'Beliefs' in martial arts.

[Daniel Sullivan]

how is this any different from any other martial art? Every single one developed in a certain era and under social conditions that influenced what it became. I guess karate and hapkido are really folk games as well. are not those methods being practiced, to a certain extent, to preserve them, in addition to any practical application that they may have?

Folk games were developed as folk games or sports (not much difference really; given that 'sports' are essentially games for the folks as well).

The difference is that one is designed as a game and a martial art is generally derived from either archaic military arts or civilian fighting techniques and have a primary purpose of fighting outside of a sporting context.

Taekwondo as seen in the olympics is, in my opinion, a game. A game with players whose sole aim is to score more points than their opponent within a finite time period. There are quite a few other well established martial arts that I would place into the same category. I won't name them, mainly because the primary focus of this thread is about the veracity of supernatural or dubious techniques in martial arts. That, and I see nothing wrong with them in any way, but nobody wants to hear that their MA is a game/sport and I see no reason to stir that particular pot.

As far as I'm concerned, MMA is a sport. I view that in the same way that I view fencing, boxing and wrestling as sports. All three have real world applicability and I have never implied in any way that they do not. Sport is not a dirty word in my opinion, and often, athletes train with greater dilligence than many "martial artists" and as a result, are more likely to achieve practical real world results from the application of their techniques outside of a sporting context.

not comparable? in an absolute and objective sort of way? really? That sounds a lot like passing judgement over it, and I will need to ask: what is your experience with capoeira, to pass such judgement? Oh never mind, I hear the ghost of an old capoeira mestre, shusshing in my ear and telling me to just let it go, let them think what they want, preserve the cover...

Passing judgement? How am I passing judgement over it? At what point have I judged capoeira? Have I stated that it is deficient in some way? Or inferior in some way? Have I made any comments to the effect that capoeira practitioners cannot defend themselves? Have I disparged it in any way? If you can find where I have done so, I will happily quote it and take it back. Seriously and with no sarcasm intended.

If you simply feel that my choice of classification is disparging or insulting in some way, then my apologies, as that is not my intent.

Perhaps I am misreading you, but you seem rather defensive on this matter. And if I am picking up a vibe that is not there, then again, my apologies.

Regarding not comparable, I was pretty clear that the two are not comparable in the sense of comparing as one being greater than or less than the other. The two are different and one is not intended to be better than the other. Each has its own merits, some of which happen to overlap. But people who pursue MMA are generally doing so for different reasons than people who pursue capoeira. Or a Koryu art for that matter.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

again, it doesn't have to.

But it usually does.

If this discussion is only looking at boxing in the sporting context, that's fine.

As you stated earlier, boxing orbits around the sport. I am talkng about boxing in the context that most people, including boxers and MA-ist think of boxing most of the time.

But if the intent is to state that it is a sport and that is the end of the story, no I disagree.

That is not what I am saying. I do agree that boxing exists outside of a sporting context and has application outside of a sporting context.

you may or may not be right, but I'd say you really have no idea one way or the other.

Unless you can produce some compelling data to the contrary, I'll stand by my admittedly seat of the pants assessment.

It is based on knowing enough about a lot of people whom I have met over the years of a wide variety of ages who have no boxing experience whatsoever and never practiced it in any meaningful way with any family member.

So yes, I have an idea. It may be an incorrect idea, and as my assessment is based entirely on personal interractions and anecdotal 'data', I certainly could be. I would be quite happy to be proven wrong in this regard actually.

Daniel

 

[Aiki Lee]

WHen you say ' they react to my ki' would you explain your experience? You said, 'peoples' intention', like when you spar for a long time and you can sense the timing of someone else? Their intent? Do think these are the same?

Sometimes we practice intention sensing by blindolding each other and throwing rubber shuriken. The blindfolded person's job is to evade and only evade when they feel the shuriken has been thrown. We go to great lengths to ensure that the blindfolded student cannot hear or see us, and that we are not establishing a repetitive timing that the student can pick up on.

Sensing a person's intention comes easier if you have a personal history with that person. I can sense my training partner's intention stronger than a new person, but if that new person has a strong will during training it becomes apparent.

Timing is involved but not in the way you might be thinking. Its not that I pick up on a pattern that an opponent or partner is displaying. We litterally feel a change in the air when a person goes from being neutral to thinking about causing harm.

My personal belief about that matter is that since everything in the universe is made of waves and we react to sound waves and light waves, then why not the brainwaves another person. It's not mind reading in the sense of having the psychic power to know detailed thoughts. It's the ability to walk into a room and sense that something is not right. Body language helps make what a person is thinking easier to read, but it is not always necessary.

I think sensing intention (or ki) is common to all animals and born from a survival of the fittest evolutionary standpoint.

I believe certain military groups in the US are told that if they must remove a sentry silently they are not to look at him as they approach. The idea behind this is if you concentrate on someone with a focused intent, they tend to feel something is up even if they cannot see your physical features.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Beliefs are intimately intertwined with behavior. ie

Islamic fundamentalism/WTC
Pedophilia/Child Molesting
Newtonian Mechanics/wearing seat belts
NTKO/people getting hurt when they shoulda' just 'gave him their wallet'

It IS also relevant to humanity.

Beliefs are intertwined with everything. There comes a point where you can't be the belief police. People with beliefs that you find irrational may consider them entirely rational. And most beliefs do not have the catastrophic consequences of the things that you mentioned. If a person wants to believe that the earth is flat, he hurts nobody. The airlines, cruselines, and every industry that fucntions on the basis that the earth is spheroid will continue to do so an allow flat-earthers to larp to their heart's content. If that same flat earther boards a plane for an international flight, regardless of his belief in the shape of the earth, the pilot will get him to his destination. He can believe that the earth is rectangular for all I care.

