SevenStar

what about the grappling scene as a whole - bjj, judo, etc. included?

That's what I was addressing above - he won't mind covering up and taking a few shots as long as his goal is accomplished. In addition to striking, you would have to be very mobile. But, IMO, you don't want to just side-back step as you stated in the next paragraph - you want to circle as well. He wants you going back anyway - he's driving forward, and you have less power while going back. true. There are several wrestling holds that do hurt though - the grapevine and crucifix come to mind. He could cross face you to death as well. That is easier said then done while you are being smothered, however. agreed.

that's exactly my point. you're giving advice on something you're not completely clear on. a wrestler and a bjj guy have some similar tactics, but don't completely share the same arsenal. So, you may be thinking of what you would do to defend against something, but have it all wrong because you are actually talking about something different.

I'm about to go to work, so I can't respond to your post now, but it looks like ww covered alot of it. However, the double leg take down IS a greco roman technique, as is the sprawl. I didn't "go bjj on you", you're just not up on all of your grappling techniques and terminology.

All you will ever see him do is throws. Like I said, throws are the power of judo. you friend will become an awesome stand up grappler, and should be at least decent on the ground, but judo will not make him a good striker. As for the strikes being the same as some from japanese jujutsu, I don't know, as I've never trained in jujutsu.

ignore them. Don't let what they are doing distract you from your task at hand, which is training.

I don't agree with that. How much time you spend promoting the art be it through teaching, movies, etc. Is great for just that - promoting the art. But, that doesn't equate to being a great fighter. Good fighters can be made, but great fighters are born. You either are one or you aren't. Several factors lend their hands at becoming a good fighter though - good training, precision timing, understanding of fighting principles and how to use them, gauging distance, strength, courage, tenacity, etc. Royce gracie is "bound" by his style. He uses it in such a way though that he can defeat other stylists with it. I've asked Royce about his fighting and philosophy before, And he will tell you stright up "I'm not a mixed martial artist, I'm just a bjj guy." Hhwever, he understands his art inside out, and has experience in dealing with other styles. He knows how to use what he has to defeat people. That is what makes him a good fighter.

1. capoeira when done right is has ALOT of fighting. 2. fighting is art. Do you fight the same way your teacher does? I don't, nor do I fight the same way my friends fight, even though we know the same techniques. I was talking to a friend about this recently. We've known eachother for seven years and have been training the same thing the entire time, yet we fight VERY differently. That expression of fighting is art - it's your expression of what you've learned through your MA.

judo has strikes. Atemi (striking) is taught to judoka after they reach black belt level. It won't be a major focus of your training though. The power of judo is in its throws.

I haven't looked at the vids yet - I will in a sec. my first opinion though is that you should hold off on the vids. Either attend a seminar, have a thai boxer come to your school, or something. Have him show you the techniques. THEN, use the tapes to help you train them. By only using videos, you may miss something. If that is the only method of learning it you have available, I would just stick to whatever you are currently training and focus on using those techniques more effectively when you spar.

there is definite benefit - you get exposed to different methods of training and fighting. grapplers don't train the same way a karateka trains. Neither of them train the same way a thai boxer trains. you gain experience and exposure. you may also find methods you prefer compared to what you were currently doing.

that's not true at all. 1. he's not shooting at you from a mile away, he's shooting from punching distance or closer. you most likely will not be able to sidestep in time, nor will you be able to unleash multiple strikes. If that first one doesn't drop him, you're gonna go down. Once he has you up in the air and going backward, you will have zero power to your strikes, and they will do no good until you are on the ground again - but that won't be until you are on your back. One thing to keep in mind is that in order to learn to defend it, you need to actually defend it - that means working with someone who has grappling experience. Otherwise, They will be doing it all wrong. This is the reason that many people think defending a tackle is the same as defending a good double leg. As far as defenses go, work takedown defenses, like the sprawl. After you've sprawled and stopped his momentum, THEN you worry about striking. Another option is to keep him back pedalling while he's standing. This is easier said than done, because a grappler doesn't mind absorbing a few shots if it means he will get you where he wants you. If you can keep him back pedalling though, he will be unable to shoot effectively, because it requires forward motion. 1. I've seen several go to the ground. Also, in some instances, they are better serverd on the ground. For example, when you work security, you are allowed to restrain, but you cannot strike. What does that mean? That you will have to grapple. 2. It doesn't matter how often fights go to the ground. What matters is that some of them do go there. Even if statistics showed only 5 out of every 20 fights go to the ground, how do you know that you won't be one of those 5? You don't.

1. how deep are your pockets? 2. no. To be effective, you need constant drilling with resistance, and IMO, sparring. I can do neither by myself. If a training partner was going with me, cool. But you're not gonna increase your fighting skill much by training alone for a year. 3. whatever I could fit into the camper.

I wouldn't use a horse stance for any of those reasons...

Why is that?

That sounds weird.... When I was in CMA, we placed first in tourneys all the time, but were always invited back. Regardless, enter them anyway - does your gi have some distinguishing patch that tells them which school you attend? If not, then enter. When you are asked what school you train for, just tell them you're taking private lessons from someone, or something.

