Constructing a purely TCMA MMA? Can it be done?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
81

I think a good definition of ground fighting is needed.

Is standing over, knee riding and pounding ground fighting?

Side control, mount, guard, 1/2 guard, clearly ground fighting.

Pak Mei has a takedown that follows up with some kicking, ground to ground, that can sometimes give you a leg for large joint attack as well…but its not a mainstream thing, and its not ground fighting, just another tech.

We have a set of up kicks that are really good for regaining your feet against most guys, if you get one of those San Da takedowns and keep flowing.

We have a number of traps and locks that can be used to drag someone down, and hold them. That’s about the extend of it.

If you have a ‘sticky style’ or a “flowing” style (Pak mei or Tai Chi Chuan?) where you keep a lot of contact with an opponent, and you attack their centre of gravity, i.e. SC, do you have the COUNTERS for a grappler, without having to grapple? In a lot of places you do, its not a total vulnerability. But its certainly underdeveloped and under trained. I think that is evolving.

You know, what are the stages of mourning? First comes denial, then anger, sadness, and then resolution, something like that. Maybe were moving out of the anger stage…LOL.

Perhaps a justification?
There is a whole argument for direct action being most efficient. i.e. why grapple down to control and attack a joint when you can just go directly to attacking the joint? For example, If we grab a wrist lock or something like that, we don’t go for a bar, we straight away go for the break with a strike or a smash. You only need a couple of seconds of control.

82

I think Pride allowed for more of what Kung Fu potentially can do in terms of “ground fighting” than UFC does: in Pride, we saw more complex interactions between one competitor lying down and one competitor on their feet.

83

8 step praying mantis is technically a MMA hybrid Kung fu made up of 14 styles some of which are tong bei, bagua, xing yi, tai ji, shuai jiao. chin na fa…
it has punches kicks, joint locks, throws and ground fighting. and it suits me very well,

84

[QUOTE=Knifefighter;1053829]It’s called open guard. It kind of works like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg58TdNUM24

Sounds like you need to work with people who are better at striking from inside the closed guard.[/QUOTE]

So it’s not even really a guard… but sort of a half-way shrimp and kick to the face?

And to answer the second one, it’s hard not to telegraph your intent, especially when striking is such an attractive option.

Ain’t arguing… sounds like different points of view if you ask me.

85

[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1053837]
There is a whole argument for direct action being most efficient. i.e. why grapple down to control and attack a joint when you can just go directly to attacking the joint? For example, If we grab a wrist lock or something like that, we don’t go for a bar, we straight away go for the break with a strike or a smash. You only need a couple of seconds of control.[/QUOTE]

True dat. A common joint attack I’ve seen in most kung fu styles is to intercept the punch and jam the elbow with a forearm. I wouldn’t call that a submission.

EO

86

You probably want to realistically have sme ground fighting under your belt. Crouching zebra, jumping weasel will not save you on the ground.

That being said, you also shouldn’t think that learning some of this stuff will somehow destroy the “purity” of your style. It’s just to keep you safe when that 220lb guy barrels through your say ping mah and gwa choi.

And on the flip side of that flip side, ground fighting isn’t the end all be all either.

87

actually hard work is correct goju ryu and a few other karate styles do have grappling in their curriculum

lyoto machida

“My style is Machida Karate and it is a very traditional form.It differs from sports karate which we usually see in Karate schools and competitions as it has many elements which were lost in the style including the use of knees, elbows, takedowns and even some submissions”.

Granted again its not as thorough as the judo or bjj arsenal but its a decent start.

88

I understand you mean MMA as groundfighting, But Hung Ga is the first original Mixed Martial Art. It is not meant for the ground, but in some forms you do go to the ground, and one of the combined styles is drunken boxing, which some styles that do go to the ground.

