Martial arts contradictions

[geezer]

For those of you who train or have trained in more than one martial art, have you come across any major contradictions? If so, how do you deal with them? I don't mean the little stuff ....details about the position of this or that hand when executing a technique, or minor differences in forms, and so on. I mean the major differences that may arise in basic structure, orientation, posture, and approach. Have you encountered differences that are so extreme that they are irreconcilable and have forced you to have to choose between the arts?

Here are some examples of differences I deal with in two striking arts I train:

Art 1: keep your weight back on the rear leg
Art 2: keep your weight 50-50 or slightly forward on the front leg.

Art 1: Always fight with your shoulders square to the opponent.
Art 2: Always fight with your body angled or "bladed" sideways to the opponent.

Art 1: Always press forward, closing with your opponent at the first opportunity.
Art 2: Be evasive, move in and out of range.

Now these are actually oversimplifications, and I have been able to resolve these apparent contradictions to my satisfaction. But this might not always be the case with other arts. How about you? What's your experience?

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

I wouldn't necessary call them contradictions but different strategies.

My Choy Li Fut and Wing Chun are complete opposite in allot of their strategies but they do have some similar structure aspects.

I figure just learn each art as a separate entity as they are suppose to be but try to pick arts that compliment each other or fill gaps that an art might have since there isn't a perfect art out there.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Do you

- coordinate your punch with your back leg, or do you coordinate your punch with your front leg?
- move your back leg first, or do you move your front leg first when you step to the side?
- keep your punching arm with your body as a straight line, or do you keep your punching arm and chest in a 90 degree angle?
- use a side stance, or do you use a forward inward horse stance?
- ...

When you train in one way, you should not train the other way. It can confuse yourself big time. For example, when your opponent stabs a knife toward your heart, you may have 1/4 second to move to the side. In that 1/4 second, if you have to think about whether you should move your back leg first (because 1 style told you), or to move your front leg first (because the other style told you), you may be dead.

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

When you train in one way, you should not train the other way. It can confuse yourself big time. For example, when your opponent stabs a knife toward your heart, you may have 1/4 second to move to the side. In that 1/4 second, if you have to think about whether you should move your back leg first (because 1 style told you), or to move your front leg first (because the other style told you), you may be dead.

Hopefully you've trained it enough where your muscle memory does what your suppose to do because if your standing there thinking your most likely stabbed or cut anyways.

 

[seasoned]

Looking at the OP, I came from a traditional art that was also sport oriented. They had a sparing application art in mind. As instructors changed so did the perception of the same art I was studying. Once, we trained with a much lesser focus on sparring, and a more kata based approach, we tended to think more of defeating as apposed to scoring points. Hence the changes you describe were altered.

Basically changes (contradictions) occur within the same art, when perception of art focus is altered.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Hopefully you've trained it enough where your muscle memory does what your suppose to do because if your standing there thinking your most likely stabbed or cut anyways.

During side stepping, if you repeat to move back leg 1st for 10,000 reps, and also to move front leg 1st for 10,000 reps, what kind of muscle memory will you develop on your body?

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

During side stepping, if you repeat to move back leg 1st for 10,000 reps, and also to move front leg 1st for 10,000 reps, what kind of muscle memory will you develop on your body?

Just my opinion I would rather be the one that trained both styles 10K times to allow my muscle memory and reflexes decide whats best due to the scenario of the event and my weight distribution at that particular time.

 

[MartialMellow]

There is always the trouble of trying to remember if a purple or blue belt is more advanced depending on what school you are in.:karate:

 

[geezer]

Do you

- coordinate your punch with your back leg, or do you coordinate your punch with your front leg?
- move your back leg first, or do you move your front leg first when you step to the side?
- keep your punching arm with your body as a straight line, or do you keep your punching arm and chest in a 90 degree angle?
- use a side stance, or do you use a forward inward horse stance?
- ...

When you train in one way, you should not train the other way. It can confuse yourself big time. For example, when your opponent stabs a knife toward your heart, you may have 1/4 second to move to the side. In that 1/4 second, if you have to think about whether you should move your back leg first (because 1 style told you), or to move your front leg first (because the other style told you), you may be dead.