This whole thread begs the further discussion of what evolution actually is when pertaining to martial arts. Looking at the example of muay thai, it's been around for centuries. Since it's inception, it's always been known as a brutal style. Why? because that's the way that it was trained. Over the years, it's under gone several changes - not necessarily evolutions, such as the introduction of hemp to wrap the hands (muay chaad cheurk). This was done until around the 1920's, when gloves were introduced. People say that the training methods of muay thai and the fact that it's a sport make it a modern style, but thais have been using those training methods for centuries. Instead of heavy bags, they were kicking bananna trees. The evolution of muay thai came fairly recently - american thai fighters noticed that traditional thai footwork is somewhat limited, as were the punches. Because of this, they began combining it with western boxing, creating the muay thai you see today in the us and europe. Judo was the result of a similar process. towards the end of the tokugawa and into the meiji, there was a time of piece. There was no need for the samurai of their fighting arts. judo was the result of a man who wanted to preserve the fighting tradition of his people. He removed the killing/maiming techniques and introduced free sparring. His efforts paid off - in tournaments involving his judo students and some jujutsu schools, the judo guys mopped the floor with everyone. Why? because they added free sparring to the curriculum. That said, adding free sparring to any style really isn't an evolution, but a necessary (IMO, anyway) change. Not point sparring, but contact, full contact rules sparring. The reason alot of people say karate and other TMA need to "evolve" is because of the emphasis on kata and other things that really aren't an immediate help to your fighting skills. I think this is where change comes in. keeping forms is fine, however, I would change the way that they are taught. First, I'd eliminate the immense number of forms many styles have. Fighting should be based on principles, not techniques. It shouldn't take 27 kata to demonstrate every principle in a style, I wouldn't think. When I was training karate (and this was under a guy who was born and raised in japan) he taught only two forms - taikyoku shodan and sanchin. He knew the other forms of shotokan and also knew some from other styles, so when I was learning them in my other karate class, he would make corrections when he noticed I was doing something wrong. Next, as opposed to learning an entire form, then working it daily, I would break the form down into sections. you would spend day after day drilling applications of the form for the particular section that you are working. You would drill them lightly, then with resistance. The techniques need to be drilled into muscle memory if you intend to use them. Lack of doing so is the reason why you see so many people today who can't use the techniques of their systems - they just throw punches and kicks out there. These aren't necessarily evolutions, but small changes that could benefit practitioners. Back in the day, some people may have trained 12-16 hours a day. They may have had challenge matches all the time. They may have used their skills in battle. Today, people don't do that. Time to train is more constrained. Guns are used in war, not hand to hand skills. People barely fight at all, much have challenge matches. For these reasons, I think that more drilling, more sparring and more conditioning is necessary.

good post. I was just getting ready to post something similar, as I noticed proactive self defense hadn't been mentioned.

you're walking to your car. Someone jumps out from behind a nearby wall, blindsiding you as you walk by them... you can't always maintain distance. Not all confrontations begin with chest pounding. It could be semantic, but "someone lunges in at you. Feel free to counter" sounds as if you are expecting the guy to only lunge in and throw one strike. The guy you are fighting in the street is likely untrained. He's not gonna throw one strike, which you counter and throw back, like a light sparring session. He is continually throwing punch after punch. in a fight, you generally don't have time to think in terms of "counter with control and keep him at bay", IME. you want to put him down as fast as you can. If that involes getting in hist space, then do that. The "keep him at bay" mentality, IMO anyway, is far too passive. That's cool that you're in Nap - I've got family there, so I'm up there quite a bit. Next time I'm in the area, I'll try to remember to shoot you a PM.

I dont get it? How is Kyokushin Karate related to kickboxing in any way, maybe the fact that its full contact i guess, but thats about as far as it goes. one obvious one is the use of thai style kicking. Thai boxing has had influence over the kyuokushin that we see today.

kyokushin is nothing like kickboxing, training wise. fighting wise, it shares some similarities with muay thai - If I'm not mistaken, oyama had some thai influence and incorporated it into his style. Italian guy is correct about the differences. I posted the exact same thing in another thread about kick boxing and san da a while back.

I completely agree. to me, all "martial sports" are indeed martial arts, and tend to fit the definition MORE than traditional styles, actually. People talk about all of the challenges in the old days, how hard the training was, etc. Where is it now? Instead of challenges, you have the sport guys competing, and in general, they train harder because of that....it seems like they are more aligned with the old guys, IMO, but I digress. The fact that they are used in a sporting venue means that they have rules, and this is why many people draw the delineation - we fight with rules, they "don't". As for judo, yeah, it's a sport. There's alot of tradition involved, as I know you know, but judo is not one of the koryu arts and is therefore considered modern. Some people also make the delineation based on training methods. Thai boxing has been around for centuries, but they run, hit bags, do padwork and fight. they don't do stance work, forms, internal strength, etc. - the training isn't conducted in a "traditional" manner.

good post. Landing a strike to the eyes will give you an advantage, but the problem is actually landing it. I don't put alot of faith in eye or throat strikes for the fact that the head is moving, hands are up, chin is down, etc. (ideally, anyway). That makes these targets much harder to hit.

1. lay off of the hard punching for a while. you need to heal, and you won't be able to do so while still punching hard. 2. check your form when you punch. Pay close attention and notice if you bend your wrist on occasion. Also, if you wear gloves, make sure that your fist is completely closing on impact, and not loose or partially open. 3. see a doc. find out if it's a sprain or something worse.

ANY exercise done improperly can cause injury. For overall back strength, you won't find a better exercise than deads, however, I don't do the stiff legged variation. No particular reason, just personal preference.