A Lot of One System vs A Little of Many

I always relate it to languages you can study French your entire life and be absolutely perfect and fluent in it and that wonderful and great….but that perfect French won’t help you if you’re talking to someone who speaks Spanish
And yet, if you find yourself in France, the ability to speak French is remarkably useful. And that Spanish won’t help you so much if you are in France. So I’m not sure I understand what you are saying here.

But hey, I’m an American so like most of my fellow citizens, I have failed to learn another language.
 
True, but this is risky, especially if your back is presented. If he has moved in and checked your upper arm he has gained some control. Unless I am very fast there are much better ways to lure the opponent in.
Yes this is true, but i think there exists no risk-free strategies ion a fight, there is always some "risk" involved. Even the fully defense strategy is extremely risky because - sooner or later all energy is wasted unless you have better endurance than the opponent and they you are an easy pray; this is why I think some degree of risky offense is required for a "good defense"

For me personally cariovascular endurance is not my strenght, but i have decent mental endurance and tolerance against pain, so i try to adapt my strategy and risk taking to that.
 
In a fight I suppose this can be used both to surprise with an aggresive attacke, or as a bait, if you hook 3 times on the same side, the opponent is dedicated to defened that side, then you can surprise with something else.
This is speed and power trade off. I agree that if you use hook to set up something else, you don't need 100% power in your hook. The following 2 combos are also my favor:

- right low hook, right middle hook, right high hook.
- right low hook, right high hook, left high hook.

The "right low roundhouse kick, right high roundhouse kick" is a very combo kicking combo used in point system sparring. But the requirement is you have to land your 1st roundhouse kick and use it to bounce back for your 2nd roundhouse kick (your 1st roundhouse kick may not make enough damage). If your 1st roundhouse kick miss into the thin air, it's hard to have a fast 2nd roundhouse kick.
 
Last edited:
And yet, if you find yourself in France, the ability to speak French is remarkably useful. And that Spanish won’t help you so much if you are in France. So I’m not sure I understand what you are saying here.

But hey, I’m an American so like most of my fellow citizens, I have failed to learn another language.
Yeah so it’s better to have knowledge of multiple languages so that you can communicate in more than 1 place
 
i think there exists no risk-free strategies ion a fight,
Agree! As long as you know your technique weakness, you can use it to bait your opponent's attack.

- You raise arms to invite kick.
- You drop arms to invite punch.
- You open your centerline to invite jab and cross.
- You guard your centerline to invite hook.
- You put weight on your leading leg to invite pull.
- You put weight on your back leg to invite push.
- ...

MA is just a big cheating game after all.
 
This is speed and power trade off. I agree that if you use hook to set up something else, you don't need 100% power in your hook.
True, but what I tried to say is that is that I train maximum power hooks fast. That does not mean I should throw myself totally off balance to the extent that i fall over in case I miss. No my body stops to make sure balance is never compromised. Also if you overcomitte and throw yourself off balance, pulling the hook back fast will be impossible.

But this is different than a snappy pullback which is more like a "reset". Fast hooks is more like feeling a fast pace harmonic rythm, wher your torso and punch in swining back and forth but fast, mainly driven by muscle, not just structure. I think this is how many boxers do it, so not a specific karate technique. It's not "snappy" but nevertheless a kind of active pullback..

I sometimes "overcomitt" on purpose, and say throw a hook (but that misses) and as I continue to rotate and turn around, there is a planned back kick to the liver, or a low heelkick to the leg coming. I like that alot. So if then try to "step in" then to strik me while turning, they are stepping into a back kick that was planned to come.
 
Also if you overcomitte and throw yourself off balance, pulling the hook back fast will be impossible.

But this is different than a snappy pullback which is more like a "reset".
You can set up in both ways. An over committed hook punch can set up a perfect spinning back fist.

If your over committed hook can be an infinite sign punch and use a circular motion to come back as a back fist. IMO, the small curve pull back is better than the linear pull back.
infinite_sign.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yeah so it’s better to have knowledge of multiple languages so that you can communicate in more than 1 place
I agree with this, in spite of my own language failings. I guess I am confused on how the message fit in to the post you were responding to.
 
I've seen several posts from those who, for whatever reason, seem to have bounced from style to style - a year here, a couple there, another year or five somewhere else, and so on. Then, there are those who have stayed with one style for many years. And there are those who've followed a combination of these MA paths. No doubt there will be various opinions on the value of each of these MA experiences and there will be some validity to most of them.

I think the basic question involves depth verses breadth, horizontal verses vertical development. What are the pros and cons of these approaches and is there an ideal approach or balance?
My approach for all my time in Jow Ga is to grow in depth, but also to grow in width. Learning to use Jow Ga against other systems allows me to grow in width because I must learn about other systems and then explore if there is something in Jow Ga that can help.