I would suspect that pedophiles and child molesters suffer more from a mental illness than from irrational beliefs.

As for seatbelts, most who refuse to wear them do so as some idiotic act of defiance of state laws and/or place comfort over safety. I doubt that they have an issue with beliefs.

With the guidance of some evangelical churches there is now widespread manhunts for gay people and their executions. It's like witch hunts going on in Uganda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Bill

Though I am religious, I am personally against legislation of sexual preferences outside of those which affect minors or those incapable of informed consent, regardless of the context. If a secular government wants to marry two men, I really don't care.

I am of the opinion that churches (including my own) should not directly guide public policy. Same goes for corporations or large entities. No surprise that I am also against political parties as well, which I find more damaging to public policy than any religion can be (at least in the US).

The pope also informed Africa that condoms are NOT effective

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

I won't get into my thoughts about condom effectiveness (to which I give scant thought at best), however, the Catholic church's approved method of preventing the spread of STDs is to abstain from sex outside of the context of marriage. Putting aside religious beliefs, abstainance is more effective than a condom in prevention of unwanted pregnancy and spread of STDs. Not as much fun, but more effective.

The pope has informed the entire world of this, by the way; not just Africa. Probably the last pope too. Oddly, though he apparently said that it is okay for male prostitutes to use them for prevention of spreading STDs.

Those who are swayed enough by the pope's thoughts on condoms to choose not to use them should make sure to also practice the pope's recommended method of controlling STD's. You can't not use a condom and blame it on the pope while having promiscuous sex.

If you are married and your spouse has aids, well, as a Catholic, if I were bound and determined to have sex with my HIV positive wife (frankly, we'd just have to go without if it were me), I'd still use the darned thing regardless of what the pope says.

I don't care if others find fun in believing in Aphrodite or Zeus. It just always finds ways to effect EVERYONE
I'm just not seeing how superstition aids human progress. Politics, science, even in martial arts. It seems like claims that don't require evidence lead us nowhere. Like when I was in Iraq years ago, what if I took out the iron plates out of my flack vest and just trusted my 'iron shirt', and if I said an 'oracion' before going out on patrol, my beliefs would protect me? lolz

I'd say to you, 'may fortune favor the foolish.'

...HEY speaking of 'iron shirt', anyone do that here? I use to do iron palm/forearm years ago. Had a good experience with it, but just couldn't make time for it anymore. The constant striking of a limb and it's result of hardening and desensitizing really doesn't magically impress me much. But I remember watching some Iron Crotch videos and just being perplexed. What exactly is goin on here? Does it also have to do with turning off pain receptors in the brain?

What does magic have to do with hardening of limbs through repeated striking?

The only Iron crotch technique that I have ever practiced is called a cup, so I suspect that what you are talking about is outside of my realm of experience.

Daniel

 

[fangjian]

Unless you can produce some compelling data to the contrary, I'll stand by my admittedly seat of the pants assessment.

It is based on knowing enough about a lot of people whom I have met over the years of a wide variety of ages who have no boxing experience whatsoever and never practiced it in any meaningful way with any family member.

So yes, I have an idea. It may be an incorrect idea, and as my assessment is based entirely on personal interractions and anecdotal 'data', I certainly could be. I would be quite happy to be proven wrong in this regard actually.

Daniel

This is also what I was talking about in a way. I think it was clfsean who accused me of, I think, ',not really knowing what I am talking about 'cause I didn't train that art and sweat and bleed in their training hall' While there is smidgen of truth to this, I can most certainly come to sound conclusions based on observation. I have never trained in Kosen Judo or Regional Capoeira, but I know what they do. I don't have to have trained in EVERYTHING to have a good understanding of them.

 

[clfsean]

This is also what I was talking about in a way. I think it was clfsean who accused me of, I think, ',not really knowing what I am talking about 'cause I didn't train that art and sweat and bleed in their training hall' While there is smidgen of truth to this, I can most certainly come to sound conclusions based on observation. I have never trained in Kosen Judo or Regional Capoeira, but I know what they do. I don't have to have trained in EVERYTHING to have a good understanding of them.

Actually I didn't accuse you of anything. I made a statement based on what I perceive as ignorance of concerning training methods, applications, structure, format, etc... about martial arts without having spent the time on the floor/mat with them. This is based on your statement saying you don't understand everything you have.

So... since that's come up again. So you're able to "pickup" the training methods, foundations, applications, basics, etc... of a style, just by watching, please... go youtube Choy Lee Fut or Xingyi or White Crane. Then come back & tell us what you absorbed via "watching" and how you "understand" the whole of the style.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

So... since that's come up again. So you're able to "pickup" the training methods, foundations, applications, basics, etc... of a style, just by watching, please... go youtube Choy Lee Fut or Xingyi or White Crane. Then come back & tell us what you absorbed via "watching" and how you "understand" the whole of the style.

I'll leave the rest to the two of you, but I don't think that the above is what was meant by what he said.

Daniel

 

[fangjian]

Actually I didn't accuse you of anything. I made a statement based on what I perceive as ignorance of concerning training methods, applications, structure, format, etc... about martial arts without having spent the time on the floor/mat with them. This is based on your statement saying you don't understand everything you have.

So... since that's come up again. So you're able to "pickup" the training methods, foundations, applications, basics, etc... of a style, just by watching, please... go youtube Choy Lee Fut or Xingyi or White Crane. Then come back & tell us what you absorbed via "watching" and how you "understand" the whole of the style.

