A different question about forms, kata and patterns

Context.

If Men’s Journal does an interview with Rickson about MMA training is he going to bad mouth it?

If it was really all about self promotion he would downplay it and push jujitsu instead.

Also, you’re jumping through mental hoops. He talking about the benefits of mma, BJJ is part of mma, he teaches BJJ ergo he’s self promoting.

Again, if you want to move the goal posts all the way across the field, a tactic you seem keen on, you could argue that anyone doing an interview on something they are or have been involved in is a form of self promotion. But context is a thing.

Like when people are discussing effective self defense on a martial arts forum they are not taking about heart attacks and car accidents.

 

I was directly challenged to come up with an MMA instructor who, in some way or another, oversold their curriculum by saying it's optimal at X instead of useful at X. It took me about two minutes to find one such example. My point is not "OMG Rickson Gracie is a terrible human and BJJ is trash." My point is that that sort of comment is not uncommon from anybody whose profession is teaching X.

As for the distinction you're drawing between BJJ and MMA (a distinction that is pretty miniscule in the context of discussing martial arts that include forms training and those that don't)...so if a Choy Lee Fut instructor did an interview about "how optimal kung fu is at X," would you claim they were not self-promoting because there's more to kung fu than just CLF? In both cases, I think it's hyperbole, but not "OMG FRAUD."

I'm not "moving the goalposts." I'm respond to posts that seem to say that any style that includes forms training is trash. And since those arguments are coming from a number of different angles in this thread, so my responses have to address different arguments. For example, although the original post asked a very narrow questions, the criticisms of TMA that other posts have raised in this thread have been a lot more varied (like the repeated assertion that karate instructors are more motivated by money than MMA instructors are).

 

What I'm saying is you did a terrible job of answering that challenge. An interview where Rickson Gracie is answering questions about MMA training in a fitness magazine does not equate to icefield's examples which are promotional statements by organizations claiming to teach effective self defense when there is no direct evidence of those statements being true. Not only that, but there is plenty of direct evidence that MMA training is good for all around fitness.

And you do move the goal posts a la attempting to redefine the meaning of self defense on a martial arts website. That's just nonsense.

And for the record I'm currently studying Shotokan Karate, among other things, a style that has kata as part of its curriculum. I would argue they are not the most effective way to impart knowledge related to hand to hand combat or self defense, but some people enjoy the training and they can be good for general physical and possibly mental fitness. So your view and mine- boiled down- may not be entirely that far apart. But when push comes to shove- probably as a result of being a competitive judoka- the arguments for practicality, evidence based, and false advertising also ring true to me.

 

Well, for one thing the snubnose isn't made of plastic. (disclaimer - I have a snubnose .357)

 

Did I say anyone was motivated by greed?

Greed is a vice. Making $ isn't a vice.

 

Who said kata was taught purely for money? I keep thinking we're talking about "why so many" and you want to talk about the value of kata? For real, in 2018?

I don't think I'm rude.

 

"how many people have you met" isn't a very good measure of anything.

 

I think the main reason kata and patterns are taught is because people are taught them.
Instructor A teaches them to person B.
Person B becomes instructor B in time and teaches them to person C.
Person C becomes instructor C and teaches them to person D and so on along the line.
A bit like a meme really.

 

So someone can spend years in Karate and never come across one of these instructors who got rich teaching kata?

How stinking rich do these guys get? McMansion Rich? Private jet rich? Can you name any of these people?

 

Mmm what he said above

And if we stick with forms and there usefulness its interesting that the main branch of CLF know for its fighting ability reduced the number of core forms from dozens to three empty hand and one weapon form, the rest of their time is spent drilling and sparring.

 

Similarly, Wing Chun has six forms - three empty hand, one with the wooden dummy, and two weapons forms. The majority of our training time is spent on drills.

 

I'd argue it's less about the number of forms in a style, and more about the percentage of training time spent on them. I personally like about 25% of training time spent on forms practice (I really enjoy them, but I think they should be secondary to padwork and sparring). But you can have 24 forms like JKA Shotokan does, and still keep forms training time at 25%.

Likewise, reducing the number of forms doesn't automatically reduce the percentage of training time spent on forms (i.e., Yang taijiquan schools that teach one or two forms but spend 80%-100% of time doing forms practice). And I like there being some variety in the portfolio of forms so that once you get past the basic/mandatory forms, you can find some that work for your own body style and your own personal preferences. Not everyone is going to like Kanku Dai; not everyone is going to like Hangetsu.

 

Must resist the urge to reply.....

 

...it appears you did not.

 

I would like to inject an outside opinion into this current (same old, same old) debate on the merits of rules fighting for "self defense".

I grew up in a VERY rough neighborhood in El Paso, Texas. It has been my experience through a number of "trying desperately not to die" fights and personally watching gang members in action, that the most important martial art trait for personal self defense is self confidence. I saw a great many instances of people that would look for victims that acted like victims. I also saw a few instances of people becoming victims because they acted superior and challenging. Those people that went about their business in a confident manner with good awareness of what was going on around them were almost universally ignored as more trouble than they were worth.

Because of this, it has always been my opinion that self confidence is much more important for self defense than actually learning how to fight, because you are much less likely to become a victim of violence if you have a self confident attitude. Thus, avoiding the fight entirely is the best self defense option. Failing that, killing the other fellow as quickly as possible is the next safest. Actually engaging an a fight is extremely dangerous and not advisable as predators very seldom work alone. (unless it's a drunk in a bar, in which case what the heck are you doing getting in drunken bar fights! )

Just something to think about.

 

This is sound advice, in my opinion.

I've not been in a fight in 30+ years largely because of the confidence thing. I gained the confidence from my preying mantis days.
Well, the confidence thing, situational awareness, and avoiding places where trouble is likely to happen (e.g. bars, nightclubs, etc.).

That and yes, those types of predators seldom work alone. They're cowards at heart and want to be sure that the odds are heavily in their favour.

 

I agree Pgsmith but I'd also add that ironically what gives you that confidence - at least in part - is knowing that you know how to handle yourself in a throwdown. Not necassarily in the "i can fight anyone" kind of way, but in the "I know I can take a bit of punishment and give it back" kind of way. Which you're only going to get with one kind of training