Official IWS Traditional Martial Arts Thread

[Ludo]

[SPX]

I had to quit watching the Kung Fu Monk episode because the shit was just too much. There was way too much emphasis on cardio than actual techniques which seemed to not quite do justice to the art itself.

I remember the kyokushin, boxing, savate and wing chun episodes being particularly cool. You might want to start with those.

Yeah but there are people who are literally afraid to end up having killed someone. They don't want to have to end up taking someone's life even in a situation where their own might be at risk. I have to think at least some of those people are drawn to martial arts for the sake that it's, on the whole, much less lethal than a firearm but may still see you through being attacked by someone.

I certainly don't want to kill anyone, both because I don't want to have it on my conscience and because of the legal ramifications. And I also encourage people to learn hand-to-hand self-defense. But there are some people, especially small women, who just don't have the size or strength to deal with a big man who intends to do them harm, regardless of training. Sometimes the difference between getting raped or not is a gun.

I like the principles of savate in that it's something you could have done under dim torchlight in the streets of London circa 1890 in a fucking dress suit and top hat. It was created for the every-man to perhaps persuade a thief to target someone else next time, or to make it home safely from work/the pub. But the real intrigue of savate, at least for Me, is what it helped lay the ground for in european kickboxing along with traditional asian martial arts. It just goes to show that you didn't have to be asian to develop a style of fighting that made ample use of kicks.

Yeah, savate is interesting for a number of reasons, and like you, I think the idea of a kick-based european martial art is pretty fascinating. In fact, it may be the only one that I know of.

I can see the appeal of this kind of thing, but I don't think it'd ever be for Me.

Yeah, well I don't think I'd want to fuck with it right now, but when I'm like 60 and just chilling and have gotten my fill of hard-charging ass-kicking martial arts, I could see it interesting me.

Does Aikido even work outside of a dojo setting? I don't think I've ever heard about/seen/read about aikido being used to any kind of effect beyond a randori demonstration and even then it looks alot like coreography. I'm sure it's good for weapon disarms but I just don't see how something so utterly passive can be used in a situation where you don't have the luxury of having exact movements true to trained form being attempted on you for the purpose of demonstration.

I really don't know. And the "randori" demonstrations ARE choreographed . . . there is no free sparring in aikido, according to something I recently watched. Personally, I don't really care about aikido, and I'm sure I'll never learn it, nor would I suggest it to anyone else for self-defense.

A lot of the aikido people that I've run across talk more about its spiritual/meditative qualities than its self-defense value, so I don't even know how confident most aikidokas are in their SD skills.

I know Yip wasn't directly involved in Jeet Kun Do, but he seemed to be a pioneer in the concept. I don't think you can call what Yip was doing purely wing chun, at least from the legend that had surrounded him. It seems like he took what he learned and did a sort of fusion to incorporate more than what he had been trained with to an extent. I have to believe alot of Bruce's concepts were derivative of Yip's education.

That whole thing about emotional content, form without form, etc etc etc. Not to mention the fusion between striking and grappling along with being constantly aware of what opportunities are available to you and what openings have been left. Bruce was a brilliant man, but he isn't the first to come up with some of those core beliefs for a combat system.

Could be. I've never heard much about Yip Man's influence beyond wing chun, but then again I haven't done a lot of research on it either.

I think this attitude may be a bit of backlash for how muay thai has been portrayed by the media in the past. Broken glass dipped wraps, being un-hurtable beastly motherfuckers, ones who practice by shin kicking load bearing beams and shit, being called Sagat since 1987. I'm sure all of that has jaded a few guys, but it's probably a pride thing mixed with the kind of person who chooses to act a fool in the first place, you know? Kind of like how Junie Browning and War Machine give MMA fighters a bad name almost every day.

I think that's part of it. I also think it has plenty to do with the fact that the sport component of MT is full-contact and is virtually synonomous with the style itself, and that virtually all legitimate striking weapons are allowed in competition. And of course there's something to that. MT is battle-tested and people respect that. This is also the reason that Kyokushin was pretty much the only karate style that got any respect in the MMA world before Machida came along.

The other problem is McDojoism in traditional martial arts. The way many traditional styles have been taught and trained over the past few decades hasn't done the traditional world any favors. Thankfully things are starting to come full circle a bit and people are beginning to realize that the problem isn't TKD or Karate or whatever, but the way they're trained. Train them like practical, serious fighting styles, and they will be.

