karim Posted July 19, 2003 Posted July 19, 2003 I'm a newbie to this forum. I am planning on taking Hung Gar and Tai chi next month. I've done a lot of research on various martial arts and in this forum, many people believe that BJJ and MT are the way to go. Then I notice a lot of people talking about UFC and how BJJ and MT rule the ring. While watching UFC, I noticed they have a few rules that are actually detrimental to the person who studies kung fu. I know a lot of hits are to pressure points and stuff which are not allowed in the UFC. Thus I can see why all the grappling sports seem to rule. In a real fight, the last thing I want to do is grapple with someone on the ground. They try to tackle me, and i'd elbow them in the back of the neck. Kick them in the groin. Don't get me wrong, I think learning some grappling will help anyone (I plan on studying it too some day) but overall, i'd stick with kung fu. Hopefully i'm not babbling too much and make some sense.
Kyle-san Posted July 19, 2003 Posted July 19, 2003 Honestly, go with whatever makes you feel the most comfortable. It doesn't matter if the focus of many people is on the BJJ/MT combination, just find an art you feel at home with. There are a lot of advantages to a BJJ or MT background, but most of them are geared towards time in the ring.
paolung Posted July 22, 2003 Posted July 22, 2003 if you stay with hung kuen and train hard, you won't be sorry. "It is not how much you know but how well you have mastered what you've learnt. When making an assessment of one's martial arts training one should measure the depth rather than the length". - MASTER "General" D. Lacey
TJS Posted July 23, 2003 Posted July 23, 2003 Because MT and BJJ are the most proven stlyes out there. Thats just the Fact. Rules Never Hampered Kung Fu guys in the First UFC's ...One of the most succesful Kung Fu fightiers in MMA almost got his arm broken of by Royce at UFC 2. kung fu just never had succes In Nhb fighting even in the early days. As Far as Standup I think MT pretty much has that covered. But do whatever you enjoy...as long as you realize certain truths.
aznkarateboi Posted July 24, 2003 Posted July 24, 2003 TJS, who was the Kung Fu fighter who was in MMA? Out of curiosity.
Treebranch Posted July 24, 2003 Posted July 24, 2003 TJS you are convinced that other MA's are not as effective as BJJ and MT. Yet from your profile you study TKD and Krav Maga. BJJ and MT may be the most successful in the ring, no one knows what's the most successful in the real world. Just know that two people fighting in a ring are very different than someone attaking you on the street. However brutal UFC fight can get, a Street Fight or Combat is much more brutal. How can you prove a Combat MA is effective unless you have a death match and weapons are allowed? You can't. So before you measure the effectiveness of all MA's based on UFC fights, study BJJ and MT and get in the ring. You might learn that certain people can fight and some can't no matter what the style. People who like to fight in competition will study MT and BJJ or San Shou, or Judo, etc. People who don't want to compete study for different reasons. MT, BJJ, whatever, if I am attacked by someone on the street it's about survival, and I personally will do anything to survive however dirty and unsportman like that may be. The thing to understand is when you fight in the ring, you fight to win. When someone attacks you on the street or in Combat, the goal is survival. Two UFC fighters are not going in there to kill eachother, that fight would look very different. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Kirves Posted July 25, 2003 Posted July 25, 2003 The most important thing, if you believe in the techniques taught at a school, is how they train them? Do they use alive drills against totally resisting opponents, or are they teaching with dead drills against co-operative or worse, pre-arranged opponent action. If the school uses lots of mits and kicking shields, bags, trains athletically, and uses lots of alive partner drills, then it is wonderful.
Kirves Posted July 25, 2003 Posted July 25, 2003 How can you prove a Combat MA is effective unless you have a death match and weapons are allowed? Depends on what you are training for. I, personally, am not training for being able to fend off five armed expert fighters in a dark alley. That kind of thing is ludicrous. I'd try to escape and pray to God. Sometimes the odds just are too much against you. The situation that I, personally, am training for (self-defence wise) is one or two opponents (or max of three stupid/drunk/unskilled ones) who are hopefully not armed, or are poorly armed. Then I as a martial artist may stand a chance, and if I instantly kill them I go to jail. Actually, most of the common sport rules are just about the same rules that the law here enforces. If I train MMA/NHB style and use it on the street, I won't go to jail. But if I train for eye-gouges, spine-breaks, neck-twists, throat-kill-shots etc. I will go to jail. Sure, it is better to be judged than carried, but what are the odds... it is quite common to get into fights that are not death matchs, just either robberies or drunk-bastard-ego-boost-events and these are much much more common than a gang of armed wrestlers to attack you with intent to kill. As I'm much more prone to get into the former than the latter situation, I will train with the former situation foremost in my mind. If I train to instantly kill or maim anyone who attacks me, I'll end up in jail in no tme in a common bar brawl where deadly force wasn't necessary at all. As Matt Thornton says in http://www.straightblastgym.com/questcuriculum.html if you can fight NHB good, it is easy to change the jabs to eye-jabs and add biting and so on. But if you don't know boxing, only try to learn eye jabs, then you won't be able to land any of them, you lack the delivery system. If you can prove that you have the delivery system, then maybe we'll believe you can hit us with the "deadly" stuff, but if you can't hit us with a fist then how come you think you can hit us with the "death-move"?
Prodigal Son Posted July 25, 2003 Posted July 25, 2003 JJ is definitely very effective on the deck, but IMO Wing Chun is a considerably better standup art than MT - no disses to MT intended, but I've done 'em both and as far as my own structure and mindset goes, there is no comparison. Have you thought about a WC/JJ combination ? >>>PS<<< ------------------------------------------------------------------------Self-defense is only an illusion, a dark cloak beneath which lurks a razor-sharp dagger waiting to be plunged into the first unwary victim. Sifu Wong.
monkeygirl Posted July 25, 2003 Posted July 25, 2003 This is a topic for the Comparative Styles forum, so I'll move it there. Please remember to discuss the differences/similarities in training/techniques between the different arts, not just "which is better". 1st dan & Asst. Instructor TKD 2000-2003No matter the tune...if you can rock it, rock it hard.
Recommended Posts