- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,692
- Reaction score
- 176
I know to some of you this post will be familiar as it appeared in a different thread, but i received a few suggestions that I should make it its own thread , so all righty then:
Andy Moynihan's MA/SD philosophy boiled down as small as he can make it. And now he's gonna lie down 'cause his head hurts:
Just a little background on how I got to be where I am:
From the time I was 12 till the time I was 20 I was on and off involved in quite a few arts myself, and though I never got higher than brown belt in one of them, i was exposed to about 7 styles that I got varying degrees of formal instruction in and independently kept reading up on anything i could find; if it was to do with a martial art i'd never seen, I wanted it. (I was a 20 year-old Boston Irish kid who thought that'd give him all the answers to make the best style there was, what can I say?
Then while I was yet so young and certain, I figured out, about the same time I figured out a lot of things, that any system of hand to hand combat, regardless of national origin, will teach a person one or more of the same five things:
*hand/arm blows
*Leg/foot blows
*Grappling while standing
*Grappling while grounded
*Weapons
And any or all of those things can work in a "real fight" if the person using them is a "real fighter". Almost any tool will do, if *you* will do.
Eventually I finally realized that what mattered most was not how your movements looked or if they were "scientific" or not, but how you handled the adrenaline dump into your system and how many techniques are *right there* in your nervous system that you can cover a standing/grappling/armed/whatever situation with that you can snap off lightning quick, and to that end, understanding what each art's function is, and choosing which functions suit his /her abilities/limits/temperament, and then doing the "absorb what is useful" bit.
Thing is though, come time you reach that point you probably have visited at least 5 styles trying to "find yourself" 'fore you finally realize you were always there, and you know enough at last to make informed decisions about what suits you.
Now that I'm 29 and been around the block a few more times, most of my preconceptions are gone, and I've no longer got any grand illusions about who or what I am, I'm not gonna become some grand poobah of some new art, I ain't gonna bring the martial arts world to its knees, all's I'm gonna do....is take a look with my now hopefully wiser eyes, at my limitations, what styles exist that function in a way that makes my limitations less "limiting", and go from there.
And to this end my choices have been thus:
FMA/Silat are what I started training in as much as I can
Mainly because:
* All have a reputation for adaptability and/or simplicity.
* i like the fact they seem to have a natural flowing response rather than rigid prearranged actions,and are brain dead simple to learn, the work comes in getting them down(any person can do sinawali *drills*. NOT everyone can spar using them--certainly not me--YET)
*I like the fact that they seem to transition from armed to unarmed and back with very little hitch
stylistically(your nervous system won't hesitate while your mind tries to tell your body "It's a weapon. Change fighting styles" and gets you killed).
* I wear glasses and can't afford contacts/ corrective surgery right now. I'm severely nearsighted. If during a crisis those glasses come off my pistol just became worthless unless there's a laser sight on it and sufficient darkness to see it(my eyes without glasses can no longer use the sights but CAN still track the dot).I can however see enough for H2H/contact weapons just barely enough and such training is best there(If it were available around me I would have actually considered Wing Chun as well since it and FMA are supposed to have a lot in trapping range, Wing Chun's a Punching style, I used to box, and of course the trapping is an excellent area to be skilled at both because so few people are comfortable fighting that tight and for close in when you're nearsighted).
Does this mean I think other arts are "not as good" or somehow "less"? No it doesn't. It just means these are what click the most with who/what Andy Moynihan is at this stage of his life.
But before I decided that, I first had to go through those other 7-8 to figure that out, is that making sense now?