An example would be, one time when I wasnt there, so Im sure your all gonna dismiss it as a lie, or fake, but for the purpose of the story, a jiujitsu guy challenged one of our students at the school I train in. The student done drunken boxing. The jiujitsu guy got the drunken boxer on the ground, and dropped onto side guard and was attempting an armbar (not sure exactly what arm lock it was, but he was leaning forward and had the arm locked). The drunken boxer rolled using a Chung Li Chuan technique, (The fat Immortal holding the gourd) and the jiujitsu guy was catapulted face first into the floor. We do not use mats so it was flat on the cement.

89

[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1053837]I think a good definition of ground fighting is needed.

Is standing over, knee riding and pounding ground fighting?

Side control, mount, guard, 1/2 guard, clearly ground fighting.

Pak Mei has a takedown that follows up with some kicking, ground to ground, that can sometimes give you a leg for large joint attack as well…but its not a mainstream thing, and its not ground fighting, just another tech.

We have a set of up kicks that are really good for regaining your feet against most guys, if you get one of those San Da takedowns and keep flowing.

We have a number of traps and locks that can be used to drag someone down, and hold them. That’s about the extend of it.

If you have a ‘sticky style’ or a “flowing” style (Pak mei or Tai Chi Chuan?) where you keep a lot of contact with an opponent, and you attack their centre of gravity, i.e. SC, do you have the COUNTERS for a grappler, without having to grapple? In a lot of places you do, its not a total vulnerability. But its certainly underdeveloped and under trained. I think that is evolving.

You know, what are the stages of mourning? First comes denial, then anger, sadness, and then resolution, something like that. Maybe were moving out of the anger stage…LOL.

Perhaps a justification?
There is a whole argument for direct action being most efficient. i.e. why grapple down to control and attack a joint when you can just go directly to attacking the joint? For example, If we grab a wrist lock or something like that, we don’t go for a bar, we straight away go for the break with a strike or a smash. You only need a couple of seconds of control.[/QUOTE]

maybe not but being stood over, being under ground and pound and being under a knee ride is ground work lol

If you are a sticky art and dont train it to its fullist (ie allow leg attacks clinch work body lock and throws) then you are really setting up yourself for a real problem, i know this from personal expereince and I have seen it with others, if you are a close range sticking art you are in grappling range and you have to be aware that these days people wont play the cente line sticky hands striking game they will play the throwing/clinching and striking game and you need to understand this game to make your art work

Your last arguement sounds logical unfortunatly attacking a limb without controlling the body is very very hard to do, people move around they cover up and they bounce back up after being thrown down, grapplers would love to throw and go straight into a lock anmd MMA guys would love to throw to straight ground and pound it beats all that other stuff hands down, but it rairly if ever happens like that

90

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRg2XTIzhmI

heres a hammed up demo of the goju sticky hands with some grappling in it

91

[QUOTE=Frost;1053876]maybe not but being stood over, being under ground and pound and being under a knee ride is ground work lol

If you are a sticky art and dont train it to its fullist (ie allow leg attacks clinch work body lock and throws) then you are really setting up yourself for a real problem, i know this from personal expereince and I have seen it with others, if you are a close range sticking art you are in grappling range and you have to be aware that these days people wont play the cente line sticky hands striking game they will play the throwing/clinching and striking game and you need to understand this game to make your art work[/QUOTE]

I’m glad you brought up that point as it lines right up with my thinking. Sticky fighters have to attack the centre of gravity, not the limbs, to be most effective.

[QUOTE=Frost;1053876]Your last arguement sounds logical unfortunatly attacking a limb without controlling the body is very very hard to do, people move around they cover up and they bounce back up after being thrown down, grapplers would love to throw and go straight into a lock anmd MMA guys would love to throw to straight ground and pound it beats all that other stuff hands down, but it rairly if ever happens like that[/QUOTE]

Think of it this way, you are in the mount, and the guy reaches up to your throat with a straight arm. You can go for the armbar (lock the arm, shift your hips, rotate your body, and drop), or grab the hand, twist a 1/4 to half circle as you strike the straightened, or even locked elbow. Its capitalising on a very small window of opportunity with precision force.

