I was just thinking about with how much video we have of everything from Olympic TKD to Toughman to Vale Tudo to bum fights can’t we figure out where our styles are weak and strong at least at the expert levels?
I finally finished reading the SD vs BJJ white belt thread on bullshido, and the entire thing seemed pointless. I think crossing hands with others is great for training and learning but does the “my style is better than yours” challenge match have a point anymore? 
Re: Are style vs style challenge matches obsolete?
Originally posted by rogue
does the “my style is better than yours” challenge match have a point anymore?
Did it ever? The type you mention, “mine better than yours,” carried no validity. The “let’s see what happens,” now, that’s some good stuff, at least for those who can apply the techniques/principles of their styles. That way, gaps in plans can be discovered, covered, and made whole. The ego clashes never meant nothing to nothing.
At the risk of sounding redundant…
Its the practioner, not the style
Unless it a complete B.S. system…
Re: Are style vs style challenge matches obsolete?
Originally posted by rogue
I finally finished reading the SD vs BJJ white belt thread on bullshido, and the entire thing seemed pointless.
Depending on how fast you read, that is about one hour of your life that you wasted and never getting back.
I use to strongly believe that “It’s the practioner” thing, but in some cases (not counting the b.s. systems), I think the style can play a huge factor. More so than the practioner.
At the risk of sounding redundant,
Its the practioner, not the style…
aye.
Originally posted by PHILBERT
I use to strongly believe that “It’s the practioner” thing, but in some cases (not counting the b.s. systems), I think the style can play a huge factor. More so than the practioner.
I’m interested in what you have to say on this matter, can you expand on your point?
If it is striking vs. striking or grappling vs. grappling, then I don’t think that any one art is inherently better than another.
Speaking from a striking arts perspective, I don’t see large differences in basic/core philosophy. Some arts have their ideas better formulated/formalized so that the practitioners are more able to articulate why their art is “better”.
If you’re talking about a stiking style versus a grappling one, then that is just comparing apples to oranges. It’s almost the same as saying that weapons based styles are better than empty-handed ones. Weapons provide an undeniable advantage in combat which would and should make even a competant empty-handed combatant pause for thought, but it doesn’t necessarily make it superior.
Originally posted by CFT
[B]I’m interested in what you have to say on this matter, can you expand on your point?
If it is striking vs. striking or grappling vs. grappling, then I don’t think that any one art is inherently better than another.
Speaking from a striking arts perspective, I don’t see large differences in basic/core philosophy. Some arts have their ideas better formulated/formalized so that the practitioners are more able to articulate why their art is “better”.[/b]
There are differences in the mechanics of some strikes throughout various styles. The standard TMA roundhouse is completely different from the thai roundhouse. There are different philosophies about proper stance, footwork, etc. Those won’t matter much, but difference in striking philosophy can make a world of difference.
Also, there’s the topic of training methodology. Watch the avg thai boxer train. Next, go watch the avg tkd guy train - completely different. thai boxers undergo heavy contact in the ring, and their training reflects that. In addition, some styles train WAY more efficiently than others. It’s not a secret that many CMA take longer to become proficient in- it was designed to be that way.
If you’re talking about a stiking style versus a grappling one, then that is just comparing apples to oranges. It’s almost the same as saying that weapons based styles are better than empty-handed ones. Weapons provide an undeniable advantage in combat which would and should make even a competant empty-handed combatant pause for thought, but it doesn’t necessarily make it superior.
Apples and oranges or not, it’s still a necessary comparison, for the simple fact that those matches do happen. And, it’s not really apples and oranges. Grapplers use alot of principles that stand up guys use - they may use them in different ways, but they use them.
There is definately some advantages in certain systems over others. For example in this most recent issue of IKF magazine there was an article of why women should study wing chun. I read the article and looked at all the pictures and drills they were doing with wing chun. It was bad wing chun. Over extended attacks, grabbing pak saos, spine out of alingment, poor structure, weak bong sao, etc. If someone who practiced that paticular style of wing chun Vs. someone who trained it the way its suppose to be, I would be my money on the person who trained it properly.