As to the "sport" and "art" thing:
Did you know when I was in my late High school years, competing in a UFC was one of the only things I wanted to do? See, I was at a point then where I too had grown sick of the "McDojos" in my area--I loved MAs but was sick of getting lied to. there being no MMA style gyms near me, the next best thing was a karate/boxing gym which did groundwork, a judo dojo some ways away, and I lived about 20 min. drive from no less than Dick Kimber's kickboxing gym. Meeting him the first time was cool, i'll tell you what. I was the same height as he but not even *half* as wide and I ain't talkin fat neither.
anyhow, for awhile there I tried to train in that general fashion till I found myself workin with this kid who signed up for the same boxing class as me. I thought *I* was a testosterone poisoned 20 year old kid? I had nothing on this kid.
Now, I didn't learn until much later that this kid was already an accessory to murder, but you begin to see where this was heading.
Went right to his head, thought he was big bad man because he knew boxing, whenever someone challenged his bullying he'd want to take it out side with gloves( he for some reason never challenged me outside boxing rules--can't imagine why).
Kid was about to go to trial and jail for assisting in killing someone( they said it was manslaughter, unintentional--i dont know), and he very likely KNEW once he got to trial he was cooked, and yet here he was wanting to do nothing but "fight" to gain "respect". I guess some folks just aint wired right.
Anyway, long story short, he served his hitch, got out, jumped himself BACK in for assault again, spent some time under house arrest and who bloody KNOWS what happened after, or if he's even still around. Nothing to help him slam the brakes on when the darkness fell.
I had other physical concerns that derailed my interest in competing (I suffer from both impaired vision and hearing and i got the crazy idea that maybe years and years of whacks to the head wouldn't help either condition, and since then I've been made aware of warning signs that could help me stave off the heart disease and diabetes that my parents have since we caught it early, and it's likely best not to tax them with such a lifestyle, to say nothing of the fact I feel the whole industry has devolved to where I feel I want no part of it anymore anyway even if I WERE still at a competetive age ( almost 30 which as pro athletes go is post prime or on the way).
But, needless to say watching him doom himself like that took a bucket full of stupid right out of me as concerned true violence and left a bad taste in my mouth for all such displays, and so it probably just became clearer why the current MMA marlketing/reality show/ fan trash talk about "prove it in the cage or it ain't ****" just sets my teeth to grinding some days. I had enough of that watching this diseased life form find out just exactly what "Mr. Tough Man" gets you.
Which also has shaped how I view things now.
*The MMA vs Traditional "Fad" type of thing:
On both sides ( with varying degrees of radicalism in individual opinions expressed but the points otherwise remain the same) we have the question of how what we do relates to SD.
On the one side we have the camp which appears upset at the other for a percieved lack of what they deem necessary for SD ( in this case, not having, or at least not publicly appearing to have, a means of working with an alive, resisting opponent under conditions of adrenaline stress, what to them, from the outside, appear outdated training methods, and lack of athletic conditioning.)
On the other side we have the camp which appears upset at the other for a percieved lack of what they deem necessary for SD ( in this case, a mindset percieved to be all about "winning" and not "surviving", concern over the fact of what the resultant attitude could be in the legal aftermath or public opinion of such activites , a claim that because there are rules the match is different from a "real" fight, concern over the fact that the style's operators totally ignore or are not permitted the use of weapons or their equivalent simulators).
But here's the crucial thing Everybody needs to get, but apparently nobody WANTS to get:
It is this:
Both points of view are wrong....because both camps are RIGHT!
* Physical conditioning is beneficial to any person regardless of chosen path, since, apart from specialized conditioning to execute a given path's techniques, if a person is unhealthy or injured they cannot even train in any path.
*a means of working with an alive, resisting opponent under conditions of adrenaline stress is beneficial to anyone's SD abilities/confidence, but some people need more time than others and may not be able to handle the same amount, so paths with different levels of emphasis on this will attract the people able to handle that level, since if a person is dissatisfied with too low a level or overwhelmed by too high a level they'll quit and not get ANY benefit because if you don't like your path you won't stay on it.
*Mindset is important concerning how you approach SD--the qualities you must possess to be successful in professional athletic competition differ from, and in many cases could be at direct cross purposes with, what must be your mindset in pure SD situations, and vice versa. Exposure to both activities can help you figure out for yourself where you must find your balance, on your path.
