Can anybody fight like this?
- Thread starter Yoshiyahu
- Start date
BrandonLucas
3rd Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
- Messages
- 902
- Reaction score
- 41
First, I would like to say that Gymkata is one of the greatest martial arts movies of all time.
But in all seriousness, the purpose of kata/forms/poomse's is debated all the time. And it does have some relevance in the argument in terms of a form's usefulness in regards to SD the same as XMA techniques...
While it can be argued that practicing forms is not useful in SD applications, TMA forms are more relevant than XMA forms in that the moves are SD at the core...XMA forms are more for show than actual practicality.
Sure, we're not going to actually fight from a backstance and throw a textbook sideblock when being attacked...but a sideblock from a backstance is one of the first core techniques that we're taught. So it could be argued that the backstance is completely useless, since we're not going to actually use the backstance during an SD situation...but the truth of the matter is that this is one of the building blocks of any TMA...the use of the basics helps to shape and mold each student into someone who can use the techniques in an SD application.
The forms and patterns of TKD are all made up of the basic block/punch/kick and stances that are taught as basics. They are used as a conditioning tool as well as understanding why the moves are performed the way they are. If you look at the XMA forms, you are not going to see any basic techniques or stances...I'm not even sure how exactly they teach their patterns. But I do know that nowhere in any of the TMA's can I find a reference for any of the flash that is performed...but there are punches and kicks sprinkled throughout their pattern that allude to TMA's...but you would be hardpressed to name what art they come from.
Basically, in TMA's, forms are a way of teaching someone how to defend themselves, by giving them a kind of blueprint of what to do...and most students know and understand not to directly mimick a form or pattern in a real situation. In XMA, even if a student decided to not mimick a form or pattern to protect themselves, they wouldn't have any real techniques to choose from.
But in all seriousness, the purpose of kata/forms/poomse's is debated all the time. And it does have some relevance in the argument in terms of a form's usefulness in regards to SD the same as XMA techniques...
While it can be argued that practicing forms is not useful in SD applications, TMA forms are more relevant than XMA forms in that the moves are SD at the core...XMA forms are more for show than actual practicality.
Sure, we're not going to actually fight from a backstance and throw a textbook sideblock when being attacked...but a sideblock from a backstance is one of the first core techniques that we're taught. So it could be argued that the backstance is completely useless, since we're not going to actually use the backstance during an SD situation...but the truth of the matter is that this is one of the building blocks of any TMA...the use of the basics helps to shape and mold each student into someone who can use the techniques in an SD application.
The forms and patterns of TKD are all made up of the basic block/punch/kick and stances that are taught as basics. They are used as a conditioning tool as well as understanding why the moves are performed the way they are. If you look at the XMA forms, you are not going to see any basic techniques or stances...I'm not even sure how exactly they teach their patterns. But I do know that nowhere in any of the TMA's can I find a reference for any of the flash that is performed...but there are punches and kicks sprinkled throughout their pattern that allude to TMA's...but you would be hardpressed to name what art they come from.
Basically, in TMA's, forms are a way of teaching someone how to defend themselves, by giving them a kind of blueprint of what to do...and most students know and understand not to directly mimick a form or pattern in a real situation. In XMA, even if a student decided to not mimick a form or pattern to protect themselves, they wouldn't have any real techniques to choose from.
dancingalone
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 5,322
- Reaction score
- 281
I digress, but why not? All stances should be regarded as transitory when actually fighting. The back stance is an excellent defensive posture for avoiding an attack as part of an off-line pivot manuever. Then one has an option of shifting to a more aggressive stance for counter-attack.
BrandonLucas
3rd Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
- Messages
- 902
- Reaction score
- 41
Ok, you have a valid point there. I didn't realize that while typing my reply.
But that further reinforces what I'm saying about TMA vs XMA for SD applications. The forms and patterns in TMA's have substance, purpose, and value, whereas XMA patterns and forms are for show and little else.
But, again, most of the people who do XMA realize this, I'm sure...it's just disappointing that most people see this and think that it's real martial arts.
OK, I have been resisting this for a while now but I can no longer stop myself
Can anyone fight like this OK, maybe if you happen to have a pommel horse handy but how often does that happen
Extreme pommel horse, very nice.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
BLASPHEMER!!!!! You know, I suppose carrying a pommel horse where ever you go just in case you have to fight could be considered a form of training
Gymkata man I remember that movie and also remember that steel bar going a cross the two building so he could swing on it and wipe out the bad people chasing him. I made so much fun of that movie.
