Kung Fu vs MMA

[Gerry Seymour]

Not about challenging dogma, although that's a by product of it, in my opinion.

Regarding testing a style's effectiveness, I can think of a few ways to do that. Competition. Working as a professional cop, bouncer, body guard, soldier, or soldier of fortune. Criminal.

Only one of those is practical and accessible for the average person. Can you think of others? I can't. I can think of other ways to train that are great. But training is not testing. One leads to the other.

Informal "competition" fits in there, too. Working and sparring with people you don't know (at least from a training perspective) both within and outside your own art/style.

 

[Steve]

Informal "competition" fits in there, too. Working and sparring with people you don't know (at least from a training perspective) both within and outside your own art/style.

I wouldn't consider sparring to be competition, even informal. It's helpful and a great way to train, but it's not testing. It's part of preparing for the test. Same with "working" with people you don't know. Very, very different things, IMO.

 

[Martial D]

A formal competition isn't a necessary element in testing a style's effectiveness. It's a helpful one in some ways, but not the only way of challenging dogma.

No, there is also informal competition.

What other ways are there to test effectiveness without a resisting opponent?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

No, there is also informal competition.

What other ways are there to test effectiveness without a resisting opponent?

- sparring/wrestling training.
- friendly challenge.
- unfriendly challenge.
- tournament fight.
- body guard, security service fight.
- street fight.
- battle field fight.

 

[Martial D]

- sparring/wrestling training.
- friendly challenge.
- unfriendly challenge.
- tournament fight.
- body guard, security service fight.
- street fight.
- battle field fight.

So which of those does not involve a resisting opponent?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

So which of those does not involve a resisting opponent?

None. Competition is the "only" way to test your MA skill.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm not saying that you would not be using jow ga.

I am saying that you WOULD be using jow ga, but what that means and what that looks like in the chaos of a genuine fight or self defense situation is not what most people assume.

If you really understand your jow ga, then it is the principles that are most important. The techniques, while useful and important, are an expression of the principles. In practice, the techniques are often exaggerated, as a way to help emphasize the principles. When that skill has been developed, then, IN ACTUAL USE, that exaggeration can be dropped, and the principles are still being utilized, on a more compact and un-exaggerated technique.

This is using your jow ga. Not what it LOOKS like, but rather, the principles underneath, that power your technique, regardless of what it looks like.

The exaggerated training methods can leave you vulnerable if you try to use them in a fight. But the exaggeration is not meant to be used in the fight. It is a training methodology, meant to emphasize the principles and the body mechanics.

Maybe this issue seems so clear to me because my system uses a very exaggerated training method. Maybe I'm on that extreme end of the spectrum, while others are less so.

My guess is that in your system your punches are more exaggerated then what is done in Jow Ga Kung Fu. I trained with some Lama Pai students last month and we have the similar punches but they exaggerate their punches more than Jow Ga Students do. For example the Pao Choy punch is like a really long upper cut. for Jow Ga stops at my face level. The same type of punch for Lama Pai extends well above the head as you can see in the video below.

You can see the punch here. at :23

Compare it to the punch here at around :34

In Jow Ga kung fu we don't throw that punch higher than that for the very reason you speak of about being open. This is both in forms and in sparring. If your punches exaggerate like Lama Pai then we aren't talking about the same measure of exaggeration.

 

[JowGaWolf]

For many styles, though, there are some quite similar postures and approaches used. For those styles, it can be much harder to pinpoint anything that's particularly "signature" of that style

I think this is because munch of what we see are people using the same basics techniques and not going much beyond the basic kick and basic punch. I think if people actually try to use the techniques that they train, then we would see more of a difference between martial arts systems.

Think about it. How many sparring matches have you seen where someone has used the Signature styles of that system. (other than wing chun)?

There will be some exception for some martial art systems. For me, Hapkido and certain styles of Karate are similar to me. As an outsider it looks the same, even when they are doing advanced techniques.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I wouldn't consider sparring to be competition, even informal. It's helpful and a great way to train, but it's not testing. It's part of preparing for the test. Same with "working" with people you don't know. Very, very different things, IMO.

So, it's only valid if there's a referee? What sense does that make?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No, there is also informal competition.

