"Anti"-style techniques

[mrhnau]

Most styles seem to have some form of defense vs a particular type of punch, kick or other attack. Do any styles teach specifically against other styles? For instance, would someones Muay Thai class teach specifically how to defeat, lets say, TKD? TKD teach how to defeat or counter BJJ grappling? Or do most schools just teach against isolated attacks? I imagine this might vary from school to school, but just curious if this has happened. Why would it happen? Possibly for tournaments in which you meet various styles, or possibly a street fight with someone that studied a specific style (is this really likely?). I imagine this might start seeming like MMA, but was curious if schools that teach solo styles did this.

A related thought. Do local schools ever spar together cross-style? For instance, do MT schools sometimes spar with the TKD schools? I imagine same style in different areas would do this, but was curious if cross-style happened often.

Another related thought... if you do teach "anti"-techniques, how do you proficiently perform the style in question? For instance, if TKD teaches anti-BJJ techniques, do they go find a real BJJ student, or just teach rudimentary skills to other TKD students?

Thanks!

 

[gakusei]

I have only seen this in movies. Your techniques work or they don't.

 

[Makalakumu]

A related thought. Do local schools ever spar together cross-style? For instance, do MT schools sometimes spar with the TKD schools? I imagine same style in different areas would do this, but was curious if cross-style happened often.

My teacher had us spar against people of other styles often. At my dojang, we spar against Danzan Ryu jujutsu guys who occupy the same building. I am now a student of the jujutsu sensei and he is a student of mine.

 

[Grenadier]

Each school is going to have its own set of techniques, and certain techniques in that set will be emphasized when going against someone who tends to favor a particular technique.

Just as an example, someone who practices Shotokan or Wado-Ryu, who suddenly finds that he's going against an opponent that throws many high kicks, would make adjustments to take advantage of the weaknesses involved in his opponents methods. Thus, the practitioner would probably go for more leg sweeps, takedowns, etc., that were already taught to him in the dojo. If the opponent makes adjustments, then it's up to the practitioner to react to those adjustments.

Think of it as a fast-paced chess game. We may all have our own "generic" strategies that we would employ in the beginning, but would make adjustments as needed, to find the best approach. After all, all of my instructors have told me that it's a foolish thing to try to outkick an excellent kicker, to outpunch an excellent puncher, and outgrapple an excellent grappler.

This is also an example of how much of the martial arts is strongly dependent on one's brain. I'm sure many of you have heard that particular line from your senseis throughout the years.

 

[MJS]

Most styles seem to have some form of defense vs a particular type of punch, kick or other attack. Do any styles teach specifically against other styles? For instance, would someones Muay Thai class teach specifically how to defeat, lets say, TKD? TKD teach how to defeat or counter BJJ grappling? Or do most schools just teach against isolated attacks? I imagine this might vary from school to school, but just curious if this has happened. Why would it happen? Possibly for tournaments in which you meet various styles, or possibly a street fight with someone that studied a specific style (is this really likely?). I imagine this might start seeming like MMA, but was curious if schools that teach solo styles did this.

I don't think each school works on specific techs. necessarily to defeat a TKD, Shotokan, etc. student, but instead teaches specific defense against certain attacks. For example: You might find a tech. in a system that is a defense against a high kick. This does not mean that it is geared to defeat a TKD student. IMHO, if one wants to know specifics on a defense against a certain art, they need to have some knowledge of said art. Not saying that you have to go and join a TKD school, but instead understand the thinking.

A related thought. Do local schools ever spar together cross-style? For instance, do MT schools sometimes spar with the TKD schools? I imagine same style in different areas would do this, but was curious if cross-style happened often.

Some schools may have a certain night during the week where they invite in another local school for some friendly sparring. You may also see students take it upon themselves to inquire at another school if they can join in during a sparring class.

Another related thought... if you do teach "anti"-techniques, how do you proficiently perform the style in question? For instance, if TKD teaches anti-BJJ techniques, do they go find a real BJJ student, or just teach rudimentary skills to other TKD students?

See my reply in the first paragraph. Many schools teach "anti" techs. but again, you need to understand how the other art operates. If you wanted to better understand the ground game, I'd think that its better to seek out a grappler. IMO you'll get a much better understanding.

Mike

 

[Brad Dunne]

This question seems to come around more since the advent of the UFC, Pride, and K-1. Folks are losing the perspective of what the training is really for, pure self defense. In self defense, there is NO SPARRING. Sparring is a sport mindset that can and will get you hurt on the street. The martial arts in general are a defensive application. Let your opponent commit to the attack and then counter. There is an exception to that rule and that involves a weapon. When in a self defense mindset, there are no rules of engagement, no ref, no time limits and no tap outs per se. The intent is to end the altercation as quickley as the induvidual is capable off. So interfacing with other styles, may be fun and there is always something that can be learned, but your intent at the time is not the same.

 

[CuongNhuka]

My coung nhu sensei is playing with a weapon called a "pocket stick". Most of the stuff he has us do is anti-pugilism, if you'd count that. Sensei Wes also teaches a tae kwon do 5th Dan who owns her own school, and we go over and spar with them sometimes. For some reason I notice I do better against them, weird huh? Well the main reason I think that is weird is did boxing for eight years before coung nhu, so my best bet is in my hands, and they tend to keep me out of punching range. And another thing, off topic (mostly because of what brad said). And brad try to keep cool, i'm not challenging your opinion, just giving you mine. I think that most people now a days do a form of martial art with the main focus on one of the following: spiritual improvement (mine for coung nhu), physical improvement (mine for boxing), and competition (apparently the most common for people in tae kwon do, judo, and MMA).



Sweet Brighit Bless your Blade,



John

 

[arnisador]

My JKD instructor breaks out stuff for defense against a boxer, or wild swinging puncher, or kickboxer, or high kicker, etc. Not a specific art but a style of striking/attacking.

But, it's all basically the same defenses, done at different ranges and angles.

 

[Loki]

I don't think that thinking of "anti-style" techniques in terms of your opponent's art would be productive. I'm not going to take the time to see if my opponent knows TKD, JKD, BJJ or whatever. Like Grenadier said, I'll react to his attack pattern. He kicks a lot, I'll try to close in, he punches a lot, I'll rely on footwork, he grapples, fight dirty (which should be done in any case).

MJS suggested the idea of friendly sparring with people from different styles. Sounds like a good idea to me. My style is roughly free-form, but it's still a good idea to see what it's like to go up against people who have a more traditional style.

 

[bushi jon]

There are only so many Tech that are taught in all of the Martial arts. What I train for application of the tech against me.