John, I think you really got down the the essence of the problem which is that even though there may be several ways to achieve an end, if those methods are inherently contradictory, then you are actually at a disadvantage if you train both. As you put in in your response to Doppelgänger, if you practice both methods equally, even if you train each method 10,000 times, you can not develop muscle memory that will automatically kick in when needed. Instead you will still hesitate and have to consciously decide which technique to perform. Clearly in such a case it is best to pick the approach that works best for you and train that exclusively.

Now in response to the list you posted above, there are some things that are not a problem in my view. I can punch in coordination with either the lead leg, the rear leg, or independently of stepping. My punches are strongest when I set my body weight into them, but that works with either leg, or with a turn (juen ma), or with sinking or rising, etc. I believe it is quite possible to train to feel how to engage your body with your punch without limiting punching to moving one leg or the other.

For footwork, generally I move the leg first that is closest to the direction I am intending to go, i.e. I step forward moving the front leg first, backwards moving the rear leg first, to the right moving the right leg and to the left moving the left leg. It's a simple shuffle, and it becomes an easy habit. But it's also possible to train other steps, especially when like with the punching analogy, they all respond with a common logic to the situation and the energy or "feel" your opponent feeds you.

It's when you try to train contradictory responses to a given energy fed to you that you can never develop that automatic response and instinctive "feel".

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Here is a simple example. When you see a punch coming toward your face, do you

- kick out your leading leg (offensive attitude), or
- block with your leading arm (defensive attitude),

without thinking?

Another similar example. When you see a punch coming toward your face, do you

- move in toward it (offensive attitude), or
- move away from it (defensive attitude),

without thinking?

 

[K-man]

Rather than call it a contradiction I would call it a paradox. For example 'hard' and 'soft'. We heard about that all the time in Japanese Goju but didn't learn any of 'soft' until I stared Aikido. Then I found the 'soft' in Okinawan Goju.

The next difference is that the sport oriented style is to move in and out whereas the reality based style is to engage and not disengage until the job is done.

Stances too are different. Some are longer and some deeper, some are more or less fixed and others are light to allow quick movement.

Punching ... huge difference between punching for points and striking with power. One had body weight back and the other body weight behind the punch.
:asian:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

generally I move the leg first that is closest to the direction I am intending to go, ...

You are taking the "aggressive" approach. For "conservative" approach, you may do the opposite. Also IMO, it's difficult to train both aggressive approach and conservative approach at the same time.

When you move the leg first that is

- closer to your opponent, the distance between you and your opponent has changed. You have committed your action, and you won't have room to change your mind.
- away from your opponent, the distance between you and your opponent hasn't changed yet. You haven't committed your action yet, and you can still have room to change your mind.

 

[geezer]

Here is a simple example. When you see a punch coming toward your face, do you

- kick out your leading leg (offensive attitude), or
- block with your leading arm (defensive attitude),

without thinking?

A similar example. When you see a punch coming toward your face, do you

- move in toward it (offensive attitude), or
- move away from it (defensive attitude),

without thinking?

Example 1: I respond with my arms (I'm not much of a kicker). If I see an opening and I'm close enough to take offensive action I go right to Example 2 and take option a. "move in toward it".

However these are false dichotomies. Within any given art, your course of action will be determined by the particular situation. The real contradiction occurs when you face two opposing strategies for identical situations. Too many options can cause confusion and hesitation. That's one thing I liked about your "big fist" entry for grapplers. Not perfect perhaps, but simple and practical and most of all, unambiguous. We train something similar for closing on a club wielding attacker. Not perfect, but simple and effective.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

IMO, to train 2 different arts that one is "aggressive" and the other is "conservative" can be confusing and difficult. Should you attack first and then respond to your opponent's respond, or should you wait for your opponent to attack, you then apply counter? If you only have one option, you just can't do both.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Art one: Try not to counterbalance.
Art two: Counterbalance is our base.

 

[Buka]

Maybe contradictions are all part of the Yin/Yang concept, maybe not.

I move my front foot first - but charge with my back foot when looking to close a longer distance. As some folks point out to me - moving the back foot first is more natural as we walk/run in that way a zillion times a lifetime. But I still do both.

It seems to me that we don't actually think about anything, we just move. Maybe not in the first few years of training, but after that.

