Question to traditional martial artists.

dlofnep

I know this place has been swarming with mixed martial artists and guys who train in a resistance emphasised situation. I'm wondering if in the last few months if you guys have felt ridiculed by some of us because we might question an art you train and It's not really fair of us. I'm pretty sure I've done it in the past too.

I think we should all try to stop the ridicule on here from now on in regards to what martial art we study. I think it's only fair that we respect each other's respective art, even if we don't agree with it's methods or potential.

John.

Roper

Well as a "TMA" I'll give you my opinion on the whole deal. Firstly, I think a lot of people who get on here and on other boards having never trained in a TMA, or having a limited experience of them, tend to lump all and sundry into the one pile. Some of the more experienced lads are gulty of that too sometimes. Secondly, When it comes to discussion of techniques and such, if I were to post "back spinning kick- how do you do it?", it would probably be answered with a dozen posts with "semi-contact", "wouldn't work in K1", "double leg would take you out beforehand", blah blah. Then if some one posted "rear naked choke", there'd be a host of interested partys discussing the best ways, the best you'd seen etc.......
Both are valid discussion on technique, I think we need to respect that there are people training in different things for different reasons, and that it's all good essentially as long as you know why you do it and where it takes you in the end. But then, that's another problem...

But lets face it, if we didn't argue about our opinions and such then we wouldn't really learn anything in the long run. I've been introduced to various different training methods by... yes, the internet. I've met people and exchanged ideas on training and methods etc. And most of them I started out arguing with!

Also, if something is b0llocks, there's no harm in calling it b0llocks. I don't think we should go PC!

Millionaire

I suppose I have been on here questioning TMA too. I guess that is because I have spent a few years doing them, and today my only interest is Reality Based self Defense, (with a bit of kickboxing for conditioning and fun to back it up ).

I found too, I got a wee bit of stick from the MMA lads, for adovacting lethal vital point attacks(eyes, bits, gouges, claws etc) in serious life of death situaitions as in rape, serious violent assault, multipe attacker etc (not of some drunk spilling beer on yer gf in the pub).

I guess we all got to recgonise is someone really enjoys doing traditional kata like Sanchin, or others pointfighting, or MMA or RBSD, well great let us all at it, and encourge people in an open environment.

It is great to debate techniques. but no use in slagging people.

Once on here I was saying , someone (much bigger and heavier) got a bit "too enthuastic" on me in a ground fighting class inKM, and really pinned me and tried to full a fast one. Well my only option available was to spear his arm pit with a "too enthuastic" finger spear.
Now some of the MMA lads said that was a crap technique , it would not work etc etc. Well it worked for me!!!!! cause your man jumped about 3 feet in the air off me! so I could escape and re gain the advantage.

Now did it matter the fact that it was called a crap technique, or was it more important that it worked for me , under very limited options, with a bigger, much stronger bloke who was trying to take a liberty.

anyway rant finished!!

pma-ire

dlofnep wrote:

I know this place has been swarming with mixed martial artists and guys who train in a resistance emphasised situation. I'm wondering if in the last few months if you guys have felt ridiculed by some of us because we might question an art you train and It's not really fair of us. I'm pretty sure I've done it in the past too.

I think we should all try to stop the ridicule on here from now on in regards to what martial art we study. I think it's only fair that we respect each other's respective art, even if we don't agree with it's methods or potential.

John.

Being classed as a TMA person. I don't mind discussing any part of the Whole combat/martial arts world. What I don't like is senseless comments that are used to trod down on someone's point of view without even trying to engage in a disscusion.

Sorry to rush my comment, gotta go training

Colm_OReilly

I think it's fine to disagree, and express your point of view. If your views aren't going to be discussed, why are you on a discussion board?

dlofnep

Oh course Colm, we just shouldn't ridicule each other. It's not the way of the ninja turtles and it sure won't be the way of the boards :P

dent

Roper wrote:

Well as a "TMA" I'll give you my opinion on the whole deal. Firstly, I think a lot of people who get on here and on other boards having never trained in a TMA, or having a limited experience of them, tend to lump all and sundry into the one pile. Some of the more experienced lads are gulty of that too sometimes. Secondly, When it comes to discussion of techniques and such, if I were to post "back spinning kick- how do you do it?", it would probably be answered with a dozen posts with "semi-contact", "wouldn't work in K1", "double leg would take you out beforehand", blah blah. Then if some one posted "rear naked choke", there'd be a host of interested partys discussing the best ways, the best you'd seen etc.......
Both are valid discussion on technique, I think we need to respect that there are people training in different things for different reasons, and that it's all good essentially as long as you know why you do it and where it takes you in the end. But then, that's another problem...

