Evolution of the fighter and fighting styles

Your opinions?

I was recently engaged in a conversation about the traditionalist (martial artist) mindset and why it is that so many fighting styles/systems have not welcomed evolution or change.

Example: My past training in Wing Tsun, although I am grateful for, was I feel in many ways watered down and oppressive. (This is Wing Tsun and we don't need anything else to defeat our opponents) was the mindset across the board. In speaking to training partners/teachers who have been working in this particular system for 5-10 plus years none of them could remember ever training from the clinch, on the ground or outside of the traditional mindset and in my opinion this is a dangerous case of arrogance.

I would like to know how many of you would agree or disagree with these ideas and why?

Is the fighter and the art of fighting evolving?

Do you feel that failure to be a successful fighting art is imminent for the "fighting" system or style that does not welcome change or evolution?

Looking at your own styles or sytems, do you feel that you have enough information at your disposal to keep up with other fighting arts or have you found yourself having to crosstrain to fill in the voids?


Joe
Yong Tjun Concepts

Exposure to other ways, ideas the means of development and so on. Evolution of fighting systems is a lot like the evolution of everything else people are exposed to more and at a faster rate. The real driver is communications. The web, TV, and more instant real time news. This is going to have a change in people at a rapid rate. This last 5 years that rate has increased over what it was 20 years ago.

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

Is there a difference between a fighter and a martial artist? Are they the same thing? Can one be a Martial Artist and avoid being a fighter? Or are the two things the same? Does "self defense" have any value? Becoming a great fighter will undoubtedly allow one to defend oneself better, but is that the only route and is it open to all?


What do you want to achieve from your training?

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

“	Originally Posted By: Sthrn Lipan Is the fighter and the art of fighting evolving?	”

A good fighter always evolves and adds to their skill set, the art of fighting not so much, it's still pretty much the same as it's always been just changes face every now and then.

“	Do you feel that failure to be a successful fighting art is imminent for the "fighting" system or style that does not welcome change or evolution?	”

Yes, if it doesn't improve it's game to adapt to new environments, it is doomed to stagnation and failure.

“	Looking at your own styles or sytems, do you feel that you have enough information at your disposal to keep up with other fighting arts or have you found yourself having to crosstrain to fill in the voids?	”

My main system has a good versatile skill base in striking, standing grappling and takedowns, but I went to BJJ/MMA to develop my ground game and some different skill sets to include in it to make me a more balanced fighter.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat Is there a difference between a fighter and a martial artist?	”

Yes

“	Are they the same thing?	”

No

“	Can one be a Martial Artist and avoid being a fighter?	”

Yes

“	Or are the two things the same?	”

Not exactly, a fighter is more interested in practical realistic skill, in testing/proving their methods through live training, sparring and competition.

A Martial Artist does some of that but also studies the philosophical/religious ideals as well as the artistic side of their system, they do not always train live or fight to test their skills.

“	Does "self defense" have any value? Becoming a great fighter will undoubtedly allow one to defend oneself better, but is that the only route and is it open to all?	”

Of course "self defense" has value, without it you're a sitting duck.

It isn't the only route but it is the best route with a proven track record of success

“	What do you want to achieve from your training?	”

To develop the artistic side of my art, gain knowledge in all parts and to become the best fighter I can be through live training, sparring, competition and realistic training methods.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

IMO a great many students, including myself, do not train traditional martial arts properly. Meaning, they do not dedicate enough time to it, and do not actively explore the material they're given.

Don't take this the wrong way, I know a lot of DL'ers train several hours per week in class and on their own. But most students go to class 2-3 times a week, sometimes as little as an hour per class. They rarely practice outside of class. So when an average student feels there are voids in his training he should consider how much and how wisely he is training with the material he's been given. 3 hours a week is not enough time to develop the movements properly, much less really explore them.

While it's a fallacy to go around saying "my martial art is superior and needs no changes," it's also a fallacy to believe that just because your art has little/no ground training that it is useless.

