Skepticism & Spirituality in the Martial Arts

[DARPAChief]

To have a teacher with some kind of law enforcement or military experience must be quite the privelege.



When most of us think of Danzan Ryu or really modern Jujutsu in general, this is what comes to mind. It's definitely not koryu, nor is it a combat sport, so modern combatives or self-defense seems to be the only niche left. Yet keeping it "real" probably demands LEO or military experienced individuals' involvement amongst other things. As long as advertising "self-defense" isn't subject to any kind of qualification however, I suspect groups like yours will be the exception and not the rule, and that's why skeptics scoff.

[Limit]

I agree with Matt that Aliveness is considerably lacking in most TMA's. By aliveness, I interpret he means that the training has to be authentic and real for it to work in a real and authentic fight. "You do as you practice".

He does go a little overboard though, and I can find a ton of instances where MMA, BJJ, and the others show "dead training". Assuming the guy you're fighting isn't going to do any illegal techniques, have a friend, etc... is JUST as bad as TMA's assuming they're going to leave their hands out after they punch.

I'm remember seeing a video of a BJJ black belt who was in a real fight, locked in a guilitine, and had his eyes gauged to where he had to release it. It happens in MMA fights too. Every MMA event, there's usually at least 1 eye gauge, groin hit, etc... that they stop the fight for and give them a chance to recover. And those are ACCIDENTAL.


Frank Shamrock vs Renzo Gracie. Start at 1:45: v=7DjBbs5km1g

Renzo was in a dominant position the whole fight, but left the back of his head exposed to knees. He had no reason to defend the back of his head because it's illegal to hit it.

But therein lies the problem, when you train for rules, whether it be: certain strikes or targets being illegal, how many opponents you have, etc... the probability goes down that the authentic or realistic scenario will match the way you've trained.

[battlefields]

I agree with Matt that Aliveness is considerably lacking in most TMA's. By aliveness, I interpret he means that the training has to be authentic and real for it to work in a real and authentic fight. "You do as you practice".

You should've left it right there. What you are trying to say in a really bad implication is the tiredest argument on this site, that you train for the street, not sport and that in the street there is no rules. First off, there are rules, society's rules, oh, and they're called laws and breaking laws have punishments. So by you training "for the street" where your "go to" move is break their bones, gouge out their eyes, rip off their ears and curb stomp them into oblivion after fourteen savage soccer kicks to the groin, then you are flirting with a little thing called "excessive force". Think of the guy who calmly wraps them up, nullifying all those above "street" techniques and sits on him until the cops arrive. Who do you think the witnesses are going to side with, guy who is trying to kill, maim and destroy, or guy who hugs their attacker, possibly until he goes to sleep or cries uncle.

Also, you talk of Renzo having to let go of a guillotine due to eye gouges. I am assuming that he let go and proceeded to win the fight in another way, most likely using his BJJ rather than some low act like trying to permanently blind someone. If he didn't win, were his eyes still intact, how crippled and maimed was he? Were the eye gouges really that successful? I think maybe Renzo might have just had supreme control over the situation and decided to rise above low tactics like groin punching, biting and eye gouging.

Do you also think that knees to the back of the head aren't trained for? He didn't need to block that "under the ruleset" but I can almost guarantee Renzo has trained for situations where knees to the back of the head are being thrown.

Any bitch can try stick their fingers in someones eye, any ***** can kick to the groin, any ***** bitch can bite. If you are that ***** bitch that thinks that because you aim your kicks for balls, fingers for eyes and if there's flesh near your mouth you will bite it, you will emerge victorious because "those sport guys only train to aim for the other parts of the body" then I have this bridge that I would like to sell, right now, for the low low price of $550.

I mean, do you think it would be hard for someone who trains inside leg kicks against a resisting opponent to aim a tad higher? To me it seems that these low tactics are the actions of a desperate man, I've been bitten before and I'll tell you this, I have never felt more alive! You eye gouge me you'd better be in a REALLY dominant position, because even though I have shitty eyesight, I like my eyes and you have just shown me that you don't value my safety at all, so my interest in minimising damage to you will wane and disappear.

Regarding ball kicks, I don't get your point, they are accidents, where the kicker has aimed for the inside leg and the blocker has missed the block. People who train in an alive manner learn to block and minimise any damage to their legs, inside and outside, which includes their groin. Remember this, if I block one kick of yours going to my groin because I have trained to block inside leg kicks, I am going to know you were going for my groin. Try it a second time. Please. I'll block it again. Then the fight will end and you will likely have to come to grips with impotence and sterility.

And that is the serenity that comes with learning a martial art that trains with aliveness.

[Limit]

I didn't leave it right there because Matt was making a false statement by thinking that, ironically the MA's he profits from, are perfect and TMA's are perfectly 0.