But lets face it, if we didn't argue about our opinions and such then we wouldn't really learn anything in the long run. I've been introduced to various different training methods by... yes, the internet. I've met people and exchanged ideas on training and methods etc. And most of them I started out arguing with!

Also, if something is b0llocks, there's no harm in calling it b0llocks. I don't think we should go PC!

I agree with the above post. I do get annoyed when all "TMA's" are bunched together or presumptions are made. I think some MMA practitioners forget where a lot of their techniques came from and where they are still used. That said I do have a lot of respect for them and there training methods. Just wish it was mutual.

dudara

As a TMA (TKD), I do get sick of all the bashing. I think anyone with half a brain will clearly see that TMAs are more "sport-based" these days and accepts that. It doesn't mean that a TMA is any less capable of a good self-defense, as long as their head is in the right place.

To lump all TMA praticioners into a single incapable ball is very insulting. Anything that trains you to think about defense is good, just maybe not as good as other techniques. But if a person knows that, and continues to train in TMA for the fun and sport, then accept it.

Personally, when I have the time and money, I'd love to try BJJ and/or Krav Maga to add to my knowledge. I don't knock these disciplines, in fact I'm very keen to learn some, so I ask that others don't call my TKD training useless for no reason other than a feeling of superiority.

Roper

Okay, so while my above post seems to have got some support from other TMA's (assuming the glove fits) it's also worth knowing that I agree with a lot of what the MMA guys say. There is an awful lot of dross out there. Outdated training methods and such.

anyone with half a brain will clearly see that TMAs are more "sport-based" these days and accepts that

As long as they're training for that sport and don't pretend otherwise, I think we can agree, yes. But that's not really the problem is it? The problem comes when people train for "contrived" (in-joke there) competition (semi-light contact) but remain convinced that this is an acceptable form of self defence training. Or people who train with no resistance, technique after technique with no application.

I am an advocate of semi contact sparring as I think it's a great and inclusive way for everyone to have a go at competition, but it's not the same as self defence and it may be a hinderance in a "real fight", whatever that means.

dudara

Roper wrote:

I am an advocate of semi contact sparring as I think it's a great and inclusive way for everyone to have a go at competition, but it's not the same as self defence and it may be a hinderance in a "real fight", whatever that means.

I'm in utter agreement with you here. Sparring is fun, but it is a sport. I would like to think, and I hope, that in a real-life situation, I will kick gouge and bite my way through sensitive points.

However, the sparring judges take a dim view on that kind of thing

Roper

dudara wrote:

I'm in utter agreement with you here. Sparring is fun, but it is a sport. I would like to think, and I hope, that in a real-life situation, I will kick gouge and bite my way through sensitive points.

However, the sparring judges take a dim view on that kind of thing

Hmmm, would like to think? Hope?
Not very encouraging language. Do you think that your training would help you in a self defence situation. (Just curious)

Rev Hellfire

I think that what is often missed in the arguments about virtues of MMA v TMA is the motivation of the individuals doing the particular style. I would say that most people would include fitness a motivation for doing a style, but the actual combat/self-defence element maybe of little or no concern to a person doing a TMA, just as the meditative practices in a TMA would (may) be of little of no concern to MM Artist.
I personally would have no interest in MMA's (and I admit this maybe an unfair impression, but I'm going by what I have picked up here) since they seem to be concerned only with the actual fighting and competition. This ofcourse is exactly what certain people what and maybe ideally suited to them.
Different horses for different courses as they say.

dudara

Roper wrote:

Hmmm, would like to think? Hope?
Not very encouraging language. Do you think that your training would help you in a self defence situation. (Just curious)

There's a big difference in knowing what to do, training to do, and actually applying it. People can bottle it for no reason. I've always thought that I'd fight viciously to prevent myself being raped or something like that, but until that situation presents itself, I can't say anything for certain. I'm confident, but not over-confident

Millionaire

My last kickboxing places I trained in, the trainer had everyone spell bound in there, that because he was training them , they were the best in the world and would be unstoppable on the street.

