Traditional or MMA preference

What is your preference?

  • A traditional discipline.

  • A MMA discipline.


Results are only viewable after voting.
A

A.R.K.

Guest
I thought it might be interesting to begin a poll on members preferences in training.

For purposes of the poll I would offer the following definitions;

Traditonal

An older, established discipline that strictly adheres to techniques and training practices as previously set forth and passed down unchanged from generation to generation. Of course there will probably be slight alterations from time to time but in essence it is distinguished based on it's history.

MMA

A discipline probably having it's foundation in large part on a traditional style/system, but has since branched out. Utilizing concepts and techniqiues from other disciplines to reinforce or replace one's associated with the foundational structure.

These definitions are not absolutes of course. If you would like to add to, delete from, or offer and alternate definition please do so.

Thanks for participating.

:asian:
 

James Kovacich

Senior Master
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
2,900
Reaction score
51
Location
San Jose, Ca.
MMA training can help complete any system whether they beleive their system needs it or not.

:asian:
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Uh...I don't agree with this division, and I'm dyin' to know exactly what, "complete," means.
 

James Kovacich

Senior Master
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
2,900
Reaction score
51
Location
San Jose, Ca.
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Uh...I don't agree with this division, and I'm dyin' to know exactly what, "complete," means.

What division are you talking about?

For the most part (from my view) there are traditional arts that adhere strictly to their traditional format and there are many arts that have branched out and cross train and follow a more modern format.

If I go to train with my Sensei, then yes I bow when I enter the Dojo and before stepping on and off the mat. When I teach my art, no I do not bow on and off the mat.

Now, since your dying to hear exactly what "complete" is. "Completing our systems" can be very differant for all of us. Some will think that they are already complete. Thats find for them.

Assuming that we are both Instructors and if you can throw something at me that I do not understand, do not know how to counter, then my training "may not" be complete.

From my experience most Instructors will argue that their systems are complete and that "we" just need to put more time in our arts.

That dosen't go over well with me because self defense needs to be practical, to the point and we don't have a lifetime to become proficient. Yes it takes a lifetime on our "journeys" but no we shouldn't have to wait to be able to defend ourselves and our loved ones.

So (for me) to be complete. From Karate I went to Jun Fan Gung-Fu and my hands became much better, more practical. At the same time I trained a couple of days a week at a Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu school for 3.5 years.

In the beginning I wanted to know in my head that I would not get beat when someone "overwhelms" me and slams me to the pavement. That was something that "ALL" of my instructors dating back to 1973 overlooked.

They would say, well I'll do this or I'll do that. But I beleive that "we" have to get on the mat and learn some grappling first hand if "we" are going to be able to stop that grappler from taking us down. We need to have an "understanding" of other areas that are not our expertise to be complete.

Just saying well I'll shift my body weight and..... dosen't get it.

Well you got my definition of "complete."

Whats yours?

:asian:
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Empiricism isn't a good answer, I think.

I'm asking--since you and others keep insisting that one's art must be, "complete," what exactly, "complete," means to you.

Further, in at least one sense there are no "modern," arts. What defines "modern," for you, precisely?

In point of fact, it is virtually inevitable that any well-trained martial artist will be able to come up with something that you--and certainly, me--cannot counter.

And just to make my premises clear, what bothers me about these discussions is indeed the equation of the words, "grappling," and "Brazilian jiu-jitsu," with words such as "complete," and, "modern."

Thanks.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
428
Location
Cromwell,CT
A possible defination of complete- To have a good understanding of all ranges of combat. To be as prepared as possible for any situation that you might come across. Granted, there will be no way to tell if in 2 yrs, you will find yourself in a hostage situation, and thinking to yourself, "Holy s***, I dont know what you do cuz I never trained for this!" But, if you put yourself into as many real life senarios as possible, you might stand a better chance of surviving.

Tradition- Pretty well sumed up in the first post.

Modern- Something that has changed with the times. Learning a new idea or concept to improve your base art.

You certainly can't expect to defend yourself against something if you have never seen it. Do a gun disarm with a water gun. At least you will know if you got shot. A knife disarm with a marker or chalk. At least you'll know if you got cut. How the hell can you defend against a grappler, if you never train with one? BJJ is not the end all- be all of SD, but it is a piece that you need to complete the puzzle.

You can sit there and say, "Well, when the grappler shoots in I'll just hit him with a downward elbow and the fight will be over." If that was the case, then why hasnt it been done? Against a skilled grappler, you won't have time to get that shot off, and even if you do, it won't have that much power, because you'll already be going to the ground. Shouldn't you have an understanding how to counter the takedown?

