After you have leaned a form, you take it apart, understand it, and then put it back together any way you want as long as it makes sense to you. The best lesson that I have learned in my life is one day my teacher told me that, "Form was designed for teaching and leaning only. It was not designed for training."

You use "partner drill" to develop your skill. You will learn your

- body alignment,
- power generation,
- footwork,
- ...

at this stage.

you then train "solo drill" at home when partner is not available. Since you have already developed your skill, you just use your solo drill to "polish" some minor detail that you may not pay enough attention when you train with partner.

Since your "solo drill" is just your "partner drill without partner", when you have learned the "partner drills", you will get "solo drills" by default. If you link your "solo drills" in a sequence, you will have your form. This form that you have created will truly belong to you.

I had created the following form many years ago. Do I train it? No. Do I ask my students to train it, No. It just serves as a text book, no more and no less. The first 13 moves are the 13 postures. Since the order of those postures are not important, there exist no value to train those 13 moves in sequence. The rest of 24 moves has many combos in it. It makes sense to train

- combo A as move 1, move 2,
- combo B as move 3, move 4, and move 5.

Since combo A and combo B has no logic connection, to train combo A and combo B together as move 1, move 2, move 3, move 4, move 5 is not necessary.

 

[K-man]

My only issue with that is Korean and Japanese karate practitioners also consider themselves traditional stylists.

I have no problem with a takedown defense like that. My issue is the idea of defending a shoot with a kick to the face. I think that's a pretty laughable TD defense. I didnt get a detailed look at the second one, but that looked iffy as well.

I would also point out that (here in the states at least) wrestling and American football are very common and popular sports taken up by the male population in secondary school and college. Football is the most popular sport in the US by a country mile. Thus, there's a higher than normal chance of running into someone who is highly trained in tackles and takedowns here in the US.

I think we have more in common than I initially thought. If you are basing your ideas on what you have seen in the styles above, I would have to agree. I don't mind calling them 'traditional' but like in George Orwell's 'Animal Farm' some animals are more equal than others.

I wouldn't be relying on kicking some one in the face to prevent a shoot but a quick thrusting front kick is standard fare in Krav against someone rushing in. Same to some extent in our karate. As I have said, you train all sorts of techniques then rely on an instinctive response when the brown stuff makes contact with the rotating blades.

The second one, the neck crank, is iffy if the attack is already taking you back but in that instance it is also impossible to sprawl. Either way, you need to get at least one foot back to brace.

 

[K-man]

I'll say the "solo form training" is the major problem.

When you learn a form, it will become your burden for the rest of your life. The day that you throw away your forms, the day that you will be free. You can then concentrate on your

- kick,
- punch,
- lock,
- throw,
- ground work,
- ...

And I'll say that this is proof that you have never been shown how to use your forms in the way they were designed.

I learned my 1st from when I was 7 years old. That was 60 years ago. I have learned more than 50 forms in my life. I understand the purpose of forms, but I still do not believe that form training has any "combat" value (it has health value and no argument on that).

The following training program is much more effective.

One can use

- partner training to "develop" skill,
- sparring/wrestling to "test" skill,
- equipment training to "enhance" skill,
- solo drill training to "polish" skill.

I can write a book about "why form training is a big waste of time from the combat point of view". But that will have nothing to do with this thread discussion.

Learning 50 forms is like having 50 Zip folders on your computer desktop. You have bought the packages but never opened them. Twenty five years ago I knew about 25 kata and reckoned I was doing well. Twenty five years later I know about three and am working on another couple. Knowing how to perform a kata without knowing how to unpack it and use it as a fighting system is practising a series of techniques. Even using small segments of a kata to make a drill is barely scratching the surface. That is why many masters only learned two or three kata in their entire lifetime. I trained for decades without understanding the value of kata.

You won't need form if you just train drills. Your drills may come from your forms but it doesn't have to be. After you have leaned a form, you take it apart, understand it, and then put it back together any way you want as long as it makes sense to you. The best lesson that I have learned in my life is one day my teacher told me that, "Form was designed for teaching and leaning only. It was not designed for training."

You use "partner drill" to develop your skill. You will learn your

- body alignment,
- power generation,
- footwork,
- ...

at this stage.

you then train "solo drill" at home when partner is not available. Since you have already developed your skill, you just use your solo drill to "polish" some minor detail that you may not pay enough attention when you train with partner.

Since your "solo drill" is just your "partner drill without partner", when you have learned the "partner drills", you will get "solo drills" by default. If you link your "solo drills" in a sequence, you will have your form. This form that you have created will truly belong to you.

I had created the following form many years ago. Do I train it? No. Do I ask my students to train it, No. It just serves as a text book, no more and no less. The first 13 moves are the 13 postures. Since the order of those postures are not important, there exist no value to train those 13 moves in sequence. The rest of 24 moves has many combos in it. It makes sense to train

- combo A as move 1, move 2,
- combo B as move 3, move 4, and move 5.