I never fell for that of course.

While I the kickboxing training was good, and plenty of hard knocks there etc. when I saw my first KM class, I realised how limited my ability to defend myself was. as in getting escapes from grabs, close in fighting, etc.

But there are guys still in that place totally convinced they are masters of the street and that they could batter a thai boxer too! I will leave them to their egos and false sense of security.

dlofnep

Thanks for the feedback guys. Intelligent discussion.

Roper

dudara wrote:

There's a big difference in knowing what to do, training to do, and actually applying it. People can bottle it for no reason. I've always thought that I'd fight viciously to prevent myself being raped or something like that, but until that situation presents itself, I can't say anything for certain. I'm confident, but not over-confident

Well that's certainly one of the universal truths about self defence, nobody can say anything for certain, and because we're all nice people we can be fairly certain that any attacker will have the situation weighted to their advantage.
However if self defence is your aim, then why not train in something that matches that aim as closely as possible? Your quote above about kowing what to do and applying it etc. is true. There is a big difference but when it comes down to it I'd bet on the person who'd prepared in the best fashion for a confrontation.

Millionaire

Roper is right re self defense. you got to be pressure tested in role play situations, from the stand off, (shouting and acting like an attcker) thru to the actual attack. in street clothers too.

sparring helps but RBSD pressure test is much different.

dudara

As I said previously

Personally, when I have the time and money, I'd love to try BJJ and/or Krav Maga to add to my knowledge

Until then, I take the view that TKD is better than nothing, and more importantly I thoroughly enjoy it.

Remember however, that we do a good bit of self-defense techniques, or at least in our club. The biggest aspect of self-defense is having the mental ability to strike in a vicious manner at someone else. The willingness to smash a nose, poke at an eye, stamp on a kneecap. Lots of people don't want to do such things.

Millionaire

Why do not you buy some DVDs to get a flavour of what is out there. re RBSD. for example Geoff Thompson stuff is great.

Full set of Krav Maga vidoes cost me 99 usd dollars last year. thats goodvalue for 5 videos.

Look on ebay. you can find good stuff cheaper.

no one (who is sane) wants to poke eyes etc. Its a horrible nasty things to do. but if you got some cocained, 15 vodka and red bull, brute trying to smash your head in for no reason, and a good old 1 2 and hook bounces off them. then to survive a violent ferral attack like that, you might have to.

the few times in recent years I had to defend myself on streets, with on option left. Ihad to do it, otherwise I could be on my back in the rehab centre in dun laoghaire for life. But I did feel bad for a day or two after, even though my actions were more than justifed.
anyway enough about that, negatitive vibe.

Plus on a positve note there is tons of stuff on the web, where you can get a taste of training or ideas to supplement your TKD. rememebr its a cheap option to get a DVD and a like minded willing buddy and do some training yourself!

Naos

dudara wrote:

Until then, I take the view that TKD is better than nothing, and more importantly I thoroughly enjoy it.

Of course it is. Pretty much(im sure there are bullshido exceptions) any MA is better than nothing.

TKD is excellant for discipline and stretching to say the least.

As for this continuos debate about real life situations:

People who start fights are generally not into MA for the following:
A MA would not start a fight as they do not need to prove their fighting abilities to their friends.
A MA would not start a fight because they do not know if the other person trains.

With regards to the TMA v MMA debate, Im hoping to try a hand at MMA when I return to Ireland, as I like the competitive idea.
I shall shed my unbiased opinions in a year or so...

breadmonkey

Just out of interest, are there any TMAs here that have trained MMA and decided that they were happier overall with the TMA training? Because there are quite a few who have done the opposite and converted from TMA to MMA.

