That'll be the day, when you give me orders. So, basically, by MMA, you don't really mean what everyone else thinks of, i.e. you go to a credible MMA gym and follow a properly designed and accredited training programme, you just, as you say, train in your back yard, picking up stuff from here and there... It's a funny thing that 'MMA' tag, isn't it? It kind of relies on people not abusing it, in order to retain its intrinsic connotations.
Anyone can claim to "do MMA" because they do a couple different arts or whatever... But this is a bad definition IMO. I recall a discussion on this a while back, and someone defined MMA as (I'm paraphrasing a bit here) "Not simply cross-training, but learning how to use your arts together. Also covering all the ranges." I also think that nowadays it usually refers to the sport... so by deliberately using it contrary to it's accepted meaning, you're simply being difficult and causing confusion, perhaps in an attempt to claim the credibility that often comes from the term "MMA".
I've never personally heard of any MMA gym teaching this stuff: Although I guess technically there could be the possibility of 'cartilage shredding' through the natural completion of sub grappling techniques.. Although they can't really be practiced in that fashion for obvious reasons. Something else I don't quite understand is why you refer to him as your shihan. This would be pretty (very) rare in MMA I would think, it's something more in line with a traditional Japanese art. When I asked you about where you trained MMA before Weili you declined to answer. That is fair enough - I'm not one of those internet guys who demands information as a stamp of credibility... But I hope you can see for yourself that inconsistencies with the experience of others results to questions naturally arising, so please don't take offence if I ask again. I'm still curious, who was your MMA coach Weili, and what's with all the cloak and dagger secrecy ? You've already let it be known that he trained Maurice Smith. Surely it's not that big of a deal to let it be known where you trained MMA and under which coach/ shihan it was. cheers
So far, my minimal experience of x-training tells me that you can gain from it, but what is important is how much you can usefully and meaningfully bring aspects together, however small. Reb W makes good points. There are more that could be added, but later.
Shihan is a term used in JMA attributed to a master teacher, granted by a school or style, after signifiacnt service and respect has been acquired within the peer community. It is a title given to acknowledged Aikidoka from the Aikikai Honbu Dojo, and by other organisations to their acknowledged and recognised leaders. Until about 2005 or so, there were probably no Aikidoka Shihan in the UK except for Kanetsuka Shihan (I cant state this with certainty, as my involvement with Aikido is minimal these days - but my interest remains in the art.) The title is distinct from Sensei, which means teacher in simple translation, and can be attributed to seniors in many walks of life beyond MA. I am not sure whether the title Sifu corresponds more closely to Shihan or Sensei, but I would imagine that 'teacher'/Sensei would be more appropriate.
Thanks embra, I figured as much. Although Weili mentions "Jujitsu. Brazilian and or Japanese" as being typically trained at MMA gyms. I personally have never ever heard of traditional Japanese jujitsu to be part of any MMA gym/ training I've ever heard of or come across. If there is any examples anyone knows of I would be interested to take a look/ hear about. out of interest really, as it would be a rare find indeed!
With regard to self-defense with Taiji and Aikido, individually and x-trained, in terms of effectiveness, it boils down to who you train with and how you train with them. Both arts have an 'internal' aspect, and somewhat consequently suffer from overly-philosophical interpretations, which I have seen in both, result in somewhat less than efficient transmission from some teachers to students, from time to tme. Hence, choose your training partners with some care and interest. In general, my tack is to be really sure (and keep on inquiring about) about how the first art works in self-defense/potential really nasty usage, before getting too involved in the secondary art. Both arts share some similarities and exhibit different strengths and weaknesses - though these are somewhat down to interpretation, but I post only from my own interpretation and experiences. Personally I maintain a slightly narrower Aikido like posture with what is called 'hanmi' (angular projection to opponent), than I see with many TCCers. I have adjusted the length of my Aiki-like posture to be a little bit shorter than before courtesy of TCC 7 stars stepping. With this posture I am somewhat easier to up-root (I have strategies for this however - which seem to be reasonably effective - still testing) but a lot more mobile and evasive, than most TCC folk that I have encountered so far - some of whom are too static for my liking. Where TCC really scores for me is in Pushing Hands and Chin si ?? spelling?? - silk reeling, where an element of unpredictability creeps in. Pushing Hands also permits a competitive element which Aikido does not have directly (at least not Aikikai - I think Tomiki does have something like this.) Aikido does get competitive from time to time, as people are people, and will compete, even though they are not supposed to. The 9 Palace step exercises and usage in san shou/applications is almost (but with diferences) eqiuvalent to Aikido's taisabaki evasion movement. The 7 stars step is not unlike Aikido's irimi/omote movement. The thunderhands boxing of TCC is another area that I found usefull. Bringing all these things together is not simple, and will vary according to personal taste, and interpretations from whom you learn both arts.
The guy i learnt basterd aikijutsu and tcc from used to just tell me "it's all the same". He learnt and taught other stuff too. he was right. in the end all "style" is a bunch of abstraction. and you are left to assimilate for yourself. "Your style" - it's only one that really matters.
Wow I am feeling like I'm attacked. LOL. First thing MMA means Mixed Martial Arts. Anyone who says different is wrong. Sorry I didn't make up the name MMA,but that's what it means. Next Brazilian jujitsu came from Japanese jujitsu. So yes there is some Japanese stuff still being used,but mostly Brazilian. Our school had some of both. cartilage shredding,ah you never heard of that? ripping dudes ears,tearing the nose upward from the nostrils or small joint locks that you just don't lock you go further then that by twisting back and forth while holding pressure on the joint,this tears the cartilage of the joint. This is an old video of Shihan Lysak,he was a sensei then. 10:14,guy on the left. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnOOIin7eZA"]YouTube - Maurice Smith and Mark Coleman highlights with end celebration w/ Joe Rogan and I[/ame]
weiliquan, the MMA description you made in a previous post sounds like what some would call a "street-based MMA system". I refer to the Kajukenbo martial art that I teach and train in as a "street-based MMA system" because these days people can understand what that means without a whole long need for an explanation. If you don't know, it means a martial system that integrates training in all ranges of combat with focus on being practical for the street... or at least the unarmed ranges. Kajukenbo, for example, founded in the late 1940s is a combination of Karate, Judo/Ju-jutsu, Kenpo, American boxing, Chinese boxing, and Escrima. My instructor added to that American kickboxing and the Muay Thai he learned in the early 1970s in Thailand. I have added my cross-training in Aikido and I was originally a black belt in Goju-ryu Karate. Kajukenbo covers all ranges from ground to sticks. To help fill in the gaps I started cross-training in BJJ more than ten years ago, and in the last five years have started focusing more on the internal arts. Note that all ranges would also include thrown weapons and firearms, etc. Although I have several years of tactical firearms training with ex-military and law enforcement, that area of my training, I rarely have a need for in my lifestyle, but the knowledge and experience from it I consider invaluable for a self-defense situation, even if just to be able to think like a criminal and spot concealed weapons, etc. On the other hand, what others have said about the term MMA being abused is dead on in my experience. So many schools are using the term MMA these days, it hard to know what they are really doing. For instance, I claim we are a "street-based MMA school" but at the same time we also are a Muay Thai school. We train fighters for the ring, and although our fighters are aware of illegal moves, we focus their training strictly on what they can use in the ring. The fundamentals of Muay Thai training can be used for other things such as in a self-defense situation, so they still are learning good stuff in that regard, but I don't see any good reason to confuse the combat instincts of our fighters with a bunch of stuff that will not help them in the ring. So our Muay Thai is sport-based, even if it can be useful in self-defense. So we are a case of being both a sport and a self-defense school... I don't believe that your sifu is suggesting that you should not keep a "beginners mind" (in other words always be a student and be willing to learn from anywhere and anyone). But maybe you need to think of anything you do as cross-training and not starting over. There are a couple guidelines I would suggest you follow for cross-training. 1. Always call ahead to announce you will be attending until you establish a schedule of attendence. 2. Make sure it is okay with your Sifu and the other instructor. 3. Do not "teach" anyone you cross-train with anything UNLESS they ask you for help. You are there to learn by example, which means keep your mouth shut except to ask questions as needed. If you are lucky enough to share what you know, be brief and to the point, and only if asked to do so. If you are friends with the instructor, you can talk to them in private with any concerns you have. 4. Take things slowly, if you under fire, it is expected that you will revert to your combat instincts... anyone should know this. Slow things down so you can learn how to do things in different ways. 5. Good cross-training will help you build good fundamentals and help you fill in the gaps in your training. Instead of focusing on techniques, focus on learning the fundamentals and understanding the principles that allow the techniques to work. Good luck.
Yes! another great post,I do allot of what sport would call illegal moves because it is street effective. The sport MMA as brutal as it is, is tamed down a bit. It's makes me very happy to find and hear from someone else that Trains MMA stuff and also trains in internal stuff. And thanks for that good advice about keeping my mouth shut. You sound very knowledgeable. One example is the rear naked choke. In sport it's very hard to get out of,in street I bite that arm. I sure you know what I'm talking about so no need for a list. Thank You very much!
This statement demonstrates an ignorance of proper RNC technique. If the choke is set in correctly, you will: 1. Have limited head mobility. Even if you manage to bite the choker, you won't be able to move your head enough to really rip anything. 2. Not be able to get your teeth in contact with the chokers arm. Seriously, have you ever been RNCed by someone who knows what he's doing? They aren't just going to circle their arm around your face in an attempt to choke you. They'll set it up with other moves (cross face, for example), and sneak the arm in. You won't be able to get your teeth to their arm. And even if you were, you wouldn't be able to do much with biting anyways; you won't be able to move your head enough to rip flesh or anything like that, and I for one would willingly[1] put up with the pain of a bite to choke someone unconscious. [1]Probably not "willingly" exactly, but I think you get the idea.
Sorry my fault,You have to defend it first. And start biting before it's sunk in. It's almost impossible to get out of any choke that is applied correctly.
Biting is a tricky subject to me. With all worry about blood transmitted diseases, most biting is going to be the equivalent of something like a very strong pinch. One of my friends always teaches to bite through clothes for example so there is less chance of breaking the skin. If you have ever been bit or pinched in the right spot by surprise, it is a instant reaction. Biting can be a good tool of opportunity for self-defense situations. Given that, what Spinmaster posted I agree with. If a good grappler get's your backside, you are in trouble, no matter what... biting isn't going to get you out of it most likely. You will probably be off balanced and they will have their hooks in; my personal realization moment was when someone got a body triangle on me while I was defending the RNC. The triangle squeezed my kidneys and boy that was not nice... grrrrr... and my hands dropped and they then got the RNC on me too. Conversely, biting as an offensive ability is taught in some places more militarily oriented. Biting and ripping the throat can be a kill technique... you absolutely need to be aware of this if you are training grappling for self-defense because you get no second chance if someone rips your throat out... you must defend against it first. Also another biting technique, among many, is to bite the inside tendon that connects the thumb to the hand... this can permanently disable the thumb very quickly, again no second chances. Without a thumb it is very hard to hold a weapon or shoot a handgun. Just some thoughts about it. Not really related to Tai Chi... just responding to posters.
Yes I agree. With hooks in or a body triangle you can't even move the body to start to rotate out. Do you do taijiquan?
I'm more of a mutt when it comes to internal styles. I started some Tai Chi several years ago to help me with transitions, flow, and generally to relax better. The people I have mostly learned from are all hard-stylists (e.g. Muay Thai, Kajukenbo, etc.) that later began their training in internal styles, some now for more than thirty to forty years. I am following sort of the same path, coming from hard-style to internal style. Besides my immediate teachers, I have gotten the privilege to work with a friend of mine who is the head of the Tum Pai branch of Kajukenbo (a link to the history of Tum Pai http://www.tumpaiassociation.com/history.html ). It can be described as a combination of the hard style Kajukenbo with the internal style of Tai Chi. P.S. Maurice Smith seems like a great person. I have not met him, but he lives in the city I live in and my oldest son has actually met him a few times in passing.
Cool and thanks for the info. it makes sense now I can check out your school/instructor on the net. it's a rare combination. I think you've been pretty lucky in training with someone of so much experience in sport and self defence.
Thanks,but actually I'm feeling pretty bad about it. That's why I don't really want to talk about it. I wish I stayed there. They are the best I ever seen. I only stayed there for 3 years. That's when I met my Sifu,well 6 months or so before that. The Sifu I have was all about combat,no b.s. His style was reinforced with ninjutsu. That's how he got so good at taiji. He had to fight them. The guys at lysaks didn't understand why I wanted to learn taiji when shihan lysak was a top trainer. kind of ragged on me a bit about taiji. maybe I took it to hard,it just wasn't funny to me, I was serious. Then 2 years ago i ripped something in my neck, grapping at my house. It's a long road back. cheers
sorry i couldn't follow - who had to fight who ? Did you mean that he didn't want you to continue training there, or felt he had to show you he was better than them ? It's a shame that the guys where you'de been training weren't more cool about it. Seeing the traditional backround on the website you would think they would be. But on the other hand that is more of a traditionalist trait.. My own teacher was similar. Whilst he had some good things there was also things i couldn't get along with in the longer haul which is why I quit. One of those was him saying that he didn't really approve of me training with other people. he didn't much so mind the odd one off - he wasn't that bad, but at the time I did want to learn from others and in some ways go a different direction to how he generally taught. So I ended up leaving - it was a bit of a wrench after about five years and i had made good mates, and had a good relationship with my instructor despite differences of opinion. so I know a bit about how you feel.. Onwards and upwards i guess. I sympathise with the injury man, that sucks. regards