Kwan Jang
Purple Belt
The use of traditional basics as an effective means of self defense is not what I am questioning. It's just the way 97-98% of TMA practitioners apply it that is ineffective. If Tez is making proper use of this, then my argument does not include her. Brandon's statement (I do not mean any personal attack or insult by saying this) goes to the heart of the matter. The vast majority of the TMA crowd will say traditional forms and basics are a great training tool and vital for developing core martial skills and fighting ability, but then they never practice their self defense or sparring in such a manner. Other than it's "tradition", this approach absolutely makes no sense at all.
Your basic skills should reflect the way you would fight or defend yourself. This is why the vast majority of the MMA crowd rejects traditional kata and basics as an effective training method. And if what you see on the surface of the "school children's art" was all there was to it, then they would be completely right in doing so. IMO, by not taking the time to look more closely and back track to research the original intent and purpose of the forms, they are "throwing out the baby with the bathwater". With the (using the Okinawan terms since the Japanese and Korean forms can be traced back to theirs) kyusho and tuite applications, then you do have something worthwhile for self defense in forms work. Provided you actually work it rahter than just memorize the patterns.
Just for the record, most of the high level XMA competitors I have seen do use front, cat, back, x stances, ect. Most of the high level ones also have very sharp basics and performing their forms in a much more physically demanding exercise and form of conditioning than the traditional patterns. Brandon used the deep traditional stances as a method of leg conditioning argument, but if it's about conditioning, then the XMA people have the TMA guys all beat by miles (speaking of which, Ineed to quit typing and head to the gym). It's been argued in both this thread and the similar one on the general forum that these forms are not combat worthy. I agree, but point out that the vast majority of how TMA competitors perform and practice their patterns is no more combat worthy (though I would like to see the numbers come up on those who do). It's also been implied by several posters that none of the XMA crowd can fight (with an under current from a few posters that they would easily wipe the floor with the lot of them). Though this would come down to an individual basis, if I were a betting man, I would give better odds towards many of better XMA guys in a fight. The reality is that the vast majority of the XMA crowd are guys with a solid traditional base (and for most this includes fighting) who want to push their physical limits to new heights. Speaking of which, I'm heading for the gym.
I am not even really a fan of XMA and have my own problems with it. I even agree with many of the points made here, but I feel too many are throwing out flawed arguements. Exile's point of comparing it to the difference between aeriel skiiers and speed skiiers was a good one.
Your basic skills should reflect the way you would fight or defend yourself. This is why the vast majority of the MMA crowd rejects traditional kata and basics as an effective training method. And if what you see on the surface of the "school children's art" was all there was to it, then they would be completely right in doing so. IMO, by not taking the time to look more closely and back track to research the original intent and purpose of the forms, they are "throwing out the baby with the bathwater". With the (using the Okinawan terms since the Japanese and Korean forms can be traced back to theirs) kyusho and tuite applications, then you do have something worthwhile for self defense in forms work. Provided you actually work it rahter than just memorize the patterns.
Just for the record, most of the high level XMA competitors I have seen do use front, cat, back, x stances, ect. Most of the high level ones also have very sharp basics and performing their forms in a much more physically demanding exercise and form of conditioning than the traditional patterns. Brandon used the deep traditional stances as a method of leg conditioning argument, but if it's about conditioning, then the XMA people have the TMA guys all beat by miles (speaking of which, Ineed to quit typing and head to the gym). It's been argued in both this thread and the similar one on the general forum that these forms are not combat worthy. I agree, but point out that the vast majority of how TMA competitors perform and practice their patterns is no more combat worthy (though I would like to see the numbers come up on those who do). It's also been implied by several posters that none of the XMA crowd can fight (with an under current from a few posters that they would easily wipe the floor with the lot of them). Though this would come down to an individual basis, if I were a betting man, I would give better odds towards many of better XMA guys in a fight. The reality is that the vast majority of the XMA crowd are guys with a solid traditional base (and for most this includes fighting) who want to push their physical limits to new heights. Speaking of which, I'm heading for the gym.
I am not even really a fan of XMA and have my own problems with it. I even agree with many of the points made here, but I feel too many are throwing out flawed arguements. Exile's point of comparing it to the difference between aeriel skiiers and speed skiiers was a good one.