What other ways are there to test effectiveness without a resisting opponent?

A resisting opponent is a key component. (And by "resisting", I'm not necessarily referring to someone trying to stop the specific technique, but someone who is trying to achieve their own ends, rather than quietly waiting for you to perform your technique.)

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think this is because munch of what we see are people using the same basics techniques and not going much beyond the basic kick and basic punch. I think if people actually try to use the techniques that they train, then we would see more of a difference between martial arts systems.

Think about it. How many sparring matches have you seen where someone has used the Signature styles of that system. (other than wing chun)?

There will be some exception for some martial art systems. For me, Hapkido and certain styles of Karate are similar to me. As an outsider it looks the same, even when they are doing advanced techniques.

That may be part of it, but there's also a lot of similarity between styles. Kicks between Shotokan Karate-do and Nihon Goshin Aikido are reasonably similar, as are the punches. Under similar rulesets (assuming only strikes), it might be difficult to tell which a participant studied (if the NGA person was a distance-fighter).

 

[Steve]

So, it's only valid if there's a referee? What sense does that make?

It's not the referee that distinguishes competition and sparring or "working" with other people. Not to say that they're not great elements of a training program.

Cops don't have referees when they apply what they learn in the context for which they learn them. Soldiers don't have referees. The ref is a characteristic of competition, but not a salient one.

 

[Martial D]

A resisting opponent is a key component. (And by "resisting", I'm not necessarily referring to someone trying to stop the specific technique, but someone who is trying to achieve their own ends, rather than quietly waiting for you to perform your technique.)

So then we agree.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It's not the referee that distinguishes competition and sparring or "working" with other people. Not to say that they're not great elements of a training program.

Cops don't have referees when they apply what they learn in the context for which they learn them. Soldiers don't have referees. The ref is a characteristic of competition, but not a salient one.

But you are saying competition is effective testing, but sparring cannot be. It is possible for sparring to be exactly as intense as competition.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So then we agree.

It appears so. You and I seem to share the notion of "informal competition".

 

[Steve]

But you are saying competition is effective testing, but sparring cannot be. It is possible for sparring to be exactly as intense as competition.

Yes. I'm saying that they are both great, but do different things.

If this were cooking, sparring would be part of the Mise en place, along with kata, drills, fitness and everything else. Competition, like combat as a soldier or working as a cop, is the result of training. It's what you train for.

I like competition because it's far more accessible to the average joe or Jane accountant than being a cop, or a soldier.

 

[JP3]

I wouldn't consider sparring to be competition, even informal. It's helpful and a great way to train, but it's not testing. It's part of preparing for the test. Same with "working" with people you don't know. Very, very different things, IMO.

If you look at the intensity of engagement as a continuum, light soft and slow stuff at the left end and people truly trying to kill one another on the right..... I can conceive of two people who consensually decide to enter a training session with enough intensity that it truly becomes that "test" of which you are speaking. Granted, it'll end up looking like Bloodsport, but I can conceive it.

I'd not want to traint hat way, myself. Hard to go get beers after class witht he dude who just dislocated your elbow, broke your jaw, fractured some ribs, etc.

 

[Steve]

If you look at the intensity of engagement as a continuum, light soft and slow stuff at the left end and people truly trying to kill one another on the right..... I can conceive of two people who consensually decide to enter a training session with enough intensity that it truly becomes that "test" of which you are speaking. Granted, it'll end up looking like Bloodsport, but I can conceive it.

I'd not want to traint hat way, myself. Hard to go get beers after class witht he dude who just dislocated your elbow, broke your jaw, fractured some ribs, etc.

That would be hardcore training. i agree completely. But competition isn't training. It's the result of training. It's what you are training to do.

Look at it this way. Sparring is a means. Competition is an end. Basic training is a means. Combat is an end.

Not understanding this crucial distinction between training and the result of training causes a lot of misunderstanding.

 

[JP3]

The road vs. the destination. I see your point.

 

[Steve]

The road vs. the destination. I see your point.

Have to have a destination to anchor the training, or things get wonky. Every martial artist trains for something, when younthink you're training for "self defense" but are actually training for the next belt test, there's a disconnect.