Throws are amateur techniques??

[MaartenSFS]

I was just posting something interesting that a visiting master said. It seemed like he had specialised in it and could pull it off. Sorry that I didn't arrange a meet to find out whether it would work in a full-contact fight against a UFC champion. I don't know why I bother posting on here. It seems that most of you already know everything. Next time I'll just keep it to myself.

A little bit late, but thanks for taking the time to post. I for one also appreciate the time you take to post your observations, so please keep up.

(also, jealous that life offered you such an opportunity )

No need to be jealous. It's actually very do-able to come here and learn, though I recommend knowing someone before coming and/or speaking Chinese before coming out, though I had neither of those or money so feel free to just show up! :-P

[MaartenSFS]

Im sorry if i came across as insulting you or this teacher.

I look at things from a conceptual perspective. In this instance the claim is that throwing isn't as 'high level' as point hitting. It doesn't really matter what this master can do or what you experienced if we are looking objectively at the claim. I was trying to look at it from the POV of combat, not style specifics as the claim is about a generic combative concept.

If your just relaying your experience with masters then cool. Its interesting to hear and i enjoy your posts. If your posting for a discussion on the merits of a claim such as this. you will always have differing opinions, some from people with both competition and street fighting experience, some from a stylistic POV.

Please don't take offense, but i mainly fall into the discussion on merits of a claim. Because i think that sort of discussion is more valuable. Its easy to be offended on the internet mate, but most of the time people arent purposely trying to offend IME.

all the best.
chris.

No worries, mate. I probably could have reacted better to your reply. After all, it is the internet.. I am indeed mostly relaying my experiences from over here, which is why I was annoyed to be judged as if it is my opinion. I was hoping that it would generate discussion - about what the master said - not about me, the messenger. My replies to the initial posts were just trying to further explain what I experienced, as none of you were there. That being said, if I thought that what he said had nothing to offer, I wouldn't post it..

[MaartenSFS]

Can throws be devastatingly simple? Absolutely. But amateur? No, there is certainly a spectrum of skill-sets.

I believe regardless of your "vital point strike" ability, one should be able to "take the center from the first motion", while sticking, adhering, connecting, following, and striking all at the same time. The throw can be at the initial contact/center taking, or can come during or after strikes, breaks, etc.

Best,

G

When I said throws I was not including strikes, etc. where the enemy is knocked away or onto the ground, "by-the-way". Generally speaking, either something is broken (with strikes or joint-locking) or they are severaly damaged and knocked away/down with each successful technique used.

[Ba-men]

I hoping someone here has already addressed that the question is relative to the opponent.

There are good strikers
There are good grapplers
There are people skilled at doing "some of both."

If I face off against a skilled striker and can't defend against his strikes can I realistically say "His striking skills are basic?"

How about a skilled grappler and if I can't defend against his throws, submissions etc, can I say his grappling skills are basic?

How about the guy skilled at doing some of both that just kicks my ass with whatever screw up I give him?

If you have been doing MA for as long as I have you know that the better you get and the better your opponent is, you rely on simple basic techniques. Your skills are in your timing, your set ups, your control of the ever so brief tempo (in a real situation) your ability to think in real time. The skilled opponent is doing the same. So called basic become the effective tools why? "because they are the techniques easily "hard wired" thus becoming your gut reactions (i.e.techniques you don't think about, but just do) Somewhere in the fog of "confrontation" if your able to learn to think fast and enact those basic gut reactions upon an opponent then you have achieved prowess.

"is any technique really basic?" IMO... no and I might add so called "advanced techniques" usually 90% of the time will not work on a skilled opponent. either to tricky, to dependent on deception, to long winded etc etc...

[Frank Bellemare]

To answer the original question: no, throws are not amateur techniques, they're one of the best fight enders!

It seems like your visiting master has honed his skills around a precision striking strategy, but that doesn't take away anything from throwing and standing grappling.
I guess he hasn't been dropped on his head enough to respect the skill.

No big deal, I think a lot of people would retort that pressure point striking is generally unrealistic and unfeasible in combat, it's just a case of "well in my experience...".

