Six months - year of Pankration vs.10+years of asian arts.

[Martial_Artist]

Hmm, I've kept out of this for a while just because it really is just one guy promoting his new system to help himself feel better about taking it. But, I've got to say something.

 

The first thing I've got to say is: I don't care who you are 6-12mo. of training in an open hand martial art is nothing compared to 4-5years or more. I don't care what "system" of martial art you are taking if you are lead to believe that in 6mo. you will be an "effective" fighting "machine" then you are simply being sold.

 

And about your method of fighting. You are one arrogant person. You assume that the person you will be fighting is going to be some mindless twit that can't fathom moving or defending himself because he doesn't do pankration.

 

I'm not a defender of styles or systems (just look up any of my past posts--those that know me also know this), but I will speak out against bs.

 

I did some research on Pankration and the sites I got information from claim Pankration is a sport, designed for a ringed environment. Here are two sites I visited:

 

https://www.pankration.com

 

https://www.chez.com/pancrace/

 

Both of these give clear pictures of the history and future of Pankration. It seems to me to clearly be a NHB orientated system.

 

I think that if you want to start beating chests you should have at least chose a real combat art instead of an old olympic-class sport like Pankration. (Just because they fought to the death, sometimes, doesn't mean they did so effectively or efficiently. Illegal street fights in the Philippines fight to the death, those guys aren't the best fighters. They have weak technique, form, etc. But they're fighting people of the same caliber. The real martial artists don't fight there--mainly because they're not involved with the mob--because why would they? Same reason I don't compete in NHB. I don't need to prove anything to anyone. I don't train for sport or trophy. I know what I'm capable of and that's fine for me. I don't need anyone else telling me how good I am or what a great fighter I am. My self-esteem isn't that weak.

 

Perhaps, you should look deeper into what a martial art is. It is combat centered, thus called martial, but it's an art, meaning it does something more for the personal than merely puffing up your pride.

 

MA

[hogwan]

Bravo

[TJS]

This is not a fair question because the goals are differant.

 

I can train in anything (type of Combat) for 6 month to a year) and be pretty good. Give me TKD, Kung Fu, Karate, TSD, etc fighting techinques and let me spar and work fighting moves everyday with a good teacher and I will fight as good as any Pankaration guy.

 

Then Show me 1 single example of one of the stlyes you listed competing succesfully in any type of mixed event.

[Martial_Artist]

You don't honestly think that all the good martial artists are wasting their time trying to prove to the world how good they are in a ring, do you? Only those who have something to prove, some reason for fame enter that ring. I don't think that a real representative from a TMA will ever compete in a NHB event. I just don't think they will ever have to. What will it prove? That, lo and behold!, their art is better than yours? I don't think they really care about that. I don't. I'm not a TMAist in any way. In fact, my personal opinions are not pro-TMA. (I have written two articles about this The Martial Arts in Combative Arts forum and Art vs Art ?!?!?! in comparative arts)

 

But, I don't think for one moment having traveled much o' this hunk o' rock that the real martial artists are the roosters in the c*ockfight. Why would they be? I'm sure they'd rather be out training and progressing as a martial artist than trying to beat their chest in a ring to show who's got the bigger pair of jacobs.

 

Then again, I don't know much about a great many things.

 

MA.

[AndrewGreen]

I can train in anything (type of Combat) for 6 month to a year) and be pretty good. Give me TKD, Kung Fu, Karate, TSD, etc fighting techinques and let me spar and work fighting moves everyday with a good teacher and I will fight as good as any Pankaration guy.

 

No, technique plays a part as well. But training methods dictate technique, if you where to start sparring with your karate strikes in a Muay Thai environment (gloves & contact) it would start looking more and more like Muay Thai.

 

 

However the point is that the traditional art are not about fighting. They are about learning not to fight. I have made this point several times. Not all of us join MA to learn how to bust heads. Thats great if thats why you are here and thats great if you are good at it.

 

Explain how traditional arts achieve this and MMA doesn't.

 

Both teach you to fight, one just does a better job then the other.

 

Through that other things come out, I think all the other stuff that TMA claims is the goal can be achieved better through MMA because it is much more "real" then TMA.

Fact in most people who get into traditional arts do not seek to get to this ultimate combat leval. I would say less than 20% of all Traditional arts black belts can hold their own with MMA only because this is not the goal we seek.

 

But what is the goal? And how is that different from MMA?

 

Why can't someone train for the same goals you have, but do it through MMA and get far better self-defence skills?

