Sparring

[Gerry Seymour]

Buy good headgear, like $80-100 that Boxers use, and not the junk that many TMA schools train with, made by Century, Pro Force... You are taking a lot of risks at your age with head shots...sparring, even with the agreed upon, light level, can spike to hard at times when people get mad....but it's true, getting hit pretty hard and often, is apart of real Self Defense training.

I'll argue one adjustment to that: getting hit hard and often in the head is apart from Self Defense training. It delivers the exact things we're working to avoid: potential long-term injury. Taking an occasional reasonably hard shot to the head can help prepare mentally and emotionally. Getting hit more often than that, and with full force, is harmful even with head gear or boxing gloves.

It's a question of priorities. If I want to be the best I can possibly be, I should start training as early as I can, train as often as I can, and train as hard as I can. Then, for a while (until the injuries catch up, if I've received any), I'll be the best I can be. For most of us training for SD, we need to be reasonably prepared for the most likely and most common attacks, plus whatever preparedness we can gain for the less-likely ones.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Kwon Gracie has done pretty good so far, and as near as I can tell he's only using old school Gracie JJ.

Roger Gracie did pretty good in MMA using mainly Gjj as well. He did cross-train in Muay Thai to sharpen his striking though.

Point is, guys like Alan Orr or Shawn Obasi who come from TMAs like Wing Chun have to change their entire style and cross-train heavily in order to be competitive. The level of cross-training is so major for those styles that WC instructors (for example) have actually commented that TMAs like WC aren't suited MMA;

You are assuming these folks did NOT prepare for the adversaries they'd face (and their respective styles). Just because they are sticking mainly to BJJ/GJJ doesn't mean they didn't train against those other types.

I actually find it odd that there are two contradictory and mutually-exclusive arguments against I see on the 'Net these days: 1) they don't adapt, and keep doing the same things, and 2) when practitioners enter combat, they have to do new stuff (adapt) which isn't part of their art (which assumes the art CANNOT adapt). Oddly, both of these accusations typically come from those who favor MMA competition, and are often both said by the same people in diffferent threads.

Either the art isn't adapting, or it is adapting when someone adds a "new" move. When someone adopts a new move, are they adapting the style (using moves that fit with the principles and techniques already within the art) or are they incorporating another art into their fighting (using moves and principles that don't fit within their core style). And does the answer actually matter, beyond the academic question?

 

[Ironbear24]

It's a very one sided argument here, you can take the same logic and ask what would happen if a bjj guy entered a competition where grappling is not allowed? And all you are permitted to do is strike?

He would be destroyed obviously. No matter what your style is you have to train to prepare yourself for what you are going to be fighting against.

 

[Hanzou]

You are assuming these folks did NOT prepare for the adversaries they'd face (and their respective styles). Just because they are sticking mainly to BJJ/GJJ doesn't mean they didn't train against those other types.

I'm sure they did prepare for their adversaries. However, you can prepare for your adversary by trying to find the solution within your base style, or branching out and incorporating a different style. Those are two very different things. Roger opted to do the latter, and incorporated Muay Thai striking to augment his Bjj grappling. Kron appears to be doing the former. Either way, its clear that the base of both of their MMA styles is Bjj. My argument is why aren't we seeing guys doing stuff like this in MMA;

I actually find it odd that there are two contradictory and mutually-exclusive arguments against I see on the 'Net these days: 1) they don't adapt, and keep doing the same things, and 2) when practitioners enter combat, they have to do new stuff (adapt) which isn't part of their art (which assumes the art CANNOT adapt). Oddly, both of these accusations typically come from those who favor MMA competition, and are often both said by the same people in diffferent threads.

Either the art isn't adapting, or it is adapting when someone adds a "new" move. When someone adopts a new move, are they adapting the style (using moves that fit with the principles and techniques already within the art) or are they incorporating another art into their fighting (using moves and principles that don't fit within their core style). And does the answer actually matter, beyond the academic question?

The reason you're getting those arguments is because the other side is purposely dodgy and refuses to give a straight-forward answer. When all else fails they resort to the classic arguments that they're either above fighting in a cage, they have no desire to seek "fortune and fame", or that their martial art of choice is too deadly for competitive fighting.

There's nothing wrong with an art adapting. Bjj adapts constantly, and I think its a wonderful thing. However, the difference is that traditional styles (for the most part) don't believe in adaptation. They believe that the system's creator had all the answers for fighting hundreds of years ago, so any change to the system is blasphemy, and is why you see so many Karate and Kung Fu systems today. Usually one minor disagreement caused a disciple of the main system to create a completely new martial art.