Dave Joyce

I have trained, taught and fought MMA, but don't any longer. Don't really want to get into all of the reasons why, but while I do enjoy watching the sport, and I think it is one of the most effective "sports" and quite good for the street, I feel in a lot of cases there are too many closed minds, bad attitudes/egos and don't like a lot of the people involved in the fringes of the sport. I do understand however, the frustration of some of the more reasonable MMA practisioners with some of the wild claims made by some TMA's as regards the effectiveness of their "complete" system, but I'm happy continuing to train in TMA. :cool:

pearsquasher

My earlier Bujinkan days here were effectively MMA based. At the dojo in Parnell St. there was lots of ground work, grappling and sparring. Lots of big tough bouncers trained there, and US Embassy guards, and while there was a certain amount of proper "bujinkan" style efficient movement, most of it was fairly unsubtle and geared towards toe-to-toe "streetfighting" with little weapons training. Some of the instructors there mixed in stuff they knew from judo and karate and looking back on it now, it was a bit of a mess and there were lots of injuries (that some folks seemed strangely proud of).

So now i'm studying Bujinkan proper, i.e. still affiliated with Japan, unlike the Parnell St club, and its a little more sophisticated than the mixed up stuff. It would, i guess from the general definitions here, be classed as a TMA in a lot of ways. We do less ground grappling, less sparring and more kata and weapons. Our kata are probably a lot different from what the definitions in threads here indicate - i described them somewhere here before - but they're very dynamic and alive study tools on distance and timing. Now the training has zero injuries, is less of a workout and is not geared toward squaring up to a 3 minute bout of exchanges. The class demographic is less head-the-ball orientated too and its just seems more adult and less teenagey in the TMA side of Bujinkan than the old "hard" days in the club that broke away from Japan. I'm glad i did both although doing the earlier one held me back in my studies a lot and its taken a while to loose bad habits.
So...there you go... MMA and TMA within the same art (in a way).

Colm_OReilly

I think a big thing about this discussion is how we use the terms "TMA" and "MMA". When I use the term "TMA" I mean any sort of 'combat orientated' training that is not done against progressive resistance with a ruleset that allows as much as possible.

That being said, MMAer's could be a little more friendly when posting their point of view. I think we get frustrated and/or excited and want to share our discoveries with everyone.

Peace and Love Y'All,
Colm

Musashi

So is RBSD a MA an MMA or a TMA then?
Especially for those with access to a "Red Man" or "Bulletman" suit it's Alive and as near full contact as you can go with some moves while not injuring each other.It takes from all styles of Martial Art and can include knife,stick and Pistol training,like the ISR Matrix for PD in US and Canada.
It also includes Combatives as well as awareness and psychology,stuff like the OODA loop and how to use it to your advantage,trigger phrases and "Metsubushi" or distracting techniques.Anything from talking calmly while moving to a better position to bolt or fight,to flicking a lit cigarrette at your opponnents face to make him flinch giving you the second advantage in leaving or fighting.
I enjoy and train in TKD,I admire the athletes in MMA/Pride/UFC/K1 and I like to learn about what the like of Thompson,Cestari,Hocheim and Kelly McCann are teaching.
I like Pick n' Mix training

Millionaire

Musahi, yeah bulletman is an excellent drill. its great the way it is done from the posturing, the verbals, the line up, the vicious attack. Man what a drill for throwing your wits. In fact it really gives me a good fright(scary!), and thats what is need for street drills. plus you can attack Bulletman in vital targets pretty much full contact eyes, knee in balls etc.

its great for teaching the "regular joe" who has no MA exp, does not want to do MA, but wants to get basic defence skills. and most reg joes, after some training, destroy poor bullet man! amazing to watch!

Steven Hayes the ninja master, did the bulletman course and said it was one of the most radical things he came across in 30 years of training and was sorry it was not around (bulletman) years before!

I never did Redman but I' d imagine it would be similar.

Pick N Mix is the way forward!

Roper

I think there's a lot of people who try to justify their art as being 'alive' in some way. Why go to try to explain and who are you justifying it to? If it works for you and you enjoy it then why not do it as long as you understand where it gets you in the end.

It's funny though, I don't think any of the boxers/muay thai guys get on here and say, man I worked the pads last night and I sweated. Uh, by the way there was movement, timing and resistance involved...... so it was alive like. They don't feel the need to justify because they have a quantifiable result.

Oh and pic n' mix is great as long as you have a solid base!

Naos

Bulletman: http://www.gentrymartialarts.com/html/fast_defense.html

Can someone post a link to this Redman object? Googled but not coming up with a lot.

