Braden.
I agree there.
Personally, I don’t like the term “MMA” as it appears to have become solely associated with UFC, PRIDE & NHB Fights and their way of thinking.
That is one of the reasons why I don’t like to call my style “MMA”, but would rather say it is a “combined style”.
Yep, different words same meaning, but a big diff for me personally.
Have a good one.
In this case, I am using the term MMA to refer to Pride, UFC, or similar events.
I also understand that MMA doesn’t explicitly mean this.
Touchy…sheesh. Or maybe I’m just tired.
Shooter-- I had a big long thing written, but it was WAY too sarcastic and negative… reflecting my frustration, not anything else.
It’s “when you meet the buddha, kill the buddha.” You learn techniques. The techniques lead to an understanding of the concepts. You forget the specific techniques because, as I often say “an armbar is an armbar is an armbar.”
Tai Chi might be a concept in the way that Judo is “maximum efficiency, minimum effort,” but it also constitutes a set of techniques used to take advantage of that concept. These would be identifiable to another Tai Chi player, yes?
Braden,
How about an event that allows the three basic ranges of fighting. Striking, stand up grappling and groundfighting at the same time.
MP - I don’t mean to sound touchy, I’m just trying to find out specifically what you’re asking. I mean, I can’t answer your question when it’s not clear what you’re asking. And you admit that the term MMA is extremely vague, and doesn’t explicitly mean what you are saying.
I have difficulty dealing with this question when the qualifier is “a number of specific venues of my choice” rather than an objective description, such as “any venue which allows practitioners of any style to enter and allows full force attacks.”
Fair enough–I made an assumption that you were familiar with Pride and UFC to understand what a “similar” venue would be 
But basically, a full contact fight that allows any “range” of combat, although certain technique restrictions might apply. How’s that?
MP - That’s better. 
I’m familiar enough with Pride and UFC. What makes me frustrated is that we’ve had this conversation here a bagazillion times, and what most people mean by MMA (I’m not saying this is what you mean) is “I belong to a cultural movement that subsumes these specific people and things, why isn’t what you do part of this?” In other words, it is analogous to someone saying “I just finished watching Modern Jazz Countdown, and I didn’t see a single Malmsteen riff… what’s up with that?” I’m not putting down the proper philosophy of MMA. But like any movement which becomes popular, it becomes overwhelmed by people who are incapable of comprehending the original goals, and just want to belong to something and recieve external validification for what they do. And that’s mostly what we see in these conversations.
I’ve got no interest at all in debating with people why they don’t hear any Malmsteen on their jazz guitar programs. If you want to ask why we don’t see kungfu guys do well in groundfighting venues, that’s a legitimate question. Kungfu really doesn’t have any adequate groundtraining. That’s about all there is to say on that topic. (As an aside, there are people like Shooter here who get down and roll on the mats and train out taiji principles there, which is of course extremely valid. But I’m sure we’ll agree - even if the kungfu nuts who will flame me for this don’t - that that is different from the typical silly stance that their principles will magickally manifest on the ground with no training).
If you want to broaden the topic to ask about kungfu people working in open-style hard-contact competitions, we can talk about that. I personally believe that many kungfu styles (we have to remember here that there is as much variation between kungfu styles as there is from a kungfu to a non-kungfu style) are extraodinarily effective stand-up styles. Remember a thread you started a while ago where you said (and I agreed avidly) that ground-standing is an important distinction, but that close-far, grappling-striking weren’t? Keep that in mind. Kungfu does great standing. The best standing contact open-style venue we have is koushu. Kungfu styles dominate it.
The only question left to ask is ‘why haven’t these idea been brought together?’ Maybe you should pose this question to the people who claim to watch contact open-style events to scientifically pick out the best styles to train in. In other words, maybe you should bring this to the MMA people, not the kungfu people. The question to ask to kungfu people is clearly NOT ‘what’s up with your style and contact competition?’ but rather ‘what do you think about achieving some proficiency on the ground?’ Since, logically speaking, that’s where the discrepency is.
Because all these other, watered down martial arts are derived from kungfu, what kungfu looks like in the ring is what you’ve already seen.
