WT in MMA

[Tonuzaba]

And please guys (Tonuzaba and DTT) do not take this personaly. I'm sure you both have valid reasons to stick with _ing _un. I just don't understand them.
Tomas

I am thankful for every reasonable and dialogue-capable poster like you Tomas, even though our views on Wing Tsun are the opposite.

[eriq]

As an official n00b I have a question to all the WT guys here. How come here are all these people, who used to do WT, then realized, that it doesn't work and switched to something that does, like MT or BJJ, but here doesn't seem to be ANYONE, who has done the opposite?

ANYONE? So you know everyone now?

Who alleged that? I was really interested wheather or not there are people here that have done something like that. Now I know that at least some german guy has done it. Thanks for the information

The main fallacy you all suffer from is that the training sets must look Exactly like a fight.

That's not a fallacy, that's just common sense.

[---]This makes it more difficult, and I have always granted the sport techniques are an easier route to non-lethal self defense.

Non-lethal self defence?!
If you guys train with the object of killing people why don't you just carry a gun or something? I have to say that although I'm not the type of guy who goes around looking for fights, I have had to fight for various reasons (I used to live in a tough neighbourhood) with different idiots, but it has never been my objective to actually KILL somebody. I mean, that kind of thing would look bad on my CV.

In this case, a Tsunner went into Sport Boxing, so he trained in a Tsuner fashion, using Tsunner fighting Theory, but applied to boxing. It looks like sport boxing because it is a sport boxing venue. However, several Chunners have recognized adduction and turning in his foot work, the rapid combos with vertical (non-corkscrewing) punches, the close chasing, etc.

Yeah, the theory being you have to hit your oponent.
The fact that some chunners found something on the video that sort of looks like something they learn doesn't mean shit. Accoridng to you that is:

The main fallacy you all suffer from is that the training sets must look Exactly like a fight.

I'll bet my grandma would "recognize" some cool knitting-techniques from the video if she tried really hard.

What more can I do? This video was edited by them specifically to show this connection.

Well it's really hard to show a connection that doesn't exist.

Oh man I have to stop reading Bullshido at nights, I have work tomorrow (it's 1 AM here).

[Virus]

_ing _un theory: The creationism of martial arts.

[DevonHartigan]

_ing _un theory: The creationism of martial arts.

That is so true, though I would rather compare it to Intelligent Design. Something that seems to make sense, and seems to be scientific, but really is devoid of both. Whereas creationism is just plain Harry Potter magic.

[Lu Tze]

Intelligunt desine is creationism, just couched in psuedo-scientific terms the creationists believe will fool the average joe into thinking it's real science.

It actually bloody works to a certain extent, which is an unfortunate testament to the declining standards in western education systems and our burgeoning culture of anti-intellectualism. Oh well, the dark ages weren't that bad were they guys? Guys??

Speaking of psuedo science, when I've had a wee kip I'd like DTT explain his use of the null hypothesis to prove a negative (hint: that's not what it's fucking for).

[blindfury]

I think Harry Potter magic is cooler than creationism. I take offense!lol

[DevonHartigan]

Intelligunt desine is creationism, just couched in psuedo-scientific terms the creationists believe will fool the average joe into thinking it's real science.

It actually bloody works to a certain extent, which is an unfortunate testament to the declining standards in western education systems and our burgeoning culture of anti-intellectualism. Oh well, the dark ages weren't that bad were they guys? Guys??

Speaking of psuedo science, when I've had a wee kip I'd like DTT explain his use of the null hypothesis to prove a negative (hint: that's not what it's fucking for).

There is quite a bit of difference between the two, but yeah, basically they both have the same agenda.

As to DTT, I just think it is SO incredibly stupid to say that you have made your own(very unbiased) scientific study on something and found it flawsless, without proving that you understand and have adheared to the scientific method, and without exposing any results or methods used to peer review(which is a HUGE part of the scientific method, having others contesting and recreating results).
Untill this is done, this is anecdotal evidence. This is pseudoscience at its finest. This is bullshit!

[Virus]

I'm a member of a Harry Potter group that takes a stern stance against reading the bible.

[Torakaka]

Well, Mas Oyama did kill a knife-weilding man with one punch, so it's not all hogwash. After killing bulls, what's a man?

[Virus]

_ing _un: So lethal it's silly.

[DevonHartigan]

_ing _un: So silly it's lethal.

Here, fixed that for you.

[Virus]

I've been reading DTZ's posts and I see that he is still using the long discredited arguments of sport vs street and t00 d34dly.

[DevonHartigan]

I've been reading DTZ's posts and I see that he is still using the long discredited arguments of sport vs street and t00 d34dly.

Exactly.

I'm currently writing a response to the most of his entire HUGE post.

[DevonHartigan]

Ok I'm having a go at your huge post DTT.
If you instead of posting HUGE replies, just reponded underways, it would be a hell of a lot easier to repond to what you are saying. You are clogging up the discussion in this way.

