Being Well Rounded

[MJS]

While reading another thread in the FMA section, I came across this post. The part that I wanted to focus on in this thread, was this:

4. i have my opinion about sikaran as an older art, but meliton geronimo is not THE founder of sikaran. there are a couple arts called sikaran, and there is also some schools who have the fighting techniques of sikaran inside there styles. i fought against some of them in the philippines and they are very good fighters, even though they dont use their hands very much. one guy, who i forgot the name of, kicks so good, he doesnt need hands. he is the first person to prove to me, than you dont need "well rounded" or skill in all ranges to be an effective fighter

Now, for clarification, I'm not posting this to pick on the person who said it, but instead, to make a discussion out of the bold part.

So, what are your thoughts on this? If someone was really that good of a puncher, kicker or grappler, they dont need any other ranges of fighting? Now, I really dont like to use the UFC as a 'written in stone' example, due to the fact that there're obvious differences between the ring and the RW, but if we look back to the early days, where we pretty much saw nothing but 1 dimensional fighters, we saw many of the stand up guys, turn into fish out of water, once they hit the ground.

Now, my personal opinion....I would rather be comfortable in all areas, should I find myself in a position, where my strong point, is taken away. I dont know about anyone else, but once I start to see what the other persons strong point is, I'm certainly going to do my best, to take them out of their game. Should the same happen to me, I'd rather be prepared, instead of wishing I was.

 

[celtic_crippler]

The person referred to in this post obviously has never met anyone who knows how to deal with their kicks.

 

[Telfer]

So, what are your thoughts on this? If someone was really that good of a puncher, kicker or grappler, they dont need any other ranges of fighting? Now, I really dont like to use the UFC as a 'written in stone' example, due to the fact that there're obvious differences between the ring and the RW, but if we look back to the early days, where we pretty much saw nothing but 1 dimensional fighters, we saw many of the stand up guys, turn into fish out of water, once they hit the ground.

There is a very powerful drive in most Asian arts to LOOK GOOD...graceful, harmonious, and all that.

The problem is that diving for your opponents legs and pushing them over does NOT look good.

But it does work.

 

[MJS]

The person referred to in this post obviously has never met anyone who knows how to deal with their kicks.

Yup, I was thinking the same thing.

 

[MJS]

There is a very powerful drive in most Asian arts to LOOK GOOD...graceful, harmonious, and all that.

The problem is that diving for your opponents legs and pushing them over does NOT look good.

But it does work.

So, that being said, you'd figure that they'd do something to fix that.

 

[Carol]

Personally, I think being well rounded is better, but I also think the most important thing that anyone can do is train on a regular basis. If rolling on the ground is so unpleasant that it is going to sour a person away from MA training, then perhaps that is a person that shouldn't train in ground fighting, until they are ready to do so.

I'm all for learning different ranges. But I absolutely loathe training with anyone that doesn't want to be there. So if striking/weapons/ground/whatever is so repulsive that the student doesn't want to be there...then don't train in it. Don't go to class and take time and energy away from the people that really want to be there.

 

[shesulsa]

I like the way Master Ken Corona puts it: learn several styles or have many teachers, but master one style and have one master teacher.

I can't imagine going quite deep into virtually any art out there without finding similarities and borrowings into other art forms. Go high enough in Tae Kwon Do and you find some Kung Fu. Go high enough in Kung Fu and you're sure to find some Okinawate, etcetera.

I think I'd rather have a really good understanding of the theme of an art - the underlying theory and be able to use it well for my own purposes and delve into other things to serve my own personal needs for supplementation.

 

[Xinglu]

Well, isn't the entire premise of Korean Karate that the foot is a superior weapon to the hand? Guys like Chuck Norris and "Super Foot" Wallace were/are great with their feet, yet next to a boxer look like amateurs with their hands.

My favorite kick-boxer is Cung Le, the dude is amazing with his feet.

All of these men were highly successful fighters that did not adhere to the "well rounded" or equality of hand vs. foot. Their entire strategies are to take away your ability to use your hands effectively. All of these men fought opponents who trained specifically to defeat their fighting style... and all of them were STILL highly successful fighters.

really, it is all about how you train.

Now for me, I lack long legs, so kicking distance for me is punching distance for most. Ergo, I prefer mid to short range (hands) and very low kicks, because that tends to be to close for a lot of people to deal with.

To say that one doctrine is in general superior to another is IMHO myopic. It is all about what works well for you.

 

[sgtmac_46]

While reading another thread in the FMA section, I came across this post. The part that I wanted to focus on in this thread, was this:



Now, for clarification, I'm not posting this to pick on the person who said it, but instead, to make a discussion out of the bold part.

So, what are your thoughts on this? If someone was really that good of a puncher, kicker or grappler, they dont need any other ranges of fighting? Now, I really dont like to use the UFC as a 'written in stone' example, due to the fact that there're obvious differences between the ring and the RW, but if we look back to the early days, where we pretty much saw nothing but 1 dimensional fighters, we saw many of the stand up guys, turn into fish out of water, once they hit the ground.