Okay, that’s kind of a troll, but I’m betting there’s a little bit of truth to it as well. Shuai Chiao throws are going to look a lot like Judo throws without the gi. Chin-na locks are going to resemble jujutsu locks. Tang Lang kicks are going to be similar to TKD or muay thai kicks. The most distinctive aspects of the movements as they appear in forms are going to disappear somewhat because of the presence of a resisting opponent, and are mostly meant for conditioning anyway (ie: you kick higher or stand lower in a form to develop the strength and flexiblity that will allow kicks and stances in a combat context to be stabler, faster and so on.)
But then I’m a newbie, so I could be talking out my cornhole on this.
MP, I actually liked what you originally wrote and appreciated your candor.
The techniques lead to an understanding of the concepts. You forget the specific techniques because, as I often say “an armbar is an armbar is an armbar.”
Actually, it’s the other way around. At least in my school.
I don’t view Tai Chi as a menu of techniques that lead the student to a conceptual understanding. I teach a movement principle by not teaching it directly. I skirt the core of the principle with extraneous aspects of the movement so that the player can draw from their internal experience of moving, and formulate an understanding that applies to their current level of relaxation and coordination (energy management) as they work within the parameters of Tai Chi’s structure principles.
As the practitioner begins to learn about energy, they begin to look at the methods of acquiring refined energy management as a 3-dimensional model. I call it “stratification.” It goes like this:
I show a student how to perform the basic figure-8 pattern of movement and recovery with their hands at first, as in Corn-grinding or another Chi Kung exercise we just call figure-8s. Corn-grinding is first introduced as a reciprocating circular pattern done with the hands. As we continue the exercise, I explain the ideas of centerline integrity, rotational and extension theory, and how the waist is used to initiate the pattern theyÕre describing with their arms and hands. This takes about 5 minutes, and they have the idea of movement being the essence of their energy managment and tactical possibilities/options.
The Figure-8 is one of the staples of Tai ChiÕs energy management. It allows smooth, eliptical recovery at all levels of movement from the center of the spine on outward to the full extension of the limbs.
The core of movement isnÕt the paradigm contained in technical execution, nor is it dealing with a concept or a particular movement method. ItÕs all three things being practiced in one. As the idea begins to take form, it supplies a paradigm for developing the concept which will imbue sound movement skills, and specialized techniques much like a Judoka’s tokui-waza.
Corn-grinding is a ten-minute introduction to the 3-dimensional modeling of how to use hooks/circular hand method with relaxed, smooth recovery during a series of reciprocating rotations. As a form of tactical application, corn-grinding transcends the mental/intellectual contrivance-based approach to technique, and allows the practitioner to NOT fight - Just manage their energy as the body is set in motion. The opponentÕs targets are just things that get in the way of the movement.
The same approach applies to “submissions,” fast-wrestling, and everything else combative in their Tai Chi.
Tai Chi might be a concept in the way that Judo is “maximum efficiency, minimum effort,” but it also constitutes a set of techniques used to take advantage of that concept. These would be identifiable to another Tai Chi player, yes?
Yes and no. Another Tai Chi player may not visually identify with what I described, as in an MMA match, unless they trained with the person they were watching. But they would definitely feel it, as in an MMA match or sparring for same. 
Hey Merry-P
I know this is off topic but since i know you are into mma…
The hot news is that just a few hours ago, Vitor Belfort got into a reality show. It is kinda like Big Brother but its done with celebrities from tv, music, entretainement, etc.
So the thing is, will Vitor fight Liddel??
He is inside the house and cant get out.
Re: Kung Fu fight strategy in the ring?
Originally posted by Merryprankster
[B]
It seems to me that the fight strategies themselves are not incompatible with ring fighting–while specific techniques might be illegal, the overall strategy would still seem valid. I’m sure that a good CMA guy could modify that eyestrike/throat strike into a shot to the face, a kick directly to the knee to the thigh, a knee to the groin to the stomach, etc.
[/B]
Although I agree with your supposition, I have to stress that to say all kung fu is about eye and throat strikes is misleading. The root of CMA is about accuracy and control. There is no real reason why a CMA person cannot take his/her skills to the sport world. CMA punches and kicks are pretty much like every other human’s in the world, with little variations here and there of course. The “too deadly for prime time” is a myth. If you are good, you can fight. Period. There are techniques in CMA that are designed to do permament damage, but it’s not the totality of the system and it is not the backbone of it either. If anything, CMA styles should be known for their extreme variety of technique and adaptability. The kung fu I grew up with was about being able to take a situation as it comes and flow with it. Kung fu is not all about “dirty” tricks, it’s about power, speed, accuracy, focus and strategy. There are no “willow” people in my school. Just a bunch of hard hitting ghosts.