I have to believe not as many martial art instructors give a rats ass about MMA.

A lot don't. Some are still bitter and actively hate MMA. But a lot are fans and have been open to the holes and gaps that MMA has exposed in a lot of traditional training. I've talked to a lot of instructors on MartialTalk and Martial Arts Planet who have added in leg kicks and grappling and the like because of MMA.

Muay Boran is the direct predecessor of Muay Thai, and while it is a bit of an umbrella term it has a distinct trademark difference in that headbutts were permitted in muay boran, which was called the ninth weapon or nawa awut. Unfortunately the origins are unknown because the Burmese destroyed all the records of the ancient kingdom in which muay boran came about.

I remember hearing that, about headbutts.

BTW, I think you've been holding back on us a bit. You clearly know more than you've lead us to believe. Is all your knowledge academic or have you actually trained in anything?

[SPX]

Awesome contribution. Truly groundbreaking stuff.

[Ludo]

I remember the kyokushin, boxing, savate and wing chun episodes being particularly cool. You might want to start with those.

I'll check those out soon, thanks.

I certainly don't want to kill anyone, both because I don't want to have it on my conscience and because of the legal ramifications. And I also encourage people to learn hand-to-hand self-defense. But there are some people, especially small women, who just don't have the size or strength to deal with a big man who intends to do them harm, regardless of training. Sometimes the difference between getting raped or not is a gun.

I was talking more about men than women. Obviously a petite woman has next to no chance without some serious knowledge and confidence in that knowledge against a large male assailant. But a man, even a small man has different reasons and options in a fight or flight situation. He might fight to survive, or fight because of pride, or run because he's trying to survive. For a woman it's likely she'll be outrun and overpowered, or just overpowered without some kind of equalizer. On average a woman is going to be smaller than a man and won't have the muscle content in the places it counts to fend off even a poorly educated attack/attempt to overpower her. A man has the added muscle to help bridge that gap, and the threat of rape usually(at least outside of prison) a non factor in things.

The idea of non-lethal resistance has been the goal of plenty of people for a long time. Going back to the core principle of Aikido itself, the general procedure of law enforcement, etc etc etc. Taking a life is usually the last thing on any morally inclined sane person's mind. Most people who fit the description for sane and morally inclined probably wouldn't want to try and kill someone who was potentially trying to kill them first, thats just how it is. If someone came up to you with a knife and said "give me your wallet before I cut you!" you'd probably give them your wallet because the issue isn't just defending yourself at that point, it's potentially having to kill that guy in order to do so.

Yeah, savate is interesting for a number of reasons, and like you, I think the idea of a kick-based european martial art is pretty fascinating. In fact, it may be the only one that I know of.

I think that personally savate's roots in kicking follow the psychological effect that being punched in the face has for most people. Especially someone who wasn't looking for a fight in the first place. If your just walking home you don't want to be in a fight, and you certainly don't want to be punched in the face by someone for whatever reason. The easiest way to avoid that without giving up your ground is to create and hold distance. The best way to do that is to use something that has effect from beyond the average length of the human arm, which is the leg.

I really don't know. And the "randori" demonstrations ARE choreographed . . . there is no free sparring in aikido, according to something I recently watched. Personally, I don't really care about aikido, and I'm sure I'll never learn it, nor would I suggest it to anyone else for self-defense.

A lot of the aikido people that I've run across talk more about its spiritual/meditative qualities than its self-defense value, so I don't even know how confident most aikidokas are in their SD skills.

Thats what I meant. The randori's are choreographed and impressive in that aspect but will those same techniques translate to situations where the movements being thrown at you aren't exactly what you've been taught about? Will they be able to snag the wrist and flip an opponent who's REALLY charging them with a knife? It just doesn't seem like a practical art for anything other than fitness and achieving perfect technique.

Could be. I've never heard much about Yip Man's influence beyond wing chun, but then again I haven't done a lot of research on it either.

I haven't done a whole lot of research about it. But I find it hard to believe that, given Yip's story and the legacy he's left in his students who went on to be great practitioners of martial arts in general, he was practicing 100% by the book wing chun as opposed to a self made fusion style. His success and fame couldn't have arisen just simply by achieving the status of "master" in the traditional wing chun.