The guillotine eye gouge wasn't Renzo, but it was a BJJ BB teaching and discussing doing an arm-in guillotine because of it. He said he let it go, whether or not he lost the fight because of it, I don't know. He wasn't blinded for life though, which means it's not necessarily going to be "excessive force" on the attackers part though either.

Regarding the ball kicks: It had to do with when a particular rule is broken, ie: ball hit, they usually get a 5 min. break. In many instances the fight can be ruled no contest, or in Renzo's case, a victory. That's not being very "Alive".

You can consider "cheap shots" ***** all you want, it doesn't takeaway from their effectiveness. If I'm not mistaken, it wasn't that long ago that taking a guy to the ground wasn't proper. That you fought standing and if the guy fell you waited for them to get up or gave up.

I'm not one to start fights, so it's going to be in a self-defense situation anyway. I could care less about laws, mores, folkways, taboos, ethics, and all the like when it comes to my safety. I'll deal with those when I'm safe. I've seen a buddy "go easy" and win, and less than a minute later be stabbed by the guy who he let off. I'd rather train for the worst and not need it than to not and then need it.

It may be trained for in some instances just like other things, but when competition has a rule set that has some things that can be exploited by knowing what the other guy can't do, it changes from being PURELY "Alive". Matt, whether he believes himself or not, realizes this. He totally dodges the "Well, What if there's more than one person" question. Running away? There are PLENTY of situations where running away isn't an option. He never worries about a 2nd guy? I was in a fight where there were 20 of us watching, a guy had mount and was pounding on the guy and got kicked in the head from a buddy before anyone could stop him.

Hell, most standing arts don't even remotely think for one second of being taken down. Look at MMA's boxing vs regular boxing and how the stances change to adapt to that threat alone. I'm not knocking BJJ, EVERY single martial art, TMA or not, isn't PURELY, 100% alive. Unless you're 100% trying to kill one another, practicing any and every scenario. No one would get very far. Each training method has rules in it. Their own MA rules, societal rules, basic safety for a classmate, etc...

[Charles Brown]

Yep, you're right. I talked with my sensei about it last night. He said that the majority of Danzan Ryu schools do not train the way that we do. Being a wrestling coach, he feels the need to teach us in this manner, even if it means having less students.

To have a teacher with some kind of law enforcement or military experience must be quite the privelege.



When most of us think of Danzan Ryu or really modern Jujutsu in general, this is what comes to mind. It's definitely not koryu, nor is it a combat sport, so modern combatives or self-defense seems to be the only niche left. Yet keeping it "real" probably demands LEO or military experienced individuals' involvement amongst other things. As long as advertising "self-defense" isn't subject to any kind of qualification however, I suspect groups like yours will be the exception and not the rule, and that's why skeptics scoff.

[Downrange]

I didn't leave it right there because Matt was making a false statement by thinking that, ironically the MA's he profits from, are perfect and TMA's are perfectly 0.

The guillotine eye gouge wasn't Renzo, but it was a BJJ BB teaching and discussing doing an arm-in guillotine because of it. He said he let it go, whether or not he lost the fight because of it, I don't know. He wasn't blinded for life though, which means it's not necessarily going to be "excessive force" on the attackers part though either.

Regarding the ball kicks: It had to do with when a particular rule is broken, ie: ball hit, they usually get a 5 min. break. In many instances the fight can be ruled no contest, or in Renzo's case, a victory. That's not being very "Alive".

You can consider "cheap shots" ***** all you want, it doesn't takeaway from their effectiveness. If I'm not mistaken, it wasn't that long ago that taking a guy to the ground wasn't proper. That you fought standing and if the guy fell you waited for them to get up or gave up.

I'm not one to start fights, so it's going to be in a self-defense situation anyway. I could care less about laws, mores, folkways, taboos, ethics, and all the like when it comes to my safety. I'll deal with those when I'm safe. I've seen a buddy "go easy" and win, and less than a minute later be stabbed by the guy who he let off. I'd rather train for the worst and not need it than to not and then need it.

It may be trained for in some instances just like other things, but when competition has a rule set that has some things that can be exploited by knowing what the other guy can't do, it changes from being PURELY "Alive". Matt, whether he believes himself or not, realizes this. He totally dodges the "Well, What if there's more than one person" question. Running away? There are PLENTY of situations where running away isn't an option. He never worries about a 2nd guy? I was in a fight where there were 20 of us watching, a guy had mount and was pounding on the guy and got kicked in the head from a buddy before anyone could stop him.

Hell, most standing arts don't even remotely think for one second of being taken down. Look at MMA's boxing vs regular boxing and how the stances change to adapt to that threat alone. I'm not knocking BJJ, EVERY single martial art, TMA or not, isn't PURELY, 100% alive. Unless you're 100% trying to kill one another, practicing any and every scenario. No one would get very far. Each training method has rules in it. Their own MA rules, societal rules, basic safety for a classmate, etc...