I also asked you about how you come to your conclusions about XMA?

Regarding your proposal, it sounds kinda' fun so I took it up. I use to study a bit of Choy Li Fut and Wah Lum some years ago so I have some knowledge of CLF. ( as a cool segui, when I was in Baghdad. We were patrolling one day and I noticed a mural on a bombed out wall of picture of a figure that looked like Bruce Lee or something. Above the figure it said "Choy Lee Fut" . I asked some of the locals in the neighborhood what it was all about, and they told me there use to be a group of kids who would practice, but there not there anymore. When I first saw it I was like "Oh Man!!! I wonder if I still remember my 'spinning spear' form. I would totally do a demo for some PR or something. Isn't that funny? You may have some kung fu brothers/sisters in Baghdad?! ) So I'd rather pick something else.

How about boxing? I've never gone to a boxing school before.

forms: to teach how to efficiently move your own body for success in combat in regards to attacking, evading, footwork, alignment, etc. ( I think most styles do this. In boxing their 'forms' are things like 1, 2. 1, 2, weave....)

Drills: for using those forms while under 'moderate pressure'. You know. Your coach will have pads and use them to 'install' proper responses to common threats you may run into.

Conditioning: Use of other things to build up your stamina, timing, speed...... Commonly I see use of Heavy Bags so practitioners can learn to generate power, speed bags, double end bags, jump rope, push ups etc. All of these things will give the practitioner desirable attributes that will give them an edge in combat.

Sparring: A free session where practitioners can have a chance to pressure test what they have learned (forms and drills) counter for counter. Use of protection, rules, etc.

*the next two categories are not always done by practitioners

Fighting: Could be just considered in the 'sparring' section, but usually there is less protection and less 'rules'.

Self Defense: Theoretical thought on the applications of boxing and how they can be used for other circumstances (MMA, Muay Thai, Knife attack, multiple attackers, ......) Boxing is strong in the area of striking, and striking defense. Weak in other areas.

-Now obviously many other styles have this same format. I don't know everything about Boxing. But is the above a somewhat fair representation of the style of Boxing?

 

[clfsean]

I also asked you about how you come to your conclusions about XMA?

XMA = martial gymnastics with no viable usage.

How did I come to that conclusion??

3rd Dan Taekwondo (MooDukKwon from what I can tell)
1st Dan Shotokan
I've taught CMA's since the late 90's and had the title of Sifu awarded to me by my teacher. He was awarded the title from his CLF teachers & missed the Sifu test in Wah Lum by two weeks in the mid 90's. I've also studied Chen Taiji & Xingyi for my own edification. I've dabbled with Wah Lum courtesy of my teacher in the past & I've lion danced since 2004. I've been fortunate enough to be exposed to multiple CMA styles by publically famous & unknown teacher to everywhere except the CMA world.

I've dabbled in JMA's that included kobudo & ken work.

I've been around the block once or twice on the floor, bleeding & sweating.

I think with fair certainty when I see a "katana" flipped 30 feet in the air by a kid wearing a tie dyed hakama screaming like he just lost his leg, I can call BS and be authoritative in my position.

When I see a kid doing a gymnastics run in the middle of a kata & coming down in a pose that expresses "I just killed 50 people... DOOD!!!!!", I can call BS and be authoritative in my position.

Satisfactory?

Regarding your proposal, it sounds kinda' fun so I took it up. I use to study a bit of Choy Li Fut and Wah Lum some years ago so I have some knowledge of CLF. ( as a cool segui, when I was in Baghdad. We were patrolling one day and I noticed a mural on a bombed out wall of picture of a figure that looked like Bruce Lee or something. Above the figure it said "Choy Lee Fut" . I asked some of the locals in the neighborhood what it was all about, and they told me there use to be a group of kids who would practice, but there not there anymore. When I first saw it I was like "Oh Man!!! I wonder if I still remember my 'spinning spear' form. I would totally do a demo for some PR or something. Isn't that funny? You may have some kung fu brothers/sisters in Baghdad?! ) So I'd rather pick something else.

Good on you for doing time in Iraq & hat's off to you with a big thanks, but still...

Try CLF. Go on... give it a shot.

How about boxing? I've never gone to a boxing school before.

forms: to teach how to efficiently move your own body for success in combat in regards to attacking, evading, footwork, alignment, etc. ( I think most styles do this. In boxing their 'forms' are things like 1, 2. 1, 2, weave....)

Drills: for using those forms while under 'moderate pressure'. You know. Your coach will have pads and use them to 'install' proper responses to common threats you may run into.

Conditioning: Use of other things to build up your stamina, timing, speed...... Commonly I see use of Heavy Bags so practitioners can learn to generate power, speed bags, double end bags, jump rope, push ups etc. All of these things will give the practitioner desirable attributes that will give them an edge in combat.

Sparring: A free session where practitioners can have a chance to pressure test what they have learned (forms and drills) counter for counter. Use of protection, rules, etc.

*the next two categories are not always done by practitioners

Fighting: Could be just considered in the 'sparring' section, but usually there is less protection and less 'rules'.

Self Defense: Theoretical thought on the applications of boxing and how they can be used for other circumstances (MMA, Muay Thai, Knife attack, multiple attackers, ......) Boxing is strong in the area of striking, and striking defense. Weak in other areas.

-Now obviously many other styles have this same format. I don't know everything about Boxing. But is the above a somewhat fair representation of the style of Boxing?

