He wasn’t hitting them with forceful blows either. Its funny how fast students will leave you when you beat the cr@p out of them on a daily basis. Demonstrations can’t done that way. This is the biggest empty complaint about demos. They are DEMOS!!! The only way to really show how the techniques work is to take the gloves off and call the ambulance just before the fight starts.
These would never work in a real attack situation.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;758055]Anyway, sticking to the subject of Mook Jong not having anything to do with fighting… [/QUOTE]
I’m no extreme enlightened one on the mook jong subject, but from my perspetive it provides two things:
Training in maintaining a precise range to an opponent while moving, blocking, striking. You can get out of range or jammed up easily.
Resistance training to striking / blocking
You can say that bag work (heavy bag, speed bag) doesn’t have anything to do with boxing either, but in my experience they train it about 30% of the time.
[QUOTE=TheSwedishChef;758065]He wasn’t hitting them with forceful blows either. Its funny how fast students will leave you when you beat the cr@p out of them on a daily basis. Demonstrations can’t done that way. This is the biggest empty complaint about demos. They are DEMOS!!! The only way to really show how the techniques work is to take the gloves off and call the ambulance just before the fight starts.[/QUOTE]
The only thing that demonstrates is that, since forceful blows are not used in training, the students (and the teacher) will never achieve much in terms of realistic skills.
These would never work in a real attack situation.
[QUOTE=Wayfaring;758067]I’m no extreme enlightened one on the mook jong subject, but from my perspetive it provides two things:
Training in maintaining a precise range to an opponent while moving, blocking, striking. You can get out of range or jammed up easily.
Resistance training to striking / blocking
You can say that bag work (heavy bag, speed bag) doesn’t have anything to do with boxing either, but in my experience they train it about 30% of the time.
So maybe mook jong is similar to bag work?[/QUOTE]
The movements used in striking the heavy bag are pretty much exactly the same as those done when fighting… not so on the Mook Jong.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;758073]The only thing that demonstrates is that, since forceful blows are not used in training, the students (and the teacher) will never achieve much in terms of realistic skills.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know about that. I think of my old Shaolin sifu. He never hurt me or anybody else in class but when he hit the heavy bag with his fist it looked like someone kicked it. I’m reasonably sure he and alot of other practitioners could turn up the heat on the punches when its “go time”.
And nobody actually trains realistically. (That goes for all you tough guy MMArtists out there as well. Since the octogon isn’t the street.) To do that you have to pick real fights. Do you know of a class that does that?
[QUOTE=TheSwedishChef;758077]I don’t know about that. I think of my old Shaolin sifu. He never hurt me or anybody else in class but when he hit the heavy bag with his fist it looked like someone kicked it. [/QUOTE]
That’s the problem… since he never went hard against anything except the heavy bag, there was no way to know whether or not he could actually fight against a resisting opponent. Lots of people look very hard core when they practice on the bag, Mook Jong, focus gloves, kicking pads, doing forms, etc… however, it often all falls apart the first time they face someone who actually hits back with intent.
And nobody actually trains realistically. (That goes for all you tough guy MMArtists out there as well. Since the octogon isn’t the street.)
This is true. However, training full contact is much closer to reality than those whose training consists of only going halfway because their techniques are “too deadly” to be practiced all out.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;758059]If you watch those techniques, 90% are innapplicable to what actually happens when fighting against a resisting opponent, so the point is still moot.[/QUOTE]
Analyze and count the techniques in the clips I was originally talking about. Then count the different techniques done in the clip you posted above. I think you will see there are only about the same 10 being done… and even most of those 10% would have probably been out the window if he wasn’t just playing tag with someone who fell over every time he kicked.
[QUOTE=TheSwedishChef;758077]I don’t know about that. I think of my old Shaolin sifu. He never hurt me or anybody else in class but when he hit the heavy bag with his fist it looked like someone kicked it. I’m reasonably sure he and alot of other practitioners could turn up the heat on the punches when its “go time”.
And nobody actually trains realistically. (That goes for all you tough guy MMArtists out there as well. Since the octogon isn’t the street.) To do that you have to pick real fights. Do you know of a class that does that?[/QUOTE]
Don’t let him pull you into any conversation.
He enjoys the trolling…please don’t give him any attention.
I do admit though that in many demos you se some… not so often used technics.
To me a demo can achive 2 things, either to dazzle the uninitiated or to demonstrate the level of control/skill the demonstrater got. Most time you need to have trained in a system for some time to appreciate nr 2. I usually dont put to much into demos either way, though on occasion you se the odd technic where you go hmm…
Hello to all,
I believed that the forum foreign was more serious than those Italians but I mistook myself. Also there are only opinionisti here that they judge without to know but being based single on of my video. Creed that vent’ years of practical is not little and that fourteen years of instruction are not from not holding of account, é true does not demonstrate null but personally they represent a good “ticket from visita”.Ah care the storiella of my degrees I say to you that they exist, as they exist the diplomas that demonstrate cio and are guarded in my academy to Napoli(Italia). Thanks for your availability and… buon training to all.