 

[JowGaWolf]

You are assuming these folks did NOT prepare for the adversaries they'd face

This is the danger zone for most martial arts that are popular like TKD and Karate. They train against their own style so the become really good with that. But when they go against a different style they forget to adapt their skill set to deal with what is being used against them. This is why on technique has multiple applications. in some cases the same technique can be used for setting up striking or grappling techniques. The only way to learn how to adapt is to practice against the style that will be attacking you.

 

[drop bear]

You are assuming these folks did NOT prepare for the adversaries they'd face (and their respective styles). Just because they are sticking mainly to BJJ/GJJ doesn't mean they didn't train against those other types.

I actually find it odd that there are two contradictory and mutually-exclusive arguments against I see on the 'Net these days: 1) they don't adapt, and keep doing the same things, and 2) when practitioners enter combat, they have to do new stuff (adapt) which isn't part of their art (which assumes the art CANNOT adapt). Oddly, both of these accusations typically come from those who favor MMA competition, and are often both said by the same people in diffferent threads.

Either the art isn't adapting, or it is adapting when someone adds a "new" move. When someone adopts a new move, are they adapting the style (using moves that fit with the principles and techniques already within the art) or are they incorporating another art into their fighting (using moves and principles that don't fit within their core style). And does the answer actually matter, beyond the academic question?

That I back to the concept of form follows function. Some people will change their techniques to fit reality.

 

[Ironbear24]

I'm sure they did prepare for their adversaries. However, you can prepare for your adversary by trying to find the solution within your base style, or branching out and incorporating a different style. Those are two very different things. Roger opted to do the latter, and incorporated Muay Thai striking to augment his Bjj grappling. Kron appears to be doing the former. Either way, its clear that the base of both of their MMA styles is Bjj. My argument is why aren't we seeing guys doing stuff like this in MMA;

The reason you're getting those arguments is because the other side is purposely dodgy and refuses to give a straight-forward answer. When all else fails they resort to the classic arguments that they're either above fighting in a cage, they have no desire to seek "fortune and fame", or that their martial art of choice is too deadly for competitive fighting.

There's nothing wrong with an art adapting. Bjj adapts constantly, and I think its a wonderful thing. However, the difference is that traditional styles (for the most part) don't believe in adaptation. They believe that the system's creator had all the answers for fighting hundreds of years ago, so any change to the system is blasphemy, and is why you see so many Karate and Kung Fu systems today. Usually one minor disagreement caused a disciple of the main system to create a completely new martial art.

It is very obvious your knowledge of Chinese martial arts is very limited. Nobody is going to perform kata or kata forms in a fight. Kata and combat are separate things.

 

[Ironbear24]

The reason you're getting those arguments is because the other side

There are no sides. We are all martial artists. These sides you talk about are arbitrary and fictional. They only exist in your mind.

 

[Hanzou]

It is very obvious your knowledge of Chinese martial arts is very limited. Nobody is going to perform kata or kata forms in a fight. Kata and combat are separate things.

So Kata has no combat applications?

 

[Ironbear24]

So Kata has no combat applications?

That depends on the martial art. I'm assuming you don't know this because bjj doesn't have kata. Kata is ideally supposed to be light impact training which is good for when you are sore from previous training or from matches. Some katas are designed to practice combat technique but many of the kata you seen in Chinese styles are more of an art and meant for training qi gong.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm sure they did prepare for their adversaries. However, you can prepare for your adversary by trying to find the solution within your base style, or branching out and incorporating a different style. Those are two very different things. Roger opted to do the latter, and incorporated Muay Thai striking to augment his Bjj grappling. Kron appears to be doing the former. Either way, its clear that the base of both of their MMA styles is Bjj. My argument is why aren't we seeing guys doing stuff like this in MMA;

I've also never seen that particular stance in any of the various kung fu (any style) sparring videos I've watched. Admittedly, I've not watched all of them, but if it were common, I'd expect to have seen it by now. They don't use it frequently for sparring amongst themselves, so why expect it with others?

The reason you're getting those arguments is because the other side is purposely dodgy and refuses to give a straight-forward answer. When all else fails they resort to the classic arguments that they're either above fighting in a cage, they have no desire to seek "fortune and fame", or that their martial art of choice is too deadly for competitive fighting.

Some do. I, however, am from that "other side", and know that some of all of those statements can be true (most of the people I know who study TMA - the styles I interact with the most - have no interest in competition, most of them won't hurt someone for contest, most have no desire for recognition for their martial skill, and some of the techniques in EVERY art are too dangerous to be used in competitive fighting). I also know that none of those statements are the entire reason. There's a lot more that goes in: whether the individual believes competition is valuable for their SD training, whether they are willing to risk injury that impedes everyday life and their ability to defend themselves, whether they want to incur the extra expense of gear and time necessary train for and to get good enough for competition, etc. Somewhere in there, there is also the question of the effectiveness of the training (not the style, IMO, because the way a style is trained appears to have a more powerful impact than the style itself).