I have no clue. I've not been trained in Western Boxing so I can't comment on that.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Self Defense: Theoretical thought on the applications of boxing and how they can be used for other circumstances (MMA, Muay Thai, Knife attack, multiple attackers, ......) Boxing is strong in the area of striking, and striking defense. Weak in other areas.

-Now obviously many other styles have this same format. I don't know everything about Boxing. But is the above a somewhat fair representation of the style of Boxing?

As a general rule, boxing addresses fighting with the hands used as the primary weapon and was developed in a culture where the hands were the primary weapon in unarmed fighting. Pre-Queensbury boxing incorporated techniques outside of punches, though for the most part, those no longer are taught as part of boxing.

Boxing in self defense involves blocking, parrying or evading an opponent's strikes, regardless of the striking limb being used. So a boxer does not need to be able to kick in order to defend against a fighter who kicks. A boxer who can manage distance can overcome an opponent's kicks, either by evading them or closing in and rendering the kicks ineffective. Using the knees and elbows to strike requires no special training and a boxer would certainly have those options in a self defense context.

Likewise, modern boxing has no grappling, but one need not be a grappler to be able to frustrate an opponent who tries to grapple. Effective use of distance and judicious use of strikes can shut down an opponent who is trying to grab you.

A boxer who trains exclusively in boxing will have a good sense of distance, timing, and will have a strong technical command of the strikes, blocks, and parries associated with the art. Thus, he is the man who has practiced a small number of techniques ten thousand times rather than the man who has practiced a wide variety of techniques but has less technical command of them.

I would contend that it would be more beneficial for the boxer to do friendly sparring with kickers and grapplers on occasion so as to know what they can do and to become familiar with how they respond as opponents than it is for the boxer to expand his repitoir to include their techniques.

Daniel

 

[Flying Crane]

@ Flying Crane

You obviously possess some knowledge of Capoeira. This is a great example of something that I would consider 1-2 dimensional along with many other styles(boxing, bjj, sikaran). Since I am ignorant to the combat apps of Capoeira. Could you enlighten me? Capoeira, frequently is viewed in this light I think. So I think this would be a great opportunity to shed a little light on it.

When I think of Capoeira, I see many fascinating kicks, movements and such, some that I can see higher % moves, and some that are not. Do they normally train 'capoeirista v capoeirista, like a duel( not for play, but counter for counter spar)? Or are there really some schools that teach how to use Capoeira to counter other styles(wrestler, boxer etc. ) ?
I'm intrigued.

ps. I saw some guy (mma fighter I think) on youtube a few months ago. He was doing some badass moves from capoeira on a hanging heavy bag, and ground n pounding it using capoeira etc. It was fascinating! Wish I could find a link 4 u, but I can't

OK, we may be drifting farther from the thread here but that seems to be happening and if everyone is happy to take the discussion where ever it goes, I'm game.

Capoeira as we know it today was first developed in Brazil during the slavery era. Africans from different tribal groups and different parts of Africa were deliberately mixed in Brazil, by the slave holders. This was done to undermine the ability of the slaves to stage an uprising, as different tribal groups often had different cultures, different languages, etc., and it made it more difficult for the slaves to communicate and organize, and feel a sense of unity in such a culturally mixed environment.

Of course over time, the slaves learned the language of the owners, and perhaps learned the African languages of those held with them, and the were able to communicate. But at lest initially the mixing of groups helped to prevent unity and uprisings.

Within this melting pot of cultures, ideas were shared. Keep in mind that many of the slaves brought from Africa were warriors, and they brought their knowledge and techniques of fighting with them. This knowledge was shared amongst their slave groups, and a method of fighting was born. It is highly probable that the fighting method was also influenced by native Brazilian and Euro-Brazilians as well, as the interaction between these groups would have provided for it. It is impossible today to say specifically, which techniques or which cultural influences and elements came from which group.

This is the beginnings of what became capoeira.

African cultures tend to differ from European cultures in a couple of striking points that heavily influenced the development of capoeira. The big one is the music and rhythm. African cultures tend to express themselves musically, thru instruments and singing, and this is prevalent thru many aspects of the culture. Music brings the people together, gives them something to focus on to take their minds off tedious work, helps them remember their cultural past as they sing about their ancestors, etc. This would be an important tool in the reality of slavery, as it helped an oppressed people survive and cope with their grief and suffering and loss.

This element is prevalent in capoeira as well. Just as music is present in the other aspects of the slaves' daily lives, working in the fields, taking produce to the markets, etc., it was present during their limited time for recreation and when they would practice fighting techniques.

Capoeira has always been a fighting method. It was heavily oppressed in Brazil because it was recognized that as a powerful fighting method it gave the slaves and the recently freed Blacks a tool to oppose local law enforcement and disrupt the status quo. In the post-slavery era the police would crack down on capoeiristas, and the laws on the books specifically outlawed the practice. Known capoeira "troublemakers" would be hunted down by law enforcement and brought to justice, and their capoeira skills were justifiably feared.

This is where capoeira comes from. It was always a fighting method from the beginning, tho it holds other cultural elements that are not common to other martial arts. This gives it a unique flavor and can sometimes obscure the original intent of the method, but it was a fighting method, a martial art, before anything else. Coming out of the unique cultural mixing pot that was its genesis, it takes on aspects that outsiders may have trouble with reconciling as a martial art. But martial art is what it is.

Today things have changed and capoeira skills are no longer necessary on a frequent basis to save one's life from the oppressors. The art has changed from its original form, and probably what is most noticeable is its game-like, playful attributes. I do not deny this and I understand why people tend to believe that it is not a true martial art. But that is why I tend to speak up about it, to set the record straight and help educate those who may know just enough about it to misunderstand what it is.