When it comes down to it, its attributes Vs attributes. The person who can take the most damage and deal the most damage will win in a fight. However, I do believe that not all styles of martial arts are created equally. I think that there is good teachers for every art, and there are good fighters practicing their art. I believe there is good karate, good TKD, good BJJ, good wrestling, good judo, good akido, good wing chun, good taiji, good long fist, and so on and so forth. I also believe there is a bad to every good.
So it may not be the style per se, it could be the teachers or some other factor as to why the style was not taught right to you.
I know in my kung fu classes we really get hit sometimes. I get black eyes, fat lips, etc. but I know I can take a hit, and I know I won’t freeze up when I get hit. So really it comes down to how hard you train. I know people who can’t really fight, but are really tough. I also know people who are very skilled but cannot take much pain. You never know who you will fight, nor will you know their attributes and skills. You could be an excellent martial artist, but your technique could also have no effect on your opponet if they are just plain tough.
I think it is very important to play outside of your syle to see.
I don’t look at it as a, “mine is better than yours.” That is a little rude.
I look at it as, “wow, your Nintendo is really cool, you must have a lot of fun with that (duck hunter, ect.). But hey, check out my X-Box, tell me this isn’t the ****.”
Maybe right away, from all your hours of controller work and hand eye coordination and just getting afeel for how games work, or maybe playing an updated, better graphic version of a game you have … your better than me already. But when you compare Nintendo to X-Box, one is higher technology.
At the same time, I believe no one style is perfect or the best at all things. But some have cut out a lot of fat and have added a lot of power and mechanics and they adapt better to all situations.
No matter what your opinion though (student/style) there is only one way to validate it: go out and play with other styles.
No matter what your opinion though (student/style) there is only one way to validate it: go out and play with other styles.
I think nowadays there are soooo many avenues to do just that……
I think crossing hands with others is great for training and learning but does the “my style is better than yours” challenge match have a point anymore?
no, no point to prove.
Yes and no
There’s no point in creating an f-16 compared to the Wright Brother’s plane… it’s just evolution and updating. You don’t go and say the Wright Brother’s plane is ****, you just add to it, start with the basic principles and make it better.
As a martial artist I think there is a point in going out and crossing hands. You find what YOU are week in and see what you can do to fix it. If you keep an open mind, you may also see some things YOUR STYLE is week in.
I haven’t met a TKD guy who impressed me with their hands or on the ground, but their kicking is beautiful and some can change with their leg the way some can with their hand… I mean realy change, touch you and still chanhe direction with power (not just the snapy, snap of the pants).
But they can play with each other in their school till the end of time and fool themselves that the leg and standing on one leg takes care of everything and nobody can take them down or get in close enough to punch.
Is that Self Defense or Self Deception?
As Sun Tzu pointed out, there are plenty of forums now to see if you’re fooling yourself.
People create a million reasons (moral, based on rules, spiritual ect) on why they won’t go out to test and frankly, I think it’s a matter of skill. If you have it or almost have it you want to see and feel relatively safe. If you’re no where near to having it of course the ring is the last place you’d want to find yourself … you’d get your a$$ kicked. It’s that simple but people make it complicated, often like their martial art.
Originally posed by SevenStar
Apples and oranges or not, it’s still a necessary comparison, for the simple fact that those matches do happen. And, it’s not really apples and oranges. Grapplers use alot of principles that stand up guys use - they may use them in different ways, but they use them.
I agree with alot of what you say, mechanics are different in most arts, but alot of principles seem to be similar of not the same. The principles of Aikido, Tai Chi, Wing Chun seem to be the same (at least on paper), and yet to look at they are very different.
Getting back to Philbert’s post:
I use to strongly believe that “It’s the practioner” thing, but in some cases (not counting the b.s. systems), I think the style can play a huge factor. More so than the practioner.
I still don’t think anybody has convincing said why one art can really be superior to another, excluding training methods and time. I agree that a professional thai boxer will have the skill, stamina and conditioning to cream any TMA who has not taken his/her training to that level … but that does not make muy thai a “superior” style.
As everyone knows, BJJ is the best style ever! 
