Treebranch

How do these MA's work for you is the question. Have you ever used them in a real fight? Have you used them against experts of other styles? That is the way you evaluate the MA you study. Don't look at others who are great and assume you will be like them. Train yourself hard and experience will bring you the answers. Too many people say I study what he studies so therefore I know what he knows and I can defeat someone. Wrong. That's like saying I study film making so I will make great films. Not necessarily. It all depends on the level of talent you have. So just because a talented individual beat another talented individual doesn't mean the style they studied won. It mean the individual was more talented. For example 2 boxers from the same gym of equal talent fight and one of them wins. Does that mean you blame the gym for the loss. That doesn't make sense, the gym also produced the winner. So in the end it comes down to the goals of the individual and how serious he is. But as far as this thread goes I think we all need to clarify what we all mean by Combative MA's. Remember there will always be someone bigger, stronger, and more talented. The question is how can I defeat him. If you feel that you haven't strength, size or talent to defeat someone like this don't fight or use something other than size, strength, and talent to defeat him. If you can think of ways to defeat someone like this you are on your way to becoming a True Martial Artist.

Drop into his center with your elbow in good Kamae. He will run right into your weapons and then he is yours.

Almost every style of fighting has it's roots in Kung Fu. So watch how you speak of your ancestors. Kung Fu is like the water in every sport drink, coke, pepsi, lemonade and so forth. It is the essence of all asian fighting arts. Plus not every Kung Fu practition entered UFC and don't have the desire to. That doesn't mean that there aren't practitioner of Kung Fu that would do well in NHB. To make that kind of conclusion from such limited data is ridiculous. Also, know that there are very effect Kung Fu styles out there and if coupled with the proper training methods it would turn the fighting world on it's bum. That goes for many styles of fighting period. What a lot of you are judging Kung Fu on is Wu Shu is not fighting.

Don't tell people you are a BB. It's like telling people you are carrying a weapon. People become uneasy and some people will try to settle their uneasiness by challenging you. Keep your skills a secret so that no one knows what to expect from you. The element of surprise is a big factor in any fight.

JLee I just took a good luck at Hapkido and depending on the school you will be making a very good choice. It is a very complete and effective MA. If the Hapkido dojo doesn't focus on exercise join a gym or run and do exercises on your own. I highly recommend Hapkido.

Yeah, but the car is foreign object and machine, not part of the human body. The car and driver analogy works better when comparing someone using a weapon. There better made and bigger weapons and it depends on the skill of the person using the weapon that will determine the outcome. I like to think of it more along the lines of the Artist and Craftsman. Certain styles focus on one specific aspect of Combat and perfect it. This one would fall under the Craftsman. Other styles focus on the broadest range to cover all forms of Combat, although you may never master all that is to be taught you master the basics in order to learn all the rest. The basics of these Arts are usually very similar to those of the Craftman. The Artist has more room to grow and explore answers on his own. Both are great, and both have their advantages and disadvantages. It is also entirely up to the individual to decide which of these he is.

Your right granmasterchen. I apologize if I have offended anyone here. Good Combative MA's should cover every possible scenario of Combat. Which means the use of weapons, multiple attacker concepts, grappling, groundfighting, tactics, striking, evasion, escape, ukemi, balance point concept and application. Also, the movements shouldn't be too complex to learn in a reasonable amount of time. A good Combat MA should allow you to use the least amount of muscle strength to defeat an attacker. The reason being that if you have more than one person to disable (as in battle) you need to conserve your energy as much as possible. Those are my 2 cents about Combative MA's. What are yours.

Now why would you want to use insulting words? Oh I know why, but I won't say. I got your tool right here, sweety.

Rich 67 you sound like you are open to new things and old. It just bothers me that people regard traditional styles useless. I guess I'm a MMA as well, look at all the styles I've studied over the years. But to be fair there are styles that are better suited for specific things. This thread was about Combat and I gave my opinion. Whether someone sucks at a style doesn't automatically make that style useless. This is exactly the mentally of most of the people arguing on this thread. Just because some TMA people got thrashed in the early UFC's that doesn't mean that those styles are useless. That kind of thinking is the same kind of stereotyping you see when people judge others. They use the example of a few and lump the whole bunch together. It's plain and utter ignorance. I've said enough here. Experience is the greatest teacher so good luck with your preconceptions of what Combat is.(That comment was directed at the people who that applies to)

Yeah, your probably right. Yeah, I don't have a mind of my own. Yeah, maybe I should buy into modern myths created by modern MA's marketing efforts. I'm sure the techniques and skills I'm learning are useless against practitioners of Modern MA's. I guess I haven't taken enough MA's and been in enough real fights to know what works when I see it. Thanks for your great wisdom and good luck using your skills in Combat.