There is a difference between playing capoeira, and fighting with capoeira. The capoeira game is played in the roda, between two antagonists, surrounded by the group who plays the music and sings the songs (the songs are often about old and dead capoeiristas, the heros and founders from the past, the ancestors), and give the game its rhythm and intensity. The players create a physical dialogue, spontaneously attacking and defending and moving and positioning. The intensity of the game can range from mild and gentle and jovial, to harsh and fast and brutal and nasty. A lot of it depends on who the players are and whether or not they have some perceived grudge to avenge. I've seen games between rival groups that have gotten bloody, people getting tossed out of the circle, kicked and smacked around. I remember one player's face was busted open by a kick because she didn't evade in time. I've had it done to myself, kicked in the ribs hard enough to throw me out of the circle, swept and taken down, rolled across the floor and pummeled by the other guy who was on top of me, tho I've managed to avoid being truly injured. I've done it to others as well, swept them down, knocked one player out with a kick to the face tho it was an accident and I didn't intend it. The energy of the game can take you away and it becomes intense. But this is the game of capoeira, what is done inside the circle, in the group. This is how capoeira is practiced, it is capoeira's method of sparring.

Fighting with capoeira is different. I believe that most schools in the US at least, practice and play the game of capoeira and don't really train to fight with capoeira. To do so, one must train differently.

While capoeira has a number of techniques that are unique, it also has a lot of standard fare that you would find in other systems: front kicks, side kicks, roundhouse kicks, spinning kicks, crescent and reverse-crescent kicks, knees, tripping, sweeping, take-downs, elbows, palm strikes, evasive bobbing and weaving methods, etc. These tools all exist in capoeira, as well as some unique kicks and acrobatics and methods of moving and repositioning. When one fights with capoeira, the fancy things are taken out. The playful elements, the acrobatics, the dance-like and game-like aspects would be eliminated. These things add spice to the game, make it fun and exciting. But in a fight, those things are not appropriate. It is no longer a game, and the capoeirista will attend to business. I think that to fight with capoeira will look a whole lot like fighting with any other style: ugly, brutal, brief, decisive. A capoeirista in a real fight isn't going to do a bunch of cartwheels and acrobatics and stuff. That's showing off and the enemy will obviously take advantage of that to strike. Instead, the capoeirista will use his techniques to get in and strike hard and finish the issue. That is fighting with capoeira, and I realize that is not the image that is usually shown to the public.

Many people like to use capoeira as a performance art because in the context of the game it lends itself well to performance. The music and rhythm, the singing, the acrobatics and playful attitude can be a real crowd-pleaser. So I get it when people call it a "folk game" or think that it's a form of dance. I really do get it. But they are wrong, that is not what it really is. That is just one aspect that is on display.

Regardless of how it is done today, regardless of the fact that most people today train for the game and not for the fight, that doesn't negate the fact that it developed as a fight, and it is still a viable fight to those who train appropriately. This is what makes it a martial art, like any other. As a martial art, it can stand next to karate, kungfu, and all the rest.

In the last decade or so there have been a number of well researched books written in English on the topic. There are some good stories in those books. One of my favorite capoeira stories that I read goes like this: Shortly after the abolishment of slavery when capoeira was heavily repressed, there was a somewhat famous capoeirista who was known for causing trouble for the local law enforcement. He was feared by the police, and they decided they needed to bring him to justice. An officer tracked him down and cornered him, with no way to escape. The capoeirista collapsed in a blubbering heap, crying and pleading for his life. The officer was shocked at this display of weakness and could not believe this was the same man who was so feared. In the officer's hesitation, the capoeirista jumped up with a straight razor in his hand and cut the officer's throat and escaped. This is capoeira. Capoeira is deception.

that is why I say that the old masters would be happy to let everyone believe capoeira is a folk game.

 

[fangjian]

As a general rule, boxing addresses fighting with the hands used as the primary weapon and was developed in a culture where the hands were the primary weapon in unarmed fighting. Pre-Queensbury boxing incorporated techniques outside of punches, though for the most part, those no longer are taught as part of boxing.

Boxing in self defense involves blocking, parrying or evading an opponent's strikes, regardless of the striking limb being used. So a boxer does not need to be able to kick in order to defend against a fighter who kicks. A boxer who can manage distance can overcome an opponent's kicks, either by evading them or closing in and rendering the kicks ineffective. Using the knees and elbows to strike requires no special training and a boxer would certainly have those options in a self defense context.

Yes a boxer CAN use elbows, knees, head-butts, but it is not as likely that he will use those tools he they aren't regularly part of his training. I was helping a friend one time train for a Muay Thai fight. He practiced using his knees in a ineffective manor while training. That's the same way he did it in the actual fight. And that's someone who actually trains using knees. One time when I was in highschool, I got in a street fight, had a kid in a double collar tie attempted to throw some knees and missed every single one, because at the time it wasn't part of my training.

I would contend that it would be more beneficial for the boxer to do friendly sparring with kickers and grapplers on occasion so as to know what they can do and to become familiar with how they respond as opponents than it is for the boxer to expand his repitoir to include their techniques.

Daniel

"A technique that you have never seen, will hit you." Boxers normally just train to fight other boxers. High school wrestlers just train to wrestle other wrestlers. The more variables you introduce into your style, the better(for self defense anyway).

XMA = martial gymnastics with no viable usage.

How did I come to that conclusion??

