Train TMA but fight like kickboxer

[Gerry Seymour]

You still think about "teacher-students" model. I'm thinking about the "google engine" model that everybody can learn MA online without teacher.

I don't think folks can learn a system effectively without a teacher. Those with a foundation can learn techniques without one. Beginners, with a good partner, can learn some basics - much more slowly and less reliably - without one. But a system will never transfer well that way. And a form picked up without feedback from the instructor will become whatever the beginner imagines it is, rather than what it was meant to be.

Here's a good analogy: in a lot of business environments, task-training is done without formal work procedures. So the new person takes a ton of notes during training. Essentially, they have the least experienced person in the room documenting the process. This always introduces some interesting misunderstandings in their notes (I know, because I collect a bunch of these notes when I go into a company to help develop desk-level documentation).

I've seen first-hand how badly things can be misunderstood, while following what looks like (to the beginner) the proper movements. And I don't even have to get into things as hard to understand as aiki. I've seen leg sweeps (Judo's osoto gari) done with very bad mechanics by people who were quite certain they were doing exactly what they were shown. Even working against a sofly-resisting partner, they didn't figure out those basic mechanics over time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You never know what bits and pieces are kept.

I just created a post how people at the gym are following my instructions when I teach my son. I'm not teaching them but they watch when I teach my son and then they follow what I teach him.

Sometimes as a teacher you think what you teach, may not have an impact but it does. It just not always easy to see where that impact is and if that lesson will be taught again or forgotten forever.

None of that makes it at all likely there will be someone following my teaching methods when I'm not around. Because I teach differently from others who teach the same art, putting my stuff out there - with no supporting direct instruction - just becomes a confusion for students of other instructors, because those instructors don't know why those things are different.

Sometimes, the things we do are just what they are at the time, and don't have a lasting impact in that way. And that's just fine. I don't teach for legacy, and there's a reason I make sure to build non-martial skills in my MA teaching. Those are the things more likely to have a real impact on folks.

 

[Steve]

I was speaking of physical principles, so they'd need to understand them more than philosophically if they are to pass along the art well.

Maybe, depending on what your expectations are. You can learn a system, whatever that system might be, and there could be a lot of value in that for you (depending on what you're looking for).

You know, I've always wanted to learn to distill liquor. I've read several books on how to do it, and know the process. I was pretty deep into home brewing back in the 90s, and so have a solid understanding of at least the first step, which is to make mash. I can talk about it. I continue to learn more ABOUT it. But I'm no expert. I've never done it. And so, I am really careful when I talk about it with folks who do have some expertise, because I'm sure there are a lot of things I don't know that you can't learn intellectually. The best I can do without a still is to be a very well prepared beginner, so that when I do it the first time I'm not starting from zero. That's it... the best I can hope for.

But the reality is, I may never have an opportunity to try it. And that means two things. First, if I never have a chance to try it, I'll never be more than a well prepared beginner. And two, that means I'm never going to be qualified to teach other people to distill liquor. It would be dangerous for me to try... for them and for me.

And I'm cool with that, because I understand that to become really good at something, you have to do it. It's not enough to learn about it. And I also understand that learning complimentary things (like home brewing) is helpful, and can give you a head start, but doesn't guarantee success or expertise into a new context, because homebrewing and distilling liquor are two different things, even if there is some overlap.

But if I had a system where I teach people how to appreciate good liquor, where we actually drink some... now THAT I can learn and teach. That's my 101 steps to appreciating fine liquor system. And while you will learn a lot ABOUT the distilling process, it won't teach you to actually distill liquor. And for many people, that might be all they want or need.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Maybe, depending on what your expectations are. You can learn a system, whatever that system might be, and there could be a lot of value in that for you (depending on what you're looking for).

You know, I've always wanted to learn to distill liquor. I've read several books on how to do it, and know the process. I was pretty deep into home brewing back in the 90s, and so have a solid understanding of at least the first step, which is to make mash. I can talk about it. I continue to learn more ABOUT it. But I'm no expert. I've never done it. And so, I am really careful when I talk about it with folks who do have some expertise, because I'm sure there are a lot of things I don't know that you can't learn intellectually. The best I can do without a still is to be a very well prepared beginner, so that when I do it the first time I'm not starting from zero. That's it... the best I can hope for.