Now, my personal opinion....I would rather be comfortable in all areas, should I find myself in a position, where my strong point, is taken away. I dont know about anyone else, but once I start to see what the other persons strong point is, I'm certainly going to do my best, to take them out of their game. Should the same happen to me, I'd rather be prepared, instead of wishing I was.

There are obvious differences between the ring and the real world, but not as many as some would like to pretend. It's like the difference between Grand Prix driving and driving a normal car on a public roadway. Yeah, there are things on the street that you don't run in to in Grand Prix, but the reality is a great deal of the lessons from the former transfer very well to the later.

A prime example of this is law enforcement high speed driving. The reality is that most police officers are mediocre drivers at high speed. There are only a few good training programs in this country that actually teach very useful skills for operating a motor vehicle at the edge of the envelope..........and they are all ran by former race car drivers.

So to the answer the question, the UFC put to rest the notion that one who master of a single range of combat can be undefeated.......and though, like pursuit driving and Grand Prix, the UFC and the street aren't the same, driving fast is still driving fast.......and those who do it best are generally those who do it most often.

 

[Bruno@MT]

If you have the physical make up of someone who is extremely mobile in his legs and hips, then perhaps this could be true. As a general philosophy it sucks though. Everything depends on your anatomy.

I am very flexible and bendy -except- in my thigh muscles. I tried many things for long times, but I will never be a graceful high kicker. Mind you, I never saw the point of kicking to the face, any more than I would strike at the foot from a standing position. Nevermind that in a crowded space, kicking would have its own problems.

Personally, I think that it is more important to figure out what art fits your body and preferences, and train in that as serious as possible. If that means you become a boxer or do TKD, more power to you.

It is arguable that as fighters became more well rounded in MMA, they became less 1 dimensional. But how many times do you fight other fighters on in self defense scenarios? And if Bas Rutten would jump me in an alley and decide to beat me up, then being well-rounded or not will not make a difference to the actual outcome.

 

[sgtmac_46]

If you have the physical make up of someone who is extremely mobile in his legs and hips, then perhaps this could be true. As a general philosophy it sucks though. Everything depends on your anatomy.

I am very flexible and bendy -except- in my thigh muscles. I tried many things for long times, but I will never be a graceful high kicker. Mind you, I never saw the point of kicking to the face, any more than I would strike at the foot from a standing position. Nevermind that in a crowded space, kicking would have its own problems.

Personally, I think that it is more important to figure out what art fits your body and preferences, and train in that as serious as possible. If that means you become a boxer or do TKD, more power to you.

Absolutely right!

It is arguable that as fighters became more well rounded in MMA, they became less 1 dimensional. But how many times do you fight other fighters on in self defense scenarios? And if Bas Rutten would jump me in an alley and decide to beat me up, then being well-rounded or not will not make a difference to the actual outcome.

That depends........if that 'well rounded' means training with and carrying a gun or a knife, you might just get the edge........which kind of makes the point. You're never going to beat Bas hand to hand, but taking it outside of HIS element, being MORE well rounded, might get you the W.

 

[shesulsa]

To say that one doctrine is in general superior to another is IMHO myopic. It is all about what works well for you.

I've been saying that for years - train to your passions, your abilities, your purposes. If you need supplementation then get it somewhere.

 

[Aiki Lee]

I agree that one should train in all aspects of fighting if they really want to be skilled enough to deal with a real world situation.

With that out of the way, I do believe some people may be excellent enough at a particular thing that they may not ever have do anything else. But why risk it?

 

[MattJ]

MJS -

I think the guy you were quoting was trying to use the exception to prove the rule, which is questionable logic, IMHO. Very few people can specialize so effectively as to able to ignore other fight ranges. Not that it can't be done, but it doesn't really *prove* anything for the average person.

 

[Xue Sheng]

There is a very powerful drive in most Asian arts to LOOK GOOD...graceful, harmonious, and all that.

The problem is that diving for your opponents legs and pushing them over does NOT look good.

But it does work.

Ever seen Wing Chun at work or Xingyiquan at work or Changquan at work or Shuaijiao at work or Sanda at work... they don't appear to care all that much about looking good as the care about effective. But then in many of the CMA arts many people confuse form with application... they are not the same

I like the way Master Ken Corona puts it: learn several styles or have many teachers, but master one style and have one master teacher.

I can't imagine going quite deep into virtually any art out there without finding similarities and borrowings into other art forms. Go high enough in Tae Kwon Do and you find some Kung Fu. Go high enough in Kung Fu and you're sure to find some Okinawate, etcetera.

I think I'd rather have a really good understanding of the theme of an art - the underlying theory and be able to use it well for my own purposes and delve into other things to serve my own personal needs for supplementation.

Mostly agree....except that it would not be higher levels of kung fu you find Okinawate it would be higher levels of Okinwate you find Kung Fu

Well, isn't the entire premise of Korean Karate that the foot is a superior weapon to the hand? Guys like Chuck Norris and "Super Foot" Wallace were/are great with their feet, yet next to a boxer look like amateurs with their hands.