[Wanderingdragon]

I think it's not about throwing as low level or precision striking, maybe there is something lost in translation, I don't know. But, by knowing that CTMA sees going to the ground as low level, I think it's about clean striking, without becoming entangled, the ground as a weapon and Shuai being a grandfather art a clean strike would be to throw someone down with enough force to finish them, this technique must be immaculate, as just the slight grip , tug , or attachment front the opponent could soften his blow/fall, if you are entangled he has the opportunity to reverse it. This would be my understanding.

[gasmaster]

It's also possible that he meant that point striking is more difficult to do right, and thus a more advanced technique. He might have meant that It would take years to become proficient at point striking, but when you get it, it can be a more efficient way of defeating a well matched opponent. Where as throwing techniques can be learned in much shorter time, but if your opponent is as strong as you it might be more difficult to get the upper hand.

... Or maybe he's being smug and elitist, god knows there's enough of that in the arts. who knows, just a thought.

[Niall Keane]

Very true from a western perspective....

Throwing is for amateurs as professional wrestling is fake!
And striking vital - ko points is for professionals due to the greater number of rounds and slight difference of rulesets in boxing!

Perhaps somewhat true too for Sanda? (Given the Chinese context). An amateur fighter will find quick clean throws a match winning ability, and for the longer round lengths and number of rounds in pro Sanda the ability to KO is seriously important!

[MaartenSFS]

It's also possible that he meant that point striking is more difficult to do right, and thus a more advanced technique. He might have meant that It would take years to become proficient at point striking, but when you get it, it can be a more efficient way of defeating a well matched opponent. Where as throwing techniques can be learned in much shorter time, but if your opponent is as strong as you it might be more difficult to get the upper hand.

... Or maybe he's being smug and elitist, god knows there's enough of that in the arts. who knows, just a thought.

I think you've got it. As someone else said, though, he is quite elitist, so I wouldn't hazard a guess without asking. He is elite, though, so...

[DeusTrismegistus]

Marten, was the vital point striking hitting targets like the solar plexus, liver, spleen, throat or more like hitting specific pressure points?

Hitting vital points even ones like the liver which is fairly large can be really difficult while sparring and I could understand someone considering that an advanced technique. However throwing is an art by itself and someone who is very high level will make you fly around like a toy. The difference is vital point striking you have to be skilled to do at all, anyone can learn some basic throws in a couple months and if they spar or wrestle regularly can apply them against the famous resistant opponent. That does not negate how advanced throwing can be though. Especially once you start adding counter throws.

Also my teacher trained with GM Chang before he learned taiji. Will kind of. Chang taught his taiji form and apparently combined taiji with his shuai jiao. For me I can't really separate the two systems or separate the taiji from striking. When I met iwalkthecircle who used to post on here he commented about it after we lightly sparred some.

[C.J.W.]

I've heard the same "throws are for amateurs" comment from a couple of CMA teachers here in Taiwan. But guess what? None of them know much about throws and I honestly doubt that they've ever been on the receiving end of a good grappler's throws or takedowns. The comment only shows their ignorance and hubris.

IMO, no techniques are intrinsically amateurish; it all depends on HOW they are done. Secondly, when an expert CMAist apply a technique, the distinction between striking and throwing is often blurred; there's throwing in striking, and striking in throwing.

[dspyrido]

I've heard the same "throws are for amateurs" comment from a couple of CMA teachers here in Taiwan.

I have also come across the odd comment from ima guys that is not just about throws but also about shoalin or other stylists. The comments used are things like "only skin" meaning that the abilities are only surface level.

When I first heard it I was confused because in some cases I felt that the persons they were commenting about could probably kick the living shit out of them. Over time I have formed a theory based on two levels:

1. The masters: These are persons who have been around and are amazing. They might throw out these comments not because they are itching for a fight but because they feel that what they are seeing they can replicate or know enough that they can easily pick up what is being shown. OTOH the so called amateurs could not replicate what they could demonstrate.
2. The wannabes: These are the ima persons who have taken on the masters persona but lets face it don't have the skills to back it up. But culturally they have adopted this tactic of self promotion & probably feel comfortable getting away with it because no one really is out to test them. On gut instinct most of the outspoken (ie not humble) ima guys fall into this category.

