ThePinkMan

[PhotonGuy]

Anybody familiar with ThePinkMan? He has a youtube channel where he analyzes all sorts of martial arts. Some arts he strongly criticises other arts he advocates or at least emphasizes the strong points of the art. Some of the stuff he says I find useful although I am skeptical about some of the other stuff he says. Here is his youtube channel.

ThePinkMan

 

[drop bear]

Yeah I have seen his stuff.

A lot of what he suggests hinges on the concept of aliveness. Mat Thorton generally gets used to explain the concept.

So it is basically a concept of putting a martial art through this test and discarding those that dont pass.

 

[Flatfish]

he's one of the main contributors on Bullshido, goes under Holy Moment...

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Anybody familiar with ThePinkMan? He has a youtube channel where he analyzes all sorts of martial arts. Some arts he strongly criticises other arts he advocates or at least emphasizes the strong points of the art. Some of the stuff he says I find useful although I am skeptical about some of the other stuff he says. Here is his youtube channel.

ThePinkMan

I like his critique of Aikido.

 

[Anarax]

Anybody familiar with ThePinkMan? He has a youtube channel where he analyzes all sorts of martial arts. Some arts he strongly criticises other arts he advocates or at least emphasizes the strong points of the art. Some of the stuff he says I find useful although I am skeptical about some of the other stuff he says. Here is his youtube channel.

ThePinkMan

I agree with some of the points he's making. If a MA school is only doing "dead patterns", then I don't think they are bridging the gap between training and practical application. Are there schools that only train "dead patterns"? Yes there are. However; for him to say Boxing, BJJ and wrestling schools are more accustomed to this and "99.9%" of MA school aren't is inaccurate. Everything doesn't have to be a sparring match to learn and train techniques.

 

[Steve]

I like his critique of Aikido.

I do, as well. I think he plagiarized my posts from the last several years.

 

[PhotonGuy]

I like his critique of Aikido.

His critique of Aikido basically downplays it as an ineffective art for self defense. In his video he concludes that Aikido should be used as a supplementary art and that's what its founder intended it to be. I myself know very little about Aikido so Im not sure if its an accurate critique although I do see where he's coming from. I do disagree with what he says about Tai Chi.

 

[FighterTwister]

I have mixed thoughts about all this.

For starters back when I was in class my instructor would "Teach The Art - Train and Think Street" approach!

In class we would do drills that in reality you would need to slap an ear or smash the nose.

Instead we would hit the shoulder for the ear and for the nose we would hit the forehead not full force either but enough to apply the drill and hit.

We weren't going to injure each other over a drill in sparring/training is the point.

Not every technique is going to work 100% in the reality but you still train like that and adapt in the flow of motion through any move or technique you do.

For example -

Also in JKD / Wing Chun we use the Wooden Dummy ( Mook Jong) but you got to visualize the opponent in your imagination and see the strikes and counter/s. Also this conditions the forearms and builds up internal energies very quickly as an added benefit.

So its all subject to interpretation and perception in some ways no one is wrong or right it really is up to the student as well.

But when we had Sparring sessions or practice KALI sticking fighting we would wear full protection like this..............

So in my opinion I see Matt Thorntons approach a little unfair if I am understanding this correctly based on video on post #2

Also its up to the teacher / instructor to monitor the situation on-hand responsibly as well, there might be some aggressive gent/s on board that need to be pulled back so training is adjusted so on, if you are hurting each other well that ain't good I doubt there will be future members. LoL

All opinions welcomed of course thats my take on this in a nutshell!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

His critique of Aikido basically downplays it as an ineffective art for self defense. In his video he concludes that Aikido should be used as a supplementary art and that's what its founder intended it to be. I myself know very little about Aikido so Im not sure if its an accurate critique although I do see where he's coming from. I do disagree with what he says about Tai Chi.

I don't know if that's what Ueshiba intended, but that's how it apparently was taught to the people who became his first generation of instructors. They all had competency in other arts, so had some basics (strikes, hip throw, etc. were likely), so he didn't teach those. So they didn't teach those, and that became the foundation of the art. So, it now seems best suited IMO to those with a fighting base already in place.

 

[jobo]

I have mixed thoughts about all this.

For starters back when I was in class my instructor would "Teach The Art - Train and Think Street" approach!

In class we would do drills that in reality you would need to slap an ear or smash the nose.

Instead we would hit the shoulder for the ear and for the nose we would hit the forehead not full force either but enough to apply the drill and hit.

We weren't going to injure each other over a drill in sparring/training is the point.

Not every technique is going to work 100% in the reality but you still train like that and adapt in the flow of motion through any move or technique you do.

For example -

Also in JKD / Wing Chun we use the Wooden Dummy ( Mook Jong) but you got to visualize the opponent in your imagination and see the strikes and counter/s. Also this conditions the forearms and builds up internal energies very quickly as an added benefit.