+1

I have been on this site for a couple of days now and the way people are bashing TMA is quite honestly, a put off. I am getting ready to enroll in a Wing Chun school this evening and you know what? I could care less what people on Bullshido think about the style. I like it and thats all that matters. MMA isn't end all be all but thats the impression I get when reading many of the threads on this forum.

[Petter]

I have been on this site for a couple of days now and the way people are bashing TMA is quite honestly, a put off.

If you actually stick around and actually read what people have written, you might do a little better. Many tradition-steeped martial arts get plenty of respect: Boxing, wrestling, various (full contact) karate and kung fu, Muay Thai, and judo, to name just the most obvious examples. Nor does it look to me like the concensus opinion here is against people who choose to practice martial arts of dubious utility. I’ve spent time on rapier fencing, various people practice with various weapons unlikely to ever appear in a modern-day altercation, and there are even practitioners of *ing *un and Aikido who manage to be active on the site and suffer no more ribbing than anyone else.

So, no, it’s not contempt for tradition or even “traditional” martial arts per se.

I am getting ready to enroll in a Wing Chun school this evening and you know what? I could care less what people on Bullshido think about the style.

Yes, it is evident that you could, since you are talking about it. If you couldn’t care less you wouldn’t be here mentioning it.

MMA isn't end all be all but thats the impression I get when reading many of the threads on this forum.

Read more and read more closely. The point is that alive training is vital for martial effectiveness. Regardless of whether your art is a thousand years old or was created last year, what we really care about is that if the art is being presented as something useful for actual fighting skills, it had better incorporate alive training, and have some tradition of alive training (after all, taking a dead art and incorporating alive training is an improvement but won’t weed out the bad overnight).

(I haven’t attempted to quantify it, but I have the vague impression that “MMA” is much rarer in posters’ style fields than BJJ, boxing, kickboxing, or karate. Yes, MMA gets a lot of respect here because it is among the closest things to real combat that the martial arts world has to offer, but I don’t get the impression that most of the people here practice MMA—though alive combat sports are common.)

“I like Wing Chun and, though it’s kind of **** for fighting, it amuses me so I’ll do it anyway” won’t get you in trouble. “I like Wing Chun and I feel it’s just as good for fighting as MMA” will raise a few eyebrows and attract certain amounts of scorn. “Wing Chun is the ultimate and most scientific fighting system” will result in…well, the search function can tell you that.

[Petter]

I agree with Matt that Aliveness is considerably lacking in most TMA's. By aliveness, I interpret he means that the training has to be authentic and real for it to work in a real and authentic fight. "You do as you practice".

Then perhaps you should actually read or listen to what Matt has written and said, because he means something very specific and describes it very well.

He does go a little overboard though, and I can find a ton of instances where MMA, BJJ, and the others show "dead training".

Such as?

Assuming the guy you're fighting isn't going to do any illegal techniques, have a friend, etc... is JUST as bad as TMA's assuming they're going to leave their hands out after they punch.

No it isn’t. (It also has nothing to do with aliveness, but that is by the way.)

Training an alive combat sport will give you the ability to perform in combat under certain conditions. It’s true that it won’t give you much ability to fight multiple attackers, but you do gain effective skills, which are empirically verifiable (and verified).

Dead TMA training such as what you describe makes an enormously larger mistake, because it provides no useful skills whatsoever. I don’t care how much time you spend musing over multiple attacker scenarios: If you haven’t learned how to effectively beat one person, you can’t fight several either.

Every MMA event, there's usually at least 1 eye gauge, groin hit, etc... that they stop the fight for and give them a chance to recover. And those are ACCIDENTAL.

In events where groin strikes were not banned, how often have they been decisive?

But therein lies the problem, when you train for rules, whether it be: certain strikes or targets being illegal, how many opponents you have, etc... the probability goes down that the authentic or realistic scenario will match the way you've trained.

I will agree with part of that: That is, the best combat training for the purpose of being effective in combat is that which best simulates real combat, while sufficiently protecting participants that they are not unduly hampered by training injuries. However, for unarmed combat, I don’t believe that any dead training is ever better than alive training, limitations of the latter notwithstanding.

I didn't leave it right there because Matt was making a false statement by thinking that, ironically the MA's he profits from, are perfect and TMA's are perfectly 0.

Please show us where Matt Thornton ever said either that his chosen martial arts are perfect or that all traditional martial arts have absolutely nothing to offer. I suspect that your only source is your own ass.

I'm remember seeing a video of a BJJ black belt who was in a real fight, locked in a guilitine, and had his eyes gauged to where he had to release it.