What aqira said about evolution and massive exposure to so much "stuff" thanks to the information revolution is important. When I was in college, finding out about other martial arts besides judo or TKD -- much less finding a school -- was a real challenge as it was mostly word of mouth. The 1 or 2 ppl in my judo club who had copies of Kung Fu Magazine or JAMA, were very popular; I was always digging into Stormy's stash to find out about unheard-of arts like XingYi and Bagua. Now I can just google whatever I want to know. On one hand, it's great to have instant access to info. OTOH, it's a curse because there's a tendency to be led around by the nose from art to art.

In short, my opinion is that traditional systems do not welcome change because their advanced practitioners know the system has much more to offer than most junior students understand, and because changing simply because popular opinion says they should will destroy the bridges between novice and advanced understanding of the art.

There's an old saying, "Three years horse stance." It literally means beginning students spend three years practicing nothing but horse stance, but this is not necessarily true. The contextual meaning is that one demonstrates dedication and hard work even when the training seems to be going nowhere. "Three years horse stance" is really the answer to how to cross the first bridge toward real understanding of TMA. It's also the answer to improving one's skill at anything, TMA, MMA, knitting, whatever.

Sorry if I'm rambling a bit. My beer levels are low.

__________________
"Pain can be a great teacher of compassion and humility."~ Unkotare-san

"Whatever the case, it proves that countless disasters can be prevented by simply assuming everyone you're working with is a moron." ~ Adam Brown, 5 Tiny Mistakes...

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Exposure to other ways, ideas the means of development and so on. Evolution of fighting systems is a lot like the evolution of everything else people are exposed to more and at a faster rate. The real driver is communications. The web, TV, and more instant real time news. This is going to have a change in people at a rapid rate. This last 5 years that rate has increased over what it was 20 years ago.	”

Would you agree that the majority of "fighting" systems, even with the advancements in communications, have stood idle in their traditions? There is no doubt that the age of information is running strong but just how many masters/teachers or what ever are really leaning towards this and running with it? How many systems, with all the available information do you see changing, evolving, assimilating and incorporating new ideas into their teachings? If you claim to be in the arts for the sake of art then OK... forms, techniques, weapons training and all else should obviously work within the teachings of your style. Now if you are claiming to be in the arts for the sake of defense and combat training then should you not as a master/teacher be open to any and all opportunities for progression?

Great point Aqira

i think personal styles evolve quickly

but it when you try to pass that on the trouble starts

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

Aleister Crowley

I think WC is suffering a little from rapid evolution about a generation ago that turned out to be a bad idea. All that "grabbing stuff" is hard work to learn and even harder to learn to apply usefully, all those kicks too. So a whole bunch of people in the HK lineage decided to just label the lot "flowery impractical movements" and drop them out of the style. Then they started sparring kick boxers and later grapplers and started rushing to put kicks and "grabbing stuff" back in... What seemed like progress turned out to be a reduction in diversity.

Evolution is tricky. It does not have a purpose. It is not guided. It doesn't "think" - it is a random process by which useful random changes last. Is that really what you want for your training or art?

I've never really encountered the "we don't need anything else" mindset. I've often met the "we've got enough to learn right now" mindset, though, and it always seemed fair enough to me.

__________________
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

Traditional styles have become stagnant. Thay can perform well in limited environments.

If everyone trained in only the most effective principles then everyone would be training the same style and there would be no more styles, traditional or not. It's selectivity, omission and focus that make styles what they are.

Martial artist and fighter are two entirely different things. Martial artists can train in exclusive one dimensional styles and be what they are. Fighters cannot. Fighters have to cross train in effective principles and forego the notion of styles. Myself and others have put too much effort into earning the title of fighter and have worked hard. Simple martial artists do not have the right to call themselves that as it is misleading and very disrespectful to the ones that are.

Peace-
Cam

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

“	If you claim to be in the arts for the sake of art then OK... forms, techniques, weapons training and all else should obviously work within the teachings of your style. Now if you are claiming to be in the arts for the sake of defense and combat training then should you not as a master/teacher be open to any and all opportunities for progression?	”

You're either consciously or unconsciously separating the two.

Forms, techniques, weapons training are some of THE training methods for defense and combat training. If you separate the two you are not doing martial arts.