I think that's part of it. I also think it has plenty to do with the fact that the sport component of MT is full-contact and is virtually synonomous with the style itself, and that virtually all legitimate striking weapons are allowed in competition. And of course there's something to that. MT is battle-tested and people respect that. This is also the reason that Kyokushin was pretty much the only karate style that got any respect in the MMA world before Machida came along.

The other problem is McDojoism in traditional martial arts. The way many traditional styles have been taught and trained over the past few decades hasn't done the traditional world any favors. Thankfully things are starting to come full circle a bit and people are beginning to realize that the problem isn't TKD or Karate or whatever, but the way they're trained. Train them like practical, serious fighting styles, and they will be.

That could also be part of it. Maybe the fact that the proverbial outlandish likes-to-fight-guy is drawn to a style where full contact is regular practice has something to do with it. Maybe the culture difference between indo-chinese culture and the main portion of asia is something to look at as well. It could be a big mixture built on many factors or it could just be localized to a specific type of person.

It's true that the moment you start treating something like a practical self defense system it can be. Even Aikido could probably be adapted given the core principles of redirecting force much like Judo. But that kind of thing takes change on a grand scale, and it may not be something purists ever adopt.

BTW, I think you've been holding back on us a bit. You clearly know more than you've lead us to believe. Is all your knowledge academic or have you actually trained in anything?

I've dabbled here and there. Never trained seriously but I'm mostly a student of biomechanics. I'm fascinated by how the human body moves and can move, the different powers at work in something like an armbar or a low kick.

[SPX]

Thats what I meant. The randori's are choreographed and impressive in that aspect but will those same techniques translate to situations where the movements being thrown at you aren't exactly what you've been taught about? Will they be able to snag the wrist and flip an opponent who's REALLY charging them with a knife? It just doesn't seem like a practical art for anything other than fitness and achieving perfect technique.

Yeah, I dunno. I'm sure there's SOME of it that can be used in a self-defense situation, and a lot a lot of the perp-control tactics used by law enforcement are aikido-esque in nature. But yeah, if someone wanted a self-defense grappling art I wouldn't point them toward aikido.

I haven't done a whole lot of research about it. But I find it hard to believe that, given Yip's story and the legacy he's left in his students who went on to be great practitioners of martial arts in general, he was practicing 100% by the book wing chun as opposed to a self made fusion style. His success and fame couldn't have arisen just simply by achieving the status of "master" in the traditional wing chun.

I would like to know how well-known he would be if there had never been a Bruce Lee.

It's true that the moment you start treating something like a practical self defense system it can be. Even Aikido could probably be adapted given the core principles of redirecting force much like Judo. But that kind of thing takes change on a grand scale, and it may not be something purists ever adopt.

I think that some arts pretty far enough out there to where they would require a good bit of modification, or at the very least, only a small part of the entire system would be truly applicable to self-defense. Aikido is certainly one of those styles. A lot of kung fu styles would be as well.

There are a lot of traditional styles that I think are pretty good to go as-is, though. But it's important to separate the art from the sport. If you train karate just for the sport aspect, then you might have some issues with adapting your habits and technique to a self-defense situation. On the other hand, if you ignore the sport and only train it for self-defense, then there will probably be little modification required. For me, personally, I'd like to take a middle ground and do some of both.

I've dabbled here and there. Never trained seriously but I'm mostly a student of biomechanics. I'm fascinated by how the human body moves and can move, the different powers at work in something like an armbar or a low kick.

That's pretty interesting. Do you get into those Fight Science Discovery Channel shows and shit like that?

[SPX]

I think that personally savate's roots in kicking follow the psychological effect that being punched in the face has for most people. Especially someone who wasn't looking for a fight in the first place. If your just walking home you don't want to be in a fight, and you certainly don't want to be punched in the face by someone for whatever reason. The easiest way to avoid that without giving up your ground is to create and hold distance. The best way to do that is to use something that has effect from beyond the average length of the human arm, which is the leg.

I think two things are particularly interesting here:

1. For a long time in many parts of the world, including America, a fist fight was considered the manly way to go about things. My step-dad even told me once that when he was growing up there was no kicking in fighting. Kicking was for cowards and pussies. Real men fight with their fists. It seems that this was not the mind-set of the French.

2. Considering that Savate was not created strictly as a ring sport with rules, I think it's interesting that there was little to no concern about kicking in a street fight in the sense that kicks take your base away and being wrestled to the ground is a much greater possibility with only one leg supporting all your weight.