I have yet to see a totally complete art. If anything, I'd have to say that JKD is probably the most complete, because of the fact that they address all ranges of combat. Nobody has even said to totally abandon your base art, but instead to 'get a taste' of what else is out there.

Why should we have to sit and wait and think, "Well, maybe if I wait 20yrs, this will be addressed in the art I"m taking?" Akja said that in his post and I agree 100% with that.

Mike
 
OP
T

twinkletoes

Guest
MMA is based upon having a functional game in all 3 "ranges": Standing, Clinch, Ground.

Standing should include a solid knowledge of striking and defenses. (simple enough)

Clinch should include controls/tie-ups, attached and unattached hitting, and takedowns/defenses.

Ground work needs an understanding of leverage and control, as well as opportunities and methods of striking, choking, locking, and escaping.

MMA favors skill development over rank. It is geared towards raising personal performance in lieu of fulfilling requirements. It tends to avoid uniforms, belts, titles, rituals, and hierarchies in favor of an athletic-coaching model of classroom behavior, endeavor, and instruction. Because of this, it favors molding each athlete's training towards making that individual functional in each range, rather than imparting a standard and uniform curriculum to every member.


There is a way to tell if you study TMA or MMA. It works like this:

Go through every single detail in your curriculum. Ask yourself of each component, "Why do I do it like this?"

If you are in MMA, the answer is always "because that is the way that works best, because of......"

If you find something in the curriculum to which your answer is "because that's the way I learned it" or "that's the way my teacher said to do it" then Congratulations! You practice a TMA!

Let's look at a couple examples:

Why do you punch like that?

1) Because it works in the ring.
2) Because it is the most biomechanically sound way.
3) Because it imparts the greatest force.
4) Because it's the way I learned it.

So far so good? No TMA'ers?

Why do you practice that combination?

1) Because it helps me practice loading my weight on one side, then the other.
2) Because I use it in the ring all the time.
3) Because it knocked my last opponent out.
4) Because it's in the curriculum that way.

Maybe not yet? Ok...

Why do you practice that form or prearranged technique like that?

1) I don't practice forms.
2) I don't practice prearranged techniques.
3) I only practice with resisting opponents, once I have the mechanics down.
4) It's a part of the curriculum.

If you answered 4 to ANY of the above, or other questions like them, you practice a TMA. I don't say this to knock TMA, but to point out the difference. That's why it's called "traditional."

Note: You might list 100 of these questions, and only answer like that to 1 of them. That still makes it a TMA! MMA is what happens when you cannot answer a single question that way!

~TT

PS - I'm sure I will get objections. They will start like this: "I have a legitimate explanation for all of the things I do...." That's fine. I understand. I am not knocking you for knowing what you are doing. I am not knocking anyone. People wanted a distinction. That is the distinction. I will add a stipulation: To be MMA, you must test your art in an environment with as few rules as possible, in order to test and refine your methods.

I will get others who say "If MMA isn't based on what you learned from your instructor, why is it the specific things you said above?" The reason is because it is under constant revision through testing. It is constantly forced back to the drawing board. My definition at the top is the current draft of MMA. If someone finds a more effective way to lock an arm, it will be adopted. If someone finds that there is a completely new range, or method, or something, then it will be tested. If it is functional, it will be adopted, and without sentimentality for the old way.
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Sorry, no.

The fundamental bases of your claim remain unsound, based as they all are upon this, "the ring," business. Ya wanna train for the ring, mazeltov. I don't, and neither do most...

More importantly, I reject the structure you've imposed on the discussion. It isn't accurate, and it isn't adequate.

Among other things, I guarantee that there are lots of places in your own training in which you violate the very rules of the game that you've given as essential.

And gutting martial arts in the pursuit of some dream of perfect completeness and efficiency...well, I'vee already posted enough on this.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
428
Location
Cromwell,CT
Oh boy--I can already see where this is gonna go. Just because the mention of MMA comes into the discussion, does not mean we are talking about he rign here folks. A clinch applies to the street just as it would in the ring. It makes no difference. You can alreayd see the one way thinking going on here. People think "Well, my Inst has never had to get into a clinch so neither will I" Well, you know what, you will never be your Inst. because we are all one of a kind. You can try to act and model them, but you will never be them. What works for you mightn ot work for them.

In regards to his training. Well, I happen to know Chris and also train with him. I can guarentee that he violates none of the mentioned things.