* like it or not, in our present society, a basic knowledge of national, state( where applicable) and local legal precedent regarding SD is a stone dead MUST. May not be the way it *should* be, but it's the way it *is* right now.
*Knowledge of weapons is beneficial to anyone interested in SD from either side since A) if you know their use it is far easier to determine their defenses, B) if you have a path which treats every incoming punch as though it is a knife, what is necessary for the weapon translates over ( another reason I chose my path) and it is more difficult to gain surprise which most criminal knifemen try for ( in many reports people report not knowing they were stabbed till they looked. There's a very real lesson there). C) weapons have always been humankind's first choice to fight with, so knowing how to be alert for them is beneficial to anyone of any camp, and for those of you who are US residents an additional D) according to the last few FBI Uniform Crime Reports cite that an average of 8 out of every 10 streetfights involve weapons.
*As to what is or is not an "obsolete" training method( the usual bone of contention is forms, but there are others)---"obsolete" for what purpose, "obsolete" for whose needs? If we were to discuss the hot button of forms, the greater part of whether they are useful tools or not largely stems from people on the outside( and, sadly, exponentially too many on the inside too), plain and simply not understanding what the tool is FOR. I have been uncommonly fortunate to find a teacher who can break down each part of any formlike movement we do and say"here is the form movement" and then "now here is *one way* the streamlined application version of the movement can be used". "This is a drill", then" here are the attributes that drill burns in your muscle memory so that you are able to do *this* aspect of the system". Most schools( which could perhaps be classified under the "McDojo" umbrella) are unable to do this because the ones teaching were never taught it either, and so can demonstrate the movement only at "face value" and this , I'm certain, is the most significant contributing factor in the position that this method is "obsolete". But in all of those movements, cvollected over all those millenia, ebgineered for all those different putposes and times, has GOT to be something for everyone whatever their needs.
I been hearing that word "obsolete" most all my life---and they still dig holes with shovels.
Andy Moynihan's MA/SD philosophy boiled down as small as he can make it. And now he's gonna lie down 'cause his head hurts:
Just a little background on how I got to be where I am:
From the time I was 12 till the time I was 20 I was on and off involved in quite a few arts myself, and though I never got higher than brown belt in one of them, i was exposed to about 7 styles that I got varying degrees of formal instruction in and independently kept reading up on anything i could find; if it was to do with a martial art i'd never seen, I wanted it. (I was a 20 year-old Boston Irish kid who thought that'd give him all the answers to make the best style there was, what can I say?
Then while I was yet so young and certain, I figured out, about the same time I figured out a lot of things, that any system of hand to hand combat, regardless of national origin, will teach a person one or more of the same five things:
*hand/arm blows
*Leg/foot blows
*Grappling while standing
*Grappling while grounded
*Weapons
And any or all of those things can work in a "real fight" if the person using them is a "real fighter". Almost any tool will do, if *you* will do.
Eventually I finally realized that what mattered most was not how your movements looked or if they were "scientific" or not, but how you handled the adrenaline dump into your system and how many techniques are *right there* in your nervous system that you can cover a standing/grappling/armed/whatever situation with that you can snap off lightning quick, and to that end, understanding what each art's function is, and choosing which functions suit his /her abilities/limits/temperament, and then doing the "absorb what is useful" bit.
Thing is though, come time you reach that point you probably have visited at least 5 styles trying to "find yourself" 'fore you finally realize you were always there, and you know enough at last to make informed decisions about what suits you.
Now that I'm 29 and been around the block a few more times, most of my preconceptions are gone, and I've no longer got any grand illusions about who or what I am, I'm not gonna become some grand poobah of some new art, I ain't gonna bring the martial arts world to its knees, all's I'm gonna do....is take a look with my now hopefully wiser eyes, at my limitations, what styles exist that function in a way that makes my limitations less "limiting", and go from there.