This would be like me wainting to put a Dump Truck in a street race against you Corvette. Guess what Im not going to win. But if you wan't a load of rocks Im your man.

 

I disagree with the comparisson. MMA can achieve all of the Self-development stuff, and IMO can do that better, plus it gives you better fighting skills...

Differant arts focus on differant things. Some focus on more than one.

 

No, both train to fight and gain other benefits through that.

Most traditional arts leave the door open for the person taking it to choose what they want to do.

 

What door?

Again the question is true but it is a bad question becasue both are not used for the same thing.

 

Yes, they are.

 

It is not a matter of styles, but individuals. A person can train either way for the exact same goals. Whether it is fighting, self-defence, competition, enjoyment, character development, social aspects, etc.

 

MMA can do all of those just as well, and sometimes better.

 

Fun & enjoyment is individual, some people enjoy the Traditional aspects, be that kata, culture, environment or whatever. For them TMA is better, but it is not good for fighting.

 

I do agree with the basic premise of the initial post: Training MMA in the right way can make you a far better fighter far faster then the traditional techniques and methods.

 

But who cares, martial arts should be done primarily for fun.

 

Tae Bo & Tai Chi won't make you a great fighter, but they will make you healthier and can be quiet enjoyable, that is what counts. Karate / TKD /etc are somewhere in the middle.

[TJS]

You don't honestly think that all the good martial artists are wasting their time trying to prove to the world how good they are in a ring, do you?

 

So Michael Jordan Wastes his Time proving to the world how good he is at basketball?

 

Lennox Lewis is also wasting his Time i guess..

Only those who have something to prove, some reason for fame enter that ring

 

Yes, Royce Gracie wanted to Prove His Family's stlye was effective and he did so.

 

Mas Oyama wanted to Prove Kyokushin was the most effective so he traveled to Thailand to do it against the worlds best.

 

Everyone can talk, few back it up.

I don't think that a real representative from a TMA will ever compete in a NHB event.

 

Not Today because they would not be succesful unless they changed their training meathods...Everyone knows this including them.

 

However plenty did in the past.

 

some people like to back up their claims...most dont.

[G95champ]

Mr Green

 

Im so glad you read what I wrote but did not listen to any of it.

 

MMA teaches you to fight quicker no question about it. Fight better well like you said that is up to the person doiing MMA vs the person doing TMA.

 

TMA teaches you other things early on. Just like MMA teaches you to fight early on. Both will get you to the same place down the road but they start in differant places.

 

Think of MA as a big circle. All of us are trying to get to the center. On the outside of the circel you have arts that focus on fighting, arts the focus on weapons, arts that focus on spirt, etc etc etc. Every art has a little bit of this and a little bit of that in it. The longer we train the closer to the center we become.

 

My point yes MMA will teach you to fight sooner but but doing so you loose other things. TMA teaches out discipline, morals, kata, weapons, history, traditions, SD, blah blah blah as well as how to fight. In the end they both get to the same place.

 

My comparison was very good BTW. You win the race in your Vet. I get there in my dump truck but it takes me longer and I got some more knowledge along the way. Now because you learned so much quicker than me who is to say you did not stop by at the Lib. on your way to the finish line and learn some more.

[monkeygirl]

I will give you guys a warning right now: bring the conversation back to a calm, respectful tone. If it gets out of hand again, the thread will be closed.

[G95champ]

TJS

 

Your right TMA will not compete today. Because training methods have changed. I don't mean class I mean training with weights, diets, etc...

 

Just like you could not put Bart Star on the 2003 Greeb Bay Packers and expect him to be the same QB he was in the last 1960's. The times have changed and so has the game.

 

People who want to be fighters now come out from day one and train to be a fighter. They don't use kata, or weapons, or gi's, etc. the got to hit the bag, spar, run, go the gym, etc... Athletes today are better than they were 20 years ago because medicine is better.

 

Thats not to say those guys back them were not great they were and thats not to say the guys today are not great they are. Point is the style in which you train has very little to do with anything. The training methods you use do. The more popular fighting became the more people worked on only becomining a great fighter.

 

 

 

The more I do something the better Im going to get at it. RIGHT??? So if I take a style where we spar everyday chances are Im going to be a better fighter much sooner than I would be in a class where we spared only once a week and that may be at a controled paced. No one every questioned that.

 

But using the same argument If I spar everyday I am missing out on what the other guys is doing all week. Does that make me a worse MA??? No just means were working on differant goals.

[G95champ]

Sorry MonkeyGirl