3rd Dan Taekwondo (MooDukKwon from what I can tell)
1st Dan Shotokan
I've taught CMA's since the late 90's and had the title of Sifu awarded to me by my teacher. He was awarded the title from his CLF teachers & missed the Sifu test in Wah Lum by two weeks in the mid 90's. I've also studied Chen Taiji & Xingyi for my own edification. I've dabbled with Wah Lum courtesy of my teacher in the past & I've lion danced since 2004. I've been fortunate enough to be exposed to multiple CMA styles by publically famous & unknown teacher to everywhere except the CMA world.

I've dabbled in JMA's that included kobudo & ken work.

I've been around the block once or twice on the floor, bleeding & sweating.

I think with fair certainty when I see a "katana" flipped 30 feet in the air by a kid wearing a tie dyed hakama screaming like he just lost his leg, I can call BS and be authoritative in my position.

When I see a kid doing a gymnastics run in the middle of a kata & coming down in a pose that expresses "I just killed 50 people... DOOD!!!!!", I can call BS and be authoritative in my position.

Satisfactory?

No. I am not satisfied. How come you can claim to come to informed conclusions about other styles, and I can't?

Good on you for doing time in Iraq & hat's off to you with a big thanks, but still...

Try CLF. Go on... give it a shot.

My Iraq story has nothing to do with anything of course. I just thought you would enjoy the story. I think it said you do CLF in your profile.

Why was my 'boxing' 'write up' not good enough?
If I have time later, it sounds fun to come up with one for White Crane/Xingyi/CLF. But I'm afraid it won't matter what I write. You are likely more knowledgable than me in let's say CLF, and just 'one up' me every line, just because I forgot to mention something about their kind of wooden dummy training. Or I didn't mention their training of 'horse bench'.

 

[Flying Crane]

Folk games were developed as folk games or sports (not much difference really; given that 'sports' are essentially games for the folks as well).

The difference is that one is designed as a game and a martial art is generally derived from either archaic military arts or civilian fighting techniques and have a primary purpose of fighting outside of a sporting context.

I just made a lengthy post about capoeira and the difference between the game and the fight, and how capoeira developed as a fighting art. Hopefully that will help clear up the misconception.

Taekwondo as seen in the olympics is, in my opinion, a game. A game with players whose sole aim is to score more points than their opponent within a finite time period.

I would agree, but I would not say that TKD as a whole is a sport, end-of-story. It has a sporting component to it, and that is what we see in the Olympics. But it began as a fighting art, a martial art, and for those who practice appropriately, it still is.

Passing judgement? How am I passing judgement over it? At what point have I judged capoeira? Have I stated that it is deficient in some way? Or inferior in some way? Have I made any comments to the effect that capoeira practitioners cannot defend themselves? Have I disparged it in any way? If you can find where I have done so, I will happily quote it and take it back. Seriously and with no sarcasm intended.

maybe I am also misreading you and if so I apologize as well. But by calling Capoeira a folk game and negating it as a martial art, I feel you are simply uninformed on the topic. As I mentioned earlier, I have trained capoeira for a number of years and developed some reasonable skill with it. I know the art, and I know that it is a martial art. Hopefully my other post will clear this up.

If you simply feel that my choice of classification is disparging or insulting in some way, then my apologies, as that is not my intent.

Perhaps I am misreading you, but you seem rather defensive on this matter. And if I am picking up a vibe that is not there, then again, my apologies.

apology accepted, thanks and no worries, I know it's not personal.

I do get a bit defensive about this because I believe people are uninformed about what capoeira really is, and it irritates me to see people calling it this or that, when they have no real experience with it. My wife and I were at a party at a friends house. She and I met in the capoeira school, we were both students there. Our friend also comes out of that school, and some other friends from the capoeira world were also at the party. Some other guy, friend of our friend, but not from capoeira, starts talking to my wife about capoeira, and wants to tell her how its not really a fighting art, it's a cultural dance, etc. My wife was like, "what the hell do you know? You know nothing about it, you've not studied it, you have nothing to say". It is something that irritates me and I find myself bouncing between thinking I should take the opportunity to educate people, or I should listen to the old dead masters and let the public remain ignorant. Sometimes I choose the former, sometimes the latter. This time I spoke up.

 

[jks9199]

Ahhhh. Ok that makes sense.

I see what you mean. Other people have different 'realities' of violence. My 'world' is slightly different from my best friend's (who's a cop) 'world' which was different than both of our 'worlds' when we were in the same squad in Iraq. Is this what you are meaning?

As an example,

We had to do raids and cordon & searches on weekly basis. We pretty much had a body of techniques/methods that were used so we could do the missions efficiently, safely, etc.

(for the sake of argument) Like if our 'style' for doing these missions contained techniques that involved 'flagging(accidentally pointing your weapon at) fellow soldiers, not 'cutting the pie' with your rifle when entering new rooms, not using verbal/oral communication during the mission etc. , then I would consider this method to be inferior.

We frequently had to run missions with Special Forces and they would teach us new techniques, methods ( and sometimes show us how some techniques we had that needed to be dropped) that we could add to our 'style' that improved it.

So yeah, while there are many different 'realities', it just seems that certain 'bodies of knowledge (styles) could be GENERALLY more efficient than others in certain environments. Like our style for doing these raids and such was superior to the way we were doing them in our first month there. And the environment and threat was the same. Same environment, different styles. But one was better.

I won't address this issue anymore so we can stay on topic. But would like to hear your response to this.

OK; you've got personal knowledge of a particular scope of violence -- and I give you absolute credit for that, and I thank you for your service.