You have your definition and I have mine. Go roll around with men and pretend your a prize fighter.

Sorry guys but the thread says Jiu-Jitsu for Combat and I gave my opinion. If you don't like my opinion, I can live with that.

Muay Thai was used as training for warriors back in the day, but it was coupled with sword training and the pike. So basically unless you are studying the traditional Muay Thai with weapons you are only studying part of it. So basically what you are claiming to be a Combat MA wa a Combat MA but is not one now. The streets of Brazil I imagine were and are brutal, but BJJ came from Jujitsu and is taught in the context of sport more so than the context of Combat. Also I have looked at the GJJ street defense book and by all realistic standards is lacking many important factors that essential for defense against an attacker. The most realistic book for street defense I've seen so far is a Krav Maga book. So basically it is not me who is brainwashed by any means. It's just fact that BJJ is not a Combat Art and Muay Thai used to be. Just like Judo is not a Combat MA's and came from a Combat MA's called Jujutsu. Once you really have the understanding of what MA's is really about you will see that there are a lot of viable MA's out there that are not being taught correctly. I don't blame you for being skeptical about TMA's after those bozo's got slaughtered in the early UFC's. But there were a few TMA practitioners that held their ground quite well. Besides in competition, you must be trained to compete and to win. Combat MA's are about survival. So if I saw that someone wants to do me harm and he looks like one of those steroid MMA's guys I'd either run, gut him with my knife or take my chances. All are possibilities and the outcome is unknown. So before you start saying I'm brainwashed putting a little thinking behind scenarios outside of NHB tournaments and remember you are not those fighters, you are you.

Venezolano what do you think Combat is anyway. What are you talking about? Are you comparing NHB with actual Combat? If you are you are delusional. No most NHB competitors cross train in Muay Thai and BJJ or Judo because that's what works best in a controlled environment, with set rules and a referree. Combat could mean fighting on an incline in the mountains, when it's raining, in the sand, in the snow with so much clothes on that you can't move the way you are used in your safe little Dojo. Are you taught how to fight when your hands are bound? Are you taught to fight when there is no way to take the fight to the ground? Do you know how to evade a knife or night stick? Can you fight with an armed opponent? Do you really want to shoot in on someone that may be hiding a knife behind him so you can't see it? Have you even considered any of these scenarios? Probably not. Why? Because BJJ doesn't teach Combat scenarios and Budo Taijutsu does. So what with the NHB fighters train in, what does that prove in the real world. You can't use ring tactics in real life. You don't have the time to pass the guard when a potential second or third attacker is near. Does BJJ teach you how scope out your surroundings, to check exits when you walk into a building? I'll answer for you. NO! That isn't their concern. Their concern is how to win in a match, not COMBAT. So let it go bro. BJJ is not a Combat MA and it is not a complete art. Budo Taijutsu is as complete of an art that you will ever hear of. That's just a fact baby.

The only Combat Art you mentioned is Silat and Jujutsu, Matt. The others are not Combat MA's.

Well Budo Taijutsu is basically Traditional or Combat Jujitsu which is to taught to Armed forces and Judo came from this stuff. Also BJJ is nothing new when it comes to ground work. I've seen variations of the same techniques in Kodokan Judo as well as Hapkido. So basically I'll go back to the original topic. BJJ is not good for Combat unless it only a part of the MA training. There are groundwork techniques in other arts that would suffice for Combat. Like you said Judo is heavily used in training forces and you can trace that back historically after WW2. True Jujutsu would have been better for Combat but Judo gained popularity at that time so there you go. I have nothing against either style, but Judo is far better an art for Combat than BJJ is. BJJ should put the striking and stand up throws back into the Jujitsu. I think we have seen that BJJ alone will not stand up in NHB and it sure as hell won't stand up to actual combat. Just admit that it is not a complete art and that it needs other arts to complete it to be rounded art.