Vid in action : http://www.gentrymartialarts.com/html/todd_movie.html

I really hate that **** that you see in the vid above though, people not trying. Annoys me.

mark.leonard

Dave Joyce wrote:

I have trained, taught and fought MMA, but don't any longer. Don't really want to get into all of the reasons why, but while I do enjoy watching the sport, and I think it is one of the most effective "sports" and quite good for the street, I feel in a lot of cases there are too many closed minds, bad attitudes/egos and don't like a lot of the people involved in the fringes of the sport. I do understand however, the frustration of some of the more reasonable MMA practisioners with some of the wild claims made by some TMA's as regards the effectiveness of their "complete" system, but I'm happy continuing to train in TMA. :cool:

You still train in Thai Dave don't you? That's hardly TMA training!

Dave Joyce

Actually, Mark it is. As traditional as you can get! I don't train Thai-boxing which is just kickboxing with knees and elbows. I train in the traditional art of Muaythai. We even train the forms/dancing part of Muaythai namely the Wai Kru/Ram Muay. Funnily enough this is another reason I dislike some aspects of MMA. With no traditional structure a lot of these guys have no respect, discipline or understanding towards anything let alone other martial arts. I think also in the future as I read in a magazine article today MMA will cause lots of problems in the future, as this no need for grades and slight training in some areas will lead to a lot of cowboys running schools with a mis-mash of stuff and calling it MMA.

walshb

dlofnep wrote:

I know this place has been swarming with mixed martial artists and guys who train in a resistance emphasised situation. I'm wondering if in the last few months if you guys have felt ridiculed by some of us because we might question an art you train and It's not really fair of us. I'm pretty sure I've done it in the past too.

John.

I think it's healthy and interesting for people to question things. Different opinions are what makes these threads bearable. I for example question a lot of martial arts and there impact and importance. My main gripe with some of these arts is that there are just too many people claiming to be the best and it's damaging the martial arts world. For example, how many different TKD organisations are there, how many Kickboxing organisations are there. In Ireland alone you might have 20-30 guys all trying to say they are the world champ. This makes a mockery of the sport. Too many chiefs for my liking. Then there's the whole idea of semi contact-full contact-points scoring etc etc. I just find it hard to take when I read stories of this guy and that guy being world champion in this variety or that variety of a martial art.

Musashi

Redman is just a protective suit for hard training

Redman

A less bulky but less protective version of the Peyton Quinn RMCAT Bullet Man

RMCAT

And there's the FIST suit where you are licensed to use it

FIST

mark.leonard

Dave Joyce wrote:

Actually, Mark it is. As traditional as you can get! I don't train Thai-boxing which is just kickboxing with knees and elbows. I train in the traditional art of Muaythai. We even train the forms/dancing part of Muaythai namely the Wai Kru/Ram Muay.

I think we are disagreeing over semantics - TMA to me means traditional dead patterns being the primary training method of the art. Including some traditional aspects in an otherwise alive art is commendable and wouldn't be enough to label it TMA in my book.

Dave Joyce wrote:

Funnily enough this is another reason I dislike some aspects of MMA. With no traditional structure a lot of these guys have no respect, discipline or understanding towards anything let alone other martial arts. I think also in the future as I read in a magazine article today MMA will cause lots of problems in the future, as this no need for grades and slight training in some areas will lead to a lot of cowboys running schools with a mis-mash of stuff and calling it MMA.

I don't think that will be a huge problem, you have cowboys in every walk of life, and while I am sure MMA will get its share, guys preparing fighters poorly will result in them losing students, nobody wants to train in a gym that always looses after all! Not to mention that even with the belt systems in other arts they still get a quota of cowboys too!

dudara

I tend to agree with Dave Joyce here. While Mark is right in saying that there are cowboys in every walk of life, I also think that the uncontrolled growth MMAs could result in people thinking that they can fight anything after a few lessons. Now I know that the responsible guys out there amongst you don't let yourself or your students think like that, but there are others out there.

pearsquasher

I thinks its fair to point put that not all TMA's have dead patterns/kata's. Some have very alive ones and its been discussed at length in the Practical kata thread

dent

mark.leonard wrote:

I think we are disagreeing over semantics - TMA to me means traditional dead patterns being the primary training method of the art. Including some traditional aspects in an otherwise alive art is commendable and wouldn't be enough to label it TMA in my book.

