Traditional Martial Arts in MMA (choke, fight, techniques, boxing)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From what I understand, there is a very large distaste for many traditional martial arts, such as the Chinese kung fu styles, in MMA.
Exactly why is this? I know they're deemed ineffective, but what is it that makes them ineffective? These arts had been used in actual life or death combat in war for decades. What makes them so difficult to use now?
There isn’t one reason in my opinion, so it would come down to the specific art in some cases with multiple reasons. For starters, most of these martial arts aren’t taught the way they were taught centuries ago. Take Tae Kwon Do for instance. The TKD that is taught in the US is pretty much sport TKD and not applicable in a street fight. I’ve had Koreans tell me this is due to their people not wanting to teach true TKD to the western world. I don’t know how true that is but it makes sense. I do know, that If you attempt to use most of what is taught in this type of martial art (at least in my experience), you’ll find that a large percentage of it is useless in street application. Furthermore, fighting has evolved to a degree. At one time, there were 2 types of people. Those who knew how to fight and those who didn’t. Now you have a greater range of people knowing different types of fighting styles. On any given day you could meet someone who knows how to box, grapple, etc. Some arts have developed and evolved to combat specific types. When BJJ first came into the public light, it dominated. No one really knew how to combat it outside certain circles. That has since changed of course. It is easier to study a fighting style now and find it’s weak spots. At the same time, and to revert back to my earlier statement. The true style of some of the ancient martial arts may not be taught anymore for various reasons.
There isn’t one reason in my opinion, so it would come down to the specific art in some cases with multiple reasons. For starters, most of these martial arts aren’t taught the way they were taught centuries ago. Take Tae Kwon Do for instance. The TKD that is taught in the US is pretty much sport TKD and not applicable in a street fight. I’ve had Koreans tell me this is due to their people not wanting to teach true TKD to the western world. I don’t know how true that is but it makes sense. I do know, that If you attempt to use most of what is taught in this type of martial art (at least in my experience), you’ll find that a large percentage of it is useless in street application. Furthermore, fighting has evolved to a degree. At one time, there were 2 types of people. Those who knew how to fight and those who didn’t. Now you have a greater range of people knowing different types of fighting styles. On any given day you could meet someone who knows how to box, grapple, etc. Some arts have developed and evolved to combat specific types. When BJJ first came into the public light, it dominated. No one really knew how to combat it outside certain circles. That has since changed of course. It is easier to study a fighting style now and find it’s weak spots. At the same time, and to revert back to my earlier statement. The true style of some of the ancient martial arts may not be taught anymore for various reasons.
I think a lot of this makes since.
In my limited studies of the history of kung fu, I've pretty much summed up that those styles take far too long to master in the modern world. Most of us have jobs and other responsibilities we have to tend to and can only dedicate a limited amount of time to these arts. The teachers of these arts are in the same boat.
Historically, people seeking to learn the art took an apprenticeship under their master. They would literally train under him all day, every day for about four or five years. Many times they would live in or around the master's home and clean and cook. So we're looking at a solid 50-60 hours of instruction under your master at least four years. Most kung fu practitioners now are getting 8 hours of instruction at the most a week...and that's if they're really intense.
Today, even if you have a lot of time on your hands, the teacher most likely has his own job and family and isn't going to be able to train with you all day and everyday. Things like Hung Gar, Mantis, Wing Chun, and Bagua rely heavy on countless hours of repetition and muscle memory to even begin to be effective. And more than anything else, fighting experience! That's true of any art, but especially these seeing as how esoteric then can be at times.
Boxing, Muay Thai, and BJJ are all more practical and have a quicker learning curve to be effective against an average, non-trained fighter.
At least that's my theory.
It's also interesting to note that once communism took hold in China, it is said that they purposely watered down a lot of Chinese martial arts to make them into more of a show, instead of to breed fighters. That's where we get competitive wushu.
In my limited studies of the history of kung fu, I've pretty much summed up that those styles take far too long to master in the modern world. Most of us have jobs and other responsibilities we have to tend to and can only dedicate a limited amount of time to these arts. The teachers of these arts are in the same boat.
Historically, people seeking to learn the art took an apprenticeship under their master. They would literally train under him all day, every day for about four or five years. Many times they would live in or around the master's home and clean and cook. So we're looking at a solid 50-60 hours of instruction under your master at least four years. Most kung fu practitioners now are getting 8 hours of instruction at the most a week...and that's if they're really intense.