[Ludo]

Yeah, I dunno. I'm sure there's SOME of it that can be used in a self-defense situation, and a lot a lot of the perp-control tactics used by law enforcement are aikido-esque in nature. But yeah, if someone wanted a self-defense grappling art I wouldn't point them toward aikido.

I know some of the basic police techniques are aikido based in that they are joint locks designed for control rather than destruction of the joint at first. But you won't see cops making criminals swirl around in the air like a jumprope anytime soon.

I would like to know how well-known he would be if there had never been a Bruce Lee.

Probably not so well known in the western world, but he was absolutely famous in his city and is still well revered across china through his students and whatnot.

I think that some arts pretty far enough out there to where they would require a good bit of modification, or at the very least, only a small part of the entire system would be truly applicable to self-defense. Aikido is certainly one of those styles. A lot of kung fu styles would be as well.

There are a lot of traditional styles that I think are pretty good to go as-is, though. But it's important to separate the art from the sport. If you train karate just for the sport aspect, then you might have some issues with adapting your habits and technique to a self-defense situation. On the other hand, if you ignore the sport and only train it for self-defense, then there will probably be little modification required. For me, personally, I'd like to take a middle ground and do some of both.

This is essentially what I was getting at. There are a few techniques that would need to added/removed from the basic repertoire to be considered "spontaneous-proof" because let's face it. You throw a traditionally trained tang soo do practitioner in some random setting where without warning he's rushed on and attacked by someone and the chances are more or less 50/50 that he's going to come out on top. That may not be a very good concept but it's off the top of My head and I think it would apply beyond a person by person basis.

That's pretty interesting. Do you get into those Fight Science Discovery Channel shows and shit like that?

Constantly. I love that shit.

[Ludo]

I think two things are particularly interesting here:

1. For a long time in many parts of the world, including America, a fist fight was considered the manly way to go about things. My step-dad even told me once that when he was growing up there was no kicking in fighting. Kicking was for cowards and pussies. Real men fight with their fists. It seems that this was not the mind-set of the French.

I don't necessarily buy into that line of thinking by and large. While that's something that was "said" as soon as asian martial arts came to the western world it was like an explosion. Bruce Lee wasn't a total celebrity by accident. As soon as kung fu and other martial arts made their way to Europe/America everyone wanted to learn to look like a ninja while fighting.

Also, I think another thing that may have influenced this is kicks themselves. Not everyone has one punch knockout power in their hands. That much is just a fact in the world. Even professional boxers and fighters seemingly lack that ability to place the shot that puts the other guy to sleep. Anyone, literally anyone over the age of ten years old who isn't a midget has the leg strength to knock someone out/end a conflict with a well placed kick.

2. Considering that Savate was not created strictly as a ring sport with rules, I think it's interesting that there was little to no concern about kicking in a street fight in the sense that kicks take your base away and being wrestled to the ground is a much greater possibility with only one leg supporting all your weight.

Well for john everyman who may not be versed in catch wrestling it wouldn't make a difference is he was throwing punches or kicks against one. His best chance at getting out of there before he's robbed and possibly bleeding is to kick while keeping his hands up to protect his face. Also, distance becomes important in a scuffle involving more than just two people, especially when the odds aren't even. Being swamed on is pretty much a loss for the most part, being able to keep at least one or all of your attackers at a distance to be able to have a free range of motion is imperative for coming out of that kind of situation.

[SPX]

Probably not so well known in the western world, but he was absolutely famous in his city and is still well revered across china through his students and whatnot.

Have you seen the Ip Man movies with Donnie Yen? I've seen the first. Good shit.

This is essentially what I was getting at. There are a few techniques that would need to added/removed from the basic repertoire to be considered "spontaneous-proof" because let's face it. You throw a traditionally trained tang soo do practitioner in some random setting where without warning he's rushed on and attacked by someone and the chances are more or less 50/50 that he's going to come out on top. That may not be a very good concept but it's off the top of My head and I think it would apply beyond a person by person basis.

I think the same is true for a muay Thai guy, though. An MT guy is trained to fight under a very specific set of circumstances--ring, gloves, only one opponent, clearly defined start and end points for rounds, etc.--and MT also also requires modification with the stance to defend takedowns. The other thing about MT that's worth pointing out is that because it's pretty much exclusively a sport, there is no discussion on striking vital targets or anything else that's self-defense related. There's just no mentality for that kind of thing.