I think its the definition of a TMA thats causing the problem. I train in Jujutsu and we have no patterns. So by your outlook I'm not really doing a TMA. But I'm sure others in the MMA world would disagree and would point at the bowing etc as a unnessecary part of the art and a reason why its a TMA.

Maybe if you guys used another term like pattern based arts or non alive arts or something people might not react.

When you use the term TMA as a label of disrepect it can be taken that your disrepecting every art that was around before this newest manifestation of MMA.
When really its certain training styles that you are against.

I guess we shouldn't use catch all terms like MMA or TMA at all.

Musashi

TMA to me means traditional dead patterns being the primary training method of the art.

What styles do this? If this is the definition of TMA then even TKD don't count as Patterns is part of the training,not the primary training method!
Also,why is MuayThai considered to be not a TMA? Because it's seen to be an effective Combat Art? So can't possibly be a TMA? If it works it's MMA and if not it's TMA? You can't pick and choose like that lads,Muay Thai is around longer and has all the attributes of a TMA,so it must be a TMA. For that matter boxing predates Marquis of Queensbury and as such had shin kicking and Cornish Wrestling in it before it got sanitised! Seems mine workers wore wooden "clogs" to prevent sparks underground in a potentially flammable atmosphere.Imagine a pit worker kicking your shins with timber shoes while trying to punch,gouge or throw you!This is what boxing was,a brutal fight style! Same goes for those "wussy" Morris Dancers,look at em,it's an olde English "Kata" for Strick Fighting ensconced in a musical form.Laugh at them but like Capoeira?? What is the difference?
If TKD trained "Alive" but still had patterns would it be a MMA or a TMA?
For the Thai Lads,is Krabi Krabong MMA or a very trad. TMA?
Does it make it less lethal?
As far as I can see MMA limits itself in the exact same way as TMA when it comes to Self Defense or Protection.It still works mainly under the assumption that a street fight is the same as the Dojang/Kwoon/Ring/Cage.
One on One,some degree of fairness,no weapons,no seconds leaping in on either side,no dirty fighting,you know when the fight will start and there will be rest breaks.
Can be applied to either rule set and all wrong when it comes to a fight outside your local club! I am not picking on TMA or MMA here,both make the same assumptions and both are wrong.However the basics are laid down in either style and it's up to the individual to tailor what he does to address his own reality.If you are a D4 your hardly likely to meet a scanger locally,if your a scanger you'll meet em every damn day!Only the person training can decide how far is far enough and what,for them is too far and Paranoia Land.
Dojang or Ring, lob in random weapons,possible two or more on ones,dirty tactics,drink,and chatting up the wrong girl and we'll be getting closer to life as we live it.No system is perfect,but few are pure ****e either..................

pearsquasher

I think its ok to use the terms MMA and TMA as long as we aren't using them too generally. Saying TMA's are the ones that have dead patterns is inacurate. Saying some TMA's have dead patterns is ok as long as you back it up by saying which ones in particular and what your expereince of it was.


Another thing is that one person may see, say something like aikido as being tradtional, while another may say it not tradtional seeing as it was created last century. We can say aikido has a tradtion now as its a good few decades old and has its own lineage now as well as the one that created it. But if you were to compare Aikido to say, Katori Shinto Ryu Bujutsu a 6 centuries old school of martial arts, you could argue its not tradtional at all.

Everyones correct though, in a certain context and we must simple always qualify the context if we say MMA or TMA if its not obvious.

Millionaire

I muay thai guy from Uk was telling me when i was in thailand, that in Muay Thai with Krabi Krabong , there is also a ground fighting system ( I cannot remember name) and a system of biting and gouging on the ground.
as with the sportification of things , they got lost.

does in Thai experts know what this is? is it practiced in ireland?

I really hate when the word sport and martial arts are used in the same breath.

Roper

Musashi,
we can talk about what was and what has gone before all day. But that doesn't change the fact that an awful lot of what people train to day is outdated, and has had elements of wishy washy mysticism attached to it over the years to make it sound "deadly".

Your morris dancing example is good, it might be an ancient tradition of stickifighting passed on, but now it's just a dance..... why try to justify it as anything else?