I hate to say the word again, but its probably the best that comes to mind. You are closed minded at ANYTHING that is not Kenpo. I assuming that you have never trained outside of it and that is why you impose such a NEGATIVE repsonse to anything not related to Kenpo. Change is a part of everyday life. There are always new and improved ways of doing things. Body styles of cars change, new cures for an illness come out, a new clothing design, etc. Like it or not Rob, and I can see that you don't, but change happens. If you want to stay in the dust, while everybody else moves forward, then go right ahead. When it comes down to SD, I guess that will be the true test as to who has the better, updated material.

Furthermore, nobody has said that you have to abandon your current training and learn something new. But, what is wrong with adding in something to make your current art better. Oh, I forgot, you art is already the best, right?

MJS
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Yes, well, that sort of response is precisely what's wrong with the whole approach.

First off, I was responding to the repeated mention of, "the ring," in the previous post. nearly all the "questions"--actually statements--made reference to ring efficacy. Please read them.

Second off, please show me where I've written anything vaguely resembling an assertion that my art alone was the best. That's apparently your dream, not mine.

Third off, why in the world do you expect anybody to actually discuss the issues with you, when you repeatedly claim that anybody who disagrees with you, "will be left in the dust," when you repeatedly throw cliches such as, "change happens," at them rather than discussing anything?

Fourth off, and one last time--the binary oppossition you've forced upon this issue is fundamentally inadequate to the reality you claim to describe.

I see that I'm about the only person not in your circle who's responding to any of these threads. I think I'll follow the wise example of the silent, and leave you to it.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
428
Location
Cromwell,CT
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Yes, well, that sort of response is precisely what's wrong with the whole approach.

First off, I was responding to the repeated mention of, "the ring," in the previous post. nearly all the "questions"--actually statements--made reference to ring efficacy. Please read them.

Second off, please show me where I've written anything vaguely resembling an assertion that my art alone was the best. That's apparently your dream, not mine.

Third off, why in the world do you expect anybody to actually discuss the issues with you, when you repeatedly claim that anybody who disagrees with you, "will be left in the dust," when you repeatedly throw cliches such as, "change happens," at them rather than discussing anything?

Fourth off, and one last time--the binary oppossition you've forced upon this issue is fundamentally inadequate to the reality you claim to describe.

I see that I'm about the only person not in your circle who's responding to any of these threads. I think I'll follow the wise example of the silent, and leave you to it.

I'll reply from top to bottom.

1- Yes, the post was talking about applying these things in the ring, but they do also apply to the street as well.

2- Regarding your art to be the best. I'm taking your comments of, "Why study anything else when its already addressed in Kenpo?" as you saying just that. Why study grappling when Kenpo addresses it? Because it does not address it.

3- LOL, thats a good one. I'm always ready to have a friendly discussion and share and compare ideas and training methods. You are the one that does not wish to because you dont think that the tradition should be changed. Anytime someone talks about change, you take the defensive.

4- What I've forced??? I have forced nothing. I was not the starter of this thread, just a contributer. There is nothing wrong with change.

5- My circle of friends. It is just proof in the pudding Rob, that I am not alone when it comes to this type of thinking. There are many people out there that have walked down the same road as I have and have seen and got a taste of what else is out there. We have never once said that anybody should stop doing what they are doing and take up a new art. All we are saying is to look at the way your base art is, look at other arts out there and their training methods, and maybe adapt something to your art. That is all.

It has nothing to do with being silent. Maybe these other people (the ones in my circle)are tired of hearing your negative words about change and dont feel like arguing with you anymore. If you want, you dont have to participate in the discussion. I'm not holding a gun to your head, forcing you to do anything. If you want to stay in your circle of friends, you know, the ones that think change is not good, then that is fine too. If your group chooses not to participate in the discussion, that is their choice. Nothing wrong though with looking at all the options that you have available to you.

MJS
 

James Kovacich

Senior Master
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
2,900
Reaction score
51
Location
San Jose, Ca.
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Yes, well, that sort of response is precisely what's wrong with the whole approach.

First off, I was responding to the repeated mention of, "the ring," in the previous post. nearly all the "questions"--actually statements--made reference to ring efficacy. Please read them.

Second off, please show me where I've written anything vaguely resembling an assertion that my art alone was the best. That's apparently your dream, not mine.

Third off, why in the world do you expect anybody to actually discuss the issues with you, when you repeatedly claim that anybody who disagrees with you, "will be left in the dust," when you repeatedly throw cliches such as, "change happens," at them rather than discussing anything?

Fourth off, and one last time--the binary oppossition you've forced upon this issue is fundamentally inadequate to the reality you claim to describe.

I see that I'm about the only person not in your circle who's responding to any of these threads. I think I'll follow the wise example of the silent, and leave you to it.