“I still don’t think anybody has convincing said why one art can really be superior to another”
It’s hard to answer that without ****ing someone off.
Let’s just say that maybe style “A” is very sport oriented, and it doesn’t allow its practioners to attack a kicking or supporting leg, doesn’t allow full contact to the head. Or let’s say style “B” begins all of its matches standing up and clinching each other’s uniform – this style with time may lose the ability to succesfully bridge the gap. Maybe, maybe not.
Let’s say one style tends to stand very erect, perhaps even leaning back a bit and has very slapy hands… in the contect of playing with others do the same it may work, but with some with less busy hands and true powerful punching they may have trouble.
I know it may not be the style but the way they school trains, but styles tend to have their own way of training, where you can enter 8 out of 10 TKD, Judo or Wing Chun schools and find a similiar curriculum.
I know this is not PC and I don’t really feel so strongly about any of this because frankly I’ve put this type of thing so far behind me. I have found what I have been looking for and it fits my personality and thinking. Everyone has to find what works for them and once they dedicate themselves to it they can make it work if they train realisticly … now that’s a more PC answer;)
As everyone knows, BJJ is the best style ever!
betta tell that to Genki Sudo
and if someone strongly feels that X is better than Y… well there are more than enough oppurtunities to prove your point… big gloves… little glove… “jacket”… no jacket… standing… or ‘grappling’… from bars to ballrooms to arenas…
I finally finished reading the SD vs BJJ white belt thread on bullshido, and the entire thing seemed pointless. I think crossing hands with others is great for training and learning but does the “my style is better than yours” challenge match have a point anymore?
Actually YES they do still have a valid point because we STILL have pple deluding themselves.
For those who can step back and take an objective look at their art and skills then a STYLE vs STYLE challenge is not needed. For those who STILL think they can death tough a Pro Fighter and claim victory or believe they can stop a wrestling shoot with a horse stance then they still need to have this.
betta tell that to Genki Sudo
You know Sudo trained BJJ at the Beverly Hills JJ club, right?
But I agree BJJ is NOT the best art ever its BAJIQUAN!
I think its best to look at what works for you, not what works for everyone else. I think you can learn a great deal from others, but ultimately you learn the most from yourself.
Style has nothing to do with anything in a real fight. Which cannot be compared to any kind of ring fight. Ring fights can be looked at as a testing lab I suppose. However, in real fights on the streets its much much different. Remember that kickboxer guy who got shot not too long ago? Someone robbed him w/ a gun and he thought he could fight back because he was a good fighter. Well, not good enough to beat a gun.
Even if a gracie wins a fight in UFC, or loses a fight in K-1, it really proves nothing. If you study a good art you should technically be able to use it in many different situations against a wide variety of opponets, and perhaps even multiple opponets. I am not saying you would win your fights, I am saying you would have an idea how to win. Even if you don’t win your fights on the streets you can at least know what to do and execute it.
You know Sudo trained BJJ at the Beverly Hills JJ club, right?
STOP IT!!!
Remember that kickboxer guy who got shot not too long ago?
Alex Gong?..
I am saying you would have an idea how to win. Even if you don’t win your fights on the streets you can at least know what to do and execute it.
and ‘you’ should now this how?.. by being sheltered from the rest of the world… toiling away in you ‘classes’ unaware of what other ‘styles’ are doing?.. or by mixing it up?.. taking the guess work out of the 'what ifs"…
Having an idea of what to do is what you will ultimately gain from your training IMHO. You will not have any definate or absolute answers, but you will have an idea of what the answer is.
A person who constantly attacks in a fight may wear themselves out quicker. The person who is constantly defending may be saving energy but is still taking hits and not advancing in any way at all. You have to act upon the situation and not react. Reactions take too long. Sometimes you will need to attack and sometimes you will need to defend. Knowing what to do at the right time.
I am not arguing with you about touching hands with other styles of martial arts. That will teach you how to dynamically apply your art to other situations. Sometimes you have to adapt your art to fight another fighter.
SunTzu-
What I am saying is you should train realistically for your physique and attributes. Have an idea of what you can realistically pull off in a fight. Its different for everyone.