But the reality is, I may never have an opportunity to try it. And that means two things. First, if I never have a chance to try it, I'll never be more than a well prepared beginner. And two, that means I'm never going to be qualified to teach other people to distill liquor. It would be dangerous for me to try... for them and for me.

And I'm cool with that, because I understand that to become really good at something, you have to do it. It's not enough to learn about it. And I also understand that learning complimentary things (like home brewing) is helpful, and can give you a head start, but doesn't guarantee success or expertise into a new context, because homebrewing and distilling liquor are two different things, even if there is some overlap.

But if I had a system where I teach people how to appreciate good liquor, where we actually drink some... now THAT I can learn and teach. That's my 101 steps to appreciating fine liquor system. And while you will learn a lot ABOUT the distilling process, it won't teach you to actually distill liquor. And for many people, that might be all they want or need.

Don’t blow up your shed! My buddy did that in the late 90s. He too was a home brewer of some skill. Oops! Boom! Luckily he put out the fire before any fire trucks came.

 

[Steve]

Don’t blow up your shed! My buddy did that in the late 90s. He too was a home brewer of some skill. Oops! Boom! Luckily he put out the fire before any fire trucks came.

I am going to do some home-distilling at some point. It's on a long list of things I'm interested to try. But if I don't, that's okay, too.

Like many martial artists who have never been in a fight, I might just have to accept that I'll never become an expert distiller, much less competent to teach people the art of distillery. I might be able to teach some folks the performative elements of how to appreciate good liquor, though.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I am going to do some home-distilling at some point. It's on a long list of things I'm interested to try. But if I don't, that's okay, too.

Like many martial artists who have never been in a fight, I might just have to accept that I'll never become an expert distiller, much less competent to teach people the art of distillery. I might be able to teach some folks the performative elements of how to appreciate good liquor, though.

I’m no expert. My unprofessional record probably reads like 20-20-20. I’m guessing, but that’s close. Far from expert, but I’m hopefully retired from that nonsense. Haven’t been in a fight in over 15 years and hoping to keep it that way for good. Im much older and a tad smarter these days. Never too old to taste some homemade shine! Give it a shot, you might be better than you think.

 

[Grandmaster Yue men quan]

In another thread, people mentioned that one may train TMA but fight like kickboxer. If the TMA founder had fighting experience, should the style that he created be more like kickboxing?

For example, if an ancient TMA master fought all his life, in one of his fights, he found out that the roundhouse kick and hook punch worked very well. When he created his TMA system, should he include the roundhouse kick and hook punch into his training?

My logic is the following:

If you fight enough -> you will fight like kickboxer -> the TMA style you create will be like kickboxing.

If you don't fight enough -> you will fight like the way you want to -> the TMA style you create will be like TMA.

What's your opinion on this?

A TMA uses parts of the ancient system. It could include systems designed around yin yang theory, orthodox theory, combined diagrams or single diagrams or animal theory. By using one or more of these theory there is a correct way of boxing along each one and it is part of a larger diagram of the same thing that includes more parts and each part is used in a grand scheme of things system. Which has many sub sets and arts in one system. It would be akin to learning all the parts of the mma system like x guard iminari rolls mount guard work ground and pound, judo jujitsu catch wrestling. Throws takedowns kick boxing muay Thai. And stand up grappling. It is just a different system format. Kick boxing would be a style of karate developed to fight with muay Thai. Where bagua hsing I and tai chi would be styles of TMA that were complementary. So the question isn't does it look like this or that or can you combine them together thats what we all do its what is the foundation of the system and does it fit you.

 

[OLD DOG NEW TRICKS]

This just goes around and around and around. It's a strawman argument.

"Here is the ideal goal. Your TMA can't give you that, therefore it sucks."

"That is not my goal."

"Then you cannot fight."

"I do not train strictly to fight, and you don't understand the principles of TMA enough to criticize it."

"If you do not fight, your TMA sucks."

I'm tired of it. I know how to fight. I've been in more than a couple. I don't need to be told what you think my system lacks. I don't train to fight the way you think I should. I don't even train to fight anymore. I train because I'm on a path that gives me something I value.