What War or conflict was this? What year? What Army has used this in battle? I'm listening.

You know there's just no room for new ideas, even if they are old ones. People make up their minds that they have found the answers when really there are no answers just questions. It is the questions or questioning that help us learn and grow. To disregard a style of MA because you've never seen it work or not work shouldn't be the way people learn. Experience is the only way to really know if something works in any situation. That's what Budo Taijutsu is all about and many Combat styles are similar in nature to this. The definition of Combat that I am referring to is one that takes place in battle. Weapons and terrain and countless factor come into play which BJJ never touches upon whatsoever. Sorry but that's the fact. My friend is a BB at the Machado school and we talk about MA's and he has never mentioned once that they ever cover situations like the one's we are talking about now. Now about training with weapons, locks and throws in the opinion of the uinformed sounding like we are being spread thin. That is so not the case with Taijutsu. You just wouldn't get it if I explain, you have to experience it to know. There are many things in life that have to be experienced to know not just seen on TV. I am glad that people disregard this art as being silly and useless. I will tell you one thing, I hope you never attack one of us on the street, you will have a rude awakening. WE DON'T FIGHT FAIR.

Venezuelano the reason I said you are influenced by movies is that you obvisiously think Ninjutsu is a joke. I study Budo Taijutsu that has Ninjutsu in it, but it has very little to do with what you have seen in movies. So before you start insulting people, take the time to educate yourself and research Budo Taijutsu.

Thanks for that White Warlock very well put. Venezolano it is you that has been influenced by Ninja movies. I have made no metion of Ninjutsu here and that is a very small part of Budo Taijutsu. I think you like living in the safe little world of your Dojo with the confort of the soft little mats to break your fall. Come visit us at Muzosa in New York or L.A. and teach us a few things. By the comments you make it seems that you could use some extensive mental training.

That depends on the nature of the altercation and the practitioner. There are Budo Taijutsu dojos out there that train hard and do randori. The training methods for MMA's I agree for the most part are more rigorous, but how they approach a fight is in the competitive spirit which can be detremental against the wrong person. There's far more to combat then just being strong and powerful. Personally I'd rather be the blade that becomes sharper over time than the one that constantly dulls. Most MMA's train for sport and do very little to no weapons training, therefore being able to handle multiple opponents is foreign to most of you. It's not about winning in the sense of defeating multiple opponents, it's surviving and evading. Doing what it takes to survive at all costs. So in combat you'd better know how to kill when you need to and do it fast. Also the physical conditioning that is envolved is the responsibility of the practitioner not the Dojo. So I agree you will see MMA's that are in generally better shape than Combat MA's, but that means very little when anything goes, I mean anything. So basically I really don't feel BJJ would be good in actual combat and there are better suited arts for that purpose. Is BJJ good? Sure, It's brilliant. For Combat? No, absolutely not. To some of you this may sound like B.S. Things that are hard to comprehend because of a lack of knowledge always sound like B.S., even to me. So I don't blame anyone for there skepticism. All I have to say is there's so much more to Budo Taijutsu than meets the eye. Unless you emerse yourself in it you won't understand it. I think the concepts in these types of arts can help improve a lot of the techniques that are used in competitive fighting, but that's another story entirely.

It's good to know what to do when you are on the ground with someone. I combat time is of the essence and there is not much time and there are weapons at your disposal. I don't feel BJJ would be the most effective grappling art for actually combat. Sure it has a lot to offer especially conceptually, but the training would have to be changed and more realistic scenarios would have to be employed. I think BJJ relies totally on being on the ground and staying upright isn't a high priority in that art. I think going to the ground as a form of attack in a real situation can be reckless. Being able to fight on your feet is absolutely essential in a combat situation. You need to be able to move and evade attacks from more than one person. It is very difficult to do that when you are on your back or on the ground tied up with someone. If you really think about it, there is no such thing as a submission in combat. Someone trying to out skill you is entirely different than someone that is trying to kill you.

Modern MA's for the most part are tailored for today needs, whether it be sport of street defense. Most Traditional MA's were created in times where fighting was truely the only way to protect yourself. I think there is a lot of Modern styles that are questionable as well as there being many Traditional styles that are just a questionable. So basically most modern MA's have never been used in actually combat except for a few.

Imagine what a trained fighter with an actual strategy could do.

Yeah lions. Thanks for your contribution.