Also,why is MuayThai considered to be not a TMA? Because it's seen to be an effective Combat Art? So can't possibly be a TMA? If it works it's MMA and if not it's TMA? You can't pick and choose like that lads,Muay Thai is around longer and has all the attributes of a TMA,so it must be a TMA.

I agree that the term TMA is a jumbled mess, but take it as this: those who use outdated training methods. That would be my loose deinition. Muay Thai does not fall into this category.

Dyr

dent wrote:

I think its the definition of a TMA thats causing the problem. I train in Jujutsu and we have no patterns. So by your outlook I'm not really doing a TMA. But I'm sure others in the MMA world would disagree and would point at the bowing etc as a unnessecary part of the art and a reason why its a TMA.

Maybe if you guys used another term like pattern based arts or non alive arts or something people might not react.

When you use the term TMA as a label of disrepect it can be taken that your disrepecting every art that was around before this newest manifestation of MMA.
When really its certain training styles that you are against.

I guess we shouldn't use catch all terms like MMA or TMA at all.

to be honest though, most jujutsu is not a "traditional" martial art as it has no real tradition behind it. Its not derived from the japanese art, but rather just a term of convenience

soma

Millionaire wrote:

I muay thai guy from Uk was telling me when i was in thailand, that in Muay Thai with Krabi Krabong , there is also a ground fighting system ( I cannot remember name) and a system of biting and gouging on the ground.
as with the sportification of things , they got lost.

Ok I'm probably gonna get flamed for this.. but Im gonna go ahead & post it as it'd be great if there's a traditional muay thai player who could shed some light on this.

note: this is not gospel, only something I had heard in conversation, I dont have sources etc to back it up.

I had heard that there was a point in the past where muay thai & (malay?) silat systems were quite similar or at least had alot in common. If that were the case, I guess it might make some sense in terms of what millionaire was referring to in terms of a ground fighting system with bites and gouging (perhaps a cousin or parent of some tiger systems like harimau/macan).

Anyone see that film 'ongbak (muay thai fighter)' that was out recently..? Well I did my 'crane' grading in silat a few weeks back and plenty of the crane sylabus is actually visible in the film.

Finally, my instructor once mentioned that every now and then he's contacted by a trad muay thai player who is interested in learning the monjet/monkey system from silat.

PS I think I can actually hear the MMA guys laughing at all my animal references..

dent

Bambi wrote:

to be honest though, most jujutsu is not a "traditional" martial art as it has no real tradition behind it. Its not derived from the japanese art, but rather just a term of convenience

Are you talking about Brazilian Jujutsu. If not I'd tend to disagree. The Jujutsu Schools I have come across in Ireland all claim to be of Japanese origin and are even registered with the Dai Nihon Seibukan, Tokyo, Japan.

Dave Joyce

I have to agree with everything Musashi wrote and to me one of the most important things about TMA is teaching people the whole history and culture of what you're teaching, along with structure, respect and discipline which I feel is totally lacking in a lot of MMA clubs. This is also why in years to come it will be a problem (with cowboys) precisely because of what I mentioned above. This is what makes me pissed off with MMA guys attitudes. They feel they have the right to diss/pull the piss out of guys who have trained most of their lives in systems (which MMAers consider outdated) which admittedly would not fair well in a cage etc but who have the respect and admiration of a lot of the mainstream for achievement in their own field. Then they (MMAers) have the audacity to demand respect after a few years success in THEIR chosen field against in a lot of cases guys (who have great guts/determination/fitness/raw ability) BUT who have very little MA background in a lot of cases. What I do find interesting (in my opinion, as I'm not sure on this) is that this seems far more common place in Europe and particularly Britain and Ireland than in the States where there seems to be more of a live and let live attitude.

Dave Joyce

*hit, sorry, so busy ranting I forgot to finish my reply. Soma and Millionaire are correct in what you say. There is a style common to Southern Thailand called (not sure of correct spelling) Kuchen which is basically a cat style which has a lot of ground fighting. There is also parts of the old style which specialise in biting and gouging but its really difficult to find a teacher and if you can one who is willing to show you that stuff. As regards any of it in Ireland there is only one guy with a *hit load of knowledge on this stuff and that is Frankie Mc Conville in Belfast.