Again I disagree with Kwan Jang I'm afraid, there's far more martial artists out there who understand Bunkai than just a small minority that he suggests. I can think of several on MT for a start, I don't do martial arts for the 'arts' bit, I do it so I can fight. I have learnt considerably from kata moves that enable me to do this efficiently, even grappling moves are there. Going back again to Iain Abernethy, his seminars are extremely popular, they are well attended so there are plenty of martial artists out there who are using katas to do precisely what Kwan Jang says they are not.
I do MMA and TMA and am not alone in doing so, a recent signing to the UFC is Neil Groves a karateka who still does kata and Bunkai, his instructor also trains with Iain and is well known for his realistic training. The majority of fighters in the UK come from a TMA background, Wolfslair where Micheal Bisping trains and Rampage was training recently has a regular TKD class so I wouldn't say MMA people have turned their back on TMAs at all. Perhaps it's different in America.
I do MMA and TMA and am not alone in doing so, a recent signing to the UFC is Neil Groves a karateka who still does kata and Bunkai, his instructor also trains with Iain and is well known for his realistic training. The majority of fighters in the UK come from a TMA background, Wolfslair where Micheal Bisping trains and Rampage was training recently has a regular TKD class so I wouldn't say MMA people have turned their back on TMAs at all. Perhaps it's different in America.
BrandonLucas
3rd Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
- Messages
- 902
- Reaction score
- 41
To give what Kwan Jang is talking about some credit, I do know that a large number of the MMA'ists in America reject forms and katas as a credible form of training. The ones that I've noticed reject them are the MMA'ists who are on the competition side of MMA. And, in reality, for their needs, forms and katas are not really a part of their primary training. I don't think it would be a waste of their time to learn them, though....
I think everyone should at least learn forms. After they've learned them, they can make their own decision as to whether or not it can be used as an actual learning tool. I think that forms are valid and have their place in my training, and I really can't see myself progressing without learning them...and others may be different. There really isn't a right or wrong for that, IMO, because training is a very individual thing.
The point of comparison that I was making between TMA and XMA forms are the techniques involved. Forms in TMA are based on combat with an opponent with minimal wasted movement, based on the interpertation of the form. Forms in XMA, however, are not about minimal wasted movement at all. There is no practical application for tricking. There is nothing martial about 540 spin kicks. It's all about the looks.
Forms, for me, have helped to hone my fighting ability...and while I have never tried sparring in any of the stances, the forms have helped me refine my technique and combos. I understand that the forms and patterns were designed for a specific set of definsive combinations against a specific set of attacks, but alot of times I find myself going back to those combinations when I'm sparring. Again, that's just me, though, and I understand that everyone has a different opinion about forms. But, just because you don't agree with the use of forms in your training, doesn't mean that it doesn't work for someone else.
Now, I can pull combinations, attacks, and defenses directly out of any of the forms that I've learned and use them in a real situation. I have been taught some of the applications of the techniques (There are many different interpertations of the forms, and therefore, many different applications to learn), and I understand how those can help me in a real SD situation. XMA forms are not the same at all. It's apples and oranges. There is no practical use for XMA forms. There just isn't. They may use the occasional back stance or punch or what-have-you, but those come between all the tricking and "non-martial" techniques that are only there for show.
And that is where it gets to the heart of the matter for me.
My 10 year old cousin has never been to any of the TKD classes in town, and has never really been personally exposed to any martial arts, other than in the movies. He's never sat in on classes, never witnessed a fight, anything like that that would give him an understanding of what TMA's are all about.
I was at my Aunt's house over the holidays last year, and we were going through the channels on TV after dinner, and I stopped it on one of the ESPN channels where they were doing the forms competition. My dad was watching too, and wanted to see if any traditional forms were being done....nope. Not the first one. All XMA. All jumping and twirling, all yelling and screaming, all wearing Mortal Kombat uniforms.
So my cousin leans over to me and says this:
"I thought you told me you were a black belt. How come you can't flip in the air like those guys are?"
So I tried to explain to him that what they were doing was not actually a martial art at all, but it was all for show. He just didn't get it because all over the competition were the words "martial arts".
XMA is not a martial art. It is a performance art. And it it being marketed as a martial art. It is confusing people who don't know anything about actual martial arts.
Now, just so I'm not misunderstood here...I'm in no way saying that someone who is involved in XMA can't fight. There is no undercurrent to what I'm saying at all. If John Doe is involved in XMA, that's one thing, but how do I know that he's not a trained fighter involved in MMA? He could be a middleweight champion of the UFC for all I know...but he's involved in XMA, which is not a martial art. If he wants to be involved in that, then more power to him. But he does not need to tell everyone that he's a blackbelt in XMA, or that he trains in a martial art known as XMA, or that he uses any techniques that were taught in XMA. It is the same as false advertisement.