Western boxing has many techniques and even has a few forms. Does anyone argue that a boxer is not a fighter?

The arts evolve whether one wants them to or not. How Americans are taught CMA is very different from how Chinese were once taught. This is due to several physical and cultural factors, e.g. body type & size, the way we move (doing a heels-flat squat is difficult for many because we didn't grow up doing it), the way we think & process information (Aristotelian vs. Confucian education), our values (hitting students with a stick is unacceptable).

So, why would a teacher not be open to any & all opportunities for progression? One aspect of a good teacher is the ability to evaluate those so-called "opportunities" against what he knows the art contains. If it's a better way to train that doesn't conflict with the core theories of the art, fine.

__________________
"Pain can be a great teacher of compassion and humility."~ Unkotare-san

"Whatever the case, it proves that countless disasters can be prevented by simply assuming everyone you're working with is a moron." ~ Adam Brown, 5 Tiny Mistakes...

“	Originally Posted By: Lugaldamhara Martial artist and fighter are two entirely different things. Martial artists can train in exclusive one dimensional styles and be what they are. Fighters cannot. Fighters have to cross train in effective principles and forego the notion of styles. Myself and others have put too much effort into earning the title of fighter and have worked hard. Simple martial artists do not have the right to call themselves that as it is misleading and very disrespectful to the ones that are.	”

Go stuff it, Cam! That's incredibly disrespectful of YOU. Has anyone here NOT acknowedged you as a fighter? Why do you assume ppl who don't do YOUR art are somehow NOT fighters? Go say that to aqira! Just because I don't fight doesn't mean all TMA'ists are not fighters.

That was arrogant and ignorant and 100% typical of the MMA mindset that you yourself have tried to dispel.

__________________
"Pain can be a great teacher of compassion and humility."~ Unkotare-san

"Whatever the case, it proves that countless disasters can be prevented by simply assuming everyone you're working with is a moron." ~ Adam Brown, 5 Tiny Mistakes...

I'm sorry.... I think you misinterpreted my post.
I think you are under the impression that somewhere in there I made an exclusivity statement suggesting there could be no overlap.

I also think your mind may be playing tricks on you and forcing you to see things that aren't there. I never said anything about "my style" or any style in particular.

Either that, or the post itself exposes martial artists that like to fancy themselves fighters as those would be the only ones that would take offense to it. But I tend to see that a lot here..... I guarantee Aqira would not take offense to it because he would understand it.

Bottom line... to be a fighter, you have to fight. There are too many people that do not understand that, it would seem you are one of them.


Peace-
Cam

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

Your post is full of assumption and I very much doubt I misinterpreted your meaning. You don't have to single out any one style to generalize about them.

You assume that traditional styles are one-dimensional. You assume that I don't understand the difference between fighting and not fighting.

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.

Jesus Christ, it's not even worth discussing anymore. The same stupid argument ad infinitum. The "effectiveness" crowd is just as close-minded as the staunch traditionalists.

__________________
"Pain can be a great teacher of compassion and humility."~ Unkotare-san

"Whatever the case, it proves that countless disasters can be prevented by simply assuming everyone you're working with is a moron." ~ Adam Brown, 5 Tiny Mistakes...

Sammygirl: "You're either consciously or unconsciously separating the two."
"Forms, techniques, weapons training are some of THE training methods for defense and combat training. If you separate the two you are not doing martial arts."

Here is where you would have to separate those with the intent to teach an art and those who claim to teach applicable, combative skills (there is a difference). I train vigorously in several weapon types but know that in this day in age that that training (for me) is a supplement to combative skill building. Escrima, knife training, short stick... I don't need these weapons to protect the farm so to speak, those days are over. Weapons training, techniques and forms are all apart of a bigger picture. I would never dismiss/separate these tools from martial arts or combative training, they are the root.


"Western boxing has many techniques and even has a few forms. Does anyone argue that a boxer is not a fighter?"

No doubt. The boxer should be one of the most feared fighters in existance. They train hard and real. They learn by hitting and being hit which is why they are in constant evolution.