And to this end my choices have been thus:
FMA/Silat are what I started training in as much as I can
Mainly because:
* All have a reputation for adaptability and/or simplicity.
* i like the fact they seem to have a natural flowing response rather than rigid prearranged actions,and are brain dead simple to learn, the work comes in getting them down(any person can do sinawali *drills*. NOT everyone can spar using them--certainly not me--YET)
*I like the fact that they seem to transition from armed to unarmed and back with very little hitch
stylistically(your nervous system won't hesitate while your mind tries to tell your body "It's a weapon. Change fighting styles" and gets you killed).
* I wear glasses and can't afford contacts/ corrective surgery right now. I'm severely nearsighted. If during a crisis those glasses come off my pistol just became worthless unless there's a laser sight on it and sufficient darkness to see it(my eyes without glasses can no longer use the sights but CAN still track the dot).I can however see enough for H2H/contact weapons just barely enough and such training is best there(If it were available around me I would have actually considered Wing Chun as well since it and FMA are supposed to have a lot in trapping range, Wing Chun's a Punching style, I used to box, and of course the trapping is an excellent area to be skilled at both because so few people are comfortable fighting that tight and for close in when you're nearsighted).
Does this mean I think other arts are "not as good" or somehow "less"? No it doesn't. It just means these are what click the most with who/what Andy Moynihan is at this stage of his life.
But before I decided that, I first had to go through those other 7-8 to figure that out, is that making sense now?
As to the "sport" and "art" thing:
Did you know when I was in my late High school years, competing in a UFC was one of the only things I wanted to do? See, I was at a point then where I too had grown sick of the "McDojos" in my area--I loved MAs but was sick of getting lied to. there being no MMA style gyms near me, the next best thing was a karate/boxing gym which did groundwork, a judo dojo some ways away, and I lived about 20 min. drive from no less than Dick Kimber's kickboxing gym. Meeting him the first time was cool, i'll tell you what. I was the same height as he but not even *half* as wide and I ain't talkin fat neither.
anyhow, for awhile there I tried to train in that general fashion till I found myself workin with this kid who signed up for the same boxing class as me. I thought *I* was a testosterone poisoned 20 year old kid? I had nothing on this kid.
Now, I didn't learn until much later that this kid was already an accessory to murder, but you begin to see where this was heading.
Went right to his head, thought he was big bad man because he knew boxing, whenever someone challenged his bullying he'd want to take it out side with gloves( he for some reason never challenged me outside boxing rules--can't imagine why).
Kid was about to go to trial and jail for assisting in killing someone( they said it was manslaughter, unintentional--i dont know), and he very likely KNEW once he got to trial he was cooked, and yet here he was wanting to do nothing but "fight" to gain "respect". I guess some folks just aint wired right.
Anyway, long story short, he served his hitch, got out, jumped himself BACK in for assault again, spent some time under house arrest and who bloody KNOWS what happened after, or if he's even still around. Nothing to help him slam the brakes on when the darkness fell.
I had other physical concerns that derailed my interest in competing (I suffer from both impaired vision and hearing and i got the crazy idea that maybe years and years of whacks to the head wouldn't help either condition, and since then I've been made aware of warning signs that could help me stave off the heart disease and diabetes that my parents have since we caught it early, and it's likely best not to tax them with such a lifestyle, to say nothing of the fact I feel the whole industry has devolved to where I feel I want no part of it anymore anyway even if I WERE still at a competetive age ( almost 30 which as pro athletes go is post prime or on the way).
But, needless to say watching him doom himself like that took a bucket full of stupid right out of me as concerned true violence and left a bad taste in my mouth for all such displays, and so it probably just became clearer why the current MMA marlketing/reality show/ fan trash talk about "prove it in the cage or it ain't ****" just sets my teeth to grinding some days. I had enough of that watching this diseased life form find out just exactly what "Mr. Tough Man" gets you.