Most BJJ demos I’ve seen (Rickson and Royler at Pride for example) have a good proportion of prearranged techniques. And they don’t go full bor or full contact either.
You have to have some of this. Watching two guys fight a BJJ ompetition match looks like nothing if you don’t know what to look for.
There is a very simple “test” to tell whether or not what you are doing is realistic: does it look like MMA? Because whatever you do, whatever your martial art, if you put it into a fighting environment, it will look like MMA (stand up, clinch, ground). The less it looks like MMA, the further you are getting from reality.
[QUOTE=anerlich;758327]Most BJJ demos I’ve seen (Rickson and Royler at Pride for example) have a good proportion of prearranged techniques. And they don’t go full bor or full contact either.
You have to have some of this. Watching two guys fight a BJJ ompetition match looks like nothing if you don’t know what to look for.[/QUOTE]
The difference between BJJ and the TMA demos is that the BJJ guys balance out their demos with live stuff (there is actually more live stuff than there are demos). You will also see the techniques used in the demos pulled off when going live.
Most TMA people who show off their demos never show any live sparring/fighting (most because they don’t do that) and the majority of their techs are unrealistic when the opponent is resisting.
Demos are like fights in the movies – done for entertainment value. Unfortunately, if that’s all people see, they may begin to believe that’s how fighting really is or that the demonstrator really has those “fighting skills” (Van Damme, Seagal, etc. or the TMA “masters”). Whether choreographed or not, demos don’t take place in fighting environments, where you have someone who trying their best to mess you up, to make you miss, to make you look bad, to put the hurt on you, etc. The main difference I see when functional martial artists demo and when the others demo is that the first group tend to draw more on things that actually happen in their performance whereas the second group, which doesn’t have real application as a resource to draw upon for inspiration, rely on their theory of how things will be to perform.
Jesper, my point was that fights, regardless of the styles involved, are a messy, chaotic, violent, etc. and don’t look anything like good demos (which are meant to be clear displays of certain things). And many people look at demos and believe that they are good examples of how that art should “look” in application.
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;758381]Demos are like fights in the movies – done for entertainment value. Unfortunately, if that’s all people see, they may begin to believe that’s how fighting really is or that the demonstrator really has those “fighting skills” (Van Damme, Seagal, etc. or the TMA “masters”). Whether choreographed or not, demos don’t take place in fighting environments, where you have someone who trying their best to mess you up, to make you miss, to make you look bad, to put the hurt on you, etc. The main difference I see when functional martial artists demo and when the others demo is that the first group tend to draw more on things that actually happen in their performance whereas the second group, which doesn’t have real application as a resource to draw upon for inspiration, rely on their theory of how things will be to perform.
Jesper, my point was that fights, regardless of the styles involved, are a messy, chaotic, violent, etc. and don’t look anything like good demos (which are meant to be clear displays of certain things). And many people look at demos and believe that they are good examples of how that art should “look” in application.[/QUOTE]
Demo’s are a tricky thing. If you make it too realistic you will scare most that are there and get no interest in your school. If there is no interest made from the demo, then why do it in the first place. Therefore the ideas presented in the demo should be that of the THEORY behind the art, not the actual useage. Most wouldn’t be able to recognize what is going on anyways so demonstrating for REAL would be a waste of time. When I demo, I’m not trying to demonstrate the exact useage of the art, I’m promoting my school and interest in the art. To do that you have to do more than just FIGHT, lol.
[QUOTE=sihing;758386]Demo’s are a tricky thing. If you make it too realistic you will scare most that are there and get no interest in your school. If there is no interest made from the demo, then why do it in the first place. Therefore the ideas presented in the demo should be that of the THEORY behind the art, not the actual useage. Most wouldn’t be able to recognize what is going on anyways so demonstrating for REAL would be a waste of time. When I demo, I’m not trying to demonstrate the exact useage of the art, I’m promoting my school and interest in the art. To do that you have to do more than just FIGHT, lol.
James
P.S. This is starting to get ridiculous[/QUOTE]
There is nothing wrong with demos per se – and we all seem to agree that they do not reflect reality. But that’s my point: many people, particularly those without much or any experience, take what is demoed as reflecting reality. It is what is presented in that demo that appeals to these people (“I want to be able to do that”). But what is going on is that they are being misled, because that is not what they will be able to do.
And I think it is even more dishonest to demo THEORY, because for the most part, these are the sorts of things that are the most false but sell to the gullible (“you can defeat the alrger stronger person with little or no force”).
In other words, demos are mainly false advertising practices. So they should be looked upon like the movies – as entertainment only. At least with the functional guys, more “realism” is involved in their demos. And, you can see how they really do it outside of the demos before you buy what they are selling.
