Posted On:11/29/2007 2:27pm
Style: JJ, CQB,FMA
goon, can you explain to the difference in [pardon my spelling] raykobo and kadinokov systema? is the system one and politically split? or is there technical differences between the two? if so how technical of a difference, carl clint and i attended a weekend seminar with scott sonnon several years ago, it was bayonet , staff and unarmed felt like a mix of internal chinese boxing, silat and aiki ju jitsu, scott called rma, but looking on you tube rma looks very much like systema---both look nothing like combat sambo--thanks, ralph g
Dark Overlord of the Bullshido Underworld
Posted On:11/29/2007 2:49pm
Style: Taai Si Ji Kung Fu
The reason you thought it looked like Systema was because it is Systema from Alexander Retuinskih.
ROSS = Rossijskaya Otechestvennaya Systema Samozashchity
Calm down, it's only ones and zeros.
"Your calm and professional manner of response is really draining all the fun out of this. Can you reply more like Dr. Fagbot or something? Call me some names, mention some sand in my vagina or something of the sort. You can't expect me to come up with reasonable arguments man!" -- MaverickZ
"Tom Kagan spins in his grave and the fucking guy isn't even dead yet." -- Snake Plissken
My Bullshido fan club threads:
Tom Kagan's a big hairy...
Tom Kagan can lick my BALLS
Tom Kagan teaches _ing __un and bigotry?
Tom Kagan: Serious discussion here
Lamokio asks the burning question is Tom Kagan a ***** or just cruising for some
I'm Dave the gay Kickboxer from Manchester and I have the hots for Tom Kagan
TOM KAGAN, OPEN ME, THE MKT ARE COMING FOR YOU ! ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO MEET ?
ATTN TOM KAGAN
World Dominator 'Kagan' in plot to lie about real Kung Fu and Martial Arts
Tom Kagan just gave me my third negative rep in a day
I am infatuated with Tom Kagan
Tom Kagan is a fat balding white guy.
Posted On:11/29/2007 2:54pm
tom , so is there a major difference in these styles? or if you put them all in one room teaching, you will see much of the same. in some clips, it looks like aikido, in others a softer version of sambo/judo or sometimes old bare knuckle/white crane--very confusing---ralph g
Posted On:11/29/2007 3:12pm
Style: Systema & BJJ
in a nutshell, systema ppl will distinguish the learning styles by this
Ryabko utilizes instinctual approach
Kadochnikov utilizes scientific approach
Posted On:11/29/2007 3:17pm
hank, one works on natural reaction, the other possibly on a scientific yielding? also, over the years of research, which was found to provide results faster [ not judging as sometimes faster is not better]?--ralph g
Posted On:11/29/2007 3:24pm
I don't have the answers to which one is better. I say go with what u prefer.
Some ppl, who have a background in biomechanics, or whatever, will probably find the structure of K-sys a bit easier to understand.
I myself, with my experience in other arts, prefer the instinctual way right now. It allows me the freedom to explore what i already know and use it within the systema principles
I can't speak for the the mechanical approach, since i haven't done it, but i like the instinctual approach because IMO it helps you flow and adapt to changing environments or different body types
Posted On:11/29/2007 3:28pm
do you think instinctual requires a past martial arts background?---ralph g
Posted On:11/29/2007 3:32pm
Kadochnikov System- In its initial incarnation developed by Alexey Kadochnikov, Sergey Shvets, Viktor Zavgorodnij, and A. I. Retuinskih based Spridinov Sambo mixed with a smattering of Traditional RMA but primarily developed through the science of Biomechanics with Biomechanically effecient movement as its primary goal. All books initially written were co-authored by either Dr Shvets or Viktor Zavgorodnij. In its later incarnation, after Kadochnikov broke with his primary researchers and Students/Co-Founders, it became highly stylized and nationalistic, making so far unsubstantiated claims of ancient lineage and the like(in packaging a lot like current Systema including the high emphasis on Orthodox Christianity), but in product still much the same only with a lack of teachers.
ROSS- Developed by Alexander Retuinskih. Was orignially called Kadochnikov System Retuinskih Style. Blended and recreated more Traditional Russian Martial arts. Was highly concerned with biomechanically efficient movement, but also strove to include ethnically Russian Arts. Blending in Asian arts to fill the gaps.
Ryabko/Vasiliev Systema- It initial incarnation was a free form derivative of ROSS and Kadochnikov until a number of lawsuits both in the US and Russia put a stop to that. Hence Vasiliev and the first generation of instructors(mostly Russian) look a lot like those systems. Currently it is solely the invention of the Ryabko and Vasiliev with a little blending of Kadochnikov when Konstantine Komarrov teaches as he holds Instructor 1st Class third Rank(in other words he has passed with ability to teach the first three tests of Kadochnikov System).
That pretty much sums it up. All three pretty much have origins in Buza, Samoz and Skobar as a base, to which they then add their own unique twists.
Posted On:11/29/2007 3:41pm
pretty complicated, do you think any aikido or paqua may have been absorbed? i have several jiu jitsu books from 1900, which indicate that smaller japanese got the better of larger russians in h2h, articles in turn of the century magazines insist that this spurred russians to create their own system [true or false?] if true in your opinion than issambo/systema is less than 100 years old? or do you consider local wrestling systems like armenian khok, mongolian wrestling to be original russian systems?--ralph g
I would agree with Hank re. the technical/"instinctual" split. Kadochnikov was a professional engineer and the principles of his system (biomechanical leverage, equilibrium, momentum etc.) are explained through very complicated mathematical formulae. Ryabko's system is based on experimenting with the same principles but more intuitively, without the formal maths and physics.
I've taken a few classes in the Ryabko style and IMO the intuitive approach works fine if the participant has an open mind and considerable prior experience in other styles. It's a good way to practice thinking, reacting and moving "outside the box". I think that it would take longer to develop real skill using this method if the participant didn't have a solid prior MA background.
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info