The discussion of the usefulness of forms and katas is something seperate to the usefulness of techniques learned in XMA. XMA itself is not designed for combat. XMA itself is not designed for anything other than forms...and that's it. I'm not saying that it can't help develop strenth, endurance, and flexiblity as well as help sharpen your technique from your TMA...but XMA by itself...the techniques involved with it....serve no actual martial purpose whatsoever.
If you want to debate the usefulness of TMA forms as far as SD goes, that's a whole other subject. But, going back to the title of this thread, which is "Can anybody fight like this?", the answer is no.
I think everyone should at least learn forms. After they've learned them, they can make their own decision as to whether or not it can be used as an actual learning tool. I think that forms are valid and have their place in my training, and I really can't see myself progressing without learning them...and others may be different. There really isn't a right or wrong for that, IMO, because training is a very individual thing.
The point of comparison that I was making between TMA and XMA forms are the techniques involved. Forms in TMA are based on combat with an opponent with minimal wasted movement, based on the interpertation of the form. Forms in XMA, however, are not about minimal wasted movement at all. There is no practical application for tricking. There is nothing martial about 540 spin kicks. It's all about the looks.
Forms, for me, have helped to hone my fighting ability...and while I have never tried sparring in any of the stances, the forms have helped me refine my technique and combos. I understand that the forms and patterns were designed for a specific set of definsive combinations against a specific set of attacks, but alot of times I find myself going back to those combinations when I'm sparring. Again, that's just me, though, and I understand that everyone has a different opinion about forms. But, just because you don't agree with the use of forms in your training, doesn't mean that it doesn't work for someone else.
Now, I can pull combinations, attacks, and defenses directly out of any of the forms that I've learned and use them in a real situation. I have been taught some of the applications of the techniques (There are many different interpertations of the forms, and therefore, many different applications to learn), and I understand how those can help me in a real SD situation. XMA forms are not the same at all. It's apples and oranges. There is no practical use for XMA forms. There just isn't. They may use the occasional back stance or punch or what-have-you, but those come between all the tricking and "non-martial" techniques that are only there for show.
And that is where it gets to the heart of the matter for me.
My 10 year old cousin has never been to any of the TKD classes in town, and has never really been personally exposed to any martial arts, other than in the movies. He's never sat in on classes, never witnessed a fight, anything like that that would give him an understanding of what TMA's are all about.
I was at my Aunt's house over the holidays last year, and we were going through the channels on TV after dinner, and I stopped it on one of the ESPN channels where they were doing the forms competition. My dad was watching too, and wanted to see if any traditional forms were being done....nope. Not the first one. All XMA. All jumping and twirling, all yelling and screaming, all wearing Mortal Kombat uniforms.
So my cousin leans over to me and says this:
"I thought you told me you were a black belt. How come you can't flip in the air like those guys are?"
So I tried to explain to him that what they were doing was not actually a martial art at all, but it was all for show. He just didn't get it because all over the competition were the words "martial arts".
XMA is not a martial art. It is a performance art. And it it being marketed as a martial art. It is confusing people who don't know anything about actual martial arts.
Now, just so I'm not misunderstood here...I'm in no way saying that someone who is involved in XMA can't fight. There is no undercurrent to what I'm saying at all. If John Doe is involved in XMA, that's one thing, but how do I know that he's not a trained fighter involved in MMA? He could be a middleweight champion of the UFC for all I know...but he's involved in XMA, which is not a martial art. If he wants to be involved in that, then more power to him. But he does not need to tell everyone that he's a blackbelt in XMA, or that he trains in a martial art known as XMA, or that he uses any techniques that were taught in XMA. It is the same as false advertisement.
The discussion of the usefulness of forms and katas is something seperate to the usefulness of techniques learned in XMA. XMA itself is not designed for combat. XMA itself is not designed for anything other than forms...and that's it. I'm not saying that it can't help develop strenth, endurance, and flexiblity as well as help sharpen your technique from your TMA...but XMA by itself...the techniques involved with it....serve no actual martial purpose whatsoever.
If you want to debate the usefulness of TMA forms as far as SD goes, that's a whole other subject. But, going back to the title of this thread, which is "Can anybody fight like this?", the answer is no.