You don’t HAVE to eye gouge a person, You don’t HAVE to break a knee in order to be effective. Although it does make for interesting T.V., j/k.
MP - Strategy…
MP, just some ideas to consider. I have a feeling that you are doing the same sort of investigating that I’m doing these days…
I’ve noticed that there are two levels of CMA strategy with good fighters. SifuAbel said it:
Originally posted by SifuAbel
The root of CMA is about accuracy and control.
I guess I would reverse the order, but let me sorta lay it out…
In the beginning, you are trained to control the opponent. For example, let’s just say that you have thrown a punch high and your opponent blocks high with both arms, leaving his middle open. Do you punch? No, not if that punch would be another movement. You would instead make sure you could control one of the blocking arms and attack in the next moment. In CMA, you are trained that every punch leaves you open, so you don’t strike until you control your opponent. (It’s the same thing that boxers know, which is why you snap back your punches to cover up.) So basically, the CMA guy will bridge, never lose the contact, and control the opponent until he can off-balance and just kill the guy with a few fast, solid punches.
At the higher level, as you probably know, these “controls” are less obvious. Each attack is a block at the same time. This will essentially look like western boxing. But if the person hasn’t gone through the training of control, then they will really just be trading punches, which is very risky in a street fight.
So I would say the main strategy of a CMA artist is to get the other guy to extend himself with a fake jab or something, to control that arm (which usually means moving in on him as he retracts the jab), and then from that close position (not quite clinching range, more like uppercut range) off balance and then strike the guy.
Hope that helps!
-crumble
Yup sifuabel,
I understand that Kung Fu isn’t a collection of dirty tricks–my only point is that IF a particular series you may have been taught, or a common follow-up in your school involves a groin strike as a target of opportunity, or something like that, then the adjustment to a legal technique shouldn’t be too hard.
Shooter–I understand what you are saying–it’s different in combat sports I guess–you learn techniques, and the concepts you gain via combat–you learn many ways of doing the same basic thing (like an armbar from several different spots) and then as you start to apply them more and more you stop thinking, I have to do this this and this to get the armbar from here and start thinking–
I need to control his shoulder, shut down space, and keep his head pushed away while driving my hips into his elbow. THAT’S conceptual–now you can hit the armbar from any of the positions you could apply it from, because you can SEE where you’re headed by applying the concepts.
And the reason I kind of asked this question in the first place is because a lot of CMA guys insist that a kung fu guy sparring shouldn’t look like a kickboxer, so that leads one to wonder what it SHOULD look like.
Braden-
I agree totally about kung fu being fine for full contact fighting. San Shou and Kuoshou are great examples.
Why they don’t bring groundfighting and kung fu together, I don’t know. However, the question remains, where are they in venues like pride and ufc? I understand maybe they don’t want to do it.. that’s fine. But somebody out there no doubt DOES!
Most of us who follow this stuff are DYING to see Cung Le or somebody of similar caliber in action in Pride, UFC, etc.
We also know that he’d need to work the ground a bit before doing it, but I’m in the camp that thinks San Shou fighters
at that level would tear some people apart.
MP - My feeling is that a MMA community evolved which chose early on which arts it supported based upon it’s limited exposure to good quality martial artists. Since then, there has been a growing ‘bad blood’ between that community and other martial arts communities. Of course, the ‘bad blood’ comes from both directions - stupidity and dogmatism are equal opportunity predators. Regardless, because of this, alot of groups have been slow to pick up on some of the positive aspects of the MMA sub-culture. I think this is slowly changing, and you’re starting to see a wider scope of opinions on the subject in communities like the CMA one. If you asked the board here what they thought about groundfighting, you’d get a wide range of responses like Shooter who trains out CMA concepts on the ground, other people who think the concepts will emerge spontaneously without training, others who are allready supplementing in BJJ, and some people that think there’s no need at all for ground training, and at least one person (me) who thinks the need for groundfighting issue is wildly exaggerated but still viable and will supplment when and if they have access to a decent quality intructor! . I’d rather see a healthy cross-section of opinions like this than see everyone agreeing. Although I think we still have a long way to go before we reach the equilibrium.