Today, even if you have a lot of time on your hands, the teacher most likely has his own job and family and isn't going to be able to train with you all day and everyday. Things like Hung Gar, Mantis, Wing Chun, and Bagua rely heavy on countless hours of repetition and muscle memory to even begin to be effective. And more than anything else, fighting experience! That's true of any art, but especially these seeing as how esoteric then can be at times.
Boxing, Muay Thai, and BJJ are all more practical and have a quicker learning curve to be effective against an average, non-trained fighter.
At least that's my theory.
It's also interesting to note that once communism took hold in China, it is said that they purposely watered down a lot of Chinese martial arts to make them into more of a show, instead of to breed fighters. That's where we get competitive wushu.
Agree with you on those points. When I took BJJ and Muay Thai, I was amazed how quickly I was able to learn techniques that I could apply immediately. Especially compared to some of the other arts I studied or discussed with other practitioners. Well said.
traditional martial arts as they exist now are full of wasted movements and time consuming technique or kata. bruce lee is one true reason mma is what it is today, his tao of jdk was a real eye opener to a lot of martial arts practitioners. when you say that traditional martial arts where used for centuries in life or death, real fights, this were a LOT different, then. of course all we have to go off of is tradition passed down, and pictures/drawings/text. when dr kano created the kodokan he was a precursor to bruce lee himself. the original judo IS BJJ and bjj IS JUDO. anyone who tells you different is ignorant or uneducated in these maters. (or trying to sell you gracie something or other) judo took all the fighting styles known to dr kano and his students, and combined them, weeding out the ineffective ones. since that time (and since ww2 especially) judo has been watered down via points and competition. as stated above, a lot of these martial arts are just not taught in their intended form. the times have also changed, you do not have men on a battle field fighting with knives and swords. some techniques still work but so many of those old traditional techniques were never intended to fight the way we do now. back in those days, if you and i fought, we both knew a similar style of martial art (or none at all) so it was a mater of whos technique prevailed in a hand to hand situation. travel and opening trade around the world exposed people to different things, so you take a japanese samurai and take away his sword and send him to face a greek wrestler and he gets smashed because he is accustomed to fighting another samurai with similar technique. also a lot of the techniques used in traditional styles were not conducive to power, they requred a weapon (knife/sword) or you would likely be fighting someone with some sort of armor on so you didnt want to strike to hard because it would just damage yourself. accuracy was key, hit solid and in the right spot. these days, power AND accuracy are key. old martial arts movies have also given a lot of people a false idea of what traditional martial arts truly is.
judo IMO is the only remaining "traditional" martial art that is effective, in its true form. the usa has watered it down so much though, for lack of a better term to be politically correct. case in point, children under 13 yrs old are not allowed to train submissions PERIOD in the usa. at 13, they are allowed strangles with the clothing, at 15 they are allowed armlocks, that is all. no leg locks, no shoulders, nothing but straight arms and strangles. other parts of the world allow their kids to train submissions at any age much like bjj.
we mix bjj and judo, my 10 yr old has been training bjj for 4.5 years, and judo 1.5, and he can not wait until he turns 13 to choke a judoka. we also train muay thai and boxing with some sambo.
From what I understand, there is a very large distaste for many traditional martial arts, such as the Chinese kung fu styles, in MMA.
Exactly why is this? I know they're deemed ineffective, but what is it that makes them ineffective? These arts had been used in actual life or death combat in war for decades. What makes them so difficult to use now?
False, in terms of these arts being used in life or death HAND TO HAND combat for decades (during ancient times). They used WEAPONS. This was what made Kung-Fu or w/e Asian MA's useful & effective in wars, not hand to hand mumbo-jumbo. Did the Romans know Kung-Fu? Spartans, Barbarians, medieval knights, whatever? Even up to the time of singleshot muskets, there was still a lot of H2H combat to the death. Stabbing someone to death with bayonets and/or bludgeoning their skulls in with a rifle butt always works. Lose the rifle/bayonet, then go to the knife....then the fists. Punching someone in the face always works. Magical Kung-Fu movie techniques is WAY, WAY, WAY overrated.
In modern times, unless you're going to carry a broadsword or nunchucks on the streets....you just train that in Kung-Fu class for show. And if you want to fight animal style vs. a trained & experienced Boxer, chances are, you're screwed.