I do not need or want your validation that my art meets your requirements. It meets mine. Are we clear?

Hello Sir, I have trained in several Martial arts for over 30 years. Tang Soo Do, Akido, American Ed Parker Kenpo, TKD, BJJ, etc. And I feel the exact way you do. We don't need anyone's validation to do what we love. All Martial Arts have a value, it is how we use them that defines our ability. Thank you.
Ron

 

[Steve]

Hello Sir, I have trained in several Martial arts for over 30 years. Tang Soo Do, Akido, American Ed Parker Kenpo, TKD, BJJ, etc. And I feel the exact way you do. We don't need anyone's validation to do what we love. All Martial Arts have a value, it is how we use them that defines our ability. Thank you.
Ron

I think the value statements and validation are self imposed, for the most part. All martial arts have value. But value is relative, and often objectively measurable. A wrench has value... but not as a drill. A hammer has value, but not as a screwdriver.

Simply put, when @Bill Mattocks says, "If you don't fight, then your style sucks," I'm sure that's what he hears, but seldom what is said. What is said more often is, "If you don't fight, then you aren't learning to fight." When people point out this seemingly obvious observation, folks hear, "Your style sucks."

And if you're not fighting, know you're not fighting, don't want to fight, and aren't interested in learning to fight... that's fine, too.

 

[jergar]

In another thread, people mentioned that one may train TMA but fight like kickboxer. If the TMA founder had fighting experience, should the style that he created be more like kickboxing?

For example, if an ancient TMA master fought all his life, in one of his fights, he found out that the roundhouse kick and hook punch worked very well. When he created his TMA system, should he include the roundhouse kick and hook punch into his training?

My logic is the following:

If you fight enough -> you will fight like kickboxer -> the TMA style you create will be like kickboxing.

If you don't fight enough -> you will fight like the way you want to -> the TMA style you create will be like TMA.

What's your opinion on this?

I think the question should be if you train enough in a TMA would you then fight like a kick boxer ? The answer should be no. The movement and techniques from your studies should be engrained in your brain and become an automatic response. Most people will fight like they train. Kick boxers are trained a certain way , in Thailand kickboxing is a traditional martial art. But sure if you see something different that works use it and integrate it into your fighting style . I remember when BJJ hit the United States some of the Masters got together and started working out ways to defeat it using the techniques we already knew by just tweaking the strategies involved. Peace!

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I don't think folks can learn a system effectively without a teacher.

The EE "digital logic design" is a self study course. You study one chapter, you then take the test. If you pass, you study next chapter. This is an example that if the information is recorded completely, self-study is possible.

Many university course just require you to read a book. At the end of that semester, you write a paper. The teacher then grades on your paper. This is an example that even if the information is not recorded completely, self-study is still possible.

IMO, to learn MA before the 21th century without a teacher could be difficult. But today, it's possible.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I think the question should be if you train enough in a TMA would you then fight like a kick boxer ? The answer should be no.

Still nobody has explained how a non-kickboxing fight suppose to look like.

Will you call these guys fight like kickboxing just because they throw

- roundhouse kick?
- hook punch?

This Taiji master and white crane master also used hook punches. Did they fight like kickboxer?

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I think the value statements and validation are self imposed, for the most part. All martial arts have value. But value is relative, and often objectively measurable. A wrench has value... but not as a drill. A hammer has value, but not as a screwdriver.

Simply put, when @Bill Mattocks says, "If you don't fight, then your style sucks," I'm sure that's what he hears, but seldom what is said. What is said more often is, "If you don't fight, then you aren't learning to fight." When people point out this seemingly obvious observation, folks hear, "Your style sucks."

And if you're not fighting, know you're not fighting, don't want to fight, and aren't interested in learning to fight... that's fine, too.

I would add to this, that there is a difference between training to fight vs. training to be able to fight. If I know I’m going to have a fight in 2 months then those two months leading up to the fight are going to be a much more intense and focused type of training than my everyday training.

 

[Steve]

I would add to this, that there is a difference between training to fight vs. training to be able to fight. If I know I’m going to have a fight in 2 months then those two months leading up to the fight are going to be a much more intense and focused type of training than my everyday training.