The guillotine eye gouge wasn't Renzo, but it was a BJJ BB teaching and discussing doing an arm-in guillotine because of it. He said he let it go, whether or not he lost the fight because of it, I don't know.

So was this a video you saw, or someone you heard talking about it, or something you read, or something you got from your cousin’s uncles second best friend?

I'm not one to start fights, so it's going to be in a self-defense situation anyway. I could care less about laws, mores, folkways, taboos, ethics, and all the like when it comes to my safety.

So if someone tries to punch you, for instance, you feel it’s worth applying lethal force?

Personally, I’d rather have a black eye than a murder conviction.

He totally dodges the "Well, What if there's more than one person" question. Running away? There are PLENTY of situations where running away isn't an option. He never worries about a 2nd guy?

For someone who apparently hasn’t even watched the famous “aliveness” video, you sure do seem to know a lot about what Matt Thornton thinks about very specific things.

[It is Fake]

MMA isn't end all be all but thats the impression I get when reading many of the threads on this forum.

Then stop posting. I get tired of every so called TMAer whining about "MMA is not the end all be all that everyone said" even though no one said that and "OMG multiple opponents, street and the deadly" hi five BS.

This is based on the fact of participating in multiple TMA and chun threads where the above excuses are trotted out.

[Downrange]

If you actually stick around and actually read what people have written, you might do a little better. Many tradition-steeped martial arts get plenty of respect: Boxing, wrestling, various (full contact) karate and kung fu, Muay Thai, and judo, to name just the most obvious examples. Nor does it look to me like the concensus opinion here is against people who choose to practice martial arts of dubious utility. I’ve spent time on rapier fencing, various people practice with various weapons unlikely to ever appear in a modern-day altercation, and there are even practitioners of *ing *un and Aikido who manage to be active on the site and suffer no more ribbing than anyone else.

So, no, it’s not contempt for tradition or even “traditional” martial arts per se.


Yes, it is evident that you could, since you are talking about it. If you couldn’t care less you wouldn’t be here mentioning it.


Read more and read more closely. The point is that alive training is vital for martial effectiveness. Regardless of whether your art is a thousand years old or was created last year, what we really care about is that if the art is being presented as something useful for actual fighting skills, it had better incorporate alive training, and have some tradition of alive training (after all, taking a dead art and incorporating alive training is an improvement but won’t weed out the bad overnight).

(I haven’t attempted to quantify it, but I have the vague impression that “MMA” is much rarer in posters’ style fields than BJJ, boxing, kickboxing, or karate. Yes, MMA gets a lot of respect here because it is among the closest things to real combat that the martial arts world has to offer, but I don’t get the impression that most of the people here practice MMA—though alive combat sports are common.)

“I like Wing Chun and, though it’s kind of **** for fighting, it amuses me so I’ll do it anyway” won’t get you in trouble. “I like Wing Chun and I feel it’s just as good for fighting as MMA” will raise a few eyebrows and attract certain amounts of scorn. “Wing Chun is the ultimate and most scientific fighting system” will result in…well, the search function can tell you that.

Man I just signed up here, not about to get into a battle of semantics or logic with you or anyone else (speaking on the snarky remark you made about me caring more).

Trust me, I have read, re-read, read some more, watched countless youtube vids, read those comments, and more. The consensus is that MMA heads continuously **** on TMA (especially Wing Chun). I have found very few replies where people speak highly or positively of it. Its always "its fantasy, its fake, its set moves, nobody leaves there arm out, yada yada yada." And this is across the net, not just here. And its a put off. The whole "my style is the best" no matter what you train in is really corny.

I thought as a boxer that it was more the fighter him/herself than it was the style. But MMA heads around the net seem to give the impresssion that if you learn the GOD art BJJ, Muay Thai, and Wrestling, you can easily beat anyone because well, you sparred. Im not this is indicative of ALL MMA heads, Im just saying that it seems to be prevalent on all of these forums.

I know some really cool MMA heads and I know some who are douches who couldn't armbar a bag of doritos no matter how much they spar (and in no way am I disparaging sparring, its an invaluable training technique). But since they are all studying the "Holy Trinity" of styles, they are teh l33t.

From the outside looking in (meaning that I don't train in it yet), I see its lacking a ground game, so I committed myself to also learning what the consensus says is a very effective ground art, BJJ. What I have also gleaned is, people need to spar plain and simple. Coming from a boxing background, I couldn't agree more. What I have also gleaned is a lack of rigorous conditioning. That part is easy, I will condition the way I did when I boxed.

Do I ever want to fight MMA? At this point, even though I have been completely turned off by the MMA crowd over the last few days because they think their style is "t3h d3d13st" I can't say that I don't ever want to venture into the ring.

After a few months training Wing Chun, I may have an educated opinion of it.