The main fallacy you all suffer from is that Martial Arts must be a collection of specific techniques, that the training sets must look Exactly like a fight, and that WT is NOT a system of engineering training sets. Being wrong on these three points you continue to bark at shadows.

Martial Arts can grow and change over time, so you can not label them by techniques alone, as those evolve and grow. The training doesn't have to look exactly like a fight just as weight lifting doesn't look like the sports it is used to improve for. A Martial Art System is most importantly a way of creating training sets and training up work out partners as well as passing on the stored knowledge to future generations.

That in itself is a fallacy. The fallacy which have been mentioned in this thread several times before(the Strawman fallacy). You are simplifying and twisting what we are saying, so it is easier for you to argue against it, just so you can prove your point.

We are NOT saying that a martial art must be a collection of specific techniques, and that training must look exactly like a fight. What defines a martial art is a very subjective and extremely difficult discussion. We are however criticizing the majority of the basic techniques and theory in _ing _un, and saying that there is a huge difference between theory and practice(Tom Kagan), and that live resistance has to be included, in order to stress test the techniques. The training doesn't have to look exactly like a fight, but the closer you get, the better the results. We are saying that training with aliveness creates SO much better results than _ing _un's training methods.

WT is about creating training sets to program muscle memory. So, the sets we do mostly concern lethal encounters and thus the techniques we train take the most protective and defensive precautions. Being that the result we desire is to maim and kill the evil-doer bothering us, by definition, the techniques we use to train can not be exactly the techniques we will use in Battle. at least at full contact in a fully free and alive environment.

This makes it more difficult, and I have always granted the sport techniques are an easier route to non-lethal self defense. In much the same way Knife fighting or sword play also must train around the goal in order to achieve it, yet we don't reject knife fight training, in fact most of us carry a knife today, yet we have never cut another human with them..

What good does your muscle memory do you, when your techniques fail while you are fighting someone who is resisting and fighting back, especially in a life/death situation? Muscle memory does help in some areas, but I'd take aliveness over muscle memory any time.
And in order to reach the point where you can apply your lethal techniques, you have to first go through "battle". Lethal or non-lethal self defense, the techniques have to work. The techniques have to work, be it in the street or in the cage, be it in a competition or in a life/death situation. Stop making exceptions and excuses.

If you can not see that the demos and drills, specifically chosen for this video, are almost exactly the same techniques he does in the Boxing and MMA portion, then you are blind and/or just being stupid. What more can I do? This video was edited by them specifically to show this connection.

Ahh the immature "You are just too stupid and ignorant to see or realize my point. Respect the almighty awesomeness of my genius!". Lets all stop arguing then. Lets all stop making valid arguments, when we can retort to attacking each others persons, calling them stupid and blind.

Again you are making lame excuses for why your style doesn't have to test itself in a live environment. "Oh no, the other kids are teasing". How about just ignoring this and proving us wrong by participating in sports. It would get a hell of a lot more respect than just bitching, generalizing, and predicting our reactions. When you keep testing a style in a "live" sport environment, you are making sure that the techniques work and evolve.

Usually they start on their feet because takedowns is an important part of BJJ. And you KNOW the reason why they don't strike in competitions. Strikes and kicks could however easily be incorporated into it, but then it's called MMA;)

No, you shouldn't write something completely off, but until new evidence is presented, it won't get recognized and appreciated as a good MA style. And for the record, saying that it has been proven but,"that was in the far way time where tangible evidence couldn't be created" is bullshit. Then it hasn't been proven.
If you feel that you don't have to prove anything, then you better god damn also accept the ridicule.

"The null hypothesis is presumed true until statistical evidence in the form of a hypothesis test indicates otherwise. The use of the null hypothesis is controversial; a null hypothesis is often the reverse of what the experimenter actually believes; it is put forward to allow the data to contradict it."

Isn't that fortunate. It is true until disproved. And since you don't FEEL the need to disprove it, it can't be disproven. Since you need WT'ers in order to prove/disprove the effectiveness of the style. All in all you are using a controversial hypothesis originating from statistics to back up your point...hmmm.

Originally Posted by eriq
"As an official n00b I have a question to all the WT guys here. How come here are all these people, who used to do WT, then realized, that it doesn't work and switched to something that does, like MT or BJJ, but here doesn't seem to be ANYONE, who has done the opposite?"

ANYONE? So you know everyone now?

Stop being an asshole. He said "seem" and was talking only of his experience, and not claiming it to be anything else than that. But you made some good examples afterwards

Hmm "rationalizing everything to fit...". That sounds strangely familiar DTT. This is what you are doing in my opinion.


There, I gave it my best shot at making a response to your rediculously long ass post.

[DevonHartigan]

I'm a member of a Harry Potter group that takes a stern stance against reading the bible.

You are not the only one that is part of a Harry Potter group...;

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/show...1&postcount=56