But even though we are talking about chinese ima stylists looking down on others - get two western accomplished experts of the same or different schools together and it is surprising how often the egotism, tension & catiness comes out. The number of times I have heard - "Ah I could easily kick the shit out of him" when one of them steps out of the room ...

[meeks]

I've heard the term 'throws are low level' (as opposed to high level) but the explanation was simply because practising that sort of skill means getting your clothes dirty (hitting the ground often). Never heard it as 'amateur'. In fact, IMO hitting can be viewed as amateur because it might leave out the first principle of connecting to someone "attack the root" and you're not in control of your opponent at all, which should be the primary objective of any combat method - stay in control of the opponent. Perhaps punching styles are the 'look mom, no hands' bike riding approach kids do, albeit applied to a combat situation where you're refusing to control the opponent from the get-go.

Not saying this about YOUR teacher, but I've met plenty of guys that hide behind "I don't do that because it's low level/amateur" but when you watch them you can tell they've never had a fight in their life, and use the "I cannot hit anyone for fear of exploding their organs" B.S... what I figure is throwing is quite binary in its result - you either threw the guy or you didn't, and we can all see your skill level in how well it was done. A hit - anyone can throw a hit and "not go full force for my opponent's safety" and not have bullshit called on them...

Just remember it's not the style that determines your level - it's you, your training and talent. If you find a style (throwing or hitting) that works for you then I say go for it and remember that sometimes ignorance breeds contempt also...

[Bao]

I've heard the term 'throws are low level' (as opposed to high level) but the explanation was simply because practising that sort of skill means getting your clothes dirty (hitting the ground often). Never heard it as 'amateur'.

True. Wrestling was considered a low class "peasant sport" because it made you sweat. Why the middle and higher classes could practice an art like tai chi was because they didn't need to sweat and exhaust themselves. This is also why many qigong methods became popular as health exercises. Today, if you have visited a beach, no one lies in the sun. They all hide under big umbrellas until they get into the water and when they get up, they quickly hide from the sun again. This is because they don't want to get tanned so they look like workers. And this is why "whitening" beauty products sell like butter. Even today, the hierarchy thinking is very strong, so you can imagine how it was for about 200 years ago. "Acting like a gentleman", the Junzi ideal, has been very strong throughout Chinese history. People tend to forget this when they think about the history of Chinese martial arts. "IMA" practice meant that you could practice martial arts but at the same time you didn't need to sweat and get dirty like a peasant or a worker. This was what Yang Luchan knew and he understood to popularize the art to attract a certain type of people. Then Yang Cheng Fu took over and popularized it to the public. They had never been successful if they had taught wrestling or some kind of strenuous jibengong exercises.

[willywrong]

I've heard the term 'throws are low level' (as opposed to high level) but the explanation was simply because practising that sort of skill means getting your clothes dirty (hitting the ground often). Never heard it as 'amateur'.

True. Wrestling was considered a low class "peasant sport" because it made you sweat. Why the middle and higher classes could practice an art like tai chi was because they didn't need to sweat and exhaust themselves. This is also why many qigong methods became popular as health exercises. Today, if you have visited a beach, no one lies in the sun. They all hide under big umbrellas until they get into the water and when they get up, they quickly hide from the sun again. This is because they don't want to get tanned so they look like workers. And this is why "whitening" beauty products sell like butter. Even today, the hierarchy thinking is very strong, so you can imagine how it was for about 200 years ago. "Acting like a gentleman", the Junzi ideal, has been very strong throughout Chinese history. People tend to forget this when they think about the history of Chinese martial arts. "IMA" practice meant that you could practice martial arts but at the same time you didn't need to sweat and get dirty like a peasant or a worker. This was what Yang Luchan knew and he understood to popularize the art to attract a certain type of people. Then Yang Cheng Fu took over and popularized it to the public. They had never been successful if they had taught wrestling or some kind of strenuous jibengong exercises.

I find that a very interesting insight. Thank you.