Traditional MA (TMA) can work (especially against untrained street people/fighters) and are better than nothing. But against, ie. an MMA fighter of the same size, weight, ferocity and equal amount of training time....you'll probably lose due to the MMA fight curriculum being geared towards turning you into a fighter, and requiring that you actually spar hard, some times (to often time) at full power trying to KO your partner....vs. TMA starting you off with a bunch of flowery forms and such (for months) that aren't even used (hardly) in a real fight...then when they spar, it's tap sparring or very light to medium......then when they fight in competition, they look like sloppy kickboxers:
Then if your TMA trains weapons, well that's even more wasted time (while your MMA counterpart is training to knock people out) as you'll never carry a giant sword in public...however, if the world ends and becomes a Book of Eli one, then it's useful.
This is the main weakness of TMA....it wastes a lot of your time, effort and money teaching you flowery forms for mostly the purpose of tradition and looking pretty, while MMA trains you only practical fighting techniques that you drill and spar repeatedly until you get good at it and then just repeat. Plus, you actually test out your chin and striking power for real in class.
If you train MA for spirituality, exercise, Asian fetishes, etc. TMA is fine and perfectly legit. But if you want to learn how to fight and learn self-defense more efficiently and effectively, MMA is much better than TMA.
Historically, people seeking to learn the art took an apprenticeship under their master. They would literally train under him all day, every day for about four or five years. Many times they would live in or around the master's home and clean and cook. So we're looking at a solid 50-60 hours of instruction under your master at least four years. Most kung fu practitioners now are getting 8 hours of instruction at the most a week...and that's if they're really intense.
Many of these Masters would withhold the most effective techniques of their art from their students for a very long time, which were the weapons. These students were their meal ticket and they didn't want to teach them everything all at once.
But it were the weapons that made these TMA's effective. This is no different than some child of nobility class during Medieval times training every day to become a great swordsman and maybe lead his own army one day.
Quote:
It's also interesting to note that once communism took hold in China, it is said that they purposely watered down a lot of Chinese martial arts to make them into more of a show, instead of to breed fighters. That's where we get competitive wushu.
After the Chinese Cultural Revolution, the Commie Chinese actually dumped Kung-Fu from its military curriculum for H2H and replacing it with Sanshou, which was created by taking only the effective techniques of Chinese MA's to train & fight while discarding all of the traditional, flowery forms......basically the precursor to MMA. Sanshou was around in the early 1900's I think.
Many of these Masters would withhold the most effective techniques of their art from their students for a very long time, which were the weapons. These students were their meal ticket and they didn't want to teach them everything all at once.
But it were the weapons that made these TMA's effective. This is no different than some child of nobility class during Medieval times training every day to become a great swordsman and maybe lead his own army one day.
After the Chinese Cultural Revolution, the Commie Chinese actually dumped Kung-Fu from its military curriculum for H2H and replacing it with Sanshou, which was created by taking only the effective techniques of Chinese MA's to train & fight while discarding all of the traditional, flowery forms......basically the precursor to MMA. Sanshou was around in the early 1900's I think.
san shou or sanda was technically not a form of martial art but a tournament. it has since become a martial art and translates to "free fighting".
commies didnt take power until after ww2.
(edit: some sanda/san shou history)
Quote:
Its root laid in traditional kung fu which someone claim is thousands of years old.
Some historians see a link between modern Sanshou and tournaments traditionally held throughout china for thousands of years by kung fu and martial arts masters called “Sanda” or “free fighting” to decide who the greatest fighter was.
Traditionally, matches were between two contestants fighting on a platform called “Lei tai” typically, fight ended at the death of looser. Today, Sanshou fights are generally fought with in boxing rings or mats.
Re – Emergence:
In 1949, when communism took over Chinese culture functions. The only allowed was wushu, a more acrobatic or non combative type of kung fu. Some credit the emergence of more combative martial arts to Chinese military who realized it needed an effective hand to hand combat system and utilize various martial arts masters to create a combat system.
In time, soldiers wanted to test martial skills and developed a competitive event rules, such as the use of gloves and limited extreme strikes to the eyes, spine and back of the head were developed. The Chinese wushu federation is also credited with helping create Sanshou competitions since it refine the more brutal techniques from the military and created a civilian amateur competition.
Close enough. It was a tournament using Chinese MAs. Just like like MMA can both be a fighting system and a tournament.
I never implied anything about the Chinese Commies taking power anytime earlier than WWII.
You're just nitpicking for whatever frivolous reason(s).
defensive much?
nobody is nitpicking anything only stating the facts. you are correct, you were not far off, i suppose.
but if you would like i could nitpick.
sanshou/sanda was not a form of martial art until the communist party took power where bits and pieces of other martial arts where placed together and were given the long used words sanda and or san shou. this didnt happen until 1949. now for the nitpicking part, thats more "middle 1900's" not "early 1900's"
how does that work for ya?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