When I grow in depth it is usually just me looking into Jow Ga without consideration of what I may be going against. When I must understand something outside of Jow Ga then my growth is wide. It's still Jow Ga but I have to know more than just Jow Ga in order to apply Jow Ga.

Not sure if that makes sense. But in short. I must understand the techniques that are being used against me so that I will know how to best apply Jow Ga.
 
I always relate it to languages you can study French your entire life and be absolutely perfect and fluent in it and that wonderful and great….but that perfect French won’t help you if you’re talking to someone who speaks Spanish
Fighting is not the same thing. I do not need to be fluent in Muay Thai in order to be able to defend against it. I only need to understand what my Muay Thai opponent is trying to do to me and which Jow Ga techniques work best against those techniques.

One of the things people seem to be surprised about is that for someone who doesn't train in certain systems, I do a really good job in defending or countering certain techniques. It may take me 100 hundred failures to figure out which Jow Ga techniques I should apply against a muay thai clinch, but I will eventually figure it out.

Language is more like saying. If I want to learn how to do Muay Thai then I must train Muay thai. I cannot learn Muay Thai by training Jow Ga Kung Fu.

If I want to communicate in Spanish then I must learn Spanish.

If I want to defeat Muay Thai then I don't need to learn Muay Thai in order to do so.
 
I agree with this, in spite of my own language failings. I guess I am confused on how the message fit in to the post you were responding to.
It's better to learn multiple languages when you want to communicate in another language. Fighting isn't about communicating in another system. It's about defeating the system that stands before you and you don't need to learn that system in order to defeat it.

BJJ does not need to learn Kung Fu in order to defeat Kung Fu. This is why language is not a good example.
 
This is the benefit for cross training. If you only train the striking art, you may not know the weakness of your wide horse stance. Not only your opponent can use single leg easier on you but also, he can spring your wide horse stance from inside out.
 
I do not need to be fluent in Muay Thai in order to be able to defend against it. I only need to understand what my Muay Thai opponent is trying to do to me and which Jow Ga techniques work best against those techniques.
I agree with this view. Sugar Ray Leonard, Joe Frazier and Ken Norton are all boxers but fight with completely different styles. A boxer fighting against them (good luck!) not having seen them before, will not know just what their style is at first. Each would have to be handled differently, our fearless opponent having to figure out how to use his own style to combat them. Luckily, all styles have some flexibility built in, whether it's technique or tactics. It's a matter of picking out the right tools from his toolbox and the most effective way of employing them for the job at hand.
 
I agree with this view. Sugar Ray Leonard, Joe Frazier and Ken Norton are all boxers but fight with completely different styles. A boxer fighting against them (good luck!) not having seen them before, will not know just what their style is at first. Each would have to be handled differently, our fearless opponent having to figure out how to use his own style to combat them. Luckily, all styles have some flexibility built in, whether it's technique or tactics. It's a matter of picking out the right tools from his toolbox and the most effective way of employing them for the job at hand.
Kazushi Sakuraba is a good example of Striking vs Grappling where striking techniques are grappling informed. There are other examples in MMA but he shows really good contrast between someone who is going to strike vs an opponent who wants to take the fight to the ground. Then compare his striking against a striker whose striking isn't grappling informed.


Another good example is to look at recent Wing Chun vs MMA fights and Wing chun is doing much better now against MMA than the earlier years ow MMA. There were only a few who expanded their wing chun. But now it appears that this is the norm for many who train Wing Chun

12 years ago Wing Chun practitioner is not grappling informed. For many of us it's obvious where his opponent will attack, but for that Wing Chun guy he was totally caught off guard.
 
Last edited:
Question for those that teach -

If an instructor from another school taught you a variation of a technique, that worked much better and made more sense than what you taught, would you teach that new variation to your students?
Absolutely, and I would even tell them the whole story and why it’s better. I have, in fact, done that not too long ago.
 
If all my teachers pass away I won’t have that problem. But that’s not likely to happen, some of them are younger than I am. One of them used to be my student a long time ago.
Ah! Now that is full circle, and a place I hope to be in someday! I have two students that are young and skilled enough that I hope one of them comes to teach me new things someday.
 
Ah! Now that is full circle, and a place I hope to be in someday! I have two students that are young and skilled enough that I hope one of them comes to teach me new things someday.

It’s pretty cool. I currently have three students that are higher ranks than I am. They don’t care, I don’t care, and they still refer to me as their chief instructor and still ask questions.
 
I don't feel you need to be a master or have a high Dan level to benefit from any style. Consider the current MMA fighter as an example. The whole objective of the martial arts was self-protection; if you can take a couple techniques you've encountered in life and construct your own defensive system to success, then it's successful in my view.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top