EPO_MAN

Impressed with the original post as i'd had you down as one of those arrogances.....I guess you're just a nice guy.

I do jujutsu...classsical in all it's glory. I also study kickboxing which helps me in my stand up which i find lacking in trad jujutsu.

One thing I find that MMA (and boxing) has over a lot of TMA is fitness.
A martial art is bollocks without fitness and endurance.

I'll admit that my jujutsu isn't as fitness orienatated as i'd like it to be but the kickboxing is and I train myself running and lifting weights to be as fit as fighting demands.

Anyway any MMA around swords/north county dublin?????

Dyr

dent wrote:

Are you talking about Brazilian Jujutsu. If not I'd tend to disagree. The Jujutsu Schools I have come across in Ireland all claim to be of Japanese origin .

thats my point. many claim that, Very few can verify it.

dent

Bambi wrote:

thats my point. many claim that, Very few can verify it.

I think you forgot the last part in that quote

"and are even registered with the Dai Nihon Seibukan, Tokyo, Japan"

The ones I have trained are recognised and are derived from the Japanese art (There is no single unifiying school though). I have yet to come across a Jujutsu school in Ireland that isn't.

You are right though because of its long and complicated history its quite easy for people to cliam they teach a particular style weather or not it actually exsited at all.

Good source is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jujutsu

and my coachs own take on our styles http://www.jujutsu.8m.com/history.html

Sorry for going off topic

pearsquasher

One thing I find that MMA (and boxing) has over a lot of TMA is fitness.
A martial art is bollocks without fitness and endurance

True... i would imagine that MMAers are a lot more fit, in general than TMAers. Its worth poiinting out why - they general train to get athletically fit because that's what sustains them in a long one-one-one fight in the ring and through all their sparring. Thats perfectly fine to do in my opinion and a reasonable thing to do given the general applications of MMA - ring-based martial sports and winning.

The reason d'etre of TMA''s as far as I can see.. and i'm really talking about non-sports ones, is too survive an aggressive encounter and not be in a prolonged engagement. The reuirement to be cardiovascularly fit and have the best stamina ever is less than the requirement to study martial skill - distance and timing. Non Sports TMA's produce a nice side effect of having reasonably fit individuals but probably not in the same league as MMAers. They have different goals as far as I see. TMAs will let you train at old age when endurance and stamina and fitness are weakened and moslty whats left is timing and skill. Of course there are older chaps doing MMA's and competing - the Gracies I guess - but i would say that their time training in martial skills is what keeps them going not their fitness.

Again... Im not saying fitness and endurance aren't important or necessary but i just had issue with the idea that an MA is bollox without them.
To underestimate an opponents abiltiy just beacuse he looks unfit could get you killed - happened in Vietnam, could happen in the street, in the ring, in prison, or whereever.

columok

Again... Im not saying fitness and endurance aren't important or necessary but i just had issue with the idea that an MA is bollox without them.

Well surely the goal of a street martial artist is to last in any conditions for as long as it takes. When we cross trained with the bujinkan class in UCD they gassed very quickly. A really cool bunch but their actual combat cardio was really really poor. This was low intensity grappling. Most combat encounters are gonna involve this type of strain or far worse on the cardio vascular system. It struck me that whatever about skills in a scrap you need a base level of cardio vascular fitness to defend yourself.

pearsquasher

Of course a base level of fitness and anything after that is advantageous for endurance during any sort of intense excercise.

I couldn't possbily comment on anothe Bujinkan club as the Bujinkan has absolutely zero fitness requirement outside of the individuals own responsibility or how an instructor wishes to train in it. We don't compete so its not an issue. I''ve doen enough sparring and grappling myself to know that of course you can "gas out" fast if you ain't fit and thats why i personally maintain a certain level of fitness myself, although its not required. But, given the time i have these days i thinks it's a lot more beneficial for me in my non-sports MA to spend time looking at other things and more or less leave my fitness be a side effect of hard training which does involve cardio and stamina in its own way with drills, movement excersises etc.

If i was an MMAer into ring-fighting, i'd imagine i'd have to spend a lot more time on my fitness I've been there and it is tough and sports MA'scan be incredibly fit but i'd rather train for something else - not fighting.