Now, the example may be poor, but the principle is applicable. The same reason we punch through blocks, because if you can block, you can strike, and striking is better than blocking. Taking a weak hit in exchange for a strong one is acceptable.

This is training as well, perhaps more psychological than physical, but training nevertheless.

92

Heres my list of pure TCMA for MMA:

CLF for outside and longer range power striking and foot work
Hung gar for power and stability close in
Hakka art for close range striking and clinch work
SC for throwing and clinch
And the ancient art of tapping for the ground :o)

Why are guys so all bent up about using pure TCMA for everything, hll no art in china started off as pure anyway, , hung fut, CLF, bak mei, yung ling, Northern Mantis etc are all amalgamations of other styles (admittedly Chinese styles but then china was an isolated country for a long time) hung gar added in the long arm stuff and took sets whole sale from other arts, the iron wire set and the lau gar set for example, the masters who actually fought when they saw boxing and judo saw the benefits of these arts and most trained in one or the other or both (just like Ross’s master), hll when setting up the san shau programme the Chinese officials also brought in boxing experts as well as the best masters of the time…what does that tell you?

Do people really think that when wong fei hung was adding the longer range strikes to him village art after seeing how effective the lama style was that if he had also seen judo he wouldn’t have added its throws and ground work in just because they weren’t Chinese in origin?

These arts adapted to the changing times and skills of their opponents, who here can really argue that the masters of old were wrong for changing with the times and allowing their arts to change as a result?

93

[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1053885]I’m glad you brought up that point as it lines right up with my thinking. Sticky fighters have to attack the centre of gravity, not the limbs, to be most effective..[/QUOTE]

The problem is if you attack the centre of gravity without knowledge of hip throws, body lock throws, level changes and clinch work you are in for a nasty surprise, now if you have that knowledge then its not a problem, I’m not sure tai chi outside of the chen village has it, certainly not in the yang I have seen, and the bit of bak mei and dragon I did didn’t have it either, your expertise in bakmei is greater than mine, so is it in there or are you having to go outside the art to work against them? That’s not an bad thing its great you are thinking like this I just wondered where you are working on it and with whom?

[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1053885]
Think of it this way, you are in the mount, and the guy reaches up to your throat with a straight arm. You can go for the armbar (lock the arm, shift your hips, rotate your body, and drop), or grab the hand, twist a 1/4 to half circle as you strike the straightened, or even locked elbow. Its capitalising on a very small window of opportunity with precision force.

Now, the example may be poor, but the principle is applicable. The same reason we punch through blocks, because if you can block, you can strike, and striking is better than blocking. Taking a weak hit in exchange for a strong one is acceptable.

This is training as well, perhaps more psychological than physical, but training nevertheless.[/QUOTE]

Firstly in mount you are in a control position so I’m not too sure how this matches up with your original point of going straight for a sub rather than a control position? But that aside the problem is how effective is the move and how likely is it to be pulled off?

My experience tells me that to break a limb you have to control it, I haven’t seen many grab and hit breaks pulled off successfully, I have seen loads of arm bars pulled off and a lot of breaks in comps if people don’t tap in time so I go with what I know works. And although it might take longer to perform (I say might because I have been arm locked way to quickly by guys for my liking) the control you have is constant so you don’t need the split second to pull it off

Also note that in MMA (which was originally asked about) hitting straight on the joint is illegal in most comps (before a certain person, not you, starts to argue this is because its too dangerous for sports please note the commissions banned a lot of things out of ignorance not because they are too dangerous and that in the first MMA matches and still in vale tudo these things are legal but you never saw them pulled off)

Now if we are talking pure self defence not comps I would simply keep hitting him and I wouldn’t be in mount but knee on stomach…..I have seen guys finish fights with broken limbs but once you knock them out they tend to go limp :slight_smile:

94

[QUOTE=pateticorecords;1053731]Another thing that is important to understand is that a lot of the CMA or other MA training is not competitive in nature y more to preserve your life.

