Evolution of the fighter and fighting styles

at the moment my training is at a point of evolution that is for me quite major

the only MA i have trained properly in is wing chun

but after 4years i am finally seeing that this excusivity is leaving big knowledge gaps

in areas that i am interested in, not just in a self defense situation

but as an actual interest

so i am starting arnis

i wouldnt call myself a fighter

i know/have known quite a few

and know i am not one of them (in this sense of the word)

but should i get into a fight then my MA training is there

__________________
"...any theory that satisfies the facts demands assumptions which are completely absurd."

Aleister Crowley

Sammy & Cam: Let's not get into the personal flame-war here.

__________________
Wolfgang says:

I could think of a million better things to do in Japan for a month besides jumping off of picnic tables. - x893

Let’s sort this out in a different way

Traditional MA – a system that has gone through a lot of refinement in its development so that means the system may have already come across flaws and how they are going to be addressed. Now they may not have gotten all the answers right or made the best choices but chances are they addressed all issue.
Why? How much new do you think we have found say in the last 20 years?

Modern arts mostly the competing art. To compete is a whole other animal. One thing it has done that no one ever address is learning to loose. Cam as a sport fighter had to learn to loose just as much as anything he has learned to win.

Combat fighter- I have not come across any real ones on the DL yet so it may be a mute point at least for now

Street fighter- learns little why? That’s the nature he fights in fast few moves damage objectives. Most competitors and traditional artist just don’t train or think like that. Though they may know how to they don’t make that the objective so it is at best secondary.

Weapons- a weapon is trained as an extension of the nature of the art you train and that is selected from those stated before. So the Traditionalists train weapons in that manner perhaps more forms than anything else. A competitor trains to compete his moves against another’s same move- the combat fighter uses the type of weapon based on the intent. I.e. up close or long range and the street fighter uses a skill to make what can be found a weapon.

If we try to look at these things this way maybe we get a little closer to the truth and more away from preferences or taking sides.

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

Going back to TMA and modern for a min, there is a lot of confusion of fact. TMA use to have tournaments. There were no rules and they fought weapons and empty hands.
There was no one to step in so often to the death now not just in China but in all areas such as the Philippines that is very true.
Tournaments in the USA and Europe…lawyers live in those lands and have been the main reason why rules and safety gear have changed tournaments into nothing more than dancing shows. Even MMA has gone in that direction from its origins in NHB fights….its not the art it’s the lawyers!

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

“	Originally Posted By: Sammygirl How does "Traditional styles are stagnant" NOT constitute an exclusivity statement? You make generalized statements about styles you know NOTHING about and assume no one will take offense? I just spent a few posts patiently explaining why TMA instructors are not all jumping onto the the latest bandwagon to pull through town and I get the typical response that TMA's are one dimensional and its practitioners know nothing about real fighting.	”

In all honesty, Cam is 100% correct.

Funny enough, we were having this exact same discussion on another forum with the Bujinkan folk, their belief, according to Hatsumi, is that sparring/live training is detrimental and harmful, that it doesn't prepare you for real fighting, but doing dead drills where someone punches and leaves their arm out and waits for you to attack is the real deal, will prepare for real life confrontations and self defense, if that isn't stagnant BS I don't know what is. Fact is there are alot of schools that are the same, they do not train live and if they do it is infrequent.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Let’s sort this out in a different way Traditional MA – a system that has gone through a lot of refinement in its development so that means the system may have already come across flaws and how they are going to be addressed. Now they may not have gotten all the answers right or made the best choices but chances are they addressed all issue. Why? How much new do you think we have found say in the last 20 years? .	”

Folks pull this card out a lot, but I'm not so sure. I mean, the bow and arrow and sword and spear settled stuff for thousands of years and "figured out" what was needed for a given historical context, but when firearms came along there was a gradual, inevitable move away from those things because though they can still kill a body today as before, the context in which they may be used has changed too much to make them very practical as a weapon that someone is likely to actually depend on in reality. Studying them still carries a variety of excellent and admirable benefits, but niether a soldier nor the average man on the street realistically thinks that he is going to rely on them (very largely speaking) to defend himself or others in any but the most unlikely of circumstances. Could this same trend not apply to other means of combat/defense? 'Been around for a long time' isn't a trump card.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Modern arts mostly the competing art. To compete is a whole other animal. One thing it has done that no one ever address is learning to loose. Cam as a sport fighter had to learn to loose just as much as anything he has learned to win.	”

I think we need to look at why that first sentence may or may not be true and why in relation to my first response above. As for the 'losing' part, could you clarify what you mean? Do you mean learning how to mentally deal with loss? or being willing to lose things you learned before in order to gain something new? or staying loose? I'm not sure what you mean there.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Combat fighter- I have not come across any real ones on the DL yet so it may be a moot point at least for now .	”

Do you mean people serving in the military?