Anyway, as for UFC proper, the ground fighting thing directly addresses that. We both know how well someone who’s never touched the ground will do in UFC. ;p
I’m one of the people who would say kungfu sparring should look much different than kickboxing; although again you have to keep in mind the vast stylistic differences within kungfu here. Some are very distinct, others are more widely interpreted, others are very much like kickboxing.
I’m sure I’ve posted these before… unfortunately there’s a terribly tiny assortment of decent CMA vids on the internet, but this isn’t that bad. It at least gives you an idea of how some a certain CMA style (xingyi aka hsing-i) creates combinations.
http://www.hsing-i.com/pics/WTaiApp1.mpg
Shows some same arm check-strike combos and striking while continually moving at an angle.
http://www.hsing-i.com/pics/WTaiApp2.mpg
Shows combinations and continual forward pressure.
(both from www.hsing-i.com)
Ignore the sweeps, big sticking movements, and victim’s reactions if you want; just picture them as striking combinations.
Xingyi is a cool art. It’s based around one posture (which would look much like a more extended kickboxer’s posture to you) and five one-step strikes much like boxing. These clips are sequences from a slightly more complex form which is supposed to teach how to use the same power generation as the five basic strikes to power different techniques, and to generate combinations and give the practitioner technique ideas. Although I’m sure someone who actually knows what they’re talking about will correct me.
Anyway, it might show some tactics which are different from what you’d expect from a kickboxer. And no anti-CMA guy can call bull**** on these clips (as they are apt to), because this guy’s students have stepped up and proven their stuff in the ring.
Here http://www2.sinowushu.com/taiji_04.ram is a clip of one kind of push hands which you could think of as an energy drill from taiji (aka tai chi; although it’s more than just an energy drill). While not sparring, it might give you an idea of the attributes being trained, and their application.
(from http://www.sinowushu.com/xinshang/xinshang.php?page=0&whichone=video&lanmu=ÎäÊõ&leibie=ÆäËû where there is also a couple dozen clips of sanshou matches )
Here is another xingyi clip, showing some rooted stepping, then a two man light contact striking exercise. http://www.brainsalad.com/mov/clip06.mov
http://www.brainsalad.com/mov/clip02.mov is some external style throws and takedowns - but it’s all stuff I think will look familiar!
(from http://www.emptyflower.com/xingyiquan/index.html a great site on xingyi!)
Braden–
The need for groundFIGHTING is highly exaggerated. The need for groundDEFENSE is not. I don’t advocate becoming a competent groundfighter if you don’t want to. I advocate positional escapes, sweeps, and submission defense. That’s the bare minimum, but if you know it, you’ll do fine. We call those types of fighters “sprawl and brawl.” They defend takedowns, know how to escapeand get up, know how to avoid submissions. So they can get back up and continue administering
damage.
I think the reason sportive styles do/did so well is because they came in, in shape, with a gameplan
and a set of techniques they had commonly practiced full speed all the time. They also were more “used” to that type of competitive atmosphere (not to be underestimated). Unfortunately, I also agree that that has closed many people’s minds to what works and what doesn’t.
I shouldn’t expect ANY guy who doesn’t train for ring stamina to stand up to somebody who does in a fight. And that’s what happenned in a LOT of those early events.
I still think you’re exaggerated the need for positional escapes and GROUND specific submission defense for self-defense. I percieve A need, it’s just pretty low on the priority list. As for takedown defense, that’s for sure. Remember I see a ground-standing dichotomy, and no other. Takedown defense = standing. But that’s all ok, we probably disagree on lots of stuff.
Well Braden, then that’s just a difference of opinion we’ll have to live with
I’m not bothered if you aren’t!!!
If I lived in a city with a larger concentration of BJJ practitioners, I’d probably hold a different opinion. As it is, I think the best we have is maybe 8 blue belts… I’ll just be sure to buy them all beer or something; probably alot less time-intensive and cheaper than honing up my sweeps.
Anyway, I dunno if you’re at all interested in any of those clips, but I’m sure someone is. Some of them are pretty interesting if you’re interested in CMA, but I can see why they might be boring for someone else. It’s not quite the same WATCHING someone do martial training. But on the other hand, it’s such a shame when someone asks for information on a discussion board and no one has anything to offer!
Watch out for angry half-drunk frat boy wrestlers too…