I see your point. I might disagree a bit, though. Not with the impact. Deadlines can really focus training and drive performance. On that, we agree completely.

This may sound counterintuitive, but sometimes, it can be really productive to set seemingly unreasonable goals, even. @drop bear's school does this with their new fighter program (I can't remember the details, but people with no training get a fight in like 2 months or something.) I've heard them called many things, but in the corporate world, they're referred to as Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAGs). Idea is, if you only ever deal with reasonable, achievable goals, you are imposing limits. Sometimes, it's good to set a goal that is audacious and aspirational. You might get there. But even if you don't achieve that goal, you will probably find you've done more than you thought possible.

But back to the point, with or without a deadline, you need feedback on performance. And you can't get that unless you perform. The feedback loop is important. In order to get to the point where you can say, "Hey, that didn't go as well as I'd hoped. I need to work on X, Y, and Z for next time,' you need two things. First, you need a "this time" and second, you need a "next time."

This is where some folks start to ask that question about street fighting... am I suggesting folks go out and get into street fights in order to gain experience? Answer is, no, of course not. What I'm suggesting is that it may be impractical, in which case you should get used to the idea you will never be an expert street fighter. Just not in the cards for you, just like I may never be an expert liquor distiller.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

am I suggesting folks go out and get into street fights in order to gain experience? Answer is, no, of course not.

One can learn a lot through civilized challenge fight. The civilized challenge fight can be you challenge a

- boxer to throw 20 punches at you and see if you can block all punches.
- TKD guy to throw 20 kicks at you and see if you can block all kicks.
- Judo guy to take you down within 1 minute and see if you can remain standing.
- BJJ guy to mount on top of you within 1 minute and see if you can avoid tapping out.
- ...

Since you only play defense, most people would love to accept your challenge.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I see your point. I might disagree a bit, though. Not with the impact. Deadlines can really focus training and drive performance. On that, we agree completely.

This may sound counterintuitive, but sometimes, it can be really productive to set seemingly unreasonable goals, even. @drop bear's school does this with their new fighter program (I can't remember the details, but people with no training get a fight in like 2 months or something.) I've heard them called many things, but in the corporate world, they're referred to as Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAGs). Idea is, if you only ever deal with reasonable, achievable goals, you are imposing limits. Sometimes, it's good to set a goal that is audacious and aspirational. You might get there. But even if you don't achieve that goal, you will probably find you've done more than you thought possible.

But back to the point, with or without a deadline, you need feedback on performance. And you can't get that unless you perform. The feedback loop is important. In order to get to the point where you can say, "Hey, that didn't go as well as I'd hoped. I need to work on X, Y, and Z for next time,' you need two things. First, you need a "this time" and second, you need a "next time."

This is where some folks start to ask that question about street fighting... am I suggesting folks go out and get into street fights in order to gain experience? Answer is, no, of course not. What I'm suggesting is that it may be impractical, in which case you should get used to the idea you will never be an expert street fighter. Just not in the cards for you, just like I may never be an expert liquor distiller.

I don’t think it’s possible to be an “expert“ street fighter. It’s never the same scenario twice. You don’t always know its coming either. Two of my uncles were money collectors, they did it all working for my dad. They had a 100% collection rate over 37 years. They both were hurt several times over the years. I would say they were close to being experts but you just can’t be prepared for every circumstance. When it comes to training, what I am teaching takes most people quite a while to just move correctly. Without basics there is no martial art. I don’t bother with any of that until they move like I want. I don’t care how long it takes. I don’t give goals like that. I don’t award rank. I think pushing people into a match or fight too early just makes for sloppy flailing. The guys that trained under our Sifu more than 10 years move like cats and punch far above their weight. I understand where you are coming from but I’m not selling any promises to anyone. Some people intuitively get what we are doing with training, most don’t, many quit because the training is difficult and very taxing physically. None of that changes the methodology. I don’t teach children, I don’t care if someone doesn’t excel because the few that do become very skilled. If it sounds like I’m an elitist pig, it’s because I am. I have seen a lot of schools train, I have never seen our method anywhere else. Many of us trained 3-4 hours a day 4-6 times per week for 2 years before any sparring or forms were even shown to us. Then when we would be invited to learn martial arts, we were conditioned and ready to take on the actual martial aspects of the training. This is the epitome of old school training. Most people are surprised to find out that I teach it exactly as it was taught to me. I do it that way because it works, though it can take a decade to become truly skilled. Sorry for the long winded explanation but I think most folks are completely taken aback by the commitment that our system requires.