When I speak, I speak of "my experiences." My "equation of the words grappling and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu" with the word "complete," is because "I" am primarily a stand up fighter. Common sense without even knowing me will tell you where my weaknesses may have been. It was my quest to fix them. Pretty simple there.:D

And your final line that you've posted enough on this already. I don't think so! EVERYTHING you've stated was just "opinionized" and NOTHING was "factualized!"

I gave you my "definition" of complete for "me." But you failed to give me "your" definition of complete for "you."

For the rest of you guys, good posts! I see that some of us walk similar paths.

:asian:
 
OP
A

A.R.K.

Guest
Some good posts here gentlemen, thank you for your contributions thus far.

And Twinkletoes, that was an excellent post! :asian:

The poll is 50/50 at this point....

My personal view is that a MMD [my new abbreviation for Mixed Martial Discipline which is more realistic ;) ] or realistic training in more than one discipline will better prepare you for a real world encounter.

Works well in the military and LEO.

:)
 

Mithios

Green Belt
Joined
Jul 10, 2003
Messages
187
Reaction score
0
Location
Missouri
In my opinion a person should get a good solid base in a so called traditional system (black belt). And then move to mmd( i like that a.r.k. ) if they feel they need to.For myself i earned black belts in 2 styles before taking the mmd approach.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
428
Location
Cromwell,CT
Originally posted by Mithios
In my opinion a person should get a good solid base in a so called traditional system (black belt). And then move to mmd( i like that a.r.k. ) if they feel they need to.For myself i earned black belts in 2 styles before taking the mmd approach.

I agree. Cross training is not for everybody. I would not recommend it to someone who is a white belt. They have enough to worry about learning and getting familiar with the other things, let alone having to worry about another system. Of course, I'm also not saying that it is a requirement either. It is an option. If you feel that your system is complete, thats wonderful. I have said many times already that we all train for different reasons. Just because we talk about "reality", does not mean that we plan on jumping into the ring. The street is as real as you are going to get. Adding something to your art to help you be more prepared for the street is beneficial not harmful.

MJS
 

Mithios

Green Belt
Joined
Jul 10, 2003
Messages
187
Reaction score
0
Location
Missouri
Your on the money MJS, as far as i am concerned. Most people don't want to come to terms that there system,style whatever ! Has holes in it . And lord have mercy if they have made it there so called lifes work. For some reason there martial art is tied up in there feelings about what other people think of them. And if they aknowledge(sp ?) it they are saying something about themselves.(Did i just say all that??). I have never seen one system that has it it all.Whether it is Karate,Kenpo,Tae Kwon-Do,jiujitsu etc. MITHIOS
 
OP
K

Ken JP Stuczynski

Guest
I study MMA, and voted for TMA.

Why?

I beleive in pragmatism, but respect lineage (when it's worth respecting). I am like an orphan without a heavy foundation.

If you get "stuck" on your style, which is just as easy ("That's the way I was taught" or "I was taught it was because of this" -- same difference) in MMA, you'll never find your groove.

You can study TMA, and sometimes develop a deeper foundation for when you leave it behind for the real world.

It's like 99% of the New Age nonsense out there ... few of those people really know any of the disciplines they borrow from, and then mix yoga and chi kung in a blender and think they have something worth passing on. On rare occassion they do, but it's ussually by accident and misleads future generations into thinking they have any clue what the deeper understandings of these things are.

TMA does not guarantee quality, and has drawback, yes, but MMA almost guarantees that every clown has his own style based on his limited "half-a-generation" expereience of what he thinks works.

The few that work, such as Parker, Tegner, JKD, et alia, then almost become their own TMA over time, but with more openmindedness for evolution. Truly nice in principle. But again, the openmindedness is only as good as the wisdom of each generation, and it can easily degrade into a rejection of things that "don't work" because the understanding of them was lost.
 

7starmantis

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 13, 2002
Messages
5,493
Reaction score
50
Location
East Texas
Some systems are so inclusive that in order to be proficient in them it takes many many many years of hard training. Its like in the mantis system every time I think I know the limits of the system and its techniques my sifu shows me more and blows my mind. I would have to say TMA in this poll, but I don't think the division is correct here. I study Seven Star Preying Mantis Kung Fu, but yet some of our beginner forms we learn are Wah Lum. A few of my Sifu's sidai spent many years studying Eagle Claw and one Hung Gar, so we get to incorporate some of those systems as well in our learning. Is that MMA, I don't think so, I still view it as traditional. I guess I would say then that my traditional discipline would be Kung Fu and in that case, no I would not recommend cross training. There is so much in Kung Fu that I could study for the rest of my life and not even get close to learning it all.
 

Latest Discussions

Top