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Weapons- a weapon is trained as an extension of the nature of the art you train and that is selected from those stated before. So the Traditionalists train weapons in that manner perhaps more forms than anything else. A competitor trains to compete his moves against another’s same move- the combat fighter uses the type of weapon based on the intent. I.e. up close or long range and the street fighter uses a skill to make what can be found a weapon.	”

This brings back to mind my earlier questions about weapons, which we never really got into as deeply as I had hoped. Interesting topic, though.

__________________
Wolfgang says:

I could think of a million better things to do in Japan for a month besides jumping off of picnic tables. - x893

first to deal with the bow and arrow... modern firearms were invented that were able to replace the bow and arrow....compare this to empty hands and tell me what new human parts were invented that made the old ones obsolete?
( besides that one speical one they made for you )

and the point was not been around a long time it was been through a process already

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira first to deal with the bow and arrow... modern firearms were invented that were able to replace the bow and arrow....compare this to empty hands and tell me what new human parts were invented that made the old ones obsolete? ( besides that one speical one they made for you ) and the point was not been around a long time it was been through a process already	”

Again, the sword and the bow went through a great many 'processes.' Firearms (mostly) replaced them for a reason. What was that reason?

Could it be they were proven to be more effective over time? That they could be trained to a sufficient degree of proficiency in a shorter time than classical weapons? That they became more practically applicable in a changing world?

__________________
Wolfgang says:

I could think of a million better things to do in Japan for a month besides jumping off of picnic tables. - x893

I don't think science and anatomy are the same thing. There is no new invention in the body or the way it works. There are only so many combinations possible a gun to a bow is not going to win the point of grappling. Grappling is not new and neither is the endless debate.

Who do you know and have been around enough time to really know what they are that is a traditional teacher? From the same old argument and twisted example I would venture to say no one.

One thing that is often skirted is time in the art now a grappler or mixed artists can learn something’s in a short time where as TCM arts do take way longer. But then FMA artists will state theirs is better than both.

At a young age a sport artist will have a learning curve advantage...but that will change to the exact opposite in a few years no 20 year old will know that until they are 40 then it will be to late to reverse their thinking. The ironic thing is as age adds on it will make them more likely a victum their ability to be able to defend therself becomes less, but by then the time to do it right has passed.

But then this has taken the same old pr turn again that is bringing the forum down so if it goes that way I will close this broken record thread

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira I don't think science and anatomy are the same thing.	”

Um, isn't anatomy a field of science?

“	Originally Posted By: aqira There is no new invention in the body or the way it works.	”

I don't think anyone said there was. There was specific mention of, "were proven to be more effective over time," "could be trained to a sufficient degree of proficiency in a shorter time," and "became more practically applicable in a changing world."

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Who do you know and have been around enough time to really know what they are that is a traditional teacher? I would venture to say no one.	”

I'm afraid you fail in that venture. I've trained with quite a few traditional teachers, and valued every minute of the experience.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira One thing that is often skirted is time in the art now a grappler or mixed artists can learn something’s in a short time where as TCM arts do take way longer.	”

I'm starting to wonder about the 'way longer' thing lately.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira At a young age a sport artist will have a learning curve advantage...but that will change to the exact opposite in a few years no 20 year old will know that until they are 40 then it will be to late to reverse their thinking. The ironic thing is as age adds on it will make them more likely a victum their ability to be able to defend therself becomes less, but by then the time to do it right has passed.	”

I'm gonna go ahead and request clarification on this last quote. Not exactly sure what you want to say there.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira But then this has taken the same old pr turn again that is bringing the forum down so if it goes that way I will close this broken record thread	”

What happened? I thought we were now pursuing a line of discussion that YOU began? What's gone wrong?

__________________
Wolfgang says:

I could think of a million better things to do in Japan for a month besides jumping off of picnic tables. - x893

If we are going to compare styles to evolution and use evolution as a model then it's very simple: the older the style the better it must be. An old style has coped with many evolutionary challenges and survived. A new style has faced relatively few evolutionary challenges and may turn out to be a mistake.

There is always the risk that an old style evolved to fit a now non existent niche but that has been possibly true of all empty hand training since man (or, it seems, more likely woman) first picked up a make shift weapon and despite that empty hand arts have survived so the risk seems small.

__________________
Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you
High mountains are a feeling
I don't need to sell my soul, he's already in me

I am going to reply and I will state now that I am keeping this general, addressing the specific comments, and not the individual making them.

