We should collect all the effective techniques used in UFC and create new forms.
I think what he's saying is that there's no evidence the kata (assuming that was used extensively in koryu arts - I have no real knowledge in that area) was responsible for developing that fighting ability. In other words, we find good fighters (perhaps better fighters on average) from systems that don't rely on kata. Of course, that's correlation, so an assumption of causality has to be taken with a grain of salt given all the confounding factors involved.
There are so many confounding variables, we'd literally need a controlled experiment to tell. Any comparison "in the wild" also includes other variables in training, instructional quality, time commitment, effectiveness of techniques, fitness, etc.
I have to say I loved that they added the sound effects to the first clip. It made all those old kung fu movies seem more real.
I wasn't going to respond but I clicked the disagree button and before you retaliate, which you always do, I figured I need to explain why I disagree with you. There is plenty of evidence that koryu arts do not produce capable fighters (which we all agree is synonmous with self defense). That's not an opinion. You may suggest that there is contrary evidence and you might also challenge the conclusion, but thats not nearly as condescending and dismissive as your snarky comment about opinions.
In 1886, the Tokyo police held exhibitions to see what martial art would be used for their personal self defense system. Judo overwhelmingly beat out the Koryu arts and became the preeminent Jujitsu school in Japan. On July 24, 1905, representatives of the leading jujitsu schools (ryu) of Japan, gathered at the Butokukai Institute in Kyoto to agree upon the forms of Kodokan Judo and to continue the development of the technical forms of the sport. The ancient jujitsu techniques of each particular school were to be preserved in kata (pre-arranged form) for posterity. Here's a photo of that meeting:
Ok ..... now where does that say they died out etc and that was due to Judo .... ?
I took it to mean that the combat (I.e., application) produced the competent fighters. Someone earlier brought up basic training. The military training model is grounded in a training/application/training cycle . You learn it, you do it, you learn some more and then do some more . When I got to my first duty station, I was fully trained, but wrnt through 6 more months of ojt before I was able to even look at ordnance with direct supervision.
It’s all in the mindset/approach/whatever you call it. And we don’t know exactly what was said before and/or after the video was rolling. But I agree that the teacher in the initial video was most likely teaching it as stuff that’ll definitely happen and not situation drills. But early on he did pause and have the other guy throw a counter punch to explain why certain postures and hand positions were used. But definitely not enough of it. But we’re not his students and seeing the whole picture; we’re seeing a few minute snapshot of training. When you’re first learning stuff, training this way is acceptable. You’re learning a strategy. If you’re being countered right off the bat, you’re not going to get a solid grasp of how to apply it. A great example of a technique that’s known to be effective is a single leg takedown. If I’m teaching you it and sprawl every single time you try it, from the very first time you try it, you’re going to have a real difficult time learning it. If I let you take me down a couple dozen times before I start countering it, you’ll get it a lot quicker and more effectively.