There's nothing wrong with an art adapting. Bjj adapts constantly, and I think its a wonderful thing. However, the difference is that traditional styles (for the most part) don't believe in adaptation. They believe that the system's creator had all the answers for fighting hundreds of years ago, so any change to the system is blasphemy, and is why you see so many Karate and Kung Fu systems today. Usually one minor disagreement caused a disciple of the main system to create a completely new martial art.

That hasn't been my experience with most. Yes, most are slow to change things - they want to work with what has proven effectiveness (at least in the dojos I've studied at, where there was some evidence to work from) and only adapt where they find something specifically lacking. Most, however, are very good at making gradual adaptations (drastic changes are new styles, not adaptations) once they reach a high enough level of understanding to see where they'd like to strengthen one point or another. Sometimes, they just adapt their school, rather than the art, as in the case of one instructor I know who decided he wanted his students to have more than our rudimentary (effective, but limited) ground work to choose from, so he studied GJJ and added some classes. I took the other route, and added more focus to the ground work and leveraged the principles of the standing techniques to expand by using what I've learned by rolling with MMA folks.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That I back to the concept of form follows function. Some people will change their techniques to fit reality.

I'm not clear what you mean by that.

 

[Hanzou]

That depends on the martial art. I'm assuming you don't know this because bjj doesn't have kata. Kata is ideally supposed to be light impact training which is good for when you are sore from previous training or from matches. Some katas are designed to practice combat technique but many of the kata you seen in Chinese styles are more of an art and meant for training qi gong.

This guy seems to have no problem applying it to combat;

I've also never seen that particular stance in any of the various kung fu (any style) sparring videos I've watched. Admittedly, I've not watched all of them, but if it were common, I'd expect to have seen it by now. They don't use it frequently for sparring amongst themselves, so why expect it with others?.

It appears to be a variation on the crane stance, given his "beak hand" and the raised leg.

 

[Ironbear24]

This guy seems to have no problem applying it to combat;

It appears to be a variation on the crane stance, given his "beak hand" and the raised leg.

There was no combat here.

 

[Hanzou]

There was no combat here.

He said you can use the stance to avoid a sweep, block a kick, or to kick.

In other words, he believes (and I'm sure he's not alone) that you can use that stance for fighting/combat purposes.

And here's some Tiger/Crane self defense moves;

Definitely different than what you're seeing in MMA. I highly doubt an ignorant MMA viewer would confuse those movements and attacks for you're standard MMA striking.

 

[Ironbear24]

He said you can use the stance to avoid a sweep, block a kick, or to kick.

In other words, he believes (and I'm sure he's not alone) that you can use that stance for fighting/combat purposes.

It is probably a stance that you fluidly transition into throughout the fight I guess. Similar to front stance and horse stance and corkscrew stance in kenpo. If that is the case then yes this stance can be used in combat. Though I seriously doubt he is going to have his hands on his hips during the fight.

 

[Hanzou]

It is probably a stance that you fluidly transition into throughout the fight I guess. Similar to front stance and horse stance and corkscrew stance in kenpo. If that is the case then yes this stance can be used in combat. Though I seriously doubt he is going to have his hands on his hips during the fight.

So were you wrong when you said that no one would perform this stance in a fight?

Additionally, why wouldn't we see these types of stances in MMA?

 

[Ironbear24]

He said you can use the stance to avoid a sweep, block a kick, or to kick.

In other words, he believes (and I'm sure he's not alone) that you can use that stance for fighting/combat purposes.

And here's some Tiger/Crane self defense moves;

Definitely different than what you're seeing in MMA. I highly doubt an ignorant MMA viewer would confuse those movements and attacks for you're standard MMA striking.

Aaaand this is banned in UFC. Eye pokes are not allowed and neither is clawing eachother. Chinese martial arts are made to win at any cost not be tournament legal.

 

[Hanzou]

Aaaand this is banned in UFC. Eye pokes are not allowed and neither is clawing eachother. Chinese martial arts are made to win at any cost not be tournament legal.

You can modify the eye poke into a punch.

As for clawing, while the UFC doesn't allow it, there are plenty of MMA outfits that do. Rio heroes being the biggest one.

Or again, you can modify the clawing into a punch or something else.

No thoughts on the palm strike to the chest that supposedly sent that kid flying? That's perfectly legal in MMA.

 

[Ironbear24]

You won't see any good practitioner have his hands on his hips while blocking a kick with his or her shin as you saw in the video. And I said you won't see Katanot that stance in combat. I was talking about the picture you posted originally with that guy trying to imitate some crouching tiger hidden dragon jumbo.

If you want to split hairs, yes you can see crane in fighting if according to you crane is simply lifting up one leg in a front position.