My favorite kick-boxer is Cung Le, the dude is amazing with his feet.

Cung Le is a pretty damn awsome fighter but he does have a tiny bit of a wrestling background and a whole lot of background in Sanshou which is kicking punching and Shuaijiao. But I do not think he was looking for well rounded as much as for what works best for him and/or what he enjoys and so far he appears to have found it. And a note on enjoy... if you don't like training it, no matter how well rounded someone may beleive it makes you it is likely you will train it little and use it not at all.

All of these men were highly successful fighters that did not adhere to the "well rounded" or equality of hand vs. foot. Their entire strategies are to take away your ability to use your hands effectively. All of these men fought opponents who trained specifically to defeat their fighting style... and all of them were STILL highly successful fighters.

really, it is all about how you train.

Also of late, after reading and rereading all osrts of books on Xingyiquan, focusing mainly on the Santi bits I feel the need to ask some one to define well rounded.

Now for me, I lack long legs, so kicking distance for me is punching distance for most. Ergo, I prefer mid to short range (hands) and very low kicks, because that tends to be to close for a lot of people to deal with.

I have long legs and still prefer low kicks. High kicks are, IMO, dangerous. You better be damn sure of your target before you throw one or it can very quickly comie back to bite you.

To say that one doctrine is in general superior to another is IMHO myopic. It is all about what works well for you.

Agreed

 

[MJS]

1) I like the way Master Ken Corona puts it: learn several styles or have many teachers, but master one style and have one master teacher.

2) I can't imagine going quite deep into virtually any art out there without finding similarities and borrowings into other art forms. Go high enough in Tae Kwon Do and you find some Kung Fu. Go high enough in Kung Fu and you're sure to find some Okinawate, etcetera.

3) I think I'd rather have a really good understanding of the theme of an art - the underlying theory and be able to use it well for my own purposes and delve into other things to serve my own personal needs for supplementation.

1) See the other thread I started regarding mastering an art. Maybe I'm not following the one master teacher thing. I have teachers for every art that I do.


2) Yes, its amazing on how similar some things are.

3) Well, thats what I did with Kenpo. Maybe the short comings are my own, maybe they're in the art...either way, the other arts that I do aside from Kenpo, help to make MY Kenpo better.

 

[MJS]

There are obvious differences between the ring and the real world, but not as many as some would like to pretend. It's like the difference between Grand Prix driving and driving a normal car on a public roadway. Yeah, there are things on the street that you don't run in to in Grand Prix, but the reality is a great deal of the lessons from the former transfer very well to the later.

A prime example of this is law enforcement high speed driving. The reality is that most police officers are mediocre drivers at high speed. There are only a few good training programs in this country that actually teach very useful skills for operating a motor vehicle at the edge of the envelope..........and they are all ran by former race car drivers.

So to the answer the question, the UFC put to rest the notion that one who master of a single range of combat can be undefeated.......and though, like pursuit driving and Grand Prix, the UFC and the street aren't the same, driving fast is still driving fast.......and those who do it best are generally those who do it most often.

Well, looking at the long list of 'no-nos' I'd say there're quite a few differences, but I see what you're saying. I'll always give credit where its due, and I've said many, many times, that the UFC opened the eyes of many, and if it didn't, well, shame on those people.

 

[MJS]

If you have the physical make up of someone who is extremely mobile in his legs and hips, then perhaps this could be true. As a general philosophy it sucks though. Everything depends on your anatomy.

I am very flexible and bendy -except- in my thigh muscles. I tried many things for long times, but I will never be a graceful high kicker. Mind you, I never saw the point of kicking to the face, any more than I would strike at the foot from a standing position. Nevermind that in a crowded space, kicking would have its own problems.

Personally, I think that it is more important to figure out what art fits your body and preferences, and train in that as serious as possible. If that means you become a boxer or do TKD, more power to you.

Good point. I think its safe to say that we all have our strong/weak points, but this is why I feel that its important to figure out those problems and try to work on them, as best we can.

It is arguable that as fighters became more well rounded in MMA, they became less 1 dimensional. But how many times do you fight other fighters on in self defense scenarios? And if Bas Rutten would jump me in an alley and decide to beat me up, then being well-rounded or not will not make a difference to the actual outcome.

Hopefully the guy that decides to attack me wont be Bas' evil twin, but in any case, and Sgtmac said the same thing...this is why I mentioned taking the person out of their element. I'm certainly a big fan of picking up and using an improvised weapon. If it means saving my tail, I'm gonna do it.

 

[Flying Crane]

There is a very powerful drive in most Asian arts to LOOK GOOD...graceful, harmonious, and all that.

not in the Chinese arts that I've trained.

careful with the blanket statements. There are often more exceptions than examples of the rule.

 

[MJS]

MJS -

I think the guy you were quoting was trying to use the exception to prove the rule, which is questionable logic, IMHO. Very few people can specialize so effectively as to able to ignore other fight ranges. Not that it can't be done, but it doesn't really *prove* anything for the average person.

Agreed. Of course, I think its safe to say that we've all seen people who think that they'll never be put in those awkward positions. Oh well....