Since combo A and combo B has no logic connection, to train combo A and combo B together as move 1, move 2, move 3, move 4, move 5 is not necessary.

No one 'needs' forms. Boxers don't have forms, wrestlers don't have forms, MMA fighters don't have forms. They don't need forms for what they do. Some whales have teeth, some whales don't. That doesn't invalidate either species. Baleen whales don't need teeth, orcas would die without them. Why do you think we are having this discussion about TMAs. If people knew what was in their kata then we wouldn't even be having this discussion. The only discussion would be how the Gracies and others improved the systems by adding the ground component.

So I would say that your teacher was mistaken with what he told you, although what he told you was pretty much the same as my teachers told me many years ago. They were mistaken too.

As to the form that you created. It does what you wanted it to do, but it is nothing like the forms that have been passed down through generations. You said it yourself, it is nothing more than a text book. My forms might look like a text book, if you just look at the cover, but once you open the book it is a total fighting system. That is why our training is now highly focused on kata and although I can perform many, I only know a few.
:asian:

 

[Steve]

And I'll say that this is proof that you have never been shown how to use your forms in the way they were designed.

Learning 50 forms is like having 50 Zip folders on your computer desktop. You have bought the packages but never opened them. Twenty five years ago I knew about 25 kata and reckoned I was doing well. Twenty five years later I know about three and am working on another couple. Knowing how to perform a kata without knowing how to unpack it and use it as a fighting system is practising a series of techniques. Even using small segments of a kata to make a drill is barely scratching the surface. That is why many masters only learned two or three kata in their entire lifetime. I trained for decades without understanding the value of kata.

No one 'needs' forms. Boxers don't have forms, wrestlers don't have forms, MMA fighters don't have forms. They don't need forms for what they do. Some whales have teeth, some whales don't. That doesn't invalidate either species. Baleen whales don't need teeth, orcas would die without them. Why do you think we are having this discussion about TMAs. If people knew what was in their kata then we wouldn't even be having this discussion. The only discussion would be how the Gracies and others improved the systems by adding the ground component.

So I would say that your teacher was mistaken with what he told you, although what he told you was pretty much the same as my teachers told me many years ago. They were mistaken too.

As to the form that you created. It does what you wanted it to do, but it is nothing like the forms that have been passed down through generations. You said it yourself, it is nothing more than a text book. My forms might look like a text book, if you just look at the cover, but once you open the book it is a total fighting system. That is why our training is now highly focused on kata and although I can perform many, I only know a few.
:asian:

What if your instructors and his instructors aren't mistaken? Isn't it possible that you're mistaken?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[drop bear]

If I had to give a definitive answer, it would be because when you throw punches and kicks, you open yourself up to grabs, clinches, and throws. If someone's intent is to get you to the ground, out-maneuvering them is far easier said than done. A skilled grappler just needs to wait for you to throw something they can work with. For example, for a period of time in my classes I had a habit of catching the person's leg when they kicked. In fact, I wasn't always doing it on purpose, I'd just reflexively hook their leg before then could put it down. If my instructor allowed throws, takedowns would have been a no-brainer. Instead, because it was a TMA class, when I did it the match was stopped and we reset after I got chastised.

To truly have the upper hand against a grappler is very hard for someone who just knows standing martial arts. It isn't a simple thing to avoid, and every time you go for a strike you open yourself up to a counter offensive.

But grappling is not exactly a new idea either. I wonder why they left it out?

Look at the re created medievil sword fighting. It is not like that don't have the opportunity to grapple to their advantage.

 

[drop bear]

I didn't realize we were talking about street fighting. But, okay, I agree that Mayweather could knock someone out in a street fight. But I think he'd get smoked in MMA. I know Rickson could choke out someone outside the cage, but he'd lose in a boxing match. I think Ronda could snap anyone's arm, anywhere.... and look damn good doing it, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by "So why can the "sport arts" translate to various applications, but a TMA cannot?" I don't think sport arts translate to other sport fighting arts at all, which was my point in my last post. I get the feeling you are headed to the conclusion that a TMA person can't win in a street fight. Yes? No? Not applicable to this conversation?

Can MMA translate to other competitions? My coach won a no GI bjj comp. Wrestled them to death. His coach some some sort of open submission thing.

Gsp sparring Wayne parr.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LvowMXlPn4o

One of the reasons I still believe is that mmaers still do tma.

 

[drop bear]

Depends if you train against being taken down.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVKxEdCdBog
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TRvgw1qIqE0

Or is they are already in ..
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTNDHodUISw
:asian:

Why are you trying to re invent the wheel there?