[Ludo]

Have you seen the Ip Man movies with Donnie Yen? I've seen the first. Good shit.

I saw the first one. I wasn't aware there were more though.

I think the same is true for a muay Thai guy, though. An MT guy is trained to fight under a very specific set of circumstances--ring, gloves, only one opponent, clearly defined start and end points for rounds, etc.--and MT also also requires modification with the stance to defend takedowns. The other thing about MT that's worth pointing out is that because it's pretty much exclusively a sport, there is no discussion on striking vital targets or anything else that's self-defense related. There's just no mentality for that kind of thing.

Well speaking strictly for self defense you may not have to modify the stance at all. It's not especially likely your going to be attacked by a trained individual, since studies show that structured activities like that tend to keep youths out of crime for the most part. As far as vital targets that's only a minor tweak to things, it's still going to be the same basic movements and core motions that are just aimed elsewhere. A jab is still a jab only now it goes to the throat and not the nose, a knee to the gut can be a knee to the groin, etc etc etc.

[SPX]

I don't necessarily buy into that line of thinking by and large. While that's something that was "said" as soon as asian martial arts came to the western world it was like an explosion. Bruce Lee wasn't a total celebrity by accident. As soon as kung fu and other martial arts made their way to Europe/America everyone wanted to learn to look like a ninja while fighting.

This took some time. I mean, Bruce Tegner was writing books on martial arts as early as 1950 and the public was aware of the existence of karate, kung fu and judo, but it wasn't until the 70s that public interest really took off.

Well for john everyman who may not be versed in catch wrestling it wouldn't make a difference is he was throwing punches or kicks against one.

Even an unskilled brawler can just windmill into a guy and knock him down. This isn't especially difficult.

[SPX]

I saw the first one. I wasn't aware there were more though.

If you have Netflix, I believe the second one is up for streaming.

There's also this shit, which I believe is totally separate from the Donnie Yen movies:

Well speaking strictly for self defense you may not have to modify the stance at all. It's not especially likely your going to be attacked by a trained individual, since studies show that structured activities like that tend to keep youths out of crime for the most part. As far as vital targets that's only a minor tweak to things, it's still going to be the same basic movements and core motions that are just aimed elsewhere. A jab is still a jab only now it goes to the throat and not the nose, a knee to the gut can be a knee to the groin, etc etc etc.

My point is that you'll fight how you train. If you don't regularly put it into your mind to go for those targets, then you'll treat it like a ring fight. Not that it will probably matter in MOST situations. By and large, a skilled MTer will beat the shit out of most guys anyway.

[SPX]

Re: Krav Maga. An interesting post. . .

The thing that gets me about Krav Maga is that it is basically every Traditional Martial Art I've ever seen but with a new name and they swear up and down that it is new.

Then they give you these life or death scenarios that statistically no one would have a chance of surviving and they tell you to hit the guy in the nuts, or rake his eyes, etc. Basically just shit that you could have told yourself to do without paying for it.

I've taken Krav Maga and it's just not impressive. You'd be better off learning boxing, MT, wrestling, or BJJ and just telling yourself that everyonce in a while, you might have to kick someone in the nuts, poke them in the eye, or run the fuck away.

http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f11/krav-maga-really-effective-898414/#post27957432

[Ludo]

Re: Krav Maga. An interesting post. . .




http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f11/kr.../#post27957432

Easily the most overall disrespectful to a single system I've ever seen. But like one guy pointed out it's not a sport and it isn't meant to be for competition, it's meant to teach you things to stay alive in spontaneous encounters.

[Ludo]

If you have Netflix, I believe the second one is up for streaming.

Watched the second one last night. I didn't like it near as much as the first one, there seemed to be alot more fighting just for the sake of fighting and traditional martial arts movie-esque acrobatics in it. It honestly reminded Me of Jet Li's Fearless.

My point is that you'll fight how you train. If you don't regularly put it into your mind to go for those targets, then you'll treat it like a ring fight. Not that it will probably matter in MOST situations. By and large, a skilled MTer will beat the shit out of most guys anyway.

You have a point here. But even just drilling jabs to the throat or something without actually hitting anything may still do the trick when things become automatic. But yeah, someone who's 2-4 years into muay thai will probably beat the shit out of any unskilled tough guy when push comes to shove. It's amazing how much a little conditioning of the legs makes a difference when being kicked or how a person reacts who's not used to being kicked at all.