But -- I suspect you don't have a lot of personal experience about one-on-one, personal violence. Even doing house clearing and the like, your tactics were all about overwhelming force. Bluntly, and appropriately, you were the aggressors. Personal violence is a different thing entirely, just like clearing a house as a cop is different.

Your experience is shaping your beliefs -- but your beliefs are also shaping your interpretation and expectations. Rory Miller, in Meditations on Violence, notes that one possible source of the mythological unicorn was the rhino -- and we "know" an awful lot about unicorns, but most of us know very little about rhinos. The only catch is the unicorn ain't real... and if we prepare to handle a rhino based on the myths about the unicorn, the results aren't likely to be pretty. I just don't think a virgin walking up to an angry rhino is likely to gentle the beast, y'know?

Personal violence and real fights are ugly -- lots uglier than most of us expect, especially based on TV and movies. Think about your training in house clearing. After a while, you all probably were almost pretty to watch clearing houses in training, right? Everybody moving together, communicating... A well trained team doing entry training is a thing of beauty. But -- take the best trained team, and put 'em in a real situation, and it's just never as pretty or smooth, is it? (And if it is... STOP! Something is wrong! In the cop world... you're probably hitting the wrong house...)

Rory summed up real personal violence in the 4 truths in my signature: Violence happens closer, faster, more suddenly, and with more power than most people believe. And your training needs to take those truths into account IF your training is about preparing for real violence.

 

[clfsean]

No. I am not satisfied. How come you can claim to come to informed conclusions about other styles, and I can't?

Because I do understand what I teach and understand what I know.
Because I do take the take the time to look into (ie... mat/sweat time) other arts if there are questions I might have.
Because I don't make blanket statements without the facts to back them up and be ready & able to physically prove my point or have it disproven.

XMA, based on 30 years experience, understanding of the "base arts" they ripped off and understanding body mechanics leads me to make my statement. Now they are magnificent atheletes & gymnists. They do things I can't do now & when I could, weren't done. So they have my respect for that. Then again, my youngest ex-stepdaughter is a competative gymnist & does the same kind of things. Doesn't mean she could pull any of that stuff off in a self defense situation to come out ok. But she also studies CLF with me & THAT, she can pull off as I taught it to her & will get her out of a scrape.

My Iraq story has nothing to do with anything of course. I just thought you would enjoy the story. I think it said you do CLF in your profile.

I did & like I said, whole hearted thanks for the time you put in there.

Why was my 'boxing' 'write up' not good enough?

No it was fine, but I don't train Western boxing, so I can't comment on their training methods.

If I have time later, it sounds fun to come up with one for White Crane/Xingyi/CLF. But I'm afraid it won't matter what I write. You are likely more knowledgable than me in let's say CLF, and just 'one up' me every line, just because I forgot to mention something about their kind of wooden dummy training. Or I didn't mention their training of 'horse bench'.

It's not a matter of one upping. It's a matter of first hand knowledge & experience. That makes the difference. I wouldn't supposed to tell you how to field strip a M4 or M9 (I don't like'em anyway. I carry a 1911. ). Not my training arena or field of expertise.

Besides, I don't practice with the bench. It's not found in every line.

 

[fangjian]

Because I do understand what I teach and understand what I know.
Because I do take the take the time to look into (ie... mat/sweat time) other arts if there are questions I might have.
Because I don't make blanket statements without the facts to back them up and be ready & able to physically prove my point or have it disproven.

XMA, based on 30 years experience, understanding of the "base arts" they ripped off and understanding body mechanics leads me to make my statement. Now they are magnificent atheletes & gymnists. They do things I can't do now & when I could, weren't done. So they have my respect for that. Then again, my youngest ex-stepdaughter is a competative gymnist & does the same kind of things. Doesn't mean she could pull any of that stuff off in a self defense situation to come out ok. But she also studies CLF with me & THAT, she can pull off as I taught it to her & will get her out of a scrape.

I don't know, man. Seems to me like you're making a sweeping generalization of XMA. How many years did you train XMA for? It's not the style it's the practitioner right? Just because you can't perform a '540 kick' on someone's face, doesn't mean someone else can't. Who are you to judge?

It's not a matter of one upping. It's a matter of first hand knowledge & experience. That makes the difference. I wouldn't supposed to tell you how to field strip a M4 or M9 (I don't like'em anyway. I carry a 1911. ). Not my training arena or field of expertise.

Besides, I don't practice with the bench. It's not found in every line.

In regards to 'gaining knowledge'. I've never truly studied Wu/Hao Taijiquan, Epee, Stratigraphy, Oceanography, Alchemy........ But I can tell you about what those things are. What they can teach you. What they can't teach you......
1911 is the KING of pistols. Am I right or am I right?!

 

[clfsean]

I don't know, man. Seems to me like you're making a sweeping generalization of XMA. How many years did you train XMA for? It's not the style it's the practitioner right? Just because you can't perform a '540 kick' on someone's face, doesn't mean someone else can't. Who are you to judge?

I'm going out on a limb & guessing you had your sarcasm hat on here.

In regards to 'gaining knowledge'. I've never truly studied Wu/Hao Taijiquan, Epee, Stratigraphy, Oceanography, Alchemy........ But I can tell you about what those things are. What they can teach you. What they can't teach you......

But how can you tell me what they can & can't give to me if you haven't truly studied them? Especially something that requires physical instruction (such as taiji or epee). Academic discussion is one thing. Amybody can read about anything & talk about it. But to truly be able to discuss it, you must have experience with it.

1911 is the KING of pistols. Am I right or am I right?!

NO arguments here. I prefer my XdM (lighter/high capacity) for daily wear & tear, but the 1911 is the go to, nail driver. NO DOUBTS!