So its all subject to interpretation and perception in some ways no one is wrong or right it really is up to the student as well.

But when we had Sparring sessions or practice KALI sticking fighting we would wear full protection like this..............

So in my opinion I see Matt Thorntons approach a little unfair if I am understanding this correctly based on video on post #2

Also its up to the teacher / instructor to monitor the situation on-hand responsibly as well, there might be some aggressive gent/s on board that need to be pulled back so training is adjusted so on, if you are hurting each other well that ain't good I doubt there will be future members. LoL

All opinions welcomed of course thats my take on this in a nutshell!

i was with you to you mentioned the benefits of fighting a wooden dummy,!

 

[Steve]

I agree with some of the points he's making. If a MA school is only doing "dead patterns", then I don't think they are bridging the gap between training and practical application. Are there schools that only train "dead patterns"? Yes there are. However; for him to say Boxing, BJJ and wrestling schools are more accustomed to this and "99.9%" of MA school aren't is inaccurate. Everything doesn't have to be a sparring match to learn and train techniques.

You are getting better at what you're actually doing.

His critique of Aikido basically downplays it as an ineffective art for self defense. In his video he concludes that Aikido should be used as a supplementary art and that's what its founder intended it to be. I myself know very little about Aikido so Im not sure if its an accurate critique although I do see where he's coming from. I do disagree with what he says about Tai Chi.

A position that has been endorsed by experienced Aikidoka on this forum is that it's akin to an advanced degree and only really works if you have a foundation in another grappling style.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i was with you to you mentioned the benefits of fighting a wooden dummy,!

Wooden dummy serves some of the same functions as a punching bag. Not all of them, and some additional, but a similar concept.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

A position that has been endorsed by experienced Aikidoka on this forum is that it's akin to an advanced degree and only really works if you have a foundation in another grappling style.

And just to clarify Steve's post - the techniques will work without another grappling style as a foundation, but the system needs them to be functional, because the techniques (as they are used in most Aikido schools) don't cover enough situations or enough common responses/attacks.

 

[Ironbear24]

Jesse Pinkman?

 

[jobo]

Wooden dummy serves some of the same functions as a punching bag. Not all of them, and some additional, but a similar concept.

it serves non of the functions of a punch bag unless you punch it, which I've never seen advised

 

[Gerry Seymour]

it serves non of the functions of a punch bag unless you punch it, which I've never seen advised

That statement assumes it is never punched, and that a punch is the only strike.

 

[jobo]

That statement assumes it is never punched, and that a punch is the only strike.

a punch bag has two qualifying features, one its a, bag and second that people punch it,
even if people are misguided enough to punch a solid piece of wood, it still fails to be a punch bag because of its lack of bagness

 

[Steve]

a punch bag has two qualifying features, one its a, bag and second that people punch it,
even if people are misguided enough to punch a solid piece of wood, it still fails to be a punch bag because of its lack of bagness

"I once saw a forklift lift a crate of forks, and it was way too literal for me." Mitch Hedberg.

 

[drop bear]

I have mixed thoughts about all this.

For starters back when I was in class my instructor would "Teach The Art - Train and Think Street" approach!

In class we would do drills that in reality you would need to slap an ear or smash the nose.

Instead we would hit the shoulder for the ear and for the nose we would hit the forehead not full force either but enough to apply the drill and hit.

We weren't going to injure each other over a drill in sparring/training is the point.

Not every technique is going to work 100% in the reality but you still train like that and adapt in the flow of motion through any move or technique you do.

For example -

Also in JKD / Wing Chun we use the Wooden Dummy ( Mook Jong) but you got to visualize the opponent in your imagination and see the strikes and counter/s. Also this conditions the forearms and builds up internal energies very quickly as an added benefit.

So its all subject to interpretation and perception in some ways no one is wrong or right it really is up to the student as well.

But when we had Sparring sessions or practice KALI sticking fighting we would wear full protection like this..............

So in my opinion I see Matt Thorntons approach a little unfair if I am understanding this correctly based on video on post #2

Also its up to the teacher / instructor to monitor the situation on-hand responsibly as well, there might be some aggressive gent/s on board that need to be pulled back so training is adjusted so on, if you are hurting each other well that ain't good I doubt there will be future members. LoL

All opinions welcomed of course thats my take on this in a nutshell!

Your drills should reflect the fight. The fight in general terms is defined by your alive training. Or sparring. This is because the alive training is as close as you are willing to go to replicate the conditions of a fight in your training.

You seem to be suggesting the fight reflects the drills which is the backwards approach.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

a punch bag has two qualifying features, one its a, bag and second that people punch it,
even if people are misguided enough to punch a solid piece of wood, it still fails to be a punch bag because of its lack of bagness

You might try actually reading the posts you're trying to argue with. I never said it was a punching bag. I said it filled some of the same functions.