 

[jks9199]

The EE "digital logic design" is a self study course. You study one chapter, you then take the test. If you pass, you study next chapter. This is an example that if the information is recorded completely, self-study is possible.

Many university course just require you to read a book. At the end of that semester, you write a paper. The teacher then grades on your paper. This is an example that even if the information is not recorded completely, self-study is still possible.

IMO, to learn MA before the 21th century without a teacher could be difficult. But today, it's possible.

There are things that may be taught by merely communicating the information in writing. History is an easy example... dates, events, names, etc. can all be written down.

There are things that cannot be meaningfully except by direct interaction between a student and teacher; it's just the way they are. You can approximate motions, you can "get the idea" but without a teacher, you'll miss details. Video, writing, all of that can help... but only help, not replace. And, often, it takes a teacher who not only knows the material, but understands it, and understands how things can be changed, but still stay the same for different students...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

There are things that cannot be meaningfully except by direct interaction between a student and teacher; it's just the way they are.

You assume that 1 on 1 teacher and student relationship is always available. For many beginner classes, there are a lot of students in one class. Students can only watch what teacher shows them from a far distance. Class like this won't be any different from the online class with video and text book.

If a MA teacher is not willing to share his personal secret to his students, to study from a well recorded video/text can be better then to learn from that teacher in person.

This is why I believe the following information should all be recorded properly (in form, text, video, ...) and not just in a teacher's head.

- technique,
- principle,
- strategy,
- defense and counter,
- training method,
- ...

To assume the information should be stored inside a teacher's head is not the 21th century thinking.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Maybe, depending on what your expectations are. You can learn a system, whatever that system might be, and there could be a lot of value in that for you (depending on what you're looking for).

You know, I've always wanted to learn to distill liquor. I've read several books on how to do it, and know the process. I was pretty deep into home brewing back in the 90s, and so have a solid understanding of at least the first step, which is to make mash. I can talk about it. I continue to learn more ABOUT it. But I'm no expert. I've never done it. And so, I am really careful when I talk about it with folks who do have some expertise, because I'm sure there are a lot of things I don't know that you can't learn intellectually. The best I can do without a still is to be a very well prepared beginner, so that when I do it the first time I'm not starting from zero. That's it... the best I can hope for.

But the reality is, I may never have an opportunity to try it. And that means two things. First, if I never have a chance to try it, I'll never be more than a well prepared beginner. And two, that means I'm never going to be qualified to teach other people to distill liquor. It would be dangerous for me to try... for them and for me.

And I'm cool with that, because I understand that to become really good at something, you have to do it. It's not enough to learn about it. And I also understand that learning complimentary things (like home brewing) is helpful, and can give you a head start, but doesn't guarantee success or expertise into a new context, because homebrewing and distilling liquor are two different things, even if there is some overlap.

But if I had a system where I teach people how to appreciate good liquor, where we actually drink some... now THAT I can learn and teach. That's my 101 steps to appreciating fine liquor system. And while you will learn a lot ABOUT the distilling process, it won't teach you to actually distill liquor. And for many people, that might be all they want or need.

Ok aside from anything else, how long do I need to sit outside your gate to be accepted into your 101 steps to appreciating fine liquor class? I mean I just need to know what I have to do? To hell with this martial arts talk We can do that after liquor class!

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You can learn a system, whatever that system might be, and there could be a lot of value in that for you (depending on what you're looking for).

When you cross train, you may find something useful from other system that can enhance your primary system. Each system have many things in common, but it also have something unique.

For example, the WC Fu Shou is similar to the praying mantis (PM) Diao Shou. Whether you learn Fu Shou from the WC system, or you learn Diao Shou from the PM system, it won't make any difference.

But the WC Tan Shou is quite unique. You can use it as a drill to separate your opponent's arm away from his head. Since most WC guys don't use head lock much, this value may not be recognized by most WC guys. But for a wrestler, the WC Tan Shou can be used as a drill, a nice set up for the head lock.