Which also has shaped how I view things now.
*The MMA vs Traditional "Fad" type of thing:
On both sides ( with varying degrees of radicalism in individual opinions expressed but the points otherwise remain the same) we have the question of how what we do relates to SD.
On the one side we have the camp which appears upset at the other for a percieved lack of what they deem necessary for SD ( in this case, not having, or at least not publicly appearing to have, a means of working with an alive, resisting opponent under conditions of adrenaline stress, what to them, from the outside, appear outdated training methods, and lack of athletic conditioning.)
On the other side we have the camp which appears upset at the other for a percieved lack of what they deem necessary for SD ( in this case, a mindset percieved to be all about "winning" and not "surviving", concern over the fact of what the resultant attitude could be in the legal aftermath or public opinion of such activites , a claim that because there are rules the match is different from a "real" fight, concern over the fact that the style's operators totally ignore or are not permitted the use of weapons or their equivalent simulators).
But here's the crucial thing Everybody needs to get, but apparently nobody WANTS to get:
It is this:
Both points of view are wrong....because both camps are RIGHT!
* Physical conditioning is beneficial to any person regardless of chosen path, since, apart from specialized conditioning to execute a given path's techniques, if a person is unhealthy or injured they cannot even train in any path.
*a means of working with an alive, resisting opponent under conditions of adrenaline stress is beneficial to anyone's SD abilities/confidence, but some people need more time than others and may not be able to handle the same amount, so paths with different levels of emphasis on this will attract the people able to handle that level, since if a person is dissatisfied with too low a level or overwhelmed by too high a level they'll quit and not get ANY benefit because if you don't like your path you won't stay on it.
*Mindset is important concerning how you approach SD--the qualities you must possess to be successful in professional athletic competition differ from, and in many cases could be at direct cross purposes with, what must be your mindset in pure SD situations, and vice versa. Exposure to both activities can help you figure out for yourself where you must find your balance, on your path.
* like it or not, in our present society, a basic knowledge of national, state( where applicable) and local legal precedent regarding SD is a stone dead MUST. May not be the way it *should* be, but it's the way it *is* right now.
*Knowledge of weapons is beneficial to anyone interested in SD from either side since A) if you know their use it is far easier to determine their defenses, B) if you have a path which treats every incoming punch as though it is a knife, what is necessary for the weapon translates over ( another reason I chose my path) and it is more difficult to gain surprise which most criminal knifemen try for ( in many reports people report not knowing they were stabbed till they looked. There's a very real lesson there). C) weapons have always been humankind's first choice to fight with, so knowing how to be alert for them is beneficial to anyone of any camp, and for those of you who are US residents an additional D) according to the last few FBI Uniform Crime Reports cite that an average of 8 out of every 10 streetfights involve weapons.
*As to what is or is not an "obsolete" training method( the usual bone of contention is forms, but there are others)---"obsolete" for what purpose, "obsolete" for whose needs? If we were to discuss the hot button of forms, the greater part of whether they are useful tools or not largely stems from people on the outside( and, sadly, exponentially too many on the inside too), plain and simply not understanding what the tool is FOR. I have been uncommonly fortunate to find a teacher who can break down each part of any formlike movement we do and say"here is the form movement" and then "now here is *one way* the streamlined application version of the movement can be used". "This is a drill", then" here are the attributes that drill burns in your muscle memory so that you are able to do *this* aspect of the system". Most schools( which could perhaps be classified under the "McDojo" umbrella) are unable to do this because the ones teaching were never taught it either, and so can demonstrate the movement only at "face value" and this , I'm certain, is the most significant contributing factor in the position that this method is "obsolete". But in all of those movements, cvollected over all those millenia, ebgineered for all those different putposes and times, has GOT to be something for everyone whatever their needs.
I been hearing that word "obsolete" most all my life---and they still dig holes with shovels.
