Traditional vs MMA Vs Self defense.

[TJS]

I think this write up is an excellent one describing the diffrences between Traditional styles/MMA-Spor styles/ and reality based self defense styles.

 

It's on a schools website..im not trying ot advertise for them or anything I just thought they did a good job at explaning it.

 

I hope everyone reads it

 

http://www.austinmartialarts.com/miniguide.html

[SBN Doug]

Interesting. However, when I see statements like "Unfortunately, many individuals, who thought they were going to learn legitimate self defense, have been misled by these misconceptions and unrealistic techniques. These methods of training should not be considered self defense as they have nothing to do with "real world" self defense applications.", tells me the entire article is bias, and should be taken as opinion only.

[TJS]

you dont belive that there any traditional schools out there that teach unrealstic techniques when it comes to self defense?

 

lets be honest, if someone want to learn no nonsense self defense and fighitng there are more efficent ways of going about it.

[SevenStar]

two words: knife defenses

 

Also, these "defenses against other styles" that you see alot. just because you throw a roundhouse, that doesn't mean it's a thai roundhouse. Just because you train to defend a sloppy tackle, that doesn't mean that you are capable of defending a good double leg.

[Karateka_latino]

Yes, its interesting.

[Sepultura]

very interesting.

[JIUJITSUFIGHTER]

very interesting but , I HAVE STUDIED BLAUER TACTICAL CONFRONTATION SYSTEMS, because its based in montreal,quebec, canada, where i live, and i have trained under tony himself and if this system of combat is anything like blauers system i would stay away. because that was a major scam to take my money. it gave me no technical ability at all.

 

jeet kune do has a training method that trains you to fight example: boxing v.s. knife fighting

 

knife fighting v.s. kicking , and so on........... so this is definately a revolution in the martial arts community. they train they're fighters to be prepared for any situation, they don't just claim to do so.

[SBN Doug]

you dont belive that there any traditional schools out there that teach unrealstic techniques when it comes to self defense?

 

I didn't say that anywhere in my post. I said the article is extremely bias toward it's own style. There's pleanty of traditional schools that don't teach as many "realistic" techniques as they should. But the article insinuates that none of them are any good.

[TJS]

you dont belive that there any traditional schools out there that teach unrealstic techniques when it comes to self defense?

 

I didn't say that anywhere in my post. I said the article is extremely bias toward it's own style. There's pleanty of traditional schools that don't teach as many "realistic" techniques as they should. But the article insinuates that none of them are any good.

 

ok, but on a side not it is a martial art's academy that teaches traditional aswell.

[martialartist1]

traditional vs mma vs self defense? well you simply cannot put it that way. heres some few ideas:

 

traditional is ancient, mixed martial arts is developing and self defense is used mainly for overcoming street fights and self protection.

 

traditional has the best forms, mma has the best attention for hardcore fans and self defense has the specialised defensive/offensive techniques. you could say endless ideas about this issue. example of traditional is kungfu, example of mma is brazillian jujitsu and example of self defense is jeet kune do.