I have seen good MMA as well as MA get their asses handed to them in a real brawl. I have also seen skinny little dudes hit a guy twice his size in a vital area and have the big guy crumble like a cookie:p[/QUOTE]

realy which MMA figthers have you seen this happen to, please tell?

95

TCMA has lots to offer. you just have to dig though the crap to find the diamonds. I’ve never written off any style or art and listed it all as complete garbage. People get to wrapped up in the perfection of things that they sometimes forget the basis of it.

96

[QUOTE=Frost;1053909]Heres my list of pure TCMA for MMA:

CLF for outside and longer range power striking and foot work
Hung gar for power and stability close in
Hakka art for close range striking and clinch work
SC for throwing and clinch
And the ancient art of tapping for the ground :o)

Why are guys so all bent up about using pure TCMA for everything, hll no art in china started off as pure anyway, , hung fut, CLF, bak mei, yung ling, Northern Mantis etc are all amalgamations of other styles (admittedly Chinese styles but then china was an isolated country for a long time) hung gar added in the long arm stuff and took sets whole sale from other arts, the iron wire set and the lau gar set for example, the masters who actually fought when they saw boxing and judo saw the benefits of these arts and most trained in one or the other or both (just like Ross’s master), hll when setting up the san shau programme the Chinese officials also brought in boxing experts as well as the best masters of the time…what does that tell you?

Do people really think that when wong fei hung was adding the longer range strikes to him village art after seeing how effective the lama style was that if he had also seen judo he wouldn’t have added its throws and ground work in just because they weren’t Chinese in origin?

These arts adapted to the changing times and skills of their opponents, who here can really argue that the masters of old were wrong for changing with the times and allowing their arts to change as a result?[/QUOTE]

This is pretty much what should end this discussion. I find it humoring that a bunch of westerners act as though it’s a cardinal sin to cross train or add to their Kung Fu something that is not Chinese when most of the Chinese themselves would have or do cross train in these systems. I find it absolutely ******ing hilarious to tell you the truth.

If a style or system of fighting does not evolve and adapt, it is a dead style. Period. Times change, people change, situations and sceneirios change. I guarantee you that the ancient warriors these guys worship like gods would have adapted and used whatever worked for them, be it a chinese art or not. Too many people get wrapped up in the mystical BS or engulfed in a culture they really do not understand, but think they do. My two cents.:wink:

97

[QUOTE=Yum Cha;1053837]

Perhaps a justification?
There is a whole argument for direct action being most efficient. i.e. why grapple down to control and attack a joint when you can just go directly to attacking the joint?[/QUOTE]

Because when you do it for real against a resisting opponent, that’s what you HAVE to do in the huge majority of cases.

98

[QUOTE=Eric Olson;1053851]True dat. A common joint attack I’ve seen in most kung fu styles is to intercept the punch and jam the elbow with a forearm. I wouldn’t call that a submission.

EO[/QUOTE]

Too bad that doesn’t work against a resisting opponent.

99

Even Chan Heung learned multiple styles. Just sayin’. :smiley:

100

[QUOTE=goju;1053871]actually hard work is correct goju ryu and a few other karate styles do have grappling in their curriculum

lyoto machida

“My style is Machida Karate and it is a very traditional form.It differs from sports karate which we usually see in Karate schools and competitions as it has many elements which were lost in the style including the use of knees, elbows, takedowns and even some submissions”.

Granted again its not as thorough as the judo or bjj arsenal but its a decent start.[/QUOTE]

I see that the TCMA-clueless MMA knucklehead majority of this forum have ignored this post of yours so far.

I guess that if they don’t know about something then for all intents and purposes, it does not exist, and if you come along and say otherwise with proof and evidence, their fragile egos will just ignore it.

Machida was an execellent example. He practices traditional Shotokan Karate, including the katas and so on.