 

[fangjian]

But -- I suspect you don't have a lot of personal experience about one-on-one, personal violence. Even doing house clearing and the like, your tactics were all about overwhelming force. Bluntly, and appropriately, you were the aggressors. Personal violence is a different thing entirely, just like clearing a house as a cop is different.

I was just using it as an example of an environment where a particular style of combat was inferior to another. Most people don't have much experience with 1 on 1 combat. I've only been in a few fights, myself. I have a friend that never trained martial arts, but has been in probably about 30 street fights. That experience is valuable, but some place greater value on that experience (and of course, some place too much value on their training as well) than they should. My friends style of fighting would be a little bit of a boxing/brawling no technique but a lot of heart kind of approach. I think this would be most peoples approach to a 1 on 1 barehanded fight. At least from what I have observed. Just because my friend has more experience in real fights on the ground(too) doesn't mean we are equal in ground fighting skill.

Personal violence and real fights are ugly -- lots uglier than most of us expect, especially based on TV and movies. Think about your training in house clearing. After a while, you all probably were almost pretty to watch clearing houses in training, right? Everybody moving together, communicating... A well trained team doing entry training is a thing of beauty. But -- take the best trained team, and put 'em in a real situation, and it's just never as pretty or smooth, is it? (And if it is... STOP! Something is wrong! In the cop world... you're probably hitting the wrong house...)

It's never pretty at first. Just like the black belt in Bjj. Headbutt him on the bridge of his nose and he's a 'blue belt' now. After more experience though through the 'truths' you mention below, he'll perform like a black belt again.
In regards to raiding the wrong location, I have more stories of us going to the wrong place (through ****** intel) than going to the right place

Rory summed up real personal violence in the 4 truths in my signature: Violence happens closer, faster, more suddenly, and with more power than most people believe. And your training needs to take those truths into account IF your training is about preparing for real violence.

In regards to the 'truths' you mention. Wouldn't the more truths a style takes into account the better?

PS. I'm gonna do some research on more supernatural stuff in ma so we can get this back on track

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Yes a boxer CAN use elbows, knees, head-butts, but it is not as likely that he will use those tools he they aren't regularly part of his training. I was helping a friend one time train for a Muay Thai fight. He practiced using his knees in a ineffective manor while training. That's the same way he did it in the actual fight. And that's someone who actually trains using knees. One time when I was in highschool, I got in a street fight, had a kid in a double collar tie attempted to throw some knees and missed every single one, because at the time it wasn't part of my training.

Never had any trouble using knees or elbows and I've never trained specifically in them in a sparring scenario. They are touched on very lightly in taekwondo and hapkido, but if fights that I was in in grade school and high school, I found knees and elbows very effective. Not rocket science. More than likely, the kid in question was just like most high school kids: not a particularly adept fighter.

As for the MT guy, who knows? Maybe he just is lousy with knees and elbows. There are TKD kicks that I trained in regularly for years that I was never what I would consider very strong in. Others, I am excellent with.

I'm not sure if this thought has crossed your mind, but there are people who are excellent fighters who have little to no formal training. A lot of those types of fighters ended up boxing because they were already good at fighting.

"A technique that you have never seen, will hit you." Boxers normally just train to fight other boxers. High school wrestlers just train to wrestle other wrestlers. The more variables you introduce into your style, the better(for self defense anyway).

Hence my comment about the benefits of a practitioner of one art (boxing in this case, but it applies to any) training with people who practice differing skill sets.

Again, however, most striking 'techniques' are not techniques that a boxer, or anyone else for that matter, hasn't 'seen.' I saw many kicks outside of martial arts. I learned to avoid low kicks before I ever took TKD because a girl in class used to try to kick people in the shins on a regular basis. We got along, but it was something of an odious personal habit on her part. 'Look over there' kick! She thought it was funny. I suppose that when you're six and seven, a lot of things are funny. But I got very used to getting out of the way of her kicks. I used to get into scraps with kids in the neighborhood, and even though none of them ever took karate or TKD, they all seemed to know how to kick, knee, and elbow.

To a certain extent, it seems that you are operating on the assumption that if you haven't formally trained in it, then you either cannot do it or will not recognize it. For many things taught in martial arts, that is true, but in its most basic form, unarmed attacks in and of themselves are not all that hard to recognize. It is timing and setting up of your opponent and/or the element of surprise that makes them susceptible to the attack.

Formal training helps, but as I said, some people can just fight with little to no formal training. This is one of the reasons that when I watch MMA, I don't evaluate the styles being used, but the fighter who is using them.

As far as using anything in self defense outside of tournament, the majority of encounters will be unscripted and against untrained fighters.

Untrained fighters can be more problematic than trained ones, particularly if they can fight, because they do not exhibit patterns or behaviors that a trained fighter might expect, not to mention the possibility of concealed weapons. This is a potential issue for any trained fighter, regardless of style. And yet another reason why friendly sparring with practitioners of other systems is advisable for stylists of any art.

Daniel

 

[fangjian]

More than likely, the kid in question was just like most high school kids: not a particularly adept fighter.

HEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That was ME!!!!!!


In regards to the untrained fighter is also a dangerous one.

Yes, he/she is. I always ask my friends who aren't 'martial artists' to come in to my place so that I may recognize what the 'untrained' timing, instinct might look like. I train Balintawak which was kind of designed for stick fighter vs. stick fighter. I always want people to come in who don't know this stuff to spar with me cause I bet it would help to know how to deal with that different type of movements. Like in the above posts. the more 'truths' of violence we are aware of, the better.