“	You assume that traditional styles are one-dimensional.	”

I don't assume. I am sure of the fact. If you have any substantial evidence to the contrary then please feel free to present it.

“	How does "Traditional styles are stagnant" NOT constitute an exclusivity statement?	”

My "exclusivity statement" wasn't referring to the quote you mention.
Traditional styles are stagnant. I stand by that.
What you suggested was that I said that martial artists and fighters were a dissected group, separate from one another.... that martial artists could not be fighters and that there was no crossover. Basically, all fighters are martial artists but not all martial artists are fighters.

“	You make generalized statements about styles you know NOTHING about and assume no one will take offense?	”

What style did I make a statement about that you think I know nothing about? Aren't you making a grand assumption stating that "I know nothing about "style X"?
Either way, pick a style, any style, and offer some substantial evidence to the contrary of what I have said.
Ad-hominem attacks and assumptions on my knowledge and character mean nothing. If you have an issue with what I say then please offer some evidence or facts to the contrary and stick to the topic and issue at hand.

“	I get the typical response that TMA's are one dimensional and its practitioners know nothing about real fighting.	”

Non sequitur. I said absolutely NOTHING about TMA practitioners knowing anything (or nothing) about fighting. There are many TMAists and martial artists that are fighters, I am one of them. What I said was that someone could be a martial artist by simply studying a one dimensional traditional style or art but that does not make one a fighter. Once one takes that step towards becoming a fighter they will learn quickly that a one dimensional limited style is only holding them back. This goes to Aqira's statement about "learning to lose". That is a very wise statement and is a grand first step towards becoming a fighter.

“	Jesus Christ, it's not even worth discussing anymore. The same stupid argument ad infinitum.	”

I disagree. I think some people make it the same by association in their own mind because they fail to grasp the scope of what is actually being said.

Aqira- Good post #18.

“	Been around for a long time' isn't a trump card.	”

Agreed. I have no idea why it is relied upon so often.

“	compare this to empty hands and tell me what new human parts were invented that made the old ones obsolete?	”

Valid point... BUT.... times and circumstances change (you said it yourself above with the lawyers example) and with that comes new paradigms and new focuses on strategy. If BJJ was/is nothing new then why did the kosen masters hire Helio Gracie to come to Japan to teach? It is stated over and over here about the reasons people do not want to go to the ground... multiple attackers, weapons, on the battlefield there were thousands of opponents, etc., etc., etc... That was the prevalent paradigm over the course of centuries. Now, due to a change of times and paradigms, the focus of ground fighting has changed and has evolved tremendously. To deny that is to bury one's head in the sand.

“	That they could be trained to a sufficient degree of proficiency in a shorter time than classical weapons? That they became more practically applicable in a changing world?	”

Exactly!!!

“	Grappling is not new and neither is the endless debate.	”

Grappling itself is not new but a lot of the way it is done today is vastly different. I covered this above. When grappling was considered only a small part of the equation in many traditional arts, there was no need to develop it to a great extent. But let's assume the musket as an example. As time went on and people realized that the strategy of battlefield warfare was going to revolve around a firearm then the paradigm changed and new focus was put into developing that strategy... hence the automatic machine gun was invented. Look at traditional notions of grappling as a musket and BJJ/modern submission grappling as the AK-47.

“	At a young age a sport artist will have a learning curve advantage...but that will change to the exact opposite in a few years no 20 year old will know that until they are 40 then it will be to late to reverse their thinking. The ironic thing is as age adds on it will make them more likely a victum their ability to be able to defend therself becomes less, but by then the time to do it right has passed.	”

I fail to understand this logic. I see it offered up often as a saving grace of TMA vs. sport arts but I must be missing something. Can anyone offer any substantial evidence as to why a sport art practitioner will automatically stop learning and become a vegetable quadriplegic as soon as he hits 40? This really concerns me because I am very close to 40....

“	I'm starting to wonder about the 'way longer' thing lately.	”

Yeah, me too....

Peace-
Cam

__________________
Rock On!
Cam
"Raise up your mind....."

“	the older the style the better it must be.	”

In general, through hands on, practical experience I have actually found the opposite to be true. I have also witnessed it first hand in thousands of fights. What have you seen/done to offer any evidence to the contrary?

Peace-
Cam

__________________
Rock On!
Cam
"Raise up your mind....."

“	through hands on, practical experience I have actually found the opposite to be true. I have also witnessed it first hand in thousands of fights	”

Further evidence against the linking of "evolutionary" ideas to martial arts - not a comment with any bearing on my point.

__________________
Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you
High mountains are a feeling
I don't need to sell my soul, he's already in me

Tom Cruise.

__________________
It's all about the nitty gritty.......