This is the point we are trying to make, that you can't fight like this. That's what the OP asked and we've answered.
If I could, I would like to take one last stab at it. Although I feel that the question Can anybody fight like this has already been answered. A true MA is based on self defense, which means any art that claims this MA status, can be used in any and all situations. As antiquated as my chosen art of TMA,Okinawan GoJu is, I do feel that I have learned some very good points over the years. One point being to never kick higher then their waist, and to grab, off all your blocks, so as to immobilize them. From the grab you can control them while at the same time utilizing your close in arsenal of techniques that are taught in those old fashion kata and drills. I feel that XMA falls short on some of my above points, as being impractical in its endeavor to be flashy and nonfunctional with high kicks which would not work in a crowed environment. Would I want to spar one of these people, no, I would get my head taken off. J Do I feel I would stand a chance in close, with low kicks, and take downs, I hope so. :deadhorse
You have done better than I! Well done, that's how I feel!
I was running out of words tbh, it's good at what it does and what it does is not the MA we all know and love lol!
I can see I am not the only one who has thought about this topic alot. (XMA vs. TMA).
Earlier this week some students, mother and 11y/o daughter were telling me about an activity the daughter is involved in, something like "Book Battles" I can't remember the name. But students read a list of books and then they have organized contests about them.
I thought this was the BEST idea! I love to read!
They told me the daughter's class beat out even the higher grades last year and this was something she was getting serious about. Boy, I am just loving this. What a great idea...gets kids reading and talking about books, learning enthusiastically...
And then they told me about a local school that is THE school to beat. And here is where it begins...The parents read the list of books, too. And they drill the kids on the info, etc. Very involved...great,eh?
My students are plotting what they can do to beat these people who have decided that this book battle thingy is how they are going to make their mark on the world and become world famous readers!
All of a sudden, it does not sound like a good thing to me anymore.
It's not about the books, the love of reading, learning, creating a community of people who love ideas.
It's only about memorizing some facts now and regurgitating them to impress some judges. (I can't stretch this far enough to imagine a crowd going "ooooh, wow!" at this competition...but maybe it happens)
Substitute "martial art" for books in this story and you have the beginnings of XMA. For everyone here who prefers TMA to XMA, even while we say we appreciate the flips, I know you get my story. It is the difference between reading for pleasure, learning, growing and reading to win a competition that makes me so sad about this book competition. It is the same with martial arts.
The competition starts out with a good goal of improving the skills, but ends up being an end in itself. Tragedy.
Earlier this week some students, mother and 11y/o daughter were telling me about an activity the daughter is involved in, something like "Book Battles" I can't remember the name. But students read a list of books and then they have organized contests about them.
I thought this was the BEST idea! I love to read!
They told me the daughter's class beat out even the higher grades last year and this was something she was getting serious about. Boy, I am just loving this. What a great idea...gets kids reading and talking about books, learning enthusiastically...
And then they told me about a local school that is THE school to beat. And here is where it begins...The parents read the list of books, too. And they drill the kids on the info, etc. Very involved...great,eh?
My students are plotting what they can do to beat these people who have decided that this book battle thingy is how they are going to make their mark on the world and become world famous readers!
All of a sudden, it does not sound like a good thing to me anymore.
It's not about the books, the love of reading, learning, creating a community of people who love ideas.
It's only about memorizing some facts now and regurgitating them to impress some judges. (I can't stretch this far enough to imagine a crowd going "ooooh, wow!" at this competition...but maybe it happens)
Substitute "martial art" for books in this story and you have the beginnings of XMA. For everyone here who prefers TMA to XMA, even while we say we appreciate the flips, I know you get my story. It is the difference between reading for pleasure, learning, growing and reading to win a competition that makes me so sad about this book competition. It is the same with martial arts.
The competition starts out with a good goal of improving the skills, but ends up being an end in itself. Tragedy.
The thing that bothers me is how deeply XMA manages to miss the point of the MA's they're Xtremeing up.
Random bellows. Uh, yay.
Blade poses. Now I'm jealous.
Forms of no discernible value. Really just a bunch of flipping around.
Use of the Mortal Combat theme song.
IMO it's a comparison more akin to wrestling to pro wrestling. There are a few decent holds, and the latter takes a lot of athleticism, but it's a superficial take on the actual article. Being good at one format doesn't mean it translates to the other.
AMP-RYU
Black Belt
I dont care if it is pratical or not this guy is good!
Last edited by a moderator:
