|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 27, 2012 20:18:51 GMT -5
But would you really prefer trying to learn to beat, say, a BJJ player at their own game by trial and error, or by cross training to get an understanding of what they're doing which likely would take far less time? While one art evolves and learns to adapt, another will continue to evolve and adapt as well. It's not like they'll someday full understand it without ever trying it, or at least it doesn't seem likely. I think it's pride that would lead one to train in only one style more than anything.
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 27, 2012 20:46:26 GMT -5
I think its tradition that keeps training in one style but your right it can be a slow process and it doesn't always include everyone ans some will get left out of the evolutionary process.
And I don't think the idea is to beat a jiujitero at their own game but to be as well rounded as possible and you don't always have to cross train to do that unless your style already lost something and again not all schools follow suit.
If the karateka can out strike the jiujitero and almost grapple as good as him in a self defence situation the karateka has the advantage but most karateka neglect newaza all together because they do the sport of karate which follows specific rules and its almost always illegal.
|
|
|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 27, 2012 21:15:15 GMT -5
So, considering that you just sort of agreed with me, grappling and striking styles AREN'T bullshit?
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 27, 2012 21:53:40 GMT -5
not quite still I`m saying pure striking & pure grappling styles are bullshit & a sports term however there are styles that use strikes as their primary means & grappling secondary and some styles that use grappling as their primary means & striking secondary.
their sports are usually based on their primary techniques and leave out all the advanced stuff like judo leaves out the atemi waza & karate leaves out the ne waza but they still have them.
just because judo is a grappling sport doesn't mean there are no strikes in the style and just because karate is a striking sport doesn't mean there isn't strikes in the style there are 2 sides to the same coin.
I can't think of any styles that historically didn't have both grappling & striking that weren't lost in transition to becoming a sport.
|
|
|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 27, 2012 22:21:33 GMT -5
But what styles were absolutely and purely a 50/50 mix of striking and grappling? I find it hard to believe that there was any style in history that was 100% perfectly complete in every way that just got watered down, let alone that being the story for everything. So if every martial art had a focus on one more than the other, chances are it never became "complete" so your argument that they're bullshit is actually null because nothing was totally complete. If something ever was complete then it wouldn't have been watered down, right?
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 27, 2012 22:36:45 GMT -5
I'm talking not having it at all vs having something.
Like the sport of judo has no strikes but the style does.
I'm saying that people who say a style is 100% grappling doesn't know what they are talking about unless they are referring to the sport version & same with striking.
I think most styles were a 50/50 mix at some point but changed over time but changed one way or another but we have no way to prove that 100% but we know they all had some of both.
|
|
aaronj
Global Moderator
Yondan - Shurite Karate Jitsu, Chen Taijiquan
Posts: 116
|
Post by aaronj on Jul 1, 2012 16:53:12 GMT -5
Here's a video that is a promotional video for Koryu Uchinadi. This video might not be the best for a complete focus on ground work grappling, but it does show that the system trains in it, and they do train it as equally as they train stand up. youtu.be/M_jhy-k6I-UThere's plenty more where that has come from if you want to surf their videos. In my primary dojo we do ground work, and standing work. It's a must for a person to be a complete fighter, and we were also recommended to study other systems to broaden our experience and viewpoints.
|
|
aaronj
Global Moderator
Yondan - Shurite Karate Jitsu, Chen Taijiquan
Posts: 116
|
Post by aaronj on Jul 1, 2012 17:29:23 GMT -5
The necessary grappling and striking techniques are within the systems that practice the martial art as self defense. In other words, the non-watered down system. A problem with this argument is that the wrong element is being put on trial here. It's not the art itself, but HOW it is trained that matters. IE: I've rolled with Judoka who've both sucked horribly, and who've been outstanding, the same with GJJ guys. Because one is great doesn't mean that the system is the best, and just because one is bad doesn't mean the system sucks. It's HOW the science is learned, and what is doen with it that matters.
Even seeing these guys from the SAME background, and in some instances, the SAME gym/dojo with such an enormous gap in skill proves that it is in how the person trains, not what they train.
Back to the argument of no complete system... Many karate dojo, have a lot of emphasis on standing application for the new student, and even for the low to mid-level (say shodan). What this should be doing is teaching concepts in a way that the student can grasp early on. This is important to take note of, because it is the concept that the fighter must understand deeply, and not the individual technique for cataloging. a choke standing up is the same concept as the choke off your back. The difference is the fact there is a barrier preventing free-movement, or a barrier to use for advantage. If they don't train on the ground, it's on them not their system.
It comes down to HOW the individual person chooses to train their system.
|
|