everything wrote:This one has the uppercut bit:
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2015/1/7/750 ... -elbow-gif
Jones has to be in the discussion as the GOAT. Statistically, he is: http://blog.datadive.net/who-are-the-be ... ian-study/
If there were a Jones style, in 500 years, people would talk about the "complete system" blah blah blah, some of the JKD theory he studied, etc., but no one could do what he does.
Some of the article is about Jones' camp bringing back long forgotten techniques (in this case from boxing?), which we were talking about somewhat on the jujutsu thread.
GrahmaB wrote:Sticking like that can be very useful for negating a grappler that wants to clinch. If you watch this breakdown of Jon Jones vs Cormier you can see Jones using very similar hand fighting to that displayed in the Tai Chi clips to negate Cormier - see around 2.50 mark. Combined with striking, obviously.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhWfSj5_CuQ
everything wrote:On a side note, sometimes there seems to be this related fallacy in CMA discussions. If Wang Xiangzhai was great, I can study what he did and be great. If Jones is great, I can study MMA and be great. If Mozart was great, I can study what he studied and be great. It just isn't true (or at least sufficient), but often there seems to be this erroneous assumption in all our BTDT-type debates.
everything wrote:What could be more interesting (theoretically) is if Jones studied IMA and to see how he incorporated it. Much of it is invisible, felt in the body, or sticking that he would feel in a fraction of a second, but we might not see and Bloody Elbow couldn't break down either. But would still be theoretically interesting.
everything wrote:Yeah definitely interesting. He's probably a genius who seems to be able to read a JKD theory (for example), or in-fight adjust to uppercuts, and almost instantly know what to do and be able to do it. To take a top 1% guy and then see where other CMA (or MMA or XYZ) people aren't doing the same thing is interesting. Of course it's not really fair, even if it's instructive.
On a side note, sometimes there seems to be this related fallacy in CMA discussions. If Wang Xiangzhai was great, I can study what he did and be great. If Jones is great, I can study MMA and be great. If Mozart was great, I can study what he studied and be great. It just isn't true (or at least sufficient), but often there seems to be this erroneous assumption in all our BTDT-type debates.
What could be more interesting (theoretically) is if Jones studied IMA and to see how he incorporated it. Much of it is invisible, felt in the body, or sticking that he would feel in a fraction of a second, but we might not see and Bloody Elbow couldn't break down either. But would still be theoretically interesting.
every[quote="everything wrote:Not sure what kind of videos you are seeking. Are you looking for a video where someone sticks, adheres, follows, borrows, etc? Many times throwing experts go one way then the opponent comes back and they go the other. e.g,. Fedor:
Or Bonnar is pushing into Jones so Jones "borrows" some force and throws the other way
These follow when push, pull, etc., and incorporate listening.
everything wrote:What could be more interesting (theoretically) is if Jones studied IMA and to see how he incorporated it. Much of it is invisible, felt in the body, or sticking that he would feel in a fraction of a second, but we might not see and Bloody Elbow couldn't break down either. But would still be theoretically interesting.
everything wrote:Here's an interesting Machida gif where his parry is almost guiding and following the opponent's punch toward him, then pushing it downward.
C.J.W. wrote:everything wrote:Here's an interesting Machida gif where his parry is almost guiding and following the opponent's punch toward him, then pushing it downward.
Very interesting indeed! Looks like a textbook version of parry and punch universally found in Asian martial arts.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests