grappling/vale tudo/nhb training

[djh]

Just curious...

Has anyone else here spent a little time training in a grappling/nhb style aswell as their traditional CMA?

What were your conclusions on the matter? Valuable to know and useful in rounding out your ability as a fighter or waste of time?

I trained Chow Gar for 5 years (loved it), travelled to a place where there was no southern mantis for a year and did vale tudo instead (always been interested to have a go). Now I'm living in London so am back into the Chow Gar (loving it).

I know there have been a million threads about who's tougher etc etc and this is not the point of this post. I am committed to the SPM and will not be changing, but I must say that time with the vale tudo guys was a real eye opener.

That should be enough to get it going... any experiences/reflections? Many traditional MA people dismiss the cross-training with a freestyle art out of hand but I believe there is a lot to be learnt in terms of techniques, fight psychology and application.

[DeathTouch]

It sounds as if you know the answer to your own question, so why seek advice here?

[djh]

I'm not seeking advice I'm seeking discussion.

Why be defensive? This is part of what I'm talking about...

[DeathTouch]

djh, im sorry u are so emotionally disturbed as to call me defensive i just simply stated that you answered your own question in your original post that is all. LOL i dont know why I would get defensive when this forum is not mine for me to defend i do not own and make no profit from posting here lol just read your original post and you will see how contradictive you sound,

As a matter of fact if i were you i would reread the post and then rewrite it. I think that sounds like a great idea dont you

[djh]

'emotionally disturbed'... that's helpful

How could I finally answer my own question when there is no definitive answer? I asked for discussion and the experiences of others. I consider that to be clear in my original post (even after re-reading as you suggested).

Thanks for ruining what could have been an interesting exchange (although from your profile I see you're not interested in that '...none of that modern bull'... I see you've already made up your mind and are ready to discount all other views).

Nice one

[Ralphie]

I do vale tudo. It's very valuable. I think the next revolution for CMA is to incorporate a sport around it, weather it's san shou having a broader base or another form that doesn't use large gloves. Vale tudo allows you to test your skills, and appreciate other martial artists. It also allowed me to appreciate CMA much more, and that the concepts and principles that CMA teach are practical and real.

[Fu-Pow]

Most of my training is centered around NOT going to the ground. If I did then it might be useful to know a FEW grappling ground techniques.

The problem I see with a lot of SPORT martial arts is that they are not very realistic.

For example

-Most fights last a very short time, 3 seconds tops

-The person who usually gets in the first good shot wins

-Many fights involve mutliple people, not a one on one situation

-Many of the most effective moves ie knees, elbows, groin shots, kicks to the knee, joint locks, etc are not allowed.

Not to say there isn't some value in training the sporting aspects of martial arts. For example:

-Real time reaction training

-Distance

-Footwork

-Learning to take a hit safely

Furthermore, sporting arts that involve a lot of pounding full contact strikes to the head and face are kind of antithetical to martial arts. MA training is about not getting hit and hitting your opponent. Again, the time that a real fight takes is very fast, not 3-10 rounds. You don't even have time to take a lot of hits in a real fight. Its that first good shot that is probably going to decide the fight.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Most of my training is centered around NOT going to the ground. If I did then it might be useful to know a FEW grappling ground techniques.

it doesn't have to be centered around the ground game. Mine is not either. However, once there, you need to know how to get around. That's an asset regardless of what you are training for, because you CAN be taken down. IMO, all MA should know at least the basics, regardless of your style or "what your training is centered around"

The problem I see with a lot of SPORT martial arts is that they are not very realistic.



For example

-Most fights last a very short time, 3 seconds tops

-The person who usually gets in the first good shot wins

-Many fights involve mutliple people, not a one on one situation

-Many of the most effective moves ie knees, elbows, groin shots, kicks to the knee, joint locks, etc are not allowed.

not only are those assumptions, but some of them are just wrong. One of them is somewhat correct.

- I've seen and been in fights that go over three seconds. Most of the ones I've seen last longer than that. that's almost as bad as the "all fights go to the ground" generalization...

- the person who gets the first shot does not usually win - unless the one he shot on has no ground game.

- assuming that we want to go to the ground is another bad assumption. I don't want to take someone to the ground in a multiple attacker scenario, but am well prepared to efficiently get up, should I be taken there.

- the techniques you listed are very much allowed, except for groin kicks.

Not to say there isn't some value in training the sporting aspects of martial arts. For example:

-Real time reaction training

-Distance

-Footwork

-Learning to take a hit safely

agreed.

Furthermore, sporting arts that involve a lot of pounding full contact strikes to the head and face are kind of antithetical to martial arts. MA training is about not getting hit and hitting your opponent. Again, the time that a real fight takes is very fast, not 3-10 rounds. You don't even have time to take a lot of hits in a real fight. Its that first good shot that is probably going to decide the fight.

IMO, and strictly IMO as oppinions on this vary, MA training IS about fighting. ethics, philosophy, etc. I get at church, school, etc. I don't need MA to try and reinforce it. The only exceptions I make for that are arts like aikido which are completely based on such principles.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by djh
Just curious...

Has anyone else here spent a little time training in a grappling/nhb style aswell as their traditional CMA?

I was training muay thai before doing four years of longfist. I now am back training in muay thai and also grappling.

What were your conclusions on the matter? Valuable to know and useful in rounding out your ability as a fighter or waste of time?

I learned alot of useful things in CMA, but my preference is for MT and judo. I train bjj also, but prefer the formers.

[Fu-Pow]

- the person who gets the first shot does not usually win - unless the one he shot on has no ground game.

FP: This is simply not true. In the ring it is different. On the street whoever lands a good shot, especially a good head shot usually wins. I'm not talking about a jab, I'm talking about something like a strong right hand cross followed by a succession of follow up techniques. That first strike stuns the opponent and sets up the following strikes. I'm not talking about karate "one hit, one kill" theory. I'm talking about landing a strong shot, and then quickly following it up. This aspect of the fight doesn't take more than 3-5 seconds tops. Why am I going **** around worrying about going to the ground when I can focus my training on landing that first shot and taking my opponent out fast?

[Ralphie]

F-P
I agree with you to to some extent. However, my argument isn't the same as yours. I don't think you have to seperate sport from an overall martial art. The sport is just going to allow you to practice your fighting skills on a consistant basis with unfamiliar opponents, and force you to adapt to different situations. BTW, this has nothing to do with going to the ground or ground fighting. I do think it's a good thing to know, but honestly don't care if someone else does or not.

[Fu-Pow]

I don't think you have to seperate sport from an overall martial art. The sport is just going to allow you to practice your fighting skills on a consistant basis with unfamiliar opponents, and force you to adapt to different situations.

FP: I'd disagree with you there to some extent because they are two different skillsets. I believe that "sport" should be separated from "combat" training which should be separated from "form" training and theory. They are all different and valuable components of MA training but they are "different" components.

The confusion comes when people mix up "sport" training ,"combat" training and "form/theory" training. Training for a sport trains you to go from point A--->B---->C within the confines of rules X, Y, Z. A real fight is more like A------>C without any rules. Its a different mindset and different skillset....that's my point.

In my experience ground fighting knowledge is not as valuable in terms of real "combat" where as in a sports type arena like nhb or what have you it is more valuable.

Depends on where you want to expend your effort.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
- the person who gets the first shot does not usually win - unless the one he shot on has no ground game.

FP: This is simply not true. In the ring it is different. On the street whoever lands a good shot, especially a good head shot usually wins. I'm not talking about a jab, I'm talking about something like a strong right hand cross followed by a succession of follow up techniques. That first strike stuns the opponent and sets up the following strikes. I'm not talking about karate "one hit, one kill" theory. I'm talking about landing a strong shot, and then quickly following it up. This aspect of the fight doesn't take more than 3-5 seconds tops. Why am I going **** around worrying about going to the ground when I can focus my training on landing that first shot and taking my opponent out fast?

I see what you mean now.... In grappling, going for a takedown is called a shot. when you said shot, I wasn't thinking about a strike, as I would've called it a strike. you made references to other sport fighting instances, and I was thinking that that statement was one also.

[phoenix-eye]

I've done a wee bit grappling on the side - some lessons/rolling in no-gi grappling class and picking up stuff from videos before more informal rolling with like minded CMA classmates. I've really enjoyed it.

As for it's benefits - it's an area where I really only want to develop basic survival skills. Primarily escapes from positions and a few, easily workable submissions. There's no way - unless I train for many years - that I'm gonna be able to do anything fancy on the street while the beer soaked hooligan is trying to make me eat my teeth. That's where the more competition oriented stuff leaves me cold. However, there's a pretty good chance that in the heat of a streetfight I might miss my strike and he intentionally/unintentionally "shoots" and gets a takedown. I need to know how to get out and back to my feet asap.

If he gives me a good opening for some sort of clean kimura, keylock, straight armlock or a choke (by far the best) then I'll go for it. But not much else. He's not going to tap when he's all raged up and I'd better be prepared to pop something and make him cry.

That's all I want to know. Hopefully this small amount would allow me to get back to my feet and use my Hung Gar to take him out.

Hopefully........

Cheers
PE

[Fu-Pow]

Agree with you phoenix eye. That's about the amount of grappling that I would like to study. Just enough that I can get up and then pummel the guy or send him to the ground on his head.