 

[MJS]

For those of you who train or have trained in more than one martial art, have you come across any major contradictions? If so, how do you deal with them? I don't mean the little stuff ....details about the position of this or that hand when executing a technique, or minor differences in forms, and so on. I mean the major differences that may arise in basic structure, orientation, posture, and approach. Have you encountered differences that are so extreme that they are irreconcilable and have forced you to have to choose between the arts?

Here are some examples of differences I deal with in two striking arts I train:

Art 1: keep your weight back on the rear leg
Art 2: keep your weight 50-50 or slightly forward on the front leg.

Art 1: Always fight with your shoulders square to the opponent.
Art 2: Always fight with your body angled or "bladed" sideways to the opponent.

Art 1: Always press forward, closing with your opponent at the first opportunity.
Art 2: Be evasive, move in and out of range.

Now these are actually oversimplifications, and I have been able to resolve these apparent contradictions to my satisfaction. But this might not always be the case with other arts. How about you? What's your experience?

As its been said, I wouldn't necessarily call it a contradiction, but simply another method or way of doing something. But yes, to answer your question, I faced this a lot, when I went from training Kenpo, to training Kyokushin. I saw this with blocks, strikes, kicks, and stances. It was, and still is at times, hard to break the habit, as I trained Kenpo for so long, you obviously get used to doing something a certain way. I've gotten better about that, as time goes on.

 

[skribs]

It can also be dependent on what you're doing. For example, Taekwondo WTF point sparring is going to have different stances and a different focus than TKD self defense, because with sparring you're going for kick points while self defense you're going for protection and power.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Usually this can be found when trying to teach new students balance, and power generation. Of course techniques can be optimized to the methodology of the system, but if one has the principals of balance and power generation and they study a system the is completely different just for some cross training to see how others do it, or to learn some variations of techniques, I see no problem. If one is trying to learn the system so one can teach the system then that person needs to be able to do it both ways, and do it naturally. So can be very difficult as people need one way to do something. Yet, if they train that I do these techniques this way when I am in this type of stance or some other physical trigger then they can keep them separate. And for those who are insightful, yes this is what good instructors do and may not realize it, when they are making mistakes for their students to capitalize upon. So when they fight they change out of their teaching form or format and they now seem to react differently.

 

[geezer]

OK, just for fun, heres another apparent contradiction I've run into teaching Ving Tsun. Over the years, many members of our group (including instructors) originally had training in "hard styles" such as Shotokan Karate, TKD and the like. Our Ving Tsun is generally thought to be more of a "soft" or yielding style. Sometimes we discussed the following sayings or mottos:


Shotokan: Ikken hissatsu or "One punch kill" --i.e. your punch should have 100% focus, power, and commitment with intent to finish the fight in one blow.

Ving Tsun: Mo kuen yat fat or "No one-punch technique" --i.e. never use just one punch or punch with overcommitment, and always follow up immediately with more punches.



An example of ikken hissatsu would be Shotokan's oizuki --a powerful lunge punch. One technique coordinating a lunging step into a deep stance with the energy of the whole body focused into a single punch.

Basic Karate Punches: Oizuki - Front punch/Lunge punch - YouTube


An example of mo kuen yat fat would be Ving Tsun's lin wan kuen -- a rapid fire barrage of short, fast punches that are not individually coordinated with steps or breathing and are designed to overwhelm an opponent collectively rather than individually.

How to Do Lin Wan Kuen aka Chain Punch | Wing Chun - YouTube

On the surface these approaches seem absolutely contradictory. On the other hand, if you look at them more broadly, they seem like two sides of the same coin. Every attack needs total mental and physical commitment to succeed. Yet any attack can fail, so you must be able to instantly follow up and continue without hesitation. So you need both the attitude of "one punch kill" combined with "never depend on just one punch". Like others have pointed out, it's kind of a yin-yang thing. Which one you favor is up to you.

...And never under-estimate the other guy. So for example just because a guy is known as a WC/VT/WT stylist don't think he can't put real force and commitment into a single punch (ikken hissatsu). If like me, you've ever been hit by the guy demonstrating below, you'd know otherwise!

Emin Boztepe punching - YouTube